The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Most (if not all) of the keep commenters have a self-interest in the project: the consensus among impartial Wikipedians is clear. If Wikiproject Serbia wishes to help edit articles to promote neutral point of view, that is fine; but, making an entire wikiproject whose goal is to counter a single, specific bias is troublesome, as this comes very close to encroaching on POV-promotion. Xoloz 14:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject countering anti-Serb bias[edit]

A single-purpose, single-POV WikiProject which divides Wikipedians rather than uniting them in a shared goal of NPOV. Such groups are generally not healthy for the Wikipedia community. There is an existing WikiProject Serbia which should address the combined goal of improving articles relating to Serbia. We should not be hosting single-issue-pushing WikiProjects. FCYTravis 04:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

note - Wikipedia:Russian History Harmonization no longer exists as a WikiProject --Dijxtra 16:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
note - it's due to lack of interest in it now, not due to division of the community or to generating NPOV or other allegations preseted to the "WikiPeoject countering anti-Serb bias". In the past it helped to establish some facts and to replace reverting wars with discussions. I can't see how can it be used in favor to delete the new project. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 17:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it goes in favour of deleting this project. Just that the project doesn't exist anymore and cant be used as precedent. --Dijxtra 17:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but its lessons can be used... :-) Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 17:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, they're not even close to the same lines. WP:CSB has a goal of reducing systemic bias in our articlespace based on lack of sources or lack of interest in creating and editing articles on Third World, African, etc. subjects. Its goal is not to change the POV of a specific subset of articles because of a perceived political bias one way or the other. This project opens the door to Wikipedia:WikiProject countering conservative bias, Wikipedia:WikiProject countering anti-Confederate bias, etc. etc. etc. Wikipedians should not divide themselves by POV, but instead unite in the shared goal of creating NPOV articles. This WikiProject does the opposite. FCYTravis 04:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you missed the point, by reading the project page my impression of the goals of the project which is exactly what you said -- to unite in the shared goal of created NPOV articles. My rationale I have given above is taken directly from Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. // Laughing Man 04:52, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the difference is that that project is not aimed at one specific POV. This project is clearly single-POV, based on the title alone. What if this project runs across an article which is clearly inherently biased TOWARD Serbs? Will it simply ignore it, because "we only stop those evil Bosnian-slanted articles?" This WikiProject sets a dangerous precedent for splitting Wikipedians along partisan lines, and that is not acceptable. FCYTravis 17:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am very disapointed that you are nominating this WikiProject for deletion based on title alone. And frankly your hypothetical question is so off tangent here it is very offensive. It does not whatsover reflect the goals of the project based the current project page. So much for assuming good faith. // Laughing Man 17:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please clarify what you meant by this statement please? Thanks. // Laughing Man 08:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What would WikiProject Countering systemic bias do if it runs across an article which overpresents the third world and doesn't talk about an issue as it appears in the first world? Pretty much the same thing.
You should note that Wikipedians are already split along partisan lines on these issues; it is better to keep it in the open than to pretend that it doesn't exist. Nikola 06:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely not. Wikipedia's goal is to eradicate such partisan divisions and encourage disparate groups to work together and build an NPOV consensus. FCYTravis 07:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally, I have no desire to work on articles if I know that they will be POVed to destruction afterwards. Nikola 06:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Then engage in newsgrouyps or simething similar. Encyclopedia is about articles. In the future, when stable version articles will be implemented it will be easier to keep quality of articles against vandalism and warring. Pavel Vozenilek 11:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the answer to that is to nom the Russian harmonization thing for deletion too? We just don't need projects that push a particular POV. ++Lar: t/c 14:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to check this out. --Dijxtra 15:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good thinking, seeking consensus first seems a good idea. ++Lar: t/c 16:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And, there it goes, Wikipedia:Russian History Harmonization no longer exists as a WikiProject. --Dijxtra 16:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
More