- 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 . This MfD doesn't have sufficient consensus to archive, delete, or redirect the whole Portal, but I think it's reasonable to delete based on SmokeyJoe's argument that it may be out-of-date and not reflecting recent information. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
A todo list that has not been updated in close to 4 years. To the extent these jobs still need doing, this page is evidently an ineffective way to get attention. Legacypac ( talk) 21:25, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- While I agree that the portal content are not being updated, I wonder why nominating this subpage for deletion while the whole portal namespace is getting discussed for deletion? I'd wait for the outcome of that first. Tone 22:15, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Because the whole namespace may not be deleted and we need to start somewhere and drive some precident. Legacypac ( talk) 22:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Archive the whole WikiProject by redirection to the parent article,
Slovenia. Deletion is not appropriate because there is a non-trivial history, including features that may be reused in another (likely automated) form. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk)
23:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- I still believe that it is better to wait for the outcome of the general discussion instead of focusing on a single tiny subpage ;) --
Tone
11:31, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- The general discussion has a very long way to go, I believe it will not end up with deletions but some form of archiving, and a redirect is easily reversed. The general discussion may never end, and it can’t lock in the current state. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 12:17, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- I still believe that it is better to wait for the outcome of the general discussion instead of focusing on a single tiny subpage ;) --
Tone
11:31, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep as useless but harmless. Is there any reason why we need to keep Portal space (and the other weird 5-dimensional spaces) free of old harmless but useless stuff?
Robert McClenon (
talk)
23:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- Out of date, not reflecting recent advances, and distracting readers and editors from the much more important mainspace articles, these are no “harmless”. Small harm admittedly, but not harmless. I have for some years advocated shutting down most of the portals as a net negative. There are ideas for replacing them with automated content navigation, but that is compatible with and even advantaged by archiving portals. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 01:33, 18 April 2018 (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 . This MfD doesn't have sufficient consensus to archive, delete, or redirect the whole Portal, but I think it's reasonable to delete based on SmokeyJoe's argument that it may be out-of-date and not reflecting recent information. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
A todo list that has not been updated in close to 4 years. To the extent these jobs still need doing, this page is evidently an ineffective way to get attention. Legacypac ( talk) 21:25, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- While I agree that the portal content are not being updated, I wonder why nominating this subpage for deletion while the whole portal namespace is getting discussed for deletion? I'd wait for the outcome of that first. Tone 22:15, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Because the whole namespace may not be deleted and we need to start somewhere and drive some precident. Legacypac ( talk) 22:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Archive the whole WikiProject by redirection to the parent article,
Slovenia. Deletion is not appropriate because there is a non-trivial history, including features that may be reused in another (likely automated) form. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk)
23:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- I still believe that it is better to wait for the outcome of the general discussion instead of focusing on a single tiny subpage ;) --
Tone
11:31, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- The general discussion has a very long way to go, I believe it will not end up with deletions but some form of archiving, and a redirect is easily reversed. The general discussion may never end, and it can’t lock in the current state. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 12:17, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- I still believe that it is better to wait for the outcome of the general discussion instead of focusing on a single tiny subpage ;) --
Tone
11:31, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep as useless but harmless. Is there any reason why we need to keep Portal space (and the other weird 5-dimensional spaces) free of old harmless but useless stuff?
Robert McClenon (
talk)
23:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
- Out of date, not reflecting recent advances, and distracting readers and editors from the much more important mainspace articles, these are no “harmless”. Small harm admittedly, but not harmless. I have for some years advocated shutting down most of the portals as a net negative. There are ideas for replacing them with automated content navigation, but that is compatible with and even advantaged by archiving portals. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 01:33, 18 April 2018 (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.