Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Sweden

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Bratsche^{talk | Esperanza} 03:59, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Portal:Sweden

Last edit is from 5 July and since that time it looks more british than swedish. Visitors will not get much help. 80.135.25.238 12:03, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My first instinct was to vote keep. But this duplicates the British Wikiportal and only has its header changed. At the moment it's completely misleading. Delete, unless someone wants to actually turn it into a Swedish portal before VFD ends. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:05, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
~~Ditto. Unless the content has been changed to Swedish-relevant stuff by the end of the vfd period, then I recommend deletion -- Francs2000 | Talk 16:12, 24 August 2005 (UTC)~~[reply]
Comment None of us Swedes knew about this. If someone is willing to put work into this then I'll vote keep. --Fred-Chess 16:38, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
- Now that it's been raised at the Swedish notice board I'm sure someone will put enough work into it so that it will be kept by the end of the vfd period. -- Francs2000 | Talk 16:43, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now as per Mgm. Svest 22:57, August 24, 2005 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up}
Keep It may not turn out much, but there is no reason to delete it anymore. Fred-Chess 09:13, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
Keep for certain now, the original reason for deletion (being a copy of the UK one) is no longer true. Let it develop. -- Francs2000 | Talk 10:52, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the reason for the vfd was to get people to work! We are getting the fruits now. It was just like presenting Sweden to vfd at its early stages. Of course, there's no need to delete a portal except if it's a "nonsense" one, let's say Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Toilet paper. Anyway, we're discussing those issues on Wikipedia:Wikiportal. Your help would be appreciated for participating in the discussion there. Cheers -- Svest 20:47, August 25, 2005 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up}

If this was the reason for VfD, I suggest we save everyone some time and close the VfD. Fred-Chess 10:26, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Well, it wasn´t my reason and I´m not satisfied with it now. But if the majority votes for keep, then keep the portal. --80.135.14.6 21:53, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but maybe a "historical" tag? Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 22:41, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
Recruit a bunch of swedes to look after it. If it's not going to be maintained (or at least worked on until it's in such a state that it's a decent portal) it should be moved out of the protal namespace though. --fvw * 00:20, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Oh for heaven's sake, nobody is forcing Swedes to use the portal, and if they want it to be more useful all they have to do is edit it. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 02:44, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Portals are like main namespace pages in that they're part of the "end product" though. Just like an article that just consists of headers, sometimes nothing is better than something. --fvw * 02:46, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
- Maybe. But the editors are the ones who decide what that "something" is, so let's let them get on with it. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 02:57, 1 September 2005 (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 article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.