Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Nudity (2nd nomination)

 __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: keep. I'll be restoring the pages deleted in 2014, I believe they were just the following:


 * Portal:Nudity/box-footer
 * Portal:Nudity/Selected picture/Previous
 * Portal:Nudity/Selected article
 * Portal:Nudity/Nudity news
 * Portal talk:Nudity/Did you know
 * Portal:Nudity/Did you know
 * Portal talk:Nudity/Web resources
 * Portal:Nudity/Web resources
 * Portal:Nudity/Selected picture
 * Portal:Nudity/Related portals
 * Portal:Nudity/Nudity-related topics
 * Portal:Nudity/Associated Wikimedia
 * Portal talk:Nudity/box-header
 * Portal:Nudity/box-header
 * Portal:Nudity/Things you can do
 * Portal:Nudity/Selected biography
 * Portal:Nudity/Quotes
 * Portal:Nudity/Intro
 * ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 02:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Nudity

 * Assorted unused subpages.
 * Assorted unused subpages.

Redirected by discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Nudity and by various editors over several years. This one will not die so bringing for deletion again. It is not maintained and now become a problematic automated portal until I redirected it again. Also delete the unused subpages that remain (I was able to delete some blank ones but the way outdated
 * was disputed when I speedy tagged it as unused G6. Legacypac (talk) 17:25, 1 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - Hasn't this already been redirected? What are we trying to delete?  Can this wait until 2 April?  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:58, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * You nominated a different portal and linked to this discussion here.   D r e a m Focus  18:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks Legacypac (talk) 19:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * You didn't fix it, you did the same error again. You need to revert the page want to be in this deletion discussion back from a redirect to when it had content, then place the nomination there.   D r e a m Focus  19:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Darn redirect. Hopefully fixed now Legacypac (talk) 20:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Keep - First, nudity can not be directly related to sexuality, the MfD who did this was a mistake. Portal:Nudity was not a mass creation, it is in the process of rebuilt. The rebuilt was requested by the user HERE, who later thanked me by email.

To: "Guilherme Burn"  Subject: Wikipedia email from user "ErikAmsterdam" From: "Wikipedia"  Reply-To: "ErikAmsterdam"  Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:13:06 +0000 Message-ID:  X-Mailer: MediaWiki mailer List-Unsubscribe:  MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

Hello Guilherme,

Thank you for your message. I am still new here and I find the editing system of Wikipedia very complicated.... Thank you for repairing what I should not have deleted.

Best regards,

Erik Amsterdam

-- This email was sent by user "ErikAmsterdam" on the English Wikipedia to user "Guilherme Burn". It has been automatically delivered and the Wikimedia Foundation cannot be held responsible for its contents.

The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, nor any information about his/her email account; and the recipient has no obligation to reply to this email or take any other action that might disclose his/her identity. If you respond, the sender will know your email address. For further information on privacy, security, and replying, as well as abuse and removal from emailing, see .

And there is a project that supports this portal WikiProject Nudity. The fact that an article is deleted, or redirected by Mfd, does not prevent it from being re-created.

The fact that the portal has errors can not be grounds for an exclusion too.Guilherme Burn (talk) 19:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I suggest getting concensus at the Wikiproject before trying to build a portal on this topic. Soem Wikiprojects are not willing to support portals. Legacypac (talk) 19:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Nudity is marked with the inactive template, "This WikiProject is believed to be inactive". Attempting to obtain a consensus from a defunct project makes no sense. North America1000 00:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Well then that is a reason not to have the portal. No wikiproject to maintain it. Legacypac (talk) 03:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep – Meets WP:POG. Has enough content to qualify. North America1000 00:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Neutral at this time. Errors are so a reason to delete a portal.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep If it meets WP:POG, then leave it be. Thousands of people have seen it according to the page view stats for the past 30 days.  So its useful to someone.   D r e a m Focus  19:28, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, less than 5% of the nearly 97,000 page views at Nudity. What format do the readers prefer? Legacypac (talk) 22:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Obviously some prefer the portal. No reason to eliminate one thing because something else is more popular.   D r e a m Focus  23:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)


 * the 2014 MFD on this, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Nudity was not well attended, so feel free to have a new discussion - I had a request to undelete the old subpages, but will defer that this this discussion - any admin that feels they will help this discussion is welcome to restore. — xaosflux  Talk 21:46, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile I was trying to delete the stray empty/busted subpages and ran into having my edits reverted so decided to nominate the whole portal to either enforce the redirect decision and delete the subpages or at least delete the unused subpages. Legacypac (talk) 22:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets WP:POG, which is the test for portals. I can find no guidelines to suggest errors, page views relative to another article or no Wikiproject are grounds to delete. Agree with the comment above that the redirection to sexuality was erroneous. Nudity and sexuality are not the same thing. I struggle to see how a "discussion" with only two replies to the nomination, one of which was from the nominator, can be seen as a consensus to do anything. --John B123 (talk) 08:10, 6 April 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.