Logo Voyage

Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion Voyage Tips and guide

You can check the original Wikivoyage article Here
Votes for deletion

This page lists articles, files and templates that are nominated for deletion. Any Wikivoyager can make a nomination or comment on any nomination. Nominations or comments should follow a rationale based on our deletion policy.

If our deletion policy leads towards a merge or redirect, then coordinate this on the discussion page of the article.

The purpose of this page is limited to the interpretation and application of our deletion policy. You can discuss what our deletion policies should be on the deletion policy discussion page.

Nominating

[edit]

Add a {{vfd}} tag to the top of the article, file or template being proposed for deletion, so that people viewing it will be aware. Place the tag at the very top, before everything else, except the page banner. Do note though, if you're tagging a template for deletion, use <noinclude>{{vfd}}</noinclude> instead of {{vfd}} alone.

Add a link to the article, file or template at the end of the list below, along with the reason why it is being listed for deletion. Sign your recommendation using four tildes ("~~~~").

If you're nominating a file for deletion, make sure it's actually hosted on the English Wikivoyage and not on Wikimedia Commons.

The basic format for a deletion nomination is: 

===[[Chicken]]===
Not a valid travel article topic. ~~~~

Commenting

[edit]

All Wikivoyagers are invited to comment on articles, files or templates listed for deletion. The format for comments is: 

===[[Chicken]]===
* '''Delete'''. Not a valid travel article topic. TravelNut 25:25, 31 Feb 2525 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. There is a town in [[Alaska]] called Chicken. ~~~~

When leaving comments you may elect to delete, keep, or redirect the article. If you recommend redirection, you may suggest where it should be redirected to. Any attempt to merge content from an article to some other destination must retain the edit history to comply with the attribution (CC BY-SA) requirements of the free license, so it may be possible to merge and redirect but not to merge and delete. Sign your comment using four tildes ("~~~~").

Deleting, or not

[edit]
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to delete, an administrator may delete it.
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to redirect or merge, any Wikivoyager may do it. If you make a redirect, please check for any resulting broken redirects or double redirects.
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to keep, any Wikivoyager may remove any VFD notices from that page, and archive the deletion discussion.
  • If there is no consensus after 14 days, allow a further 7 days for discussion.
    • If, after the additional 7 days, there is no consensus, the page should be kept – any Wikivoyager may remove any VFD notices from that page, and archive the deletion discussion.
    • If, after the additional 7 days, there is a consensus, implement it in line with the first three points above.
  • When deleting an article, check "What links here". Either remove the newly-broken links from the articles or point them somewhere else. Inbound redirects to a deleted page should either be deleted or redirected elsewhere.
  • When deleting a template, either replace it wherever it's been transcluded, especially if it served a formatting function. You can do this by adding "subst:" before the template name (especially if the use is in article space, you may then want to clean away unnecessary HTML or CSS code, which would make the wikitext confusing). Once that's done, you can delete the template without affecting individual uses of it. Otherwise, remove the template from all pages that use the template. However, do not delete the template first – this breaks links and will cause a swathe of red links, requiring a lot of cleanups.

Archiving

[edit]

After you keep/redirect/merge/delete the article, file or template, move the deletion discussion to the Archives page for the appropriate month. The root archives page has a directory. Note that it's the month in which the action was taken, rather than when the nomination was first posted, that should be used for the archived discussion; that way, recourse to the deletion log can lead subsequent readers right to the discussion (at least for the pages that were deleted).

When archiving, always make it clear to other editors what the outcome of the discussion was. First, describe the outcome in the edit summary when you remove the discussion, with something like "archive as kept". Then add a line for the result to the discussion on the archive page.

If the nominated article, file or template was not deleted, then the nomination should be mentioned on its talk page. Generally this is done by providing a link to the deletion discussion on the talk page. One should also indicate the result on the talk page. If the discussion is short, an alternative is to place an (identical duplicate) copy of the discussion on the talk page.

See also:

October 2025

[edit]
Latest comment: 14 hours ago119 comments11 people in discussion

Wts:How to start a new language version

[edit]

It seems that cross-namespace redirects are bad enough, so this soft redirect to another wiki is no good (What does "Wts" even mean?). JsfasdF252 (talk) 16:46, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Endangered animals

[edit]

Contains no travel information and nothing useful beyond the lead. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 19:39, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sbb1413: –LPfi (talk) 22:37, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Redirect to Animal ethics. Ground Zero (talk) 14:27, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Keep – It intends to cover endangered animals that don't have their own articles, with an advice to all such animals. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 03:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I agree on not deleting, but what's the advantage to not merging and redirecting it as I propose? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:22, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Natural attractions is just list of links with a brief overview, and the topic I'm trying to cover is specific to endangered animals, which are by definition rare in the wild. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:26, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Not as brief, and with the addition of the introductory text in "Endangered animals", less brief. I just don't see the advantage of having this subtopic. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:08, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I am not convinced that there is anything about endangered species that differs from non-endangered ones from the traveller's viewpoint, other than that you should be more respectful, which can be stated in a short paragraph (I think we already have such language in most if not all of the relevant articles). It also seems that nobody is adding the content that would make this article useful.
I would appreciate an addition to the page that would show the intension and why it is better suited here than in Animal ethics, Birdwatching, Eurasian wildlife or similar articles.
–LPfi (talk) 11:40, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Agreed. I support redirecting to Animal ethics. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 12:16, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Animal ethics makes the most sense to me. //shb (t | c | m) 12:20, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I think that's more apt than Natural attractions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Fpp

