Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Fiji Wikipedia

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion is closed.

Closed, as new policy is in place ("all current proposals will be made invalid").

I propose closure of Fiji Wikipedia. There are hardly any native users in the project. Since its creation in 2002, it has 59 articles (averaging 7 a year). Recently, there has been a flood of copyvios/test pages and vandalism in the wiki. Since no one has expressed any interest about the project for 8 years, I propose it be closed. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support[edit]

  1. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I agree that it is probably too small a base population to develop into a project. MBisanz talk 03:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Many of its pages are simple image galleries or just Bible quotes. This includes the article on its own country. -- Prince Kassad 12:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Dead project: no local community, no admins, very little content, and nothing but spam. —§ stay (sic)! 03:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support I hate to support the closure of a wiki with over 100 pages but they're all terrible (e.g. one-line stubs, extremely messy, written in a foreign language, etc.) Something tells me that the majority of these pages was caused by a boom because of the this proposal, which is a good thing if done correctly--this hasn't though.--Pineapple fez 01:47, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support -FASTILY (TALK) 05:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - Per Snake311, this wiki is pretty much dead in the water. Not enough native users to build a workable community. Closure endorsed. BarkingFish 22:20, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Diego Grez return fire 22:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. See #Cleanup. --dferg ☎ talk 11:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. The articles that were created the last days can hardly be called articles. This wiki looks dead to me. -Barras talk 11:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support --by Màñü飆¹5 talk 11:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. support --Betalph 05:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support closing this project. There's been virtually no content creation in the last 30 days.[1] I respect the oppose comments which say there should be a Fijian Wikipedia just as Fjian speakers should have better Internet access. Unfortunately, we don't have a real Wikipedia to offer them -- just a pretend Wikipedia with just one barely active editor (plus spam and vandalism clean-up people that don't speak Fijian + a cross-wiki linker). I agree with some oppose commenters that there should not be a language base size requirement; I am happy with a Wikipedia for just 10,000 speakers if there's at least one or two that are actively building just several solid articles (not just 150-word stubs) every month. The problem is that we don't have anyone like that here. We can always restart this project when someone steps forward who will actually start building more content. In the meantime, this project is just wasting others' time on cleanup. --A. B. (talk)
  14. Support --Stryn 17:29, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support -- I count 6 non-bot mainspace edits in the past 30 days. Of them, about half are administrative tweaks (main page, add a category), and with all of them combined, they added about one and a half sentences worth of information. This project is simply completely inactive, and despite the protests of the opposers, activity has, if anything, decreased over the past year. There's no loss in closing down a project that doesn't really exist, and this one simply isn't a project because it has no contributors. Zachlipton 19:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support --Underlying lk 03:50, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support --Turn685 00:47, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Important Language, but too less activity after too much years. Vibhijain 10:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  19. 'Support' closing due 1) to long term inactivity (100 articles in 8-9 years is really too few) and 2) absence of native-speaker(s). I think closing it is a better thing than maintain it to avoid non-Fijian speakers to spoil it by making five-word sentences. There is no real loss in closing Fijian Wikipedia as no native-speaker contributor has contributed to the wiki since 2002. --Jagwar 交談 homewiki 18:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose[edit]

