Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Approved (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to Motto of the day/Nominations.--Aervanath (talk) 05:16, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Motto of the day/Approved
This page now seems to be obsolete following changes in the WP:MOTD project including overhauling processes and other areas. Actually i suggest redirect to Motto of the day/Nominations -- Simply south (talk) 00:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - rendered obsolete according to our current method of nominating mottoes. &mdash; La Pianista  Speak · Hear 05:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Unneeded section. We only need nominations subpage. Versus22 talk 05:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * As a projectspace collaboration with a long, many-contributor history, do not delete, but redirect as per nom. Simply south, if you thought this should be a redirect, you should have proposed so on the talk page, and if there were no objection, converted it to the redirect. MfD is for deletion.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, this has been as discussed at Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day/Nominations and consensus was to send it to MfD so this is in the right area. Simply south (talk) 11:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Nonetheless, if you don't want something deleted, don't nominate it for deletion. You don't want this deleted, and thus should not have nominated it for deletion.  Uncle G (talk) 12:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Useless.  Simon KSK  12:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's not needed as all mottos that have achieved a positive consensus are immediately put on the Schedule page.  Wikiert  T S C 18:01, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect per nom. No reason has been given to remove extensive page history or break links. Graham 87 00:44, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect per nom.--Sunny910910 (talk 02:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete; I have never seen it used since I joined here. Queenie  20:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Having kept an eye on MOTD since its creation, if it has outlived its purpose I believe it should be redirected for the sake of preserving history and links.  bibliomaniac 1  5  03:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Close nomination. If you recommend a redirect, then you don't need a deletion discussion. - Mgm|(talk) 11:15, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and redirect as nominator requested. The Archives can also be kept and left as they are to preserve history, it is quite clear they are historical archives by their names. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:49, 19 March 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.