[05:03:24] <MirahezeRelay>	 <redmin0, replying to m3w> [1/3] The Dormancy Policy exists so that wikis that no longerserve a purpose do not take up space that could be used by others. If a wiki has enough content and is not expected to be updated regularly, then it qualifies for exemption. In this case, someone making edits to prevent closure is not at all against the policy albeit someone applying for exemption would be grea
[05:03:24] <MirahezeRelay>	 <redmin0, replying to m3w> [2/3] t. As for the wiki in question being big, the only solution for that "issue" is to impose size limits and that should not be needed anytime soon. Furthermore, most of the wikis that are "hit" by the DP are small wikis that were only ever edited a handful of times, if at all; if the DP is to be changed to handle wikis that cause space deficiency then the right way to 
[05:03:24] <MirahezeRelay>	 <redmin0, replying to m3w> [3/3] do so would be to make it stricter for these wikis.
[05:05:23] <MirahezeRelay>	 <redmin0> Anyway, I think this conversation has drifted far away from the original topic, so we should probably return to it. Further conversation about the Dormancy Policy should be taken to #general .
[13:42:39] <MirahezeRelay>	 <m3w, replying to redmin0> Ok, if we are going off _no longer serving a genuine purpose_ then this particular case still stands as relevant on the basis whoever tried to fork clearly gave up. It's a failed fork with little if any benefits.
[13:52:57] <MirahezeRelay>	 <m3w> Keeping an attempted failed fork when a real fork occurs is honestly poor taste because its getting random traffic or edits. The person who forked long forgot or gave up.