This category is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles
This category was nominated for deletion on 16
March 2009. The result of the discussion was keep.
This category was nominated for deletion on 1
April 2013. The result of the discussion was keep.
Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I have a problem with this category. It fails Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Visitor Attraction is a completely subjective term, pertaining to the business of marketing. Just as one visitor might deem something worthwhile seeing, another visitor would say to avoid it. How can this category be justified? Please discuss.- Gilliam (talk) 12:00, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
The two CfD discussions above were for deletion and resulted in consensus to "keep", but the naming was not discussed. The main article is Tourist attraction and that is by far the more common name outside Wikipedia, featured in books over 20 times more than "visitor attraction": see Ngram. I suggest that the whole tree should be nominated for renaming accordingly. Comments? – FayenaticLondon11:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
I don't know if the common name rationale is right here. The most logical name should be used i.e. "visitor attraction" because not all visitors are tourists. We have Mastication but "chewing" is the common word. The commonscat is also "mastication". Also, in articles we use section the heading "visitor attraction" rather than "tourist attraction". Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:26, 30 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
For visitors who are not tourists, e.g. business people attending a conference held in a venue or academics visiting a place to study it, there is no common connection that would make it WP:defining for the purpose of categorisation. It is the characteristic of a place as a tourist attraction that is being categorised. – FayenaticLondon09:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
If we must have a category for, essentially, WP:SPAM, i would prefer "Tourist attraction." This topic, at least, can be justified under a place article subsection, "Economy." "Visitor" is too vague. Student7 (talk) 21:57, 18 August 2015 (UTC)Reply