Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion

From Wikivoyage
(Redirected from Vfd)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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.


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.

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 located on the English Wikivoyage and not on Wikimedia Commons.

The basic format for a deletion nomination is:

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:

* '''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 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.
  • 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.


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. This can be done by adding the result to the discussion in a separate edit from the one in which you remove the discussion from this page; or you can describe the outcome in the edit summary when you remove the discussion.

If the nominated article, file or template was not deleted, then place another (identical duplicate) copy of the deletion discussion on the discussion page of the article, file or template being kept or redirected.

See also:

Icon delete talk.svg

April 2021[edit]

Taiwan redirects[edit]

This is a bulk nomination of Taiwan, China, Taiwan Province, China, and Taiwan Province, recently created by User:Soumya-8974. They don't have a navigational purpose, as there's no use case to have any of the three in articles rather than just Taiwan, and in the search box "Taiwan" would pop up before you had time to write the three in full. It'd be one thing if they were useless but harmless, but they're also politically contentious endorsements of one side in a geopolitical dispute, which pushes them from neutral to a possible net negative. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 01:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete all three per nom. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. LPfi (talk) 06:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep – People who believe Taiwan is a part of China will probably search for "Taiwan, China" or "Taiwan Province" for the country. We generally don't delete redirects, because they aid searches. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talkcontribs) 07:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Don't you understand that they'll type "Taiwan" first, thereby finding the article? Besides, no other province of China has a redirect from, e.g., "Guangzhou, China" - and please don't create such unnecessary redirects. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete, not even worth discussion. Pashley (talk) 09:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
User:The dog2, any comment? Pashley (talk) 11:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete" per User:Vaticidalprophet. "Taiwan" is a very likely search term, and users will have no trouble finding the article. Ground Zero (talk) 12:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per other comments above. --Ypsilon (talk) 12:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete The dog2 (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment Soumya just created another similar redirect, Chinese Taipei, which given this discussion is ongoing I've deleted. Should these others be speedy deleted?--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
I'd say speedy delete. "Chinese Taipei" is not a term that is used in daily conversations. Even to people opposed to Taiwan independence, "Taiwan" is still the name of the island. Even mainland Chinese will use the term "Taiwan" to refer to the island, an you're not going to offend anyone by saying that you went to "Taiwan". Mx. Granger can probably back me up on this since he lived in China for a bit. The dog2 (talk) 15:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep (or rather recreate) Chinese Taipei, which is a plausible search term for someone who, say, saw them competing in the Olympics. I agree with The dog2 that "Chinese Taipei" is not used in ordinary conversation, but I still think that redirect is useful for someone who may not be familiar with the term. Neutral on the others, which strike me as harmless redirects but also not very likely search terms. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:13, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
    • A search on "Chinese Taipei" leads the reader to Taipei. The reader can easily find their way from there. I do not believe that someone who is watching the Olympics and has never heard of Taiwan or Chinese Taipei would be seized by the urge to travel to this mysterious country on the basis of seeing its athletes performing. Wikivoyage is not an encyclopedia or a dictionary. Our readers will be people looking for a travel guide for Taiwan, and will be familiar with its common name. Creating links for search terms that travel guide readers won't search on is a waste of time. Ground Zero (talk) 18:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • I thought "Chinese-Taipei" was hyphenated at the Olympics? Anyway, I'm neutral on whether to delete that search term or not, but I'd just observe that sometimes, the best redirect is really the one that wasn't created. We should have redirects for likely search terms, but there's no need to try to be exhaustive. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:11, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete User:Ikan Kekek is right, someone will probably find Taiwan itself first. SHB2000 (talk) 06:37, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment: In any case, in common speech, "Taipei" is always used to refer only to the city, and not to Taiwan as a whole. The dog2 (talk) 15:49, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


Empty category, unlikely to be filled since we do not have articles on individual attractions. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talkcontribs) 09:33, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

