Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Chinese folk religion

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) 08:41, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Chinese folk religion[edit]

Abandoned, static portal. Created by a confirmed sockpuppet.

Created[1] in March 2014‎ Aethelwolf Emsworth (talk · contribs), who has been indef-blocked[2] ("AE") since June 2018 for sockpuppetry (see SPI).

It escaped the 2018 rush to automation. But the list of sub-pages at Special:PrefixIndex/Chinese folk religion shows just a set of static pages, most of which have not been edited for 4 years.

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 non-portal has missed dozens of updates..

In theory, could be argued to be 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", because it 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 Chinese folk religion and its sidebar navbox Template:Chinese folk religion.

Two newish features of the Wikimedia software means that the article and navbox offers all the functionality which simple 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).

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:Confucianism
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 this link to the article Chinese folk religion.

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 Chinese folk religion with its sidebar {{Chinese folk religion}}.

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) 07:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete In addition to the cogent points above, the Portal has not been managed to coordinate with other areas, such as WT:CHINA.ch (talk) 23:16, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Yet another portal by a blocked or banned editor. This one has 17 average daily pageviews, and the article has 640 daily pageviews. We don't need little-used portals by blocked editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Abandoned draft of a portal, 17 subpages, created 2014-03-25 16:45:31 by User:Aethelwolf Emsworth. Never went alive. Nothing to keep. Portal:Chinese folk religion. Pldx1 (talk) 13:18, 26 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.