Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Prescott-Russell

 __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 no consensus. Salvio Let's talk about it! 15:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Prescott-Russell



 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/August/Statement
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/August/Tasks
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/August/Title
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/November/Statement
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/November/Tasks
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/November/Title
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/October/Statement
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/October/Tasks
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/October/Title
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/September/Statement
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/September/Tasks
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/Collaboration/September/Title
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/EN Article of the Month Voting
 * WikiProject Prescott-Russell/NON-EN Article of the Month Voting
 * Template:WikiProject Prescott-Russell

Project started back in 2006 and had died 2010, has only three members and 36 articles within the scope which is very narrow. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  22:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to WikiProject Ontario. WP:NENAW. Almost nothing there, project effectively died in 2007. For those of us who have never heard of Prescott and Russell United Counties, Ontario, the population there is 80,000. -- Klein zach  22:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - It looks to me like it has been dead for quite a while; three members seems like a few too few. I wouldn't object to redirecting.  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 23:17, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete overly narrow scope is reason alone to delete, never mind that only 2 of the members are active and there is no discussion of note on the talk page. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 02:40, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The scope of the project is irrelevant. If editors want to work together on a series of articles related to a subject, and a Wikiproject will assist in that objective, then it doesn't matter a whit whether someone else thinks the scope is narrow or broad (both relative and subjective terms, by the way) or whether other non-involved editors are familiar with the subject matter.  Wikiprojects exists to help coordinate efforts to improve a series of articles, and arguably a smaller, focused Wikiproject has more potential for success than a large and unfocused one.  However, if the project has been inactive for a reasonable time (and that would appear to be the case here), and the three involved editors have been notified and given a reasonable opportunity to speak up (and have not done so), then it would be fair archive the project ( not delete it), perhaps as a subpage of the Ontario project, and tag it as defunct.  --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:56, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep make into a workforce We have told this guys this many many times - that we should not delete  projects - they simply dont care about our polocies and guidelines on this matter even after RcF and Mfd nomination. In fact they wont even reply to our inquiries  about this type of negative approach to projects. Not sure how  TV and music editors even find this projects that they clearly  have no knowledge of.Moxy (talk) 20:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have notified the few editors that participated in some way in this Wikiproject that hadn't already been notified. Most of them are inactive, so I'm not sure we'll get much input. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge the useful information (resources, books, discussions, links) into a subpage of the Ontario WikiProject. Certainly some projects come back to life (such as the Ontario Roads project, for example), but this one is far too narrow a scope to ever serve a useful function. The history of this county is tied into nearby counties, Ottawa, Montreal, etc. If there is some activity, a taskforce can suffice. Akin to what I have set up for the similarly populated and sized Kawartha Lakes task force. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  10:52, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately Kawartha Lakes task force is a kind of fake task force. One participant (Floydian), inactive and virtually no discussions. -- Klein zach  22:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Exactly the point. I created it so I could offer up resources to future editors and track progress. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  23:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that's true. And who are we to tell people how best to collaborate?  This makes no sense to me.  --Skeezix1000 (talk) 11:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not, at least. I'm just saying they are best venued as a taskforce of WP:CANADA to avoid the need for extra reassessment work, additional banners on talk pages, etc. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  23:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * This is getting tiresome. Would be nice if at some point our guidelines were followed - I see no  talk about a merger or a move to a task force, nor do I see any attempt at revival or even notices about this deletion. Bringing  this here would be the last option we should be doing with the project.   JJ98 please for the love of god read over WikiProject Council/Guide NOTE how there are many things to do before a  deletion request is made.Moxy (talk) 15:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Council/Guide applies specifically to inactive projects. Inactivity was not the reason for this nomination (see above). I note Moxy is again hectoring the nominator. Perhaps he should take a wikibreak and let cooler heads get on with the job here? -- Klein zach  03:33, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Again I ask why our prodcedures  were not followed?? Your saying it should be deleted because its covers a small topic? - This is not a reason to delete a project.!! If a project helps just one article  its worth it no? What we need is more attention paid to helping projects not deleting them! At no point was there any efforet made to help this projec as is recomeded by our guidelines. Dont you think its odd all this people keep telling both of you the same thing  over and over, but yet here we are again - having to explain what we should be doing. Moxy (talk) 19:45, 6 August 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.