[edit]

Redundant cross-namespace redirect which I've replaced all uses for (except two uses in userspace). //shb (t | c | m) 23:50, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Do

[edit]

Can refer to an actual place instead of the standard section "Do". Note that see is a dab page. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:35, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

What place can it refer to? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:08, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
There are three tiny villages in Bosnia Herzergovina called Do, but all have populations less than 200. The only attraction appears to be taking a selfie next the village's sign. AlasdairW (talk) 11:04, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

* Delete. No significant towns or travel destinations with this name, and we want to avoid cross-namespace redirects. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 13:02, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Gh

[edit]

Another cross-namespace redirect (XNR). Could also be an ISO country code for Ghana. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:44, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

OK. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:13, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pub

[edit]

A rather astonishing XNR. Should redirect to alcoholic beverages#Bars and pubs. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:54, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

I would rather not delete this one because a) there are more than 500 uses of it; b) most of them have not been replaced. I will try and replace them, but in the meantime, keep. //shb (t | c | m) 04:57, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I'm not asking to delete, but redirect to a mainspace article like alcoholic beverages#Bars and pubs, which actually describes pubs. Maybe a hatnote is needed to for our pub, which is not mentioned there. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 05:00, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I agree in theory, but let's wait for further remarks by SHB. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Ah, right, I get what you [Sbb] mean – I'm in the midst of replacing all links (give me a day or two), but yes, I support redirecting this to alcoholic beverages once I finish doing so. //shb (t | c | m) 06:10, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
This gets an average of 3 views per day, and there have been a few days where there were over 100 views, so a hatnote is essential if the redirect is changed. AlasdairW (talk) 11:10, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I'm switching to a full keep per Pashley. I'll continue to replace the links slowly, but it's a huge task, and one that I wouldn't encourage doing unless you want to procrastinate. If British pubs is created (which I hope someone does, because it sounds like a good travel topic), then I will support changing the redirect target, but it's no biggie for the timebeing. //shb (t | c | m) 08:42, 30 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Al

[edit]

Same as el, but in Arabic instead of Spanish. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:58, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Il

[edit]

Same as al and el, but Italian. Maybe redirect to Israel, as "IL" is strongly associated with that country (cf. kl → Kuala Lumpur). --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 09:41, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Na

[edit]

What?? We already have wia and wiaa, no need for another. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 09:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Sh

[edit]

Another pointless cross-namespace redirect (XNR). Also, an ISO country code for Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 09:49, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

PO

[edit]

Another XNR. Also, an ISO country code for Poland, or as per SelfieCity, a Spanish village. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 09:53, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Redirect to Pô. Ground Zero (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
That's a reasonable suggestion. I have added that to Pô. Ground Zero (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for doing that. I'm ok with it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Arrivals

[edit]

Another XNR. Redirect to arriving by plane or arriving in a new city. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 09:58, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've replaced the only instance of this redirect. I think arriving by plane is what I think of when "arrivals" is mentioned, but I don't object to a disambig page. //shb (t | c | m) 11:21, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
To me, redirecting to Arriving by plane makes the most sense. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 12:13, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
On this site, Wikivoyage:Arrivals lounge is the first thing I think of, so I think we need a disambiguation page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:50, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Policy and Policy outline

[edit]

Two more cross-namespace redirects. The words aren't specific enough to redirect to a travel topic, and there aren't any places that share the name "Policy". --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 16:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Policy outline is not useful. Why are we deleting all these cross-namespace redirects again? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:13, 26 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Per WV:XNR:
"The creation of cross-namespace redirects (typically from mainspace (ns-0) to projectspace (ns-4)) is generally discouraged – these can accidentally mislead readers and have the potential to confuse bots/external tools. Any new cross-namespace redirects should either be immediately moved to their corresponding namespaces (without a redirect) or be speedily deleted."
That said, they're not as explicitly against policy as I thought they were. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 17:46, 26 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
And it was added starting on 16 September 2025, after a talk page thread that had 2 participants. My main issue is that we have to type longer redirects, so I'm starting to have misgivings about this, but they would have mainly applied to redirects we already got rid of... Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
To be honest, when I proposed that I also didn't expect that change (or more so existing practice encoded into policy) to be this drastic – it was more or less what I'd been slowly doing for months now regarding lesser-used cross-namespace redirects because replacing all uses of them do take time, so maybe you'd only see me nominating one or two such XNRs a month. //shb (t | c | m) 22:36, 26 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I restarted that discussion. It was not a consensus, has led to vast consequences, and I regret my votes to delete very useful cross-namespace redirects that saved a lot of typing for high-volume editors like me. I'd like to take those votes back and undelete the most useful of those redirects. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 30 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Delete policy outline and hold policy for the timebeing – there are 64 uses of it atp. //shb (t | c | m) 22:13, 26 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Discover


Powered by GetYourGuide