text:
Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/April 2008

Archive for Project:Votes for deletion acted on in April 2008. If you can't find the chronicle that interests you here, try Project:Votes for deletion/March 2008 or Project:Votes for deletion/May 2008 for things that may have happened earlier or later, respectively.

Image:Nova-Jerusalém-HerodesPalace.jpg
"Copyright © 2005 Patrick. Picture taken by Wikipedia User Patrick-br, April 2005. Self-made. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU Free Documentation License"." ~ 203.144.143.4 05:42, 27 January 2008 (EST)

 * delete It is from Wikimedia commons, not uploaded by the photographer, so there's a license conflict. (WT-en) Pashley 19:40, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 07:54, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Guadalajara (city)

 * Delete. There is already a page for Guadalajara. Not much point having a redirect from Guadalajara (city).--(WT-en) Wandering 13:31, 30 January 2008 (EST)
 * Not sure - there is another city and a province in Spain called Guadalajara, we should deal with the disambiguation first. --(WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 14:13, 30 January 2008 (EST)
 * That makes sense. How about a Guadalajara (Mexico), Guadalajara (province), and Guadalajara (Spain) with a disamb page? I think it's a tossup whether Guadalajara (city) should go to the Spanish or Mexican one and we can just redirect it to the disamb page (along with Guadalajara instead. ??--(WT-en) Wandering 14:26, 30 January 2008 (EST)

 * Delete. Nobody is going to search for that. Regarding the naming issue, the Mexican city is faaaar more famous than the Spanish one, I didn't even know there was a spanish one... and there's not a province, as far as I know ... so Mexican one should stay where it is, and the Spanish one should be at Guadalajara (Spain) – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 21:16, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

 * So there is a province, but we don't necessarily need it to be created, as of now I've put the city in Castilla La Mancha... so we're all good to delete this – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:53, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

 * Delete. What Cacahuate said. (WT-en) Texugo 23:00, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 07:55, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Munich.jpg

 * Image being moved to shared and no license. (WT-en) 2old 09:33, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 07:57, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Montcomap.gif
Copyvio from --(WT-en) Nick 03:19, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
 * delete (WT-en) Pashley 19:33, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:04, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:LBIBeach.jpg
Copyvio from ] --(WT-en) Nick 16:18, 3 March 2008 (EST)
 * delete (WT-en) Pashley 19:33, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:04, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Lubbock County and Baylor County
I have reworked the subdivision of the Texas Panhandle so that we have no need for individual county articles. (There would be about 100 of them if we went with counties). These two were the only ones which were created so far, and basically contain no information anyway.
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 00:52, 6 March 2008 (EST)
 * I would recommend that we redirect these to the appropriate subregion (High Plains?), since they are real places and people might search for them. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:26, 7 March 2008 (EST)
 * I don't suppose I have a huge objection to that, but don't expect me to be the one who goes creating redirects for the other 252 counties of Texas! (WT-en) Texugo 00:37, 7 March 2008 (EST)
 * Redirect these, ignore the other 252. (WT-en) Pashley 01:16, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Redirected --(WT-en) Nick 08:04, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Amber Fort
Not an article, copyvio --(WT-en) Nick 16:06, 9 March 2008 (EDT)
 * delete (WT-en) Pashley 19:33, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Redirect to Jaipur, it's a major tourist attraction. (WT-en) Jpatokal 16:36, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Redirected --(WT-en) Nick 08:08, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Junagarh Fort
Not an article, copyvio --(WT-en) Nick 16:06, 9 March 2008 (EDT)
 * delete (WT-en) Pashley 19:33, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:08, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Brownies23.jpg
Copyvio from --(WT-en) Nick 03:35, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
 * delete (WT-en) Pashley 19:33, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:08, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:1223 04.jpg
Unused, not travel related, looks like a copyvio --(WT-en) Nick 03:37, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
 * delete (WT-en) Pashley 19:33, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:08, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Wielkopolski Forest
A forest doesn't qualify for its own article.
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 01:13, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:08, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Kolmanskop
A must visit if you are in Namibia, but does not qualify as an article. Info merged with Lüderitz where it belongs --(WT-en) Nick 13:22, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Redirected to Lüderitz --(WT-en) Nick 08:10, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Brandberg Mountains
A mountain, not an article. I'll be doing a bit of a rewrite, cleanup and hierarchy change on Namibia and this will be included within another region. No need for it to be an article on it's own.

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:13, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Pub m40
Definitely not an article. Would have speedy deleted, but want contributor to see why. --(WT-en) Nick 05:54, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:13, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

NO
This is not a standard abbreviation like NY.
 * Delete. (WT-en) Texugo 00:20, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:13, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Habitación
Someone uploaded this to help advertise a hotel listing.
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 19:08, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Already deleted --(WT-en) Nick 08:17, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Vatican City tour
Outcome: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 22:57, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
 * Delete. What sense does it make to keep an empty outline for an iterinary? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:39, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 02:21, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Deepak
Software developer advertising himself.

Outcome: Speedy deleted, obvious non-article --(WT-en) Nick 04:40, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:2005111016081672471.jpg
Copyvio travel(dot)987654(dot)com
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 02:32, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 20:17, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:1113313793.jpg
Copyvio www.db668.com
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 02:32, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 20:17, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Rein Guesthouse

 * Delete. Non-article and we don't redirect business establishments. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:46, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 20:17, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

TRAI

 * Delete. Hmm. Perhaps the user thought this was Wikipedia? Anyway, clear non-article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 03:43, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 20:17, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:20060925144955196.jpg
Copyvio www.maoming.gov.cn
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 02:32, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Already deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Fal

 * Delete. We have enough licenses to choose from, only 1 image uses this, it's not in our pulldown menu selection, and I don't foresee it making it's way there anytime soon – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 21:48, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Delete, also delete Image:Joburg-clockwise.jpg, the only photo that uses this template. Seems that original contributor already deleted the actual photo --(WT-en) Nick 16:18, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Both deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Wide image

 * Delete. Huh? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 21:54, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Eat

 * Delete. Never implemented, we use the tags instead now – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 21:59, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Escape

 * Delete. Not in use – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Datos

 * Delete. Not in use, created by anonymous contributor with no explanation – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Clear

 * Delete. What is this doing? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Africa

 * Delete. Not in use, and consensus in the past has leant towards not using templates like this and cluttering up pages – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Delete --(WT-en) Nick 16:19, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Ar

 * Delete. Not in use, no explanation – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:!

 * Delete. Sapphire created it while jacked up on Red Bull at 3am a while back, nothing links to it :) – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:Europe

 * Delete. Consensus in past has swayed against these types of templates, and they should be discussed before creation too – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:14, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Lore City

 * Delete. Population 305, suspiciously created by a new user who showed up and created three empty articles for tiny towns - one in Wyoming, one in Ohio, and two in England.  If it's wasn't 2:30 in Portland (Maine) then all three might have been speedy deletion candidates as page creation trolling. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 02:24, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:08, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Riding-Vilanculos.jpg
Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:28, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Mozambique Horse Safari Swim.jpg
Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:28, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Vilanculos-Riding-2.jpg
Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:28, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Mozambique Horse Safari.jpg
People in photos. All four were uploaded to advertise a company called "Mozambique Horse Safari" listed in the Vilanculos article. Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 04:28, 18 April 2008 (EDT)
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 21:31, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:F0001000005.jpg
Re-nominating this. Originally nominated as a copyvio prior to "permission" being posted on the Talk:Laurentides page. Appears to have been kept on a "See discussion above" basis, however outcome of that discussion was deletion.

Re-nominating it because:
 * 1) The permission is for text only.
 * 2) The statement applied to the image "This picture is not protected by copyright. The uploader owns the image and has released all rights. This applies worldwide." is obviously false.
 * ~ 203.144.143.4 13:03, 25 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:IMG 3532.jpg
No licence ~ 203.144.143.4 14:58, 25 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:DSCN1095.JPG
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:200px-TaipeiMosque.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Image551.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:IMG 0156.JPG
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:PoeinariCastle.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Chapora 1.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 09:58, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Chapora 2.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 09:58, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:20276 front.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:DSCF0031.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Outcome: Deleted - Unused. vfd Avalanche cleanuop --(WT-en) Nick 04:35, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Trains facilities from Vijayawada
Not really even an itinerary.
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 22:36, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 00:15, 23 April 2008 (EDT)

Qeshm Island

 * Delete. No content. Was redirect to Kish Island, which is another island in the persian gulf. (WT-en) Sleepyhead 07:47, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

 * Keep. It's a destination, and you can sleep there. But I think Qeshm is the most common name, we should move there – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 14:52, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Redirected to Qeshm --(WT-en) Nick 05:36, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Carnival
First of all, in Brazil it is Carnaval, not Carnival. Second, even as a travel topic, there is no way to make an article to cover the myriad ways the event is marked in the thousands of Latin American destinations that celebrate it.
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 21:36, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:39, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Stradun.jpg

 * Delete - People in photo --(WT-en) Nick 10:42, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 20:57, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:41, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

