From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Put a star on it!

This is where we determine whether an article is ready to be classified as Star status. Even though the criteria are fairly objective, it's good to get some additional eyes to look over a page and confirm that it's ready before elevating it to Star. For reference, here's the general description, from Project:Article status:

The article is essentially complete. It meets all of the above criteria. It follows the manual of style exactly or is the exception that proves the rule. Prose is not only near-perfect grammatically but also tight, effective, and enjoyable. It has appropriate illustrations, such as photos and a map. Enough breadth and depth of material is presented that anyone familiar with the subject of the article would have little to point out as absent. Future changes to this kind of article would reflect changes in the subject (e.g. a museum closes, a hotel price changes, a new airport is built) more than they'd require improvements in the coverage.

Objective criteria for Star status varies depending on the kind of article it is. For more concrete guidance on this, see:

If you feel that an article currently at Star status is no longer worthy, or never was to begin with, this is also the place to nominate to de-star an article.


Star articles: Last minute checklist

  • The article must be complete — See definition above.
  • Grammar and spelling must be perfect — See definition above. Prose should be stylistically superior and effective.
  • Illustration: the article should be appropriately illustrated with pictures and a Wikivoyage-style map, with all attractions marked.
  • Listings should be in alphabetical order — geographical order is also acceptable if it is deemed better.
  • No duplications: a listing should appear under one section only — if there is ambiguity, put it under the section that it most applies to.
  • Time and date formats: Use: M,Tu,W,Th,F,Sa,Su; and check our manual of style for latest and complete policy
  • Section introductions are not mandatory but should be present when they serve to improve a section.
  • Use "—" (mdash) for breaks in thought.
  • Use abbreviations for addresses, e.g., St, Ave, Sq, Blvd

You can nominate any "guide" quality article you think is ready to be declared a "star". Please do not nominate an article if you know that it falls short of the criterion above — refer to the info box for a last minute checklist. If there are other nominations on this page, add yours to the bottom of the list. The basic format of a nomination is as follows:

===[[Article name]]===
This has everything we're looking for,
plus a swell kitchen sink. ~~~~

Having done this, please add the tag


at the beginning of the article, after the {{pagebanner}} tag.

You may also post a note at Requests for comment to publicize your nomination — remember to tell people that partial critiques and even just a few quick words of support are welcome. These steps help draw attention to the article's nomination, improving the discussion as to whether it should be awarded star status.


Please comment on whether you agree that the nominated article is ready, with a bullet point (*) and your signed opinion. If you think it's ready, a simple "Support" will do. If not, explain what you think is missing or not up to standards. You don't have to leave a detailed critique to vote on the star — partial critiques are welcome, and feel free to just voice your support for the hard work someone else has done.

===[[Article name]]===
This has everything we're looking for, plus a swell kitchen sink.  TravelNut 25:25, 31 Feb 2525 (UTC)
* The sink isn't properly formatted, and there are no "budget" places to sleep. ~~~~

After three weeks of discussion, if a consensus is reached, then that article becomes a star, and the discussion should be archived. A consensus means that all outstanding objections should have been addressed and dropped; if issues remain then the discussion should be left open for two months to allow time to fix the article and reach a consensus. If the outstanding issues cannot or will not be addressed in reasonable time, the article should be added to the slush pile. Regardless of the outcome, it is useful to copy the nomination discussion to the article's talk page.

Successful nominations[edit]

  • Remove the nomination discussion from this page to Project:Star nominations/Archives
  • Copy the nomination discussion to the talk page of the new star article
  • Add the article to Star articles (and change the map on that page)
  • Remove starnomination template from article
  • Update the article status template on the article from guide to star
  • Add |star=yes to the Pagebanner at the top of the article (see also Template:Pagebanner if more than one icon is required)
  • If the article is currently being nominated at Wikivoyage:Destination of the month candidates, update the article status parameter in the nomination template.

Failed nominations[edit]

Articles should only be renominated when they address criticisms from the previous nomination.

Nominations for Star status[edit]

Number of articles currently in review: 3

For an archive of previous successful nominations please see Project:Star nominations/Archives.

