Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:20, 24 August 2008

Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce

The project is basically dead, and a good example of why throwing complex processes and bureaucracy at backlogs doesn't work. Mr.Z-man 15:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it need to be deleted though; just tag the deceased. DoubleBlue (Talk) 15:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, don't you mean historical? Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 17:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do. I was just trying to be funny/clever. DoubleBlue (Talk) 18:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Yeah just tag it, don't delete it. You never know if one day someone might want to restart it, and the list of articles needing cleanup it has might be useful anyway. Deamon138 (talk) 19:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I'm not even sure it's completely inactive, there was a new member in July (see Wikipedia:Cleanup_Taskforce/Not_Dead_Yet) and discussion amongst users on their talk pages of taking articles for cleanup. The de facto coordinator User:RJFJR has not been notified. The {{inactive}} tag was only recently applied and is sufficient. Keep and do not tag historical.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 20:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tag as historical; an inactive, redundant venue for article cleanup. - Icewedge (talk) 00:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Tag as historical, if it really is historical. Even the nom mentions that (assuming they are correct) it is a good example of something to avoid. -- Ned Scott 03:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The current tag ("appears inactive") is sufficient. If the second last comment on its talkpage is correct, then the project page can be converted to a redirect to somewhere more suitable, subject to consensus on the talk page, not at MfD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 * Why does it need to be deleted though; just tag the deceased. [[User:DoubleBlue|<font color="darkblue">'''Double'''</font><font color="blue">Blue</font>]] ([[User talk:DoubleBlue|Talk)]] 15:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 :Uh, don't you mean historical? [[User:Ilikepie2221|<font face="Segoe Print" color="#6B4226">Pie is good</font>]] [[User talk:Ilikepie2221|<font face="Segoe Script" color="#78AB46"><small><sup>(Apple is the best)</sup></small></font>]] 17:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
+::Yes, I do. I was just trying to be funny/clever. [[User:DoubleBlue|<font color="darkblue">'''Double'''</font><font color="blue">Blue</font>]] ([[User talk:DoubleBlue|Talk)]] 18:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 ::'''Keep''': Yeah just tag it, don't delete it. You never know if one day someone might want to restart it, and the list of articles needing cleanup it has might be useful anyway. [[User:Deamon138|Deamon138]] ([[User talk:Deamon138|talk]]) 19:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' - I'm not even sure it's completely inactive, there was a new member in July (see [[Wikipedia:Cleanup_Taskforce/Not_Dead_Yet]]) and discussion amongst users on their talk pages of taking articles for cleanup.  The de facto coordinator [[User:RJFJR]] has not been notified.  The {{tl|inactive}} tag was only recently applied and is sufficient.  Keep and do not tag historical.--[[User:Doug|Doug.]]<sup>([[User talk:Doug|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Doug|contribs]])</sup> 20:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)