Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Redirect Committee

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 delete. Undermaintained, and a kind of heirachy that consensus hates. Daniel Bryant 22:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is an essentially meaningless page which violates WP:5 - we don't have chairmen, we have consensus. I am concerned people would think they need to approach this "committee" to do redirects. Group appears to be inactive. DanielT5 17:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Reviewed and agree with DanielT5's comments. thewinchester 17:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Appears to create an unnecessary level of bureaucracy, especially when neither of the named people are admins and no attempt to gain consensus through, for example, WP:RFD has been entered into. Orderinchaos78 04:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Don't delete The redirect Committee isn't one you approach for redirects. Rather, it is a committee for all Wikipedians who are spending far more time creating redirect pages than new articles, just like other WikiProjects. As for the unnecessary level of bureaucracy, well, I agree. You should rather talk to the "Chairman" directly and advise him to be a "committee member". If we do have a consensus on "removing the chairman", I can go to the page and edit it out so that there are "committee members" only. rohith 18:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The project we're looking at here has 4 members, no activity, the only non-bot edit to it since four days after its creation in mid-September - prior to which was a flurry of creation activity, mostly by one user - was your joining as a member in November, only one post (excluding bot/distribution posts) on the talk page in December - which was directed to another project - and the templates are linked to about 6 articles. It would appear that the project has been abandoned and has not reached the attention of anything more than a very select group of Wikipedians. DanielT5 18:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Seems to serve no purpose. Redirects should be created when needed, not for just for the sake of creating redirects. Plus, redirects have no need to go through a committee. If they violate Wikipedia's policies, speedy deletion exists.--Wiki Fanatic | Talk 08:07, 7 March 2007 (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.