Please add {{starnomination}} to the top of the article being nominated. This will add it to Category:Star article nominations.

Sydney Harbour National Park[edit]

It's been about a month since I created this article, but I've wanted and have researched all about this park for three months now. I've been to all the mainland sections of the park, and will plan to make some trips to the some of these islands soon (Fort Denison and Goat Island). While I believe there'll probably be a couple of people who'd be using this article for the long weekend (NSW), it may not be enough at this stage, there's a variety of good quality images in the article to enhance the reader's understanding, there's a dynamic map, and most sections are basically comprehensive. The listings are well detailed where need be, and the ones that aren't are pretty self-explanatory: for example, the The Hornby Keepers Cottage is just where the old former lighthouse keepers used to stay, and there's not much more to say about it. I've also gone above and beyond and added some restaurants in Manly, 1km from the park, just so those who want to eat don't have to take the bus to Q-station, which can take up to an hour (my experiences). I've also arranged them in alphabetical order and if I use 82's table, here's a checklist:

Requirements Done? Guidelines Done?
Tourist-style map Yes Done Meets all of the criteria in the "Requirements" section Yes Done
Listings match the manual of style Yes Done Perfect spelling and grammar Yes Done
District articles are at least "Guide" status N/A Wikivoyage-style map dynamic. static would look ugly
Prose near-perfect Yes Done Listings in alphabetical order or geographical order Yes Done
Photos Yes Done No duplicated listings Yes Done
Time and dates formatted correctly Yes Done
Section introductions Yes Done
Abbreviations used in street names Yes Done

Please share your thoughts, as any feedback will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:12, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Support as nominator. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:01, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Close. Even details that seem trivial could be of interest in the listings and I think something should be included in every one for it to be a star article (only needs to be a sentence or two). A little more information and it will be ready for star status. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi SelfieCity, when you say trivial, do you mean as in adding listings that are trivial, or just adding some fun facts throughout the article? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 01:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
The latter. Some of the listings with no content sound interesting and I’d like to know more. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 02:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll try finish it before 0030 tonight (AEST) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 02:04, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Also @SelfieCity:, if I've ever used 24 hour clock in the article, could you please let me know. It's sort of hard when my personal preference is 24hr, but living in a society where 12 is used (and you may notice my hatred of 12 in my edit summaries). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 03:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Support as more work has been done to improve the article (by both of us, but mostly you) since my above comments. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:36, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
FYI take a look at the way I used markers at Loneliest Road in America. This enables you to include coordinates for places that aren’t worth more than a brief mention and could work well in articles such as this one. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment: the section "Landforms​" is the only section where the landform names are not in alphabetical order. Another comment: the map that belongs to the color scheme is missing. Is such a map under development and will it be placed here after completion? The {{mapframe}} map does not show those colors. --FredTC (talk) 13:12, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
You're referring to the static map. My understanding is that static maps are not required for star status. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:45, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Not any more. And from the checklist: "static would look ugly". But I cannot see the colours on the dynamic map either. Having the colours without showing them on the map is confusing, and having the colours on the map would make it easier to get a grip on where the different places are. –LPfi (talk) 15:32, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@FredTC: - the reason why it's not in alphabetical order is because of the significance of North and South Head as well as Vaucluse park. But I'll move it. Also, I'm not too much of a technical person, so I'll just remove the colours (and the fact that putting colours on the map may disorient some readers.) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 04:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
@SHB2000: - I understand the reason, but I'm glad you made the changes. That made the article easier to use (at least for me). However, thanks to that it also disclosed a few little inconsistencies, like: Fort Denison/Muddawahnyuh (in Landforms​), Fort Denison/Pinchgut Island​ (in Get in), Pinchgut Island (in See) and Fort Denison​ (in Eat).
About the map: you are right, putting colors to the map would not improve the map, that has so many markers. I have seen articles that have more than one {{mapframe}} map. A map that has only one marker for each Landform could be usefull.
BTW: do you think more See-listings will be added? There is a problem when there are over 100 of them. TIP: I see several See listings that are in the gray parts of the map, so, they are not in the park. There is a {{listing | type=vicinity | ...}} that could be used for things that are not really in the park, if the >100 situation would occur. --FredTC (talk) 11:40, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
At this stage, there's not going to be anymore. Also, I'll replace the Pinchgut Island with Muddawahnyuh since that's the original indigenous name. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
I did also notice the problem with over 100 listings on Interstate 5. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 12:03, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Norfolk Island[edit]

