Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Punjab (Pakistan) (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:  delete. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 01:27, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Punjab (Pakistan)


Another long-abandoned manual portal.

This portal was created in May 2010‎, MFDed in July 2010 as contentless. It was kept as "under construction", but the closing admin Bencherlite noted If this never makes it into a functioning portal, then another MfD can be expected. It didn't make it, so here — nine years later — is MFD 2.

After surviving MFD1, nothing was done, so in January 2011‎ it was redirected to Portal:Punjab.

In September 2012‎ undid the redirect, and created one of each type sub-page: see Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Punjab (Pakistan). However, those sub-pages all remain as Rachitrali left them in 2012, and no others have been created. Rachitrali has been blocked since 2017 as a sockpuppet.

Punjab, Pakistan is the most populous province in Pakistan (over 110 million people), so in theory it should meet the WP:POG requirement that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". But in practice, it hasn't attracted maintainers, and has never been updated.

WP:POG says that unless automated, the content selection should be updated monthly, or preferably weekly. Even on a monthly cycle, this pseudo-portal has missed over 75 consecutive updates, and it is time to stop wasting the time of readers by luring them to this abandoned draft.

So I propose that this portal be deleted, with prejudice against re-creation and that the title then be redirected to Portal:Punjab, which is in slightly better shape. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:12, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete with a silver bullet. The history of this portal is that it is a zombie portal.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Broad enough topic for a portal, can be salvaged through editing and issues highlighted with tagging, so deletion is not necessary to clean it up per WP:ATD. WaggersTALK  12:29, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * By salvaged, @Waggers means "completely rebuilt from a blank sheet", because a slim set of 9-year-old content forks is no base from which to start building a portal which might actually add value for readers.
 * In the meantime, it is disruptive to continue to waste the time of readers by luring them to a page which has been abandoned for 9 years.
 * The notions which Waggers suggests of editing and tagging are implausible to the point of fantasy, because:
 * There is no tag to identify long-term abandoned portals, and no category to track them, because the WP:WPPORT has never throughout its history engaged in any systematic quality-monitoring of portals
 * Category:All portals currently contains 1,331 portals, of which 1,074 are in Category:Unassessed Portal pages. That's 81% of portals to which to no assessment rating has ever been assigned. The portals project has simply never done basic monitoring of quality, let alone tracking of specific problems, which is why hundreds of abandoned portals have rotted for up to 13 years
 * Building a decent portal which would actually add value to readers takes time and research, and knowledge of the topic. Waggers has not identified any editor with the skills and commitment to build and maintain a portal on this topic.
 * For the last 2 months, I and other editors have worked in good faith to try to clear out the automated portalspam created in the last year, and ten the abandoned junk which has accumulated over a decade of neglect. It has been my hope throughout that this would leave a core of portals which add some value for readers, and could be built on.  But if members of the portals project are going to oppose the cleanup of abandoned junk without a mechanism, plan, or topic-skilled editors to fix them, then it may be time to abandon this approach and simply propose mass deletion of most portals.  --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 16:07, 10 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete This province can be more than adequately covered by Portal:Pakistan. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:08, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per prev close — python coder (talk &#124; contribs) 21:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - In addition to all of the other arguments in favor of deleting this abandoned portal, I would submit that areas that are subject to battleground editing because they are real battlegrounds and so have been put under discretionary sanctions are poor candidates for portals because they are likely to worsen the fighting. This applies equally to the Indian side of Punjab.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - Abandoned draft of a portal, ONE article, ONE biography, created 2010-05-01 09:56:12 by User:Mar4d. Never was a portal in any meaning of this term, nothing to keep. Seeing User:Waggers describing this empty thing as something the WikiProject Portal is proud of... looks as a sneaky way to campaign against the whole portal space. Portal:Punjab (Pakistan) Pldx1 (talk) 14:18, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: if Waggers wants to recreate it and actively maintain it, that's fine, but there is nothing of value here.   SITH   (talk)   12:51, 12 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.