Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Children's Television Programmes of the U.K.


 * 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 debate was Delete - Deletion of inactive projects is not the norm, however, this project appears to have done no real work towards categorizing, listing, improving and creating articles, identifying stubs, or tabulating importance, some of the normal project tasks. If it had, historical might be in order if there were no more work to be done or task-forcization into the parent project could be performed if there were only a couple of active members. With zero active members and nothing to preserve, we will delete it. Please note that projects may be active without any edits to the project page for a long time, they are a way to organize editors, not a place to do a lot of editing, and effort is important in that if this comprised a useful organization of the subject matter, policy would not support deletion. Simply creating a project though does not protect it from deletion if it does nothing and never progresses beyond filling in the blanks on wikiproject. This project is not doing any real harm but it has the potential to suggest that there is a project and to draw inquiries to which there will never be a response and to waste a lot of everybody's time (we often notify projects of nominations for deletion of pages under their scope). If the editors want it restored to userspace or find active editors sufficient to be meaningful, it will be restored on request to the closing admin. Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Children's Television Programmes of the U.K.
Inactive project since March, project seems to have been created on a whim by new Wikipedia user. Not active/notable/really doing anything. -- SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   13:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as nom. --SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   13:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The nomination is incorrect. There are edits on the talk page (where, as is common with WikiProjects, the actual business of the project is transacted) dated 2008-09-30.  And the talk page indicates that the project did do a few things. Uncle G (talk) 17:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Ah yes but you see the comment wasn't made by any active project member. The edit wasn't associated with any task from the above WikiProject, it was looking for advice on how to make an article GA status, which can be easily handled by WP:WGA or WP:GA?. Removing this comment, as well as an image to be deleted warning, the talk page hasn't been changed since 17 November 2007. --SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   02:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Very strong keep someone has gone to the trouble of setting up a group to help improve certain articles, and you want it deleted? Just because the user is now inactive isn't important in the slightest; it has a number of talk page comments, and with a little input by a more active user here it could become great.-- Serviam  (talk)  21:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Keep: Effort is not part of the notability criteria on Wikipedia. Someone could have, if they liked, went to "a lot of trouble" to create the world's worst computer virus, which broke Wikipedia beyond repair. Are you saying this should be completely acceptable due to the effort involved? And regardless of the user who created it being inactive, i was referring to them being inactive in regards to the project. I would go as far as to say that no-one was active in the project, and that that was the reason none of the comments on the talk page are answered. What would you say this project was achieving except remaining stagnant? Now you see my reason for nomination. --SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   21:28, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine and all, but we keep inactive WikiProjects and just label them as such. Effort does play a part in if we keep some of this stuff or not. -- Ned Scott 03:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per my comment above. -- Ned Scott 03:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: if that's all that happens, then i wash my hands of the project. An unsuitable end to the debate i feel. --SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   04:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with other project or mark as historical to make revival easier. I'm sure there's a project related to British TV that could take this on as a taskforce. If I had the time, I'd do it myself. - Mgm|(talk) 10:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:BTVS by any chance? this would be more than suitable. --SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   13:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Whats the point in keeping an inactive project. If the original creator wants to recreate the project then they can do so. No need to keep an inactive project that's just cluttering the place up. I've seen other inactive projects deleted so why should't this one be? -- Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign!) 00:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: per Cabe. -- Klein  zach  05:27, 20 November 2008 (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.