Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Napoleonic Wars

 __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) 04:31, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Napoleonic Wars


Neglected portal. Seven never-updated selected battles and seven never-updated selected bios from October 2011. Having a subpage for every GA trophy (e.g. Portal:Napoleonic Wars/GA/121) is extremely tedious. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 07:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nom. This portal has been abandoned for over seven years. Since 2006, the lead of WP:POG has said "Do not expect other editors to maintain a portal you create" ... and this one has not been maintained by MarcusBritish, who last edited it in January 2012 and has since been indef blocked for harassment. It also has only 14 articles, which is six fewer than the POG minimum of 20.
 * It also clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of readers and maintainers. This decrepit portal has had over seven years of no maintainers and it had a very low 17 views per day from January 1 to June 30 2019 (while the head article Napoleonic Wars had 3,156 views per day in the same period. Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I oppose re-creation, as over seven years of hard evidence shows the Napoleonic Wars are not a broad enough topic to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 (talk) 08:32, 27 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Mark S and NH12. This was one of the best heritage portals with subpages at the times that it was created in 2011.  As noted, it hasn't been maintained by its author (who is now globally blocked) or anyone else since 2012.  Also, as we have seen, the heritage portal design with subpages is inherently flawed; for instance, it means that any new scholarship on the battles will not be captured.   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)
 * Delete per nom and above comments. Buckshot06 (talk) 16:22, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Analysis of Military History Portals
The following table shows information about all of the recently nominated military and war portals, as well as Portal:History, which is a main page portal, and Portal:War (to which Portal:Military History redirects).

As can be seen, none of the portals that have been nominated have more than 30 daily pageviews. None of the portals that have been nominated have a current maintainer or have been recently maintained. 44, 28 August 2019 (UTC) Robert McClenon (talk) 20:42, 29 August 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 an AWB setup which allows me to easily replace them with links to the next most specific portal(s) (in this case Portal:France and Portal:War), without creating duplicate entries. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 16:12, 31 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.