Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Bosnian Wikinews

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

The result of the following proposal for closing a WMF project is to KEEP the project. Please, do not modify this page.

The following discussion is closed.

This wiki has had no recent activity nor improvement save the occasional pywikipedias and global userpages. Special:Statistics show that it has a small community of only four admins, three buros, and 182 content pages since its creation in 2006. It has since failed in its mission to provide free news to the rest of the community. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 04:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Link to mainpage.


  1. As initial proposer. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 04:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. Strong opose Opose VERY strong opose- This project meets no criteria for closure, according to this, ie THERE is a content, meaningful, without vandalism or in small scale, no copy-vio, etc, so it makes no sense for such proposals.--CERminator 11:35, 28 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Not objecting the !vote just noting that Meta-Wiki's speedy deletion policy has nothing to do with project closure request. This may be usefull instead. --dferg ☎ talk 12:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Wikinews projects that have generally become inactive are sometimes redundant to their respective Wikipedias, because their articles and styles of writing, although mainly for a news reporting service, can also appear encyclopedic, and they would be reduced to some of the same activity levels at their respective Wikipedias. Ideally, if this project were to be closed, the content might be merged with the associated Wikipedia. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 03:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Anyway, the argument is OK, remark for little activity on project is well. This proposal could be very motivating fact for most of users to activate again on project.--CERminator 08:26, 29 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    But after little research, fact is that not only bs.wikinews but the all other languages are almost on hold. For example: nl.wikinews without any activity in last 30 days. So this proposal for closing bs.wikinews is more than unfair.--CERminator 17:01, 30 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    FYI nl.wikinews has been closed a year ago or so (discussion). Very best, --dferg ☎ talk 18:15, 30 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I didn't saw that.--CERminator 08:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Two days of work on bs.wikinews brough 18 or more articles. It's very motivating fact to stop this proposal right now.--CERminator 14:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Strong opose will try to push it up again in next few months. I´m sure some others from bs wiki will help me. --WizardOfOz talk 22:52, 28 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Even though I proposed this closure, I feel that if this proposal fails, the least it could do to help the Bosnian community would be to draw attention to the Wikinews project and maybe bring up activity levels again. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 03:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I know. Thats why i´ve wrote above. --WizardOfOz talk 05:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. I agree with Cerminator. Medina — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Medina Džanbegović (talk)
  4. Weak oppose. bs.wikinews has stories about Obama's inauguration still on the front page - that looks bad, and certainly the wiki is clinically dead. But then again ... What's the point of putting it in the incubator? We'll simply have to move it back out again once we have enough editors interested in participating in it (that will happen, and probably soon, given the above comments). For this reason I usually oppose the closure of projects in general. Tempodivalse [talk] 01:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    After 3 days of work, it has been made already 20 new news articles, the front page is updated, and progress is very fast.--CERminator 11:40, 1 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I've removed the "weak" from my oppose above, for this reason. Activity is increasing quickly. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:47, 3 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Oppose I agree with above comment. mickit 08:01, 31 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Strong Objection No need to close the project. Kanzler31 19:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. VERY strong oppose. I agree with CERminator.--Bertrand GRONDIN – Talk 14:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. --dferg ☎ talk 14:29, 1 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Oppose No reason to close this project, active enough -- Quentinv57 14:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Oppose -FASTILY (TALK) 20:26, 3 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. per above--Andrijko Z. 18:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I propose closing of this proposal per 11-16-2010 if there are no objections? --WizardOfOz talk 08:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]