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

 __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. The primary keep argument, that there might be some users who want to specialize in just this area, seems overly hypothetical in this instance given the lack of historical participation. --RL0919 (talk) 19:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Reggaeton
Sub pages: Project set up in 2007 that never seems to have had a signed-up membership. Upmerging was suggested in 2007 Mfd but it was kept "for the meantime". Desultory discussions. Arguably nothing worth keeping. (Subpage: WikiProject Reggaeton/Assessment)-- Klein zach  10:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Reggaeton/Announcements
 * WikiProject Reggaeton/Browse Bar
 * WikiProject Reggaeton/Members
 * WikiProject Reggaeton/Templates
 * WikiProject Reggaeton/Assessment
 * Template:WikiProject Reggaeton
 * Template:User WikiProject ReggaetonMoxy (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, total nonstarter. Make sure all subpages get deleted too. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 19:29, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.—indopug (talk) 20:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. This should probably also be deleted, although it's on commons. --E♴ (talk) 01:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Not a very necessary project. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 14:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Tag with template:dormant or template:inactive. There is no nothing to be gained by deleting this. Arguments about overspecialisation are not valid. It all depends on what level editors want to work on. All a wikiproject is is a nexus and discussion point. Hypothetically, five editors could want to work on these articles but be uninterested in dance or related music collaborations per se. Deleting this is not going to magically make them interested in a broader wikiproject. Casliber (talk ·' contribs) 09:47, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - inactivity is not a delete rationale. Redirect to WikiProject Music, or possibly to WikiProject Latin America/Music task force. Mlm42 (talk) 01:50, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect is comparable to delete, IMO.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 14:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * They are fundamentally different; a redirect keeps the history, doesn't create a redlink, and helpfully redirects someone to a more appropriate place. Deleting does none of those; furthermore, some editors may be a little upset to find their project has been deleted. What is Wikipedia gaining by deleting these WikiProjects? A little more server space? Frankly I don't see the point of deleting inactive WikiProjects - unless the name is actually offensive ("WikiProject Joe is an idiot"). This was also discussed at the WikiProject Council; see also the advice at the top of the MfD page. Mlm42 (talk) 17:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirects are navigational. I don't think they should be used for keeping caches of information, only known to expert users. -- Klein zach  03:01, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Non-starter project. MoondogCoronation (talk) 11:06, 12 March 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.