Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Hertfordshire

 __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) 01:05, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Hertfordshire

 * – (View MfD)

This portal should be deleted for the following reasons:
 * There is no maintainer for this portal (the creator of this portal User:WaitingForConnection did not edit Wikipedia since December 2014)
 * The pageviews for this portal are very low (an average of 4 pageviews per day in the last 30 days and an average of 5 pageviews per day for this year whereas the main article Hertfordshire received over 37,000 pageviews in the last 30 days
 * There are seven selected pictures at Portal:Hertfordshire/Selected picture and there have been no additions since 2009
 * There are only 27 GA class articles about Hertfordshire at Category:GA-Class Hertfordshire articles and 4 FA class articles about Hertfordshire at Category:FA-Class Hertfordshire articles and there are no A class articles about Hertfordshire at Category:A-Class Hertfordshire articles
 * There are 9 selected biographies at Portal:Hertfordshire/Selected biography with no additions since 2009
 * There are seven selected articles at Portal:Hertfordshire/Selected article with no additions since 2009
 * There are only 7 sets of DYKs at Portal:Hertfordshire/Did you know and no updates to the DYKs apart from layout changes in 2012
 * My detailed analysis of this portal shows that it is very abandoned Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:47, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Another thing to note with this portal is that there hasn't been any discussion about this portal at Portal talk:Hertfordshire ever. The backlinks can be changed to Portal:England. Pkbwcgs (talk) 11:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nominator User:Pkbwcgs. In the first half of 2019, the portal had an average of |6 daily pageviews, while the head article had 1199, which is consistent with the figures cited by the nominator.
 * Note: There is another county in England with almost the same name, but its portal was already deleted.  Errors involving almost-identically named places are easy and should be avoided.  In the United States, multiple counties with the same name in different states are common.
 * The DYKs are not a reason to keep a portal. In this case, they are not an obvious reason to delete the portal, but there are other obvious reasons.
 * The intended Portal Guidelines were never approved by a consensus of the Wikipedia community, and we have never had real portal guidelines. We should therefore use common sense, which is discussed in Wikipedia in the essay section Use Common Sense and in the article common sense.  The portal guidelines were an effort to codify common sense about portals, and we should still use common sense.  It is still a matter of common sense that portals should be about broad subject areas that will attract large numbers of viewers and will attract portal maintainers.  (There never was an actual guideline referring to broad subject areas, and the abstract argument that a topic is a broad subject area is both a handwave and meaningless.)  Common sense imposes at least a three-part test for portals to satisfy common sense:  (1) a broad subject area, demonstrated a posteriori by a breadth of selected articles (not only by an a priori claim that a topic is broad) (the number of articles in appropriate categories is an indication of potential breadth of coverage, but actual breadth of coverage should be required); (2) a large number of viewers, preferably at least 100 a day, but any portal with fewer than 25 a day can be considered to have failed; (3) portal maintenance, (a) with at least two maintainers to provide backup, with a maintenance plan indicating how the portal will be maintained (b) the absence of any errors indicating lack of maintenance (including failure to list dates of death in biographies).  Some indication of how any selected articles were selected (e.g., Featured Article or Good Article status, selection by categories, etc.) is also desirable.  Any portal that does not pass these common-sense tests is not useful as a navigation tool, for showcasing, or otherwise.
 * The viewing of this portal has been seen to be consistently no more than noise. Readers who are interested in the county can view the article Hertfordshire.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing that the similar name you're referring to is Portal:Herefordshire (which was deleted at the request of its creator). I don't see the name as a problem here. DexDor(talk) 21:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment to User:DexDor - Yes. I don't see the name as a problem either.  I was just mentioning the similarity, which should have and does have a hatnote on the articles.  We don't have a Portal:Montgomery County either.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:59, 19 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as too niche a topic to justify/sustain a portal. Incidentally the current portal doesn't display well on a mobile phone (in Desktop View or in Mobile View). DexDor(talk) 21:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete this unwanted county portal forever.Catfurball (talk) 16:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nom and @Robert McClenon. Another low view decade long abandoned portal on a narrow topic. Counties don't need portals. Newshunter12 (talk) 17:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 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 a bot (BHGbot 4) which allows me to easily replace them with links to the next most specific portal(s), without creating duplicate entries.
 * In this case I think that the appropriate new links would be to Portal:England. Alternative suggestions welcome. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 07:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, per extremely low pageviews (136 in the past month; my userpage had nearly 1,000 pageviews), unmaintained portal, portal too narrow in scope, and, if the goal of portals is to feature articles, how does a portal that gets less pageviews than the articles it's featuring help things? Doug Mehus T · C  22:29, 24 November 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.