Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Pipilo

 __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 if pages work well in another portal, just edit there. — xaosflux  Talk 17:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Pipilo


A portal for a group of only six articles? Check! Repeating the image of the main article as the sole "selected image"? Check! A "subcategories" box without any subcategories? Check! Less than 1 pageview per day? Check! Another useless portal which doesn't even meet the standards of the portal project? Check! Fram (talk) 12:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete creator did not check before saving. WP:X3 Legacypac (talk) 16:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Maybe the creator did check, and didn't care. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete X3 —  python coder    (talk &#124; contribs) 21:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Whatever one thinks of portals for larger taxons of animals, a single genus is not broad enough. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:50, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's "taxa" not "taxons".  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * And it's "redirect", not "merge and redirect" because there is nothing in these portals you can merge. Fram (talk) 05:46, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to a broader portal on the Passerellidae; an entire biological family of extant organisms is sufficient for a portal (especially in this area, given the huge popularity of birdwatching). I agree individual genera are drilling down too far in most cases (some obvious exceptions will apply like genus Homo, though we'd probably have "Portal:Human evolution" or something, as a more broadly-named portal), and genus Canis, though we might want dogs and wolves/coyotes as separate portals, due to the distinctiveness of the domesticated dog from its wild progenitor and the conservation vs. pest animals debates about the wild ones that don't apply to dogs).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as part of a general process of cleaning up this mess. Until and unless someone comes up with some good reason for having portals at all, or people agree on a sensible and straightforward method of getting rid of them, we should just carry on with this interminable timesink. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That's not relevant to this discussion, but a general statement of dislike of the concept of portals in general - which community consensus disagrees with. Thryduulf (talk) 12:55, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Portals should be about broad topics. Individual families of birds don't need portals. They already have well written articles with the same pictures and navigational links. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per SMcCandlish - this is too narrow but just "birds" is too broad so this should be merged to a level in-between. Deletion is not required. Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There is nothing to merge though. The only text in the code of the portal which is not common to all TTH portals is "Pipilo". I have replied to your merge "votes" in different MfDs a few time already, but you continue to make the same mistake over and over again. Please change your votes to something realistic instead. Fram (talk) 10:40, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Merging portals means adjusting the scope of the target to incorporate the merged portal, including any curated content tweaks to the templates to avoid false positives/negatives, etc. and redirecting. Deletion leaves the other portal as-is and doesn't include a redirect. Merging is therefore significantly preferable in appropriate cases. Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * So, nothing to merge, as there are not "curated content tweaks". Adjusting the scope of the target usually isn't necessary either, as this is a subtopic of the other topic anyway. "Deletion leaves the other portal as-is and doesn't include a redirect.": delete and redirect is possible, but why would you want to redirect portals without pageviews anyway? There is one page that links to this portal, Pipilo, so it is much easier to retarget the portal link there than to do the steps you describe but which will result in nothing extra anyway. "Merging is therefore significantly preferable in appropriate cases.": perhaps, but this (and most others where you voted to merge) are not "appropriate cases". Fram (talk) 13:00, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * So, nothing to merge, as there are not "curated content tweaks". Adjusting the scope of the target usually isn't necessary either, as this is a subtopic of the other topic anyway. "Deletion leaves the other portal as-is and doesn't include a redirect.": delete and redirect is possible, but why would you want to redirect portals without pageviews anyway? There is one page that links to this portal, Pipilo, so it is much easier to retarget the portal link there than to do the steps you describe but which will result in nothing extra anyway. "Merging is therefore significantly preferable in appropriate cases.": perhaps, but this (and most others where you voted to merge) are not "appropriate cases". Fram (talk) 13:00, 27 March 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.