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.  Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 09:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Evanescence[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Evanescence (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dead project, no activity. JJ98 (Talk) 00:04, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge with/task force of Rock music (who have been informed). This project produced no discussions, but it had about 20 members. It was much into userboxes etc. (Templates: Template:WikiProject Evanescence/Invite, Template:WikiProject Evanescence/Invite1, plus 7? userboxes.) --Kleinzach 03:10, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It is an awfully specific wikiproject with only a handful of articles. I'm not sure it is entirely necessary, either. Merging it might be a good idea, though. Backtable _{Speak to me}^{concerning my deeds.} 03:11, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and tag inactive per Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion#Before_nominating_a_page_for_deletion (which you really need to start heeding, JJ98). The project appears to have done some work, so should not be deleted. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 16:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Nihonjoe. Speaking as a member, the project is inactive, though there are plans to eventually resurrect it (the band has been on a long hiatus, so no real activity). There's simply no reason to delete the project when useful information still exists in its pages. — Huntster (t @ c) 17:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Single band/artist projects invariably fail. Why not put this with the Rock music project if there are "plans to eventually resurrect it"? --Kleinzach 23:37, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Because we had no interest in being part of that group? A number of editors desired a centralised location for working on these articles, and over time that many have moved on/out. That shouldn't be a damnable offense. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and mark as inactive - Per link above: It is generally preferable that inactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as {{inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable. As Huntster said, the band is currently on hiatus and thus there has not been much activity. The WP will likely become active again once official word on their next album is released (expected later this year). Also, this WikiProject spans 33+ articles from my quick count, which is hardly just a handful. There's no need to completely delete a WP that is simply in an inactive state. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 05:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Wikiprojects should only be deleted if the subject of the project is inherently unsuitable for one or if the project has never produced any discussion or content and there is no prospect of it ever doing so. Neither of these is the case here. Hut 8.5 12:35, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and leave tagged as inactive. Yes it is a narrow focus but there'd be material floating around out there for some serious collaboration. And it has an assessment grid thingy. Collaborative editing is what wikipedia is supposed to be about, and this approach directly undermines that. Tagging as inactive saves some future collaborators reinventing the wheel. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:57, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment with so many dead band wikiprojects, shouldn't a WikiProject Musical groups be created, and whenever such a project becomes inactive, it gets merged as a taskforce to that project? 184.144.163.181 (talk) 04:36, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• No, because all the vitality in the music projects lies in the genre groups. Genre-level collaborations also produce better-edited articles because contributors follow policies and guidelines (instead of ignoring them). Please see the statistics page of the Music project to see the spectacular failure of thse single artist/band groups. (Note that only active projects are listed on that page. There are an additional 37 inactive projects, most of them single artist/bands.) --Kleinzach 03:27, 16 May 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.