Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Editor engagement

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: Soft redirect to Meta. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:50, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Editor engagement

Even before it was completely obsolete, it was a bad fit for Wikipedia. (I said so in 2013, too.) It belonged on metawiki. atdt (talk) 02:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Totally obsolete and irrelevant, and we are not the WMF. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:50, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No, the trends observed then have continues, so not obsolete but worse; and obviously screamingly relevant. Is your reaction coming from some WMF hate thing? Understandable if yes, but not a good basis for decision making. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SmokeyJoe, I don't 'hate' the WMF although I will admit to being one of its regular critics. I just wish it were more transparent, operate more professionally, and show some respect for the thousands of volunteers who provide them with their raison d'être. I don't let it cloud my judgement.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:26, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, not hate, more like frustrated and annoyed with. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this portal. It has a graph that hasn't been updated since 2009, and has an average of 3 daily pageviews. Oh. Wait a minute. That isn't a d$%@ portal. Delete it anyway, as per nominator and Kudpung. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Needlessly destructive of history. There is nothing here that should not have existed, it is just old and in the wrong place. Deleting some old things makes holes in the history and makes the known history unreliable. This is Wiki, fix it. Transwiki to meta, and keep the history available being a WP:Soft redirect. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This does not meet any of the criteria for deletion. When a page of this sort is defunct it is archived for posterity. You think the future is going to start in the future. Common human attitude, we got nothing from the past because they are evil and stupid. This project was about participation in, and study of the wider project. Don't delete that! Please. ~ R.T.G 14:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: It's reasonable to collate all technical changes like this together, so I put (a transwiki copy of) it on MediaWiki.org: mw:Editor engagement. Obviously it's for the local community to decide how it wants to dispose of your version. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 22:42, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jdforrester (WMF), en.Wiki is not a dumping ground for time and money wasting Editor Engagement Experiments (E3) team or any other departments. This is your (WMF) version, indeed it was written almost entirely by a diversity of salaried employees, all who have long since moved on, or been blocked, banned, or desysoped by the community. Please see my comment above. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:24, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Editor Engagement and Editor Engagement Experiments teams worked on the software for: New Pages Patrol, Echo (Notifications), GuidedTour, Getting Started, Thanks, WikiLove, Campaigns, and other research and projects. They tried to use this page, and the other local linked pages, for talking to and informing editors on their homewiki (partially because Notifications didn't exist back then). Yes, it's an outdated documentation page, and was never ideal (is anything?), but there's no need to be rude about it. Sadly, Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, content was already useless at the time of creation, no history worth preserving. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:40, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Tag as {{Historical}}, since the page provides some background about the evolution of Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
TransWiki - the obvious solution - has already been done (see above), so the Wikipedia version can now safely be deleted. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and tag as {{Historical}}, as suggested by North America. Server space is cheap, and breaking incoming links is a bummer. Colin M (talk) 21:20, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect. per above. It's historical documentation that can now be viewed at mw:Editor engagement. It clearly relates to Wikipedia, and I see no reason to break incoming links. Cheers, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:42, 17 July 2019 (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.