Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Supermarket

 __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: keep. After having to resort to a head count (I'm ignoring the rules here, because the discussion is so old), it seems that consensus just barely leans towards keep. There are 6 keep votes, as opposed to 5 delete votes. However, as pointed out by, one of the delete votes was a proof by assertion, and had no basis in policy or guidelines. As such, I left the vote out of the count, leaving 4 delete votes and 6 keep votes. As this was a difficult closure to make, feel free to notify me as to anything I may have missed or done wrong. (non-admin closure) Invalid OS (talk) 12:44, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Supermarket

 * — python coder (talk &#124; contribs) 00:02, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * — python coder (talk &#124; contribs) 00:02, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

An automated portal built with no care that should be deleted. Featured articles include mortgage loan, first aid kit, legume, sauces, diet food, luggage, canning, Confectionery, greeting card, toy, laundry, book, baby food, Incandescent light bulb and so on. A more random collection of articles would be hard to assemble, and not one of the articles will help anyone learn about supermarkets. Some of the pages are about processes (canning, laundry) not even things you can buy. At least the photos show supermarkets in Japan and Serbia look pretty much the same, but we can see that in the article. Legacypac (talk) 20:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. The selected article appears to be a completely indiscriminate collection. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 *  Keep There is definitely room for improvement, but I am not convinced that it needs to be deleted.-- Happypillsjr    ✉    13:41, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Care to explain why you selected mortgage loan, first aid kit, and canning as featured articles here User:Happypillsjr Legacypac (talk) 20:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep – Passes the WP:POG guidelines. I have fixed the Selected articles section by copy editing the portal (diff), which makes the nomination rather moot at this point, both in terms of content concerns presented and in terms of overall notions regarding users that apparently don't "care". The portal now only lists relevant content in this section. An idea would be to notify WT:FOOD about such matters, rather than simply nominating for deletion; simple errors such as this are often easily remedied. Furthermore, passes WP:POG per the overall availability of articles, as demonstrated in the edit I performed, as well as that in the category, listed below.
 * (Select [►] to view subcategories)
 * – North America1000 20:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and find someone to maintain the page. The creator obviously is not interested in presenting something useful and WikiProject Portals (which you are part of) can't be bothered to check for obvious problems like a completely indiscriminate collection of articles.
 * Also is not a fix - now the portal displays an indiscriminate selection of random supermarket chains from around the world. What use is that to anyone?   Legacypac (talk) 20:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Does it matter if NA1K is a member of the WikiProject? No, it doesn't. You're grasping at straws. Lepricavark (talk) 01:00, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes because they were a good part of the mass creation of these portals, directly making about 70 and editing many created by others. Anyway they are coming around to thinning the herd now so things are looking up. Legacypac (talk) 05:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes because they were a good part of the mass creation of these portals, directly making about 70 and editing many created by others. Anyway they are coming around to thinning the herd now so things are looking up. Legacypac (talk) 05:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - A weird hodgepodge. The fact that the Keepers say that they have fixed the identified problems every time just makes me wonder how many unidentified problems there are.  (Hmmm.  Are they like UFOs, from somewhere else in the Universe?)  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:31, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * How is it "weird" for a portal about supermarkets to present content about supermarkets? North America1000 10:05, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The WikiPortals team should be fixing pages with obvious errors (like when they create the pages) long before someone outside the project spots the errors. I don't consider paragraphs and logos about random supermarket chains in Japan and Finland to be serving the readers in a meaningful way.  Still no answer on how mortgage loan, first aid kit, and canning were chosen as featured articles for this portal. Legacypac (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per NA1K. This is a broad enough topic for a portal, even if the present one could use improvement. Lepricavark (talk) 01:00, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not meet the breadth-of-subject-area requirement of the WP:POG guideline. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - What is the criterion for excluding Portal:Universe and maintaining this?Guilherme Burn (talk) 12:42, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is yet another pointless, abysmally-made, automated portal which readers don't use.  The head article Supermarket can do the job better.
 * It is built off 18 navbox templates. As usual with these automated portals, the quality of work in their construction is abysmal: 5 of the 18 templates listed in the source do not exist, but the similarly-named templates which do actually exist are linked further down the portal page.


 * Template:Supermarkets in Australia
 * Template:Supermarkets in Bulgaria
 * Template:Supermarket chains in Denmark -- should be Template:Supermarkets in Denmark
 * Template:Supermarket chains in France -- should be Template:Supermarkets in France
 * Template:Supermarkets in Germany
 * Template:Supermarkets in Greece
 * Template:Supermarkets in Ireland
 * Template:Supermarkets in Lithuania
 * Template:Supermarkets in New Zealand
 * Template:Supermarkets in Pakistan
 * Template:Supermarkets in Poland
 * Template:Supermarkets in Sweden
 * Template:Supermarkets in Taiwan
 * Template:Supermarket chains in the Netherlands -- should be Template:Supermarkets in the Netherlands
 * Template:Supermarkets in the United Kingdom
 * Template:Supermarkets of the Philippines
 * Template:Supermarkets in Singapore -- should be Template:Supermarkets of Singapore
 * Template:Supermarket chains in the United States -- should be Template:Supermarkets of the United States


 * Those can be fixed if any of the editors who want to keep this this portal can be bothered. But that still leaves a portal which is redundant to the head article Supermarket, to which I have added the navboxes. We do not need a separate page just to display a set of navboxes.
 * The viewing stats are also very clear: readers do not use this portal. See the pageviews for the period from 08/02/2019 - 03/04/2019, which is from just after the portal's creation to just before being brought to attention here at MFD:
 * Portal:Supermarket: total 304 view, daily average 6
 * Head article Supermarket: total 49,551 views, daily average 901
 * That's 163 views of the head article for every view of the portal. Yet again, readers simply don't use these portals.
 * It is appalling that editors are yet again being asked to waste time debating this rubbish, rather tan speedy-deleting it. The utter sloppiness of this pseudoportal is reminiscent of its creator @Happypillsjr's creation of Portal:Reykjavík, which has only one article in its scope: see WP:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Reykjavík. It also reminds me of WP:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Palace of Versailles, a portal created by @The Transhumanist whose actual content is about a Japanese band.  And sadly, it also reminds me of WP:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:The Ohio State University, where @Northamerica1000 made a similar defence of a portal with on average only 4 daily pageviews.
 * It's long past time for those editors to stop defending this abysmally-made, redundant, unused junk. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:51, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — python coder (talk &#124; contribs) 00:02, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete  - Automated portal,  0 subpages, created 2019-02-04 05:17:02 by User:Happypillsjr, to be deleted: Portal:Supermarket. Pldx1 (talk) 11:25, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment – That's a cute printout, but "Automated portal, 0 subpages, created 2019-02-04 05:17:02 by User:Happypillsjr, to be deleted: Portal:Supermarket." has no qualification for deletion based upon any guidelines, policies, or anything. Furthermore, the phrase at the end of the script, "to be deleted" provides no qualification, other than a blanket statement with an empty proof by assertion. Just saying. North America1000 18:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - The images presented are rather proving that Sainsbury's supermarket checkouts uses English, while Fruit on display in a supermarket in Japan uses Japanese and Brazilian supermercado in São Paulo uses... (ask the Wikipedia reference desk if you have any doubt). What great discoveries, that requires a portal. Pldx1 (talk) 11:35, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Dear User:Northamerica1000. You have chosen to write your 18:28 comment between my 11:25 !vote and my 11:35 comment. Just saying. And now, you are asking for more details. Just saying. This portal was created just by clicking on a 14 characters formula. This was done so quickly that the DYK search keys are, even now: "Supermarket | NYC Subway | New York [Ss]ubway". But you have nothing to say about that. Just saying. And now, you are requiring that each and anyone here at MfD spend large amounts of time to consider how empty is this empty portal. Just saying. Perhaps you should answer to my argument that this portal only proves that each supermarket uses the language of the country it is located. Just saying. And since I have used five times the magical formula 'Just saying', and you only once, my arguments are five times better than yours. Or perhaps not. Pldx1 (talk) 21:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, problematic DYK content can be dealt with by editing the portal, for example, by removing the DYK section or commenting it out . Other changes can also be performed by copy editing it. It's all good. North America1000 23:47, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Did You Know that PLU codes are Price look-up codes ? Additionally, did you know how you can access this info from the Portal:Supermarket ? Remember: a portal is supposed to be used as a navigation tool. Pldx1 (talk) 14:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Since Wikipedia rules require more then one template, and Portal:Supermarket has 18 all total it should be kept.Catfurball (talk) 20:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Not so, @Catfurball. The policy is that the page should not be a WP:REDUNDANTFORK.  Since all the navboxes are also transcluded in the head article, this is just as much a WP:REDUNDANTFORK as a portal built off one navbox. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 01:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Whilst supermarkets may be an important part of many people's everyday lives it's not a broad topic for an encyclopedia (only a tiny fraction of encyclopedia articles are about this topic. For info: Supermarket is VA4. Retail at VA3 would be a bit less unreasonable as a portal topic). There is insufficient editor interest in creating/maintaining portals at this level of narrowness to ensure that such portals provide a quality experience to readers (taking them out of mainspace). DexDor(talk) 19:22, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - A niche interest perhaps but this topic has a significant number of related articles so is a good candidate for a portal. Might need some work due to the method of creation, but that's not a valid reason for deletion. WaggersTALK  11:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per Waggers - improvements are certainly possible here, but they do not require deletion. There is ample content available to expand it with. DexDor's comment about it being a tiny fraction of the encyclopaedia being about this topic is irrelevant as that applies to every topic (even something as massively broad as "biographies" are only small part of the encyclopaedia). I would prefer a rename to Portal:Supermarkets though, but that's very minor and not something I care about enough to defend if someone objects. Thryduulf (talk) 13:13, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * There's massively more biographical articles than there are articles about supermarkets (perhaps a factor of about a thousand). Supermarket(s) is a subtopic of Retail which is a subtopic of Trade which is a subtopic of Economy which is a subtopic of Society (a topic that certainly isn't a tiny fraction of the encyclopedia). DexDor(talk) 20:42, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.