The Battle of Austerlitz - Slavkovské bojiště

 * Delete, non-article. And, um, merge to Wikipedia? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 09:29, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) Texugo 20:57, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:43, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:Crowded.JPG
Recognizable people in photo.
 * Delete - (WT-en) Texugo 20:56, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:45, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Dufourspitze
A single mountain is a non-article.
 * Delete - (WT-en) Texugo 22:22, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:47, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Images of Seth Green and Pauly Shore
These were placed in the Essequibo Islands-West Demerara article to accompany a hoax.
 * Delete - (WT-en) Texugo 00:56, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:49, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Vestmannabjørgini
Does not seem to be a valid article --(WT-en) Nick 04:39, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:51, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Hotel Kodai Breeze

 * Delete. non-article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:33, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:53, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Serrano Street

 * Delete & perhaps merge some content to the appropriate Buenos Aires district article. Also a non-article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:38, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:53, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

St. Louis County Road 7

 * Delete, non-article & copyvio from Wikipedia. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:40, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

Outcome: Deleted --(WT-en) Nick 05:53, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Template:QuestionOnYourEdit

 * Delete. I think it's much more favorable to personal with questions, etc... I don't think we should get into creating a ton of communication templates for talk pages. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 23:38, 18 January 2008 (EST)
 * Keep Some people may find it useful, so why not. It's standard and simple and anyone could easily type the same text. I assume one doesn't have to use it. --(WT-en) Wandering 15:20, 19 January 2008 (EST)
 * Delete. I suppose its nice to have a standard way of questioning an edit but it is hard enough keeping track of the templates and special pages anyway and this doesn't add a whole lot. --(WT-en) Wandering 12:46, 19 January 2008 (EST)
 * Wandering, if you believe it's nice to have a standard way of questioning an edit--why can't we work further on the template to make it easier to use (and choose a better name for it)? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 12:57, 19 January 2008 (EST)
 * Let's think about it. The plus side of having a template is that the question is then framed neutrally, which, I think, is important. The minus is that most people will not know about it and the odds are that most people will not use it. Do you have an example of how it will work in practice and what does wikipedia do?--(WT-en) Wandering 14:02, 19 January 2008 (EST)

 * I only used the template once: SUBSTed it in which invited Texugo to comment on . --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 19:33, 19 January 2008 (EST)

 * As for Wikipedia, I would rather refer to Wiktionary templates (which is still bit too formal): wiktionary:Category:User_warning_templates. Wikipedia practice is really formal and templates-intensive; I don't think we want to go that far: wikipedia:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 19:33, 19 January 2008 (EST)

 * Keep. It is useful; it saves time for a non-native speaker contributor; it helps to keep all article-related discussions on article talk page instead of scattering them across user talk pages. See also discussion that preceded the creation of the template. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 12:57, 19 January 2008 (EST)

 * Just to clarify, my issue is with using templates in this manner at all, not whether the discussion takes place on the article talk page or a user talk page. I think it's impersonal (and on top of that lazy) to use templates for things like this rather than just typing a sentence. Denis, your English is fine, you don't need templates to get your point across ;)  Wandering, I'm not vfd'ing this template just because I don't find it useful, but more because I don't think it sets a good precedent, and will almost certainly lead to more... My overall question is whether we want to start introducing a ton of generic communication templates, and I'm clearly voting no  :)  – (WT-en) cacahuate   talk 15:34, 21 January 2008 (EST)

 * Well, for myself the choice (depending on whether the template exists) will be whether to address user on his talk page in addition to leaving a msg on article's talk page, or to not bother with talk:user and only use talk:article. I'd rather use my limited time on contributing more content to more articles than spending it on composing personal messages every time I have a comment on someone's edit. In reality, it is more likely that I will still use the same impersonal and neutral message, but instead of invoking a template I'll copy-paste the text from my user's page--and it will still take more of my time. And I would like that other contributors rather spend more time on articles rather on composing personal messages (or not address other users personally at all). --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 16:20, 21 January 2008 (EST)

Anyone else have an opinion on this? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 01:47, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

 * Delete. We don't need templates to say hi.   Just type a sentence pointing the user to the place where the question is. -- (WT-en) Colin 01:44, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

 * You mean it's OK to not worry how good or bad that sentence sound? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:01, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

 * Delete. I was on the fence, but I'm inclined to call this a slippery slope—I really like that we avoid templated interaction with each other (unlike some other wikis). Denis, I'd recommend that you keep a personal list of pre-written messages that you use often in your userspace. I started doing that for (WT-es) edit summaries on :es, and have found it a useful time-saver. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:44, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

 * It takes more time to insert 3 links (of which, 2 are different) into a pre-written text. Instead, I will not address original contributor at all--see below. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:01, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

 * Delete. As I and others have stated before, personal interaction is better. -- 62.121.119.141 15:01, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

For myself, removal of this template will mean that the community prefers me to comment only on article talk page (and hope the original author will visit it some day), and never comment on original contributor's talk page (as I only have energy for a quick template invokation, but not for composing a personal message every time). If that's what community wants, I can live with it--but I don't believe it will help in improving articles faster. That's really pity. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:01, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

DELETED – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 06:22, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

Image:DellsVacationLogo.jpg

 * 1) A logo
 * 2) No licence
 * ~ 203.144.143.6 04:49, 26 January 2008 (EST)
 * delete (WT-en) Pashley 19:37, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Image:Holstentor.JPG
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Akuh khi.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Freedom ship.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Image:VladBust.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Sigclocktower.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.10.215 06:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Houseofterror.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Parustrail.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:DSCF0023.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:DSCF0039.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Huanchaco.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Harrisons.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Harrisons.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:KrishnaveniMatastatue.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 05:51, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:My.php?image=philatq8.gif
No licence. To access the file, use this link: ~ 203.144.143.4 06:05, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:My.php?image=phillymainpg4.jpg
No licence. To access the file, use this link: ~ 203.144.143.4 06:05, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Image:P1010017.JPG
A dog; no licence (the image, that is - don't know about the dog). ~ 203.144.143.4 07:13, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Amaravathi-1.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 07:36, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Hvar.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 07:36, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:3steeple.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 07:36, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Tazza.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 07:36, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Meerkat.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 07:36, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:P1000335.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 07:36, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Breckenridge.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 07:36, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Chopta2.jpg and Image:Chopta.jpg
archived Jan.29 but then brought back to deal with the "other images"
 * Delete. Copyvio -- the second image comes up twice in the first page of GIS. Contributor marked images as his own. -- (WT-en) Colin 20:47, 2 January 2008 (EST)

Same contributor has uploaded several other images and was asked to clarify their status on 2 January 2008 (see User talk:(WT-en) Wikid) but has not responded. Should all images uploaded by this contributor be deleted? ~ 58.8.4.9 13:59, 25 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Chopta3.jpg
no licence

Image:Chopta22.jpg
no licence

Image:HarKiDun.jpg
no licence

Image:Panwali.jpg
no licence

Image:Schwebebahn.jpg
No licence; probably a copyvio too. ~ 203.144.143.4 02:47, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Back.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:14-1-. bench in the shade (2).jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:IMG 0132.JPG
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Tifranska klisura Berane, Rijeka Lim.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Glavna ulica z.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Komovi.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:15sel bus.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Sari.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:SanAndres.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:01, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Trolejbus solaris trollino12t.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Bhattathiri.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:A109pc.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Boracay2.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Johnmizzi.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Raju lonawala.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Beowulf-Spring1.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Dickens poster.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 03:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Asia 2006 202.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 21:19, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Asia 2006 089.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 21:19, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Asia 2006 082.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 21:19, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Asia 2006 156.jpg
No licence. ~ 203.144.143.4 21:19, 30 January 2008 (EST)

 * So what's the deal with these 'no license' pages? Does one delete them or are they stuck in the same limbo as the 'not licensed under cc-by-sa-1.0' pages?--(WT-en) Wandering 13:59, 31 January 2008 (EST)
 * Another question - When images appear that are not licensed, should they be tagged Dont know AND VFD at the same time or just Dont know. for a period of time to allow contributor to fix problem. I read the guidelines and was not sure of the interpretation. 65.24.110.210 15:35, 31 January 2008 (EST)

 * Why should "no license" pages/VFDs be stuck in limbo? Do you have any particular reason(s) in mind?

''To improve readability and maintenance on this page, the rest of this discussion has been moved to the talk page at CC-by-SA discussion (B). Please continue reading there.''

