Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/September 2020

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← August 2020 Votes for deletion archives for September 2020 (current) October 2020 →

This is the accepted translation of the original French name, Lac Superieur. According to Wikipedia, "The British, upon taking control of the region from the French in the 1760s following the French and Indian War, anglicized the lake's name to Superior, "on account of its being superior in magnitude to any of the lakes on that vast continent"." So "Upper Lake" would be a useful redirect for time teavellers from before 1760 who decide to use Wikivoyage to plan their vacation to the Great Lakes. Delete. Ground Zero (talk) 13:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect that points to the wrong target (as per http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=dcn ) with the "right" target unlikely to justify such a redirect. Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:19, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikivoyage talk:WikiGnome. This information might as well be included at Wikipedia, as we already have the page Wikivoyage:Welcome, copyeditors that serves the same purpose. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An orphaned article I found accidentally through Google, because it's barely linked to from other articles on Wikivoyage. It will never have any content because all relevant content already exists in other articles (South Wales, Bristol, and Somerset): there isn't anything to write about a sea itself, and content on coastal cities goes into their respective articles. The edit history of the article suggests it's a relic from the WT era, there have been no significant edits to the article in the last 10 years (!) since it was last proposed to delete it. I would suggest it be deleted or redirected to Bristol. 87.74.178.74 08:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, per Wikivoyage:Bodies of water: "Where the information on the body of water is contained within several articles, or the body of water is large and not specific to a single region, create a extraregion page referencing the destination guides, travel topics and itineraries associated with it.", so maybe (a) it's fine as it is, or (b) the bodies of water of policy needs updating. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's a real place? The same reason that's been given the countless times you've made this exact same point.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:15, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And what about the Bodies of Water policy? Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:26, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See my above comment on that. It looks like the page is in line with that policy, though in practice that seems deficient to me.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:42, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as an extraregion article. I don’t see anything wrong with it, except a few possible formatting changes. It’s okay to have extraregion articles that are unlikely to get longer; this information is enough for travelers since it takes them to nearby destinations. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 11:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Like SC. There could also be additional content for those arriving with own craft (or cruising the channel?), which is better suited for this page than the specific ports or the region articles. --LPfi (talk) 12:32, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - the Bristol Channel is a typical extraregion article of which we have many, including seas. Some of the section headings should be removed though as they will never be filled. Gizza (roam) 12:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No. --Prahlad balaji (talk) 22:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In case you didn't get my reply @ThunderingTyphoons!: --Prahlad balaji (talk) 03:28, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any registered user can handle this, including you.
Result: kept.ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 07:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Votes_for_deletion/September_2020&oldid=4924278"