Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Richard Marx

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 no consensus. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 08:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Richard Marx

This project has only two members and it never got it going. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 21:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Please leave this project open. I just really haven't had any time to really work on it but something is indeed in the works. Jeremyeyork (talk) 00:18, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All that exists is a minimal, undeveloped project page. No project proposal was ever made. The Richard Marx article is not connected to the project, so editors working on that article wouldn't know there was a project at all. (In the words of the second of only two members: "I wonder what this project is really aimed to accomplish?"). As we know, single musical artist projects fail in 95% of cases, unlike genre-based projects that have a much better chance of being sustained. If Jeremyeyork still wants to go ahead with this, I suggest going to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals, explaining the reasons for starting a project and asking for supporters. It the meantime, the existing page should go. --Klein zach 02:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a matter of process, given that User:Jeremyeyork wants to keep working with this. There are no time limits, and our volunteers are not obligated to do things in defined ways. There is no real reason that this page shouold go, certainly not soon, and at worst, userfy it. However, as advice to Jeremy. This is a project of narrow scope. You could work on it by yourself, in which case you may was well move the page as a notes page into your userspace. Or, if you would like help and contributions of a wider group of editors, merge it into Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians. If people there see an active and genuine interest, they are much more likely to look it over than if it remains in the currect state. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremyeyork would appear to be busy. Redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians, allowing Jeremyeyork or any other interested editor to merge some time in the future. Allow Jeremyeyork to userfy if he wishes. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete never even got started. As Kleinzach pointed out, if the user wants to start working on a project, he should go to the proposals page, which would be a lot more intuitive than trying to make something out of what isn't even so much a skeleton as a single bone. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep concluding that the project is never going to amount to anything is premature given that the project is less than six months old and since the creator is still active and promising to work on it. There is no rule that I am aware of obliging the creators of Wikiprojects to go through the Wikiproject Council proposal process or any rule which says that projects which haven't gone through it must be deleted. Hut 8.5 20:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Successful projects which haven't gone through the Wikiproject Council proposal process are obviously fine. However WikiProjects must be collaborations, if there is no collaboration — usually because the project never got going — then the page(s) should be deleted. --Klein zach 23:27, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, how do you know that the project is never going to get going? If it hasn't seen any edits for a year or two and the creator has left then deletion would be appropriate, but that's not the case here. Hut 8.5 08:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any guideline/precedent that we have to wait two years before nominating unfinished/unsupported/inoperative/unimplemented pages here. WikiProject Richard Marx was started on 27 May so there was a substantial elapse of time before the nomination. --Klein zach 00:45, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INACTIVEWP - Moxy (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question Imagine I create a new WikiProject Tennis elbow. I spend 20 minutes copying some standard project sections onto the project page and then abandon it for five months. I don't explain myself on the talk page, nor do I bother to promote the new project in any way, but it gets listed and one person joins the project (albeit asking what it's all about). Have I made a serious, meaningful contribution to Wikipedia space that should remain listed here as an active, community-supported WP collaboration? I'd appreciate answers. --Klein zach 23:16, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. You haven't done anything very useful, but I wouldn't want to risk offending you. I'd boldly redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine (on tha basis of the named interested WikiProjects at Talk:Tennis elbow and Talk:Sports injury) with the summary "This would be better organised from within Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine or Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennis". --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:30, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for actually answering my question. Your approach to the problem is a reasonable one. --Klein zach 00:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For a start you're comparing apples to oranges. We have only one article on tennis elbow but 88 in Category:Richard Marx. There would be little to no point in quickly sending the page to MfD as it's not doing any harm. Indeed if you're dealing with a relatively new editor with 121 edits sending the page to MfD might actually harm the project. Hut 8.5 08:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm not a new editor, I've been editing for a few years but had to create a new account name because I was away for a little bit and when I tried to log back on, I couldn't remember my password and nobody could retrieve it for me. But I created a good number of those Richard Marx pages, his albums and various discography pages, I created the template as well. I have done a lot of work on the Marx pages and even got two of them nominated for Good Article recognition. If you take a look at User:Jeremy706...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jeremy706, you will see how much work I had done. Don't let what you see under this username fool you. I've been around for quite a while. Jeremyeyork (talk) 14:39, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep was inappropriately taged as inactive (done to fast with in 3 months of its creation). Please allow our projects time to evolve and grow. In a case like this the project is likely inactive because no-one knows its there - what should take place when an orphaned project is found is its promotion over its deletion. Help this projects by way of notification, links in templates, invitations sent and a project banner is a good start. As of now the project can only been seen at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture/Music - we need to help this along.Moxy (talk) 14:24, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correction The inactive tag was placed four (4) months after the creation of the page [1]. --Klein zach 00:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So not several right? - Get it now? WP:INACTIVEWP Could we get those not familiar with our guidelines to read them over before moving forward with more tagging and nominations - Moxy (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, there isn't going to be a consensus, it split almost right down the middle, four for keeping, three for deleting. But the fact that I've been working on pretty much all of the article involving Marx and his body of work, I'm still trying to figure out a way to get it all onto the project. I even tried working on a Portal unsuccessfully. Hopefully, the Portal will be worked on as well. Jeremyeyork (talk) 00:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are no actions within the project that show that it has indeed been utilized by anyone, but User:Jeremy706 on May 26, 2011. The page does not describe any work done within the subject matter of the project. It seems as if the project page was created and, subsequently, abandoned. Other than a comment that I had left, there had been no other users interested in the project except for the request for deletion. It would be different if the subject matter were about Comics or something of a broader spectrum, but this seems very limited at best. The lack of activity speaks for itself. --Candy156sweet (talk) 19:53, 9 October 2011 (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.