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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 09:00, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Punk rock (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Static micro-portal, abandoned since 2006.

Created[1] in June 2006‎ by All systems go (talk · contribs).

Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Punk rock shows a v slim set of sub-pages:

• Portal:Punk rock/Featured Band/Musician, which has displayed the same topic (The Clash) since 2006[2]
• Portal:Punk rock/Selected article, which has displayed the same topic (Pop punk) since 2006[3]

WP:POG#How_often_to_update? says that unless automated, the content selection should be updated monthly, or preferably weekly. Even on a monthly cycle, this pseudo-portal has missed over 150 consecutive updates.

In theory, this a broad topic. But in practice, it has not met the WP:POG requirement that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". Thsi one has consistently failed to attract maintainers.

Per WP:PORTAL, "Portals serve as enhanced 'Main Pages' for specific broad subjects". But this is massively less useful in every respect than the head article Punk rock and its excellent infobox and its navbox Template:Punk.

Two newish features of the Wikimedia software means that the article and navbox offers all the functionality which portals like this set out to offer. Both features are available only to ordinary readers who are not logged in, but you can test them without logging out by right-clicking on a link, and the select "open in private window" (in Firefox) or "open in incognito window" (Chrome).

1. mouseover: on any link, mouseover shows you the picture and the start of the lead. So the preview-selected page-function of portals is redundant: something almost as good is available automatically on any navbox or other set of links. Try it on e.g. Template:Punk
2. automatic imagery galleries: clicking on an image brings up an image gallery of all the images on that page. It's full-screen, so it's actually much better than a click-for-next image gallery on a portal. Try it by right-clicking on the article Punk rock.

Similar features have been available since 2015 to users of Wikipedia's Android app.

That sets a high bar for any would-be-portal-builder to vault if they try to satisfy the WP:PORTAL principle that "Portals serve as enhanced 'Main Pages' for specific broad subjects". It would take a lot of work to make a portal which genuinely offers more than the head article Punk rock and its excellent infobox and its navbox Template:Punk.

But maybe someone will find a way to make such a better portal, and a team of editors to maintain it ... so I propose that this portal and its sub-pages be deleted per WP:TNT, without prejudice to recreating a curated portal in accordance with whatever criteria the community may have agreed at that time. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:03, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per analysis by BHG, and as per observation that portal has 17 daily pageviews, compared to 2038 daily pageviews for article. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. - A not notable page(s). Plenty of articles already, portal not needed.The Zeus is Ha-Zeus (talk) 23:13, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Portals are not required to meet notability requirements, topics are. Furthermore, the fact that there's plenty of articles actually qualifies a portal as per broadness of topical scope, per WP:POG, rather than disqualifying the portal. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:41, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The portal guidelines don't simply say that portals should be about broad subject areas. Portals should be about broad subject areas that will attract large numbers of readers and portal maintainers. We haven't seen large numbers of readers, and the portal maintainer has been on twelve-year vacation. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:43, 3 June 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.