Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball 1876


 * 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 delete.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  10:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Baseball 1876

 * Delete: While not an entirely bad idea, it's gained no interest and I'm not inclined to revive it. The lack of interest includes the creator who created the project two months ago, made a few edits to it, and then promptly left Wikipedia entirely with no notice.  —Wknight94 (talk) 14:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Mark as historical/inactive - it strikes me as a good idea (although it could be better named, my initial thought on seeing the title was that it was about a single year in Baseball history, not Baseball pre-1900), and see no reason why we shouldn't leave it around for someone else to pick up in the future. I've left a note about this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball, in the hope of raising awareness. There was no obvious link to the project under discussion from the front page of the more general WikiProject, so many editors interested in Baseball may not even know of its existence. Thryduulf 15:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I can get behind this option too although I'm not sure there's enough history to be worth keeping. It really never started. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - with possible movement of some of the content into a userpage which could be added to the Proposed WikiProjects page. The name is misleading, and there probably isn't enough activity that has taken place to actively preserve it as inactive. Also, it might better function as a work group/task force of the larger WikiProject Baseball. Keeping it as is would eliminate both of these, possibly more effective, solutions. Badbilltucker 17:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Jaranda wat's sup 17:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Terence Ong 18:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. It's not really necessary anymore, even if it is kept for historical purposes. I've been with the WikiProject a while, and I had never heard of this project.  Nish kid 64  02:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'd support marking it as historical as well, but since it had so little interest maybe it's better to just let it go. -- Wizardman 04:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete subject area is too small for a wikiproject anyway. ST47 Talk 19:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Yuser31415 03:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into main WikiProject Baseball. --Dan027 07:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. as there is a functioning WikiProject available. feydey 19:27, 3 January 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.