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 original author agrees with deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Christianity and politics[edit]

Automated pseudo-portal, built solely from the navbox ((Christianity and politics)), of which it is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. There is no non-automated version to revert to.

Note that the head article Christianity and politics is exceptionally poor. It is rated start-class, but it has no less than six orange-level warning boxes, one of which dates back to April 2009. It looks like my first ever undergraduate essay after it was marked, full of basic flaws of structure and content. That brutal assessment was an invaluable lesson on how to write proper essays, and after I picked myself up off the floor I avoided those errors the next time ... but this article never seems to have had a next time.

Per WP:PORTAL, "Portals serve as enhanced 'Main Pages' for specific broad subjects". I don't think that an encyclopedia should be showcasing such very poor content, so I recommend that we just delete this pseudo-portal, without leaving open the option of re-creation. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Redundant content fork. Tazerdadog (talk) 22:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Aside from other valid concerns, particularly the poor state of the head article, the head topic is one of those controversial areas that are not well served by portals. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point, @Espresso Addict. I think that should be noted in future guidelines. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:40, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - We could do with compiling a list of Very Bad Portal Ideas that have turned up in this spring-cleaning exercise; incest, the one including paedophilia in its literal meaning, and any BLP with sex offender issues spring to mind. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per BHG and User:Espresso Addict with thanks to User:Espresso Addict for the idea of a list of Very Bad Portal Ideas, but especially because the head article is heavily tagged. The subject may not need an article, let alone a portal. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:20, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete too controversial a topic. Legacypac (talk) 18:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Maintained, 0 subpages, ---------- created 2018-10-15 15:11:00 by User:Mr. Guye, maintained by User:Mr. Guye : Portal:Christianity and politics. Pldx1 (talk) 21:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The corresponding article starts by The relationship between Christianity and politics is a historically complex subject and a frequent source of disagreement throughout the history of Christianity, as well as in modern politics between the Christian right and Christian left. This is surely true. Saying that XXX form their opinion from such or such book is surely false, since various XXX are forming various opinions from the same book. Another differentiating factor must be at work. And the result is displaying some snippets from what is linked in the navbox. This looks like a non solution searching for a problem: do not leave milk on the stove without strong supervision. Pldx1 (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete under G7 because I, the creator and sole maintainer of this portal, agree with the nominator's notion that we should not have portals on main subjects with very poor articles. I disagree with the "too controversial" and "redundant content fork" arguments, but I really like the idea of officially banning portals with very bad main articles. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 06:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, per snowball clause . — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 06:31, 24 April 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.