Talk:Daqin pagoda

VFD Discussion

 * Merge/Delete. An article about a pagoda is not a Wikivoyage article, per Project:What is an article? - with the following exceptions: "Cases where exceptions are made include attractions, sites, or events that are far away (too far for a day trip) from any city and would require an overnight stay, or so large and complex that the information about them would overload the city article." Large and complex wouldn't seem to apply to what's described as "the oldest known church building in China," and it is clearly a viable day trip away from Xian. I'd suggest taking the essential information from this article and appending it to the "Get out" section of the Xian guide. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 05:39, 2 December 2011 (EST)
 * "Get out" is for links to other destinations. It can't be both deleted as a destination article, and placed in a "Get out" section.  (WT-en) LtPowers 14:32, 2 December 2011 (EST)
 * I didn't realize that all "Get out" items had to include a link to another article. In that case, the info could be inserted in the "Outside the city" subsection of Xian, though I find that problematic because I think a day trip taking a couple of hours or more each way should really be in "Get out." (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 18:43, 2 December 2011 (EST)
 * I've never heard such a rule, LtPowers. As far as I know, the Get out section is for things that would be good as a daytrip, whether they actually have their own article or not.(WT-en) texugo 00:37, 3 December 2011 (EST)
 * Project:Big city article template says Get Out is for "Information about nearby destinations that would serve as a good 'next stop.'" I've never seen any case made for allowing non-destination listings in the Get Out section.  Think about it -- if it's an attraction, it belongs in "See" or "Do"; why make the reader check both places for something to do?  (WT-en) LtPowers 20:45, 3 December 2011 (EST)
 * Because it's 62 km from Xian and the trip from Xian to there takes 1-3 hours by bus. It's not an attraction in or even that close to the city. That's why it makes sense for it to be a "Get out." Is your alternative to put the information in the "Outside the city" subsection of Xian? What would your distance limit be for that kind of subsection? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 00:06, 5 December 2011 (EST)
 * I agree with (WT-en) LtPowers. Attractions that are commonly visited from a destination should be in the See/Do sections of that articles. Get out is a what comes next in the journey section, and not for attractions that lie further afield (no matter how far).  The confusion in the heading has been discussed before, including here  --(WT-en) Inas 00:25, 5 December 2011 (EST)
 * Going by that linked discussion, we really ought to revisit the confusing "Get out" subtitle. However, in any case, would any of you like to weigh in on whether or not you support deleting the article in question and merging the information as appropriate into the relevant section of the Xian article? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:02, 5 December 2011 (EST)
 * I think it is an obvious candidate for merging. There are only a handful of attractions which justify their own article.  Doing the merge is the real issue.  If this was just merged and redirected I think no one would have raised an eyebrow on vfd.  --(WT-en) Inas 21:21, 7 December 2011 (EST)


 * Merge and redirect (per Project:Deletion_policy) to its own subsection of Xian. If we divide Shaannxi completely, and have a different bottom-level article, which would be more suitable, then the information can be moved there. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 13:43, 19 December 2011 (EST)
 * Agreed. merge (WT-en) Pashley 20:47, 19 December 2011 (EST)
 * Merge to Xian per Ikan. -- (WT-en) Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 21:18, 24 January 2012 (EST)

Result: Merge tag added. -- (WT-en) Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 13:30, 5 February 2012 (EST)

You are welcome to use some of the photos I took during my last trip there for the article: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevsunblush/5236196866/