This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Naerii (talk | contribs) at 17:47, 19 August 2008 (Undid revision 232943993 by Robert Horning (talk) undo as an AFD about wikiquote is not relevant to the afd about wiki). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:47, 19 August 2008 by Naerii (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 232943993 by Robert Horning (talk) undo as an AFD about wikiquote is not relevant to the afd about wiki)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Wikijunior
AfDs for this article:- Wikijunior (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Fails notability guidelines for the internet. C.f. Google News which has a whopping two hits. Most Google hits seem to be wikijunior pages themselves, or scrapers. The result of the last AfD was 'no consensus' and I believe many of the 'keep' arguments there were not based on the site's notability so much as the fact that it is part of the Wikimedia Foundation. naerii 12:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Merge to Wikibooks. Notability is not inherited but this is a fairly substantial part of one of the WMF projects. Stifle (talk) 13:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Merge with redirect, as it's not worth mentioning separately. It could have been, had it lived up to its potential, but it isn't nearly close to notable or interesting enough for its own article. -- Zanimum (talk) 16:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect given the lack of external coverage. the wub "?!" 16:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 16:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep: All I can say is... Oh, no, not again. This is a project that had its origin outside of Wikibooks and has an interesting background all of its own. As far as what is being done with this project at the moment... that certainly is debatable. I do think there is enough interesting information about this project to merit its own article and not risk getting swallowed up by an otherwise poorly written article about Wikibooks... which also needs quite a bit more help in terms of getting something up to even a B-grade article. Merging the articles at the moment would be simply merging two rather poorly written stubs together. Otherwise, the arguments about keeping, merging, or deleting this article rank with doing the same to any Wikimedia sister project article. --Robert Horning (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)