Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Peer review

 __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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Peer review


Abandoned portal on the narrow topic of peer review. Untouched since 2008 apart from a few diambiguations etc.

Created in February 2008‎ by, who made less than 600 edits in all between 2008 and 2013. The lead of WP:POG says "Portals which require manual updating are at a greater risk of nomination for deletion if they are not kept up to date. Do not expect other editors to maintain a portal you create" ... and this one has not been maintained.

Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Peer review shows a modest set of sub-pages, all of which were created in 2008 by Msanford. They include 8 article pages and one biography, and a DYK page:
 * Portal:Peer review/Did you know has dispalyed the same items since 2008. It seems unrelated to WP:DYK, and appears to be just a colection of trivia, contrary to WP:TRIVIA.
 * The list of 10 selected articles is an odd mix of:
 * concepts relating to peer review:
 * Portal:Peer review/Selected article/3: Software testing)
 * /4: Scholarly method
 * /5: Adversarial review, which since AFD:Adversarial review in 2017 has been a redirect to a disambiguation page
 * /6: Sham peer review
 * /7: Publication bias
 * /9: Academic journal
 * /10: Journal club
 * examples of peer-reviewed publications:
 * /1: Science (journal)
 * /2: Nature (journal))
 * a fraud /8: Sternberg peer review controversy
 * The lone biog, Portal:Peer review/Selected biography/1 is also a fraud: Jan Hendrik Schön, which redirects to Schön scandal

A good portal would separate these strands, but the narrowness of the topic makes that difficult: Category:Peer review contains only 29 items.

WP:POG guides that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". But this is a very narrow topic, and it clearly has not been maintained.

Two newish features of the Wikimedia software means that the article and categories navboxes offers all the functionality which portals like this set out to offer. Both features are available only to ordinary readers who are not logged in, but you can test them without logging out by right-clicking on a link, and the select "open in private window" (in Firefox) or "open in incognito window" (Chrome).
 * 1) mouseover: on any link, mouseover shows you the picture and the start of the lead.  So the preview-selected page-function of portals is redundant: something almost as good is available automatically on any navbox or other set of links.  Try it by right-clicking on these link to the article Peer review or Category:Peer review.
 * 2) automatic imagery galleries: clicking on an image brings up an image gallery of all the images on that page. It's full-screen, so it's actually much better than  a click-for-next image gallery on a portal.   Try it by right-clicking on the article Nature (journal).

Similar features have been available since 2015 to users of Wikipedia's Android app.

Since this is such a narrow topic, and a portal can add so little value, I think it's best to just delete it. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: too narrow scope, not curated enough.   SITH   (talk)   11:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Concur with analysis by BHG. At first I was hoping that this was about either Peer review or about software peer review, which is a similar but somewhat different process.  However, covering software peer review also still would not make this a broad area.  Portal has 7 daily average pageviews, and has been abandoned (originator inactive since 2013).  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Abandoned draft of a portal, 26 subpages, created 2008-02-26 19:18:53 by User:Msanford. Never went alive. Nothing to keep. Portals never have peer reviews. They don't even have views. Portal:Peer review. Pldx1 (talk) 12:55, 25 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.