Wikivoyage talk:Requested articles/Old requests

How were the requests determined to be old? I suggested Aztecs, Inca Empire and Vietnamese cuisine in 2017. And these are the ones that I remember. There are probably many other requests made within the last two years that have ended up here. Gizza ( roam ) 03:10, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * No idea. It looks like one user took it upon himself to just randomly slush more than half of the entire list for no reason at all. Revert? K7L (talk) 04:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I compared this list with one dated August 2016. I might have made a couple mistakes but generally these should be at least two years old. Selfie City (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's the state of it two years ago: . If you see any mistakes please tell me. Selfie City (talk) 13:35, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * So what? These are valid ideas. Museums, tour boats, charter flights, massage, live theatre and the performing arts don't suddenly stop being gaping holes in Wikivoyage coverage just because they've been missing for some arbitrary length of time. If the suggestion is viable, it should be on the main list - not on a "slushpile" by whatever name. K7L (talk) 14:35, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There is a difference between "Slush pile" and "Old requests", and the difference is obvious. The requests still exist, so what trouble is there? Also, keep in mind how Wikis work and even democracies, etc.: it's all about the will of the people. So if the "Museums" article isn't created, then perhaps it is not such a good idea. Also, if you think Museums should be an article, you can plunge forward and create it &mdash; that way, you will no longer have to complain that the article hasn't been created. Selfie City (talk) 01:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There isn't a difference between "Slush pile" and "Old requests", it's the same page - which you've merely renamed. And no, removing (or slushing) half of WV:RA doesn't get us any closer to getting any of these ideas turned into articles. K7L (talk) 01:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Once again I have to call K7L out on his/her abusive language toward other editors. Selfie City is a constructive contributor and a respected member of the Wikivoyage community. Using phrases like "randomly slush more than half of the entire list for no reason at all" is disruptive behaviour. K7L has made false accusations against me in the past, but it will not discourage me from editing. At that time, I asked him/her not to abuse other editors in the same way, but here he is again. This is not acceptable. Selfie City has already apologized for moving requests to another page prematurely here. Continually complaining about it after the apology is really poor form. Selfie City is working hard to build both the Wikivoyage project and the community. S/he does not deserve abuse from K7L or anyone. Ground Zero (talk) 02:17, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think K7L is openly being offensive but at the same time there is an underlying tone in his/her comments that implies I've been a near-vandal in creating this "slush pile", which just isn't true. If you scroll down at the following link, you will see that K7L actually created the slushpile themselves. I've actually done quite a lot to satisfy K7L and Granger since Granger voiced an oppose vote while I was archiving. Selfie City (talk) 02:26, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I respect that you don't want to escalate things, but I I also think that you moved half the list "randomly", and I don't think you did it "for no reason at all". That sort of bullshit is offensive, and there is no call for attacking other editors like that. Ground Zero (talk) 02:32, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Any "old" requests that haven't been granted need to be moved back to Requested articles right away and should never, ever be deleted if they might possibly be travel-relevant. This shouldn't be a point of disagreement now or ever. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It looks to me like almost all of this page should be moved back. If appropriate, Requested articles could be split by topic, but surely not by age of the request. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Why do we even have this page?
My feeling is that when requested articles are started, the requests should be deleted, and I've been operating on that basis. Why should we have this archive at all? Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I was wondering the same thing. Should we consider deleting this article? I personally vote yes. AdamT777 (talk) 15:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Yep. I guess this may require a Vfd nomination, regrettably (I'd like to just delete it without a discussion, but that's not the Wiki way). Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Vfd thread
Right here: Votes for deletion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 17 September 2020 (UTC)