Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Kanuri Wikipedia

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

I would like to propose to close this proposal. The discussion has been dormant for more than a months, and even in the months before there has been little activity. If there are no objections, I would like to declare the proposal closed within 7 days. --Johannes Rohr 12:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be fine. Final result: Obviously pro closing. As sad as that is, but it seems to be neccessary. --Thogo (talk) 01:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for closing the Kanuri Wikipedia[edit]

I think the Kanuri wikipedia could be closed down: (Kanuri is a language in Northern Nigeria)

  • According to kr:Special:Statistics, "there are 11 pages that are probably legitimate content pages."
  • According to kr:Special:Allpages, there are 36 pages. Most of those are either empty, a redirect, or written in English.
  • The only page not being empty or written in English I found was kr:Dasd which is in a language I don't know but appears to me as eastern-European or Turkish, not African.
  • There is a malfunction as well: going to kr:Anah (Ane) Minaresi you get the standard text for "no page", but when you click edit, a text in a language unknown to me appears.This is related to the recent mediawiki troubles
  • Their main page does not have a word in the native language.
  • Up to a few days ago, the main page was an advertisement for a runescape trading forum.

I am a pro to saving national languages, but for this one there seems to be no user base to maintain their 1 (possibly less) article in the native language. An alternative would be creating more interest in this wiki - but that is something I am not in the position to do.

IIVQ 09:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support closing kr.wikipedia[edit]

  1. Support. Tdevries 09:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC) No meaninful content, no userbase[reply]
  2. IIVQ 09:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC) (see reasons in proposal, above)[reply]
  3. Support - Nothing meaningful. MatthewFenton 23:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support -- 14:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support the main problem with dead wikipedia (i.e., without any activity) is that it is open to abuse. Ilqram 22:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support - If it had even one user who spoke the language, or one stub in the language, it might be worth keeping. But it has neither, and is currently being used to store nonsense. --David Edgar 16:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - This wiki is completely orphaned. I was unable to find even a single line in the target language. If it was to be kept, it should at least have a sysop who cleans up the spam from time to time. After all, it is for a reason, that the rules for new projects have been tightened. --Johannes Rohr 11:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support It's completely orphaned. If there were some people who could dedicate their time to that wikipedia, then I'd vote to keep it. As I was looking at the Recent Changes, I realized many pages were hit by WoW vandals, but no one seemed to revert back their moves. Nishkid64 23:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support for now. If a group of dedicated speakers of that language want to come by and re-open it I'd probably support recreating it. J.smith 00:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support It is mainly the target of WoW copycats, spammers and other doubtful figures. This hurts. I'd love to see Wikipedias like these flourish, indeed to see any Wikipedia flourish Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 13:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support There has been no activity for the last 100 days, appears inactive. But am open to an oppose if uses show an interest in starting it up again. :) Cbrown1023 21:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Sorry, but until a real contributor comes by and saves it with a few pages in the target language, it needs to be shut down. Vandals, spammers and nonsense abound at present. I wonder why this wiki got created in the first place. Like any experienced Wikipedian would say and obseve, it's a waste of server resources and bandwidth. --Slgrandson 13:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support It looks inactive for over 1 years and essential target of an infamous vandals(i.e. WoW, WiC, etc.). and is have only one page in its language. further more any articles on other Wikipedias does not have interwiki to this Wikipedia. so I support Strongly this proposal. -- Alpha for knowledge (Talk / Contributions) 00:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. This wiki, after being cleaned up, now has one page (the main page) which is in English. If just a handful of people who can write in Kanuri came along and pledged to contribute to it, I would wholeheartedly support its re-opening. But I don't support allowing spam traps to lie around unchecked. Grandmasterka 08:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support per above Baristarim 20:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support It is simply not useful at the moment. I hope it's not too prejudiced an opinion to add that although the language has a moderately sized population (4 million) I honestly doubt an entire Wikipedia needs to be developed for it. For example, Xhosa is spoken by a large contingent of African people, but most of its speakers also know English or Afrikaans, two major languages with extant Wikipedias. Alton 07:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support ~Pyb 16:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose closing kr.wikipedia[edit]

