Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Policy matters

 __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 as defunct. --RL0919 (talk) 17:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Policy matters
Project with 9 members which was active for about half of 2006. Discussions by a single user. -- Klein zach  08:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete since the project was started in 2006, with no activity, I have to pronounced that the WikiProject is dead and no longer active. JJ98 (Talk)  09:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete . I see that I signed up on this five years ago. I recall that was in the midst of a controversy concerning some administrators speedy-deleting and speedy-undeleting pages outside the speedy deletion criteria, and without seeking community input via the normal discussion fora. I still believe that a counterreaction to that activity was justified (and many of the involved administrators were either desysopped or resigned their tools), but it is clear that this particular WikiProject never wound up doing anything. Sjakkalle (Check!)  10:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Mark defunct per Rd232. Sjakkalle (Check!)  13:10, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete-- just a little activity in 2006. Nothing to save. --  E♴  (talk)  15:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Mark defunct - as the project's creator, I'm a little sad to see this (tiny) little bit of Wikipedia history (as mentioned by Sjakkale above) being deleted. It could simply, without causing anyone any harm, be marked as defunct, and may be of very occasional interest to someone. In this case, unlike with most defunct-never-went-anywhere projects, the mere fact that it was put together with an outline agenda, got a few people signing up, and then went nowhere is actually potentially interesting. Rd232 talk 17:29, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Community discussions on policy development, or anything else relating to the system of community self-management should ever be deleted.  Deletion disenfranchises participants.  Deletion of bad ideas dooms us to repeat the same mistakes.  Policy development is a never ending challenge that will only get more difficult as the project grows, and deletions of past ideas can only make things worse.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The nomination supplies zero reasons to consider deletion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Fine if you are putting forward the negative example argument, but the page would only be useful in this form if you can suggest an appropriate place to put it. Otherwise it's just more noise/less signal for the project. -- Klein zach  00:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * On signal-to-noise complaints, I think what is needed in response is not deletion of anything that some consider noise, but better indexing/navigation. We are not very good at that, and our categorisation system is not very developed, but it can be made to work.  We could do one of the following: tag as essay (an idea, interesting, can be ignored); tag as proposal (see if it can run); or tag as failed.  These tags do/could categorise, so that you don't have to go through noise to find your signals.  Essays are now nicely subcategorised.  You might like to rename, if you want to have things such that anything starting with "WikiProject" is a WikiProject.  Possibly, you would be happy if all inactive/defunct WikiProjects were moves to "Wikipedia:Inactive Wikiprojects/WikiProject ..."?  Personally, I like to see all failed/bad ideas collected to easy navigation, as were largely do (Perennial proposals is a nice example).  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe what you're arguing for is a new namespace called 'Museum'. It's an interesting idea. Why not go for it? -- Klein zach  02:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep We mark projects that were once active with the inactive template. This is stated on the MFD instructions, so I'm not sure what's up with all the WikiProject MfDs I'm seeing right now.. -- Ned Scott 09:08, 1 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.