Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Tarantino Wikipedia

Starting this Wikipedia was an enormous blunder.

The language is not a language, and anyway its speakers don't seem to be interested in writing anything in a Wikipedia (maybe because they don't need to write in "Tarandíne", since writing in Italian does it for them).

This project almost entirely consists of pages generated automatically, and even its administrators are hardly active. One of them quit some time after the project started, and later he suggested closing the Wikipedia, candidly admitting that things couldn't go on; the remaining two administrators haven't been contributing for four months now (since February and since March).

Let's not persevere in error.
00:33, 5 July 2008 (UTC) Comment left by someone passing by

Votes

Support

• Yes, 99% of the Tarantino wikipedia is made by bot, the community is something like 3 people and 2 of them cannot speak tarantino. --Sailko 22:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
• Yes, most of the edits are interwikis made by bots that were not even authorized to operate. Plus, it's so absurd that every proposal for closing minority language wikipedias is assumed to be driven by political reasons, rather than by objective (or at least good faith) considerations. Balabiot 07:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
• Yes, the Tarantino isn't a language detected from standards ISO-639. So this Wikipedia must be cleared.--Francescoluciano93 11:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

• No There is a lot of activity recently, so there is no need to close it. I'm completely indifferent to Italian identity politics, and the admission of any amount of editors that the project is doomed to failure is not convincing without his arguments. I cannot glean enough from Tarantino to figure out why he left or if it is a compelling reason to close an entire project. Furthermore, the bot-generated pages are not a detriment in my mind; that's a useful cross-wiki feature if anything. Koavf 01:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Good.

Then we should start 8,113 new Wikipedias at once: undeniably, it is fair to give equal opportunities to everyone's language.

And it won't matter if there'll be hardly anyone interested in writing things and the bots will do most of the work. After all, who needs humans.

(Oh, another thing: you don't need to know any Tarantino to understand what's written in this page. They're discussing in Standard Italian, though you might not even realise it. Funny, huh?)
03:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC) Comment left by someone passing by

Sure If you can get 8,113 other communities of speakers to be as active as this one, go for it. If you can show that many of those edits are in a language other than Tarantino (e.g. standard Italian), then you have a case. If you cannot show this, then you do not. Koavf 22:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

If a "community of speakers" consists of one or two editors, you will always find a "community of speakers" eager to write in their own dialect. I for one could edit my own Wikipedia, in my hometown parlance (which differs from Standard Italian in the same degree as Tarantino does); and of course, the bots would do the rest, which doesn't seem to disturb you.

(By the way: if you truly believe that Tarantino is a language in its own right, why are you calling it by an Italian word? The "native" form ought to be Tarandíne; or rather, in English, Tarantine.)
05:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC) Comment left by someone passing by

• Strong No. The admin left because he did not speak the language - not that unusual with minority tongues - that says nothing of the viability of the project as a whole. It seems to have been quite a lot of activity lately by a native speaker. Besides, the whole proposal reeks, IMHO, of politics. Something which is quite out of place here.--Damien Perrotin 11:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't be hypocritical about politics being out of place here: think about the great many Wikipedians who fill at least their own page with blatant propaganda, and no-one tells them not to.

Linguistics is what I am concerned with, and Tarantino is not classified as a language by experts who are supposed to know better than you and I.

And if one native speaker of anything is enough to make a Wikipedia, then there should be as many Wikipedias as speakers of a certain idiolect; that is, personal Wikipedias.

Nice idea, isn't it?

(As for the administrator who quit, you're not mentioning that he himself suggested closing the project for the very reasons I summarised above).
23:51, 5 July 2008 (UTC) Comment left by someone passing by

Comments

The argument of "some admins not being active" don't hold much weight. First of all, some wikis don't even have any admins. For many small wikis, the admins composed of either stewards and/or members who doesn't even speak that language. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 06:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Then I wonder: what the heck an administrator is for, if he/she doesn't do a thing?
05:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC) Comment left by someone passing by