Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kenya
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Proposed merger with WikiProject Amboseli Biosphere Reserve Project
Given the scope of the above project falls entirely within the scope of this project, and that this project has assessment and a few other advantages over that project as a project, I propose and support merging that project into this one. John Carter (talk) 17:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- I would support such a merger. As you say it makes sense since the Amboseli Biosphere Reserve Project falls totally within the scope of the WikiProject Kenya. --BelovedFreak 22:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Respectfully disagree with merger
Greetings,
As the lead author of the Amboseli Biosphere Reserve WikiProject, I'd vote to NOT merge it into the new WikiProject Kenya for several of reasons, namely:
>> The Amboseli ecosystem represents about 0.1% of the land area of Kenya. To have the project as what would appear to be the first substantive entry would seem to be a bit of tail-wagging-dog.
>> The Amboseli Biosphere Reserve WikiProject is intended inter alia to be a workspace for information exchange and updates by stakeholders in the ecosystem, as well as a source of information for the 'rest of the world'. I fear it would lose the first focus if it were embedded in another project.
>> At the moment, the WikiProject Kenya is more of a stub than a project, a good idea than a source of information. The project, in my view, should start with some substantive information on geography, ecology, history and sociology of the whole country, rather than a quite specialised coverage of one of its corners.
>> Given the current political situation, it would seem, quite frankly, frivolous to show-case an albeit important wildlife-based ecosystem, rather than reporting on the situation: time lines, causes, current status, prognosis. See, for example, Ushahidi.
I do think the WikiProject Kenya is a good idea, as it would be for all countries. I wonder if the overall WikiEditors would consider providing a general country template on which information could be hung?
Hope that helps.
Best regards, Harvey Croze
Harvey Croze (talk) 11:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Harvey Croze (talk • contribs) 11:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- While I can understand the reservations, I believe the following considerations are extremely relevant.
- As it stands, the Amboseli project is clearly and obviously eligible for deletion. One minimum requirement is that a project have at least one listed member. At present, that project has none whatsoever, not even the above editor. This despite the fact that the above project has existed for almost a year. At present, I respectfully regret to say that that project is more than eligible for outright deletion right now. Personally, I do not believe that the rather long tether that project has been given to date will necessarily be extended much further, before deletion is considered. It's utter inability to gain even a single member over that period is, I believe, more than enough evidence to verify that that project itself is little more than an attempt at a project, and apparently a failed attempt. The fact that the above editor is also one of the few if any editors invovled, and that he is the author of a book which that project apparently deems as one of its primary source materials, also could be seen as calling into question the motivation behind the project, and whether it might, unfortunately, be a self-publicization effort. That could be another motivation for deletion. I respectfully submit that that project, as it currently exists, completely fails at even the most basic level, that being a key to collaboration. Despite having existed for only days short of a full year, it is still to all appearances a one-man effort. John Carter (talk) 13:58, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
