- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous 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 discussion was: delete. ‑Scottywong | confer _ 14:00, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Stillborn portal. Three selected article, three bios, six DYK blurbs, three pics. None of these have been updated since 2010. Mark Schierbecker ( talk) 08:07, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- easy fix for anyone with a bit of portal knowledge....will work on it this weekend--
Moxy 🍁
11:44, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- @ Moxy One off maintenance means nothing, which is what you did nine years ago when creating this portal, which you then left to rot to this day. To be an asset to Wikipedia, this portal would need a large team of maintainers and a large number of readers, but nearly a decade of hard evidence shows this topic isn't broad enough to make that happen. Newshunter12 ( talk) 17:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- I see there is not point anymore ...going to nominate all portals that I have done that are junk.--
Moxy 🍁
00:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- @
Moxy 🍁 I really appreciate your willingness to rethink this issue and accept the hard truth (that they need to be deleted) about the junk portals you started or worked on years ago. Thank you.
Newshunter12 (
talk)
03:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate this too, @Moxy. Please don't be discouraged.
Mark Schierbecker (
talk)
04:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Doing it so project Canada editors dont have to deal with the problems here related to odd behavior towards others. Best to get this out of the way before more people are turned away from Wikipedia altogether by our own admins. No one wants to be called names or be told there efforts are crap....so lets move forward quickly. --
Moxy 🍁
12:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm turned off by the name-calling too, @ MOXY:. Sorry you had to deal with that. @ Username: Message text. Mark Schierbecker ( talk) 17:48, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Doing it so project Canada editors dont have to deal with the problems here related to odd behavior towards others. Best to get this out of the way before more people are turned away from Wikipedia altogether by our own admins. No one wants to be called names or be told there efforts are crap....so lets move forward quickly. --
Moxy 🍁
12:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate this too, @Moxy. Please don't be discouraged.
Mark Schierbecker (
talk)
04:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- @
Moxy 🍁 I really appreciate your willingness to rethink this issue and accept the hard truth (that they need to be deleted) about the junk portals you started or worked on years ago. Thank you.
Newshunter12 (
talk)
03:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete This portal has been abandoned for over nine years and was never completed, which is why all it's sub-pages are littered with red links to never added materials. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of maintainers and readers. This portal has had over nine years of no maintainers and it had a very low 11 views per day in June and July 2019 (despite the head article Nunavut having 1952 views per day in the same period). Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I am strongly against allowing recreation, as nearly a decade of hard evidence shows this vast but sparsely populated region is not broad enough to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 ( talk) 17:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator and per @ Newshunter12.
- This is a long-abandoned, almost-unviewed micro-portal. Note that the 6 DYK blurbs are fake DYKs, i.e. they are not items which have been through the scrutiny process of WP:DYK. They are just unsourced WP:TRIVIA. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete' - I concur with Mark, NH12, and BHG. But the DYKs of portals are almost always just trivia and have never been reviewed. They are just another feature that the portal platoon and portal fans think is neat, not a reason to keep. An editor who wants to create a future portal that does not use forked subpages knows where Deletion Review is. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete this portal isn't needed. Catfurball ( talk) 16:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
- 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.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous 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 discussion was: delete. ‑Scottywong | confer _ 14:00, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Stillborn portal. Three selected article, three bios, six DYK blurbs, three pics. None of these have been updated since 2010. Mark Schierbecker ( talk) 08:07, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- easy fix for anyone with a bit of portal knowledge....will work on it this weekend--
Moxy 🍁
11:44, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- @ Moxy One off maintenance means nothing, which is what you did nine years ago when creating this portal, which you then left to rot to this day. To be an asset to Wikipedia, this portal would need a large team of maintainers and a large number of readers, but nearly a decade of hard evidence shows this topic isn't broad enough to make that happen. Newshunter12 ( talk) 17:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- I see there is not point anymore ...going to nominate all portals that I have done that are junk.--
Moxy 🍁
00:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- @
Moxy 🍁 I really appreciate your willingness to rethink this issue and accept the hard truth (that they need to be deleted) about the junk portals you started or worked on years ago. Thank you.
Newshunter12 (
talk)
03:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate this too, @Moxy. Please don't be discouraged.
Mark Schierbecker (
talk)
04:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Doing it so project Canada editors dont have to deal with the problems here related to odd behavior towards others. Best to get this out of the way before more people are turned away from Wikipedia altogether by our own admins. No one wants to be called names or be told there efforts are crap....so lets move forward quickly. --
Moxy 🍁
12:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm turned off by the name-calling too, @ MOXY:. Sorry you had to deal with that. @ Username: Message text. Mark Schierbecker ( talk) 17:48, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Doing it so project Canada editors dont have to deal with the problems here related to odd behavior towards others. Best to get this out of the way before more people are turned away from Wikipedia altogether by our own admins. No one wants to be called names or be told there efforts are crap....so lets move forward quickly. --
Moxy 🍁
12:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate this too, @Moxy. Please don't be discouraged.
Mark Schierbecker (
talk)
04:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- @
Moxy 🍁 I really appreciate your willingness to rethink this issue and accept the hard truth (that they need to be deleted) about the junk portals you started or worked on years ago. Thank you.
Newshunter12 (
talk)
03:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete This portal has been abandoned for over nine years and was never completed, which is why all it's sub-pages are littered with red links to never added materials. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of maintainers and readers. This portal has had over nine years of no maintainers and it had a very low 11 views per day in June and July 2019 (despite the head article Nunavut having 1952 views per day in the same period). Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I am strongly against allowing recreation, as nearly a decade of hard evidence shows this vast but sparsely populated region is not broad enough to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 ( talk) 17:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator and per @ Newshunter12.
- This is a long-abandoned, almost-unviewed micro-portal. Note that the 6 DYK blurbs are fake DYKs, i.e. they are not items which have been through the scrutiny process of WP:DYK. They are just unsourced WP:TRIVIA. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete' - I concur with Mark, NH12, and BHG. But the DYKs of portals are almost always just trivia and have never been reviewed. They are just another feature that the portal platoon and portal fans think is neat, not a reason to keep. An editor who wants to create a future portal that does not use forked subpages knows where Deletion Review is. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete this portal isn't needed. Catfurball ( talk) 16:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
- 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.