Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Brunei

 __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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Brunei


Abandoned micro-portal on a small country.

Created in October 2017‎ by, who also created the subpages, and then moved on to other things. WP:NOTCOMPULSORY, so that's fine.

However, nobody else did anything with the portal apart from formatting tweaks.

So in January 2019‎, @The Transhumanist converted it to an automate format which built its "selected articles" list solely from the navbox Brunei topics. That made it a just a bloated and redundant fork of the navbox. (For a full explanation of why this type of portal is redundant, see the two mass deletions of similar portals: one, and two, where there was overwhelming consensus of a very high turnout to delete a total of 2,555 such portals).

So on 14 May 2019‎ I reverted to the pre-automated format.

But there is still nothing there. Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Brunei shows nothing except Portal:Brunei/Selected picture and Portal:Brunei/Selected article, both unchanged since the day they were created.

WP:POG says that unless automated, the content selection should be updated monthly, or preferably weekly. Even on a monthly cycle, this pseudo-portal has missed 20 consecutive updates.

Brunei might in theory be a broad topic. It's a sovereign country, though with a population of only 423,000. I haven't checked how extensive Wikipedia's coverage is. But in practice, it has not the WP:POG requirement that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". This has not attracted maintainers, and in Jan–Feb 2019 it got only 9 pageviews per day.

This abandoned draft is just a waste of the time of any readers who are lured here. There is no reason to expect that it will some day magically attract magical editors who will want to resurrect it. If any editor does want to build a real portal, they will be far better off without this outmoded set of content-forked subpages; instead they should build a modern low-maintenance portal without content-forked sub-pages, perhaps as with Portal:Mecklenburg-Vorpommern or Portal:Geophysics.

So I propose that this portal and its sub-pages be deleted per WP:TNT, without prejudice to recreating a curated portal in accordance with whatever criteria the community may have agreed at that time. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - The portal has 9 daily pageviews. The head article has 4504 daily pageviews.  The 500:1 ratio isn't that unusual, but illustrates that useless portals are useless.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - The choice is keeping either of two types of useless portals, or deletion, without prejudice to a future useful portal. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: portals require active maintenance.  SITH   (talk)   11:50, 17 May 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.