Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Azad Kashmir (3rd nomination)

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:03, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Azad Kashmir

Abandoned unmaintained regional portal, but with a twist!

This portal is about Azad Jammu and Kashmir, right? Well, guess what? It intentionally makes no reference to the Kashmir conflict. But wait, there's more!!

User:MJL - Does that mean: "But wait, there's more! It gets worse!"

This subject is under authorized Arbitration Committee Discretionary sanctions.

The portal (P:AJK as I will refer to it) was made in 2010 and then immediately nominated for deletion by Zetawoof. In 2012, it received an update on known sockpuppeter Rachitrali/Akbaralighazi (Related portals edited by this user include; MFD:P:Kalash Valleys and MFD:P:Chitral, Pakistan. Ongoing and Related: MFD:P:Gilgit-Baltistan & MFD:P:Urdu.

P:AJK has 20 subpages; of which only 15 are actively being used. Even then, one in use is still completely empty since 2016 due to Kautilya3 removal of the suckpuppeter's content. Most of the subpages were either created by the sockpuppeter in 2012 or Northamerica1000 in 2013. There is no listed maintainer for this portal. Credit where it is due: Anomalocaris cleaned up P:AJK's subpages in August last year.

This nomination actually has one more reason for deletion (if you can believe that). P:AJK can theoretically be considered redundant to Portal:Kashmir. Yes, that is right. There are two Kashmir-related portals. What's the difference? This one is for only the part controlled by Pakistan (rather than the entire region).

To conclude, P:AJK is a POV nightmare with no listed maintainer and no significant updates (minus cleanups) since 2013. It covers a highly contentious area and had significant contributions by a now blocked sockpuppeter. Major props should go out to Störm for bring this to my attention by posting to BHG's talkpage (I found this in Category:Pakistan portals.)

I therefore propose we delete this portal with prejudice against recreation. Cheers, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 15:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC) –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 15:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Concur with MJL. I would suggest having the two portals fight a war, but the humor would be lost, and would have been too grim anyway. This portal has an average of 6 daily pageviews between 1 Jan 2019 and 28 Feb 2019. There is something weird about the pageview metrics for the article, because they peak at more than 45,000 on 26 Feb, but the median is 1657 and the mean is 4595, none of which makes a case for the portal that is, perhaps fortunately, underviewed. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - nicely summed up by the nominator. It is clearly redundant to main Kashmir portal. Bad idea to create in first place. Störm (talk) 15:57, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.