KEPT ALL - images uploaded without a license are ccyba 1.0 by default per special:upload – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 06:22, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

Lake Chatuge
Redundant region, not part of the Geographical hierarchy - only linked to once, from Georgia (state), and no articles have an isin: Lake_Chatuge tag. ~ 203.144.143.4 17:20, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:01monuments1.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Europe 3.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Europe 1.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Mezquita.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Dalat PetitParis.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:EasyRiderTour.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Izola.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Image:Sagada 2.jpg
No licence. ~ 58.8.3.194 19:22, 31 January 2008 (EST)

KEPT ALL - images uploaded without a license are ccyba 1.0 by default per special:upload – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 06:22, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

CC-by-SA-2.0
These images are tagged and conflict with the following policies:
 * 1) Copyleft (up until 23 January 2008, when images were effectively excluded from the policy without prior notice or discussion )
 * 2) Project:Image policy
 * 3) Project:How to re-use Wikivoyage guides

The first 3 are not linked to from anywhere; the last 2 are only linked to from Joke articles/Hell (Hades). ~ 203.144.143.4 04:37, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Image:Charon.jpg
see also:  - VFD'd 26 January 2008

KEPT ALL - current consensus is that all ccbysa versions are compatible – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 06:22, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

CC-by-SA-2.5
These images are tagged and conflict with the following policies:
 * 1) Copyleft (up until 23 January 2008, when images were effectively excluded from the policy without prior notice or discussion )
 * 2) Project:Image policy
 * 3) Project:How to re-use Wikivoyage guides
 * ~ 203.144.143.4 05:12, 1 February 2008 (EST)

KEPT ALL - current consensus is that all ccbysa versions are compatible – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 06:22, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

user page images
Presumably it's not unreasonable to expect that these images be re-licensed:

Image:Peterfitzgerald visitedstates.gif

 * Keep, not used in main WT namespace articles. Can be any license it wants to be --(WT-en) Nick 08:03, 3 March 2008 (EST)

Image:Roger pic 150x200.png

 * Keep, not used in main WT namespace articles. Can be any license it wants to be --(WT-en) Nick 08:03, 3 March 2008 (EST)

KEPT ALL - meant for userpages – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 06:22, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

not linked to from anywhere
--- remaining images (~52) to follow shortly ---

see also:
 * - VFD'd 26 January 2008


text:
Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/April 2009

Archive for Project:Votes for deletion acted on in April 2009. If you can't find the chronicle that interests you here, try Project:Votes for deletion/March 2009 or Project:Votes for deletion/May 2009 for things that may have happened earlier or later, respectively.

Australian English phrasebook
Not sure whether I want it deleted or not, but a lot of this is similar for other English-speakers as well (cheers, yeah, boot, bloody hell, bite to eat, etc.). Not just that, but a few of these would probably bring laughter if a non-Australian tried to use them (Mate, how much a bloody ticket to ___?). Australian isn't really a dialect of English, which would merit its own phrasebook, but rather a collection of region-specific slang which isn't imperative for comprehension & which, in my opinion, doesn't merit a phrasebook. In that case, we'd also need a "British English phrasebook", an "American English phrasebook", a "Southern (US) English phrasebook", an "Indian English phrasebook", and a "Simple English phrasebook". Maybe someone could incorporate a few of the Australian-specific slang terms/phrases in a subsection of "Talk" in the Australia article. (WT-en) AHeneen 04:02, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Delete, or userfy if anyone really wants the article. The point of phrasebooks is to give novice speakers enough grounding in a language to get by.  People using this language version of Wikivoyage should already be proficient in English; any English speaker can already ask questions and understand answers in Australia, so no phrasebook is necessary.  Variations in slang are not so profound that "Where is the bathroom?" needs translation.  The introduction even admits that the phrasebook is just for fun and for interpreting the Crocodile Hunter (who, frankly, wasn't all that unintelligible to begin with).  (WT-en) LtPowers 09:08, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Delete. I think that differentiated English phrasebooks for other Wikivoyage versions can be useful, but that is besides the point. I don't think that English Wikivoyage should have English phrasebooks; after all a lot of our contributors and readership are Australian. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:08, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Bugger, I sort of like it --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 16:51, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep, and I feel strongly it shouldn't creep into the Australia article.  1. It is not devoid of use for travelers, it makes a point about Australian English beyond just the words.  Even if you think the words are easily intelligible, there is a useful point for travelers being made there too!  Many travellers are interested in Australian slang.  2.  It does no harm.  It is maintained, it is not a spam magnet 3. Incorporating it into the main article Australia article would not be of benefit to that article.  Check the New Zealand article and the edit history to see how ugly and how much of a distraction it would be to move it there.  4.  Similar information is in many other travel guides, so Wikivoyage should include it for completeness.  5. If it really doesn't fit into the phrasebook set (because it isn't really a phrasebook), we should just make it a travel topic.  --(WT-en) Inas 19:35, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

 * I have much less objection to it in travel topic form. It would be nice to convert it fully away from the phrasebook template, and give multiple "translations" for each slang word into multiple local variations. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 23:00, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Okay, well unless anyone has a better suggestion, after the 14 day expiry, I'll take on the task of moving it into an Australian slang travel topic, and fix up the links appropriately. --(WT-en) Inas 06:50, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Outcome: Rename and make travel topic

User:(WT-en) Maj/Sandbox/Lausanne
Are you able to have Star Users? haha. I don't know if you want to delete the user, but the star status seems a bit self-congratulatory. THey obviously copied the page for Lausanne and made it... themself. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 10:32, 5 March 2009 (EST)

 * Delete - This is an unattributed copy of content from our Lausanne article, and thus violates our licensing provisions. I realize "copyright violation" isn't listed on the deletion policy page for userspace content, but it should be.  (WT-en) LtPowers 10:36, 5 March 2009 (EST)
 * Keep - He, erm, first off it's a personal user space, which should mostly be left alone, lot's of users have sandboxes - nothing wrong with that, but I'd have no problems removing the star tag, if it shows up on category list. 2nd Maj is one of the founders of Wikivoyage, so that self-congratulatory thing, might be pushing it a bit :) --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 10:40, 5 March 2009 (EST)
 * Speedy Keep - This was a test page Maj created in her own user space, it doesn't violate any Wikivoyage policies, so there isn't any justification for anyone other than Maj deleting it. I've removed the two tags that are causing it to appear in category listings to resolve the issue that originally caused the page's VFD listing. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 10:58, 5 March 2009 (EST)
 * Speedy keep. There is absolutely no precedent for deleting sandbox pages for "licensing violations"—this would lead to absurdities, such as not being able to keep (WT-en) this article in progress in my userspace, since others have worked on it. The fact that the sandbox in question belongs to one of Wikivoyage's founders underscores the absurdity. In any rate, if you want to see a policy change, start a discussion. Running vfds that don't have any deletion policy rationale in order to circumvent the basic practice of consensus building and discussion is a misuse of policy. This is something we have had problems with (serious problems) in the past, and we should probably note this at the top of the vfd page to make this point as clear as possible. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 11:28, 5 March 2009 (EST).
 * Erm, take a deep breath please. The nomination was done by a new user, who's made some solid contributions, and were trying to help out. No big deal, just the price of wiki democracy. More a matter of removing the star tag, than it has anything to do with sandboxes. LtPowers delete nomination however, is another matter, but let's not scare good contributors away eh? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 11:39, 5 March 2009 (EST)
 * Excuse me? There's unattributed content on that page; it seems a clear violation of the CC-by-sa license to me.  I have no quarrel with a temporary sandbox page but that page is unaltered in over two years; that's too long to let it stand without attribution.  (WT-en) LtPowers 19:20, 5 March 2009 (EST)
 * Okay, virtually unaltered. Certainly unaltered by Maj.  (WT-en) LtPowers 19:21, 5 March 2009 (EST)
 * The "unattributed" argument is probably best handled as a separate discussion on Project:Deletion policy. If the argument is that copying a file within Wikivoyage (as opposed to using the "move" command) turns it into a copyright violation then all sandbox articles are thrown into question, as are any pages that were merged, improperly moved, etc.  That discussion is most definitely outside of the scope of this single VFD. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 19:29, 5 March 2009 (EST)

 * Keep. The attribution provisions of cc-by-sa require attribution when the work is publically displayed or distributed.  I could see an argument that a user's sandbox is just a private working space, and not a public display or distribution in the same way as wikivoyage proper.  Perhaps we need to clarify this?  In any event, if the decision was to remove this as a copyvio, then every sandbox that contains a copy of wikivoyage content would have to go.  The argument that transitory sandboxes are okay, but long term ones are not, doesn't (in my view) have any support in the licence text.  --(WT-en) Inas 20:10, 5 March 2009 (EST)
 * Keep. This seems clear. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 10:25, 6 March 2009 (EST)
 * Speedy keep.  Yet another nomination which fails to indicate a reason, per policy, why this nomination exists.  Also, the whole point of user space is to let people try stuff, and copying actual content is a good way to do that! -- (WT-en) Colin 00:32, 7 March 2009 (EST)
 * ABSOLUTE KEEP! If anyone should have a copy of an article about Lausanne in the sandbox area off their user page then Maj should. She started the page ! Therefore any other versions are based on derivation and copies of her activity. Since the article only exists because she started it, I think she has the right to keep a working copy of the Lausanne in her user area. Also, I fail to see how the Wikivoyage website can be in breach of its own copyright licence. The licence primarily exists to permit third parties have the right to redistribute and republish Wikivoyage content on another website. The reason we, as authors and administrators do not permit copyright violations is because we need to have the permission or licence from the copyright OWNER so that we can republish their content. Finally, where does it say in the policy that we delete copyright violations on sight? I thought the policy was to seek permission of the owner, first, and then delete only if no permission was forthcoming. - (WT-en) Huttite 09:17, 7 March 2009 (EST)
 * PS: If you read the page history you will find the copying was deliberate and performed by User:(WT-en) W66LinkBot - presumably as a test - before releasing the bot on the whole wiki. I would recommend restoring the page to exactly the state it was in and adding a note at the top of the page that this is a test page based on the Lausanne article. That would satisfy any copyright attribution issues. - (WT-en) Huttite 09:26, 7 March 2009 (EST)
 * Having started the page in no way gives her license to copy other users' text without attribution. (WT-en) LtPowers 15:51, 7 March 2009 (EST)
 * Keep. It's a sandbox. They've been around from the beginning, and have been a useful part of many contributors' working methods. If anyone thinks they're being ripped off because Lausanne mentions their name but User:(WT-en) Maj/Sandbox/Lausanne doesn't, they have bigger issues than we can solve here. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 17:18, 7 March 2009 (EST)