It was created 2018 as {{PartOfTopic|Travel topics}}, probably as part of an effort to organise the topics sensibly. The See (I suppose "Attractions" was meant to cover that area) is now divided between cultural and natural attractions (and perhaps some more, Travel topics does not reflect the breadcrumb hierarchy very well). I suppose it can easily be recreated if it is needed in a new such effort. –LPfi (talk) 12:02, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per User:Soumya-8974. We don't want to encourage attractions article. Ground Zero (talk) 12:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete - useless unless the category is used/planned to be used for the breadcrumb hierarchy or something like that. --Ypsilon (talk) 12:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 20:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep as below SHB2000 (talk) 06:37, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete The dog2 (talk) 16:46, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Soumya-8974, LPfi, Ground Zero, Ypsilon, Vaticidalprophet:@ThunderingTyphoons!, The dog2:, found something that actually fills in the category. SHB2000 (talk) 05:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

What? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
The Walt Disney World one. SHB2000 (talk) 07:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Visa summary for EU citizens and Visa summary for U.S. citizens[edit]

We don't do lists on Wikivoyage. And in any case, if you want to go somewhere, you should be checking with that country's diplomatic mission, or the destination page on Wikivoyage to see if you need a visa. In particular, there's no way we can have a proper list for visa requirements for EU citizens, because there is no unified EU passport, and each EU country issues its own passports, so visa requirements will defer depending on which specific EU country you are from. The dog2 (talk) 16:37, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

As a side note: citizens of EU member countries do have the citizenship of EU (and it says so on the passport) as well but this is really just relevant if you travel, work and live in other EU countries. But countries outside the EU sometimes have different visa requirements for, say, Germans and Bulgarians. Ypsilon (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete or turn these into a short articles referring to some external site that has a well maintained list - maybe a EU / US based airline or travel agent. This kind of list need to be fairly complete, and updated every few weeks when something changes. The US list is far too short to be of use, and I can see some out of date info in the EU list (in addition to the complete lack of Covid updates). AlasdairW (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
I think we should make these a soft redirect to w:Visa requirements for European Union citizens or w:Visa requirements for United States citizens. These WP articles are much more detailed and look to be regularly updated. AlasdairW (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Do we redirect any Wikivoyage search terms to Wikipedia articles? If not, should we? I don't think we do, but I don't know. I think it would be OK to do so in very limited cases that are exceptional and decided by consensus on a search term's talk page, but perhaps we should discuss that at Wikivoyage talk:Links to Wikipedia. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:44, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I am thinking of links to WP, not a direct redirect. I have put this on Visa summary for EU citizens, but this can be reverted if this is a bad move. This links to WP articles and an IATA database. I think that these kind of lists are more useful for those with less "popular" passports than US or EU - such citizens may want to avoid getting visas for airport transfers. AlasdairW (talk) 21:15, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm fine with what you did, but it's probably worth having a discussion about it, maybe at that article's talk page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete these. Add links to the WP "visa requirements ..." articles in our Visa article. If that violates policy, add them anyway & consider fixing the policy. Pashley (talk) 01:49, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
I agree with adding to the Visa article, as it takes out a couple of steps that the user has to take in order to reach the information they need (far more likely that they'll find the Visa article before they find the two pages under discussion here).--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Dale (Indiana)[edit]

Block evasion by User:Libertarianmoderate through User:Midwestern Social Democrat (block evasion account) and has remained as a useless article. SHB2000 (talk) 05:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

  • Comment: The Wikipedia article here mentions hotels and restaurants, there's a nice photo on Commons, and a regionally sizable theme park is nearby. I can see potential for expansion here, though I'm abstaining pending further discussion because I tend to be more liberal about blocked/banned edits than most of the community. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 06:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
I feel like if we leave it, then MSD will create another sock and recreate it, but this is block evasion. SHB2000 (talk) 08:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Plus, it's also the user who created "Roberto", a fake town. SHB2000 (talk) 09:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. It is a crappy article. We lose little by deleting it, and we send a signal to an LTA. Ground Zero (talk) 11:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete - nothing worth saving and there'll be no barrier to future re-creation by a good-faith user.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)