Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Featured log/January 2008

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:New South Wales[edit]

Spebi, Daniel, Riana and I have been working hard getting this portal up to status, even though it's Christmas :) I feel it now passes FP criteria; it is well-maintenanced (we have updated the selected stuff and dyk to March of next year), doesn't have irritating colour schemes, easy to read, and has an easy-to-update currentmonth scheme. I don't see any obvious problems with it, and would welcome commentary on whether you feel it passes. Cheers! --DarkFalls talk 08:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support but I barely did anything, really! I guess DarkFalls just has to pay his dues to his puppetmaster... :P I think it's a good piece of work and has all the things I'd like to see in a geographical portal. ~ Riana ⁂ 08:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as co-nominator/co-creator. Daniel 01:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a side note, the Topics box is not complete as of yet, but I'm piecing it together and it should be done hopefully by tonight, as I'll be away tomorrow. Everything else is pretty much complete, and Selected content is set until March and I have a heap of ideal articles and pictures to use should the current run out. Spebi 09:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure if it's a requirement, or even if it's the norm, but shouldn't the stuff in the Did You Know section have actually appeared on DYK (on the Main Page)? — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 09:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not really sure either, I don't see the difference that it makes. The ones in the box currently I don't know if they have appeared on the main page at all, I picked a couple of New South Wales-related ones from Portal:Australia's Did you know section, and I haven't made any of these up. Even so, does it really matter? Spebi 10:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    As far as I know, it isn't required for the DYK to be featured on the main page beforehand. I could easily get some from recent additions, but it might run out... Personally I never use those that have appeared on the main page because people might have already seen them before. I prefer fresh ones, but that's my opinion... --DarkFalls talk 12:08, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Erm, they all have appeared on the main page. I got them from archives of Wikipedia:Recent additions, which are old DYKs. ;) I doubt we're in danger of running out, fwiw. ~ Riana ⁂ 12:45, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Of the current DYKs, only one appeared on the Main Page - I'm not sure why the rest would be on RA (no, no, and no). If people insist it's not a big deal I won't push it (although on P:AUSMUSIC I try and keep it to Main Page DYKs-only), and thus I'll support. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 22:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not savvy with the DYK process at all, and if I recall correctly, Riana picked out a couple of random ones from old recent additions pages, and if they were that old, they might not have had their talk pages updated. I still don't see how appearing on the main page is particularly important... Spebi 08:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    All DYKs have the template on their talk page, it's an inherent part of the process. I'm not saying it's important (hence my support), I'm just saying those articles can't have appeared on DYK...— Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 08:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is actually really good, great work done, consistency and others have all been checked. But, if possible could someone do a selected biography section, so it's inline with all the other featured portals? Best regards, Rt. 13:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    As with Portal:South Australia - someone brought this up at its FPoC too - it's a regional portal, not a national one, so the selected article section has to encompass this. Not that many people in Australia ;) ~ Riana ⁂ 13:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I suppose so. Support. Best, Rt. 14:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, though I don't think the "Read more..." in the "News" section should link to another portal. People expect this to go to more about a particular subject, or to a search on Wikinews, at least that's what I expected. Overall, looks very nice, well-balanced and good use of images. Cirt (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Interwiki mistake, fixed now. Spebi 21:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done - Nope, it still links to Portal:Australia. Cirt (talk) 22:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    If you actually check the URL and not just the title of the page, you'll see that it links to the Australia Portal on Wikinews. Spebi 22:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Done -- Ah. Quite right. My mistake, apologies. Cirt (talk) 22:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support: Good work, everyone! — [sd] 22:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object. Support. It's a pretty good start, but I have two problems with it. First, the "Things to do" section is taken straight from the Australian portal - basically none of this pertains to New South Wales. Secondly, the topics section doesn't exactly give a great overview of New South Wales topics - compare current FTs Ireland and Utah. Furthermore, some of the selections (c.f. List of Mountain peaks of the Blue Mountains, New South Wales) seem odd to say the least. Rebecca (talk) 08:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have replaced the {{Australia opentask}} template with some selections from New South Wales, although it was slightly harder to find requested articles, as the New South Wales WikiProject didn't have the best to-do list to pick items from. I hope I've addressed that adequately, and for the record, I do plan to add some more articles to the to-do list, as I admit, it does look a little sketchy. As for the topics, I'm going to do a total overhaul of that section and choose better topics, and make the whole layout structure slightly better. It shouldn't take me too long. Spebi 09:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Great! It'd be good to have another Aussie featured portal - let me know when that's done and I'll strike my exception. (It'd be nice to see the to-do section padded out a bit - I've added a couple, but I'm sure more could be found.) Rebecca (talk) 09:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You edited conflicted me as you put in those 2 extras :) I've beefed it up a bit more, and I have a couple more in mind. Riana is helping me to tackle the Topics section next, and I'll post back here when it's done. Thanks for your suggestions. Cheers, Spebi 09:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    As a New South Welshman of 15 years, I'll also have a look at the topics and see what I can suggest :) Daniel 00:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, I've completed the topics box (without any help from Riana :P) and the Things to do section looks pretty beefed up, so I hope that I have addressed the concerns you had about the portal. Spebi 01:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Great job - I've changed to support. Rebecca (talk) 06:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: In the Related portals box, I don't think Main Australian Portal... is needed since Visit Australia Portal is already there. Happy editing! — [sd] 05:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Done. Spebi 06:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted . Anthøny (talk) 14:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Music of Australia[edit]