Outcome: kept (WT-en) Pashley 10:45, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

The Royal-Imperial Route in Poznan
No links to or from it. Merge into Poznan, delete this. (WT-en) Pashley

 * keep Hello, the article The Royal-Imperial Route is linked to Poznań site on Wikivoyage, and has an itinerary template. This tour is special one. That's not only some monuments but a route showing history and culutre of the city. In Poland we have only a few of this kind of tours. There are some articels on Wikipedia about The Royal-Imperial Route, too. We add on the website links to articles in other languages. http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trakt_Kr%C3%B3lewsko-Cesarski_w_Poznaniu http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedysta:Trakt_Kr%C3%B3lewsko-Cesarski/brudnopis. Best wishes Trakt Królewsko-Cesarski (WT-en) Trakt Królewsko-Cesarski 02:20, 20 February 2009 (EST)

It has been expanded some and tagged as an itinerary. Worth keeping now, I'd say. (WT-en) Pashley 08:18, 20 February 2009 (EST)
 * I don't care one way or another whether it stays as an itinerary or not, but the "The" has to go for sure. Just seems severely anti-wikivoyage style to have that. (WT-en) Texugo 16:05, 20 February 2009 (EST)

 * Keep, possibly rename. Would be awkward to have this in the incorporated in the Pozan article.  --(WT-en) Inas 18:55, 26 February 2009 (EST)
 * Keep This is a perfectly valid itinerary that a user is working on. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 21:06, 2 March 2009 (EST)

Outcome: kept (WT-en) Pashley 10:57, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

Futami

 * This page is about a district/subdivision of Ise. I don't believe Ise has enough to do/see to warrant making districts for the city, and since Meoto Iwa is one of the city's main attractions, it seems to make more sense to put everything on the Ise page and delete/redirect this link. I've written this on the talk page, but I thought I'd call attention to it here and get feedback before merging. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 12:56, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Redirect to Ise. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:28, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

 * All important information, as well as the picture, have been transferred to the Ise page, so it is ready to be made into a redirect. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 07:58, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Then fill it with krill, Gil! (WT-en) Jpatokal 12:21, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Ah, I didn't realize I could redirect it myself. Sorry. It has been redirected. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 09:14, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

Outcome: Merged and Redirected (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 11:40, 9 May 2009 (EDT)

Travelecuador
Falls outside the scope of the type of articles we cover. I'm holding off on a speedy delete to let the user figure out our policies. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 17:54, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Speedy delete. We get a lot of these types of pages, which are most often introduced for SEO, and this article clearly meets the first listed criteria for speedy deletion. Education is better done on the user's talk page, rather than going through this bureaucracy. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:18, 24 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Nuked. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:09, 25 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Nuked again — User:(WT-en) Travelecuador recreated it. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:35, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

www.vistazure.com
Falls outside the scope of the type of articles we cover. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 17:54, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Speedy deleted. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:09, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Images by User:(WT-en) Mostroman13
I left the user a message several days ago asking to clarify the source of this image, which I found quickly off-site, and which is an apparent copyvio. No response, and I believe the rest of the images he uploaded are suspect as well. (Additionally, all images were uploaded to :en, which makes me suspect he was not paying very close attention to our upload messages.) I'd recommend we give the 14 days to allow the user to notice the vfd, after which we should just delete all images uploaded by the user. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:48, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Agreed — nice detective work. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 23:21, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Delete. TinEye finds more off them offsite. -- (WT-en) Colin 23:56, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Whoa! That's a useful site! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 01:14, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I found another copyvio . Two weeks are up — nuke 'em. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:39, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

Outcome: deleted. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 04:25, 12 May 2009 (EDT)

All images by User:(WT-en) Ђорђе Д. Божовић
From this, it would appear that this user was uploading copyrighted files without permission. I say speedy delete all images uploaded by said user. But I'll hold off on doing it until I see some other support for doing so. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:01, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Delete. Since three of that user's other image uploads were already deleted as positively-identified copyvios, and no further license information for the others was provided in response to earlier requests, I'd consider the remaining images greatly suspect even without a complaint.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 14:32, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Speedy deleted --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:10, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Blood pressure
Contains only general advice, which is already covered by Travel Health; no topic-specific content that merits a full separate article. Tends to be a magnet for commercial third-party links, too. - (WT-en) Dguillaime 19:12, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep. Until such time as Travel Health page becomes active. Perhaps more research and contribution rather than delete.

 * Oops, miscapitalized. That page is active, but it's actually Travel health.  As for more research, what's there suggests that there's not much to do - it doesn't seem to be a topic that requires any special precautions beyond general medical planning, so there may simply be nothing else to say.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 15:37, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Merge into Travel health.... there's definitely no reason to have a whole article around for this... if it becomes large and unruly at some point, then we can revisit then – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 21:41, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Resolution: merged.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 12:58, 23 April 2009 (EDT) (with assistance from anon. user)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/April 2011

Falaj Al Moalla

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:13, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

One month of Southeast Asian ruins

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:16, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

New York Central Recreational Trail

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2006, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:35, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

Zanskar Trek

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:15, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 19:58, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Strzelecki Track

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:03, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Sunshine Coast-Vancouver Island Circle Tour

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since August 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:08, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. This looked quite useful, and not that far from usable status, to me. – (WT-en) Vidimian 13:53, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. Agree with (WT-en) Vidimian. This is a handy way to see southwestern British Columbia. I had forgotten the article existed... I'll work at improving it over the next couple of months. - (WT-en) Shaund 00:17, 24 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:12, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Royal Road

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. This is a fixed historic route like Route 66 or the Silk Road, and it is signposted to boot, and likely to be recreated if we delete it. (WT-en) texugo 22:06, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * See also similar comments at the nomination for The Jesus Trail below. Signposted, fixed routes should be exempted. (WT-en) texugo 23:47, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

 * Keep. Agreed with Texugo. – (WT-en) Vidimian 11:56, 22 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:13, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

The Jesus Trail

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since October 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. This is an actual waymarked hiking trail (see Wikipedia article here), and as such, should be kept as per a brief discussion here that suggests official, and well-known itineraries should be exempted from "delete if outline after a year" rule. However, as per naming conventions, it should be renamed to Jesus Trail, with the "the" dropped. – (WT-en) Vidimian 14:08, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep It's a legitimate trail. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 21:21, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:15, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Helambu Langtang Trek

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:35, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Great Lakes Circle Tour

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:39, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Inter Island Airways
Small airline in American Samoa. Current text is a history of the company copied from Wikipedia. Probably needs to be merged somewhere, but I'm not sure where. Result: Deleted. Useful info merged in with [American Samoa] - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 23:04, 2 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Merge - (WT-en) texugo 04:43, 18 February 2011 (EST)
 * Delete or redirect, without merge, in the spirit of Project:Cooperating with Wikipedia. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 09:52, 18 February 2011 (EST)
 * Delete. This article looks like a promotional page for a business, and would be better handled as a listing within a town served by the airline. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 18:22, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Any further comment? This nomination has been open for much longer than the required two weeks, and with two delete votes I'd assume that would be the correct resolution barring further comment. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:10, 27 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Merge contact and destination information to American Samoa. All that history and such is completely unnecessary in a travel guide. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:37, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - All info except the contact details are of little interest to travellers. The American Samoa page has it listed with a url under Get in. The phone and reservation email should be on there too. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:48, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Newell Highway

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:40, 3 April 2011 (EDT)

Overland from Singapore to Bangkok

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:15, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - Not much of worth on the page. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 09:33, 3 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:47, 3 April 2011 (EDT)

Newport with Kids
Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Cardboardbird 12:03, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since its creation in October 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 14:46, 20 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete. – (WT-en) Vidimian 16:40, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

A Day In Wakefield

 * Delete or merge. My comment on the "Talk" page:

There is already a Wakefield travel guide: http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wakefield_%28Rhode_Island%29

