MarcoAurelio, I guess I should have stated my point a little differently. You are right that policy allows the closure of this project for the reasons you state. Still, LangCom's execution of that policy in recent times has been to give projects the benefit of the doubt and to keep them open, except in cases where the spam content makes that completely inappropriate. As MF-Warburg likes to point out, having the projects open makes them easier to reinvigorate if and when people show up who are interested in doing so. Otherwise, it takes some effort to move them to Incubator, and then to reverse the process later on.

Given the above, taking the first question (should the project be closed and locked), policy allows that. I don't especially favor that, but then I don't have a vote here. And, to be sure, (a) there is not a lot of evidence that there are people interested in reinvigorating the project now, and (b) while the community such as it is doesn't exactly support the proposal, it does not object, either.

The second question, though, is whether or not it should be moved to Incubator if closed. If one item, the Python book, is valid, then it should be moved to Incubator. What I would propose, then, is the following:

* Let's get some more opinions from LangCom members who have not weighed in yet: Should this project be locked? * If the answer to that ends up being "yes", then we ask User:Jagwar (the one relatively active participant) to identify what content is actually useful. Whatever content he identifies as useful gets moved to Incubator.

I'd also like to establish the idea that part of what makes this proposal work is that the community does not object. If there are similar cases identified, but those communities object, I would not like to see projects closed over those objections.

Steven

Sent from Outlookhttp://aka.ms/weboutlook