Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:United Nations

Portal:United Nations

Portal:United Nations (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Live vandalism, key biographies horrendously out of date, tagged as out of date since July.

Fourteen selected articles.

• Four are from November 2013
• One is from October 2008
• Eight are from January 2008
• One is from November 2007

None of these pages have been updated since the day they were created.

Eleven selected bios

• One created November 2013. As for the others, the last substantial update to any of these was in January 2009.

Errors

• Ban Ki-moon is not the leader of the UN. He left that post in 2016.

• Kofi Annan died in August 2018.

• Boutros Boutros-Ghali died in February 2016.

• Shashi Tharoor has held two Ministry positions since his entry was last updated.

• Susan Rice has not been U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations since 2013. She was National Security Advisor for four years after that.

• An November 2010 edit to Angelina Jolie's birthdate subtracted four years from her age. That vandalism is still live. Now we know how she stays so youthful.

• Senator George McGovern died in October 2012, but no one updated his entry until November 2013

DYK

• ...that the UN's annual budget for its core institutions is the same amount as the Pentagon spends in 32 hours? Likely out of date.

• ...that the 2005 World Summit at the UN headquarters was the largest gathering of world leaders in history? Bigger meetup in 2015

• ...that although only 108 122 countries have joined the International Criminal Court, the UN Security Council can refer a situation in any country to it?

• ...that Dag Hammarskjöld is the only person to have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize posthumously? The average person would be confused how this relates to the UN

• ...that the Millennium Development Goals are eight international development goals that all UN member states and 23 international organizations have agreed to work towards by the year 2015? This is in present tense since it's completely out of date.

Mark Schierbecker (talk) 08:22, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

• Delete per the nom. This junk portal has been abandoned for over a decade, save for some one-off updates in 2013 by a passing editor. It clearly fails WP:POG's requirement that portals should be about subjects broad enough to attract large numbers of readers and maintainers. This abandoned portal has had over a decade of no steady maintainers and it had a low 72 views per day from January 1 to June 30 2019 (while the GA-Class head article United Nations had 9,408 views per day in the same period). This portal has a very meager 0.76% of the daily page views of the head article, and is littered with errors and outdated information no one cared to update.

WP:POG also states portals should be associated with a Wikiproject, but Wikipedia:WikiProject United Nations is best described as semi-active (the last editor to editor conversation was in March 2015), and the only editor to editor conversation about the portal was a 2013 conversation about adding more links to it. There were two older posts about a nomination for Featured Portal status, but neither the 2008 or 2009 post got any response. Portals stand or fall on their merits in the now, not what could someday hypothetically happen with them, and this one falls flat. I oppose re-creation, as over a decade of hard evidence shows the United Nations is not a broad enough topic to attract readers or maintainers. Newshunter12 (talk) 16:28, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

• Delete due to obvious and blatant lack of maintenance, as described in detail by User:Mark Schierbecker, without prejudice to re-creation using a design that does not rely on forked subpages, and that includes a maintenance plan.
  • I concur with the additional analysis by User:Newshunter12.
  • The errors listed by Mark S, both out-of-date information and vandalism, are illustrative of why the use of forked subpages is a failure (and can easily be replaced by transclusion of the lede).
  • The portalistas have repeatedly stated in deletion discussions that problems should be dealt with by tagging and normal editing. As can be seen, tagging with {{update}} doesn't get any attention. Tagging with {{MFD}} at least sometimes results in the waving of dead rats.
  • DYKs, which are almost always just general trivia and are not maintained, are not a reason to keep a portal. If the portal were being kept, there would be a reason to delete the DYKs.
  • Any new portal should have a maintenance plan, and should use some alternative to content-forked subpages.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:31, 2 September 2019 (UTC)