Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Burmese Wiktionary

The following discussion is closed: Active wiki. Needs better main page localization, but most of the concerns from 2007 have been addressed. Anyone with new concerns can open a new discussion; consensus on the issues below is to Keep.

I propose to close this discussion in seven days from now, on May 11VasilievVV 20:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The Burmese Wiktionary should be closed due to lack of content and activity. I informed the Burmese Wikipedia, but it's not really active so I doubt someone will work on it. -- Prince Kassad 16:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

That is not currently valid. I have recently been contributing in my.wikt and plan to go on doing it. --Piolinfax (@es.wikt) 01:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Prince Kassad. You said you informed the Burmese Wikipedia but I fail to find anything like that in the eleven edits you have so far in your contributions log in my.wikipedia. If it was not a public announcement from you, how anyone visiting my.wikipedia as a whole could have access to that piece of news? Thanks. Regards. --83.44.128.168 01:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
You said you informed the Burmese Wikipedia - did I? (not that it's any important anymore, since we already have contributors) -- Prince Kassad 04:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, you did. Were you lying or there is something else we cannot see and you are too keen of keeping to yourself? If so, why? I cannot totally see the point of your answer... well only you know what you are accountable about and I am not going to go on discussing it if you just want to avoid it. Anyway, keep in mind that if the project had been closed a couple of months ago thanks to this proposal it is highly probable that no contributors would be working in Incubator/Wt/my/ right now. At least they wouldn't be working at the same ease as now (unless they were part of the wiki-savvy élite; It seems that many Meta people tend to think the rest of wiki users [the ones speaking minority languages included {fortunately Burmese is not exactly a minority language}] share their average level of expertise). Harm is bad. Potential harm is never desirable even if it never ends up in actual harm. Regards. --83.44.128.168 16:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh right, just noticed it. I'm sure I informed them, but at that time I edited as IP on foreign wikis so it's hard tracking down the diff (I just know the message is gone now, for whatever reason). -- Prince Kassad 18:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Support closing

  1. Support due to inactivity. ST47 16:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support. There are almost no contributors at the Wikipedia, as only those few Burmese outside their homecountry have internet access. I would volunteer to monitor that wiki until a community shows up (I already got admin access temporarily to clean up some spam), but maybe it's better to close it and reopen when there are more Burmese on the net. PS: The same applies for the Burmese Wikibooks. Ahoerstemeier 08:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
  3. Support closure: no content (wikt:my:Special:Allpages) and no useful activity (wikt:my:Special:Recentchanges). --A. B. (talk) 02:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
  4. Support per A. B. No content and no activity. Sr13 05:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support Per all above, and because of the extremely poor localisation (7%). Siebrand 16:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose closing

  1. Oppose. If there are already some Burmese contents on it, just delete articles that's not in Burmese and keep the others. --Johnson40213 04:03, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. The wiki is not inactive, please give it some time to grow, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 11:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose. It has many articles, and some of it are good. Please keep it.--Waiwai(2) 05:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. Seems to have a lot of recent activity by user Alifshinobi. Coppertwig(talk) 00:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. Holder 08:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
  6. Oppose. The wiki need some time to grow. Closing it will waste all the previous contributions and the future ones too. MyMyanmar 11:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  7. Oppose. Why close something when work is being done? Small wikis need time to grow to become big wikis. Don't rip the young plants out of the ground because they are not trees yet. They never will get to be trees that way! --Jeffmcneill 23:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
  8. strong Oppose. ARE YOU CRAZY TO CLOSE THIS PROJECT WHICH HAS MORE THAN 500 ARTICLES ?? If yes, maybe shouldn't we lock all wikis who don't have more than 500 articles, and good articles are not so rare over there s you can see from the article "love". And, what will potential contributor do if he see the wiki is locked ??, potential contributors will go away, and the project will die slowly... So, let it a chance. --Jagwar 交談 homewiki 20:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. Let they have chance. --Vhorvat 03:12, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
  10. Oppose someone is adding new entries, and there are quite a few (I notice these in Interwicket's log). Don't know about quality. But it is high time to end this request for closure, it was started in 2007. Robert Ullmann 09:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

General comments

Someone should check on the quality of current entries, add content to the main page, and fix the broken main-page redirects. SJ+ 00:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC)