Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:StarCraft


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was Delete In contrast to the MfD on Runespace above, in this case, the voice of community is clear. This portal, under-attended, relating only to a single game as yet without sequels, is too narrow to be useful to the project. Xoloz 15:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Portal:StarCraft
This is a portal about a single video game, whose sequel has been announced but will not be released until after 2007 (but WP:NOT a crystal ball). It's an inappropriately detailed portal with content that can be quite well covered in the Portal:Video games, and a special portal just for StarCraft is not necessary. The In the News section shows one item in May and then prior to that, no news since August 2006. (See also, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:StarCraft (1st nomination)) Andre (talk) 22:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Andre (talk) 22:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per my thoughts on the RuneScape portal; however, there is no WikiProject StarCraft. Shalom Hello 01:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Significant to wikipedia's development of the starcraft universe. It is NOT only one game the Starcraft series has 8 books, 3 games and 2 expansions. The portal organizes game specific pages such as locations, factions and species. --Cs california 11:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't fully understand. A portal is there for the reader, a WikiProject is there for collaboration. How is the portal significant to the development of our Starcraft articles? Greeves (talk • contribs) 14:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Check Portal:Halo ith helped build up information on items of the halo series. The articles are more detailed and it gives non-halo players a sense of the universe. --76.211.232.144 19:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as overly specific. WP:NOT a game guide.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  09:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above reasoning (Runescape deletion). No single game has enough content to warrant a portal.  Warcraft and Final Fantasy might, for example, because they have vastly more content than a single game. — Da rk •S hik ari [T] 11:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, how can you say that the national sport of South Korea does not deserve its own portal? ;-)  -- Visviva 13:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This portal will confuse readers because Starcraft is not inherently a large enough topic for a portal Aaronk24 16:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm inclined to agree with Andre's arguement. When Clawed One and I have replaced the old universe articles with properly out-of-universe ones (there is a reason as to why they have been redirected for the moment), Template:StarCraft will suffice. A portal is unnecessary, and probably not looked at much anyway... -- S@bre 17:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per my comments for the RuneScape portal; An excuse for trivia to be placed in Did You Know and Quotes; too narrow a subject for a portal. MarašmusïneTalk 18:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, as I consider myself a prominent StarCraft editor, and didn't even know this existed until now, which should serve to demonstrate how irrelevant it is. The Clawed One 18:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep same reason as the Portal:Runescape MfD, there's no reason to delete it and it's useful (which is a valid argument for a keep vote when it's not an article). Why would you spend time on deleting this?  Sala Skan  15:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - StarCraft covers more than one game. It includes an expansion, two licensed mission packs and several sets of novels. However, I do agree that the topic is far too narrow for a portal. -- Scottie_theNerd  09:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, portals are not meant to be this specific.--cj | talk 02:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Sadly, too narrow for a portal .SYSS Mouse 03:09, 10 July 2007 (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.