Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/15 pseudo-portals built on former redirects
- 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. (Portal:Guam was already deleted.) — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:11, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
15 pseudo-portals built on former redirects
[edit]- Portal:Republic of Venice (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Holy See (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Qatar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Solomon Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Lesotho (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Equatorial Guinea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Comoros (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Seychelles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Cayman Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Cook Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:American Samoa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Guam (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Anguilla (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Marshall Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Portal:Elections (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
These pages are all automated pseudo-portals, each with its "selected articles" list built from a single navbox}, of which it is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK: e.g. Portal:Elections takes its list solely from Template:Elections. (For a full explanation of why this type of portal is redundant, see the two mass deletions of similar portals: one, and two, where there was overwhelming consensus of a very high turnout to delete a total of 2,555 such portals).
In every case, the page was previously a redirect created by me, nearly all as part of a process I developed in 2017/18 to automatically link year-based categories for countries to the relevant portals: see Template:YearInCountryPortalBox, now used on 77,507 categories. (Note that those template-generated portal links now account for a significant minority of the links to many portals.)
These redirects were later converted to an automated pseudo-portal. 14 of the conversions were done by the mass portalspammer @The Transhumanist, but Portal:Guam was converted by the good faith editor @Gazamp.
Note that over the years I have created 69 still-extant portal pages, all of them as redirects. 18 have subsequently been converted to portals:
- Portal:Curaçao, which is a curated manual portal
- Portal:Spanish Empire, an automated portals built off two navboxes
- Portal:Guernsey, a single-navbox automated portal now under discussion at MFD:Portal:Guernsey, thanks to @Hut 8.5, whose discovery led me to search the rest of this set
- the 15 portals nominated here.
I have not attempted to properly assess whether any of these topics is suitable for a properly-constructed portal, but first glance all except Portal:elections look marginal. So I propose that these pages be deleted without prejudice to recreating a curated portal not based on a single navbox or other page, in accordance with whatever criteria the community may have agreed at that time. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:38, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Discussion (15 pseudo-portals built on former redirects)
[edit]- add your keep/delete/comment here
- Delete all The articles handle each topic better, and each topic is too limited in scope. Johnuniq (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Comment. Portal:Elections is viable. Portal:Qatar is probably viable. The modern countries might be viable, though our coverage of African topics is poor. And some of the islands don't look silly. But there's clear consensus to delete portals created by this method. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, even a hardened portal-sceptic like me would say that if we are going to have any portals, elections should be one of them.
- Some of the others might indeed be marginal. Patchy coverage, and maybe not so many editors to sustain a portal. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delete all without prejudice to re-creation per nom. It's consensus to delete portals that merely duplicate the navigation capabilities of a navbox. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Portal:Guam per G7 if that is permissible - I don't know the rules for converted redirects but I agree that the portal is useless. Gazamp (talk) 16:59, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- I've deleted it under G7. G7 applies when the editor requesting deletion is the only significant contributor to the page. Here the only people with significant contributions are you and BHG, and since BHG obviously wants it deleted it qualifies. Hut 8.5 17:32, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - These are zombie portals. BHG already killed them once, but they are walking, and viewers of zombie horror movies know that a zombie is a threat to the living because it can spread the virus and turn you into a zombie. As the analysis says. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delete all of them
listing one by one, to be sure
|
---|
|
- No prejudice against re-creation of non-automated, handmade portals, such as those that use subpages. North America1000 09:44, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
- Comment No issue with the procedure here, but every single one of these topics should be able to sustain a portal. SportingFlyer T·C 21:22, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delete all with usual caveat; they can be recreated with thought and care. SITH (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep the country portals. The scope of these is clearly sufficient for a portal to exist. The format of the current portals means they might need some work due to the way they were created, but that's not a valid reason for deletion. WaggersTALK 10:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
- Waggers, your assertion that
format of the current portals [snip] not a valid reason for deletion
is simply wrong. The consensus against portals forked off navboxes was established only two weeks ago at one of the biggest-scope and most widely-attended MFDs ever. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:27, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
- Waggers, your assertion that
- 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.