Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Shark


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was Speedy delete, G7. Shell babelfish 11:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Shark
Second, redundant, project with only one individual dealing with the same subject as a larger, older, more active project; it is proving to be disruptive to the other project. Badbilltucker 15:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC) Note: This nomination is intended to cover the entire infrastructure of the project, including templates and categories. If anybody who has already voiced an opinion objects to that, or if anybody requires a list of these items please speak up. --kingboyk 16:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --plange 15:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * See this where we have an example of an article talk tagged with two confusingly similar (and apparently competing) projects, Shark and Sharks. For casual editors (the ones that recent studies suggest provide most of the raw content that more experienced editors like the folk who frequent MfD reshape into polished articles) that has to be very offputting and discordant. This project needs to go, and further, the WikiProject Council should be working to ensure that duplications of effort like this are avoided as early as possible. The amount of effort put into this project is sad, because it's all wasted, but that is no reason not to delete. Delete after examining if there is ANYTHING worth merging (my examination and that of others suggests not) ++Lar: t/c 15:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete with extreme prejudice. Forked WikiProjects are enormously bad ideas to begin with (particularly given that WikiProject Sharks is quite alive), and this one is, to boot, a one-man show whose chief activities include replacing the other project's talk page tags with his own, transcluding the other project's subpages , launching miscellaneous personal attacks on the members of the other project ("Keep your slimy members from editing my userbox... don't interfear with me or my project AGAIN. GOT IT?"), and maintaing an amusing, but quite unnecessary, monologue .  There's absolutely no reason to keep this thing around. Kirill Lokshin 15:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Kirill Lokshin. --kingboyk 16:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, projects are about consensus and not self-aggrandizement. The proper response at the beginning was "Oh, whoops! I'm so glad you guys have already done half the work!" --Dhartung | Talk 16:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * See also CFD for the associated category. --Dhartung | Talk 16:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Also give it in mention if any other such forking is intended. Lincher 16:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Kirill Lokshin. -- ProveIt (talk) 17:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I keep an eye on the Great White Shark page and was suprised to find two wikiproject boxes added to the talk page in the last couple of days. Wikiprojects in general help develop great articles and provide a way to collaborate on shared interests. But projects that are essentially the same but forked simply because editors could not come to a concensus on the project does not bode well for the articles to be edited.  Wikipedia should not support editors who will not enage in reasonable teamwork by allowing them wikipedia space for competing projects (especially when the editor engages in the type of activity outlined by Kirill above). The sooner this project is deleted, the better off wikipedia will be. -- Siobhan  Hansa  18:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Who do you think you are? My project was launched first as the other was userspace, it was not official. This project will keep going if you like it or not. Lenny 18:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Projects, like all other pages here at Wikipedia, even user pages, do not belong to individuals, they belong to the community as a whole (a thing you acknowledge every time you press save changes ... that's what "You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL." means). The community will decide which of these projects is the appropriate one to carry forward but clearly we do not need two. Based on preliminary evaluation of the two projects, the nominator chose this one as redundant. It is probably not accurate to assert "This project will keep going if you like it or not." as the fate of pages, and projects, is a community driven thing. You may want to consider putting your efforts into helping make the other project a better one, if you can do so in a constructive and collegial manner. Hope that helps clarify things for you. ++Lar: t/c 18:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete this project is un orginized small and the creator User:Unisouth or "Lenny" is hostile and does not believe in the spirt of wikipedia he doesnt want to follow procedure Break - my a*** which clearly shows this user as uncivial. besides the issue with the user the "project" is extreamly small has no members and as such offers no benifit to wikipedia. Besides that the other project is actualy named properly "shark" refers to one shark what project has only one page? "sharks" is the proper nomiclature. Betacommand 19:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per all the above. This competing project is against the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia, which has clearly been lost on User:Unisouth, who has never understood WP:OWN (see this from ages ago).  --RFBailey 19:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the project page, all subpages, and its affiliated templates and categories. Having two WikiProjects on the same topic will result in the duplication of work and maybe hinder collaboration. Keep it all on one project. --Cswrye 20:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per all of the above. &mdash; Khoikhoi 04:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Full deletion (templates, cats, subpages) POV fork of a wikiproject?  Not sure, but duplication entirely unneccessary, with the exact same scope (minus the s).  Only 1 or 2 members.  Kevin_b_er 04:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete G7 per --Rory096 02:25, 9 September 2006 (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.