This is an excellent article (OTBP in 2020) thanks to the work of a number of contributors. This is an opportunity for our first star-rated rural area article. I can't see that anything is missing, and it appears to have what is expected of a star article, though I may have missed something. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Support - It looks nice to me, and if I ever go there, I don't think I'll be needing anything else apart from someone local to help me. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


In my opinion, this article is looking better than Menzies and Innamincka, with all three being limited in sees and dos. It's probably one of our best Aussie outback articles, and I ain't seeing anything missing, although I often miss things quite easily. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 06:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

My feedback would be to slow down on these nominations. Traditionally, we've only had maybe four or five in a whole year. It would be fine if they were all getting consistent levels of interest, but with Sydney Harbour and now Norfolk Island you've started to see "Star nomination fatigue" set in with fewer participants commenting less frequently. I think this drop-off in interest that you can see is inevitable with any process that is time- and energy-consuming; people need time to recharge, and space to pursue their other projects on Wikivoyage.
Personally, the last thing I want to do right now after the successful nomination for Stratford and the slushed one for Eastleigh (which in particular took a large amount of time and attention of many users, only for the main author to inexplicably walk away when the finish line was in sight), and before that Caldas da Rainha, is wade in to another two nominations. Others may feel differently, of course, but I don't want to participate on this page at all for at least the next three months.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:04, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
I'll preface this by saying that I have no idea about how things are in the Australian outback, nor do I have any experience with star nominations at WV. So please excuse me if my comments are off the mark. But since you asked for it, here's my somewhat naive feedback:
  • The very long introductory sentence could be split up into an introductory paragraph.
  • The history section briefly mentions the "long Indigenous Australian history" and then moves on to give a detailed account of what happened after the western settlers planted themselves in the area — that feels a bit unbalanced to me. Maybe it's not a good idea to claim that Brewarrina has an indigenous history when the town itself didn't exist before the westerners arrived? Maybe better write something about the area having a long indigenous history?
  • The history section feels overly detailed with lots of dates and numbers that do not seem to be relevant nor particularly interesting to the average traveller. An then the records abruptly stop in the late 1980s, as if nothing worth noting had happened since then.
  • Maybe add one or two more images that capture the general feeling of being in Brewarrina?
Hope that helps, --El Grafo (talk) 09:14, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
@El Grafo: Thanks for the feedback. For your second point, while we know that it's rich in culture and there was significant Aboriginal history, we don't know much about it, and having studied about Aboriginal history before, there's been a lot of things damaged by European settlement (such as getting arrested for speaking your own native language which is damaging the culture, or doing traditional meetups), so we don't know too much of what's happened in this area. Also, the town didn't exist before westerners arrived, but it was a meetup spot for the Kamilaroi people. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Maintaining status[edit]

Tasks and checks:

Article needing attention or maybe de-star nomination candidates.

  • Menzies - listing not been updated for some time (apart from coordinates). Quick look at Google Maps suggests that there are new facilities.
  • Walt Disney World has a number of districts with no coordinates on listings.
  • Washington, D.C. has a number of districts with no coordinates on listings.
  • Nusa Lembongan and Ubud needing some attention and checking if listings still relevant.
  • Big Bend National Park needs an update.

Nominations to remove Star status[edit]

Number of articles currently in review: 0

Whenever possible, articles should be fixed rather than de-starred. Only nominate articles which cannot be easily elevated/restored to "star" quality. Add to the article {{destarnomination}}. Vote "Star" or "Not Star".

No current nominations

On de-star decision[edit]

  • Remove the nomination discussion from this page and paste it to both Project:Star nominations/Archives and to the talk page of the article;
  • Update the article status template on the article from star to guide if decision is to de-star;