Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Albanian Wikinews

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a proposal for closing and/or deleting a wiki hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. It is subject to the current closing projects policy.


The proposal is rejected and the project will be kept open.

  • Explanation by the closing Langcom member: Inactivity alone is no valid reason for closure. --MF-W 22:20, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I propose the closure of Albanian Wikinews.

As news sites are constantly updated, they feature new news stories. However, Albanian Wikinews has been inactive 2015 [2]. No articles have been created, and this is a mostly dead project. As news is always new, Albanian wikinews is not new. Albanian Wikinews is more like history. Also, please note there are NO administrators on the project. Let's face it: it's a clinically dead wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pitpisit (talk)

Please inform the wiki, as required by the policy. Otherwise this request will be deleted. --MF-W 16:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Communities were already informed, MF-Warburg. --George Ho (talk) 19:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
@George Ho: I don't think English Wikipedia has something to do within this proposal. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:03, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
I don't know what you were thinking, Liuxinyu970226. However, your comment looks as if the notification procedure should have been strict. Why is notifying English Wikipedia unnecessary to you? --George Ho (talk) 06:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
@George Ho: I don't know how many scores of geographical lessons were you having, but at least the nearest English country of Albania, the Republic of Malta, is even more than 600 km far from Albania (nearly 760km between capital cities Tirana - Valetta). So how is your enwiki notification on this topic useful? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:44, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Support[edit]

  1. Support --Pitpisit (talk) 07:50, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
  2. Support There is no reason for keeping this project. --Doostdar (talk) 15:59, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
  3. Support 😂 (talk) 23:09, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Oppose[edit]

  1. Oppose --Pi zero (talk) 23:34, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  2. Oppose --Liridon (talk) 09:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  3. Oppose --Leeturtle (talk) 09:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  4. Oppose for procedural reasons (the community was still not notified) and as inactivity is not a reason for closing a project. --AFBorchert (talk) 09:38, 17 April 2017 (UTC) Adjusted as the community has now been informed. --AFBorchert (talk) 05:43, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  5. Oppose Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  6. Oppose --Olsi (talk) 00:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  7. Oppose No valid reason to close the project as lack of activity is itself not a valid reason to close a project. --acagastya 21:52, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  8. Oppose There is no single reason to shut down this project. If inactivity would be a valid reason, then we should close many other projects in Wikimedia.--Alboholic (talk) 22:57, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  9. Oppose Inactivity not a reason for closing the project under policy. --Rschen7754 05:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
  10. Oppose No valid reason given for closure. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Other discussion[edit]

  • @Pitpisit: Have you contacted n:sq:Wikilajme:Kuvendi or n:sq:Wikilajme:Portali i komunitetit? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Not only is inactivity not a reason, in itself, for project closure, but the reasoning presented here about the immediacy of news — though apparently quite sincere — is backwards. The immediacy of news makes it especially important to keep a Wikinews open regardless of whether it's active recently. Certainly it's a good thing if a Wikinews project manages to publish lots of news that is current at a given moment ("now"); but it's also tremendously important that the project be available, at any time, as a place for someone to publish news when they find something has just happened that they want to cover on the project. With a Wikipedia, if it's closed and later someone wants to contribute, it's not entirely disastrous for them to have to slog through a long process to get the project reactivated; after all, the encyclopedic articles will still be waiting for someone to write them after a lengthy process of reactivation. News doesn't wait, so Wikinews projects have greater need to be kept open. --Pi zero (talk) 23:33, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Like Pi zero I would like to point out that Wikinews projects also help to preserve old news where the sources are no longer available or behind paywalls. And I do not see any notification of the community. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:02, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Notified the Albanian Wikipedia community about Wikinews. --George Ho (talk) 00:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
    Also notified the Wikinews community. --George Ho (talk) 10:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • It will be a step back. The news is accurate/valid for its time, if they are old, then they are history, but it's important to preserve them.--Liridon (talk) 09:22, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Definitely a step back for the community. If the main reason is the inactive period this can not justify the closure of the project since the community can take the appropriate steps to change this. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Leeturtle (talk • contribs) 09:35, 17 April 2017‎ (UTC) (UTC)
  • Closing a meaningful part of Wikimedia's aim to satisfy the readers in Albanian language is a back step. The Wiki project does not need backsteps but work to further improve actual values and build new ones in the same time. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)