From Wikivoyage
Latest comment: 3 years ago by ThunderingTyphoons! in topic VFD nomination
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Looking better now


@Ground Zero: ... have to say, it's looking so much better now. Thanks for fixing this Ground Zero. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

VFD nomination


An article that looks very much like an essay, and not a travel guide. Wouldn't it be better to nuke it, and let someone else recreate it, or can it be merged? Also, 50% of the edits were done by Brendan John Williams/Telstra SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 12:31, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

The current article is appalling & whatever else we do, nearly all its text should go. It is definitely a real place & policy is not to delete those. w:Abbiategrasso says it has a population over 30,000, so not a "speck on the map" that could almost automatically be redirected.
WP says it is part of Metropolitan Milan, so we could create a metro area article & redirect to that. Or redirect to Milan? Or just keep this article and trim the text radically? Someone who knows the area can decide. Pashley (talk) 12:58, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Looking at Wikivoyage:Wikivoyagers by location, User:User:Lkcl it would be a good person to respond, but they've been inactive since January. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
IMHO, let’s revert the Telstra edit (which is smaller) and focus on the body of the article. As this is a real place, it seems like a redirect candidate rather than a deletion candidate. Therefore, I’d recommend moving the discussion to Talk:Abbiategrasso but others may feel it is a valid outright deletion candidate. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 13:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
I'd've usually reverted the Brendan edit by now, but for once, it was something unusually constructive. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
So it is, good catch. Since this discussion lasts for 14 days, and the contributor who wrote it appears to be active (and a good faith contributor) here, I'd wait to see if s/he does more to improve the article. I'm not ready to write it off yet, even if there's too much content for one or two sections and no content for the others. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 16:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
User:Luchy04 is not a sock of the Telstraman, in my opinion. Why? The Telstraman never or almost never types edit summaries; if you look at this user's contributions page, they often do. I agree that the article in question is hugely bloated, but I think the solution is to delete the bloat, not the article. I'm unconvinced on the question of whether to make it a redirect; that would depend on how much other content could be added and how likely it would be for someone to add it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
And now s/he's replied to a talk page message, so definitely not a sock of that user. I will vote to Keep the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
No, the Telstra sock is User:Artullo672, not Luchy04. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 22:18, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
I agree. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
I've taken a whack at fixing the Understand section. Comment or corrections solicited.
The See section is at least as bad. Do we have a volunteer to fix that? Pashley (talk) 07:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
The understand section is looking a lot better now. Thanks for fixing it Pashley! And if I didn't get disoriented by just reading the see section, I'd do it, but after reading the first three lines, I lost track of where I am. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Despite knowing nothing about obstetrics, I took a run at doing the See section. It might call for more surgery yet. But I think we should keep this now. Ground Zero (talk) 08:34, 11 June 2021 (UTC)Reply