Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Noticeboard for autism-related topics
- 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: keep. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 17:25, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Does not seem to be regularly updated; things from 2007 are listed as 'new', for example. Plus, Wikipedia:WikiProject Autism seems to be relatively inactive. Bangalamania (talk) 19:34, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Page has sporadic edits since 2008 - the last time there was significant activity. --Whiteguru (talk) 20:28, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. It has history. The nominator's rationale supports tagging as an archive, not deletion. The use of the word "new" should be accompanied by dates. In many cases, it is. In others, feel free to add the date of entry. Confusion by this issue is not credible. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep, but maybe we can breathe some life into it by trimming it down. A small page is easier to keep updated than a large page. Maybe put the active contributors list up top and remove those who are no longer active? Or remove that section entirely as it may not be that helpful. Unless it can be automated, we can probably remove the sections about articles that have been AFD'd, since nobody is going to want to fill in thirteen years worth of AFD's to close the gap. —Soap— 01:36, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- I note that Wikipedia:WikiProject_Autism#New_articles has an automated new articles section, which we could use to replace the manually updated one on the noticeboard. It may be that the two pages will end up being very similar to each other, and could merge, but I would not endorse deletion of either page. —Soap— 01:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - Either mark as historical, or don't mark as historical. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:59, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep No reason to delete history. — csc-1 01:00, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- Mark historical per nom. The page's nominal functions would be better served by the wikiproject itself, and it's good for inactive projectspace topics to be marked as such explicitly, but prior commentators have pointed out the unnecessity of deletion in this context. Vaticidalprophet 16:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- 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.