Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Concordia(2nd nom)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 let's see if their reform program gets anywhere. >Radiant< 11:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Concordia

"The project was designed to have a friendly and helpful environment to support any unfortunate Wikipedians that have become victims of incivility, hostility, or continual disrespect." It also has its own governance with a seven-person executive council, a membership roster, an own newsletter and an own IRC channel. While it is smaller and newer, I'm afraid this sounds like Esperanza all over again, and we shouldn't let that happen a second time. See the Esperanza MFD. An older (and withdrawn) MFD is here. >Radiant< 09:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Close nomination and reconsider at a later date. This is the worst time we could possibly have chosen to consider this, and the shadow of the Esperanza MfD ensures that the program will not be considered on its own merits but rather based on what people voted last time and how they feel about the result. This MfD is essentially going to operate under guilt by association if it is run at this time. Please Radiant, give it a month, let tempers and emotions recede, and then nominate this again if you feel it is indeed worthy of deletion. --tjstrf talk 09:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support withdraw/close nomination and reconsider at a later date. I think that tjstrf is probably right. - jc37 09:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - seems pretty much inactive, way too bureaucratic, too exclusive, and we don't really need civility police crushing everyone's heads in for minor infringements, which is the impression I'm receiving. Either that or the ideals seem impossible to enforce and implement. The idea of outright "victims" needing comfort is just plain wrong, as there is usually fault on both sides. Either that, or tag as historical/Messedrockerify, by which I mean do what was done to Esperanza: turn all subpages into protected redirects to the main project page, and then replace that page with an essay about what Concordia was and why it failed, and tag as historical. Moreschi ^Deletion! 09:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Withdraw nomination. I don't see anything bad in a project having a newsletter or a list of members (many wikiprojects do) or an IRC channel (this may be more unusual for a wikiproject, but still nothing wrong with that). Also, it effectively has no governance at the moment, because the governors' terms have expired about a month ago and new elections were not held due to inactivity. Thus, I suggest withdrawing this nomination, letting the project reactivate and cut down on bureaucracy. Миша13 09:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. That seems more like a keep vote to me. --tjstrf talk 10:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • 1. It's not a vote. ;-) 2. "Close nomination and reconsider at a later date" sounds like "keep" to me as well. Миша13 10:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Actually, my close !vote is for rescheduling, not keeping. A declaration saying that any opinion which attempted to parallel this group with Esperanza was instantly voided might work as well. Maybe it is harmful and does need shut down, who knows? But I believe that if preventing damage to Wikipedia is truly our priority, then preventing a WP:MFD/EA aftershock is higher on the list. --tjstrf talk 10:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
        • Well, neither do I !vote as a definitive keep, because I have no idea what CCD will turn into after this litte "overhaul" - might as well !vote for the "MessedRocker solution" in a month or two, but for now I say "give peas a chance!". ;-) Миша13 10:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Note: There's current discussion at Wikipedia talk:Concordia about abolishing their governance council. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-01-02 10:18Z
• Keep for now. The end of Esperanza is a profound event in the history of wikiculture. Other organizations (particular those so insignificant I've never heard of them) should at least be given a chance to alter their methods and organization in light of the Esperanza decision, before being chastized for being too Esperanza like. Dragons flight 10:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Let's see if Concordia will listen the first time around -- Abolish the bureaucracy and make sure it never comes back. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 11:14, 2 January 2007 (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.