Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Great editing in progress (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was tagged as historical. As with all {{historical}} things, if someone wants to reactivate it, and has the support of the community in doing so, then that's fine. Daniel Bryant 09:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Great editing in progress

This page was created in April 2004 with the purpose of letting people know about the good work of someone, yet there have been less than 100 edits to the page (since its creation three years ago) and the most "recent great editing" was added in June 2006 [1]. The only reason it survived the previous nomination is that a few editors thought people could use the page more. In fact WP:GEIP is scarcely ever used and I don't see a reason a why it should exist any longer S. Miyano 12:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tag historical. I don't see any advantage to deleting the majority of community pages, but if it's inactive then it should be marked as such. --tjstrf talk 18:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Make historical I agree with tjstrf, mark as {{historical}}. Because of the low number of edits their and its general worthiness are low.Telly addict 19:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Resume using. I know that's not a proper MfD !vote, but actually, I like the idea of this page very much. Newyorkbrad 22:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but mark as historical. --James, La gloria è a dio 23:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mark as historical; this can always be reversed if, as Newyorkbrad suggests, people resume using it. Disuse of this page doesn't entirely surprise me, though, given what most people seem to think should be expected of a user – Qxz 02:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mark historical inactive project, but potentially resumable. Wooyi 03:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tag as historical. --Sl g r a n d s o n (page - messages - contribs) 08:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Historical - per above ...personally I think that we could stand to delete some of these historical pages, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. -- Pastordavid 14:51, 27 March 2007 (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.