Wikivoyage:Star nominations

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.

If you like it, then you shoulda put a ring star on it!

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.

Nominate

[edit source]
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 {{starnomination}} 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.

Discuss

[edit source]

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 source]
  • 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 source]

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

Nominations for Star status

[edit source]

Number of articles currently in review: 6

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.

Mungo National Park

[edit source]

I'm kinda biased because I wrote more than 99% of the content here, but I think it's well and ready for star. But here's a checklist, using 82.3.185.12's table format:

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 – uses Australian Spelling and English. Doesn't look done to me. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
District articles are at least "Guide" status N/A Wikivoyage-style map (static + dynamic) Yes Done and Yes Done
Prose near-perfect, and tight, effective, and enjoyable. Yes Done (?) Listings in alphabetical order or geographical order Yes Done
Photos Yes Done – I'd love to include one or two more, but couldn't find anymore on Commons No duplicated listings Yes Done
Time and dates formatted correctly Yes Done
Section introductions (optional) Yes Done
Abbreviations used in street names Yes Done, except for "track", because there's no abbreviation for it.


The only thing that's missing is a static map, and there's two reasons for that:

  1. I'm not an Inkscape expert, but if someone knows how to do it, it'd be well appreciated
  2. While I did mention that it'd be well appreciated, some of the trails in the park are not actually within within the park, but it's still covered under the park's website, and this could make it confusing.

The article follows most formats off Zion National Park, and Yosemite National Park, and there is one additional thing that this article has but no other park article has – and that is that walking trails are on the dynamic map. With all this, it's why I think this article is essentially complete.

--SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:22, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After a quick glance, I think the prose should be checked. There are constructs I find odd, and I think it could be made tighter at places without losing enjoyability. –LPfi (talk) 18:24, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There could be some more details in Fees and permits. Are you allowed to deviate from trails and tracks? I suppose you shouldn't pick souvenirs, but that should probably be pointed out. What about cooking etc.? One campsite is said to have "good facilities [...] including toilets. Does that mean you don't have toilets in the other one? –LPfi (talk) 18:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Generally not every campsite in NSW has toilets, and sometimes you have to do it in the bush. Both these have toilets, and it has been mentioned, and have included info of being able to deviate from trails and tracks in the get around section. Will do the prose soon. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@LPfi: Have included about cooking facilities under the sleep section. Will do prose soon. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:00, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have now checked the prose and did some copyedits. Is there any particular places that need a prose check? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going through the text intermittently, and will continue to do so. Is there an issue with the dynamic map? I can only see one of the trails that are in the key.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You might need to zoom into the others, but all of them appear on desktop. I'll check on mobile soon. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just to confirm, I can see these trails on desktop mode.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:49, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please hold off on starring to givef me a chance to read the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:54, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, sure. I'll hold it until at least next week. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look at it and the reason why you can only see the red line is probably because you can't zoom on mobile. As the other trails are much shorter than the 70 kilometre loop, with most of them hidden behind the visitor centre/woolshed marker. The blue one on the east should also be visible, but it may be small to see. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:19, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, not yet. I have made these edits so far, and I'm not even through "Understand" yet. Please check my edits to see if I introduced anything factually incorrect or stylistically improvable, but star articles have to have absolutely impeccable grammar and style, and the following question in hidden text has yet to be addressed: "What does "they" refer to- emus and roos?" Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm noticing redundancies like this: 'It's also possible to join the "Willandra Lakes guided tour" as well.' "As well" and "also" are synonymous. I also saw "there's" used for a plural subject. That may be common in Australia, but to this reader, it's not standard English. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for that. I'll fix them just in a moment. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 04:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed 90% of those in the article. I might've missed one or two, so please let me know if I have missed any. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:03, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for your copyedits :-). Nothing factually incorrect. I've just clarified the wildlife and the climate section so hope it's more clearer. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 04:23, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • First thing I noticed is that the map has several colour codes for features that do not appear to be shown on the map. On closer examination I found them hidden under the numbered markers. Do we usually just expect readers to know this?
  • Second thing ts that there is no immediately obvious graphical indication of where the park is relative to the rest of Australia. By zooming out a lot on the dynamic map the information can be found. Do the readers just know to do this? I would suggest a small static outline map of Australia with a dot to indicate the location of the park, possibly in the intro section.
  • Where does one get more information on Mungo man, Mungo lady, the local indigenes?
  • It's different during a total fire ban, but while you may be as far away from the greenery on the east coast, you haven't escaped fire. - what does this mean? Cheers,• • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:05, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the feedback Peter :-). Well appreciated. I'll implement them. However, regarding "static outline map of Australia", I don't know how to make static maps, but I'll try and add more in the #Get in section. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "And if you do have special dietary requirements, don't be too surprised to pay twice more than usual." Does this mean twice the usual price or three times the usual price or just a lot more than the usual price? • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Just a lot more than the usual price in the capital cities. I'll clarify that. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As it is three months and three hours since I nominated this article for star, any last final objections before I upgrade it within the next twelve hours? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't support unless I look through the entire article with a fine-toothed comb. The writing style has to be completely free of grammatical, spelling, syntax and punctuation issues and just generally impeccable. So consider that an objection. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:28, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In a very quick look, I found a long run-on sentence and several other things I corrected. No, not yet. I haven't made editing this article a priority, but that doesn't make it thereby a star article by default or something. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:32, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can also clearly see that Peter Southwood had objections above. You can't unilaterally declare a 12-hour deadline while ignoring the comments that didn't support the nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:34, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've already fixed those issues except the static map thing (which I can do by just downloading a freely licensed map from OSM). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
He has not passed judgment on whether you have and I voted "not yet" above, noting that I hadn't read past "Understand" or whatever and had already found a bunch of problems. And an article can't be a star because you promise to do something afterwards. Not yet, and that vote stands forever unless I change it. Star status is supposed to be extremely difficult to achieve. It's not owed to articles that are good and unpolished. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:58, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but per policy, "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. In this case, it is well over two months since the nomination. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:30, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then maybe it has to be slushed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:19, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was not pinged so did not notice there were changes. Will check now. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 14:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will edit this article with a fine-toothed comb if I feel motivated to do so; it's only fair for me to say that I don't feel under any obligation to do so, and I hope that doesn't come off as unfriendly. As long as any article isn't impeccable in writing mechanics and style, it isn't a star article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:40, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I understand and there's no rush. The article isn't going anywhere, and so are we. The sole reason why I made that list is because the "what to do" is now all over the place (but that's what happens when you get long discussions). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What IK means is that he might not do that at all, and unless somebody does, this won't be a star article. Saying "Perfect spelling and grammar {{done}}" and "Prose near-perfect, and tight, effective, and enjoyable. {{done}}" at nomination was obviously a mistake. Those "dones" should be removed, and reinserted only when somebody who feels qualified to judge has done the thorough check, or we get consensus on it, when several people have done the check without feeling like making the judgement on their own. –LPfi (talk) 09:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra/Acton

