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


 * 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 don't delete. There is no consensus on what to do about it, though.--Aervanath (talk) 18:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Khitan
I closed the first Mfd (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Khitan) as delete, as there were no objections to deletion. However, another editor has requested a new Mfd in good faith, so I have restored and relisted the project page for deletion. (See User talk:Aervanath for the undeletion request.) I personally am neutral on whether the page should be deleted or kept. Aervanath (talk) 05:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note I have notified the participants in the first Mfd of the relisting.--Aervanath (talk) 05:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Not too "narrow" as it has a bunch of articles to work on. I suspect the editor might be one of the "annual" editors - and for that reason I would favor allowing such projects which have gotten past square one about one year (I have now found that many people appear for a month, disappear, then return when there schedules again aline with WP).  Harm of allowing one year? Not a lot.  Collect (talk) 11:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - "A bunch of articles" are not enough reason to maintain a WikiProject. The purpose of a WikiProject is to serve as a collaboration tool for a group of editors. This topic is much too specialized to ever attract more than one or two, so it doesn't serve that purpose (hasn't even reached "square one"). The editing patterns of the creator are entirely irrelevant. --Latebird (talk) 09:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm the one who called for deletion last time. If there's objection to deletion, can we at least tag as inactive until more membes show up? Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Certainly. If it is inactive, tag it as inactive.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Just what's the reason for deleting something that exists and seems to do no harm to anyone? The topic itself is certainly interesting, and deserves wider coverage. Vmenkov (talk) 22:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:NOHARM is not a reason for keep. Redfarmer (talk) 22:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to user space - This is not really a WikiProject, but rather an individual editor's personal task list. It will serve that purpose just as well (of not better) when located in his user space. As a WikiProject, it is too narrow both in scope and in participation. On a project level, the subject can be adequately covered by WP:WikiProject Central Asia, and I would like to invite user Yug2 to ask for help and support there when he needs it. --Latebird (talk) 23:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC) PS.: When userfying, don't forget to also undelete and userfy the talk page.
 * Keep or Merge into a relevant larger project. Spinach Monster (talk) 22:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Inclined to agree with Latebird that this should be userfied, but it looks like the main editor is editing through an IP. Polit i zer talk / contribs 05:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Userfy or Merge, perhaps into WP:WikiProject Central Asia. WikiProjects are supposed to relate to or encourage cooperation among multiple editors, and there is no evidence to support that this one has ever achieved either purpose. John Carter (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2009 (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.