Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Piers

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 Merge to WikiProject Architecture. --RL0919 (talk) 16:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Piers

Project started in 2006 with 6 participants. Now long dead. Architecture Project have been informed of this Mfd. (Subpage: Wikipedia:WikiProject Piers/Changelog).--Klein zach 23:40, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-- almost no activity since 2006. --E♴(talk) 00:31, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. JJ98 (Talk) 08:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge as a task force of the Architecture WikiProject. We do not delete WikiProjects simply because they are inactive. -- Ned Scott 09:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the Maritime Taskforce of WP:Transport. (WP:PORTS was merged there) 65.93.12.101 (talk) 14:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Long inactive, sure, but it cannot really be described as a complete non-starter. The scope of this WikiProject is nevertheless too narrow; I think it would be better off merged into a larger, active WikiProject. WP:WikiProject Architecture is one potential candidate, as mentioned above; however, I think WikiProject Transport's Maritime Taskforce would be the best merge target. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 18:37, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the pages, especially the discussions, concentrated on English seaside pleasure piers — nothing to do with transport. --Klein zach 04:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. But regardless of the focus of those discussions, I think most articles about piers have something to do with maritime transport. Then again, piers are all architectural works, I suppose. Ultimately, articles about piers can be placed under the umbrella of multiple WikiProjects, so the question of to which project we merge this is not a critical matter. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 07:09, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and mark inactive, or merge into one of the projects mentioned above. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 16:01, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:15, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redundant to existing wikiprojects, so little content exists that a merge is superfluous. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 22:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to WP:WikiProject Architecture. The main impact of this project seems to be Template:WikiProject Piers which appears on a few hundred pages and which seem to cover both recreational and transportation piers. Templates for inactive wikiprojects are just a waste of space. Of the candidate wikiprojects the Maritime Taskforce is just too narrow, while Architecture can cover all articles. It might be appropriate to switch some of the articles to the Maritime Taskforce's project banner.--Salix (talk): 08:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to WP:WikiProject Architecture as best option based on discussion above. --Klein zach 13:24, 22 April 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.