Old FPOC

Most of the issues from the old FPOC have been dealt with. There just isn't enough news in this genre to justify a news box, but otherwise I think it has everything needed. Let's do this! — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 03:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Old issues in previous nominations are fixed. (Optional) Try find something other than contemptory music. OhanaUnitedTalk page 08:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support I think I discussed this with DHMO once before too... I think the portal has a strongly rock slant. Very little focus is given to the growing and quite popular Australian hip-hop scene, and almost none to the ancient tradition of Aboriginal music. I realise that this is perhaps because these are fringe areas to work with on WP. So, for scope of material, I'm not sure this portal hits my buttons - in all other areas, it's great. ~ Riana ⁂ 09:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • In my defense, I know nothing about Hip hop or Aboriginal music - I invite anyone who does to contribute content =/ — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 09:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oh noes... Powderfinger-cruft! I see seven instances of that band in the portal; a bit too much considering it's only one band. Mind tuning it down a little? --DarkFalls talk 23:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Support as the issue has been addressed... --DarkFalls talk 07:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support although ensuring that the scope is broad and balanced, per Riana, should be improved. Daniel 11:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. In "Selected article", the "More selected articles..." could instead say "Archives".
     Done — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 22:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. In "Did you know", "See more" could simply be "More...", I am noticing a lack of uniformity in this throughout each section.
     Done — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 22:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Same with "Selected picture", the "More selected pictures", could instead say "Archives" or "Archive/Nominations".
     Done — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 22:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Could use a nice icon in the upper right of sections "Things you can do" and "Wikiprojects" and "Categories".
    I added what I think you were referring to in the to-do and wikiprojects ones, but I can't think of anything for the categories page. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 22:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Missing an Associated Wikimedia section.
    Except on Commons, there is no associated Wikimedia on this topic. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 22:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cirt (talk) 21:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

  • Support - Per the changes addressed with regards to my points from above. Thanks so much, that was quick. Good work! Cirt (talk) 23:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  • Comment: Good job. I'll try to use Richard's design and review checklist.
  • Introduction: Nice logo.
Naturally, I didn't make it...lincalinca (talk · contribs) did. And thanks :) — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 01:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pictures:
  • The later selected pictures' text should be left justified like the first several's, instead of being centered.
Ended up centering everything. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 01:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the first selected picture, People playing the didgeridoo → Didgeridoo players
Done. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 01:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This picture seems a little blurry. Maybe it could be resized a bit?
That's just how the image is. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I was thinking that reducing the width to 200px would reduce the blurriness. Your call — [sd] 14:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. [sd] 01:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • DYK: More... → Archives...
Done. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • To-do: More tasks… → More... for uniformity with the other boxes.
Done. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Header and Footer: The header browsebar could be put into the table like the footer currently is.
Done. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overall:
  • A space after Show new selected content... would be good.
I tried this and it looked icky...you're welcome to give it a shot. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 01:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
checkY Done — [sd] 14:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would suggest italicizing all box titles (excluding the introduction). Cheers, [sd] 22:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done - the major topics and intro ones aren't, everything in columns is. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 01:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Thanks for addressing my comments! [sd] 01:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Great portal, good work. Rt. 12:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 supports, 1 week, all criteria and suggestions completed within a sufficient time period. Promoted. Rt. 16:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:England[edit]

