Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikijunior (2nd nomination)


 * 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   merge to Wikibooks. (I'm not doing the merge, this is a drive-by closing :-)  Keeper    76  20:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikijunior
AfDs for this article: Articles for deletion/Wikiquote
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails notability guidelines for the internet. C.f. Google News which has a whopping two hits. Most Google hits seem to be wikijunior pages themselves, or scrapers. The result of the last AfD was 'no consensus' and I believe many of the 'keep' arguments there were not based on the site's notability so much as the fact that it is part of the Wikimedia Foundation.  naerii  12:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Wikibooks. Notability is not inherited but this is a fairly substantial part of one of the WMF projects. Stifle (talk) 13:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with redirect, as it's not worth mentioning separately. It could have been, had it lived up to its potential, but it isn't nearly close to notable or interesting enough for its own article. --  Zanimum (talk) 16:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect given the lack of external coverage. the wub "?!"  16:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  16:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: All I can say is... Oh, no, not again.  This is a project that had its origin outside of Wikibooks and has an interesting background all of its own.  As far as what is being done with this project at the moment... that certainly is debatable.  I do think there is enough interesting information about this project to merit its own article and not risk getting swallowed up by an otherwise poorly written article about Wikibooks... which also needs quite a bit more help in terms of getting something up to even a B-grade article.  Merging the articles at the moment would be simply merging two rather poorly written stubs together.  Otherwise, the arguments about keeping, merging, or deleting this article rank with doing the same to any Wikimedia sister project article.  --Robert Horning (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh. Do you have any references to show notability? Or does your argument rest entirely on the fact that this is a Wikimedia project? Notability is not inherited. We have to evaluate this article solely on its own merits; if you have anything that shows that Wikijunior is notable, by all means please post it, but please don't make arguments for its notability based on the notability of other projects.  naerii  17:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Notability is such a slippery slope that can significantly get you into trouble, and has a funny way of biting you in the back when you aren't ready for it. Non-notability also implies that such a task is insignificant and not worthy of documentation or notation.  BTW, no, I'm not resting on the fact that it is a Wikimedia project, but I'm also suggesting that it would do a disservice to both this topic and the Wikibooks article by merging them together.  The other huge problem is that to do both article properly, you would have to write what amounts to be original research.  The assumption here is that Wikijunior is but a wikiproject of Wikibooks, but I am challenging that assertion and claiming it is much more than that.  Another issue:  At what point does something become notable?  It will be interesting to see what will happen in a couple of years with Wikijunior, and if this AfD will be considered among the more infamous of Wikipedia history or not.  Yeah, I see the prevailing consensus.  --Robert Horning (talk) 09:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Something becomes notable when it has multiple non-trivial sources written by reliable third parties discussing it. We don't keep stuff just in case it becomes notable in a few years.  naerii  11:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge per nomination. NSR 77  T C  18:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Wikibooks for now, unless there's actual demonstrable of notability. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 18:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Wikibooks - only notable as a component --T-rex 19:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Wikibooks with redirect, per above. A website doesn't get special pass to ignore article policy here all because it is wiki-related.Yobmod (talk) 10:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. Only "keep" argument I'm seeing is the invalid "it has such great potential". -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:20, 26 August 2008 (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.