Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Prostitution

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: keep. MER-C 16:40, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Prostitution[edit]

Delete Recreated via multi-page move from draft space, after the previous version was deleted here at MfD for being based on a single navbox. But still does not meet the breadth-of-subject-area requirement of the WP:POG guideline. A subtopic of the broader Portal:Sex work, itself a subtopic of the broader Portal:Human sexuality. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep as was established a month ago that both Portal:Sex work and Portal:Prostitution were broad enough subjects to have their own portals (see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Sex work), both of which are sub-topics of Portal:Sexuality. With well over 1,000 articles on the subject, the breadth-of-subject-area requirement of the WP:POG are far exceeded. The deletion of the previous version of this portal, along with nearly 1,400 other portals, was without prejudice to its recreation, the past history is therefore irrelevant. Another vexatious nomination for portal deletion.

Edit to add, following alteration of the nomination, being a sub-topic of broader topics is also irrelevant. Following that logic we'd only have a handful of portals, as virtually every topic can be viewed as a sub-topic of something else. I can find no guidelines that suggest a portal shouldn't exist if it is a sub-topic of another portal. Precedent suggest the opposite is the case, for example Portal:Chess -> Portal:Strategy games -> Portal:Games or Portal:Formula One -> Portal:Motorsport -> Portal:Sports --John B123 (talk) 07:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural Close and Trout to both the originator and the nominator, for creating this portal while we are still trying to get rid of a portal plague by the portal platoon, and by raising the issue of a new portal when we don't have working guidelines on portals and won't until the first job of getting rid of the spam is done. Whether to keep or delete this one, which should not have been created this week, should be considered in one or two months, after we have acceptable portal guidelines. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment we have WP:POG which now need to be tightened based on MfD results, but anyway this topic would meet any new POG unless all portals are deleted. I'm disappointed to see a recreation so soon after deletion but I know that this editor has a passion for the topic. Legacypac (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree (this is no Portal:Mathematics), but obviously would be fine with re-draftifying (along with its subpages, natch) as an alternative to deletion while we sorted out the specifics of WP:POG and where the breadth-of-subject-area line should be drawn. What I have a problem with is the claim of incumbency, along the lines of "this portal exists, so it has to remain in the Portal: space while we are working on the guidelines": that's exactly what the spammers argued until very recently. UnitedStatesian (talk)

Speedy keep per @Robert McClenon. Both the creation and the MFD nomination are inappropriate while portals still need new guidelines. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep - Although I believe that Portal:Sex work contemplates the theme, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Mass-created portals based on a single navbox was clear "No prejudice against creating properly curated portals".Guilherme Burn (talk) 21:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Nom's rationale makes no sense, as I understood that multi-page portals were okay again. --Auric talk 10:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They are, of course, provided their subject is sufficiently broad and they are not redundant to another portal. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Maintained, 116 subpages, ---------- created 2019-04-15 17:55:18 by User:John B123, maintained by User: John B123 : Portal:Prostitution. Pldx1 (talk) 15:59, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – A broad subject area as evidenced by Category:Prostitution and subcategories therein, such as Category:Prostitution by country, which has lots of content in and of itself. Also a decent amount of recognized content. The topic meets Wikipedia:Portal/Guidelines, which qualifies a standalone portal. Also, the previous MfD discussion, where this was included, was closed as delete with "no prejudice against creating properly curated portals". As such, the creation of this new portal was not inappropriate whatsoever. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:36, 28 April 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.