Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Crusades

 __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) 04:54, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Crusades


Neglected portal.


 * Eighteen selected articles.

Fifteen were created between March and September 2008. Three others were created in February 2010. There only updates were:

Selected article/5 received a minor update in July 2015.

Selected article/6 was vandalized in April 2009, but went unnoticed until an IP reverted in August 2012.

In November 2015 an editor added apparently contentious material to Selected article/12, which has remained live ever since. The current lede of the Reconquista does not deal as decisively with the Christian—Islam dichotomy debate, but that does not help the fact that the entry now contradicts itself.

Selected article/16 was automated in November 2016 August 2019. Before this the page had been entirely a disambiguation page since 2010. I am incredulous that the creator did not notice this.


 * Eleven selected bios.

The first nine were created March/September 2008. No updates.

Two created in February 2010. Selected biography/10 received a minor update in July 2005. The other was not updated.

Mark Schierbecker (talk) 07:47, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nom. This portal has been abandoned for over nine years, save for some one-off updates over the years by passing editors. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of readers and maintainers. This decrepit portal has had over nine years of no steady maintainers and it had a very low 19 views per day from January 1 to June 30 2019 (while its head article Crusades had 4,857 views per day in the same period.)


 * I also have serious WP:OR concerns with this portal, @Mark Schierbecker. The biography for Vald the Impaler has sat virtually untouched since it was created in 2008, but far more alarming is the firm statement that he was the inspiration for Bram Stoker's Dracula, which is dubious fancruft. As his biography in the Encyclopedia Britannica states, while some scholars do believe he inspired the character, there is no concrete evidence of that. (There is no mention of the crusades either - does he even actually qualify for this portal?.) While there is firm proof that someone by the name/title Dracula was in the historical account the author drew inspiration from, nothing is known about that Dracula. Vlad III wasn't the only Dracula from the era, yet for over a decade this portal has been definitively telling readers he was the inspiration of this well known character.


 * Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I oppose re-creation, as over nine years of hard evidence shows the Crusades are not a broad enough topic under WP:POG to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 (talk) 10:03, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Analysis of Military History Portals
The following table shows information about all of the recently nominated military and war portals, as well as Portal:History, which is a main page portal, and Portal:War (to which Portal:Military History redirects).

As can be seen, none of the portals that have been nominated have more than 30 daily pageviews. None of the portals that have been nominated have a current maintainer or have been recently maintained.

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:44, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete – There is no short-term reason to expect that a re-creation of this portal will address the problems. Any proposed re-creation of this portal using a more modern design, and taking into account the failures of many portals, can go to Deletion Review.
 * Note to closing admin. I don't want in any way to prejudge the outcome ... but if you close this discussion as delete, please can you not remove the backlinks?  I have an AWB setup which allows me to easily replace them with links to the next most specific portal(s) (in this case Portal:Christianity and Portal:War), without creating duplicate entries. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 16:09, 31 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.