I've been working hard with Qst over the past month or so getting this upto standard, and I finally think we've got it to a featured standard. It's portals been running for quite a while now, but it hasn't been updated regularly and certainly needed some help to make it visually attractive. We're now at a stage where we've got content sorted till March (except for the news sections) and we've standardised everything to make maintaining it easy. Anyway, as per usual, suggestions are welcome and we'll try and get deal with any problems as a matter of urgency. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. I made a minor wiki-link edit to feature content, hope you don't mind. I prefer to see the In the news section at the top, right before the DYK box, but that's my personal preference. I'd like to see more quotes in the archives, to assure continuity. Other than that, support. - Mtmelendez (Talk) 16:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in the process of finding more quotes, now. Thank you for the advice. Qst 16:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Great looking portal, even if I don't class Blackpool as a major city or town. ;) Rt. 17:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, greatly-written and laid out. Conveys information efficiently and effectively to the Portal's reader, and is definitely deserving of FP status. Anthøny 23:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. The author is not credited in the "Selected picture" section. This is required.
     Done - although this is not required for portals. Qst 20:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    If not required, it is certainly highly recommended for the "Selected picture" section, and I have seen it in I think all Featured Portals I have looked at so far. Cirt (talk) 21:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  2. Instead of "Read more" for all the sections, I believe the standard is simply "More...", and it's simpler.
     Not done. This was based on several other portals (all of which are featured), the Read more... is the most commonly used. Qst 20:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. No need to have external links in the "In the news" section, but the sources could be provided within the "In the news" subpage itself, through a separate subsection and use of <noinclude></noinclude>.
     Not done. It is common practice to have links to news articles for In the news section, thus making them verifiable. Qst 20:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but it is not needed to have them actually show up in the actual portal. They could still be verifiable, but it would look nicer if they were excluded from showing up, by using <noinclude></noinclude>. Cirt (talk) 21:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Ineed, I may convert the format to plainlinks so it looks tidier, but I'll wait for Ryan to come onto IRC to discuss the matter. Thanks, Qst 21:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Please do convert to plainlinks, the current format is ugly. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Done. Qst 22:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. In all sections, the "Archives" section could be on the left bottom, and "More..." on the right bottom, as it is they are place differently, sometimes aligned, sometimes centered, not uniform throughout.
     Not done. The only portal I can find where this is done is Portal:Scientology. Qst 20:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have seen this done on other portals, but whatever you choose to do, the alignment of the footer stuff should be uniform throughout all subsections. If not, it's confusing and does not look good aesthetically. Cirt (talk) 21:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    For example, in "Did you know?" and "In the New", the Archives link is centered at the bottom, but in "Selected article" and "Selected picture", it is aligned right at the bottom. Cirt (talk) 07:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
     Done Qst 13:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Try using {{Random portal component}}. Will reduce workload in the future of having to update all the various sections, and reduce risk of portal becoming stale. It is possible that participation/activity will fall of from some editors in the future.
    Mhh, the portal is update automatically by using {{CURRENTMONTH}} and {{CURRENTYEAR}}, so this does not seem necessary. Qst 20:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but if all of the subsections are updated in this manner, then it is always possible that at some point in the future the portal will become stale due to inactivity. Having at least one section use {{Random portal component}} will help with this. Cirt (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Portal:France passed recently without this feature. Rt. 21:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, and it's not required, just a suggestion so the portal doesn't get stale due to potential future inactivity. I'm not saying automate/randomize the entire thing is required, but it would be nice to have at least one section that way. Cirt (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Hmm, I suppose so. If Qst and Ryan would like any help with this feature, although I doubt they will, I could help if they liked due to my experience. Rt. 21:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Strongly recommended - for if/when you guys stop updating the portal, it'll still be useful. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done. If I was starting this portal from scratch, I'd implement this feature, but doing so now would mean all the selected article, picure and did you know would have to be moved, thus making it chaotic. Qst 23:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Is it common to have shortcuts in the intro to Featured Portals? I think the "More..." at the bottom is sufficient, no?
    Having links such as P:ENG is common for Portal shortcuts. Qst 20:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Shortcuts in the Intro to the portal? I think you may have seen this in WikiProject pages. It does not look nice in portal pages, IMO. Cirt (talk) 21:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    I agree, shortcuts aren't generally used in the introductions of portals. Rt. 21:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Portal:Bulgaria, Portal:Scotland... :) Qst 21:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Damn it! :) Rt. 21:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for those examples, but I still think it looks bad to have shortcuts in the intro. In a WikiProject, yes, in a Portal, no, IMO. Cirt (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Well, if it becomes a major problem (which I doubt it will), I'll remove them. Qst 21:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm fine with one shortcut, but having 2 looks bad IMO. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Done. By Ryan. Qst 13:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Regarding shortcuts, you may be interested in this discussion. Chris.B (talk) 22:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Could use some more creative icons for each of the sections in upper right corner, but not required, see Featured Portal Portal:Sustainable development for an idea.
    I'm sorry, I fail to see what you mean here, could you elaborate, please? Qst 20:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Icons, pictures, for example see the "News" icon used in the section at Portal:Sustainable development. Cirt (talk) 21:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    These aren't required at all. Some portals can find use of it, others can't, it's not a requirement. Spebi 21:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not a requirement, got it - but I think it adds some color and makes the portal look a bit more dynamic. It works at the Featured Portal Portal:Sustainable development, among others. Cirt (talk) 22:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    In the news =  Done. Did you know =  Not done. Qst 13:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It's fairly common, from what I've seen (although not on the aforementioned portal) to have Image:Updated DYK query.svg appear on the DYK section. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. "Selected featured content" - Why "selected" ? Why not all the featured content for WP:England ? This section should have the Featured Star in the upper right corner.
     Not done The featured star is for articles, this is not used commonly in portals. Qst 20:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I mean the larger featured star used in other portals, for example Portal:North West England, a Featured Portal. Cirt (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Okay, I'll add a small featured star, but having a large makes it look messy, IMHO. Qst 21:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cirt (talk) 20:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

  • Support: Although I support the idea of using random portal component, the portal definitely meets featured portal criteria. A few suggestions —
  • More about England... should be completely right justified.
  • In the Selected featured content box, Read more... should also be right justified. Happy editing, [sd] 22:35, 27 December::* 2007 (UTC)
  • 1 =  Done. 2 =  Done. Cheers, Qst 22:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment

