Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tourism in Ghana


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust The Homunculus 14:47, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Tourism in Ghana

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This might be a candidate for Wikivoyage Polyglot (talk) 05:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. There is a "Tourism in ____" article for many other countries, what specifically is wrong with this one? I certainly see issues with the article, and ways that it could be improved, but what makes it a candidate for deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paisarepa (talk • contribs) 07:15, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, per WP:SK - the nominator does not provide an argument for deletion. Ansh666 07:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Valid subject matter for Wikipedia. Close as nonsense with no valid rationale. ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 07:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - there are a great many Tourism of... or Tourism in... articles and they often serve as valuable merge targets for other less notable subjects at AFD. Nothing to suggest Ghana is any different from any other African country (or country generally for that matter). Presumably they have a tourism industry, it has a dedicated government agency or organisation of some sort and it represents x% of their total GDP.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 10:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll be honest - I commented before the page loaded (slow internet today) and it only opened once I had saved my edit. It's actually quite a lovely article with pictures, great wikilinks, references and some well-sourced content. Really can't see what would have prompted nomination here.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 10:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep per WP:SK - that a certain topic is suitable for another Wikimedia project is not an argument in and of itself for unsuitability on this project. As noted above, this topic is very encyclopedic, and both a Wikivoyage page and a Wikipedia page about the same topic can coexist peacefully. Merging this with Ghana may create a WP:LENGTH issue. Mz7 (talk) 14:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete - as created by a blocked user in violation of their block, per G5. GiantSnowman 17:10, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * GS, his user page says he "may be" but the last SPI was in 2013. Any more clues?  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 21:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * It seems like I got it wrong with this nomination. Sorry about that. I'm.trying to contribute by helping out with page curation. Polyglot (talk) 18:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Polyglot, Page curation can be hit-and-miss but WP:BEFORE still applies to AFD.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 21:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of the pages I flag are clear candidates for speedy deletion. With this one I had my doubts, so I chose the third option, to initiate a discussion. Anyway, I stand corrected, firmly corrected, lol. I should probably have checked for the existence of other similar tourism articles. Also it was not because the subject was an African country. Apart from the misery, Africa is a beautiful continent and I agree the quality of the article is good.--Polyglot (talk) 22:03, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't think it was because it was an African subject. Anyway, you gave the community a chance to have its say. No real harm done.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 22:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete keep per WP:SNOW. Bearian (talk) 20:44, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Bearian, snow? There is only one other speedy delete opinion (others are actually speedy keep). Is that what you meant?  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 21:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was a typo. Bearian (talk) 21:49, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * .  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 22:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep as per those above. GiantSnowman indicates on the User:MemphisPhiseux page that that editor may be a sock-puppet of blocked editor MarkMysoe. Has this been demonstrated? --Bejnar (talk) 20:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per above, including nominator's acknowledgement that it is a notable topic. -- do  ncr  am  22:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * - this is such an obvious case of DUCK that I want to cover it in hoisin sauce and put it in a pancake. GiantSnowman 11:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Ha ha, awesome visual. I don't know anything about the case or the history. There hasn't been any objection or appeal to your block and looking at some of the edit summaries they are very similar. Suppose it doesn't matter much now but thanks for getting back to us.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 11:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response . So am I to take it that there was no investigation, IP analysis or ruling at a noticeboard? While both editors are interested in Ghana and football, and the first edits of MemphisPhiseux show a familiarity with editing (all things that are incidentally also true of GiantSnowman), the types of things that got editor MarkMysoe in trouble (Akanland and series of edits to disguise purpose) seem to be absent from MemphisPhiseux's edits, although the edit war at Jonathan Mensah was informative of boldness untempered by adherence to Wikipedia policy, and seems out-of-character for the sleaziness and sneakiness attributed to MarkMysoe at the ANI ban discussion.  A couple of other points of interest are that MemphisPhiseux does not have an account on commons and seems uninterested in images, while MarkMysoe had such an account and was very active with images; and that MarkMysoe was blocked on 3 January 2013 and MemphisPhiseux did not begin editing until 18 May 2014. The other two named accounts that are listed as potential sockpuppets of MarkMysoe ceased editing on 12 January 2014. Since I did not look at every edit of MemphisPhiseux and MarkMysoe, and since I am not experienced at analysing sockpuppetry, I may have missed the "quack", but it is not obvious to me (no hoisin sauce for me please). --Bejnar (talk) 20:05, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.