[edit source]

Can't think of anything that'll significantly improve this article. Maybe a few copyedits, but apart from that, I believe it's complete. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've also deliberately left out chains such as Domino's, Chatime, Zambrero or 85C per Wikivoyage:Boring, if anyone's wondering. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 03:18, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Remember, a star article also has to be impeccable in writing style. It's very hard to get to star status. Here's the first paragraph:
"Acton is a small affluent suburb west of Civic and is Canberra's university district, with the Australian National University taking up most of Acton. Right next to the ANU is the Australian National Botanic Gardens containing one of the most diverse ranges of Australian flora, and places that can make you feel you're in the middle of either the Wet Tropics of Queensland or the Tasmanian Wilderness albeit it just two kilometres from the city!"
I'd never call that bad or unacceptable or anything like that, but I don't find it impeccable. This might not be impeccable, either, but it's my attempt at an edit:
Acton is a small, affluent suburb west of Civic. It is known as Canberra's university district, since the Australian National University comprises most of its area. The Australian National Botanic Gardens, right next to the ANU, contain such a diversity of Australian flora that you will feel like you're in the middle of the Wet Tropics of Queensland or the Tasmanian Wilderness, even though you are just two kilometres from the city!
I feel like I could go through the whole article and edit it with a fine-toothed comb. Anyway, I think it is not yet at star level, and that's no insult whatsoever. I will probably find time to look through more of it some time in the next couple of weeks (no promises, though). Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:20, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ikan, thanks for the feedback. I'm aware that star articles need to be perfect, and that's why we even have the vigorous process ;-). A lot of the content in the article is content that's been moved from Canberra so I might've dismissed it while proofreading it, though I did a proofread through the content. But thanks for the copyedits though.
On another note, I'm just wondering whether you find the bus line that's marked on the dynamic map distracting? I've been commenting out transport lines on district articles recently (as you probably noticed my edit on Manhattan/Financial District), but I sort of wanted the bus line marked, so I traced the bus route myself so the grey dots don't appear. Do you find that line distracting, or would you say that line can stay? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How many bus lines are shown, and in what color(s)? Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just the one bus line that's coloured in red (in ca0707). If you click on the bus line it should display "ACTION bus route 53". SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In the thumbnail in the article, that looks to be outside of the district. The thinner blue and green lines looked more likely to be bus routes to me. I see the bus line much more distinctly when I blow the map up to a full page. Are the other colored lines in the district all footpaths? It looks like they are, and I have to zoom in further to see that. Clicking the bus line isn't producing the route name or number, which I don't seem to see regardless of the degree of magnification. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A view of ACTION bus line 53 on SHB2000's screen on June 27, 2022, 09:35 (UTC+10)
That's strange. When I click the bus line, what you see on the right is what appears on my screen. As for the other thinner tracks, they are bushwalking trails inside the Black Mountain Nature Reserve. It's not a full list though; only the trails that were available on OSM were included. I did find various maps of other trails, but I'm not sure whether they're freely licensed and are compatible with Wikivoyage:Copyleft so I've deliberately omitted them just to be on the safe side. I'll clarify in the article what those other colored lines mean. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just another remark by me (the nominator), but I do hope that this article sets a good precedent on how university articles should look like so we never have a University College Dublin situation again. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 03:56, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[outdent] ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Revisiting this – what does this article need (apart from copyedits) that's preventing it from being slapped on with the star? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 05:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Still needs a lot of copy edits. Otherwise looks good, at a quick skip through. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:58, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra/Civic