  1. Node ue 18:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose, strong oppose. A lot of wikipedias have been "sleeping" for a long time, but became active when a couple of dedicated contributors emerged. Just wait. Sleeping wikipedia does no harm to anybody. Kneiphof 23:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose per Kneiphof. - Ev 18:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose, strong oppose. There are many more "dead" wikis, but once a native speaker begins contributing, it will expand, like Zulu Wikipedia or others. - Blockinbox 18:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Not eligible to vote: Only Edit of this user. Registered one minute before casting his vote.--Johannes Rohr 07:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    User also appears to be an impersonator of another user at Meta, user:Blockinblox, who is an administrator at the Simple English Wikipedia. Nishkid64 20:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose, Perhaps this wiki is too small and new to attract a native speaker, give it more time. - Krich 20:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC) First and only edit by this user, besides his user page, which was probably copied and pasted from elsewhere. Registered two minutes before casting his vote. See Special:Contributions/Krich --Johannes Rohr 14:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose, We should give it a little bit more time, - Archer7 20:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC) This vote is forged. It was in fact added by User:Mbonga (only edit of this user). See [1]--Johannes Rohr 07:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose, I agree with the Kneiphof. Sleeping wikis randomly come out of nowhere and emerge. Perfect example is the Chechen wiki which I am active on currently. I decided to learn Chechen and contribute and at the same time I contributed 2 other native Chechens just started editing. No we have finished a complete cover page and the site is getting 5 to 10 articles a week. But before that the wiki was almost dead, even the agreed form of writing wasnt brought up, maybe 5 articles in chechen were existed. So I think, give it some more time. Dont close a wiki, if you are going to close any wiki it should be the Klingon one. --Ice201 16:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments regarding kr.wikipedia[edit]

After cleaning up the Wiki it does not even have any page in the article namespace except the main page. —Pill δ 15:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, as confirmation of my opinion in the vote, on 13 Nov a second article was created, with nothing but 3 commercial spam links. Ilqram 22:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Confirming my vote, users 1 and 2 may possibly be meat puppets, by looking at their user pages. Krich 20:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Going through the history, I have noticed, that two votes in support of closure were removed by User:Swami86. There is no explanation in the summary. What is this about? --Johannes Rohr 20:43, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
'Twas simply vandalism. :) I've re-instated the votes. :) Cbrown1023 22:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just wasted an hour of my lifetime identifying spam on kr: and tagging it for deletion. After User:Jon Harald Søby deleted all the crap, there was nothing left. Except for the main page (which has no single line in Kanuri either.) Please put an end to this!--Johannes Rohr 16:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why the heck would anyone want to manipulate this vote here? Oppose votes have been forged, support votes have been quietly deleted, and one-time accounts have been used to increase the number of opponents.

We are discussing the fate of a entirely empty Wiki here. Who the heck would deem it necessary to apply dirty tricks in order to keep it open? I simply cannot think of anyone except for the spammers who have been massively abusing this wiki over the last months. (see above, plus: my cleanup operation of yesterday was not the first one).--Johannes Rohr 08:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More vote-rigging. So, another attempt massively falsify votes has been made. This time by User:Shamma21, who claims to be identical to en:User:Shamma21. However, the latter doesn't exist. I cannot think of any other motivation for doing so, except for keeping the current spammers playground open. --Johannes Rohr 14:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user has been blocked indefinitely now, and I hope he/she won't be back to cheat these discussions. I don't think there is any particular reason for doing so, other than for simple vandalism purposes. Nishkid64 21:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC). I believe that it should go back up 13 years later (Nov 29 2020)[reply]
2 years later... XD. RicaMariWana (talk) 23:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose to open kr.Wikipedia[edit]

Good day to you all

Hope you are doing well am Mohammed from Nigeria kanuri by language am proposing for kanuri language opening because am trying to contribute to my language in Wikipedia but unfortunately the language is in the incubator and most of my language speaking people are trying to access the page but they couldn't.We appreciate your response thank you. MohammedBama123 (talk) 11:16, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To request a new wiki you're supposed to go here, not on the page the closure was requested on. GrishForce (talk) 11:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Best regards: Muhammad Bulama

  1. Support hello everyone am in support of re-opening the kanuri wikipedia so that we can explain more and make it reliable to people in sharing and contributing in the kanuri language hope you can look into it thanks Mustybdc (talk) 03:46, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support As most people can see we have been trying our best to see that the Kanuri language is out from the incubator so any relevant help is needed so those with the authority should look into it we are ready to give our best thanks MohammedBama123 (talk) 14:01, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support hi am in support to re-opening the kanuri page. Kanuri language has a long history and heritage but unfortunately the page was closed. Hope you will reconsider by re-opening the page so we can share and contribute the kanuri Wikipedia to the world. hope you may consider thanks.Umargana1 (talk) 05:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support as was said in the closing proposal, if even one kanuri speaker wants to maintain a Kanuri Wikipedia, it should be opened. VersaceSpace (talk) 19:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. ≈ MS Sakib  «TalK» 19:14, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong support Strong support I agree with reopen AlPaD (talk) 19:21, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Thanks for the support. MohammedBama123 (talk) 08:40, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Strong oppose I suggest redirecting from kr: to ko: so that Korean speakers don't get confused. Having a separate language version in Kanuri makes no sense, there are very few people who speak this language and they hardly have free access to the internet. And besides, they all understand English or Afrikaans. (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]