Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Politics notice board

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. (Radiant) 23:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Politics notice board

Divisive and a dead noticeboard with no edits to either the article page or discussion since July 2006--MONGO 21:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I was unaware of this notice board until today. However, if developed it could be a very useful place. I don't see how it can be divisive as it clearly states that it has no ideology on the noticeboard. Ramsquire ^{(throw me a line)} 22:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete A handful of edits for one week in June '06, one edit in July and nothing until the Mfd notice was put in place. Sounds dead to me. Jcam 23:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, inactive notice board. --Terence Ong _{(C | R)} 15:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, the less that is in Wikipedia, the less wrong it can be. 81.179.84.141 15:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Say what!? What sort of reasoning is that? I suppose if we were to delete the entire website, it would then be perfectly free of errors, but I don't think that's a compelling reason to actually do so... --tjstrf talk 19:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, this was eventually based off of the conservative notice board, so you know it's not a good idea. That nobody's been using it means there's not really a reason to keep it around. --Cyde Weys 13:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
• I'm inclined to delete without prejudice against recreating if someone wants one. Started out as a divisive idea, evolved into something potentially useful, but I think the people who started it lost interest when they discovered it would not be a right-wing playground and no one else picked it up. If three people promise to take over stewardship and turn it into an active discussion board, I would change my vote to "keep". - Jmabel | Talk 06:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I would be more inclined to keep if was not defunct.-- danntm ^T _C 17:22, 16 November 2006 (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.