469:. Topic too narrow for a Portal. However, Portal is also now technologically redundant to other superior WP options/tools. For content, the Main Article is a far better (GA rated), larger, structured read (with mouseovers), that is actively monitored and edited. For navigation, the Navboxes on the Main Article are also far better (excellent), and by being transcluded are also kept more up to date. Finally, for a directory of FA/GA articles, the WikiProject Ainme and Manga has a non-POV’ed directory (the portal doesn’t even give this). This portal is therefore “rationally abandoned” by editors and readers in favour of better alternatives, and unlikely to recover from that situation.
416:
to have failed; (3) portal maintenance, (a) with at least two maintainers to provide backup, with a maintenance plan indicating how the portal will be maintained (b) the absence of any errors indicating lack of maintenance (including failure to list dates of death in biographies). Some indication of how any selected articles were selected (e.g., Featured
Article or Good Article status, selection by categories, etc.) is also desirable. Any portal that does not pass these common-sense tests is not useful as a navigation tool, for showcasing, or otherwise.
399:. The portal guidelines were an effort to codify common sense about portals, and we should still use common sense. It is still a matter of common sense that portals should be about broad subject areas that will attract large numbers of viewers and will attract portal maintainers. (There never was an actual guideline referring to broad subject areas, and the abstract argument that a topic is a broad subject area is both a
342:. As was usually the case with portals MFDs in that era, there was agreement that the portal was unmaintained, but consensus not to delete. Nine years later, it is still unmaintained, and community consensus has changed against retaining long-abandoned portals in the unevidenced hope that someday someone might star maintaining it again. (The essay
508:, like an article is, since they are for navigation instead. It is therefore improper to use rationales meant for keeping articles to argue that this failed navigation device should be kept. There is no reason to think that hoped-for improvements and long-term maintenance will ever materialize anyway,
415:
claim that a topic is broad) (the number of articles in appropriate categories is an indication of potential breadth of coverage, but actual breadth of coverage should be required); (2) a large number of viewers, preferably at least 100 a day, but any portal with fewer than 25 a day can be considered
520:
a consensus to keep all portals; instead they are to be evaluated individually, as is being done here. Content forks are worthless, since they go out of date, preserve old and inferior versions of article content, add pointlessly to the maintenance burden, and are vandalism magnets; therefore they
503:
per nominator, per the delete votes above, and per the fact that there is no good reason to keep such a portal as this. Low page views and the poor condition it is in mean zero value is added by such a portal. There is no policy or guideline which suggests this portal should exist. Portals
92:
168:
390:
were never approved by a consensus of the
Knowledge (XXG) community, and we have never had real portal guidelines. We should therefore use common sense, which is discussed in Knowledge (XXG) in the essay section
258:
remove the backlinks? I have an AWB setup which allows me to easily replace them with links to the next most specific portal(s), without creating duplicate entries. In this case I think the best target is
335:
339:
87:
317:
311:
per nominator. This portal has a narrow topic (a single anime.magna franchise), low page views, and has been long abandoned apart from the usual formatting tweaks.
512:
if promised or done at the last minute just to stave off deletion. Simple assertions that the topic is broad enough are entirely subjective; rather, that it is
121:
403:
and meaningless.) Common sense imposes at least a three-part test for portals to satisfy common sense: (1) a broad subject area, demonstrated
117:
360:
281:
233:
534:
495:
478:
461:
428:
365:
303:
286:
238:
214:
188:
69:
17:
109:
516:
broad enough is demonstrated by the lack of pageviews and maintenance. The community's consensus not to delete all portals is
64:
551:
40:
324:
299:
450:
161:. Sesshomaru abruptly stopped editing in November 2010, and UzEE hasn't been regularly active since at least 2008.
424:
356:
277:
229:
474:
457:
521:
should not be saved. I support replacement of links rather than redirection, to avoid surprising our readers.
113:
295:
164:
Fifteen selected articles, none of which were extensively updated since 2007 outside of routine maintenance.
439:
260:
202:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below.
547:
36:
530:
491:
420:
380:
347:
268:
220:
196:
172:
470:
453:
175:
that even internationally popular anime franchises aren't broad enough to merit their own portals.
104:
75:
343:
452:). I just checked all of the "selected articles" and most don't even have articles anymore. -
443:
210:
184:
58:
392:
387:
546:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's
522:
487:
154:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's
316:
I looked to see if there was a WikiProject to support it, and found that there is a
405:
396:
147:
143:
376:
264:
206:
180:
53:
158:
411:
400:
157:, who only maintained it sporadically for the rest of the year alongside
383:. Should have been deleted in 2010, and still should be deleted.
331:
542:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
419:
Not many articles, low readership, no maintenance for years.
332:
searched the project's talk archive for "Portal:Dragon Ball"
250:. I don't want in any way to prejudge the outcome ... but
93:
Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Dragon Ball (2nd nomination)
447:
321:
129:
125:
142:
Average daily pageviews in the first half of 2019 are
327:, because the last post on its talk page was in 2016.
