- 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 debate was No consensus at this time, assuming good faith that development will continue; portal should not be renominated based on lack of activity for at least 60 days while being worked on. — xaosflux Talk 16:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Portal:Microsoft[edit]
No real significant activity or maintenance since it was created. Sort of a form of advertising as well. See also similar nom, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Nortel (2nd nomination). Wikipedia:Microsoft notice board and Wikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft Windows are both not really that active. Cirt (talk) 19:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I think that portals devoted to only one private company should not exist. They are by definition too narrow in coverage and do not have much value for readers. Ruslik (talk) 12:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
-
- I am not against Portal:Companies as its subject seems to be broad enough and it presents a diversified content. This is can not be said about Microsoft portal. Ruslik (talk) 16:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The standards against which a portal may be reviewed is at Wikipedia:Portal guidelines. This portal does not have enough interest to sustain the portal. Portals should not be a vehicle for advertisement, although this portal doesn't seem to have reached "advertisement" level. A portal should be associated with a WikiProject to help ensure a supply of new material for the portal. There is no Wikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft. If Wikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft Windows and/or Wikipedia:Microsoft notice board desires to maintain this portal, they should indicated that in this MfD. -- Suntag ☼ 15:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: When I created this portal, I planned on updating it frequently. Unfortuately, other events ate my free time and I never got around to it. However, I feel that portal is still useful. It is not particulary out of date and others have stepped in to update things such as the news/events. As for dislike of one company portals, others do exist (for example, Portal:Apple Inc.). I will say that one company portals should not be the norm, but I feel that Apple Microsoft (and perhaps a few others) should be the exception as their actions have a huge impact on the computer industry as well as various other industries (MS for example formed MSNBC with NBC and Apple can be argued to be a cultural as well as a technological phenomenon). I do plan on more actively maintaining the portal from now on and I did mention on the to-do list on the portal that I wished to start a wikiproject or have one or both of the aforementioned wikiprojects join in on the effort. I feel I and others can bring this portal to the standards set by wikipedia. I want add that if I fail to get the portal to community standards within a reasonable amount of time, the portal can always be nominated for deletion again.--Wiki Fanatic | Talk 22:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep it seems to be a well developed page with some value; it is not advertising and while it may not be updated as frequently as would be ideal that is no reason to nuke it. Company portals are supported by precedents (eg. Portal:Apple Inc.). Also, per Wiki Fanatic's statement that he will work to improve the portal. Icewedge (talk) 07:43, 25 October 2008 (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.