Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Country Music

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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The result of the discussion was Withdrawn This project is going to continue to rot, I know that, but consensus is clearly against me. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 14:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Country Music, Wikipedia:WikiProject Country Music/Tasks et al.[edit]

Highly inactive WikiProject. Founder has left the project, a good whack of the editors have either never edited, have left, or haven't touched a country music article in ages. Judging in part from the shoddy quality of most country music articles, I get the feeling that very few wish to actually contribute to this project anyway. The tasklist hasn't been touched since May, and even then it was just a user removing names that were no longer red links. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Strong Keep Inactivity should not in itself be a reason to delete a project. This is clearly a potentially useful project, it has hundreds of links to it and several related templates as well. Just because people aren't active is not a reason to remove it altogether. No offense, TPH, but this smells a little POINTy on your part. GlassCobra 19:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not trying to make a point (although I am highly disappointed that nobody ever wants to help me with country music articles, since so many of them are garbage). The reason I nominated it is mainly because it hardly ever was more than partially active. I joined it a long time ago (nearly 2 years if I'm not mistaken) and even then it was dead. Almost seems to have joined, maybe edited two pages then forgotten they were ever part of this project. And in fact, I placed a very lage chunk of the {{countrybanner}} templates myself, so I'm the fool responsible for a good number of those incoming links (mainly from the 100+ country biographical articles I created). So basically, it's in part that it's highly inactive, and in part that it's never actually done anything but tag articles and created a tasklist that hasn't changed except for me removing some red links. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have amended my !vote to Strong Keep, it's clear to me from the comments below from Briguy that there are other users that care about this project. I also reaffirm my initial suspicion that this is somewhat of a POINTy nom stemmed in TPH's apparent bitterness at being the only person working on country articles, though as Briguy mentioned, TPH's own actions in nominating many articles for deletion seems to coming back to haunt him in a way. As also noted below, deleting or blanking this project page would throw off many users who click on the tempates for WikiProject Country on various talk pages. I see no valid reason to delete this or mark it as inactive; rather, TPH should take it upon himself to trim the list of inactive or departed members, and recruit more actively amongst new users and current editors of country articles. If I were TPH, I would start poring through the histories of country articles and leaving "join-the-project" notes on the talk pages of everyone there, even people who just swept in for a quick cleanup. GlassCobra 09:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I merged the discussion from the tasklist, which I originally nominated separately. No one had yet !voted there, although Cobra suggested I merge that discussion. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need to delete this. Mothball it. Redirect the task list to the main project. Remove anything from the project page that is obviously not of use if the thing starts up again (An ancient membership list or out of date task list is useless) perhaps even blank the project and leave only an inactive template. We keep plenty of useless archieves, so I see no pressing need to delete anything. Everything stays in the history so anyone interested in restarting it can.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 19:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What harm are they doing? Just leave them.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 20:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"This page is a part of an inactive wikiproject that's been blanked". I don't think that leaves a good impression. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The banner (which is transcluded on to dozens of articles) already redirects to the project page, and that's bad. Maybe just blank it for now - then nothing transcludes.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have unblanked the page; although WikiProject Country Music is inactive (as deemed by TenPoundHammer), this is still a viable and needed group. Until the project is formally deleted, there is no reason to blank the page; there still might be someone out there who is interested in participating and would like to become familiar with the Project's goals and tasks. [[Briguy52748 (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)]][reply]
The template didn't redirect to the project. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep — Sure, many of us haven't edited a page in a while, but it is no reason to abandon the project. There is still a great deal of work to do on articles. We do them as time allows, simple as that. Remember — Wikipedia is edited by volunteers, meaning most of us have jobs and other interests outside of this project. Just because an article related to a WikiProject hasn't been edited in ages does NOT mean one should take his ball and go home in discouragement. We want to help out when and where we can. Keeping this WikiProject available will help us coordinate the work. There should be no deadline as to when or where the projects are done. This is and will always be a viable group. Deleting it out of frustration will serve no purpose. [[Briguy52748 (talk) 23:21, 18 November 2008 (UTC)]][reply]
  • "There is still a great deal of work to do on articles." Then how come nobody's doing it? 70+ editors, and not a single one can ever be arsed? I've asked many people many times for help, and besides stub creation, I've gotten nowhere. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 00:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, well, maybe your propensity for bringing decent articles to AfD has something to do with that, including many articles on country music concert tours, not to mention George Jones' first album. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:12, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most of the tours were valid and indeed got deleted. Nominating George Jones' first album was a very stupid mistake, I'll admit. I don't see how being a deletionist could scare anyone tho. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 03:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll certainly agree that country music editors are significantly underrepresented in WP no matter what. But having the project's most visible editor also being a very active deletionist doesn't help. In certain areas of WP it's become necessary to hit the ground running with a near-GA-quality article or it's speedied or AfD'd before it has to grow. That's bound to scare off some editors. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:53, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that's a bit of an exaggeration, but I can see what you mean. I don't get the feeling that I'm scaring anyone off by putting their articles up for deletion, at least no more so than anyone else who tags as many articles for deletion as I do. However, I should note that whenever I politely ask for help on IRC regarding the country articles, 99% of the time I get "[bad word] off, do it yourself, you lazy [bad word], country [bad word] sucks" or words to that effect. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've been working my tail off with this project but there's only so much you can do when you have a life. And now my user page is up for deletion. Who's in charge here?! Publichall (talk) 04:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all, mark as inactive. If anyone ever does want to revive it, they can use this as a springboard. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Inactivity is not a reason to delete a project. Mark it as inactive instead. - Mgm|(talk) 11:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Country_Music&oldid=1089069801"