 | This article was nominated for deletion on 20 July 2017. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
| This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
RD1 edit
RickinBaltimore, since the deletion log shows you as currently on, would you mind doing the RD1 here so I can PROD it and mark it patrolled without the risk of the copyvio being restored and indexed by Google? Thanks. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:34, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Done RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:35, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
TonyBallioni, thank you for your concern regarding the possibility of this article not following Wikipedia criteria for inclusion. I would like to clarify why I think it’s not the case and why I object to its deletion: First of all, the idea behind starting this article was to describe and explain major points of view about an issue that, although controversial, surely deserves being characterized in Wikipedia. As such, and in order to avoid the impression of trying to do an essay or any sort of pro or against advocacy, this article was written using an impartial tone and maintaining a point of view that is as neutral as possible, while trying to include multiple points of view on the issue, its possible causes and possible solutions. The article doesn’t include any direct quotations or translations, and all its non-original content and published data comes from cited/verifiable sources, taken from publicly available information included in the ‘References’ part of the article. I’m not of course arguing the article is perfect. In fact, I think it deserves to be published in order to be improved, copyedited and better sourced by other members of this community, having in mind that the article as it is, is better than having nothing at all on the subject. Nevertheless, if you identify any specific content that sounds in any way like the author's own argument instead of a major point of view about the issue, please mark them so that I can alter or delete them. Similarly, if you identify any specific content that appears to have been added without evidence of permission from the copyright holder, please mark them so that I can add its public source.
Joao Coelho 18:34, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
- Joaodiascoelho, I've removed the content that was copyrighted from: [1]. I'll take it to a deletion discussion. Also, it appears you are the author, are you not? If not, have you been paid to put this on Wikipedia and have you ever used another account before. Thanks. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:40, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
TonyBallioni, thanks for your feedback. I'm not the author of the article in question, I've never been paid to write anything on Wikipedia and this is my only account, which I've been using for many years. This is an attempt to do an honest contribution to Wikipedia's content.
Joao Coelho 19:00, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jaodiscoelho, if you did not write the article, who did? I'm a bit confused here since the revision history lists you as creating this page on Wikipedia. Thanks. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:02, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
TonyBallioni, sorry about the confusion, I thought you were referring me as the author of [2]. As for this Wikipedia page, yes, of course it was me who wrote it. As I said, I've never been paid to write anything on Wikipedia and this is my only account, which I've been using for many years.
Several issues edit
I think this is a good article, and it should be kept. However, there are several vague/unsupported statements that do not help to explain the concept of overtourism (and which might violate WP:OR). These are the ones that seemed strange to me:
1. "Overtourism is related to the carrying capacity of a destination and to overcrowding, when too many people visit a specific place for safety or comfort." Is there a reference for this statement? I don't see how overtourism is related at all to the (biological) carrying capacity of an environment, aside from being vaguely analogous. And while overcrowding (as described on the linked WP page) might be a consequence of overtourism, I don't see how it is related.
2. "Developments outside of tourism": This subheading is under "Causes", yet none of the bullet points (except maybe the first one) can really be considered a "cause" of overtourism (at least not without a reference, and none are provided). For example, "speculation on the housing market can also create a shortage of housing for residents and increase rents and house prices."...how exactly would that cause overtourism? The argument could be made that this might actually prevent overtourism, by forcing up the prices of short-term rentals. This and all the other points need to be explained more clearly AND have references added.
3. Under "Measures against overtourism", it is stated that the UNWTO detailed 11 strategies for managing overtourism, but only seven items are listed. Either all eleven should be given or the section should be revised.
I will start looking for sources that can substantiate these claims, and if not I might remove them unless someone has a better solution. Thanks! WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 20:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Just listed all 11 strategies identified by the UNWTO (paraphrased), so item 3 is off the list. Now for 1 and 2. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 20:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)