This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 15 years ago15 comments4 people in discussion
WikiProject Video games is looking to clean up both inactive and limited-scope WikiProjects dealing with video games and move these into task forces of WikiProject Video games, as outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup. This message is being posted to this project to first see if this project is currently active, and if there is consensus to move this project into a task force. We ask that if this project is still active, that you determine as a project if this project should remain separate from WikiProject Video games, and let us know your intentions. Please let us know within the month; those projects that do not respond within that time will be assumed to be inactive and will be cleaned up automatically. This is not a mandatory process; we will not attempt to anything to your project if there is no consensus or consensus against moving it. However, we do urge you to consider if your project needs to remain separate from WikiProject Video games. Please let us know if you have any questions on this. (Guyinblack25talk 16:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC))
The project suffers from a really awkward position. Given the breadth of the subject, it doesn't have a specialised or expert value in its members. For example, you're only slightly more likely to have an expert on Kirby here than you are at WP: VG. Given this, users will and do defer to WP: VG where it is more active and there will be more users, many of whom will have worked on Nintendo games. It's just too large of a scope, which makes it redundant when that with the largest scope attracts all of the users. Oh yeah... Support.AshnardTalkContribs 09:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Support - Bout time to close up shop here and put it within WP VG, no ones left. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Should it be downgraded to task force or just a redirect it to WP:VG? (Guyinblack25talk 18:38, 26 August 2008 (UTC))
I'm not sure. As I said, I don't think it will be used for consultation on methods to improve articles. As a taskforce, it would probably only have purpose as a place to organise efforts to improve a subsection of articles within the scope. But I'm not sure whether this warrants a taskforce. AshnardTalkContribs 13:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
The scope certainly warrants a task force and even a project, but without active members scope is irrelevant. All we'd be doing is downgrading an inactive project to an inactive task force. Perhaps we should leave a note on WT:VG to see if there's any interest in a Nintendo task force. If not, then we redirect it. (Guyinblack25talk 14:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC))
Change to a Task Force — we virtually follow the same standards and manual of style as do our parent WikiProject to the point that a separate WikiProject I feel is not really necessary. However, as already mentioned, we need to get activity going, or the change would be pointless. MuZemike (talk) 16:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm... Tell you what, let's just downgrade it to a task force. I think the minimal amount of interest is there, and it's easier to handle a task force. I think interest can be drummed up and if not we'll deal with this a few months from now. Any objections? (Guyinblack25talk 16:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC))
Here's listing of Nintendo project pages. Some are used on the main project page, but others are subpages. Assuming we merge, I figured most should be redirected. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25talk 16:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC))
Well going through the list, here are my suggestions:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Nintendo/Members — delete as we should make users re-signup so we get a better representation of the new task force. Member page will be cleared, and the old userbox replaced with a new one. Done
Of course, that only scratches the surface, as there are many categories and templates to go through and potentially many CfDs, TfDs, and MfDs. MuZemike (talk) 22:33, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I forgot to mention that we would need to delete all categories pertaining to WikiProject Nintendo via CfD. There is also only one template in this entire project, aside from the userbox. MuZemike (talk) 03:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Sounds fairly reasonable. Quick question though, would the historical pages be moved under the task force umbrella first, then tagged, or just simply tagged as historical? (Guyinblack25talk 16:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC))
The Wikipedia: Policies and guidelines quickly state that A historical process is one which is no longer in use, or any non-recent log of any process. Historical pages can be revived by advertising them. So to cover that very slim possibility that enough interest is drummed up for stuff like weekly collaborations, move first, then make it historical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MuZemike (talk • contribs) 23:51, 2 September 2008
Sounds like a plan. Let's clean up what we can before moving the pages. Though I question whether or not a Smash Bros task force is needed. Of the four main articles, two are FA and the others are GA. For any editors reading this, here are the MfD links: Megaman List of Members, Kirby, and Nintendo Award. You comments in favor or against are all welcome. (Guyinblack25talk 14:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC))
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Done