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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:54, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Yukon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

old portal that I created that has not been updated since 2010 ....thus no maintainers with a dead project attached to it. Has very few articles attached to it that are also not updated. Moxy 🍁 00:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This portal has been abandoned for over nine years and was never completed, which is why all it's sub-pages are littered with red links to never added materials. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of maintainers and readers. This portal has had over nine years of no maintainers and it had a very low 10 views per day in June and July 2019 (despite the head article Yukon having 1467 views per day in the same period). Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I am strongly against allowing recreation, as nearly a decade of hard evidence shows the Yukon is not a broad enough topic to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 (talk) 05:32, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this portal isn't needed.Catfurball (talk) 16:25, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - As stated by nominator and per analysis by NH12. Only six articles (guideline says 20 is a minimum), some of which have not been tweaked since 2010. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:41, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nominator and per @Newshunter12. This is yet another a long-abandoned mini-portal, whose selected articles consist of only 4 outdated content forks. It should have been deleted long ago.

WP:POG requires that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". This has attracted only trivially small numbers of readers, and no maintainers.

I also oppose recreation. We have a decade's evidence that editors don't want to maintain this one. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:55, 20 August 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.