Jump to content

Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/May 2021

Add links
From Wikivoyage
← April 2021 Votes for deletion archives for May 2021 (current) June 2021 →

Is this redirect needed? And if so, does it point to the right target? Also: Should there be a phrasebook instead? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:48, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your questions in order, I would say (1) it does no harm, (2) if it still redirects to Singapore#Talk, then yes, (3) maybe.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Since that talk section gives a few examples of Singlish, the redirect is OK. If anyone wants to create an article, I think it should embrace Manglish (Malaysian English) as well, because they're very similar. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's fine to have this redirect. It's not going to be an easy article to create because there is no standard form of Singlish, and usage patterns are constantly changing. And what we get taught in school is standard British English, so most younger people should be able to speak standard English to you if required. The dog2 (talk) 19:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. There have been books about Singlish, Manglish, Indian English, etc., and we have a Jamaican Patois phrasebook. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If Singlish is not needed in order to communicate, then whether to create a phrasebook probably depends on whether travellers are expected to learn Singlish, and whether an outsider attempting to speak Singlish would be viewed positively or not. Speakers of dialects are often more sensitive about outsiders using them, partly because dialects are usually more "exclusive" than a standard language, and partly because a dialect doesn't have the same prestige as a language, so it is often assumed the outsider is making fun.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If someone created it, it wouldn't be for foreigners to speak it but to understand it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can try to contribute, but it's hard for me to think off hand what the corresponding phrase it in Singlish. For me, I just instinctively switch to standard English when talking to foreigners, and I don't think too much about it. Some Americans even get caught by surprise when they hear me talking to Singaporean friends, because they suddenly find me difficult to understand. The dog2 (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I had a Glaswegian friend who was the same. So how likely is it to meet someone who can speak Singlish / Manglish, but not English? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Very unlikely I would say. But it's not unheard of to meet someone in Singapore who doesn't speak much English, which may happen if you approach the elderly (my grandmother being an example), so in such cases, you will likely hear them speaking some broken English, perhaps supplemented by some gestures while saying the term in Hokkien/Teochew/whatever language they speak. The dog2 (talk) 21:30, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thought as much. In that case, I can't see the point of making a phrasebook. If you're not supposed to use it to speak Singlish, and are not likely to ever be spoken to in Singlish, the only use for it would be eavesdropping on the conversations of people around you. The traveller would be better spending their time reading the Chinese, Malay or Tamil phrasebook if they anticipate meeting non-English-speaking Singaporeans.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Keep - per Ikan Kekek SHB2000 (talk) 21:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ThunderingTyphoons!, I haven't visited Malaysia since 2003 and Singapore since 1976, so I don't know the current situation. Furthermore, I speak fluent Malay when in practice, so I didn't have much reason to speak English to people who weren't excellent English-speakers the last time I was in Malaysia. I do know that it used to be quite common to encounter Manglish in Malaysia, but I don't know how common it is now. Chongkian, do you have any feeling about how common it is to encounter Malaysians using Manglish expressions, pronunciations and suffixes when speaking English? The most common one I always used to hear was adding "-lah" at the end of an English sentence ("Very cheap-lah!"), but "oredi" ("already") is used in a similar manner to Malay "sudah" and Chinese equivalents ("I eat oredi" = "I've eaten"), etc. There's also the use of "isn't it" or "is it" at the end of sentences to indicate a question: ("You come from America, isn't it?"). I don't know if I still have it, but my mother bought a pretty good book on Malaysia/Singapore English in Malaysia c. 1976 that was a serious linguistics study of the grammar, inflection and particular vocabulary of this dialect. If you want to encounter it in a humorous context, check out the classic comics of Lat, which are really funny and endearing if you understand the context and had a long run on the New Straits Times. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think those are the only criteria, ThunderingTyphoons!. We have a Teochew phrasebook for instance, even though the only monolingual Teochew speakers you are likely to encounter are the elderly. If you go to Bangkok Chinatown for instance, everyone you meet there is able to speak Thai, and you won't be expected to speak Teochew as a foreigner. And even in the Teochew-speaking areas of China, everyone who isn't elderly will also be able to speak Mandarin, and nobody will expect you to speak Teochew as a foreigner; the only instance where you will need to know how to speak Teochew is if you want to talk to the elderly. And perhaps another scenario would be if you're dining with locals, they will of course speak to you in Mandarin as a foreigner, but their conversations with each other will all be in Teochew, and you might feel a little left out. Despite all that, we still maintain a Teochew phrasebook, and I wouldn't advocate deleting it even though it's unlikely a foreigner will need to learn it. The dog2 (talk) 00:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The main question here is whether locals who speak Singlish/Teochew among themselves will appreciate your using some phrases in that language. The phrasebooks are not enough for understanding a conversation (and key phrases and idiosyncrasies can be delt with in the #Talk) – learning the language is something we discuss shortly in Talk, Studying abroad, Working abroad etc. but mostly leave for the traveller to decide.
Although the above discussion is interesting, here on VFD it should be about the redirect, which I think nobody suggests deleting any more, and whether a new phrasebook should be deleted if created. My feeling is that we don't think a Singlish phrasebook should be created (so let's not create redlinks to it, or redirects from the phrasebook name), but that nobody is creating it just now. Let's return to the issue if somebody actually considers creating it.
–LPfi (talk) 05:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with LPfi here. SHB2000 (talk) 07:38, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A phrasebook is probably not needed but the redirect to the Singapore article's Singlish section is good to have. Or if someone would like to write more about Singlish vocabulary that a visitor may come across, a travel topic article along the lines of Australian slang would be a better alternative. --Ypsilon (talk) 08:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with LPfi as well. Keep the redirect & don't worry about a phrasebook unless/until someone creates one.
You do encounter some odd combinations travelling. Working in China, I knew a married couple from Penang where his first language was Hokkien & hers Teochew, and neither spoke the other's language. Both were also fluent in English & Malay & both spoke Mandarin, though I don't know how well. Pashley (talk) 08:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Pashley:In the case of Hokkien and Teochew, they are very similar. In fact, when I went to Bangkok Chinatown, the local shopkeepers there would speak to me slowly in Teochew, and since I can speak some Hokkien, I could usually figure out the gist of what they were saying. And when I sent my Taiwanese friend a Teochew song once, he told me he could understand about half of it. I guess for Westerners, a comparable analogy would be a Spanish speaker and an Italian speaker trying to talk to each other; you won't understand everything, but if they speak slowly, you can get the gist of what the other person is saying. Of course, it also helps that I had exposure to Teochew growing up since the Teochews are the second largest demographic in Singapore after the Hokkiens, and my home in Singapore is very close to a predominantly-Teochew area (It is well-known that the PAP lost that seat in 1991 because the opposition candidate conducted his election rallies in Teochew, while the PAP candidate did not speak Teochew). The dog2 (talk) 15:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep redirect. Based on 10 years in Singapore and counting, Singlish is absolutely a thing, but it's sufficiently covered in Singapore#Talk. More generally, we don't have phrasebooks for other dialects of English (British, Australian, etc), so we don't need one for Singaporean English either. Jpatokal (talk) 05:24, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is an Australian slang article, and there's a Jamaican Patois phrasebook. I swear there used to be a Scottish phrasebook (not Scots Gaelic); am I wrong? What happened to it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What about the Aussie slang one SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:47, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: There's never been a Scots phrasebook, unless it was already deleted before the fork and thus before I arrived. There's a Scottish Gaelic phrasebook, but that's a Celtic language.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:05, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit 2: I'm nominating these two; Texas and Inglewood, which have no see and do listings. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome: Nomination withdrawn SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 12:14, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Skeletons created by User:Vkem

