Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Geneva

 __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) 08:40, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Geneva


Abandoned, low-readership mini-portal on the Swiss city of Geneva. Created in 2011, but still only 5 selected articles, all textually unchanged since 2011. Multiple failures of WP:POG.

WP:POG requires that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". This fails each of three three tests:
 * 1)  Broad topic . The portals' intro makes it explicitly about city of Geneva, which has a population of only 200,000.  Including the suburbs brings the tally to 500,000. Even the broader agglomération du Grand Genève (which includes part of France) has a population of less than a million. The experience of data examined at many dozens of MFDs on geographical portals is that regions or cities with population under a million rarely achieve high levels or readership or maintainers, and that several million is needed to get a decent chance of viability.
 * 2)  High readership . Clear fail. The portal's January–June 2019 daily average of only 10 views per day is trivially low.
 * 3)  Lots of of maintainers . Clear fail. The minimal level of content is unchanged 2011, apart from formatting in 2013

Additionally, note that WP:POG guides that "the portal should be associated with a WikiProject (or have editors with sufficient interest)[1] to help ensure a supply of new material for the portal and maintain the portal." There is no WikiProject Geneva, so no group of editors focused on the portal topic.

Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Geneva shows a modest set of sub-pages, but it is misleading, because 9 of the "selected foo" pages ate blanks, presumbaly created to fcailitae an expansion which never happened: Portal:Geneva/Selected picture/7, /8, /9, /10, plus Portal:Geneva/Selected article/6, /7, /8, /9, /10.

The pages with actual content are Portal:Geneva/Selected article/1, /2, /3, /4, and /5. Each of them was created in 2011, and since then each of them has been edited only to wrap them in a template.

The portal was created in May 2011‎ by. Since late 2006, the lead of WP:POG has said "Do not expect other editors to maintain a portal you create" ... and in this case, WhisperToMe did not maintain it. Their last edits to any portal were in December 2011. I will AGF that WhisperToMe was unaware of guidance, but portals do need maintenance, and this one has not been maintained.

I also oppose recreation. The evidence of the last 8 years is crystal-clear that editors don't want to maintain this portal. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:32, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per the thorough and highly detailed investigation of the portal by the nominator,  Brown HairedGirl . Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. It's a useless time suck that lures readers to abandoned junk. I also oppose re-creation, as eight years of hard evidence shows Geneva is not a broad enough topic under WP:POG to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 (talk) 07:18, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, with thanks for the analysis by User:BrownHairedGirl. Too few articles, too few readers, too little maintenance (none is too little).   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.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:37, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin. If you close this 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:Switzerland), without creating duplicate entries. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 22:51, 25 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.