Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards


 * 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 Keep this is a WP:POINT nomination. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 19:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Awards
Little used Wikiproject that serves no purpose, is a source of conflict and strife and is too bureaucratic South Philly 19:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Definite Keep. I have to laugh at this, frankly. Until yesterday, Southphilly was fighting tooth and nail to keep a bureaucratic hierarchy of editors including a coordinator, which you can read on the talkpage. Since I started editing there last week, another three users have joined it, we have revamped the main page, eliminated the bureaucracy, and are thinking about creating a weekly bulletin to inform users of the status of proposed awards. This project is dead by no means. This seems to me to be a rather bad faith nom from a user who was the source of said conflict and strife outraged at not getting his way in the face of about 15 people who opposed him. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * keep - the bureaucratic elements are being removed and there is current on-going debate about the future of the project. If THAT fails, then is the time to delete this project. This seems to be a WP:POINT nomination as recent efforts from the above user to WP:OWN the project have been rebutted in great detail - both on the project talkpage and at AN/I. --Fredrick day 19:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep, bad faith nomination. --Deathphoenix ʕ 19:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment If this somehow does get deleted, then the talk pages and archives should be move back to Wikipedia talk:Barnstar and award proposals from whence they came. --evrik (talk) 19:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - another user has just joined during the course of this MfD. How very dead and little used we are... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep - nominator is reacting against huge consensus against his/her proposal to have a coordinator in said project, for it is widely believed that such bureaucracy is completely unnecessary. Honestly, this is getting way bizarre. Raystorm 20:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Great project, no good reasons to delete. -Mschel 21:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep per Dev920, Fredrick day, Deathphoenix and Raystorm. Project was an awful mess, but recent efforts are making substantial improvements and seem to be salvaging the project.  ~ Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 21:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This gives an idea where users are at in terms of service though some users have more edits than time (or vice versa) than others. Chris 22:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you're voting on the wrong MfD. In any case, if users want to show how many edits they have and how long they've been here, they can via a userbox. See my page, for example, where I have both. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

&#91;Moved to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Service awards.&#93;


 * Speedy keep, per Deathphoenix. This is clearly a vengeance nominaton. &mdash; SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 01:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep At least until the project has a chance at funtioning with whatever new organization is put in place. --After Midnight 0001 01:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep.  bibliomaniac 1  5  03:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, although I'm a litte bit confused right now about what this project is about... still, if some editors want to use it a framework, who are we to gainsay them. Herostratus 02:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. I am incredibly suspicious that someone fighting so strenuously about the project is now MfDing it. -Amarkov moo! 04:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Having !voted delete for the awards above, I do think this is a bad faith nomination for something that is a good idea. --Bduke 10:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * comment there were a number of calls to MFD this project, why is it retaliation because I decided to do it? South Philly 18:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Because those were threats to delete a project who insisted on forcing a coordinator on less than five active members, only two of which wanted a coordinator? Which, as I recall, was stopped when an administrator ordered you to stop forcing your views on everyone else. So where's these calls to delete now? I see none. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:16, 7 March 2007 (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.