These articles have remained stale for a week, with only one of them being improved by LPfi.

While I noticed that one has been improved, if someone wants to improve these, can't they be recreated later? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep - it's only been a week; give them a chance. Can you not nominate any more real places for the time being? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have asked User:Vkem if they are going to do anything with these articles. They have not responded. I am waiting for another sign of activity from them. If they don't respond the next time they are active on Wikivoyage, I will redirect these articles to existing articles, which is what we usually do for real places. Ground Zero (talk) 11:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that seems fair enough. A redirect is easier to turn into an article than a deleted page.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The skeleton can be commented out like this, which makes it supereasy to restore the article when adding content to it. Unfortunately, we have so many skeleton articles that were created 8 or 9 years ago, and have been untouched since then. It does not help the reader to direct them to a skeleton article. Ground Zero (talk) 11:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vkem has been away after creating them. I was going to speedy delete most of these stubs unless he does something about them – there is nothing but the skeleton with the default text, and even the templates at the end are missing. They are linked from the region page, and redlinks there are much better than an empty skeleton (or a redirect leading back, or a removed link), for anyone searching for these places, However, missing Turku countryside from Greater Turku is not good, and Rymättylä is large and on the Archipelago Trail, so I took the time to get those up to near-usable. Merimasku is also on the trail, but I know near-to-nothing about it. The others would be nice to have, but they are no tourist destinations, other than perhaps Velkua (mostly staycation tourists), on Hanko to Uusikaupunki by boat. –LPfi (talk) 16:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Vkem, who has been present again. –LPfi (talk) 15:55, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vkem has had ample opportunity to respond, and has done no more work on these articles. If they don't respond by this time tomorrow, we should proceed to redirect them per our policy of not deleting real places. If Vkem or anyone else want to work on these destinations, it is simple to remove the redirect. In the meantime, we are not wasting our readers' time with links to skeleton articles. Ground Zero (talk) 16:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:LPfi, since you've got a great knowledge of Finland, which one's should we redirect it to? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all linked from Finland Proper, which is the region where they belong, and where they were redlinked. Some might have a better target, but the redirect can be changed when that target is reworded to include them (I have e.g. been contemplating including Merimasku in Rymättylä). The region is the standard redirect target and any other requires changes to the target. –LPfi (talk) 11:32, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Raisio is in fact now included in Turku. I added an attraction from the outline and one from the top of my head. I don't think we should save the car hire firm – we list them only when alternatives are few or for special reasons. –LPfi (talk) 11:37, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Should I remove the vfd templates. I'm well on board with the redirect idea, and I was the only one who wanted to delete them earlier. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:40, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome: unimproved articles redirected per LPfi. Ground Zero (talk) 11:46, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A stub that provides no useful information for travellers. Written promotionally, and a google search that says it's an individual tourist attraction. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:54, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be normal to redirect this somewhere and create a listing for it in the relevant article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I thought we don't redirect individual attractions. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think everything we need to say about these rivers is at Bengal#Understand. Pashley (talk) 09:35, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Shouldn't we ask Lazarus1255 whether they have some plans for the page. As it is now I'd delete it, but if they just forgot to continue on it or are willing to add some of it to a better place, deleting is premature. There may very well be other things than the attraction (I suppose they haven't bought all the shoreline) even if not obvious from Google. This wasn't written by a random tout but by a user with 7,842 edits. –LPfi (talk) 09:36, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry WV community, I was relatively new back then and trying to do some crazy things I think by combining different listing entities (i.e. Char Atra and Padna Meghna River Estuarine) I had found in different places in WV Bangladesh that were relating to pretty much the same thing (i.e. this confluence of these two rivers) and adding a description. But it seems pretty clear to me now that it is largely just the opposite river bank from Chandpur and basically the same thing one sees from that city, so it could just be mentioned briefly as like a boat ride activity in that city article (or not). You could just delete the stub as it stands now. Thanks for asking for my opinion. Lazarus1255 (talk) 10:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lazarus1255: - apologies for not even checking the edit history. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, SHB2000. Lazarus1255 (talk) 03:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: It has been fourteen days since you nominated the article for deletion. Do you believe that a consensus has been reached? 82.3.185.12 19:07, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't nominate it, and I'm not sure whether we've reached consensus or not but would respect someone else's judgment on that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:41, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I believe we have no one for keep or redirect apart from Vat. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 01:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I had also suggested redirection, but I don't care much since Lazarus is good with deletion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:28, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, didn't read your comment since it wasn't in bold. Sorry about that. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:36, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome: Delete after 14 days. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 01:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to Japanese Wikipedia, "Almalyk, which was destroyed by Uzbek, also declined, and its function as the central city of the Iri region moved to Ghulja and disappeared from history." The Wikivoyage article provides no information about how to get to where Almaliq was, or if there is anything there. I don't think that a travel guide needs articles about places that no longer exist. Ground Zero (talk) 17:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would Pashley like to comment? –LPfi (talk) 17:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If the historical information about the city is important, perhaps we could move some relevant information to Yining and redirect? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:45, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't seem like there is any trace of Almaliq for a traveller to find, so the history should be (and is) in Wikipedia. Why would it be in a travel guide? Ground Zero (talk) 19:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This would be the sort of information that would make this a useful travel article. Ground Zero (talk) 02:24, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds to me that the town is obscure, at least to foreign travel guides, but not that there’s nothing there. That’s why I still feel hesitant about deleting, but would be interested in doing some more research about the place. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:06, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ground Zero: - it's 14 days now and we have three deletes, three keeps, and one redirect. So what's the consensus here? Are we just going to have to keep this for an extra 14 days. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 02:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is now an article about a single point of interest. According to Wikivoyage:What is an article?, "Individual attractions should not have their own articles (in general). Their information should be listed in the guide to the destination in which they are located (or nearest destination for attractions located in the middle of nowhere)." There does not appear to be anywhere to sleep (indoors). It seems to be closest to Yining, so I would put the listing there with a redirect. Do @ChubbyWimbus, LPfi, ThunderingTyphoons!, Ikan Kekek, Pashley, SelfieCity: have any thoughts on this? Ground Zero (talk) 02:52, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The same thought as before :-) There's not enough to warrant an article, so it should be redirected to somewhere appropriate; I suggested the region, you suggested the nearest viable city article, but I'm happy with whichever one of those makes the most sense for travellers.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:36, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I’m convinced by TT. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:27, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If there's no community there and no place to sleep, redirecting it to the nearest city makes sense, though it didn't require this thread. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
When I nominated it, there was no site listed. Now there is, so things changed. Ground Zero (talk) 19:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If it can be mentioned in a relevant article, I'm fine with a redirect. The listing there should include adequate directions. –LPfi (talk) 07:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome -- single listing moved to Yining and redirect created. Ground Zero (talk) 17:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Votes_for_deletion/May_2021&oldid=4924251"