It looks pretty good, too. What does this article add that's important? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 15:30, 13 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:44, 9 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - Looks like a bunch of business listings. Some (most?) of which are not relevant for a travel guide. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:51, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Nicodemus
Unincorporated town of 30-35 inhabitants, or 170 if you check Wikipedia, with no accommodations and possibly one single unconfirmed restaurant. The historical site contains 5 small buildings, all walkable. The town is right next to the slightly larger Bogue, KS, for which we have no article. The most logical redirect would be for Hill City about 8 miles away, but there is no article there either. The next town for which we have an article is Stockton, still only about 16 miles away (a stone's throw for Kansas), and I think a paragraph or so in that article would suffice.
 * Merge and redirect to Stockton - (WT-en) Texugo 23:33, 20 January 2011 (EST)
 * Merge and redirect to Stockton looks right. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 00:58, 21 January 2011 (EST)
 * 16 miles seems a long way to me. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:50, 21 January 2011 (EST)
 * If it is the nearest town with an article the choice is to redirect there or create an article for a nearer town. I also dont think 16 miles is particularly far. It is further than that to the central business area of the city I live in from my home suburb. If it is considered a short distance it its region as is claimed by Texugo I would be quite happy for it to be redirected that far. I would also have no problem with someone who knows the area creating another article for a nearer city, but preferably with a bit of content. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 15:24, 21 January 2011 (EST)
 * Any further comment? This nomination has been open for much longer than the typical two weeks, and it looks like "merge & redirect to Stockton" is the consensus. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:10, 27 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Can't we just create a stub for Hill City and redirect it there? There's an awful lot of open space between Nicodemus and Stockton.  (WT-en) LtPowers 08:37, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
 * I agree, 16 miles is too far. (WT-en) –sumone10154 10:58, 3 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Merged and Redirected to Stockton (Kansas) -(WT-en) Cardboardbird 23:41, 9 April 2011 (EDT)

Jomsom-Muktinath Trek

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

 * Delete - The info is pretty general and, given the location, probably totally out of date by now. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 04:38, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:29, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Interstate 76 (East)

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since its creation in September 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 14:46, 20 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:34, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

10 Day Holy Land Classic Tour

 * Delete. The text in this article shows up in a Google search (one example: ) so is clearly copied and there is no indication that it can be re-licensed under the CC-SA.  Additionally, the article appears to be an itinerary for a commercial tour, and thus is more of an advertisement than a true Wikivoyage itinerary. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:49, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete If it were new, I'd say speedy. (WT-en) Pashley 04:59, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:38, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Image:Sprague1.jpg
Border and in-image text do not match our style.
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 12:11, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete. It's also orphaned, which is sufficient justification for deletion according to Project:Deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:38, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Can we take out the border and text and then use it in the Cranston article? (WT-en) –sumone10154 15:04, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Although tineye doesn't find any matches, images with borders and writing are often taken from other web sites, and given that this image does not specify a license, is orphaned, and was uploaded by a user who made no other contributions my preference would be to delete it rather than risk a possible copyvio for an image of minimal value that has been unused for several years. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 15:15, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Google Image search came up with it rather quickly. http://www.cranstonri.com/generalpage.php?page=113  -- speedy it.  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:43, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Speedied - (WT-en) texugo 21:46, 7 April 2011 (EDT)

Image:Map_thailand_chonburi.gif

 * Map obviously taken from a printed guide.(WT-en) Cardboardbird 12:00, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
 * It doesn't look like a scan, but TinEye produces a boatload of results. Which makes me think that "lp" in the compass rose stands for "Lonely Planet".  However, this image is on Shared and must be nominated for deletion there, not here.  (WT-en) LtPowers 15:09, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Ok, my mistake. Nominated there there now. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:39, 9 April 2011 (EDT)

Caoling Historic Trail

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. Seems like another established hiking trail. – (WT-en) Vidimian 16:51, 22 March 2011 (EDT)

 * I'd actually still argue for deletion - this hasn't received a substantial edit in four years, and trails aren't automatically in scope for Wikivoyage per Project:What is an article. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:38, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

 * After taking a second look, I've noticed that everything this article has to offer is already duplicated at Yilan County, so the trail article is not strictly necessary to keep around in its current state and could be recreated at any time. But as the Google search results I've linked above shows, this trail seems like a sufficiently popular one, so how about redirecting rather than deleting—this would, IMO, be more in line with Project:Deletion policy as well. – (WT-en) Vidimian 05:58, 4 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Yilan County. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:47, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Vietnam visa on arrival

 * Delete There is no reason for this article to be separate from the Vietnam travel guide, except that a site called "Lucky Vietnam Visa" is trying to advertise. I will delete the link at the end of that page, but the entire article should be speedily deleted, with any valuable information merged into the Vietnam article. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 22:53, 11 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Speedy deleted - The content was also copyrighted to Lonely Planet, so we can't merge anything either. (WT-en) texugo 01:36, 12 April 2011 (EDT)

Lydia suzan evans
Childish text

 * delete - --(WT-en) Rein N. 03:53, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

 * speedy delete - That's my vote. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:00, 13 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Speedy deleted - (WT-en) texugo 06:33, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Www.utahcatering.com
Not a valid article. Advertisement for business- (WT-en) Cardboardbird 09:45, 14 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Speedied - (WT-en) texugo 11:02, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

Cape to Cape Track

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. This is another established, official, and marked hiking trail à la Royal Road and The Jesus Trail nominations above and below (Wikipedia article about the trail here—it might look like there are copyvio issues at first sight, but the articles on both Wikivoyage and Wikipedia were substantially edited by the same person). – (WT-en) Vidimian 12:06, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. This is a popular trek with quite a bit on the web about it already. It would make a very good and useful article if someone took an interest in building it up. I'll put a bit of what I know into it and redo the existing copy to remove any copyvio doubts if that will keep it from deletion. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 10:44, 12 April 2011 (EDT)
 * I made some edits to get it into shape for contributions. It's not too useful at present but has potential. If no one has any objections, I will take off the vfd so it can live a little longer. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 10:16, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:43, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Circum-Baikal Railway
Relatively short tourist train with fixed stops for walks, and no destinations along the way for which we will ever likely have articles. Could easily be contained at Lake Baikal.
 * Merge with Lake Baikal. (WT-en) texugo 02:24, 22 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Merge tag added for Lake Baikal. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:48, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Summer Day in Newport
Another article similar to the other vfd'd RI "itineraries" above. Not really an itinerary, just duplicating info from the Newport article.
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 02:24, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 10:51, 12 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:51, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Lake Ouachita
We don't write articles on bodies of water. (WT-en) –sumone10154 23:41, 23 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - Not a valid article. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 10:51, 12 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:53, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Terhaal
This was a spam article for a tour operator that has since been blanked. (WT-en) Eco84 10:15, 15 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedied - (WT-en) texugo 12:15, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Southeastern Conference Tour
A list of universities and towns in the southeastern conference. (WT-en) –sumone10154 00:14, 24 March 2011 (EDT) Result: Delete - (WT-en) Cardboardbird
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - Not a valid article. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 10:51, 12 April 2011 (EDT)

Payday loans
Not a valid article. Advertising/spam. Page is also redirected from User:(WT-en) Sammylouis - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 11:50, 21 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 12:27, 21 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - this is just spam-- (WT-en) felix 16:12, 21 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Speedy Delete - Completely irrelevant to a travel site. Why are we even discussing this? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 16:31, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:46, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Buy P90X
Not a valid article - Content is a long spiel, testimonial and detail on some product called P90X ... Buy P90X:The Greatest Fitness Workout At any time.
 * Speedy delete - (WT-en) felix 15:36, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:46, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Dudleystephen
Speedy delete. This user is a redirect to the Buy P90X rubbish detailed above. -- (WT-en) felix 15:39, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:46, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Cities in israel statistics

 * Delete. Copied without attribution from wikipedia:List of Israeli cities, and out of scope for Wikivoyage per Project:What is an article. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:56, 4 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Strong delete - I almost speedied it for being clearly out of scope, copied straight out Wikipedia, and strewn with links and templates which do not exist here.(WT-en) texugo 02:31, 5 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:21, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

List of cities in israel

 * Delete. Copied without attribution from wikipedia:List of Israeli cities, and out of scope for Wikivoyage per Project:What is an article. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:32, 4 April 2011 (EDT)
 * We have Project:World cities, so maybe we could move this to Project:Cities in Israel. (WT-en) –sumone10154 15:25, 4 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Project:World cities was originally created by User:(WT-en) Evan as a quick reference for ensuring that Wikivoyage had coverage of all of the world's large cities, so it's a one-off case (see Project:World cities). "List of" articles have typically been discouraged on Wikivoyage unless they offer something more than just a list. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 15:47, 4 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Strong delete - I almost speedied it for being clearly out of scope, copied straight out Wikipedia, and strewn with links and templates which do not exist here.(WT-en) texugo 02:31, 5 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:21, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

