Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Heraldry/Web resources

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 debate was does not look like there is any consensus to delete no matter how you interpret it. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 08:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Heraldry/Web resources[edit]

Wikipedia is WP:NOT#REPOSITORY nor are we a collection of external links. This is a linkfarm Hu12 (talk) 13:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep clearly useful, most sites are non-commercial. Grue 14:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Arguments of WP:USEFUL do not make for exemption of official Wikipedia policy. This conflicts with Wikipedia:NOT#REPOSITORY. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so many useful things that do not belong in an encyclopedia are excluded. Commercial or not, linkfarms do not belong in an encyclopedia.--Hu12 (talk) 16:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I can see that this resource could be useful for encyclopedic collaboration as a potential source of references. WP:NOT#REPOSITORY does say that Wikipedia articles are not mere collections of external links or Internet directories but this is not an article. Hut 8.5 18:19, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
comment, maybe this could be moved to project space say Wikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/Web resources. Inclined to keep as the linked sites are mainly official societies. --Salix alba (talk) 20:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Hut 8.5. It's a handy reference tool.--Bedford 22:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Hut 8.5. Wikipedia contains many lists that are useful. This is such a list.--VS ^talk 22:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Move per Salix alba. Absolutely inappropriate in Portal namespace; per WP:PORTAL, the purpose of portals are "help readers and/or editors navigate their way through Wikipedia topic areas ... portals are useful entry-points to Wikipedia content." (Italics added for emphasis.) Portals are for WP material - not external material. A Project can list these links as useful resources, unless the Project sees no use for them. If not moved, then delete.--12 Noon ^2¢ 02:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Move per Salix alba - perfectly appropriate as a collaboration tool in WP space, but Portal space isn't the best place for it. JPD (talk) 07:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Move to WP space Perfectly appropriate as part of a project. Thats what wikiprojects are for. The noms argument only applies to article space. DGG (talk) 08:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as part of this project (and useful). CarbonLifeForm (talk) 12:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clearly is useful to the project. John Carter (talk) 22:44, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It's fine here, does no harm and adds value. Maybe it really should be in Project space, but I don't see that as important, as mentioned above there is a world of difference between Portal space and the mainspace, not so much between Portal and Project space - at least one entire project is still in Portal space (Poland).--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Move to WP space, but make sure the link from Portal:Heraldry still works. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 00:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Move to project space. Don't leave a link on the portal as a direct result of the MFD, allow the WikiProject to make that decision. --Core desat 01:03, 7 February 2008 (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.