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.
Delete. If this was ever actually a Wikiproject, I might support marking as historical. But it wasn't, so marking as historical would be misleading. It's a borderline disruptive creation (seriously, a Wikiproject about a tiny element of userspace!?) and has potential to mislead newbies about what Wikipedia is about by overly focusing on userspace trivia in breach of
WP:NOTSOCIALMEDIA. WJBscribe(talk)10:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
As the sole member of the WikiProject I really have no opinion on the outcome of this. I haven’t created very many top icons yet, and I think there are only 50 total. If this page is deleted, I’ll probably just continue working in this area like nothing happened . I don’t think an entire WikiProject is nessesary if I’m the only person in it.
funplussmart (
talk)
15:02, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Please don't work on this area. It doesn't need work and I'm sorry this page made you think it did. Feel free to have whatever topicons you would like on your userpage (within reason) but don't worry about how others are decorating their userpages. Please focus on helping to write or maintain encyclopedic content. WJBscribe(talk)17:38, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete, per WJBScribe; I was planning to MFD this myself once the discussion at the Village Pump was closed, but Stephen beat me to it. Marking pages as historical is a way to preserve the record of things that were once tried and later abandoned, not to preserve disruptive driveby edits. This is a non-project created by a non-editor—its founder has only ever made one mainspace edit—and keeping it (whether live or historical) is potentially actively disruptive as it gives good-faith editors the idea that micromanaging the minutiae of the interface is a sensible use of time. ‑
Iridescent16:30, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete as per
WJBscribe and
Iridescent - I'm all for marking everything as historical but I fail to see the point here - One wikiproject created this year by one editor and that one editor has only made one mainspace edit ..... One wonders why they're even here but hey ho, Pointless Wikiproject that quite honestly won't be missed and to put it even more bluntly I doubt it was even noticed by anyone. –
Davey2010Talk01:15, 27 September 2018 (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 page's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
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.
Delete. If this was ever actually a Wikiproject, I might support marking as historical. But it wasn't, so marking as historical would be misleading. It's a borderline disruptive creation (seriously, a Wikiproject about a tiny element of userspace!?) and has potential to mislead newbies about what Wikipedia is about by overly focusing on userspace trivia in breach of
WP:NOTSOCIALMEDIA. WJBscribe(talk)10:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
As the sole member of the WikiProject I really have no opinion on the outcome of this. I haven’t created very many top icons yet, and I think there are only 50 total. If this page is deleted, I’ll probably just continue working in this area like nothing happened . I don’t think an entire WikiProject is nessesary if I’m the only person in it.
funplussmart (
talk)
15:02, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Please don't work on this area. It doesn't need work and I'm sorry this page made you think it did. Feel free to have whatever topicons you would like on your userpage (within reason) but don't worry about how others are decorating their userpages. Please focus on helping to write or maintain encyclopedic content. WJBscribe(talk)17:38, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete, per WJBScribe; I was planning to MFD this myself once the discussion at the Village Pump was closed, but Stephen beat me to it. Marking pages as historical is a way to preserve the record of things that were once tried and later abandoned, not to preserve disruptive driveby edits. This is a non-project created by a non-editor—its founder has only ever made one mainspace edit—and keeping it (whether live or historical) is potentially actively disruptive as it gives good-faith editors the idea that micromanaging the minutiae of the interface is a sensible use of time. ‑
Iridescent16:30, 24 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete as per
WJBscribe and
Iridescent - I'm all for marking everything as historical but I fail to see the point here - One wikiproject created this year by one editor and that one editor has only made one mainspace edit ..... One wonders why they're even here but hey ho, Pointless Wikiproject that quite honestly won't be missed and to put it even more bluntly I doubt it was even noticed by anyone. –
Davey2010Talk01:15, 27 September 2018 (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 page's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.