Port Phillip Bay scenic drive

 * Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since March 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:08, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Keep. This looked quite useful, and not that far from usable status, to me. – (WT-en) Vidimian 13:54, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
 * Based on discussion at Talk:Port Phillip Bay scenic drive, would a reasonable compromise be to redirect this article to Mornington Peninsula? I'm still of the opinion that it's not usable enough to merit keeping as a standalone article. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:46, 16 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Any thoughts? Barring further comment a redirect seems like the best solution. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:42, 23 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Actually this itinerary includes Bellarine Peninsula in addition to Mornington Peninsula, but as it doesn't include much information about Bellarine, it might be sensibly redirected to Mornington Peninsula. – (WT-en) Vidimian 02:58, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Mornington Peninsula. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:29, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Image:Hotel Excelsior.jpg
Image of the exterior of a non-landmark hotel.
 * Delete - (WT-en) texugo 03:57, 10 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) Pashley 04:52, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:32, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

User talk:(WT-en) Simon1
User talk:(WT-en) Simon1 has only made one contribution being a single edit to their Talk page and that appears to be spam content consisting of : "AlMtravels.com is one and only site which provide you the cheap flights, online flights cheap tickets, hotels, cars and best tourist guide services any where in the world. Here we have different packages for all our customers which give them remembrance journey and also save their lot on money. Here you can also buy the cheap flight to accra, cheap flights accra and accra ticket deals at low price."
 * Speedy delete -- (WT-en) felix 15:56, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:35, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Credit Cards For Bad Credit - How To Reestablish Your Credit With Credit Cards For Bad Credit
Blanked this nonsense pending speedy delete. Rubbish content unsuitable to Wikivoyage -- Content includes... "One of the most amazing things about the credit cards for bad credit is that they can be used not only as a regular charge cards but they can also be used in a way that you can repair your damaged credit score. Yes, this is very possible! "
 * Speedy delete -- (WT-en) felix 09:11, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. - (WT-en) texugo 09:14, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Thebeachafrica

 * Speedy delete - This user has made no posts except for the above-linked user page, which is a long advertisement. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 17:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. - (WT-en) texugo 21:20, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Forex- How To Invest in Forex Mutual Funds
Have blinded content blatantly promoting forex trading -- also associated with Image:555.jpg and Image:666.jpg which are promo images for same. Created by User:(WT-en) Forex01 (talk) who has only made three contributions all associated with the Forex promotion.
 * Speedy delete Not in the interests of the traveller and blatant contravention of WT policies. (WT-en) felix 00:23, 29 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Speedy delete, but I'd like someone to please explain why we even discuss such clear-cut cases. If it's incontrovertibly obvious that something is not an article and has no value for a merge or redirect, shouldn't it simply be deleted without discussion? I ask because that's what I would have done if Felix hadn't decided to put up the vfd tag first. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 02:06, 29 April 2011 (EDT)

 * Hi (WT-en) Ikan Kekek, Indeed I would have happily nuked all 3 of these absurd items but I do not have the required admin access to do that. All I can do is nominate for Deletion or a Speedy deletion and hope it does the pre-checking for someone else who can delete them. I am a bit hobbled, I can only temporarily blind the content if I think it is appropriate (and I think that forex rubbish qualified), Move it somewhere else (which does not help much) or just Delete the content leaving an empty article shell. Blinding and Deleting just makes it more complex for someone else to readily identify the offending content and Delete the Article or Image. I could just keep right out of the process and leave it to those with sufficient admin access but then the articles, spamming user, or inappropriate image may slip through the patrolling net for a while before someone appropriately equipped sees them. There is not always someone around to spot them so if I ignore them they are going to go off the top of the Recentchanges list and into obscurity quite quickly.  To be honest I would be happier to nip them in the bud and just get rid of them than list up the  for "discussion" but as I cannot do this I do feel compelled to try and do the  properly and ensure they at least come up for attention on the Deletion page. I don't actually think any of us would ever consider something like the forex example to be anything other than a Speedy delete, some others are in a much greyer area and deserve due process. In any case Jan whacked them pretty fast once they were there on the Deletion list. I admit though I would have been happier to just Nuke all 3 of them at the outset. If other editors would rather I kept away from the  issue/process then I will as I certainly do not wish to actually make the deletion process more time consuming by creating an additional  workload for someone else to clear. I hope this explains my activities. Maybe someone could let me know if my activity is just complicating the already tiresome process of getting rid of this rubbish. -- (WT-en) felix 06:48, 29 April 2011 (EDT)
 * No, you're fine. Ikan should not have criticized you.  We have no procedure in place for alerting admins to a speedy deletion candidate except via the vfd process.  The system worked the way it was supposed to.  (WT-en) LtPowers 11:43, 29 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Image:555.jpg
A purely promotional image created by User:(WT-en) Forex01 (talk) who has only made 3 contributions all associated with the Forex- How To Invest in Forex Mutual Funds promotion. Not a WT commons upload
 * Speedy delete Advertising image associated with Forex- How To Invest in Forex Mutual Funds promotion. Not in the interests of the traveller and blatant contravention of WT policies. (WT-en) felix 00:23, 29 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Image:666.jpg
A purely promotional image created by User:(WT-en) Forex01 (talk) who has only made 3 contributions. all associated with the Forex- How To Invest in Forex Mutual Funds promotion. Not a WT commons upload
 * Speedy delete Advertising image associated with Forex- How To Invest in Forex Mutual Funds promotion. Not in the interests of the traveller and blatant contravention of WT policies. (WT-en) felix 00:23, 29 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Credit Card- How To Build Good Credit Habits
The work of suspected currently active spambot - User:(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison--Special:Contributions/(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison See also -- Credit Card- How To Build Good Credit Habits and associated image uploads Image:333.jpg and Image:444.jpg
 * Speedy delete - inapropriate content. -- (WT-en) felix 00:34, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Image:333.jpg
The work of suspected currently active spambot - User:(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison--Special:Contributions/(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison See also -- Credit Card- How To Build Good Credit Habits and associated image upload Image:444.jpg
 * Speedy delete - inappropriate content associated with spambot activity. Image of credit card logos for Visa and MC, possible copyvio-- (WT-en) felix 00:34, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Image:444.jpg
The work of suspected currently active spambot - User:(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison --Special:Contributions/(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison See also -- Credit Card- How To Build Good Credit Habits and associated image upload Image:333.jpg
 * Speedy delete - inappropriate content associated with spambot activity. Image of woman joyously throwing USD in the air - possible copyvio and recognisable person-- (WT-en) felix 00:34, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)


text:
Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/April 2012

Special:Contributions/212.121.219.1

 * Delete all. This is unfortunately rather harsh, but temporary blocks and talk page messages haven't been sufficient to get this user's attention.  User has created dozens of orphaned region articles in the past several days that don't follow the Project:Article naming conventions and haven't been discussed.  Many duplicate existing regions (example: South Central Asia), and unless we are going to review them one-by-one and redirect appropriately these seem like they will cause unnecessary confusion and duplication with no real benefit. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:42, 24 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Delete all. (WT-en) Jjtk 04:28, 26 March 2012 (EDT)

 * Is a mass deletion really necessary? The person is learly trying to contribute and working in an area where our coverage is weak. (WT-en) Pashley 02:08, 27 March 2012 (EDT)
 * I'm not sure what else to do. Attempts to get this user's attention have failed, and as a result we've got around 100 region articles that don't follow the naming conventions, are orphaned, and duplicate existing regions.  We can go through them article-by-article and redirect where appropriate, but unless someone is willing to take on that job then a mass delete seems like the only other option. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:19, 27 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Certainly not everything should go. Many of his or her contributions are like this,, helpfully adding the name in the local language and script.
 * Do orphaned region articles actually do any harm? If they are valid names, hence possible search terms, I'd say we should have them even if most should be redirects. If we cannot educate this user and get him or her to create those redirects (which seems to be the case, given the lack of communication) and no-one else wants to leap in and do it (which seems extremely likely), does it do any harm to have those articles in the meanwhile? (WT-en) Pashley 03:38, 28 March 2012 (EDT)
 * To clarify, I'm only proposing deletion of articles for which this IP is the sole author. If someone wants to redirect each of them appropriately then I withdraw the nomination.
 * To answer your second question, in the past there has been concern that duplicative region articles cause confusion. We no longer have a clear hierarchy and users don't know where content should be placed.  Project:Geographical hierarchy is the "official" policy on this: "No two regions at the same level of the hierarchy should overlap".  Similarly, that guideline notes that when regions are created "Use caution, consensus, and collaboration when possible", something that is not being done in this case. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:12, 28 March 2012 (EDT)

 * Delete all Sandy, over time we will have the trouble with double structures and loads of redundancies. I patrol Pakistan now for a couple of years and always someone starts with the creation of skeletons and leaves them empty. After a while some editors start to promote business in that articles (mostly restaurants and hotels) or question or general structure of Pakistan regions. Usually it gets pretty messy and after lengthy discussions we have skeletons en masse which require loads of time to patrol. The articles are created by an UK IP, so it is not a local who don't understand the system. I agree that same smaller edits like the Urdu phrases do make sense but the article skeletons need to be deleted. (WT-en) Jc8136 07:42, 28 March 2012 (EDT)
 * P.S. Most of the created skeletons had already been created in August 2010. At this time Globetrotter and Ryan deleted them because they didn't fit or regional article structure. I suspect it is the same editor just with another UK anon IP. Also the user started the typical Kashmir conflict in creating article "Indian administered Kashmir" which indicates his political intentions. (WT-en) Jc8136 07:49, 30 March 2012 (EDT)
 * For reference see the discussion here: User talk:78.145.44.147 which started the same mess last year. (WT-en) Jc8136 07:55, 30 March 2012 (EDT)