[edit source]

I genuinely don't know what's preventing this from becoming a star article – it's essentially complete, as far as I can tell. The article will need a few major updates when stage 2A of Canberra's LRT opens, but that's about it. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:16, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also haven't finished adding {{time}} throughout the article, but I'm in the process of doing that right now. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:19, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've finished most of what I wanted to do, but it's worth noting that I have specifically chosen not to truncate Centre and Square to Ctr and Sq – the top of the page requires such to be abbreviated, but I've rarely seen Centre abbreviated to Ctr (this is the only place I've seen it abbreviated IRL). If the consensus is to abbreviate both, I'll happily do so, but until I receive a reply, I'll leave it as is. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:59, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are right, Pashley (talk) 11:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • So, I just started looking at the article. The first sentence is a little awkward to me: "Officially known as Canberra's city, Civic is what is now Walter Burley Griffin's design for a Civic Centre." Was Civic ever something else? Could you rephrase this sentence more clearly and elegantly? And then the second sentence is also awkwardly phrased: "Established in 1927, it's one of the oldest centres of Canberra and is the capital's central business district, surrounded by North Canberra and Acton." How about using what I'd consider a more standard word order? "Established in 1927, this is Canberra's central business district and one of its oldest centres." I'm not sure that's elegant enough, either, but I do think you could leave the remark about which neighborhoods surround it for later (maybe the end of the lede). Let's tackle this, next:
There isn't one agreed way to name this district, but Wikivoyage has chosen to go with "Civic" for simplicity. Other names for Civic include the city, Canberra CBD, or Canberra City Centre. What you see on signage may also be confusing, as whoever designed them couldn't pick a name for consistency.
How about:
This district is also called Canberra CBD and Canberra City Centre; signs are inconsistent.
"Understand" starts with "Civic was established in 1927, 14 years after Canberra was." How about "Civic was established in 1927, 14 years after the city was founded"?
I don't feel up to going through the entire article with a fine-toothed comb, but I will just point out that star-level articles don't get that way purely due to content but must have exemplary writing style - elegant, vivid, beautiful and not merely a little rough but practical. It's no shame to be primarily responsible for the creation of a good guide-level article, but this is not a star-level article and will not become one unless it is edited to have exemplary writing style. Look at the way Chicago guides are written for some examples of beautiful writing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback, Ikan Kekek. As you may know, travel writing isn't exactly my forte, but I've implemented most of your feedback with a few tweaks. The only major bit that I left was "There isn't one agreed way to name this district, but Wikivoyage has chosen to go with "Civic" for simplicity. Other names for Civic include the city, Canberra CBD, or Canberra City Centre. What you see on signage may also be confusing, as whoever designed them couldn't pick a name for consistency.", purely because I wrote it wordy to add a bit of lighthearted humour, though I'm not sure if I'm the only one who sees it that way (as a side note: I sort of took the Copenhagen districts as a source of inspiration, which is perhaps also why I didn't think twice). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've copyedited most of the history section – what do you think of it now? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: Now done with the Orientation section – this section is much less important, but what are your opinions on this? If this works out, I'll apply a similar level of writing style to the rest of the article, while trying to keep it as concise and less of a yellow pages fluff book (a la Buffalo) as possible. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another possible improvement that I've had in mind is to split the "Eat" listings based on location (as defined in "Outline") in addition to price. The only peeve with this is that most listings will end up falling into the "City Centre" or "City West" category. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:33, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FTR, I dumped a bunch of markers indicating every single carpark in Civic. It will need some minor tweaks which I'll do in the next few days. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very close. I think this article is almost ready to be made a star article. The detail, particularly in the "Understand", "Get In", and "Eat" sections is excellent and the addition of the static map helps as well. However, I'd suggest a few, mostly minor additions: the article could do with a "Cope" section with services (is there a hospital? place of worship?); it would be nice if some of the walks had markers representing the coordinates of their start points (for easy access); and the sentence "When it comes to things to see, Civic has very little to offer" seems odd given if it's followed by an impressive list of things to see (museums, parks, memorials, other sites). With those matters addressed I would support this nomination wholeheartedly. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:49, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @SelfieCity: Thanks for the feedback! I've fixed most of what you suggested, in fact all except for the walk markers – were you thinking markers as in using {{marker}} or using .json markers (which is what the article uses for carparks)? --SHB (t | c | m) 23:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Great! I would argue, both. Keep the .json markers, absolutely, but add the markers where mentioned in the article, just for the sake of additional clarity. That way when people see those markers within the article, they can click on them and go straight to the starting point on the map. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And, support already given the improvements made to the article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first sentence is awkwardly phrased and some abbreviations need to be spelled out the first time, and that's only through the first paragraph of Understand. Not a star yet. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Central Asia

