Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion
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 current 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.
The basic format for a deletion nomination is:
===[[Chicken]]=== * Not a valid travel article topic. ~~~~
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 (EDT) * '''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
All nominated articles, files or templates are guilty unless proven innocent. If, after fourteen days of discussion, the consensus is to keep, redirect or merge, then any Wikivoyager should do it. If you are redirecting, please remember to check for broken redirects or double redirects as a result of your move. Remove any VFD notices from that page, and archive the deletion discussion as described in the next section.
If no consensus has emerged to keep the article, file or template, an administrator can delete it. Check if any article links to the article, file or template in question. After removing those links, delete the article, file or template. However, if the file is being deleted because it has been moved to Wikimedia Commons with the same name, do not remove links to the local file, as the links will be automatically be pointed to the file on Commons.
When deleting a template, consider first replacing it wherever it's been transcluded, especially if it served a formatting function. You can do this by adding "subst:" before the template name. Once that's done, you can delete the template without affecting individual uses of it.
- comment isn't the issue of IATA codes also on the requested articles page? Imho we should have an article explaining IATA codes (as they are the ones most travelers will get to see the most) and maybe even a list of common ones that link to airport (or rail station, or...) and/or city articles. Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Note that Template:IATA exists separately and is wide use, while this one, which attempted to give all sorts of additional codes we decided not to care about, was never adopted. Texugo (talk) 12:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - As mentioned above, Template:IATA is the one in use, and this one is extraneous clutter. Texugo (talk) 12:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Ah OK. It appears I was under a misapprehension. Than I would favor deletion and creating of a page on IATA codes Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Regarding an article on IATA codes, in practice the traveller usually doesn't need to know anything more than which IATA codes belong to which airport. That alone is not enough to carry an article, and any further information would be better suited for Wikipedia than our site. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- delete, but a related issue is that somewhere (Flying or one of its children) we need to talk about IATA codes like LON which includes all of London's airports. I do not find that with a quick look. Pashley (talk) 22:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- Create a Bus travel in Cuba article, merge and redirect Also have a look at Talk:Viazul --ϒpsilon (talk) 17:34, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Cuba#Get around. I'm unconvinced of the need for a Bus travel in Cuba article. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:56, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Re-merge and redirect to Cuba#Get around, which can be done simply be redirecting this page and then reverting this change. I'm also unconvinced of the need to have a Bus travel in Cuba article, as the current information fit just fine in the Cuba article before it was stripped out, and the rest that was added was just timetables which we explicitly try to avoid in the first place. Texugo (talk) 18:06, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Merge with a new bus travel in Cuba article I think if a bus travel in the United States or intercity buses in Germany article can exist so can one on buses in Cuba. Even sans timetable that we shouldn't include for obvious reasons. In my humble opinion the whole subject of bus travel is dealt with too little for no apparent reason. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- What we had before obviously fits in the Cuba article and wouldn't be enough to stand on its own, so unless you are personally volunteering to start adding lots more info for such an article right now, I'm not really sure that "merge to something we don't have yet" is really a valid outcome to vote for. The normal procedure would be to let the info grow organically within the Cuba article and then split it out only when it starts to overwhelm. Texugo (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Bus travel is reasonably complicated in Cuba. Taking the Viazul (the tourist bus) is easy and straightforward and doesn’t justify having an own article (at least if not including the timetable). Taking local non-labeled buses that sometimes aren’t more than trucks sometimes even without seats is a whole different story that no guidebook so far covers and only few travelers experience. I can’t really contribute a lot to that topic though, but there should be a place where it’s easy for people to do that though. Rumpeltux (talk) 18:57, 17 April 2015 (UTC)