 * Delete new articles Wikivoyage's regions structure struggles to maintain clarity in several cases and this author is certainly not helping. These regional articles with no content are just confusing, e.g. Hyderabad_(district) was created and conflicts with the extant Hyderabad_(Pakistan). Some of this user's edits are helpful and should remain; they are at least worth reviewing. The new sub-regions, however, are not helpful and should go.(WT-en) Travelpleb 02:39, 4 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted all articles for which this IP was the sole contributor. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:07, 8 April 2012 (EDT)

South Central Asia
See above. This one is just nonsense. I am hoping tagging it will get the user's attention. (WT-en) Pashley 02:11, 27 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Speedy delete It's just nonsense to create such skeletons. (WT-en) Jc8136 07:43, 28 March 2012 (EDT)

Four Days in Newport, Rhode Island

 * Keep (for now). This one was tagged VFD by User:(WT-en) Jc8136 but not listed here (probably due to the horrid database problems the site is now experiencing).  I don't think there is a justification in the current Project:Deletion policy for removing this one unless it sits at outline status for a year.  That said, I've proposed a change to the itinerary article criteria at Project:Itineraries and would be grateful if others could comment on that proposal (not here though please, this page is for article deletion discussions). -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:25, 7 March 2012 (EST)
 * *Delete Ryan, thank you for this support, the database issues hindered me to add this vfd here. I vfd'ed that article because it is very promotional for certain local business and not really an itinerary. I think a proper article can stay but i think the editor just did it for marketing and one year free marketing is too long. Otherwise all spammers will start itineraries to avoid deletion. (WT-en) Jc8136 07:47, 28 March 2012 (EDT)

Result: Merge tag added for Newport. See Project:Itineraries. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:16, 8 April 2012 (EDT)

Metro Manila Jeepney Routes

 * Delete. Per Project:What is an article. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 10:50, 29 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Delete I agree with Ryan. (WT-en) Travelpleb 06:16, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 18:07, 11 April 2012 (EDT)

Ypacarai

 * Delete According to our policy that places where you can't sleep, its need to be deleted. (WT-en) Jc8136 11:40, 2 April 2012 (EDT)
 * That's not a policy; it's a rule of thumb designed to distinguish communities (which get articles) from attractions (which do not, usually). Ypacarai is clearly a community, and the fact that its hotel is no longer open doesn't change it from being worthy of an article to being unworthy of one.  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:10, 2 April 2012 (EDT)
 * I concur with LtPowers. This is not an attraction, it is a charming community. It would be a shame to remove it, thereby making more people leave it off a road tour around the lake. 190.23.92.124 18:19, 6 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Me too. I'd call it an obvious keep. (WT-en) Pashley 22:43, 11 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:05, 22 April 2012 (EDT)

Coorg-Bylanakuppe

 * Merge/Delete. Seems to be started in good faith by a new poster, but it's simply about a monastery. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the normal procedure would be to merge any information about the monastery into an article about the nearest village or town and delete this new article. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 03:18, 27 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Merge/Delete Full agreement to your proposal. (WT-en) Jc8136 07:52, 28 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Merge and redirect per policy. The monastery name is a plausible search term. (WT-en) Pashley 23:23, 11 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Merge and redirect looks like an auspicious move. (WT-en) Travelpleb 23:21, 18 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Kodagu. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:09, 22 April 2012 (EDT)

Northern Isaan
I think the breaking down of Isaan into sub-regions is unnecessary. I put the following to the Thailand discussion page a few days ago but no one commented, so this may get the ball rolling: ''Isaan, being an "overlooked part of the country" still has very little content in its sub-region articles. Would it be worth considering removing these subregions? At least until the Isaan article is so brimming with content that it needs to be burst into sub-regions (which is unlikely).''

I'm using Northern Isaan as a test case. If it is approved for oblivion, I'll also nominate Central Isaan and Southern Isaan.(WT-en) Travelpleb 05:06, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Isaan. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:11, 22 April 2012 (EDT)

Three days in Berlin

 * Redirect to Berlin. Has been more than a year at outline status, which per the deletion criteria is enough to subject it to deletion.  The content that's there is already in Berlin, so no need to merge, but a redirect (rather than delete) probably makes sense for SEO purposes. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:39, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Agree redirect (WT-en) Travelpleb 23:55, 18 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Berlin. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:14, 22 April 2012 (EDT)

Romanian Sampler Tour

 * Delete. Has been more than a year at outline status, which per the deletion criteria is enough to subject it to deletion.  There doesn't appear to be any content suitable for merging. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:41, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Agree delete (WT-en) Travelpleb 23:58, 18 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:18, 22 April 2012 (EDT)

Visit United States in 30 days

 * Redirect to United States. Under the revised Project:Itineraries criteria this should not be a standalone article, and I don't see anything in it to merge.  A redirect seems harmless enough as I suspect there is probably some SEO value in keeping this around. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:50, 8 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to United States of America. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:22, 22 April 2012 (EDT)

Two months in Eastern Europe

 * Redirect to Eastern Europe. This "two months" article covers only days one through three, and I don't see anything in it to merge.  A redirect seems harmless enough as I suspect there is probably some SEO value in keeping this around. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 00:53, 9 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Eastern Europe. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:34, 23 April 2012 (EDT)

One month at Southeast Asian beaches

 * Delete. Itinerary article that remains at outline status (without any content that seems merge-able) after one year, and is thus subject to deletion. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:20, 10 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:39, 24 April 2012 (EDT)

Nine days in New Zealand's South Island

 * Delete. Outline itinerary that has not received a substantial edit in more than one year, and is thus subject to deletion.  There doesn't appear to be anything that needs merging. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:25, 10 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:39, 24 April 2012 (EDT)

Back Roads and Beaches Bike and Multi-Sport Route

 * Delete. Outline itinerary that has not received a substantial edit in more than one year, and is thus subject to deletion.  There might be a sentence or two that could be merged to Lorain County prior to deletion. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:45, 10 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:39, 24 April 2012 (EDT)

Kochi-Valpara-Palani

 * Delete. Outline itinerary that has not received a substantial edit in more than one year, and is thus subject to deletion.  The pictures may be merge-able, but the text content does not appear to be. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:43, 10 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. Several images were moved to appropriate articles. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:47, 24 April 2012 (EDT)

Munnar to Kodaikanal

 * Delete. Outline itinerary that has not received a substantial edit in more than one year, and is thus subject to deletion.  The pictures may be merge-able, but the text content does not appear to be. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:42, 10 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. Several images were moved to appropriate articles. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 00:10, 25 April 2012 (EDT)

Monterey Bay

 * Delete. The Central Coast (California) region is principally subdivided by county. The Monterey Bay article is a hybrid that stretches across Santa Cruz County and the northern part of Monterey County. Anything about Monterey Bay can be covered just as well by the two county articles, and I see no good reason to duplicate it in a Monterey Bay article. The article just clutters the otherwise tidy subdivision of the Central Coast. (WT-en) Nurg 23:17, 7 January 2012 (EST)
 * And what do you propose we show someone who searches for "Monterey Bay"? (WT-en) LtPowers 15:22, 8 January 2012 (EST)
 * Good point. Ryan's idea is better - make it a redirect. (WT-en) Nurg 04:36, 11 January 2012 (EST)
 * Definitely not a delete - this could conceivably become a redirect, but I think a disambiguation page would make more sense. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:13, 8 January 2012 (EST)
 * It is probably another candidate for (WT-en) Texugo's meta-region article --(WT-en) Inas 19:04, 8 January 2012 (EST)
 * Yes, yet another. Keep (WT-en) Pashley 07:39, 29 January 2012 (EST)

 * So is the consensus that this is going to be Merged into Monterey County and Santa Cruz County and then and redirected? I would support that. It looks pretty close but I'd guess that the greater part of the bay lies in Monterey County, so the redirect should point there.(WT-en) Travelpleb 23:38, 18 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Any further comment? I think a disambiguation page makes the most sense since this is a likely search term and there isn't an obvious redirect target, but further comment would be useful. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:59, 22 April 2012 (EDT)
 * It'd be nice to have something a little more detailed than a bare disambiguation page. After all, "Monterey Bay" is not ambiguous; it's just not in our hierarchy.  Call it a "meta-region article" or whatever you want, but a brief discussion of the bay and its surroundings and maybe a map would best serve our readers.  (WT-en) LtPowers 13:58, 22 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Yes. (WT-en) Pashley 21:30, 22 April 2012 (EDT)
 * I should have clarified that I meant "meta-disambiguation" (or whatever we're calling it) rather than just a standard disambiguation page - something similar to Knowledge Corridor. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:35, 22 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Looks good. Let's do that.(WT-en) Travelpleb 02:07, 24 April 2012 (EDT)

Outcome I've made the page resemble Knowledge Corridor and copied this discussion to its talk page. Is that everything?(WT-en) Travelpleb 00:29, 25 April 2012 (EDT)


text:
Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/Archives

Archived discussions of Project:Votes for deletion. Two things to note: 1) Discussions are archived below according to the month when the deletion occurred (or when a firm decision to keep the article was made), not when the vfd discussion started. This is so that the data will line up more closely with the deletion log (so if the log says a deletion occurred in May 2006, you can zip straight to the May 2006 archive to see the discussion).