I agree with Mtmelendez (talk · contribs) that the section Portal:England/Selected Quotes/Archive is not sufficient and will soon become stale if not improved, perhaps by using {{Random portal component}} - but either way it needs more entries or some sort of rotation system. Cirt (talk) 17:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

  • Oppose No archives for Selected article/biography and DYK, also Associated Wikimedia links need a fix. feydey (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would be my fault, there were some originally, but I removed them in error earlier today when I was tweaking the portal, so;  Done. And, about the associated Wikimedia links, could you please elaborate on where the links need fixing? Cheers, Qst 16:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Good fix on archives, but still no Did you know archive? Make sure that all the links go to a corresponding page on the sister wikis, i.e. rm. 404s (see f. ex. Portal:Literature AW box. feydey (talk) 17:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • This portal, as with others, is using the standard template for linking to other Wikimedia Projects, so I can't really remove any inexistent links, but, I will, however, add the archive links to the Did you know. I'm going to tidy up the portal over the next few days :) Qst 17:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
  • Selected picture archive link is missing.
    •  Done. Qst 12:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Add full archive on the page. There is only listing for December. Shyam (T/C) 06:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is the criteria of selecting the featured content? Either list the criteria or add all of the featured content.
    • There is no particular criteria, really — it would be preferrable is the was a free image available for the selected article/biography, but excluding that, there are no formal requirements. Qst 12:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Then, I do not like the idea of Selected Featured Content. Either rotate them after a defined period or enlist the whole content. Shyam (T/C) 06:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add more archives in the Selected quote.
  • Replace Did you know? by Did you know....
    •  Not done. This seems to be your own personal preference and, upon looking over other portals (some of which are featured), I cannot see any where it says Did you know... rather than Did you know?. Qst 12:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Related portals can have other portals, like Europe, and Culture and politics related prtals, if exist.
    • Related portals would then include the Europe, European Union, Bristol, Cheshire, London, Somerset, South East England, East Sussex, Kent, Hampshire, Oxfordshire, North West England, British Empire, British Army, Royal Navy, and Royal Air Force Portals (although the last few relate more the United Kingdom). [sd] 13:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I believe, at least having Europe, European Union, London, North West England, South East England, British Empire, British Army (Last two on the choice). Shyam (T/C) 06:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Better listing requested articles or needing expansion articles in the Things You Can Do section.
    •  Done. Qst 12:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shyam (T/C) 10:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted - All my requests were seconded by others and dealt with, so I don't really have a POV. Chill, dudes. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 02:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Film[edit]

Self-nomination. See archived peer review. Not much different here to say than at the Peer Review, but for those that weren't there I'll repeat the stats (some of which have changed since the peer review). Some quick stats: -- (60) Featured articles, all of WP:FA quality, (22) Featured biographies, all of WP:FA quality, (20) Selected pictures, all free-use from Wikimedia Commons, (20) Selected quotes from film directors, (20) "Did you know" entries, all WP:DYK hooks used have previously appeared at T:DYK on the Main Page. All of the above sections use {{Random portal component}}, and pretty much the only section that will have to be updated on a regular basis is the "Featured content" section, as more articles attain WP:FA status. The French Wikipedia already has a Featured Film Portal, so I guess we'd be the second Wikipedia to try to go for one. Thanks for taking the time to take a look.

Cirt (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

  • Support. RichardF (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (reviewed portal at peer review). [sd] 01:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support FP material. feydey (talk) 21:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's really good. I was surprised to see an article about Chinese movie. Perhaps you can add other various kinds like Bollywood to turn it into global perspective? OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are so many film-related articles of a featured content, that at present every single article in that section is of a WP:FA quality-rating. So if there are any articles of Bollywood-related subject that are of WP:FA quality that I forgot to add, please let me know. Cirt (talk) 01:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Actually, there are already two Bollywood-related articles in the portal, Lage Raho Munna Bhai in the "Featured article" section, and Satyajit Ray in the "Featured biography" section. Cirt (talk) 02:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Closed by Rudget (talk · contribs) at 16:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC) - Over 1 week, 4 supports, no opposes, all concerns addressed.[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Gibraltar[edit]