  1. "Too small a base population"? Fijian is the national language of a country with nearly 1 million inhabitants. The population of Luxembourg is much smaller and yet we have a very successful Wikipedia in their language (lb.wp), even though the population is generally almost universally bilingual in French. Give it some time... --Node ue 12:37, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I see no interest in the project after 8 years which is quite a long time... Pmlineditor ∞ 12:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    "long time" is subjective. the lifetime of a man can be measured in decades, can't it? but what about the lifetime of our planet? let it grow. --Node ue 08:26, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Please dont close this wikipedia.--Lousyi 08:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Why? Pmlineditor ∞ 16:32, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    The following comment was added after the discussion was closed:
    Because that was a native right there. -- Iketsi 00:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. I hope please don't close Fijian Wikipedia. Give the change.--Metrik 15:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't exactly understand what you mean. Pmlineditor ∞ 16:32, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Please don't close this wikipedia. I want this wikipedia get untik 1,000 articles.--Digimon Adventure 08:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Many wikis are closed way before they get to 1000 articles. Why should this be an exception? Majority of the projects opened as early as 2002 have over 10k articles while this has less than 500. Pmlineditor ∞ 16:32, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I feel it's unfair to hold projects in less common languages to the same standard as other, more well-known ones. Fijian has under a million native speakers, so it's obvious that it simply cannot expand at the same exponential rate as RU or EN.wp. My opinion is that we shouldn't deny Fijians a chance to contribute to a project in their native language just because they are not as populous a society. Tempodivalse [talk] 22:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  5. There is not much wide awareness about this project. I think the infiltration of the Internet and access in addition to the government initiative of compulsory vernacular lessons in early education should make this a legitimate and useful prject as a tool of culture preservation.The key is awareness. Our Fiji based company(http://www.avonsys.com/Firefox-FJ) were involved with the Firefox Plugin in Fijian and the interest was there from a lot of the populace who were made aware. Please dont close it. As a Fijian, and have worked in a similar project we can do it again. Cheers
  6. Oppose Look at how successful the Fiji Hindi Wikipedia is. We can achieve the same in the Fijian Wikipedia. --RaviC 06:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose --Goro! 18:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose --Sarvaturi 07:56, 27 June 2010 (UTC) Fijian is an important language in its area and it's a national language.[reply]
  9. Oppose --OosWesThoesBes 19:14, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose What benefits are there to closing this project over leaving it open and allowing Fijian speakers the chance to contribute in their native tongue? Our SWMT team can easily remove any vandalism. The language is fairly significant - has close to a million speakers. Tempodivalse [talk] 22:17, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Some recent activity, more than 2,000 articles, revived. Kanzler31 21:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    You mean 2000 one sentence stubs that provide no information. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  12. oppose--Andrijko Z. 19:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose. It is an official language and it must have his chance, like fijian hindi. --21:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
    It has been given a chance for nearly 8-9 years, but all we get is uninformative one line stubs. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    What's the big rush? Encyclopedias and other large reference works take years, if not decades, to develop. By closing the project now, we guarantee that it will never grow. If we leave it open, it may get a trickle of contributions, especially as people in remote areas of the world get more and more access to computers and the internet. Tempodivalse [talk] 22:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose --GreenZeb (talk) 14:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    For what reason? Pmlineditor ∞ 10:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Oppose -- The price for Internet just became cheaper in fiji, expect more fijians online..give it a year or two, it will catch up. Instead of closing it down, why not promote it?. I had this idea when i use to be active here, have small ads on top of pages on the english wikipedia (which is the most widely used). Make a script/feature which detects the person browsing the wiki's IP and shows them a link to their country's wiki (disabled for logged in users)....so for example if it detects the ip is from fiji, there will be a small advert on the top of that page in their vernacular language welcoming them and asking them if they want to be part of Wikipedia fiji.... --Stemoc 10:08, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Oppose Same reason as Stemoc --Badener 15:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
  17. Oppose Bearas 22:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose --Baba Tabita 10:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The following comment was added after the discussion was closed:
  19. Oppose May I suggest we spend more time and energy on promoting the existence of underdeveloped Wikipedias than on picking on the little ones? -- Iketsi 00:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • Neutral - however, if there had been only *1* person contributing one word in the past 30 days, I would've been on the "give it a chance"-soap box; alas, there's nobody. If this wiki had by now, say, 200 or 300 pages, I would've busted out the "yeah, but there's content"-speech; alas, there isn't. One would think that if there was someone who cared, there would've been some response to said notification; alas, there isn't. Seb az86556 00:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

I suggest that most of User:Lousyi's contributions to this wiki be deleted. In his latest stunt, he did not even bother to type the topic manually but rather resorted to the PAGENAME-template. My concerns (see above) remain: who is going to expand all these stubs to something meaningful? (I just counted them -- close to 1,500 pages that say nothing but "PAGENAME is a city in (country-name in English, not even sure that's what Fiji uses)".) Seb az86556 09:42, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So s/he keeps going... now it's Pakistan, which bring this wiki close to 1,900 pages. What exactly is this supposed to be good for? Seb az86556 12:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think this kind of pages are useful for any project. --dferg ☎ talk 11:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User Cikgu (contribs) is doing the same thing now; wiki now @ 2,400 pages. Seb az86556 12:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Stemoc's suggestion[edit]

I like User:Stemoc's suggestion (see the oppose section above). Is there any way to implement this? I think it would help not only with this Wikipedia but other-language Wikipedias. Also, if there's a Fijan Wikiproject on any of the Wikipedias, it would be good to notify them. They probably have some Fijan native speaker members. --- Cymru.lass 02:28, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Almost a year later[edit]

you would think that if somebody gave a damn, they would by now have started actually doing something instead of just popping up and screaming "oppose"... I really suggest that the junk which was spammed into this wikipedia and hasn't been taken care of in over half a year (such as, for example, this and this, there are ~1,500 of'em) should be nuked. Seb az86556 10:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are also absolute nonsense if you can read Fijian. The word "turaga" means man or chief, so according to these articles, Valencia is a man in Spain. Yeah, right. -- Prince Kassad 16:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And Valencia is not a "man" in Spain but a beautiful city. That said, appart from closing the project I support nuking those middle line "articles". --dferg ☎ talk 16:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that Special:Nuke has a time limit which has now expired. So how would we delete this articles (since they are not meaningful, they meet deletion criteria easily)? -- Prince Kassad 17:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that by scripting or asking a dev to run a maintenance script to remove sb. user contributions... --dferg ☎ talk 18:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can be done manually; tedious, but possible. Seb az86556 00:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted them all. I used delete.py from the Pywikipedia package. -- Prince Kassad 01:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good. In this form I am not opposed to it remaining as is, e.g. small – at least it's not a frickin' embarrassment any longer... we'd just have to keep an eye on it in case someone pulls another stunt like that. Seb az86556 01:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
122 articles left after the deletion. I don't see much activity in the project to be honest. Pmlineditor ∞ 06:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know. My point was that I was about to !vote "delete"; my main concern was the impression it would give to any potential future visitors. In its current form, it might be inactive, but not a what-the-fuck-is-this-?-project. So I'll stick with "neutral." Seb az86556 13:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late reply. They don't seem good to me. I have no idea what koroturuga is supposed to mean, it's not in any of my dictionaries. Might be an invented word or anything. -- Prince Kassad 14:54, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Man... seems like the entire wiki as to be checked against some database... Seb az86556 17:24, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Fiji_Wikipedia&oldid=24932920"