Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Chicago Metro Area Portals

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:09, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Chicago Metro Area Portals


Mass created portals - because they have a nav box. Duplicate scope to Portal:Chicago which should really be about the Chicagoland metro area. Featured articles harvested off the nav box include a bunch of high schools, a mall and lovely examples like "The following list includes notable people who were born or have lived in Aurora, Illinois. For a similar list organized alphabetically by last name, see the category page."

The selected image for me on Aurora is a map "Location of Illinois in the United States" There is a lack of scope here when you exclude low importance pages like all the high schools, but maybe a reasonable portal could be built for the larger suburbs here but this is not a reasonable effort. Effort would be better placed into expanding and improving Portal:Chicago into something that showcases the metro area. Legacypac (talk) 17:37, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. An automated portal only worth of an automated deletion. Pldx1 (talk) 18:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Neutral - Bundling towns in different states in the same metropolis may confuse things. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * What everyone considers Chicago spans 3-4 states. Legacypac (talk) 22:44, 6 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete all. Unused, drive-by portalspam, each based on a single navbox.  This makes the portals merely a fork of the navbox, with much less utility than the navbox because:
 * the navbox displays a full list of the articles, but the portal displays only one page at a time.
 * the navbox should be present on every page in the set. The portal always requires navigation to a separate page.
 * The topic's main page works much better as a navigational hub, because it includes:
 * both the topic navbox and any related navboxes
 * A full summary of the topic rather than an excerpt of the lede.
 * I have checked the page histories. All these pages were created in seconds by the now-topic-banned portalspammer @The Transhumanist, simply by entering {{subst:quick portal}} or one of it analogues. None of them has since received any attention other than AWB or bot edits. So there is no reason to assume that there is anyone ready or willing to improve and maintain these portals.
 * And the pageview data is dire: for the firts three months of 2109, there is a combined daily median of |Portal:East_Chicago,_Indiana|Portal:Gary,_Indiana|Portal:Hammond,_Indiana|Portal:Arlington_Heights,_Illinois 4 pageviews per day. That's a median of 4 in total, so less than one daily pageview each.  That's barely above the background noise created by bots and webcarwlers; it may indicate that no human at all has actually read any of these pages.
 * Noe that even that data is distorted by a single-day spike for Portal:Aurora, illinois on 16 February. If we take Aurora out of the comparison, the picture is even more stark: |Portal:Gary,_Indiana|Portal:Hammond,_Indiana|Portal:Arlington_Heights,_Illinois see here. That shows only instances when any of the remaining 4 portals exceeded 4 views/day, and only 6 instances of nay single portal getting 4 views/day.
 * Yet again, we have clear evidence: readers do not want these bloated navboxes. They rightly understand that the head article is a better navigational hub. - Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:38, 12 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete all 5 as not meeting the breadth-of-subject-area requirements of the WP:POG guideline. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:41, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 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.