Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Beauty Pageants (2nd nomination)

 __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The result of the discussion was  Withdrawn by nom. Brustopher (talk) 14:25, 18 December 2015 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

WikiProject Beauty Pageants


This project has:
 * No members
 * No substantive edits since 2012 (save one)
 * A bunch of bad advice on creating more fancruft
 * It was created and used by a big paid sock farm.

Ejgreen77 will be by to say they use it - to which I suggest they copy the article alerts and anything else they find useful to their userspace. Legacypac (talk) 21:19, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for now at best as there's simply seems to be no noticeable enthusiasm and activity. SwisterTwister   talk  01:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep on a bad faith nomination, for all of the reasons brought forth in the first nomination. Yes, I am an active member of this project, and I monitor things here regularly. Just because a project has no recent activity on the talk page does not mean that people are not actively using other aspects of it (the article alerts, category structure, rating system, etc.) Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:03, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * There has been no activity since the last nomination. There are still no members in the project. Put the useful stuff in your own userspace please. Legacypac (talk) 03:09, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * 1.) I just told you that I was a member. 2.) You can't put a category structure into userspace. Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:13, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that the statement that "There has been no activity since the last nomination" is blatantly false (see here). Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:21, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep I am also active in the project. That makes at least two of the nominee's reasons to delete wrong (And one of them in bad faith too since you knew Ejgreen was active here and you wrote there are no active members. Plus you bad BLP nomination of Lexy Schenk ‎ has me wondering. That bio very blatantly had a source from a WP:RS. So that prod was wrong too.) and the closer of the last MFD on this said you needed stronger reasons to delete a WikiProject when there are active members....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:19, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep I count 38 threads on the talk page. We don't delete any WikiProjects that have ever been active. If inactive, just mark it as inactive (although it doesn't seem to be warranted here). 103.6.159.75 (talk) 18:48, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Active project. If the project has inaccurate policies listed there, change them. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:22, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

See. Last nomination was in January of this year. There have been three edits by three users. One was a close of something, one was adding a non-existent cat, and one was Ejgreen77 adding a template. No discussions, no real activity. That is what I was looking at, but I now see most of the activity occurs on a talk page and that is the source of the organized opposition to cleaning up the Fancruft, sock junk and autogenerated cut and past article. I'll Withdraw this nomination and start using the project to improve coverage of pageants and winners within policy. 07:03, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - seems to be a pretty clear WP:IDONTLIKEIT nomination. We hardly ever delete Wikiprojects and no compelling rationale has been offered to delete this one. If it's inactive, mark it inactive. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:46, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - per the above rationale. I see no legitimate reason to delete this page. Am I missing something? Let me know! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - I see plenty of recent talk page content on this Project's talk page, and this listing isn't a list of this Project's members? If this Project really is "inactive", then there's apparently an etsbalished process for dealing with that, and total deletion of a Project appears to be (at best) a last resort. Guy1890 (talk) 03:34, 18 December 2015 (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.