Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Concordia (old nom)


 * 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The result of the debate was Withdrawn by nominator (see below). Opabinia regalis 05:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Concordia
Much as though I love the principle of this organisation, and was in fact a member for a short time, it is time to face the fact that Concordia has not achieved its goals. Its members are demoralised, any suggestions that Concordia do something to promote civility make no headway, and from personal experience, Concordia never seems to have recovered from the deletion of its noticeboard, and any messages on the talkpage (none since September) are full of bitterness about this. The project started out nobly, but has quickly and severely run out of steam, and thus I propose that it be deleted. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not having achieved goals is not a good reason for deletion. -Amarkov blahedits 20:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn't want to use the terms "useless" and "pointless", but I will if "not meeting goals" isn't good enough. :D Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep... for now - I agree that not having achieved goals is not a good reason to delete, but I think it would be better to get the remaining members to discuss the future of Concordia as Esperanza are having to do at the moment because of their MfD nomination. --tgheretford (talk) 21:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's almost inactive now, just tag as historical Jaranda wat's sup 21:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I would, were it not for the fact that people keep linking to it assuming it's on par with Esperanza in activity and membership. I felt that a clean break was best. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep inactivity is no reason to delete. Keep it so others no never to go where we went. Computerjoe 's talk 21:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't mean to be offensive, but anyone would be disgruntled if a part of their organization was disbanded against their will. I also don't see how not meeting goals is a reason for deletion.  bibliomaniac 1  5  23:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. If an admin will close this MfD, I will begin a discussion on Concordia to try to determine whether the members wish to delete, tag as historical, or become more active. If I get no response, I'll nominate again. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 02:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Revive or tag as historical Will (Tell me, is something eluding you, sunshine?) 03:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I said in the Esperanza MfD that I'd rather see these guys go first, but I'm not sure what the point is of nominating Concordia so soon after the Esperanza nomination ended with no consensus. This one obviously wasn't going to result in deletion either. Since it's essentially dead now, and never did have a clear program or intention, just tag as historical and move on. Opabinia regalis 05:07, 19 November 2006 (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.