Self-nomination I have being working on this portal for some time now. It is about Gibraltar, a tiny overseas territory of the United Kingdom. The portal recently underwent a peer review where a number of issues were put forward and addressed accordingly. It's exhaustive, ergonomic, and meets the criteria in my opinion, I hope you agree. Thanks, Chris.B (talk) 21:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Looks great! A few more suggestions:
    ¤ Wouldn't the Spain Portal also be a related portal?
    ¤ When WikiProject Spain was added to Talk:Gibraltar, edit-wars and debates went on for months and a handful of users were blocked, so I don't think it's a very good idea unless consensus proves otherwise. :) Chris.B (talk) 12:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for pointing that out. Still, in my opinion, since Spain is mentioned so many times in the introduction, the Spain Portal should be a related portal simply because it relates a lot to Gibraltar. [sd] 14:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ¤ Two more quotes would be nice.
    ¤ Done. Chris.B (talk) 12:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ¤ Did you know... → « Did you know... »
    ¤ Done. Chris.B (talk) 12:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ¤ In the news section, Archive · Wikinews → Archive · More news... (following the Did you know... box).
    ¤ Done. Chris.B (talk) 12:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ¤ In my opinion, the topics box would go better like this, with the width being 100%. Regards, [sd] 22:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ¤ Done, although I've had to split the categories into two columns to compensate for extra space at the bottom. Chris.B (talk) 12:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! This would be another way to format the box. [sd] 14:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that's actually more effective. Thanks for all your suggestions! Chris.B (talk) 14:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
  1. Stats: 10 Selected articles, 10 Selected pictures, 11 Selected biographies, 8 Selected quotes. Very nice. Could use at least 2 more Selected quotes.
  1. Good use of {{Random portal component}}.
  2. Did you know... -- Could be easily randomized as well, would greatly reduce updating workload and help to make sure the portal doesn't get stale.
  • As soon as we have some more Gibraltar-related DYKs I'll implement randomization. It will certainly reduce workload. Chris.B (talk) 14:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Recent news -- Must be manually updated. RichardF (talk · contribs) is working on some way to use the DynamicPageList code from Wikinews in order to automatically transclude entries cross-Wikiprojects, and that would help with this. Alternatively, a bot might be able to to it.
  1. Topics and Categories sections could use a creative icon in the upper right hand corner, just would be a little added nicety.

Cirt (talk) 00:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks! Chris.B (talk) 14:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Very well done. Cirt (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support: Good job! [sd] 12:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - great looking portal. Good job! Rt. 00:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Closed by Rudget (talk · contribs) at 17:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC) - 1 week, 3 supports, no opposes, all concerns addressed (apart from that of Spain being included in the related portal section, which can be added at a later date) Rudget. 17:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Tennis[edit]

