Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Aam Aadmi Party

 __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 primarily due to the lack of content/potential content for a single political party. Number  5  7  11:25, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * PS, note to User:Dharmadhyaksha - you can any page's traffic by viewing its history, where you'll find page view stats as an option. This portal was getting around 5 hits per day. Number   5  7  11:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Aam Aadmi Party


I've never really understood the purpose of portals, so perhaps I'll learn something from this nomination. This portal, recently created but seemingly also stale, looks likely to be primarily yet another means to highlight/spam the Aam Aadmi Party via Wikipedia. AAP is notable, obviously, but I and others have had a lot of problems trying to keep over-enthusiastic supporters etc within our policies and guidelines across a range of related articles. Is this portal necessary? And what is the purpose of a portal? Sitush (talk) 18:43, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * They're meant to be landing pages for a collection of information about a topic, summarized into a single page-view. Sometimes this looks a lot like the main page overview.  Sometimes it is more customized.  They don't have to be kept fresh, but it helps for them to be completed.  If anything, this is an appropriate place to put energy into highlighting a favorite topic: it doesn't spam the main namespace. –  SJ  +  00:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. I'm still a bit mind-boggled but will try to do some reading up on the principles. If someone adds a portal to the mainspace article - Aam Aadmi Party - then they have effectively created a link to mainspace & thus attached the portal to it. That is potentially using WP for spam or promotion, of a sort.


 * How are these things supposed to be maintained? I can see that the portal might, for example, contain a list of all articles for elected AAP politicians but that is something that would be covered by a category and (sometimes) a template. If a portal is not being developed or maintained then what criteria applies regarding its continued existence? And what sort of period would be reasonable for evidence of development and/or maintenance? I'm not new to WP but you'll gather that I really never have got to grips with these things. I've seen a few in my time, always in connection with India and, alas, always created by POV pushers etc. I've no idea if this instance fits that pattern but the others (some related to "obscure" religious sects etc) were quite obviously hobbyhorses with little encyclopaedic value. Or, at least, so I thought! - Sitush (talk) 00:54, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Everyone has different opinions, obviously :-0. I think if there is something bad part in the portal, we can remove that part. However, if we see only the issue part, there would not have been Wikipedia which is one of the wonders of the world. If there is spammm part, we can remove it, something out of fact, we can correct it. I don't think we should go ahead and quickly delete it. The portal can also make others users to find missing related articles etc and start adding.It makes the articles more interesting Amol.Gaitonde (talk) 05:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Recently created portal, already has some content. — xaosflux  Talk  09:31, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hm. I could create probably a hundred portals in the next 12 hours. I wouldn't maintain any of them and the viewing stats would be near-zero. Linking content is not difficult: making it wortwhile in the long run is. How many active portals that cover current events do we have? For that matter, I wonder how we would define "active"? You'll gather that I'm still floundering a bit here ;) I'm obviously missing some sort of context: where do portals fit in relation to, say, projects? - Sitush (talk) 00:45, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Just like Sitush, I too haven't understood the purpose of portals. Yeah... they bring together all related article. But so do footer templates and categories. Someday someone needs to find out the traffic on these portals and really check if they are worth keeping. By deleting non-visited and thus useless pages we won't be harming the main encyclopedic aim of WP as the mainspace article are anyways staying and templates to surf through them are staying too. Now, if the portals are being created for more e-space; especially on a reputed host server like WP, that's promotional in nature and we shouldn't be allowing that. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 04:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as there is insufficient content for a portal specifically about this party. Criteria for speedy deletion of portals include "only a stub header article or fewer than three non-stub articles detailing subject matter that would be appropriate to present under the title of that portal." Aam Aadmi Party is not a stub, but virtually all of the articles in Category:Aam Aadmi Party politicians (which are the only other articles relating to the party) are stubs.  The portal just about survives speedy deletion, but the reality is that there is nothing of substance here yet.  This is reflected by the lack of any articles to put in the "selected article" section (apart from the party's leader, which ought to be in the empty "selected biography" section); by the lack of "DYKs" (the three sentences that are there are basically promotional phrases, with no links to articles); and by a bizarre "selected implementation" section that again looks promotional rather than anything else.  So, while it is recently created and that might be an argument for giving it more time, there isn't really much more that can be added anyway which is probably why creation has stopped with an incomplete-looking portal.  It would be better to expand Portal:Government of India and / or Portal:India to cover this party (with appropriate weight) rather than create a fresh portal for it.  Even long-established parties with many more relevant articles on WP such as the American Republicans and Democrats, or the British Conservative and Labour parties, don't have their own portals - they feed into Portal:Conservatism, Portal:Liberalism, Portal:Socialism and / or Portal:Politics instead.  So, while my view is that deletion should be without prejudice to recreation, in practice it will need a radical change in the quantity of articles relating to this party to make me think that a portal is necessary here. BencherliteTalk 10:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per Bencherlite. The scope is too narrow both to populate the portal and to assure compliance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view. Regarding the questions above about the use of portals: portals can be quite useful to help organize collaborations of WikiProjects and bring together Wikipedia's best content on a given topic (like the main page does for the whole Wiki). Thus a portal that would cover the scope of WikiProject Indian politics would be much more likely to be useful. -- ELEKHHT 06:38, 29 June 2014 (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.