Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Angola


 * 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 Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 11:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Portal:Angola
Incomplete portal, only content is the intro. -- B (talk) 06:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Keep and expand -Don't see any reason why it couldn't be filled out. It is a country after all. Dr. Blofeld      White cat 13:52, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you volunteering? The issue with these portals is that they are malformed and incomplete, not that someone couldn't reasonably create a portal on the subject.  Stubbed articles make sense - that's how content is developed.  But in order for a portal to be a "good stub", it needs to have at least an intro, a 2-3 items of content, and no permanently redlinked sections.  This portal has nothing but an intro&mdash;it is the functional equivalent of a stubbed article that is nothing but an incomplete sentence. --B (talk) 01:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Red-linky portal, not enough content to identify it as a portal. —macy 17:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep What's the point of deleting a portal of a country? We are not talking about a developed country where people have the time and resources to invest time in Wikipedia (WP:CSB). I think this project should be open to anyone, by having this empty portal we are guiding the way for somebody in the future to take up the task. I try to help with the portal but my actions where useless. --J.Mundo (talk) 18:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I've already started work on it. It is a country after all! (LOL) --Wiki User 68 (talk) 02:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep (laughter) I've just read J.Mundo (talk) comments above (didn't read 'em before) and realised he'd got it perfectly right! That somebody was me!! (more laughter) Please don't delete--Wiki User 68 (talk) 20:33, 20 February 2009 (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.