- 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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 04:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Portal:Personal life
Long unmaintained, was moved from the old wikiportal:health, but we now have a Portal:Health that's much more up to date. It just seems too broad to ever be really useful, even if someone did update it. Night Gyr 12:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep Although I agree it has some problems with vagueness, this is a pleasant little portal for a reasonable topic. On balance, I don't any gain in deleting it, and I do see a tiny loss. Xoloz 17:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!
Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 06:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 06:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep. It isn't updated much at all, but there's really not a good reason to delete it. -- Tantalum T e lluride 04:59, 5 March 2006 (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 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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 04:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Portal:Personal life
Long unmaintained, was moved from the old wikiportal:health, but we now have a Portal:Health that's much more up to date. It just seems too broad to ever be really useful, even if someone did update it. Night Gyr 12:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep Although I agree it has some problems with vagueness, this is a pleasant little portal for a reasonable topic. On balance, I don't any gain in deleting it, and I do see a tiny loss. Xoloz 17:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!
Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 06:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 06:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep. It isn't updated much at all, but there's really not a good reason to delete it. -- Tantalum T e lluride 04:59, 5 March 2006 (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.