2) All vfd discussions are to be archived here, whether the outcome was deletion, keeping the article, redirect/merge, etc. - see Votes for deletion for further details.

2024

 * Votes for deletion/December 2024
 * Votes for deletion/November 2024
 * Votes for deletion/October 2024
 * Votes for deletion/September 2024
 * Votes for deletion/August 2024
 * Votes for deletion/July 2024
 * No records were archived in June 2024.
 * Votes for deletion/May 2024
 * Votes for deletion/April 2024
 * Votes for deletion/March 2024
 * Votes for deletion/February 2024
 * Votes for deletion/January 2024

2023

 * Votes for deletion/December 2023
 * Votes for deletion/November 2023
 * Votes for deletion/October 2023
 * Votes for deletion/September 2023
 * Votes for deletion/August 2023
 * Votes for deletion/July 2023
 * Votes for deletion/June 2023
 * Votes for deletion/May 2023
 * Votes for deletion/April 2023
 * Votes for deletion/March 2023
 * Votes for deletion/February 2023
 * Votes for deletion/January 2023

2022

 * Votes for deletion/December 2022
 * Votes for deletion/November 2022
 * Votes for deletion/October 2022
 * Votes for deletion/September 2022
 * Votes for deletion/August 2022
 * Votes for deletion/July 2022
 * Votes for deletion/June 2022
 * Votes for deletion/May 2022
 * Votes for deletion/April 2022
 * Votes for deletion/March 2022
 * Votes for deletion/February 2022
 * Votes for deletion/January 2022

2021

 * Votes for deletion/December 2021
 * Votes for deletion/November 2021
 * Votes for deletion/October 2021
 * Votes for deletion/September 2021
 * Votes for deletion/August 2021
 * Votes for deletion/July 2021
 * Votes for deletion/June 2021
 * Votes for deletion/May 2021
 * Votes for deletion/April 2021
 * Votes for deletion/March 2021
 * Votes for deletion/February 2021
 * Votes for deletion/January 2021

2020

 * Votes for deletion/December 2020
 * Votes for deletion/November 2020
 * Votes for deletion/October 2020
 * Votes for deletion/September 2020
 * Votes for deletion/August 2020
 * Votes for deletion/July 2020
 * No records were archived in June 2020
 * Votes for deletion/May 2020
 * Votes for deletion/April 2020
 * No records were archived in March 2020
 * Votes for deletion/February 2020
 * Votes for deletion/January 2020

2019

 * Votes for deletion/December 2019
 * Votes for deletion/November 2019
 * Votes for deletion/October 2019
 * Votes for deletion/September 2019
 * Votes for deletion/August 2019
 * Votes for deletion/July 2019
 * Votes for deletion/June 2019
 * Votes for deletion/May 2019
 * Votes for deletion/April 2019
 * Votes for deletion/March 2019
 * Votes for deletion/February 2019
 * Votes for deletion/January 2019

2018

 * Votes for deletion/December 2018
 * Votes for deletion/November 2018
 * Votes for deletion/October 2018
 * Votes for deletion/September 2018
 * Votes for deletion/August 2018
 * Votes for deletion/July 2018
 * Votes for deletion/June 2018
 * Votes for deletion/May 2018
 * Votes for deletion/April 2018
 * Votes for deletion/March 2018
 * Votes for deletion/February 2018
 * Votes for deletion/January 2018

2017

 * Votes for deletion/December 2017
 * Votes for deletion/November 2017
 * Votes for deletion/October 2017
 * Votes for deletion/September 2017
 * Votes for deletion/August 2017
 * Votes for deletion/July 2017
 * Votes for deletion/June 2017
 * Votes for deletion/May 2017
 * No records were archived in April 2017
 * Votes for deletion/March 2017
 * No records were archived in February 2017
 * Votes for deletion/January 2017

2016

 * Votes for deletion/December 2016
 * Votes for deletion/November 2016
 * Votes for deletion/October 2016
 * Votes for deletion/September 2016
 * Votes for deletion/August 2016
 * Votes for deletion/July 2016
 * Votes for deletion/June 2016
 * Votes for deletion/May 2016
 * No records were archived in April 2016
 * Votes for deletion/March 2016
 * Votes for deletion/February 2016
 * Votes for deletion/January 2016

2015

 * Votes for deletion/December 2015
 * Votes for deletion/November 2015
 * Votes for deletion/October 2015
 * Votes for deletion/September 2015
 * Votes for deletion/August 2015
 * Votes for deletion/July 2015
 * Votes for deletion/June 2015
 * Votes for deletion/May 2015
 * Votes for deletion/April 2015
 * No records were archived in March 2015
 * Votes for deletion/February 2015
 * Votes for deletion/January 2015

2014

 * Votes for deletion/December 2014
 * Votes for deletion/November 2014
 * No records were archived in October 2014
 * Votes for deletion/September 2014
 * Votes for deletion/August 2014
 * Votes for deletion/July 2014
 * Votes for deletion/June 2014
 * Votes for deletion/May 2014
 * Votes for deletion/April 2014
 * Votes for deletion/March 2014
 * Votes for deletion/February 2014
 * Votes for deletion/January 2014

2013

 * Votes for deletion/December 2013
 * Votes for deletion/November 2013
 * Votes for deletion/October 2013
 * Votes for deletion/September 2013
 * Votes for deletion/August 2013
 * Votes for deletion/July 2013
 * Votes for deletion/June 2013
 * Votes for deletion/May 2013
 * Votes for deletion/April 2013
 * Votes for deletion/March 2013
 * Votes for deletion/February 2013
 * Votes for deletion/January 2013

2012

 * Votes for deletion/December 2012
 * Votes for deletion/November 2012
 * Votes for deletion/October 2012
 * Votes for deletion/September 2012
 * Votes for deletion/August 2012
 * Votes for deletion/July 2012
 * Votes for deletion/June 2012
 * Votes for deletion/May 2012
 * Votes for deletion/April 2012
 * Votes for deletion/March 2012
 * Votes for deletion/February 2012
 * Votes for deletion/January 2012

2011

 * Votes for deletion/December 2011
 * Votes for deletion/November 2011
 * Votes for deletion/October 2011
 * Votes for deletion/September 2011
 * Votes for deletion/August 2011
 * Votes for deletion/July 2011
 * Votes for deletion/June 2011
 * Votes for deletion/May 2011
 * Votes for deletion/April 2011
 * Votes for deletion/March 2011
 * Votes for deletion/February 2011
 * Votes for deletion/January 2011

2010

 * Votes for deletion/December 2010
 * Votes for deletion/November 2010
 * Votes for deletion/October 2010
 * Votes for deletion/September 2010
 * Votes for deletion/August 2010
 * Votes for deletion/July 2010
 * Votes for deletion/June 2010
 * Votes for deletion/May 2010
 * No records were archived in April 2010
 * Votes for deletion/March 2010
 * Votes for deletion/February 2010
 * Votes for deletion/January 2010

2009

 * Votes for deletion/December 2009
 * Votes for deletion/November 2009
 * Votes for deletion/October 2009
 * Votes for deletion/September 2009
 * Votes for deletion/August 2009
 * Votes for deletion/July 2009
 * Votes for deletion/June 2009
 * Votes for deletion/May 2009
 * Votes for deletion/April 2009
 * Votes for deletion/March 2009
 * Votes for deletion/February 2009
 * Votes for deletion/January 2009

2008

 * Votes for deletion/December 2008
 * Votes for deletion/November 2008
 * Votes for deletion/October 2008
 * Votes for deletion/September 2008
 * Votes for deletion/August 2008
 * Votes for deletion/July 2008
 * Votes for deletion/June 2008
 * Votes for deletion/May 2008
 * Votes for deletion/April 2008
 * Votes for deletion/March 2008
 * Votes for deletion/February 2008
 * Votes for deletion/January 2008

2007

 * Votes for deletion/December 2007
 * Votes for deletion/November 2007
 * Votes for deletion/October 2007
 * Votes for deletion/September 2007
 * Votes for deletion/August 2007
 * Votes for deletion/July 2007
 * Votes for deletion/June 2007
 * Votes for deletion/May 2007
 * Votes for deletion/April 2007
 * Votes for deletion/March 2007
 * Votes for deletion/February 2007
 * Votes for deletion/January 2007

2006

 * Votes for deletion/December 2006
 * Votes for deletion/November 2006
 * Votes for deletion/October 2006
 * Votes for deletion/September 2006
 * Votes for deletion/August 2006
 * Votes for deletion/July 2006
 * Votes for deletion/June 2006
 * Votes for deletion/May 2006
 * Votes for deletion/April 2006

title: Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/Archives