Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Luton

 __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) 00:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Luton


Abandoned non-portal from 2009, about the town of Luton in England.

Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Luton shows only 2 subpages, both for formatting.

As far as I can see, it has never contained anything other than an except of the lede of the head article, and a rough map of the wards into which Luton is divided for electoral purposes. Plus a category tree.

It was converted in September 2018‎ by @The Transhumanist to a full-automated format, which built its "selected articles" list solely from the navbox Luton. That made it a redundant fork of the navbox. (For a full explanation of why this type of portal is redundant, see the two mass deletions of similar portals: one, and two, where there was overwhelming consensus of a very high turnout to delete a total of 2,555 such portals).

So I have reverted it to today the last non-automated format.

Per WP:PORTAL, "Portals serve as enhanced 'Main Pages' for specific broad subjects". But this is massively less useful in every respect than the head article Luton and its navbox Luton.

It seems to me to be unlikely that a town of only about 250,000 people will be able to meet 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". This one never attracted builders, let alone ongoing maintenance. If anyone does want to build and maintain a portal on this topic, they will do better to start afresh instead of building on this abandoned relic ... and it the meantime we shouldn't waste the time of the readers who generated 5 pageviews per day in Jan–Feb 2019.

So I propose that this portal and its sub-pages be deleted per WP:TNT, without prejudice to recreating a curated portal in accordance with whatever criteria the community may have agreed at that time. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:50, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - This portal is about a city or town, not even a county or state (and England doesn't have states), which is not a broad area. Its originator has not edited in ten years.  So it was converted to an automated form, but automated portals do nothing other than to provide a slideshow that would be just as well provided by a navbox or list or outline or whatever.  So either keep this nothing portal, or convert it to an unmaintained nothing portal, or reduce it to nothing cleanly.  The last has the advantage of not making people think that there is a portal.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:28, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I think in this case whether it is a manual or automated portal is largely irrelevant (and general comments on the nature of both types certainly are), but Luton is definitely not a broad enough topic to support a portal (and I speak as someone who has been there a few times). I'm actually slightly surprised the navbox has as many links as it does. Thryduulf (talk) 12:38, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Pldx1 (talk) 14:34, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:POG scope issues and WP:PORTALs curation issues.   SITH   (talk)   11:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This is just the main WP article re-cut in a different format and abandoned? No need for it and it will depreciate the integriy of the main content. Britishfinance (talk) 13:40, 15 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.