Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Districts of India Portals

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 all. MER-C 21:54, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Districts of India Portals

That's all I could find so far. I only listed portals with District in the title that fall within India, which may miss a district portal named like a city.

There are currently at least 723 Districts in India and the number has been growing for years. The goal is to semi-automatically create a [1] portal for all of them using Nav boxes. We already have portals for every state and union territory plus many cities in India. I seriously doubt anyone is curating these district portals or that anyone will maintain them. They are not even being added to the list of portals.

I have not tagged these individually for deletion as that would flood the creator's talkpage and create a whole bunch of extra deletion discussion pages. If someone feels strongly about tagging every page, go for it. Legacypac (talk) 06:10, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Legacypac: I put mfd tags on all of them. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on Districts of India Portals

Comment - This doesn't seem to be a properly formatted MFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 08:12, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I moved and renamed it, so the name is not clickable. Is there something else wrong with it? Legacypac (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Am I correct that Districts in India are roughly comparable to counties in the United States as first-level administrative subdivisions of states and therefore second-level administrative subdivisions of a federal republic? If so, there is no question that we need 723 articles, and no one is arguing about the need for the article, but we do not need the portals. Robert McClenon (talk) 08:12, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes each state and union territory has between a very few and dozens of districts. Within the districts you find cities, towns and villages. I nominated an outdated list of districts in Portal space as well. GEOLAND supports having an article for each District but I see no value in a separate portal. Further some of the larger cities, which are part of districts, also have portals. Legacypac (talk) 08:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. For example, Portal:Jhargram district has a "selected picture" (only one) which is the same as the picture at the top (a map), but oversized. The layout of this automated portalis awful (a huge box on the left, with one line of text and then nothing). Scrolling through the "selected articles" I get some where I get no text at all, only a "read more"... Portal:Gadchiroli district has a big fat Lua red error instead of an image. These automatically (or at least blindly) created portals serve no purpose, are not maintained adequately, and not in use by readers either (the Gadchiroli one had before yesterday gotten 9 pageviews in the last month). Fram (talk) 08:13, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All - No demonstrated need, and do require maintenance
Delete all, evidently useless. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:19, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all and create a Transhumanist speedy deletion category Why would anyone think that this was a good idea? ―Susmuffin ^Talk 09:24, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in an effort to to stop the brooms sweeping. ——SerialNumber54129 13:55, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nuke the lot-- Why were these being created at the first place, just why? I don't recall coming across any of the lot, ever.∯WBG^converse 16:36, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note I'm still not tagging each portal for deletion even though the creator is demanding it at the Portland Oregon neighborhoods. If he insists on the tagging he can raise it at ANi or do it himself. Legacypac (talk) 17:52, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all These all violate WP:Portal/Guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:20, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as too narrow in scope for a portal, after waiting for the usual week in case anyone wishes to save particular portals as exceptionally valuable. Certes (talk) 19:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless any have some particular additional notability that would warrant a portal, as per Certes. — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 19:48, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. If there are special arguments for any in particular, they can be made at Deletion Review]. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:22, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Snow delete. Further proof that we need a speedy deletion category for these. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 15:34, 8 March 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.