Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiCV

 __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:  Move. will move this to an unknown place of their choosing. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 07:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCV

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

Moribund student/intern project from early January 2018 that never went anywhere past the initial idea (afaik). Nthep (talk) 16:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Seems like the question of whether it went anywhere or is still active is a good one for the talk page rather than nominating for deletion, and if it did stall, what's the deletion rationale rather than marking as historical or userfying? &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 18:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It's been over 3 years with no activity. The person whose proposal it was hasn't edited since, what is the point of retention of basically an idea? If there had been any developments then there is possibly a justification for retaining as historical but this is basically an abandoned draft and if it were an article would have been G13'd long ago. Nthep (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, and if it were in the template or module or help namespace it'd be deleted as inappropriate there, too, but no need for hypotheticals. My point is we need a reason for deletion based in policy, rather than presenting an arbitrary "hasn't been updated in too long" standard. i.e. WP:DELREASON or the like. But not much point belaboring the issue given what's below. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 01:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I set some of this up. I propose to move it to meta:Research:Projects, where I think all these projects should go nowadays. Advantage: this is where we put these things now; disadvantage: we lose edit history. No problem, right?  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  20:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. I don't think the history is too much to worry about, other than and your own, nobody's edits have been much beyond stylish and/or minor. The talk page goes too, I assume? Nthep (talk) 20:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Fine here, too. I would say a soft redirect would do to avoid loss of history, but it's the sort of page title that could mean different things, so I wouldn't want to presume occupy it with a soft redirect. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 01:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note added after close Moved to meta:Research:WikiCV.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  12:18, 6 May 2021 (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.