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. |
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.
There are currently 3 WikiProject-related MfDs ongoing.
Seems like abandoned project of single Wiki user. Not sure if an entire Wiki project is required for this. Wikibear47 (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete we do not need this WikiProject. And also the creator was blocked for copyright violations. Catfurball (talk) 17:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - An unused WikiProject. The project page had 94 pageviews in 2023. That was total pageviews in the year, or about 0.3 daily pageviews. The work of a Wikiproject is done mostly on its project talk page. The project talk page had 28 pageviews in 2023. That is less than 0.1 daily pageviews. This project never launched. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Severe weather/Popular pages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Useless only has 1 page and apparently only has ever had 1 page as per page history Isla🏳️⚧ 23:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- It used to have most of the pages in the projectspace back in 2021. Hasn't been touched by anyone since 2021, and since then the bot malfunctioned and trimmed it down to exactly 1 page and I doubt there's any interest within the project to bring it back. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 01:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Mark historical' and revert to last functional version, no good reason to delete it entirely as it didn't cause harm. This is not a case of a malfunctioning bot; it's a case of garbage in, garbage out as, until my actions at Talk:Winter Storm Helena (which I undeleted, redirected, then re-deleted), it was indeed the only page listed under WikiProject Severe weather in the assessments special page search results. I've removed it from the bot's config page. I barely knew anything about how the popular pages lists were generated or page assessments special pages before this discussion so I've learnt several things about them by skim-reading the documentation and realising that the severe weather popular pages list began to malfunction around the time the templates were merged/deleted. Graham87 (talk) 04:58, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Palaeontology/Articles by quality statistics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Transcludable non-template page redundant with User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Palaeontology, which uses a Toollabs tool instead of categories and is regularly updated by a bot. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment A template that is used only on this page has been TfD'd at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_August_27#Template:Assessment_row. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:46, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- No need to delete. Simply replace the page content with a transclusion of the WP 1.0 bot table, which I have seen in many other projects. This will save fixing the many incoming links. – Fayenatic London 19:33, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have implemented that transclusion, in order to update links between category pages. – Fayenatic London 08:55, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- @LaundryPizza03: Is the alternative implemented by Fayenatic London sufficient to address your concern? I can close this as withdrawn if you are satisfied. --RL0919 (talk) 02:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Why not just redirect? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- That is a question best addressed to User:Fayenatic london. I'm hoping to find a consensus among the participants in the discussion, not to become a participant myself. --RL0919 (talk) 07:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- @LaundryPizza03: does that have the same result? If so, by all means redirect instead of transcluding. I used transclusion because that's what I've seen before on these table pages for other projects. – Fayenatic London 08:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- That is a question best addressed to User:Fayenatic london. I'm hoping to find a consensus among the participants in the discussion, not to become a participant myself. --RL0919 (talk) 07:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Why not just redirect? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)