| 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]
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]Needless disambiguation, as the second entry is named "Ontario", not "Oregon". Suggest deletion. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 11:06, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete. Ontario, Illinois is also a red link, so it wouldn't make sense for there to be a disambiguation for Ontario on that basis, either. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:13, 1 September 2026 (UTC)- Delete, per Sbb1413. Ground Zero (talk) 11:47, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
Deleteper nom. //shb (t | c | m) 12:16, 1 September 2026 (UTC)- Switch to keep per Gizza. //shb (t | c | m) 13:32, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
- Keep there is already an article existing (i.e. bluelink) on Oregon (Ohio) which I've added. I've removed the Ontario entry which must've been an error. We could even consider adding a link to the Oregon Trail itinerary on the Oregon disambiguation page. Gizza (roam) 12:59, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
- It makes sense to keep on this basis. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:47, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
There are a few issues with this template:
- 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.
- 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)
- I understand your argument, but this template is used on 399 pages. AlasdairW (talk) 22:46, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

French
Deutsch