Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Forestry

 __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) 07:39, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Forestry

 * – (View MfD)

The four selected articles, four selected bios and three DYK were last updated in June 2013. All news items from 2013. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 06:10, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nom. This junk portal has been abandoned for over six years, and is 12 articles short of POG's minimum of 20. Since late 2006, the lead of WP:POG has said "Do not expect other editors to maintain a portal you create" ... and this one has not been maintained by Rougieux, who dumped it less then three hours after creating it in May 2012, never touched portal space again, and has made five Wikipedia edits after 2016. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of readers and maintainers. This portal has had over six years of no maintainers and it had a very low 23 views per day from January 1 to June 30 2019 (while the head article Forestry had 523 views per day in the same period, which is not enough to sustain a portal). This is a dramatic long-term decline from the 60 views per day it had from July 1 to Dec. 30 2015.
 * POG also states portals should be associated with a wikiproject, but WikiProject Forestry is only semi-active, and the portal was last mentioned on the talk page in 2013. The only discussion ever was in 2012, where the creator announced the creation of the portal and asked if anyone was interested in contributing, which drew a single editor's interest, but they didn't know how to edit the portal and got no response. The portal's old name since 2013, Portal:Forest, is still what's used on the projects main page. 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 six years of hard evidence shows Forestry is not a broad enough topic to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 (talk) 07:23, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Robert McClenon (talk) 14:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Another abandoned portal. Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Forestry appears to show 10 biographies and 5 articles, but there are only 4 biographies and 4 articles, updated by User:Northamerica1000 in 2013 but not maintained since then.  Are the empty subpages good, as slots for expansion, or are they puffery, an attempt to look bigger?  It doesn't matter.  Low and declining readership (and declining readership appears to be true of portals in general) of too few unmaintained articles.   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, and including a maintenance plan (since lack of maintenance is a problem with most 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:Trees), without creating duplicate entries. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 04:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, and oppose re-creation. Low readership + almost zero maintenance = clear fail of 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". -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 04:55, 11 September 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.