Talk:West End-West Bay

VfD
''This article was nominated for deletion on 24 July 2013 but was kept. The deletion debate is here. Please consider that decision before you re-nominate it.


 * No information, has been so for a number of years. Some text on what is two location in Roatán. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Just redirect this real place to Roatán --Inas (talk) 06:42, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. We went over this above: lack of content is not a deletion rationale. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 07:13, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep; I agree with Andre, lack of content is not a deletion rationale. I also think redirecting is only a good thing for real places where the development of an own article is unlikely or even unwanted. In other cases, a redirect will only decrease the chances of anyone editing it, as following a redirect back to its origin is really not that simple for less seasoned editors. I'm also not convinced it has such great advantages. Anyone who will look up West End in Honduras will already know it's on Roatán; redirecting there is of little help. It is then better to have a clear in-text link to the region article, but not to redirect automatically. Saqib went ahead and put a vfd-template on the Roatán article, as the redirect was already in place, but that just seems wrong. Therefore, I undid the redirect and restored the vfd template on West End-West Bay, awaiting discussion here. For the record, there's a bunch of hotel and other entries on e.g. Tripadvisor, so it seems reasonable to expect this article to grow at some point. JuliasTravels (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * But why are two locations in the title of this article while in the Roatán, where there is information, they are listed separately?--Traveler100 (talk) 22:05, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's fine and dandy to say that we always redirect real places, but I also think something that bears repeating is that per policy as well as precedent, even redirection should not be considered unless the destination in question is so devoid of potential fodder for a "See", "Do", "Eat", "Drink" or "Sleep" section that it could never be more than an outline even if every place were listed. (In other words, lack of content per se is neither a valid deletion rationale nor a valid rationale to redirect.) And, as JuliasTravels said, West End-West Bay doesn't fall under that category. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Somewhat disagree. We're doing our readers a disservice by leaving them with an empty article, when we do have relevant content in another.  It's not hard to both create and remove redirects, and if someone wants to build the article, they should just do so.  Removing a redirect from an empty article doesn't really progress the project any.  I don't believe we have any such thing as a rationale to redirect, nor do I think we necessarily need one.  --Inas (talk) 02:19, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Removing a redirect to create a new article isn't hard once you know how to do it, but I do think it's a rather big step for a passer-by who happens to have been to West-End and would otherwise just easily add a listing or two. In this case I'm a bit in doubt though, since the island-article has a regular destination layout, including listings for several towns, also West-End. In comparable (non-island) situations, this would rather be a region article and the towns would have their own articles, right? I'm not familiar with this place though, and I'm not entirely sure what the best solution would be. JuliasTravels (talk) 11:35, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand your perspective, and having an easy site to navigate for editors is a good thing. However, we have some useful travel content in the Roatán article, and we should assist the traveller to find that rather than this empty article with an unlikely article name.  --Inas (talk) 03:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete West End and West Bay are two different places. I don't think so anybody will go to type "West End-West Bay" in search field as its a uncommon name. --Saqib (talk) 21:03, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the logic behind redirects, is that hopefully next time someone will just spend 5 seconds doing a redirect than going through a nomination process where there is a clear target for the redirect (as there is here). Redirects are cheap --Inas (talk) 03:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'll change my vote to Redirect then and closing this nomination. --Saqib (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Result: Redirected to Roatán. --Saqib (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2013 (UTC)