Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Canada highway WikiProjects


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

The result of the debate was Merge/Redirect ^ demon [omg plz] 19:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Canada highway WikiProjects
This nomination includes: All of these projects appear to be inactive (they actually appear never to have been active in the first place). None of their project pages (which are unfinished) have been edited in several months. The projects only have three to five members, and have no articles. Merging into the WikiProject Canada Roads parent project may not be feasible since that project is also somewhat inactive, and highways seem to be covered well by existing provincial WikiProjects. I know that nominating these all in a single MFD may be weird, but they all have the same problems. --Core desat 01:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * All project userboxes and subpages (if any, I have not found any)
 * Delete. None of the projects have any dedicated editors, and, due to the low amount of articles, the parent Canada Roads project is a sufficient project to cover all of Canada. However, the possibility for recreation for each individual project should remain if enough editors/interest is found. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 01:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I declare myself a "dedicated editor" for the Saskatchewan project, thank you. Ultraflame 03:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. It seems like too much organization for too little work being done. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 01:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge. I agree, there is far too many projects for some provinces that have very little road.  That being said, I think that they shouldn't be eliminated, but merged into the parent WikiProject as task forces, like in WP:USRD.   --myselfalso 02:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * So which provinces have "very little road"? Ultraflame 14:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Communities in Nunavut are only accessible via air or sea. In fact, the territory has no highways, and very few paved roads. Remote areas of the NWT have the same problem. Caknuck 15:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. They're not doing any notable good. --TinMan 02:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge. Just look at what I have been doing with the Saskatchewan project. I believe I am quite dedicated to the Saskatchewan Roads WikiProject. Sure, I do not edit the project page, but do you even know how extensive the Saskatchewan highway system is? Look at the list of Saskatchewan highways. Then look at the list of Saskatchewan roads. Thank you. Ultraflame 03:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No offense, but one person does not a WikiProject make. These projects were started and abandoned, and they have absolutely no articles. The parent project only has a few articles; the vast majority of highway articles are covered by the provincial WikiProjects. --Core desat 05:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You called my project "abandoned". I don't think so. And look at the number of articles for the Saskatchewan project, please. Ultraflame 14:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The number of articles isn't the issue. The issue is the inactivity and current state of the projects. The project you keep referring to has no guidelines for the articles, no examples of templates to use, and is of no use of anyone trying to write articles on Saskatchewan roads. Because of how these projects were created (copy and paste), all of the projects have the same problems. Also, as Coredesat said, one person does not make a WikiProject. There's nothing wrong with the Canada Roads WP being used for all of Canada's road articles for the time being until more editors are found. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 15:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If the number of articles is not an issue, why do you think the person who nominated these projects (my project, in particular) keeps mentioning the "lack of articles"? My project does have guidelines for the articles. It has examples of templates to use. And it is very useful to myself, as a member of the Saskatchewan Roads WikiProject, to write articles on Saskatchewan roads. Ultraflame 15:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I see no structure and no infobox template (the default example does not count). -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 15:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "default example" and why does it not count? Ultraflame 15:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Infobox projectname is not a valid infobox template. Please, look at WP:NYSR for what a road-related WikiProject should contain. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 16:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I do not believe our project uses that template. About your previous comment, we do have a structure, which is at the "Structure" section of the page. Many templates are used in the Saskatchewan Highways WikiProject, and you may view them at the List of Saskatchewan provincial highways. Finally, thank you for your demonstration of a WikiProject about roads. Ultraflame 16:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. The problem with merging is that there's nothing to merge.  Deleting the projects don't get in the way of the one active editor continuing to be active.  Projects aren't required to organize the efforts of a single editor, and even if it were it's not doing the job. -- NORTH talk 03:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * So it cannot even be merged with the WikiProject Canada Roads? Ultraflame 14:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * There's nothing to merge. The project pages have no content whatsoever. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 15:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * And what do you mean by "no content whatsoever"? Have you even read the project pages? Ultraflame 15:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The pages are all copy-pasted duplicates of each other. Half the time, the editor forgot to fix the province names. Thus, they are redundant. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 *  Merge Non-precedent-setting delete. Merge is what we've been doing with similar inactive road projects in the U.S. (i.e. WP:NVSH.) Not inactive to leave on their own but not pointless enough to delete. However, these are copy-paste jobs (sometimes the author forgot to change province names!) They can probably be recreated easily. So, reluctant delete but do not speedy delete as a recreation if someone bothers to recreate the project as an active and fully maintained project. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect the main project pages to WikiProject Canada Roads, nothing to merge. An example of an active subproject would be WikiProject Golden Horseshoe Roads, which I think should be merged under WikiProject Canada Roads as well, but that's another matter. –Pomte 14:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "nothing to merge"? The links, perhaps? Ultraflame 14:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Which links? I am agreeing with some of the above that it appears there is nothing in these projects worth merging to WikiProject Canada Roads. Do not merge the member lists, because if they are active at all, they will sign their name up again at the parent project. Do not merge specific guidelines because they are boilerplate and WikiProject Canada Roads already contains a list of province/territory-specific conventions. However, if you find anything worth merging, go ahead. –Pomte 15:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete All and redirect the project pages to WikiProject Canada Roads. As stated, nothing to merge here - and the projects have not seen attention for much more than a year.  With the activity involved in this - one project page is good enough and that is Canada Roads. --  master_son  Talk  -  Edits  19:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep--as if we're all spending all of our living time on thse projects--these are works in progress, along with spending family time, work time, etc....and on wiki, it seems to be reversing vandalism on non-school days (Easter Monday)....Bacl-presby 20:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per all the people who said to delete. There sure isn't anything to merge, and redirecting them all to WP:CRWP is fine.  One person does not make a WikiProject, and there is no "I" in the word "team".  WikiProjects are a team effort.  One person does not qualify as a team.  V 6 0  干什么？ ·  VDemolitions 20:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Move all project pages as subpages under the Canada Roads WP, similar to the way inactive subprojects of WP:USRD have been demoted. Should a subproject regain interest, it can be "repromoted" by moving it back out into project space. —Scott5114↗ 21:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have to say, there might not be much to merge in the sense of WikiProjects - but it should be folded into the main project.  Otherwise, why not just delete WP:CRWP?  Also, I don't think it's fair to apply USRD to CRWP - they are two separate countries.  Unless USRD adopts Canadian highways, one can't apply USRD standards to CRWP.  --myselfalso 21:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It's easy to create empty talk pages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads/Ontario, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads/British Columbia etc and link to them from WP:CRWP for specific discussion. A parameter on CANRP can group articles under province/territory-specific categories. –Pomte 21:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It wasn't my intention to apply USRD standards to Canada, but rather to use USRD's project-demotion process as an example for how I think these provincial subprojects should be handled. (USRD has enough on its collective plate as it is without adopting other countries' highways.;) ) —Scott5114↗ 14:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge Per Scott5114. I have to admit, some Nunavut roads are interesting because they are seasonal. Some are made of ice completely and only available during winter. These roads are definetely notiable enough to be mentioned.  OhanaUnited   00:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * We're talking about the WikiProjects guys, not the articles. The articles will not be affected by the deletion of the WikiProjects. --  master_son  Talk  -  Edits  00:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - required content can be merged into the Canada Roads project, and work groups for individual provinces can be created as called for. John Carter 16:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - all these WikiProjects obviously don't have enough members or content to stay afloat, this information can be well handled at the parent WikiProject, or even without the assistance of a WikiProject. Grover 11:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I am fairly new to Wikipedia, but have enjoyed adding Saskatchewan articles. I would consider myself "dedicated", and have added a list and article, and will continue to.  Each takes time.  I am amazed at how much Saskatchewan roads articles have been growing, so does not feel abandoned to me.  I agree with Ultraflame above, keep the provincial articles as they are different heirarchies,significance and importance which only local dwellers would particularly know, and there will be more involvement at a provincial project level, rather than national.  SriMesh| talk  Julia 22:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * As Master son stated above, we are talking about the WikiProject pages, not the articles. The articles will not be affected. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 23:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Since you are dedicated to the Saskatchewan page and have made improvements, the content should not be lost and should be moved to WikiProject Canada Roads/Saskatchewan or some other suitable subpage. Go ahead and make this move if you agree. –Pomte 03:39, 16 April 2007 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.