Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Sun


 * 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. If I'm to believe that special I watched on the Discovery Channel this weekend, this portal is feasible; however, there is no compelling reason to leave it laying around, inactive, when a consensus wishes to see it go. I'll be happy to undelete if any editors show an interest in maintaining it actively. Xoloz 14:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Sun
Inactive portal, no corresponding wikiproject. No constructive edits since creation. MER-C 12:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Userfy I think it's kinda cute, and it might eventually develop into something. Yechiel Man 18:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. What is the problem with being inactive? It does its job. It is a portal into articles related to the Sun. --Bduke 01:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The scope's too small for a portal, it will never be able to develop into something. There's already a Portal:Solar System for the Sun and the objects that orbit around it. —  Pious 7  15:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, good point. Since the material can be covered in the parent portal, I support deletion. Yechiel Man  02:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete A portal's being inactive or incomplete does not (necessarily) militate for deletion (although such a portal should generally be removed from WPR and List of portals), but Pious is quite right that the scope here is likely too narrow to be able properly to provide sufficient content. There is, though, I see, a lot of content in Category:Sun, and if someone thinks there to be enough there to maintain a portal and finds editors (e.g., at the Solar System WikiProject) interested in maintaining it, I'd be altogether fine supporting keep or deletion without prejudice to undeletion/recreation in contemplation of the future development of an interest in, or belief in the appropriateness of, the portal).  Joe 17:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per Pious7. Tim Q. Wells 20:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - portal is redundant to Portal:Solar System, and doesn't have enough articles to support it separately. A navigation template on articles related to the sun would work just as well. John Carter 22:54, 29 May 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.