Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Football in the Philippines

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Football in the Philippines

Abandoned and almost unviewed micro-portal.

Created[1] in November 2015‎ by‎‎

WP:POG has said since late 2006 "Do not create a portal if you do not intend to assist in its regular maintenance", but that has not happened here: Hariboneagle927's last edit to any part of this poortal[2] was 5 hours after creating it.[3]

By September 2018‎, the portal was still in the "under construction" category, so it was converted [4] by @The Transhumanist (TTH) to an automated format which drew its "selected articles" list solely from the navbox Template:Football in the Philippines, and its "selected images" from the head article Football in the Philippines. This made the portal just a bloated and redundant fork of the head article. (For a full explanation of why this type of portal is redundant, see the two mass deletions of similar portals: one, and two, where there was overwhelming consensus of a very high turnout to delete a total of 2,555 such portals).

So in May 2019 I reverted[5] the portal to its last non-automated format.

Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Football in the Philippines shows a small set of sub-pages:

2 selected articles, both with topic unchanged since when the portal was created
3 selected biographies, each with topic unchanged since when the portal was created
Portal:Football in the Philippines/Topics, which just transcludes the navbox Template:Football in the Philippines

And that's it.

Per

WP:PORTAL, "Portals serve as enhanced 'Main Pages' for specific broad subjects". But this set of 5 articles displayed two at a time is massively less useful in every respect than the head article Football in the Philippines and its navbox Template:Football in the Philippines

.

Two newish features of the Wikimedia software means that the article and navboxes offers all the functionality which portals like this set out to offer. Both features are available only to ordinary readers who are not logged in, but you can test them without logging out by right-clicking on a link, and the select "open in private window" (in Firefox) or "open in incognito window" (Chrome).

mouseover: on any link, mouseover shows you the picture and the start of the lead. So the preview-selected page-function of portals is redundant: something almost as good is available automatically on any navbox or other set of links. Try it by right-clicking on this link to Template:Football in the Philippines , open in a private/incognito tab, and mouseover any link.
automatic imagery galleries: clicking on an image brings up an image gallery of all the images on that page. It's full-screen, so it's actually much better than a click-for-next image gallery on a portal. Try it by right-clicking on this link to the article Football in the Philippines , open in a private/incognito tab, and click on any image to start the slideshow

Similar features have been available since 2015 to users of Wikipedia's Android app.

Those new technologies set a high bar for any portal which actually tries to add value for the reader. But this portal fails the basic requirements even of the guidelines written before the new technologies changed the game:

WP:POG requires that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers" ... but this portal has been unmaintained for 4 years, and it has abysmal page views. In Jan–Feb 2019 it got an average of only less than one pageview per day, compared with an unimpressive but much better 31 per day
for the head article.

WP:POG#Article_selection

requires that portals have "a bare minimum of 20 non-list, in topic articles". But after 4 years, this has only 5 articles, only a quarter of the bare minimum.

I usually propose that abandoned portals be deleted per

WP:TNT, without prejudice to re-creation. But given this portal's history of neglect, and the clear lack of reader interest in the topic, I think it's better to just delete this portal and all its sub-pages. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete - The less than 1 daily pageview is even worse than one might think. It is 21 pageviews in two months, or 0.35 per day, the worst seen so far. I concur with the analysis. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:57, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:56, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, simply not needed. Giant Snowman 08:58, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.