325:
Template:WikiProject status#Usage:_Inactive_projects
254:
you close this discussion as delete, please can you
409:by a breadth of selected articles (not only by an
294:Pop culture portals are a privilege, not a right.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
554:). No further edits should be made to this page.
340:WP:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Dragon Ball
8:
318:WP:WikiProject Anime and manga/Dragon Ball
88:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Dragon Ball
201:I think the backlinks would work best at
167:I think it's already been established in
85:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion
80:
7:
48:The result of the discussion was:
179:Time to just delete this already.
24:
150:for the parent article (.428%).
486:this worthless portal forever.
84:All prior XfDs for this page:
1:
535:04:36, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
496:21:28, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
479:16:00, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
462:13:34, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
429:22:39, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
366:23:35, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
320:. However, I just tagged it
304:23:02, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
287:20:16, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
239:20:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
215:20:12, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
189:20:12, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
70:05:10, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
574:
334:, and got only one hit: a
83:
544:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
169:the deletion discussion
153:Created in mid-2007 by
440:Portal:Anime and manga
261:Portal:Anime and manga
203:Portal:Anime and manga
146:for the portal versus
248:Note to closing admin
381:User:BrownHairedGirl
395:and in the article
263:, as suggested by @
138:Neglected portal.
105:Portal:Dragon Ball
76:Portal:Dragon Ball
444:Portal:Evangelion
388:Portal Guidelines
375:as per nominator
364:
346:applies here). --
296:Mark Schierbecker
285:
237:
100:
99:
68:
565:
393:Use Common Sense
355:
353:
351:
323:as inactive per
276:
274:
272:
228:
226:
224:
200:
134:
133:
81:
56:
34:
573:
572:
568:
567:
566:
564:
563:
562:
558:
552:deletion review
506:are not content
442:as was done to
421:Robert McClenon
349:
348:
336:2010 MFD notice
270:
269:
222:
221:
197:BrownHairedGirl
194:
107:
103:
79:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
571:
569:
560:
557:
556:
538:
537:
498:
481:
471:Britishfinance
464:
454:Knowledgekid87
433:
432:
431:
417:
369:
368:
328:
313:
312:
306:
289:
244:
243:
242:
241:
177:
176:
173:Portal:Pokémon
165:
162:
151:
136:
135:
98:
97:
96:
95:
90:
78:
73:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
570:
561:
555:
553:
549:
545:
540:
539:
536:
532:
528:
527:
526:
519:
515:
511:
507:
502:
499:
497:
493:
489:
485:
482:
480:
476:
472:
468:
465:
463:
459:
455:
451:
448:
445:
441:
437:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
414:
413:
408:
407:
402:
398:
394:
389:
386:The intended
385:
384:
382:
378:
374:
371:
370:
367:
362:
358:
354:
345:
341:
337:
333:
329:
326:
322:
319:
315:
314:
310:
307:
305:
301:
297:
293:
290:
288:
283:
279:
275:
266:
262:
257:
253:
249:
246:
245:
240:
235:
231:
227:
218:
217:
216:
212:
208:
204:
198:
193:
192:
191:
190:
186:
182:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
156:
152:
149:
145:
141:
140:
139:
131:
127:
123:
119:
115:
111:
106:
102:
101:
94:
91:
89:
86:
82:
77:
74:
72:
71:
66:
63:
60:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
559:
543:
541:
525:-Crossroads-
524:
523:
517:
513:
509:
505:
500:
483:
466:
435:
410:
406:a posteriori
404:
397:common sense
372:
308:
291:
255:
251:
247:
178:
137:
61:
49:
47:
31:
28:
377:User:ToThAc
219:I agree. --
488:Catfurball
352:HairedGirl
273:HairedGirl
225:HairedGirl
155:Sesshomaru
548:talk page
37:talk page
550:or in a
436:Redirect
412:a priori
401:handwave
361:contribs
344:WP:GODOT
282:contribs
234:contribs
39:or in a
118:history
501:Delete
484:Delete
467:Delete
373:Delete
357:(talk)
338:about
309:Delete
292:Delete
278:(talk)
265:ToThAc
230:(talk)
207:ToThAc
181:ToThAc
54:JJMC89
50:delete
350:Brown
271:Brown
223:Brown
126:watch
122:links
16:<
531:talk
510:even
492:talk
475:talk
458:talk
425:talk
379:and
300:talk
267:. --
211:talk
185:talk
171:for
159:UzEE
148:3735
130:logs
114:talk
110:edit
52:. —
518:not
514:not
438:to
359:• (
280:• (
256:not
232:• (
533:)
494:)
477:)
460:)
449:,
427:)
330:I
302:)
252:if
213:)
205:.
187:)
144:16
128:|
124:|
120:|
116:|
112:|
529:(
490:(
473:(
456:(
446:(
423:(
363:)
298:(
284:)
236:)
209:(
199::
195:@
183:(
132:)
108:(
67:)
65:C
62:·
59:T
57:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.