Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Lemony Snicket (2nd 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:14, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Lemony Snicket[edit]

Abandoned micro-portal.

The selection of content in this micro-portal is provided through sub-pages, but the list of sub-pages at Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Lemony Snicket is tiny. There is only Portal:Lemony Snicket/Selected character/2 and Portal:Lemony Snicket/Selected article/2, each of which has been displaying the same topic since 2012: Selected article/2[1] and Selected character/2[2].

WP:POG requires that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". Snicket is prolific writer, so a theoretical argument could be made that it is a broad topic. I disagree with that theoretical argument, but we don't need to rely on theory because we have empirical evidence that in practice this portal does not pass that test: it has not attracted maintainers, and it has not attracted readers. (In Jan–Feb 2019 the portal got only 41 pageviews per day, compared with 3,250 daily views for the head article Lemony Snicket. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:52, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per analysis by User:BrownHairedGirl. As BHG implies, it isn't worth arguing about the theory of whether a popular contemporary writer can be a broad subject area. We have seen in this particular case that the subject area has not attracted portal maintenance. The daily average of 41 pageviews for the portal is actually much better than most portals, but only 1.3% of the view rate of the main article. A portal should be a miniature Main Page, and is labor-intensive, and the labor hasn't been there for this portal. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:38, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't think this is a broad topic, there appear to be 34 articles which are in scope for the portal. WP:POG requires not only a broad topic but one with "diversified content", practically every article in scope is a book by Lemony Snicket and that doesn't make a very diverse topic. Hut 8.5 18:57, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Redundant to, and competing harmfully with, Lemony Snicket. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:12, 3 July 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.