Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Chronology

 __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) 03:29, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Chronology

 * Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Mini-portal abandoned since 2013.

Created in August 2008‎ by, whose last edit was in 2009.

There is no selection of topics, and the list of sub-pages at Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Chronology shows a slim set of pages:


 * Portal:Chronology/Did you know, same four items since 2008. Per WP:DYK, "The DYK section showcases new or expanded articles that are selected through an informal review process. It is not a general trivia section" ... but this eleven-your-old list loses the newness, so its only effect is as a trvia section
 * Portal:Chronology/Selected article/1, same topic (Anno Domini) since 2008
 * Portal:Chronology/Selected article/2, same topic (Ab urbe condita ) since 2013
 * Portal:Chronology/Selected article/3, same topic (Phantom time hypothesis) since 2013

Per WP:PORTAL, "Portals serve as enhanced 'Main Pages' for specific broad subjects". But this is massively less useful in every respect than the head article Chronology and its navboxes Chronology and Time.

Two newish features of the Wikimedia software means that the head article offers most of the functionality which portasl like this set out to offer. Both features are available only to ordinary readers who are not logged in, but you can test them without logging out by right-clicking on a link, and the select "open in private window" (in Firefox) or "open in incongnito window" (Chrome).
 * 1) mouseover: on any of the link, mouseover shows you the picture and the start of the lead.  So the preview-selected page-function of portals is redundant: something almost as good is available automatically on any navbox or other set of links.  Try it on head article Chronology and its navboxes Chronology and Time.
 * 2) automatic imagery galleries: clicking on an image brings up an image gallery of all the images on that page. It's full-screen, so it's actually much better than even a click-for-next image gallery on a portal.   There's no image gallery on this page, and only one image on the head article, but the technology means that the portal would not be improved by adding images.

Similar features have been available since 2015 to users of Wikipedia's Android app.

So the first two selected articles are pointless, since both are listed in Chronology, where the built-in preview is avalable.

The third selected article is Phantom time hypothesis a piece of fringe conspiracy theory nonsense which should never have been let near the portal.

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 over 70 consecutive updates, and it is time to stop wasting the time of readers by luring them to this abandoned draft with its two redundant articles and its conspiracy-fodder.

Yes, this is in theory a broad topic. Wikipedia has extensive coverage of topics related to chrinology, but this adds nothing to the bad-but-not-quite-this-bad Portal:Time. But WP:POG guides that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers", and this has not attracted maintainers.

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. But editors may prefer to delete it with prejudice. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:20, 17 May 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - As BHG says. This portal has had 15 daily pageviews, while the article Chronology has had 470 daily pageviews, but that isn't a useful comparison because many of the actual views have been of topics that were found by links or categories.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Abandoned draft of a portal, 40 subpages, created 2008-08-19 13:29:58 by User:Vanisheduser12345. Never went alive. Nothing to keep. Portal:Chronology. Pldx1 (talk) 09:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not meet the breadth-of-subject-matter requirement of the WP:POG guideline. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:56, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: questionable scope as is, unmaintained, navboxes suffice.   SITH   (talk)   11:38, 27 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.