Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Mathematical analysis

:{{pagelinks|Portal:Mathematical analysis}} – (View MfD)

Bonsai portal on the topic of mathematical analysis, with low readership, abandoned 5 days after its creation in 2008. Only 4 sub-topics (last addition 2008) and a single fake DYK. Redundant to the head article mathematical analysis.

(Note: the portal was created as {{noredirect|Portal:Analysis}}, and moved [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Mathematical_analysis&diff=894756660&oldid=892069293] to its curent title in April 2019‎ by @UnitedStatesian, to match the name of the head article).

This portal was created [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Mathematical_analysis&oldid=204270832] on 8 April 2008‎ by {{user|Tompw}}, who also created the sub-pages. However, their last edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Mathematical_analysis&diff=prev&oldid=205318831] to any part of the portal was on 13 April 2008 (see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Tompw&namespace=100&tagfilter=&start=&end= their portal-space contribs]). Since late 2006, the lead of WP:POG has said "Do not expect other editors to maintain a portal you create." I will AGF that despite being the creator of 4 portals (Portal:Mathematical analysis, Portal:Algebra, Portal:Topology, Portal:Discworld) and editor of many others, Tompw somehow managed to remain unaware of that prominent guidance.

Whatever the reasons for the creator's rapid abandonment, portals need ongoing maintenance, and this one hasn't had it.

Special:PrefixIndex/Portal:Mathematical analysis shows a slim set of sub-pages:

• /Selected article/1, /Selected article/2, /Selected article/3, and /Selected article/4 were all created between 8 and 11 April 2008 by Tompw or {{user|Cenarium}}. Since those first few days, the only edits to any of them have been trivial, such as formatting and disambiguation. Nobody has updated any of the content.
• Portal:Mathematical analysis/Did you know consists of just one item added on 8 April 2008‎ by Tompw, since then it has had many minor tweaks, but remains about the same topic (Gudermannian function). That topic has no connection to the scrutinised curation process at WP:DYK, which exists to showcase new or expanded content. This item is just a factoid selected and summarised without scrutiny, usurping the good name of WP:DYK to create a piece of random WP:TRIVIA.

WP:POG requires that portals should be about "broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers". It also guides that "the portal should be associated with a WikiProject (or have editors with sufficient interest) to help ensure a supply of new material for the portal and maintain the portal". This portal fails on at least three of the four counts:

1. {{hmmm}} Broad topic. I'm not sure. :Category:Mathematical analysis looks very well-populated. This may indicate a broad topic, or maybe a narrow topic covered in copious detail. But either way, it matters little, because of the next three points.
2. {{Cross}} High readership. Fail. The portal's January–June 2019 daily median of only [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&start=2019-01-01&end=2019-06-30&pages=Portal:Mathematical_analysis|Portal:Analysis 16 views per day] is trivially low.
3. {{Cross}} Lots of maintainers. Fail. I can find no non-trivial changes to the portal since the creator abandoned the portal on 13 April 2008.
4. {{Cross}} Associated WikiProject. Fail. There is no WP:Mathematical analysis, and WP:WikiProject Mathematics hasn't even added its banner to the portal's talk page. A search of WT:WikiProject Mathematics talk archives [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?sort=relevance&search=%22Portal%3AMathematical+analysis%22&prefix=Wikipedia+talk%3AWikiProject+Mathematics%2FArchive&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&advancedSearch-current=%7B%7D&ns0=1 for "Portal:Mathematical analysis"] gives no hits, and a search for the old name "Portal:Analysis" gives only the second of these two posts from 2019: a Feb 2019 lament about the flood of portalspam, with subsequent discussion, plus an April 2019 question by Legacypac asking "Which of these approx 30 Portals does the math project provide support to or are you interested in managing?". Legacypac's plea brought only one response, and no offers of maintenance.

It's long past time to stop luring readers to this 11-year abandoned page. Time to just delete it. I also oppose re-creation, because of the long-term failure of the fundamental requirements for a portal. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:30, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

• Note to closing admin. I don't want in any way to prejudge the outcome ... but if you close this discussion as delete, please can you not remove the backlinks? I have an AWB setup which allows me to easily replace them with links to the next most specific portal(s) (in this case Portal:Mathematics), without creating duplicate entries. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:41, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
• Delete per the thorough and highly detailed investigation of the portal by the nominator, BrownHairedGirl. Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. It's a useless time suck that lures readers to a decade-long abandoned junk micro-portal, and damages Wikipedia's hard won reputation for quality. I oppose re-creation, as over a decade of hard evidence shows Mathematical analysis is not a broad enough topic under WP:POG to attract readers or maintainers. This portal is a solution in search of a problem. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:22, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

• Delete - Another unmaintained poorly viewed mathematics portal. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

: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.