[edit source]

I believe that this region article is ready for Star status, since it meets all of the requirements that the Wikivoyage: Region article status guidelines give except for a map depicting various routes throughout the region (which probably are not necessary in this case). The one thing I would note that differs from the set manual of style on this page is the listing for Historic Sites in the 'See' section: The countries are listed in reverse alphabetical order. When you rank the countries from most historic sites (Silk Road, etc.) to least, it lines up almost-perfectly with the Z to A listing of the Central Asian countries (the exception is Afghanistan, which has many sites, but due to the current situation there, very few people are likely to visit it so I feel it can go at the bottom of the list). I'm also not sure what all else needs to be done for region articles to make them Star status - most of the linked articles are Usable or better. I'm also happy to help edit things to make it a Star. Tuyuhun (talk) 18:35, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Central Asia doesn't meet the requirement to have all linked destinations and subregions be guide status or better. Mind you, neither does Bali, despite its star status, but the majority of its destinations are guide status. Even if there's a bit of leeway on that requirement, very few of Central Asia's destinations are above usable status. Feed Me Your Skin (talk) 04:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work per Feed Me Your Skin. All articles breadcrumbed to it – Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan – are all outlines. First get those articles to usable and I suppose we could make an exception from there. --SHB (t | c | m) 23:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Given this objectively fails the criteria for star, any objections to slushing it and then renominating Central Asia once all the country articles are guide? (which may take years) //shb (t | c | m) 11:09, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, slush it. But would it be worthwhile to start a Central Asia expedition to bring it up to snuff? Pashley (talk) 01:27, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support an expedition – there's a lot of potential in one. //shb (t | c | m) 05:56, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

San Diego International Airport

[edit source]

I believe San Diego International Airport has the potential to make Wikivoyage history, and become the first airport article to reach star status. It has a map, with markers for every store, and restaurant in the airport, along with markers for hotels, facilities (like the USO), and even transportation points within the airport. It also has 8 photos within the article not including the map. Someonehere12345 (talk) 06:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator. Someonehere12345 (talk) 06:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work – it's a decent guide article, but many of the descriptions feel rather lacklustre, especially in Sleep, which is rather unorthodox for guide articles, let alone star articles. For something like an airport, I would expect a static map since the dynamic map is very crowded. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 03:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work – The prose needs more editing to be near-perfect grammatically, tight and effective. I just made a copyediting pass that caught a lot of "your/you're" and passages like "call from the person you are picking up saying they are ready to be picked up, go to wherever they said they were", but there's more there to improve. I think there's also opportunities to clarify the bus, trolley, and train sections. Gerode (talk) 00:08, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sekigahara

