Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Dwarf

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 no consensus. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:38, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Dwarf

This project was started back in 2006 and went inactive in 2010 with 19 members, with no activity since. JJ98 (Talk) 18:56, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Inactivity is not a reason for deletion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Wikipedia:Wikiproject Television. Actually died in 2008. Overly narrow. Unresuscitable. 'Keep' in this context is just a vote for clutter. TV programmes (like individual music bands) are unsuitable for WikiProjects. --Klein zach 01:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be astrophysics, but the project main article is currently a "good article", and is yet to be improved to "featured". Template:Red Dwarf and Template:Red Dwarf episodes show many associated stand alone articles. It is certainly revivable. I cannot see why you say it is unresuscitable. What do you mean by saying that it died "actively" - was there a conscious decision for it to die, evident somewhere I don't see? While it is inactive, it is tagged and classified as inactive, and is not "cluttering" anything, unless you normally navigate by prefixfinder (do you?). This is not any old TV programme, and is far bigger than the typical individual music band we get asked about around here. This wikiproject should be kept as tagged, as there has been work done, and there is more to do, and we should make things easier, not harder, for future volunteers. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:59, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK there has never been a case of a significant WikiProject being successfully resurrected after three years. If you know of any examples please let us know. --Klein zach 00:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as this is a comedic television series, perhaps it should just be merged to WikiProject Comedy? 65.94.44.141 (talk) 05:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
keep and mark as inactive - comedy is a huge topic, and some folks who might be interested in collaborating on red dwarf might not be on a huge parent topic - deleting material would mean reinventing the wheel for future collaborations. Collaborative editing is what this whole place is supposed to be about, and I am not keen on removal of any material which facilitates this. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If Red Dwarf is too small and Wikipedia:Wikiproject Television and Wikipedia:WikiProject Comedy are too large (though the latter actually doesn't seem very busy), it could be redirected to Wikipedia:WikiProject BBC. This is modestly active project with 60 members and 1 archive of discussions. --Klein zach 10:34, 3 June 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.