Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Tornadoes/Recent tornado outbreaks

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: no consensus. The nature of this portal subpage requires that it be updated relatively frequently, whether that is manually or automatically updated. Since the subpage is about "recent" tornadoes, it serves only to confuse and misinform the reader if it shows events from the distant past. The subpage was published in December 2021, and it was dutifully updated roughly once every month until June 2022, about 7 months total. Then, about 4.5 months went by with no update until October 2022. After the October update, about 6 months went by with no update until April 2023, when this MfD was started.

All this is to say: while there is currently no clear consensus to delete this portal subpage, it will almost certainly be deleted if it goes through another long period with no updates. Therefore, I would encourage the portal maintainers to devise a system that guarantees regular updates of the page. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 04:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Tornadoes/Recent tornado outbreaks

Unsourced and non-notable tornado events that are not worthy of being housed in a separate portal. This low visibility page will ultimately be doomed to being outdated due to lack of frequent updates. United States Man (talk) 22:05, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well delete the whole portal while you're at it. If this is the route you wish to take, then the whole thing needs to be deleted rather than just one specific subpage. The first concern you mention is a WP:SOFIXIT issue and the second is something that should be discussed to see what should be mentioned there. I see the third issue more or less as a reason to delete the whole portal right here and now despite it being WP:CRYSTALBALL in nature since there was an update drought from October until yesterday. That is unless people want to put the time and effort into maintaining it. Noah^Talk 22:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@United States Man: Please see the above and consider the implication. Either delete the whole thing as has been done with many other portals or see if others want to maintain it. Noah^Talk 22:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Your second point about the page being "low visibility" and not having updates is part of WP:NEGLECT and WP:NOBODYREADSIT, a thing to avoid in deletion discussions. I put low visibility in quotation marks as it is the literally second thing down on Portal:Tornadoes—it's anything but low visibility. Also, where did you get the idea that the events are non-notable? The three most recent events all caused fatalities and are mentioned on Tornadoes of 2023. Your point about them being unsourced is reasonable, but I have an idea: add sources. If your concerned about unsourced content on portals (even though DYK is unsourced), then add the sources. Fix it, don't delete it. Infinity (talk - contributions) 22:59, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Generally the burden is on the persons maintaining the portal to provide sources, not on the person who visits the shabby portal and finds that it hasn't been maintained in a good long while. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Deletion is not for cleanup, but sometimes pages are identified which need repair, such as this manually maintenanced subsection of this portal. Ideally this should be automated, like the DYK. Significant tornado-related events would normally appear in the "In The News" section of the main page. I'm wondering if there's an automated way to flag such recent events to automatically appear. BusterD (talk) 01:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless it is seriously brought up to par. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Thanks to BusterD for alerting me to this discussion. Although most portals now update themselves automatically through transclusion, some portals still require manual maintenance, as do some parts of otherwise self-maintaining portals. Clearly, a subpage such as "Recent tornado outbreaks" will quickly become outdated unless someone chooses to update it regularly. Options include replacing it by something like a category listing of Tornados of {{CURRENTYEAR}}, which could be updated automatically by a bot via User:JL-Bot/Project content or similar. Obviously, a technical issue on one subpage isn't a valid excuse to delete the entire portal. Certes (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WaltCip. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 17:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this subpage in its current condition, because it is unsourced and so fails verifiability.
Keep, with the understanding that the items must continue to be referenced. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- - This page, a subpage in portal space, is outward-facing, and will be seen by readers who view the portal. This is just as much part of the encyclopedia that is seen by readers as an article.
  - Providing a reference for each event mentioned on the subpage ~~would be~~was a Heymann improvement.
  - The portal is not being considered for deletion, but I will provide some data about it.
  - In 2022, the portal had an average of 16 daily pageviews, as opposed to 2167 daily pageviews for the lead article Tornado.
  - This portal has a modern architecture using transclusion, with a total of 275 articles in various categories that may be randomly transcluded.
  - This portal does not have a very good viewership record, but is a good example of how portals should be designed. The portal developer should in particular be credited for a thorough job of identifying articles that may be randomly transcluded.
  - The portal developer should either provide references for the current events, or transclude a news article, or put something else in the space for this subpage.
  - If the portal were nominated for deletion, I would say to Keep it. The portal developer does not need to sulk about the criticism of one page.

Robert McClenon (talk) 05:04, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This subpage is a specialised equivalent of the Did you know..., In the news or On this day section of the Main Page. It applies the same standards of sourcing and verifiability which have been accepted there without question for 20 years: sources are in the linked articles, and verification is a simple matter of following the links. Certes (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is meant to be an ITN section for tornadoes. Noah^Talk 15:16, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It appears that I was looking at the page history, and I saw that previous versions of the ITN page had been unreferenced, and mistakenly concluded that the current version was also unreferenced. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Robert McClenon.—Alalch E. 20:08, 5 May 2023 (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.