[edit source]

Sekigahara, in my opinion, is ready to be awarded a "star" status, at least per the guidelines on Wikivoyage. All of the listings are in alphabetical order, the writing conforms with the manual of style, and the article is full of a variety of different sights and sites. The "Drink" section is lacking listings, because Sekigahara is a small town with no bars, but other than that all sections that usually have listings ("See", "Sleep", "Buy", etc.) have them. No listings are duplicated. There are ten photos and a full detailed map. I can't think of anything in particular this article would still need to be upgraded to "star". Sekigahara is also the upcoming Wikivoyage:Destination of the month candidates feature for OtBP October 2025, so the article has been extensively copyedited already. Tuyuhun (talk) 08:54, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, looks fine to me. Pashley (talk) 11:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator. Should we go ahead an upgrade it to Star status, since it's been more than the requisite 3 weeks with no apparent outstanding issues? Tuyuhun (talk) 00:56, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Give me a chance to look at it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:46, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet. I'm making a lot of copy edits. Be careful not to capitalize words like "the station." Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:14, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think it's at Star status now @Ikan Kekek? Tuyuhun (talk) 02:53, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think the writing is exemplary yet. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:12, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cruise ships

[edit source]

I've put in a huge amount of work on this article over the past few days, and I'd like for it to be considered for a Star.

The article was hopelessly out of date, had a strange bullet-point formatting style, had some strange textual choices (e.g. hyphenating words for no reason) and didn't touch on many concepts that would be crucial to someone approaching cruise travel, while expounding at length on ones that either weren't relevant or duplicated other articles. After extensive clean-up, this should now be a great resource for anyone new to cruising or who is looking for tips on how to book and travel on a cruise, giving practical and helpful advice with what is hopefully more entertaining and traveller-centric prose. Comments are very welcome! BloodNinjasPinwheel (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you have put a lot of time into this article, and thank you very much for doing that. As I look through it, I wonder if all of the info is on point and truly necessary. It's a very long read, and some of it is overly positive, sounding like it was the voice of a cruise line's marketing director. I think it could use some careful editing by an experienced editor with good critical judgment skills to hone it down to the most useful, unbiased info we can get. Mrkstvns (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Although it is a good article, it is too focussed on large ship cruises on American or European lines. I think we need separate articles for River Cruises, Day cruises and Small ship cruises. This article should cover Chinese cruise ships, I think the Russian ones have stopped. AlasdairW (talk) 22:18, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maintaining status

[edit source]

Tasks and checks:

Article needing attention or maybe de-star nomination candidates.

  • As I pointed out, the map is better than a Wikivoyage-style map, so that's not a good reason to revoke star status at all. I also suggested that if it's really important to do so, the list of campsites could be subdivided by region. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations to remove Star status

[edit source]

Number of articles currently in review: 1

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".

Walt Disney World/Disney Springs

[edit source]

This has the same issues with Walt Disney World/Animal Kingdom except with fewer coordinates. Too much for a single person to do. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:52, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've added about 20 coordinates but given the number of listings in this article, adding all coordinates will take a while. It should be clarified that coordinate markers do not match the numbers on the static map. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 14:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding them :-) I might speedy slush these once you and @Tai123.123 have finished adding coords. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 04:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be alot of chains listed in "Buy" that may violate Wikivoyage:Boring, an example of this is Levi's. Tai123.123 (talk) 03:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Levi's is definitely a boring place. I'd say remove those. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 03:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tai123.123: I slushed the other one, and here's what I think are boring:
  • Lacoste
  • Levi's (as what you mentioned above)
  • Orlando Harley-Davidson
  • Superdry
  • Under Armour Brand House – tho the description makes me feel a this and that to be fair
  • Uniqlo (the Japanese clothing store is everywhere now)
  • Zara
  • Starbucks
However, I'm not going to remove any of these except Levi's because I'd want to get an opinion of one of our Americans first. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:52, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say Uniqlo, Starbucks, Zara and Under Armour are boring as we have those in Canada, not sure about the others Tai123.123 (talk) 02:10, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those are worldwide chains (we have them here too), so definitely not worth mentioning. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:25, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I missed this for so long. As a Floridian, I'd say, let's go ahead and remove the chain stores per our general policy. There are too many shops listed here as it is. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 16:37, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On de-star decision

[edit source]
  • 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;