Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Jane Goodall

 __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) 05:58, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Jane Goodall


Fails WP:POG as insufficiently broad scope for a portal. There are 19 articles in scope. Only three articles are above start class and eligible for inclusion in the selected articles section: Primatology, Great Ape Project and Kasakela chimpanzee community (I think the first two are dubious). The automated script used to create the portal has done a very poor job and most of the "selected articles" are about awards Goodall has received or universities which have given her honorary degrees.  Hut 8.5  19:01, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete few if any individuals should have portals. This shows why even a very famous person is a poor portal topic. Legacypac (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Being a great scientist or great writer or whatever is more than enough reason for an article. We are not debating the articles.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:43, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete, pending establishment of criteria. We need to decide categorically whether we can have portals on single individuals (or singular-entity but multi-individual performers, such as jazz and rock bands), and treat them consistently. If we can't have a portal on Al Jolson or Men at Work, then we likely shouldn't have one on U2 or Monty Python or Mozart.  If we can have portals on all those things, then by what criteria? Can we also have a portal on Snooki or Tommy Tutone or Kim Wilde or Ron Jeremy or Paul Winfield?  The current deletion-spree behavior is not constructive, since it's randomly resulting in deletes and keeps without a consistent rationale in either direction.  In this particular case, the "20 articles" cut-off suggested by WP:POG may not be met, which is why I lean delete on it.  Counting Goodall, her books, and related institutions and projects (and not counting things like awards, and institutions from which she has honorary degrees, and other claptrap that's not closely tied to Goodall), there only seem to be about a dozen articles.  I'm not certain that's entirely accurate (not all portals are current or well-developed). Category:Jane Goodall has exactly 20 pages in it right now, but at least one of these, Primatology, doesn't belong in there (another is a template, and another is the portal itself).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:57, 23 March 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.