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:

    July 2025

    [edit]

    Meruleh was a former eswikivoyage sysop who had been involved in a lot of controversy. I believe she had her perms removed due to tool misuse, and was later blocked over there due to sockpuppetry. However, during her time as an eswikivoyage sysop, she did create a script called Serena which aimed to function like Twinkle. How effective this was – or whether it succeeded in its function – I am not sure.

    There was a long recent U4C case involving Meruleh (and related sockpuppets) but the final result was her (and all sockpuppets) being globally locked (not banned, though). There's a few reasons behind this, but the main ones involve extensive sockpuppetry, abuse of user rights and extensive manipulation.

    Given her extensive reputation for manipulative behaviour elsewhere, I do not trust that this script doesn't contain any malicious code. It's very likely that she had long-term plans to make this script more widely on this wiki but didn't get far. It is not used anywhere at the moment, nor is it linked anywhere outside this page and nothing of value is lost. However, the risk of some potential malicious code (maybe someone who knows Javascript more than me can check) is far too high given her extensive sockpuppetry and manipulative behaviour that led to the long U4C case – and even if it didn't, it cannot be maintained by anyone since she is globally locked. //shb (t | c | m) 12:23, 24 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

    The title couldn't possibly be compliant with Wikivoyage:Naming conventions, and its content so far consists of bullet points and lists of red-linked buildings, mountains and "Cities and municipalities". User:Veillg1 is not a new user, and we've had a bunch of problems with their persistent disregard of Wikivoyage style and consensus before, leading to 2 blocks of 3 days and 2 weeks so far. They know what's wrong with what they're doing and continue doing it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:21, 24 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

    We should also consider whether to nominate Joliette Regional County Municipality for deletion. We didn't agree to changes in the regional breadcrumb structure of Quebec, and black Wikipedia-linked lists of "Cities" and "Municipalités" described as "a city" and "a town" are not useful, while the "Things to Do" subheading is one Veillg1 knows very well is not standard. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:25, 24 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
    • Delete per nom. We have tolerated Veillg1 going out of their way to blatantly disregard Wikivoyage naming customs and there is a limit to how much we can do so. Enough is enough. //shb (t | c | m) 21:26, 24 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
    If there's a consensus to delete, I'll go along with it, but it seems worth asking if redirecting would be better. Pashley (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
    I would normally be in favour of merging, but I don't want to have to wade through crap that has been dumped into this article like, to pick a paragraph almost at random, "Local museum institutions... have implemented measures to enhance heritage elements for the sake of preservation and public exposure." Ground Zero (talk) 01:33, 25 July 2025 (UTC)Reply


    Discover



    Powered by GetYourGuide