Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion

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.

Nominating

[edit source]

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, except the page banner. Do note though, if you're tagging a template for deletion, use <noinclude>{{vfd}}</noinclude> instead of {{vfd}} alone.

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 hosted on the English Wikivoyage and not on Wikimedia Commons.

The basic format for a deletion nomination is:

===[[Chicken]]=== Not a valid travel article topic. ~~~~ 

Commenting

[edit source]

All Wikivoyagers are invited to comment on articles, files or templates listed for deletion. The format for comments is:

===[[Chicken]]=== * '''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 source]
  • 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 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.
  • When deleting a template, either replace it wherever it's been transcluded, especially if it served a formatting function. You can do this by adding "subst:" before the template name (especially if the use is in article space, you may then want to clean away unnecessary HTML or CSS code, which would make the wikitext confusing). Once that's done, you can delete the template without affecting individual uses of it. Otherwise, remove the template from all pages that use the template. However, do not delete the template first – this breaks links and will cause a swathe of red links, requiring a lot of cleanups.

Archiving

[edit source]

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. First, describe the outcome in the edit summary when you remove the discussion, with something like "archive as kept". Then add a line for the result to the discussion on the archive page.

If the nominated article, file or template was not deleted, then the nomination should be mentioned on its talk page. Generally this is done by providing a link to the deletion discussion on the talk page. One should also indicate the result on the talk page. If the discussion is short, an alternative is to place an (identical duplicate) copy of the discussion on the talk page.

See also:

September 2026

[edit source]

There are a few issues with this template:

  1. We don't really do these kinds of messages, at least not anymore. If Brendan has not responded to any of our messages for the last 10 years, I doubt any further measures will.
  2. The name is problematic. While it was fine back before IPs were masked, revealing the ISP constitutes personal information for the purposes of the temporary accounts policy; even if no IP data was used, it can still give that impression (since most users who deal with Brendan have access to temp account IPs).

Ignoring the issue of name, it's also a lot easier to detect where a temporary account is from just using Special:Contributions (which all admins have access to). If it's a registered account, a checkuser at WV:RfCU can do so in a matter of minutes. It's not worth having a dedicated template for one LTA, especially when far better methods exist for detecting Brendan socks than placing this template. //shb (t | c | m) 06:01, 8 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I understand your argument, but this template is used on 399 pages. AlasdairW (talk) 22:46, 8 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
@AlasdairW: I'm planning on substituting this template on all those pages in the next 14 days. //shb (t | c | m) 23:19, 8 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
Brought the list down to 200. //shb (t | c | m) 12:50, 13 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • Strong delete. No offense to anyone who's worked on this, but I'm sorry, it's a really asinine disambiguation page. "Bahasa" simply means "language". It's as if we had a disambiguation for some generic English word like "land" or "island" and put everyplace with "land" or "island" in its name in it. And don't start a disambiguation page for "kuala", which means "river mouth"! Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:29, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Keep — I created it solely to disambiguate between two different but related standard languages that are known as simply "Bahasa" in English. I know it's idiotic to some, as "bahasa" is a generic term in Malay, and Malay speakers call English "bahasa Ingg[e]ris". But it's English Wikivoyage, so I have created it based on the common use of English speakers. However, I agree there should not be such a dab page for "bahasa" or "kuala" on Indonesian WV (Malay WV is still in Incubator). Sbb1413 (he) (talkcontribs) 02:34, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
    There is no good reason for any language to be known solely as "bahasa". That is a misunderstanding, and one we should not be promoting. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:31, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
    I thought English speakers would use "Bahasa" as a shorthand for either language, as it's listed on the Oxford English Dictionary. If that's not the case, then I'm fine with this dab being deleted. Sbb1413 (he) (talkcontribs) 07:30, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • Delete – as a native English speaker, I don't think I think of any specific language when I solely hear the word "bahasa" – either Bahasa Melayu or Bahasa Indonesia in full, but never shortened to Bahasa. //shb (t | c | m) 07:20, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • Delete - So this is akin to saying "I speak the language" instead of "I speak English", but in a language family where "I speak the language" is a more common phrasing? I don't think linguistic quirks in general need a disambiguation if a sentence or two in a Talk section would suffice. (As an American English speaker, I've only ever encountered the bare word "bahasa" in the context of travel advice noting this exact issue.) Gerode (talk) 15:25, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
    As a Malay-speaker: "Saya cakap bahasa" (or the equivalent in Indonesian: "Saya bicara bahasa") is a stupid sentence no-one would use. "Saya cakap bahasa Melayu/bahasa Inggeris/bahasa Perancis/Bahasa Jepun" or any other language is a meaningful sentence. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:01, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Also, "Saya cakap bahasa" means "I speak language." No "The" is implied in that sentence. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:16, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply