Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Wikipedia essays




 * 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The result of the discussion was  Nom withdrawn, no remaining arguments for deletion. WP:NAC Gigs (talk)

Portal:Wikipedia essays
Inactive portal, only contributor is User:Noraft.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 02:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That portal belongs to WikiProject Essay Classification and/or Categorization. Yes, its inactive, but is that a reason to delete it? Do we delete articles that haven't been edited in a long time? The WikiProject is waiting for some interested people to come along and contribute. ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 06:25, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The concern is the portal, not the project. I support the project, but IMO it would be silly to keep a portal that has nothing in it. It might even confuse some newbies if they happen to fall upon this page.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 11:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

"The idea of a portal is to help readers and/or editors navigate their way through Wikipedia topic areas through pages similar to the Main Page."
 * Regarding your first point (Silly to keep empty portal), that sounds to me like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Can you tell me how this portal violates a rule or causes some sort of detriment? Also, I'd be happy to populate it tomorrow if that will solve your concern (nothing being in it, as you say). ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 12:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Regarding your second point,I don't think the presence of the portal in its current state will cause any confusion. It is obviously under development, and I can add a template that states such if necessary. If consensus ends up pointing to deletion, we'll move it to a subdirectory of the WikiProject. ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 12:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I admit my first point is invalid. However, about the second point, you said it is 'under development'. Since you created it two months ago, it has gone through no development at all. I daresay (and I don't know if there will be objection against the usage of this phrase in deletion discussions) you will be unable to develop it into an all-out portal unless another user pops up and helps you. Unless this happens, this portal is not likely to be developed. Note that this is all my personal opinion, and I won't mind if you object.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 13:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Portal has been populated (see below). Took about an hour. ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 06:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * And to further illstrate my point:

- Wikipedia community


 * Not exactly something that would help me navigate through the essays if you make it empty. By the way, if you do keep it please at least mark it as .  Kayau  Voting   IS   evil 13:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Conversely, the purpose of an article is to impart information to the reader. Not something many stubs do, but we don't delete them. Similarly, when WikiProjects go inactive, we don't delete them either, unless it is established that a) they are no longer necessary and/or b) they have been inactive for a VERY long time. Wikipedia is full of ways and places that editors are encouraged to do more, because of the existence of less. That's why we have redlinks. I think deleting a portal that has obvious future utility simply because nobody is updating it now is like cutting off a paralyzed limb: while it might work again in the future, it certainly can't if its gone. ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 16:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * When WikiProjects go inactive, they still remain for historical reference, but this portal is not just inactive, but also empty. Userfication would be a suitable alternative, though.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 12:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It isn't empty because it is abandoned. It is empty because I'm having trouble getting the things I put in it to stay there, as per my query at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals. If I could figure this out, it would be completely populated. ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 13:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you WP:HELPDESK for the hook-up! ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 06:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - Well, as of right now, it's not doing much good. Maybe you could userfy it until it is completed? Airplaneman   ✈  20:53, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Portal Completed. Other Objections?
The portal is completed. It has a full range of featured articles and featured quotes. I'm going to wait until some folks write new essays to populate Did You Know, and if it sitting empty is a problem, I'll remove the category. Anyone have any other objections or cause to delete the portal? ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 06:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - I see no reason to delete the page in its current state (irrespective of what state it was in previously.) --SJK (talk) 08:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - It is a useful and usable resource. Will be even more useful and usable when it has more contributors! ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 09:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep as nom - I see no reason why I should object here. Will an admin please withdraw this?  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 13:21, 30 March 2010 (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.