Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject History/History Town Hall

 __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:  delete. I am not sure what the last comment is asking for, though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject History/History Town Hall

 * – (View MfD)
 * – (View MfD)

There is no consensus for the idea of town halls, and this was done without the consent of WP:HISTORY. This is effectively redundant WikiProject History's main page and WikiProject History/Collaboration, with a mix of WP:CENT and WP:COUNCIL. This should be deep-sixed, until there's actual a modicum of support for the idea, beyond curious "what ifs" from people that wonder what this is even supposed about. This is what mockups in user-space are for. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 05:57, 16 February 2020 (UTC)


 * (reinstated as per request -comment also posted at council talk) I noticed some changes before but didn't realize to what extent till now ....the history  project has been overwhelmed by what seems to be a brand new editor despite them being here for a decade. Perhaps a review of what has happened to the project overall is warranted. This editor is all over the map with things of this nature.-- Moxy 🍁 06:09, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * And now I can add my reply. Enthusiasm is good, having new ideas is good (most don't get support, but they can often lead to some improvement somewhere), but this is bull-in-a-China-shop levels of disruption. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 06:23, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * well, I wasn't going to ask folks at other projects to link to the "Collaboration" page that is set up for one WikiProject, i.e. WikiProject History. However, that is an interesting point. I will give your ideas some thought. Anyway, as you indicated, I have now copied this to a draft page. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 11:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Provisional delete unless there's a clear consensus among editors that using the project space to host what appears to be a personal chatroom is desirable. Someone unilaterally declaring themself "coordinator" and proceeding to radically redesign something based on their personal whims is not how we do things round here; we only just fought off the (very similar) WikiProject X proposal, which at least tried to get consensus beforehand rather than trying to impose a new format and challenging others to revert it. See also the fait accompli ruling. &#8209; Iridescent 13:15, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Similar to what happened at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council..... See Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for more info.-- Moxy 🍁 15:19, 16 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Can you simply redirect the page? that way there is a record of your ruling on it, and I can still access the comments. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 15:22, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as too much, too soon, by too-new (in terms of involvement) an editor who hasn't bothered to gain consensus for substantive changes. I'm wary of a redirect, since any "comments" seem to be related to page construction.  Mini  apolis  18:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete would be best to get a consensus for such things at the appropriate Village Pump. GoodDay (talk) 01:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant, but closing administrator, please confer with to ensure their userspace version is the more up-to-date one per nom. Doug Mehus  T · C  02:57, 17 February 2020 (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.