Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/coords

 __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 mark all as archive. Tim Song (talk) 14:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/coords
Relisted on 05:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC).

Also up for deletion are its subpages: WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/coordsA through WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/coordsN. This is a group of pages composed of information from a database dump of a National Park Service webpage from 2007. These pages consist of nothing except geographical coordinates for every place on the National Register of Historic Places as of the database date. Since 2007, coordinates have been added to all geographical lists of places on the National Register (for example, see the Location column of this page); consequently, these pages are totally unnecessary. I've been involved with this project for nearly two years, but I just discovered these pages a few days ago; when I asked at WT:NRHP for advice about what to do with them, I received only one comment, which was simply "delete". Nyttend (talk) 01:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I spot checked a few, and see that the information seems to be incorporated in other articles. However, I would think it would make sense to double-check with the creator first. I see that User:SEWilco was the first to edit these pages, although I don't see the indicator that the first edit created the article, so I'm puzzled about that. I don't see a message at User talk:SEWilco. Is this because I've misread the creator? I suspect that we will conclude that the pages can all be deleted, but I'd like to make sure the creator is notified first.-- SPhilbrick  T  15:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Tables for all 3,000+ counties throughout the USA have incorporated this information since at least July of last year (we just barely succeeded with a push to add tables with this information to all lists by July 4, 2009), with some tables incorporating this information since at least May 2008. Per your request, I've notified the creator; I'd not done so previously because SEWilco hasn't been very active lately and because this is in projectspace and not at all used by the project.  Nyttend (talk) 00:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment SEWilco was active and a very constructive editor on NRHP matters, helping to design the table format for NRHP list-articles that has since been implemented by use of User:Elkman's table generator tool. Before that we did a lot more manually, such as creating all 50 states' National Historic Landmark (NHL) tables (high-importance subset of all NRHPs).  I think that Elkman's incorporation of coordinates information into the table generator tool met the need that these coordinates pages were going to serve.  There are more than one version of coordinates databases for NRHP sites, and i don't know whether the versions they each worked from were same or different, but we're not going backwards to use these now.  The coordinates we accepted via Elkman's system have been modified manually in many cases now.  Unless, are these coordinates for the NHL tables?  I am not positive whether all those are done with coordinates. --doncram (talk) 04:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Looking at the earliest edit history on one of the NHL state list-articles refreshes me: we somewhat manually created NHL tables, working from one big NPS document list, without coordinates.  Coordinates were provided later, i think in chunks like here, and we did go through transfering them into the NHL list-articles.  One way or another, all the NHL list-articles got coordinates.  There were also list-articles for each states' NRHP sites, and i guess it was envisioned that we'd go through the same process.  These pages are obviously computer program output working from input of NRIS database including one version of coordinates merged in.  Elkman's doing same, but with better output in more full form of tables, superseded this.  So these coordinates pages are essentially temporary computer output intended for a good purpose but not needed or used in the end.  Also, there is no big history of collaborative editing shown in these workpages, which could be a consideration to keep them around.  A lesser alternative than deleting them would be to blank them and redirect to one, in order to save their edit history.  But, with no actual use the edit history is short and not important to save. --doncram (talk) 04:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * For those who aren't familiar with "Elkman" — Doncram refers to this page (part of this website), which is run by wikiproject member Elkman. Nyttend (talk) 17:06, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I wonder if the good editors here have some suggestion how to tag an obsolete work page, such as WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Blue link check. This is NOT a proposal to delete that page.  The page is similar to the coords pages talked about above.  But it's a work page which was set up in 2006, was edited by many editors, served a very good role in guiding the creation/expansion of many dab pages.  It guided my creating many of them, including my just now getting to add an entry for a NRHP-listed house onto Wheel of Fortune dab page.  I've completed going through all of its sublists, myself, and would like to label it as "completed" in some way.  I think it should be kept as some kind of archive/record of good collaborative effort.  Maybe just add archive tag, with a note?  About the coords pages, they do not show such a record, so i do not mind terribly if they are deleted.  Though, as space is not an issue, i am not sure of the benefit of deleting them, either. --doncram (talk) 17:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * If there is any doubt about deletion (eg a good reason for deletion, or lack of content), we usually archive or redirect unnecessary wikiproject pages. Don't we?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Archive. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:26, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Mark as archive No reason given to require deletion, to be sure. Collect (talk) 10:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mark as archive - content like this can be easily marked historical and blanked if you want to avoid polluting search results (or left in place if there are reasons people may be searching for this). Also, as part of the history of Wikipedia and how the encyclopedia was built, we should be preserving stuff like this, not deleting it. The option of archiving, page blanking (with an appropriate notice), or marking historical, should be used far more than the option of deletion. Please remember that the deleted contributions content is liable to be cleared by the developers at any time without warning (though that is unlikely at present it is always a future option). Deletion is not archiving. Carcharoth (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2010 (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.