I've spent quite a long time over the past few days getting this upto standard. I think it now meets the featured portal criteria. It's been relatively active for four months now, it just needed some TLC and help with formatting. All selected content has been chosen for January, and we're currently open to suggestions for February. I'm still considering putting a topics box in, suggestions would be welcome - if it's needed, I'll get it in within a few hours. Thanks, Ryan Postlethwaite 13:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I was a bit involved in this, so I'll abstain for now. But I do have some suggestions for In the news section: (1) it should have a link to the source of the news, whether that be an outside news source or Wikinews; and (2) I suggest you include these three links: an archive page, to collect news headlines previously included on the portal's main page , a link to Wikinews Tennis Portal, and a link to our Wikipedia's sports portal. Users really appreciate that. I'll add more suggestions later. Good luck! - Mtmelendez (Talk) 14:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for the comments, I've created an archive for the news section and I've linked each story to an external source. I've added sprorts current events portal into the news section and there's already a link to wikinews at the bottom of the page. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • A great looking portal but, there seems to be a problem with Image:Jimmy Connors.jpg and I'd suggest changing Archive to Archives in the Biography section, as per other sub-sections. Apart from that, I'm going to support. Rt. 15:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah yes, there does seem to be a problem with the image, I'll have to take a look at it. I've changed the selected bio to point to archives rather than archive, obviously a slight typo on my part. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
:) Rt. 15:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and the image has been changed now. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, I reviewed and suggested some things for this portal a short while ago at the request of Ryan, and I'm glad to see those and the other minor things above have been cleared up. Daniel 11:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. Instead of "Read more..." could simply use "More..."
    Read more is the standard, most portals use it, including the main page. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Um, actually no, the Main Page, uses simply "More...". Cirt (talk) 23:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    I actually took this point from Portal:Scotland which is featured. You're right about the main page - not sure why I thought it was "Read more..." but I was obviously wrong in that assumption. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, just a suggestion. Cirt (talk) 23:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  2. The "Archives" should be aligned bottom left, and "More..." bottom right, this is not currently uniform throughout.
    They are infact all uniform throughout, all align fully to the right - again the norm. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Double-checked, this looks okay actually,  Done. Cirt (talk) 23:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  3. "News" does not need visible external links, just the news, but the sources could be given on the actual subpage in a "Sources" subsection, using <noinclude></noinclude>
    News should have an external link to an outside source to verify it - especially when dealing with living people or else could be considered a BLP violation. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that News should have verification, but it could be provided via <noinclude></noinclude> on the subpage, and does not need to be visible in the current manner, which doesn't look that great aesthetically. Other users have commented on this as well in another Featured Portal discussion. Cirt (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Ah, I've sorted it (I think) - can you take a look? Ryan Postlethwaite 23:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I see - give me a few mins. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Done - Looks much better! Another idea is to use the standard <ref></ref> formatting at the end of each one, and have a <noinclude></noinclude> section for Sources on the subpage - but that's up to you. Cirt (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  4. This portal will take a bit of updating work, regularly. {{Random portal component}} could reduce the workload. Looks like it is currently not used in this portal anywhere. It is possible in the future that editors could become less involved, and the portal could become stale. A bit of randomization would help this.
    I accept this point, however I'm trying to keep everything standardised throughout the portal and keep everything "selected" rather than a bit of everything. We point to wikiquote for more quotes if the user wishes to look. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, just a suggestion but as Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs) said in another featured portal discussion, it is "highly recommended". It is possible that at some point the portal will become less active, and stale, and having even just one randomized section would be nice. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  5. No captions given for the pictures in "Selected article" and "News"
    From the main page again, the pictures do not have captions, it makes the page look poorly formatted. Other featured portals don't have captions. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, the Main Page pictures do have captions. They are "rollover" captions, displayed when the cursor is on the image. This is also common on other featured portals. Check this again. Cirt (talk) 23:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Give me a sec to work out how to do it, and I'll pop some in. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Ryan Postlethwaite 00:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "Selected biography" would look nicer at top right, next to "Selected article".
    Featured portals generally have larger left hand sections to accomodate the selected articles, hence why both the bio and article appear on one side. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Understandable, just a suggestion. Cirt (talk) 23:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  7. "Selected quote" would look better somewhere on the left, where there is more room to spread out the quote.
    This is purely about formatting and the quote is on the left hand side to make the columns even. I'm very open to suggestions on this hwoever. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, there are always other ways to make the columns even, and if the quotes are differing sizes it helps to give them more room to spread out, I've found. Cirt (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    Looking at the portal and particularly the quotes section on another computer with a smaller monitor, the quotes section is really smushed and would look better on the left side with more room. Cirt (talk) 00:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
    I've moved it over to the left - I fully agree now it looked out of place - I've replaced it with a "topics" section which I think works well. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. See creative use of icons/pictures in subsections at Featured Portal, Portal:Sustainable development, this would look nice here in some subsections.
    I've tried to incorporate more images rather than icons here (more so than the sustainable development portal) simple because we have more images available - that's why I haven't tried to incorporate icons into the portal - again, I'll take a look but I think it would spoil the format. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Understandable. But again, when you roll the cursor over the images it would be helpful for it to display a caption - instead of simply the file name. Cirt (talk) 23:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
     Done Ryan Postlethwaite 00:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. There is currently no "Related portals" section. I believe this is required or at least recommended.
    The related portals section is directly at the top of the page - above the main title, this is standard with the related sports portals. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I see that now, my mistake.  Done Cirt (talk) 23:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Cirt (talk) 20:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Many of these things are not required. Ryan: See the comments relating to this at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:England. Regards, Qst 22:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure which criteria you're using to come up with these things, I'm sorry but they seem to be your personal preference rather than the norm. In fact, all but two of your points would probably get opposes in themselves. I'll go through each point individually however. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are merely suggestions on ways to make the portal better, but yes, I would appreciate it if they were addressed individually, that would certainly be a help in the discussion. However, many of these are not "personal preferences", but in fact are common characteristics used on other Featured Portals. Cirt (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support. Per the quick responses to my points from above. Great work! (Quick note, could use a caption for the image in the introduction, and "Things you can do" would look better aligned left, not centered.) Cheers, Cirt (talk) 07:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support: Looks good! A few suggestions —
  • Selected Quote → Selected quote for uniformity with the other titles.
  • As Cirt suggested, "'Things you can do' would look better aligned left, not centered." Cheers, [sd] 12:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestions, I've taken them on board and altered accordingly - looks much better now! Ryan Postlethwaite 13:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Please add purge link.  Done - Rt. 19:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Expand Things you can do.
    •  Fixed - I've moved it to below the selected quote section, to try to break up the page. I think the content on the things you can do section, is quite sufficient. What else could you suggest? Rt. 19:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Better, if you could link some of the requested articles and some articles requiring expansion. This is not mandatory, but will help a lot of having that section. Shyam (T/C) 12:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Portal can be more dynamic, so that people may be interested to visit. Thanks, Shyam (T/C) 10:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • One more thing, Current events/Upcoming events section is missing. Shyam (T/C) 10:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm, other featured sport portals like Portal:Rugby union don't seem to have this feature, could I ask what you're referring to? Thanks. Best regards, Rt. 19:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I believe that Shyam (talk · contribs) is referring to similar section used called "On this day" at Biography, Religion; "Selected anniversaries" at War; "Calendar" at Holidays, etc. But I have looked over a good number of portals and Featured Portals, and this would seem to be an optional added bonus if the section were added, but not something required for Featured Portal status. Cirt (talk) 05:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
        • Hi Cirt, I respect your views. The thing is that, the portal does not look dynamic to me. If this section will be added, then the people would be interested to visit the portal page. Other than News section, there is nothing in the portal which will be updated in the portal before February from now. I would request Rudget, please do not use another example, like Rugby union, if the portal can be improved by adding the section. Thanks, Shyam (T/C) 10:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • No Shyam (talk · contribs), I agree with you that the portal could be a bit more dynamic. I just think that in general on portals an "Events" section is something that is optional. But I do agree with you that in this case it would certainly help alot, or at least to have a couple random components, to make it more dynamic... Cirt (talk) 06:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Promoted --Chris.B (talk) 11:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Iceland[edit]

