Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:The Legend of Zelda

 __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) 06:05, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Portal:The Legend of Zelda

 * – (View MfD)

Neglected portal.
 * Thirteen selected articles; while all but one are either good or featured status, this is still not an indication that the topic is broad enough.
 * The creator maintained the portal only for a week, and left in 2008. The only other maintainer of the portal hasn't edited it since mid-2008.
 * Abysmal pageviews in the first half of 2019, making up approximately .3345% of the parent article's pageviews.

This is all proof that this portal doesn't need to exist under WP:POG. ToThAc (talk) 13:42, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, while all of the DYKs are (mostly) correct, they're not really things worth mentioning in the long-run. ToThAc (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per the nom. This portal has been abandoned for over a decade, save some one-off updates by passing editors, and is 7 articles short of POG's minimum of 20. The picture schedule, meant to display a picture every week, displays none and the most recent date is January 2007. Since late 2006, the lead of WP:POG has said "Do not expect other editors to maintain a portal you create" ... and this one has not been maintained by DarknessLord, who dumped it a week after creating it (save one stray edit in August 2007) and retired in 2008. The portal creation very slightly pre-dates that stipulation, but the long-term point remains the same: this portal should not exist. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of readers and maintainers.
 * This portal has had over a decade of no steady maintainers and it had a very low 12 views |Portal:The_Legend_of_Zelda_series per day from June 1 to July 30 2019 (while the head article The Legend of Zelda had 3,587 views per day in the same period). This is a sharp long-term decline from the 20 views |Portal:The_Legend_of_Zelda_series per day it had from July 1 to Dec. 30 2015. POG also states portals should be associated with a wikiproject, but WikiProject The Legend of Zelda is just a redirect to the WikiProject Video games/Nintendo taskforce, and while still active, the portal has never been mentioned on taskforce's talk page and is not listed by name on the main page. Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I oppose re-creation, as over a decade of hard evidence shows The Legend of Zelda is not a broad enough topic to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as per analyses by User:ToThAc and User:Newshunter12. Low and declining readership of too few articles, no maintenance at all in at least three years.   There is no short-term reason to expect that a re-creation of this portal will address the problems.  Any proposed re-creation of this portal using a more modern design, and taking into account the failures of many portals, and including a maintenance plan (since lack of maintenance is a problem with most portals), can go to Deletion Review.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:23, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin. I don't want in any way to prejudge the outcome ... but if you close this discussion as delete, please can you not remove the backlinks?  I have an AWB setup which allows me to easily replace them with links to the next most specific portal(s) (in this case Portal:Video games), without creating duplicate entries. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 03:08, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per User:ToThAc and User:Newshunter12. Low readership + poor maintenance = clear fail of 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". -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 21:52, 10 September 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.