Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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The result of the discussion was:  mark historical with superseded linking to the category. Kills two birds with one stone. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 07:18, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

I propose merging and redirecting to Category:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject. This list has not been frequently maintained, and for example, it currently has a redlink. The category would not pretty much not need maintenance separate from the pages themselves. I suggest merging the "Shortcut" column into the individual pages, where it's more useful to the participants of the various WikiProjects. The "Category" column can either be dropped, or it can be used to create subcategories of "Category:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject". I'm not sure it's needed for people looking for articles to work on. WikiProject Council/Directory would be a much better place to start, and active projects generally have some mechanism for highlighting the most needy articles, whether that's page views or assessment. -- Beland (talk) 02:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: Archive if obsolete. It was used, and so is history. Deleting history confounds attempts to understand how stuff was done before. Reserve projectspace deletions for things that shouldn’t have been created in the first place, or explain why it is undesirable to allow wikiarcheologists to have access. Also, old stuff should be archived without the need for an xfd discussion. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not proposing deleting the edit history...I thought simply turning the page into a redirect might be controversial, so I asked first. I'm not sure what you mean by "archive"? Would that include redirecting to the category and leaving the edit history in place? Or are you talking about just putting a template at the top of the page indicating it's not maintained and pointing to the category? I was trying to avoid people seeing a slightly outdated list and attempting to revive it, on the assumption it'll just fall into disuse later and isn't helpful if we already have the category. -- Beland (talk) 19:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If you’re not proposing deletion, you shouldn’t be bringing it to MfD. Not only is it not deletion, the one-week deadline for input is not appropriate. If unsure, start with the talk page, and if no one answers consider Publicising discussions.
 * “Archive” can mean blank, or redirect, or put an archive template on top, content blanked or not. As these are ordinary edits, you may just do it, and if someone later disagrees they can revert. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:53, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect per nom. Two pages with identical scope and near identical functionality, but with one that is not being maintained. An archive here would be disruptive because the content here is not "historical", it's still something that is actively done, just via categories, rather than manually updated lists. 192.76.8.85 (talk) 00:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Mark Historical, which may be what SmokeyJoe means by putting an archive template on top. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:04, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Mark historical per above. Dronebogus (talk) 12:52, 4 August 2022 (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.