Greetings, portal reviewers! The Iceland Portal recently went through a portal peer review. It currently has 12 selected articles, 13 pictures, 11 biographies, 15 DYK hooks, 10 quotes, and 10 panoramas. The mentioned sections are randomized with the templates {{Random portal component}} and {{Random subpage}} (showing new content with the portal's cache is purged). The images shown in the introduction are also randomized, and the news section has recent headlines. I believe the portal meets the criteria for featured portal status. Thanks for your time—much appreciated! Happy editing, [sd] 01:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The portal currently doesn't have a randomised DYK - obviously this isn't compulsory, but I think it would look better (as there aren't so many hooks that it changes regularly). An example of how to make a randomised DYK is Portal:Music of Australia. Support either way. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, the DYK hooks are randomized with the template {{Random subpage}}. The coding tells the page to display one hook randomly from 1 through 5, one from 6 through 10, and one from 11 to 15. Thanks for your comment, [sd] 02:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oops, didn't notice that (I only checked the main portal page's code). Nice work. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - brilliant work. Particularly like the attention to detail and the inclusion of a selected panorama! Seaserpent85 02:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks! Best regards, [sd] 02:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Awesome portal! Support, meets all criteria. Spebi 02:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks :) [sd] 02:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice suggestion! ;) Fixed. [sd] 02:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Very nifty portal with the rotating intro images, panoramas and waving flag. However, red links just don't belong anywhere but in the requests list. RichardF (talk) 03:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, and Fixed. — [sd] 03:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A Very nice looking portal, so much so that it makes me want to visit Iceland. :) Chris.B (talk) 07:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Me too—I haven't visited Iceland either! [sd] 12:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Archive/Nominations was directly taken from other featured portals that also have their content randomized (for example, the Chemistry, Dogs, Environment, and Sustainable development Portals); some have only Archive, but I wanted to convey one could also nominate new content there. I haven't seen Other selections except at the Cars and Wine Portals, both of which aren't yet featured. Thanks for the comment! Best regards, [sd] 00:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I "loled" when you used Environment portal as your rebutal because it was me who built that portal. You beat me in this argument and I have to eat my words *yum* OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Argument? ;) Happy editing, [sd] 02:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - per many of the above. Obviously quite popular! :) Rudget. 17:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Would it be possible for someone to do a relatively early WP:SNOW close as successful, with all of these Supports? If it's seen as a better idea to let this sort of thing run its course, that's okay too. Cirt (talk) 11:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
      • Seeing as it was opened on the 9th, I'll close it around the 16th unless Ohana or Chris get to it first. (Or anyone else for that matter). Rudget. 19:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Okay, sounds good. Cirt (talk) 23:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Promoted. I'm closing this nomination early due to snowball effects. --OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Television[edit]

Self-nomination. See archived peer review. Stats: (23) Selected articles, all of WP:FA quality, (11) Selected biographies, all of WP:FA quality, (20) Selected pictures, all with free-use images, (31) Selected quotes, all with free-use images and links to notable individuals with articles on Wikipedia, (50) Did you know entries, showing 5 at a time. All of the above sections are randomized and display new content when the portal is purged. The News section updates automatically from Wikinews, using User:Wikinews Importer Bot. I believe the portal meets the standards for Featured Portal status. Cirt (talk) 18:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

  • The portal looks great and is very informative. A few comments—
Addressing comments from above

I will address comments here from [sd], and note it here below. Cirt (talk) 21:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

  1.  Done, I just removed the [ Television ], as this is after all the television portal, the "It" in this quote is self-evident. Cirt (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  2.  Done, changed to lowercase wording, "television", per above. Cirt (talk) 21:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  3. I'll address the remaining points later, but feel free to add in the "plainlinks", yourself if you want, I think that's fine. Cirt (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
    • Fixed—I added class="plainlinks". [sd] 00:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Done, added DOB for both biography blurbs, as suggested above. Cirt (talk) 05:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  5.  Done, implemented changes suggested above to Portal:Television/Selected biography/11 and to Portal:Television/Selected biography/5. Cirt (talk) 05:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support: Thanks for keeping up with my comments! [sd] 12:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Closed by Rudget (talk · contribs) at 17:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC) —— All concerns addressed, 1 week +, 2 supports, no opposes. Result = Pass. Rudget. 17:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Amusement parks[edit]

Has just been through the peer review process and has had a lot of work done on including randomised content. Many thanks for your time in advance, Seaserpent85 23:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In portal peer review, Cirt was right. It's strongly recommended to have at least 10 items in each section. OhanaUnitedTalk page 00:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I'm getting that sorted ASAP, hadn't expected such a swift reply! :) Seaserpent85 00:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Seaserpent85 00:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you started a Featured Portal Candidate discussion, you should archive the Peer Review. Cirt (talk) 05:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
 Done Seaserpent85 00:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The portal needs some corrections:

