Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject AfD closing

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 debate was re-tag as inactive. If the project is not currently doing anything, it is inactive. When the project is actually accomplishing things or has activity on its various project pages, it's active. There's no indication anywhere or in any of these arguments that this project is currently active aside from the co-creator's work on it (which consists only of removing {{inactive}}), so it will be re-tagged as inactive. If the project continues to be inactive after a reasonable amount of time, it can be brought back here. --Core desat 04:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject AfD closing

This project has been tagged as being inactive since September 20, 2007. One of the founders is aware of this through a CFD and UCFD on the project's related category Category:WikiProject AfD closing participants, but remains inactive. Additionally, the project's goal, "to review current and old AfD's which have been kept and check to see if the a link to the AfD was added to the articles talk page, and if not, add it" seems to be more an issue of administrators not properly closing an AfD, which should not be a major problem. The project's page also encourages non-admin closures of deletion debates, which should be a rarity not the norm and not something promoted as being a normal part of editing. If AfDs were simple enough that any editor could come along and close it, it wouldn't be an admin duty at all. Why have a project seeming to want to usurp one of the primarily responsibilities and duties of an administrator? Collectonian (talk) 20:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm taking the project off inactive and asking the other co-creator to update the tools to provide and recreate new lists. This is for non admins who are looking to help out, and is not an admin task. And for the act of closing an AfD, I would just like to point out that there are a larger number of non admin closes since this project first began. And this was not, however, due to the project. The act of deleting is an admin task, not rational judgment leading to an obvious keep, which is, and always will be, an option left up to an experienced editor seeking to help admins out by closing. Regards. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 20:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even though I'm concerned that this MfD is going to turn into a coatrack on the concept of non-asdmin closure in general, I don't like the idea of this kind of Wikiproject. I think that a better course of action for non-admins interested in closing debates is to polish WP:NAC, and bring it to guideline status. I'd rather have one good guideline instead of fifteen spearate projects. -- RoninBK _{T C} 21:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Oh, theres more than one project? Can you show me where? I'd be interested in looking at them. Thanks. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 21:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I fail to see how this has anything to do with, or applies to coatrack. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mark historical A whole organized project to put templates on talk pages for articles kept at AFD? It doesn't seem like closing AFDs is even within the project's scope. If it was, this might be a good idea, but even then it would mostly be replicating WP:DELPRO. Mr.Z-man 06:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mark historical or tag inactive I think adding templates to talk pages of kept pages doesn't hurt anyone and is actually informative to the Afd nominators.--Lenticel ^(talk) 09:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was tagged inactive until SynergeticMaggot removed the tag in response to this AfD. Collectonian (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as it is no longer inactive. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 01:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tag as inactive - project did serve a purpose and could still but (and this is a rather large but) there has been no substantive activity there since 2006. Yes the project should be kept and if it remains inactive should be tagged historical--Cailil ^talk 19:21, 28 March 2008 (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.