Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Discworld

 __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  Keep as a formerly active project with some possibility of revival. No prejudice against converting it to a task force of WikiProject Novels, but I would recommend discussing the adoption with the prospective parent first. --RL0919 (talk) 05:26, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Discworld
Project started back in 2004 and went inactive in 2008 with no activity. JJ98 (Talk)  19:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't think we can say this project aten't dead. No activity indeed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 19:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep as tagged, or archived in some way. There are disadvantages to deleting our history, and no benefit here.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:41, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * This trikes me as a textbook example of an inactive wikiproject; absolutely nothing wrong with it apart from a complete lack of activity, it clearly has been active and with a diverse community, but it is now gathering dust. I'm not aware of any change to the status quo procedure which is not to delete such projects but rather to tag them as, etc.  If this were to be deleted, it should be in line with a policy which would mandate the deletion of hundreds of similarly-positioned projects.  So keep until I see evidence of such a policy. Happy‑melon 22:45, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Task Force for WikiProject Novels but only if there is real evidence that they actually want it. Otherwise Delete. -- Klein  zach  23:43, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I think there is an extremely low likelihood this will come back around. --Kumioko (talk) 00:21, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete-- per above — Preceding unsigned comment added by E2eamon (talk • contribs)
 * Keep as it seems important to retain it even if it is inacitve. The project has good to-do lists, looks to have accomplished goals in the past, and the information in it would be useful to anyone who wanted to improve Discworld-related articles. I also agree that the policy appears to be to keep inactive WikiProjects, whether as projects or through making them taskforces (which I might suggest for this one) or some similar thing, according to the advice on dealing with inactive WikiProjects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Layona1 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep we do not delete WikiProjects simply because they are inactive. Contains enough content and activity to warrant keeping for historical reasons. -- Ned Scott 09:38, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Covert to task force per the discussion's on User:Serendipodous/Discworld. Clearly, there's a bunch of discussion still going on. Harry Blue5 (talk) 00:14, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep JJ98 tells us that this "project started back in 2004 and went inactive in 2008." This is not a reason for deletion; a project that was active for such a long period of time, accomplished goals during that period of time (two GAs), and had a lengthy list of members should not be deleted. That's true even if the project might not be revived (and per Harry Blue5, that's a questionable "if"). A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2011 (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.