Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Villages

 __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. This has been going on too long with almost equal numbers of votes for keeping and deleting. (non-admin closure) Dronebogus (talk) 01:15, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Villages

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

This WikiProject has never been active, nor it has produced any useful output. Page originally created in 2010 by Wifione has seen little useful activity since; the talkpage has only two dozen revisions, mostly generic nofifications, reverts, and a few misguided requests. I believe deleting this altogether is a better alternative to tagging it as defunct (which I've just done). Frankly, I don't see much purpose for a project covering villages across the world. Implicitly included in the nomination are:
 * Template:WikiProject Villages (currently tagging some ~10,000 pages, a large number but only a tiny fraction of all of our village articles)
 * Category:WikiProject Villages articles (populated by the template)
 * Template:User WikiProject Villages (transcluded by 10 users total)
 * Category:WikiProject Villages — No such user (talk) 08:30, 18 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator's rationale. I see little to no prospect for a WikiProject about any village anywhere having any purpose, from jumbling all villages together into one category, to lack of organized action to improve these articles. I think individual country WikiProjects should start village task-forces on their own, if they so wish. -Vipz (talk) 17:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I really can't see some potential value of this attempt at a WikiProject. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 21:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep The fact that someone other than Wifione set up the membership and tagging infrastructure, and that 10 people consider themselves members, is enough to let this stay as defunct IMO. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I'm more bothered by Template:WikiProject Villages polluting so many article talk pages (and that's what triggered me to even find this WikiProject) so I'd like to see that go. The main wikiproject page might stay (but I'd still prefer it be deleted). No such user (talk) 09:04, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I had submitted an article using AfC a while back, and when the article had been accepted, on the article's talk page was a banner saying that "This article is within the scope of WikiProject Villages... (and so on)." The article was submitted a while back, but maybe that could mean that WikiProject Villages had tagged that article and therefore somebody was still active there? I don't know. It was probably tagged by the reviewer who knew about WikiProject Villages, but I'm just throwing this out here just in case. Helloheart   (talk)  02:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete broken formatting not allowing me to close as no consensus, so I’m shoving this off the deletion cliff. Stillborn project, has no value and just causes confusion and clutter per above. Dronebogus (talk) 14:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Oh, yeah, and:

Helloheart  (talk)  02:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, it's not particularly difficult to find a WikiProject such as this one. When you have an article about a village, you naturally search whether a WikiProject for villages exists. -Vipz (talk) 06:25, 26 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep and mark as historical as is usual for such inactive wikiprojects. Wikipedia has seen a number of attempts at creating content communities which were unsuccessful. We don't normally delete them all, unless there's a compelling reason to do so. BusterD (talk) 00:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't follow the nominator's stated opinion that the WikiProject's Template is "polluting" articles. I'm not quite sure what that means. A Wikiproject template is just that, a template, on a user talk page where, by definition, most readers won't see it unless they specifically go looking. You can just ignore it, or if it's really so troublesome to you, then you can wrap it in Template:WikiProject banner shell and hide it. Ultimately, it still adds the pages to a maintenance category, so if someone comes along one day and decides to revive the WikiProject and do work on this specific collection of articles, they can do so. The fact that no one is doing so right at this moment isn't any reason to rush to delete this. Just mark it inactive and move on. silvia  (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4)  (inquire within)  04:39, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Convention is to mark as inactive, not delete, and I see no reason to deviate from that here.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2022 (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.