Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Complementary and alternative medicine

 __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. ‑Scottywong | spout _ 02:52, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Complementary and alternative medicine


Stagnant portal that has barely changed since 2007. Five selected articles, five pictures and five bios. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 03:47, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete this junk portal.Catfurball (talk) 22:56, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete This portal has been essentially abandoned for over decade, except for a large one-off of cutting in 2017 by a passing editor. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of maintainers and readers. This portal has had over 10 years of no steady maintainers and it had a very low 13 views per day in June and July 2019 (despite the head article Alternative Medicine having 982 views per day in the same period). Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I am strongly against allowing recreation, as this subject clearly isn't broad enough to need a portal. Newshunter12 (talk) 03:13, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator and per NH12.
 * I just checked Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Complementary and alternative_medicine, and examined all 5 selected articles and all 5 selected biogs. Every one of them was created in 2007, and since then every one of them has since had only minor drive-by tweaks such as dismabiguation, and a page move.
 * I sampled other pages, and I see no evidence of any ongoing maintenance. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 10:51, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Uses forked subpages, which are a failed design that most heritage portals share, but which make the lack of maintenance even worse. An editor who wants to create a new portal with an improved architecture will know where Deletion Review is. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as per analysis by User:Newshunter12. Very little maintenance since established in 2007.  Since this portal lists two associated portals, the metrics for the three portals, for the period of 1 Jan 19-28 Feb 19, are:
 * Note that there are redirects from, , . Those backlinks will need attention if the portal is deleted. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 16:09, 18 August 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.