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 . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:49, 13 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Portal:Agoura Hills, California[edit]

Another portal that fails sentence one of the WP:PORTAL guidelines "portals should be about broad subject areas, which are likely to attract large numbers of interested readers and portal maintainers.". There is a 1/3 chance the featured image will be the same as the image on the main article. The featured articles inform us the town has a library, the Agoura High School, and several neighborhoods. These are all valid encyclopedic topics but nothing that suggests a town of 21,000 people needs a portal. Note I'm adding some additional nominations of pretty random portals because the previous ones have been labeled "fringe cases" and "not representative" [1] so it seems we need some more examples to create precedent.

Legacypac (talk) 04:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete - I thought that we had discussed a portal on a town in Michigan in November and were told to wait for a discussion of guidelines about portals. Oh. That's true. No longer waiting for guidelines. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Portal:Canton,_Michigan an interesting read. Legacypac (talk) 21:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[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.