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:

    May 2025

    [edit]

    Mesopotamia

    [edit]

    I think Ancient Mesopotamia is what a traveller might be looking for while searching "Mesopotamia". The present-day region can be mentioned under the historical travel topic, so the extra region is not needed. Other than that, Mesopotamia (Argentina) can be mentioned as a hatnote in Ancient Mesopotamia, and Mesopotamia (United States) is a red link. So, the dab page is unnecessary. --Sbb1413 (he) (talkcontribs) 18:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

    I think it's unnecessary to redirect, but we're not going to delete the term. I also don't see the advantage in deleting the disambiguation page, even if we treat Ancient Mesopotamia as the default, which I would support doing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:52, 17 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
    People appear to read both pages, the dab page has existed for 15 years and the extra region for 10, so I don't see any point in changing things. AlasdairW (talk) 21:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
    I'm going to lean a very weak keep per Ikan's explanation. //shb (t | c | m) 00:26, 27 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

    This article, which has not heen substantively improved for a year, provides only a basic factual description of the route of a highway. It has no information on what to see or do along the way, where to stay, etc.

    Wikivoyage:Itineraries says:

    "itineraries that have been at outline status or less for one year without being substantially edited are subject to deletion via the votes for deletion process."

    There is nothing about this article that makes it a travel guide or an itinerary. Ground Zero (talk) 12:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

    • Delete per nom. Given the article's nature, I very much believe it's better to start from scratch. //shb (t | c | m) 12:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
    • de:Bundesautobahn 7 is a fairly detailed, but unexciting article about the highway. It has about 80 listings of hotels, restaurants, shops and a few sights near the highway. I guess this is a highway that you will drive to get from A to B, not because it is interesting in itself, and an itinerary would only be read to find somewhere to take a break for lunch or to spend a couple of hours out of the car. Is it worth spending a few hours translating this? AlasdairW (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2025 (UTC)Reply


    Discover



    Powered by GetYourGuide