Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WikiProjects

This is an information page.

It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines; rather, its purpose is to explain certain aspects of Wikipedia's norms, customs, technicalities, or practices. It may reflect differing levels of consensus and vetting.

Shortcuts

There are no separate for venues for the deletion discussion of WikiProjects, thus all WikiProject deletion discussions are to be taken place at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (MFD) and are subject to the guidelines of the same.

This page, however, maintains an automatic list of the ongoing deletion discussions of the various WikiProjects, or their subpages, and serves as an one-stop destination for those who are only primarily interested in WikiProject-related MfDs.

Current MfDs

There are currently 4 WikiProject-related MfDs ongoing.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Noongar

Wikipedia:WikiProject Noongar has 5 talk page disscussions, 3 are automated and for the remaning two they were never replied to by anyone. This project has never been active. Since Noongar are indigenous Australians, there really is no reason to have another project when Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia exists. Gonnym (talk) 12:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep preserve, lots of activity around Noongar topics with discussions taking place on articles more than the project page. Number of discussion on a project page a poor criteria when the project covers 1,000's of articles Gnan garra 13:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No one is arguing that any articles regarding Noongar should be deleted, the argument was that the project itself is and was always dead, as evidence by the extreme lack of any activity on the project pages, including yours. Gonnym (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The project was not always dead, but many people suffer racial attacks trying to work on content so editors were driven away by the community. Contributors to noongar content and of noongar knowledge are driven into hiding even now, racial attacks on Indigenous Australian communities is not a sexy bias thats gets global attention. Wikimedia Australia still reports condiserable issues with access of accurate Indigenous Australian knowledge including global events to favour colonial perspective over Indigenous ones. The Project serves a very important way for those editors to contact people like me who are willing to stand out on the these matters. Arvhicing and redirectings isnt ideal and just adds another barrier to participation. Gnan garra 08:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of the "two [talk page discussions that] were never replied to by anyone", one of them ("categorizing Noongar people") explicitly asks editors to join a discussion on another page (to avoid fragmenting the discussion), which they did. So it is incorrect to say that the post was never replied to. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do whatever is done to inactive WikiProjects: There is a talk page archive at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Noongar/Archive 8 (which is not listed on the main talk page) which shows that there was at least some degree of collaborative activity years ago. This isn't a dead-on-arrival project but just one that has become inactive. As such it should not be deleted, but instead be archived or marked historical or marked inactive or whatever is done to such inactive projects. Curbon7 (talk) 22:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I've moved the archive to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Noongar/Archive 1 and fixed the archiving instructions on the main talk page. I have no opinion on what should happen to this project (but I live in a geographical area covered by it). Graham87 (talk) 04:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relevant process: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide § Dealing with inactive WikiProjects Mitch Ames (talk) 01:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mark historical or Redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia - This project is completely dormant at present. In the year 2023, there were 141 pagesview of the project page; that is annual pageviews, or approximately 0.5 daily pageviews. Most of the work of a WikiProject is done on its project talk page. In 2023, there were 11 pageviews of the project talk page; that is total annual pageviews. One of those was a mass message, and at least two of them were for archival. In 2024, there were 20 pageviews, and some of them were for archival. Looking back, the project was lightly used between 2015, when it was created, and 2017, and has been essentially unused from 2018 on. Maybe we need a discussion about what should be done with dormant WikiProjects when. This project was never very active, because it always should have been a task force, but was not completely unused. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Project serves a very important way for Noongar editors to contact people like me who are willing to stand out on the these matters. Archiving and redirecting isnt ideal and just adds another barrier to participation. Gnan garra 08:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and mark as inactive. The deletion arguments in the nom are spurious. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Home Living/Article Guidelines

No useful content. This page was written in 2009 and has gotten no attention since. There's nothing here worth keeping. Daask (talk) 15:22, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not listed as a member of the WikiProject. Why are you trying to manage a WikiProject that you are not a member of?

If the WikiProject is inactive, maybe it should be archived wholesale. Selective archiving by deletion is not a good idea.

How did you come across this page? SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Historical page of an inactive WikiProject. There's nothing here worth discussing.—Alalch E. 15:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The nominator appears to be ragpicking. Maybe the WikiProject should be marked historical. Is that what SmokeyJoe means by archived, or do they have a different concept of archival? If the nominator had some reason to come across the page other than ragpicking, maybe they should explain, or maybe not. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Home Living/Collaboration

No useful content. This page and its talk page have never been used. Daask (talk) 15:20, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Doesn't matter.—Alalch E. 17:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Maybe the WikiProject should be marked historical, but that is not what we are here for. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's Premier League (cricket)

Unnecessary WikiProject that was created in spite of the objections of a number of users at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 94#Wikiproject WPL notice. As predicted there, this WikiProject has immediately become dormant, because it is a tournament that runs for less than 1 month a year (and so WikiProject will be dormant for most of the rest of the year). Women's Premier League (cricket) is a cricket tournament, and so a breakaway WikiProject from WP:WikiProject Cricket is not required. Note: I do not support any of the existing breakaway WikiProjects (WP:IPL, WP:PSL, WP:BPL, WP:LPL etc), and will be considering nominating them for merging with WP:CRIC too. As per WP:OSE, the existence of these other WikiProjects is not a reason to keep this one. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:29, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Joseph and also, accept that I made a mistake as discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 94#Wikiproject WPL notice. I have been thinking about this for a while and was actually going to make a proposal this weekend, which would've been for these WikiProjects to be superseded by respective taskforces of WP:CRIC. Current WikiProjects can be renamed and reworked into new taskforces as shown below.

Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 16:51, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have just started a discussion about these taskforces at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket#Merge WikiProjects back into this project, and would personally be more than happy for WPL to have a representative task force. (I was drafting the text for that discussion before I saw Vestrian24Bio's reply here, but agree with what they have said). Please anyone feel free to contribute there. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:55, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Joseph2302 just summed up what's wrong with Wikipedia as a whole with the statement because it is a tournament that runs for less than 1 month a year (and so WikiProject will be dormant for most of the rest of the year). There's a shit-ton more to "the sum total of human knowledge" than merely regurgitating yesterday's headlines and trending topics. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:05, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nom's opening statement. Recreate if there is consensus to add it as a taskforce.—Alalch E. 15:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]