Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Heathenism

 __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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 00:05, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Heathenism


Old abandoned non-portal on a narrow topic. Recommend outright deletion.

This portal was created in April 2008 by, who hasn't edited for over ten years. It has no listed maintainer, and as far as I can has not been updated since 2011 other than in the usual drive-by tweaks ... with 3 exceptions, noted below.

It's a static page, with about 6 boxes whose content is in subpages: see Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Heathenism. AFAICS, most were created in 2008 and expanded by an IP in 2011, and the abandoned. However in 2015, Portal:Heathenism/Organizations was rightly stipped of a WP:LINKFARM which had been built there in 2011.

Alarmingly, I spotted this 2017 edit from which makes negative allegations about an unnamed but identifiable individual. I have removed that content per WP:BLP but it is an alarming illustration of a point I raised earlier today in response to @SmokeyJoe's nomination of MFD:Portal:Donald Trump, viz. that the almost unwatched sub-pages of multi-page portals are a highly vulnerable to this sort of attack. I think it's time to phase them out.

Note also that in 2015, User:Bloodofox blannked Portal:Heathenism/Featured Deity with the edit summary Unabashed WP:SYNTH promoting a personal view. Unsalvageable. The last substantive edit before that was in 2011, so for 4 years this under-scrutinised sub-page had expounding unacceptable content.

Oddly, this portal has references (though not for the BLP vio). I suspect that's probably a good thing, but I note it as unusual.

Overall, it's not a portal, just a poor-quality, outdated content fork of the featured-class head article Heathenry (new religious movement). If kept, it should be renamed to match, but I don't see anything here worth keeping. Everything this page does, the head article does better.

I checked the Category:Germanic neopaganism see how broad the topic is. I took all the pages in Category:Germanic neopaganism+subcats, and excluded the 41 pages in Category:Adherents of Germanic neopaganism, because mere adherence does not necessarily make those people suitable for inclusion in a portal. That left 51 articles, of which only 8 have been assessed as FA, GA, A, B, C or list-class. Even if some of the adherents did turn out to be suitable for inclusion in a portal, that still leaves a topic too narrow to satisfy 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".

So I recommend just delete it. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:47, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - The analysis by BHG is sound. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:10, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Old draft of a portal, 14 subpages, created 2008-04-20 21:52:52 by User:Esimal. ONE of each. This draft is below the existence level.  Portal:Heathenism. Pldx1 (talk) 14:02, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Paganism is a broad topic that could form the basis of a portal, but I don't know how exactly "heathenism" fits into that wider picture. I do know there is quite a bit of controversy between proponents of different pagan disciplines, which seems to have caused trouble here. As this is a static unmaintained portal, I have no problems with deleting it. No comment on the broader topic that the nominator raises here, which should be debated in a wider forum than a couple of MfDs. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:27, 6 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.