Votes for deletion

This page lists articles, files and templates that are nominated for deletion. Any Wikivoyager can make a nomination or comment on any nomination. Nominations or comments should follow a rationale based on our deletion policy.

If our deletion policy leads towards a merge or redirect, then coordinate this on the discussion page of the article.

The purpose of this page is limited to the interpretation and application of our deletion policy. You can discuss what our deletion policies should be on the deletion policy discussion page.


Add a {{vfd}} tag to the top of the article, file or template being proposed for deletion, so that people viewing it will be aware. Place the tag at the very top, before everything else, except the page banner. Do note though, if you're tagging a template for deletion, use <noinclude>{{vfd}}</noinclude> instead of {{vfd}} alone.

Add a link to the article, file or template at the end of the list below, along with the reason why it is being listed for deletion. Sign your recommendation using four tildes ("~~~~").

If you're nominating a file for deletion, make sure it's actually located on the English Wikivoyage and not on Wikimedia Commons.

The basic format for a deletion nomination is:

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


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

===[[Chicken]]=== * '''Delete'''. Not a valid travel article topic. TravelNut 25:25, 31 Feb 2525 (UTC) * '''Keep'''. There is a town in [[Alaska]] called Chicken. ~~~~ 

When leaving comments you may elect to delete, keep, or redirect the article. If you recommend redirection, you may suggest where it should be redirected to. Any attempt to merge content from an article to some other destination must retain the edit history to comply with the attribution (CC BY-SA) requirements of the free license, so it may be possible to merge and redirect but not to merge and delete. Sign your comment using four tildes ("~~~~").

Deleting, or not[edit]

  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to delete, an administrator may delete it.
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to redirect or merge, any Wikivoyager may do it. If you make a redirect, please check for any resulting broken redirects or double redirects.
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to keep, any Wikivoyager may remove any VFD notices from that page, and archive the deletion discussion.
  • If there is no consensus after 14 days, allow a further 7 days for discussion.
    • If, after the additional 7 days, there is no consensus, the page should be kept – any Wikivoyager may remove any VFD notices from that page, and archive the deletion discussion.
    • If, after the additional 7 days, there is a consensus, implement it in line with the first three points above.
  • When deleting an article, check "What links here". Either remove the newly-broken links from the articles or point them somewhere else. Inbound redirects to a deleted page should either be deleted or redirected elsewhere.
  • When deleting a template, either replace it wherever it's been transcluded, especially if it served a formatting function. You can do this by adding "subst:" before the template name (especially if the use is in article space, you may then want to clean away unnecessary HTML or CSS code, which would make the wikitext confusing). Once that's done, you can delete the template without affecting individual uses of it. Otherwise, remove the template from all pages that use the template. However, do not delete the template first – this breaks links and will cause a swathe of red links, requiring a lot of cleanups.


After you keep/redirect/merge/delete the article, file or template, move the deletion discussion to the Archives page for the appropriate month. The root archives page has a directory. Note that it's the month in which the action was taken, rather than when the nomination was first posted, that should be used for the archived discussion; that way, recourse to the deletion log can lead subsequent readers right to the discussion (at least for the pages that were deleted).

When archiving, always make it clear to other editors what the outcome of the discussion was. This can be done by adding the result to the discussion in a separate edit from the one in which you remove the discussion from this page; or you can describe the outcome in the edit summary when you remove the discussion.

If the nominated article, file or template was not deleted, then place another (identical duplicate) copy of the deletion discussion on the discussion page of the article, file or template being kept or redirected.

See also:

April 2024[edit]

Unused screenshots[edit]

I've been deleting some files listed at Special:UnusedFiles. In my view anything listed there is a candidate for deletion, just as general cleanup work, but I've started with the screenshots because they are all out-of-date, showing pages as they were years ago.

@SHB2000 objects, see User_talk:Pashley#Deletion_of_screenshots?, & even suggests I should do things like undeleting or copying files to Commons. I think the objection is nonsense & have no intention of taking the suggestions.

Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 04:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've stopped these deletions for now. Pashley (talk) 04:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, but I'd interpret it differently. A DOTM banner should be linked from one of the nominations page, main page or previous DOTM archives, so it should not appear at UnusedFiles. If it does, check if a link needs adding. If yes, link it. If not, delete. Pashley (talk) 10:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy undelete, then add links to the files we are expected to discuss; it is hard even for admins to discuss the merits of deleted files and non-admins should be treated equally on this page. While non-free images need to be in use for fair use to apply, the files under discussion are a separate category, which needs a discussion. –LPfi (talk) 10:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. As these are historic images, they cannot be recreated if deleted. I suppose they should be moved to Commons (where they probably are in scope, unlike here), but I will wait for the file list before making further comments on their value. –LPfi (talk) 10:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Undelete, move to Commons, then delete here. And please, just someone put these unused banners on a relevant talk page so they aren't showing up on this report. These reports are useful and shouldn't be polluted with noise. —Justin (koavf)TCM 11:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll undelete them since several experienced admins have suggested it. Looks utterly pointless to me, but I'll go along.
The file list is:
File:Wv.png, File:Screen Shot 2022-06-26 at 10.05.26.png (linked in Wikivoyage talk:Star articles#Putting the static maps requirement for huge cities to an end 00:22, 26 June 2022), File:Georgetown screenshot.png (apparently sent to the press, see User talk:Traveler100#Screenshots)
File:Screen Shot 2022-03-06 at 12.49.20.png (now at Commons: File:Wikivoyage screenshot of geoline on Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park.png), File:Screenshot 20190623-185946.jpg, File:Screenshot 20190219-224012 Chrome.jpg (linked in Wikivoyage talk:UX Expedition#Feature Banner: Desktop and Mobile versions 21:46, 19 February 2019)
File:Screenshot 2015-03-04.png, File:Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 2.27.04 am1.png, File:Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 12.34.18 am.png
File:Sheki screenshot.png (apparently sent to the press, see User talk:Traveler100#Screenshots), File:Frederiksberg screenshot.png (ditto), File:Kununurra screenshot.png (ditto)
File:Khao San Road screenshot.png (ditto)
There were a few I deleted that were duplicated on Commons; I have not included them. Pashley (talk) 12:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you move a file to Commons, it should give you an option to delete the file locally (provided you're a sysop here), too. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No doubt there will be some exceptions, but in general if an image is unused & unwanted here, I fail to see why anyone thinks moving it to Commons might be a good idea. Pashley (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So that it won't sit here unused. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If an image is linked, then it is not completely unused. Please check "What links here" before deleting/nominating a file (unless it has been moved to Commons). Half of a small sample of the images that I checked were referenced on talk pages. AlasdairW (talk) 19:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is either 1.) untrue or 2.) seemingly untrue because the report needs to be generated by MediaWiki again. Either way, the problem is solved by just using these g-darn files on the talk pages so it's a non-issue. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a difference between being used and being linked. The "unused" report doesn't care about files just being linked; that's why you need to also check "what links here". Those linked from a discussion may be essential for understanding the discussion. –LPfi (talk) 07:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I now added indirect usage in parenthesis to the files in the list where I found such. The rest may be linked indirectly by having been put at the graffiti wall and linked by a permanent link. Those are harder to trace. Keep the screenshots sent to the press. Keep the screenshots used in user interface discussions and discussions about star article requirements. –LPfi (talk) 07:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blue zones[edit]

This article is mostly the work of a block evading user (blocked by DaGizza as a LibMod sockpuppet). While I can't see its usefulness, if it does have a place, it would be better to nuke it and start from scratch per WV:DENY. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 08:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's a pity, but I support your nomination under the circumstances, and I actually don't think it should be open to question, as this is the same thing we've done with every other article created by block-evading sockpuppets of the user in question. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have started Pashley/Indigenous cuisine of the Americas, am not sure if I'll ever get it into a condition suitable for main space. Contributions welcome. Pashley (talk) 08:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(btw, I fixed the namespace – it's now at User:Pashley/Indigenous cuisine of the Americas – dw, tho: I've done this accidentally a couple of times too --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]
Also, to be clear, I support Pashley's approach of restarting anew as this topic definitely has its potential. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]