Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Slayer (2nd nomination)

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 and tag as historical. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 14:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Slayer

Ancient moribund project. Put up for deletion in 2007. Apparently nothing has happened with the project for the past year. --Klein zach 03:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC) P.S. This is the first time I've put up a repeat mfd and I've had trouble with the code. Perhaps someone knowledgeable can correct it? -- Klein zach 08:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The project seems to have been successful while it was active, which is a point in its favor. Personally, I would personally favor trying to merge it into a larger project dealing with their kind of music, like maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal, first. Then, if for whatever reason they decline such a merger, maybe then I would be more likely to favor deletion. John Carter (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Would you like to attempt a merge? Do you know how to do it? No-one ever seems to understand how to do a project merge. (I'd be happy to withdraw the Mfd if you can offer a solution.) BTW are you the former 'Warlord'? Have you changed your username? --Klein zach 04:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps make it a child project, it would be a pain to relabel all the pages involved. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It already is a child project - implicitly if not explicitly - of the Music Project, but a child project is supposed to be alive! Sorry but I don't think that would solve anything! --Klein zach 23:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If a project is inactive, it should be tagged with {{historical}}, not deleted. So Keep but tag as inactive. TJ Spyke 19:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep once living projects should be kept. They may be resuscitated, or referred to at a later point. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:04, 3 March 2009 (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.