Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Lettuce

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 Damn, and this was my favourite portal too! But the discussion appears to be unanimous. Wily D 08:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Lettuce[edit]

The scope of this portal is so tiny as to not be functional. It's very obvious that a bunch of things that use lettuce were added to flush it out, but there's no room for expansion, and there's not really enough content here for it to be worth it. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:00, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Scope of the portal is ridiculously small.--SGCM (talk) 06:17, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So what about Portal:Bacon? Andy Dingley (talk) 23:38, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a Portal:Tomatoes? :D Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe when there's a Lettuce WikiCup. ;) --SGCM (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete, are you kidding? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 13:11, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If somehow the scope expands, re our agricultural pages, then it should be recreated, but as of now its useablity is low. Outback the koala (talk) 17:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Terminate the Portal project and delete Portal:Lettuce and its subpages. Wikipedia:Portal provides the standards against which Portal:Lettuce should be measured. Portal:Lettuce doesn't help readers and/or editors navigate their way through a Wikipedia Lettuce topic area, it doesn't cover a topic that is sufficiently broad and prominent to justify it as an entry point, and the portal is not updated regularly to display different aspects of Wikipedia's content in an area, likely because the scope is so narrow that there isn't much new or different aspects of Wikipedia's content in an area. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:30, 19 September 2012 (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.