Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Intensive Care Unit


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous 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 discussion was tag as historical –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  05:43, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Intensive Care Unit
Okay, this is a bit of a bold move, but there doesn't seem to be any real objection yet from Realkyhick. The project doesn't seem to have ever accomplished any actual success in cleaning up and saving articles, with a backlog dating over 14 months and no editors coming to the rescue (<10 edits in the past 3 months). Even in July, the founder admitted that the project has kind of been on the rocks as there "aren't many 'borderline cases'". We already have WP:ARS which does basically the same thing, so I think that this project is largely redundant in addition to being stillborn. It should be deleted or at the least, tagged as historical. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment ARS is for articles at AfD, while ICU is for those that are not. I personally have addressed several articles tagged at ICU in the recent past, for what it's worth. Skomorokh  20:37, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There still doesn't seem to be much of a need for this project, and even the creator has admitted it. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:50, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not arguing one way or the other at this point, but I don't really see the merit in deletion here. If it's used and useful, leave it be; if not, tagging as historical seems appropriate to serve as a record for future generations of editors. Skomorokh  20:53, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Tag as historical and remove the icu templates from articles. There doesn't appear to be any pressing need to get rid of this project entirely, but it does appear to be more or less dormant. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 00:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: As the creator of the project, I will admit that there has been little activity with ICU. It seems that the original situation has somewhat been abated — borderline cases have either been fixed, or have been deleted. The only cases that come to our attention now typically do so during an AfD, which ARS then handles. Tagging as historical would seem to be the best course of action, because it could always be revived at that point if necessary. I willing to abide by whatever the consensus brings forth. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 02:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Tag as historical The project has potential and is prepared well with templates and procedures, for example "*If the article never came to an AfD, remove the icu and icu-triage templates as above, and tag the talk page with icu-treated." It reminds me of other processes that work well here. While it hasn't attracted enough or the right attention to its purpose, possibly because of a perceived but incorrect too-similarity with ARS. It could be revived, adapted or learned from later. Revelian (talk) 00:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Tag as historical We have a surfeit of cleanup tags anyway (which is all the Icu tags really are). I was a member of the project (maybe I still am) until I realized that I never tagged an article for them or cleaned a tagged article up.  Project and talk pages are (as TpH says) pretty dead. Protonk (talk) 07:42, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Tag as historical, as outright deletion is not needed in this case. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 09:04, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Tag as historical, as per the above statements. TenPoundHammer makes some good points, I think we should take the project down. - Enzo Aquarius (talk) 02:15, 1 January 2009 (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.