Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Phoenix Wright


 * 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. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 12:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Video games/Phoenix Wright
Unused wikiproject (see Category:WikiProject Phoenix Wright participants). Additionally, the articles that this covers numbers under ten, making it largely unnecessary. MfD'd previously, resulting in a taskforcify, which did nothing to improve the situation. ɳ OCTURNE ɳ OIR talk //  contribs 02:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep 2 months is insufficient to assert unused as a reason for deletion. It was taskforcified -- let the process work.  And there are, indeed, taskforces with under ten articles, and AFAIK there is nothing which sets a magic number for deletion. In short, we can wait a bit. Collect (talk) 12:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd say the same if this was in use. There's no collaboration on the talk page, there's no collaboration on the project page, and there's no collaboration on the actual articles itself. Simply put, this wikiproject is not in use, hence why I nominated it for deletion. ɳ OCTURNE ɳ OIR  talk //  contribs 17:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Not in use, never was in use. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:57, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Give a little more time for the taskforcification to work. If no participants or significant activity show in a few months, then I'd vote for deletion. Vicenarian (talk) 03:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly inactive, small scope, no sign that it ever will be active. This WikiProject has had its share of stale Task Forces/child WikiProjects, and this Task Force failed to get a single member in two months; what will be different about the next two months (or so) to gain such members? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 17:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Haipa Doragon. A inactive project that really doesnt suggest any significance. Salavat (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Cannot find any evidence that the group was ever approved or even discussed prior to creation. On that basis, its legitimacy as a regular task force, as opposed to the work of a single optimistic editor, can be seriously questioned. John Carter (talk) 00:58, 21 May 2009 (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.