From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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: keep . A fair portion of the participation here boils down to either "Single BLPs can have a portal" or "Single BLPs should (generally) not have a portal." While I look forward to continuing to figure out the balance there, there are other arguments. Those favoring keep cite the ever-popular WP:POG, which is not gospel. Those favoring delete make similarly-flawed arguments. In the end, I think the keeps have the stronger arguments and evidence in this particular situation. ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 01:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC) reply

Portal:Adele

Portal:Adele ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Single artist portal. Created before the WP:X3 spree but we are gaining consensus that individuals and BLPs don't warrant portals. Legacypac ( talk) 02:31, 26 March 2019 (UTC) reply

  • Comment. I'm not going to repeat this n times but I do not agree that no individual warrants a portal, nor even that no living person warrants a portal. (If you wanted to test where consensus lies on the latter, try nominating, say, Portal:Donald Trump and notifying the relevant wikiprojects.) No strong opinion here but, on a quick check, the topic appears to meet the 20+ non-stub articles and the portal was created in Jan 2016, before The Transhumanist's involvement, and could be rolled back to an earlier version if that is better. Espresso Addict ( talk) 02:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC) reply
Donald Trump warrants a portal (if we have portals). There is enough depth and breadth of articles and reader and editor interest around any recent US President. Portal:Queen Elizabeth II would be ok too. A musician or artist is just a personal business. Legacypac ( talk) 02:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC) reply
How? Beyond pages on her works, what is there to warrant a portal topic here? Legacypac ( talk) 07:57, 26 March 2019 (UTC) reply
One of the most popular performers in the entire world should be enough to pass WP:POG. SportingFlyer T· C 01:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC) reply
Popularity suggest notability, which is not what we are debating here. Legacypac ( talk) 18:30, 30 March 2019 (UTC) reply
What are we debating here, exactly? Under what grounds, exactly, should this be deleted? It's really hard to debate against WP:IDONTLIKEIT. SportingFlyer T· C 20:41, 30 March 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. "We are gaining consensus" is not enough. wumbolo ^^^ 11:11, 26 March 2019 (UTC) reply
Sure it is, we have deleted a series of single person portals as well as single band, single company etc. Legacypac ( talk) 01:33, 30 March 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Delete - I like her music. That is a reason for me to listen to it, not to have a portal. This illustrates that the pre-existence of a portal is not a reason to keep it. (In any case, it has been touched by the portal people, which is not a reason to delete, but a reason to be worth considering deleting.) Individual performers don't need portals. Robert McClenon ( talk) 20:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Not a broad enough topic, as is required by WP:POG. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 00:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - has a great many articles, hugely notable artist. Again, "We are gaining consensus" is not enough. ɱ (talk) 15:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC) reply
There is some depth to the articles here but not enough breadth. It is a narrow area of a topic. Legacypac ( talk) 08:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Portals for individual people are unnecessarily fine-grained and do not provide any useful navigational or organizational service to the reader not already provided by the article itself and the pereson's navbox. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 08:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. This is a well-made portal on a popular topic with sufficient content to present. The deletion rationale is flawed. We are not gaining consensus that individuals and BLPs don't warrant portals: even the nominator freely admits that Portal:Donald Trump is justified. Whether any particular individual warrants a portal is a legitimate matter for debate. The still-active editor who created this portal three years ago felt that Adele does. Even destroying all work of WikiProject Portals on principle would not be a valid reason for deletion, because that aim that could be achieved less disruptively by rolling back to the 2016 version. Certes ( talk) 13:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC) reply
There is a difference between a recording artist where the scope is her bio and albums and a President of the United States where there are numerous articles about the Administration, policies, scandals etc. That is the whole point. Legacypac ( talk) 15:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC) reply
Isn't that a logical fallacy though? There are enough articles on her to have a portal about, and this was not one of the "problematic" automated portals. SportingFlyer T· C 01:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. A single DYK from January 2018. Links to sister Wikis have some Adele related stuff, and loads of things not about this Adele. POrtals like this are not a service to our readers, but a distraction of better content presentations (the actual articles) and navigation tools. Alternatively, revert to the pre-"automated" version (restoring the necessary subpages) may be a viable option as well. Fram ( talk) 16:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Comment – WP:X3 is a present proposal discussion; it is not a guideline or policy. As such, whether or not a portal was created before or after the discussion commenced is not a valid qualifier for deletion. North America 1000 09:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete – for the reasons stated by PMC (BLPs aren't broad enough) and Fram (one DYK nom, distracts from better content presentations). Leviv  ich 05:53, 5 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - Yes Adele is a notable artist but this mass generated portal is simply not useful at all. It's basically part of the lead of Adele's main article and the navbox found at the bottom of Adele related articles. Meszzy2 ( talk) 08:53, 7 April 2019 (UTC) reply
Someone should delete NOTAVOTE as it is only ever quoted by the minority in a discussion. Legacypac ( talk)
Hahahahaha. The keeps have it 8–7 though. wumbolo ^^^ 20:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC) reply
Only because closures are running a couple weeks behind schedule. Give this discussion another couple weeks and we will get to delete. Anyway WP:NOTAVOTE applies :) Legacypac ( talk) 22:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - There are several articles about Adele, and WP:POG is met.-- N Ø 16:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Seems appropriate to me. --- Another Believer ( Talk) 17:46, 8 April 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Adele is a popular singer and as such has more than enough material to warrant a portal. — pythoncoder ( talk |  contribs) 19:52, 8 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.


Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Portal:Adele&oldid=1052826786"