Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Physical chemistry

 __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) 12:15, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Physical chemistry


Static micro-portal abandoned since its creation in 2007.

Created in December 2007‎ by, who made only 1436 edits in 12 years, the last in 2017. Their last edit to any portal was in 2009, and their last edit to this portal was on 18 December 2007, only three days after its creation. 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:Physical_chemistry shows only a tiny set of subpages. no DYKs, no news, just Portal:Physical chemistry/Selected article, which has had no edits at all since its creation on 15 December 2007‎. For twelve years it has been displaying the same unsourced content fork of the artucle Chemical equilibrium. WP:POG says that unless automated, the content selection should be updated monthly, or preferably weekly. Even on a monthly cycle, this portal has missed nearly 140 consecutive updates.

There is nothing here worth keeping. Three of the seven boxes on Portal:Physical chemistry are just redlinks.

WP:POG requires that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". But in practice, this portal has not attracted maintainers, and readers have also stayed away: in Jan–Feb 2019 the portal got only 8 pageviews per day, compared with 374 daily views for the head article Physical chemistry.

Time to just delete it. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:10, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * PS. I see that at WT:WikiProject Portals, portal fans are again bemoaning what one of them calls a deletionist onslaught.   If anyone is inclined to sympathise with that, just look at the state of this portal.  Note that nowhere on Portal:Physical chemistry or on the Portal talk:Physical chemistry is there any sign of any assessment of the portal, or any note that it is abandoned or festooned with redlinks or that it has only ever had one "selected article".    The portals project has just abandoned most of the portal namespace without even a cursory triaging, yet its members denounce those who perform the long-overdue cleanup which the project has shirked. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 01:31, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and further comment. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:08, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete – As per analysis by BHG. This is a stillborn portal.  Neither Portal:Chemistry nor Portal:Physics is well-maintained, but they are less hopeless than this portal, with more recent maintenance and more viewers.

Robert McClenon (talk) 12:07, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete this one is clearly not in a state to be displayed to the reader, with redlinks all over the place, and it's been that way for a long time. At most move it to draft if someone's prepared to work on it, but that doesn't look like it's going to happen.  Hut 8.5  06:39, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I have modified the table to include the page counts for the Category page in the same time period. It appears that readers interested in physical chemistry prefer to consult the Category page rather than the Portal page. So based on reader interest, I would say: Delete the Portal but please Keep the Category page. Dirac66 (talk) 22:03, 13 July 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.