 Done Some of those were from vandalism and have been reverted back. Seaserpent85 00:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Main topics section needs to be broadened. - Shyam (T/C) 05:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Seaserpent85 13:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Things You can do is missing. Shyam (T/C) 11:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Seaserpent85 00:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A few suggestions —
  • In the introduction, Learn more... → Read more...
    •  Done
  • As pointed out by Cirt, more items are needed in each section.
  • An Associated Wikimedia box is needed (example).
    •  Not done I don't see the benefit in linking to numerous non-existing pages on other wikis.
  • Show new selections is almost blending in with the background. Perhaps you could change the color of Show new selections to white? Regards, [sd] 12:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Not done Purely as I'm not sure how to change the colour of an external link. Seaserpent85 14:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • checkY Done — [sd] 14:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that, it was driving me crazy! Seaserpent85 00:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A few more suggestions —
  • Things you can do: Although it has tasks from the Roller coasters WikiProject, it would also be appropriate to add tasks from the Amusement parks WikiProject.
 Not done At present there isn't a to do list on the amusement park project.
  • News: Amusement park news (which might sound repetitive) could be changed to News, Current news, or Recent news.
 Done Seaserpent85 20:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • DYK:
  • For uniformity, More... → Read more...
 Done Seaserpent85 20:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • More DYK items are needed (around 12–15 would be nice).
 Doing... Will be adding these as I find them. Seaserpent85 20:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done 12 up there now, fully randomised too. Seaserpent85 16:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for keeping up with my suggestions! Cheers, [sd] 05:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If possible, an update to the news section would be good. [sd] 13:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Seaserpent85 15:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! A few finishing touches—
  • Here are some things you can do to help the Roller Coaster WikiProject. could be changed to From the Roller Coaster WikiProject:.
  • The Main topics section should be moved to the right columns to balance out the columns. Struck out by [sd] on 00:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • For uniformity with the other sections, An amusement park is → An amusement park is.
  • Like the to do and news sections, creative icons would look good in the DYK (example image), topics, and categories sections. Great work! [sd] 03:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another paragraph would be nice in the introduction. The featured Numismatics Portal has a nice introduction length of three paragraphs. Cheers, [sd] 12:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All  Done with the exception of moving the main topics section - from my setup, on average the columns are of comparable length? Can anyone else confirm if there's an issue here? Thanks for all the suggestions, sd! Seaserpent85 14:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
← Never mind—you're right. Oh, and Shyam (T/C) suggested above that "Main topics section needs to be broadened." Happy editing, [sd] 00:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Seaserpent85 13:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment

Missing section: The portal is missing an Associated Wikimedia section. Cirt (talk) 08:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

It was suggested above, and the nominator replied, "I don't see the benefit in linking to numerous non-existing pages on other wikis." Cheers, [sd] 11:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hrm, really? Nothing even relevant on any other project? Not even worthy of linking through the Special:Search function? Cirt (talk) 10:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
The only other projects that contain anything are the commons and wiktionary, not exactly worthy of their own section, surely? Seaserpent85 13:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If Commons and Wiktionary have relevant connections, of course its worthy of an Associated Wikimedia section. Cirt (talk) 06:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
 Done Seaserpent85 10:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Great work with the portal! Cheers, [sd] 13:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted. This discussion has been live for over a month, with all qualms put to bed and a general consensus for promotion. Congratulations!
– Anthøny 17:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a promoted featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it.

Portal:Wine[edit]

I have recently taken over editing this portal which was created early last year. As I have been updating the Portal:Food each month, another featured portal, I thought I would take over this one as well because it had been abandoned. In updating the portal I feel that I have added the characteristics that are I have found in other featured portals. After a peer review a few items have been tweaked and I am now submitting the portal for featured status.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 01:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're using random portal component, I would suggest you to change the wording of "Archive" into "Other selections" OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion implemented.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Please see my comments at the peer review, Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Wine/archive1, which has not been archived yet but as this Featured Portal Candidate discussion was started, the peer review needs to be archived. Cirt (talk) 09:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Peer review has been archived, all items you suggested were taken into consideration and implemented.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 18:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments, actually several points from the peer review were not addressed
  • The hyperlinks in the News section look ugly. Could either be removed with <noinclude></noinclude> around the hyperlinks, that way the references for the info would still be there, but would only show up on the subpage - or could instead utilize the new User:Wikinews Importer Bot, or just use some entries from Wikinews, updated manually. In any case, no need to actually see the references for the news in the portal - just on a portal subpage is sufficient. This is a point from the Peer Review that was not addressed. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-I don't agree with them being "ugly", but if that is the norm, then I shall remove the links.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Removing news links is not the norm. Displaying them just as they appear at Portal:Current events is the norm. RichardF (talk) 04:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selected picture could have something in the text description wikilinked and bolded, if the reader wants to find more info on Wikipedia about what is displayed in the picture. -- This is yet another point that was not addressed, from the peer review. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-There are items linked in the description.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Associated topics should be "Main topics". -- This is another point from the peer review that was not addressed. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-Has been changed--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some additional points
  • Associated Wikimedia -- formatted oddly, why the spacing between the links and the text/graphics? Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-This is the unmodified template used on all projects.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the featured portal, Portal:Religion, for a better way to format this section. Cirt (talk) 08:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
I'm not sure what you are seeing on your screen, but on mine they are exactly the same.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 04:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You don't see the big space gap between "Wine on Wikinews" and then "News", below it? Cirt (talk) 08:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
On my screen both of them have a "big gap". I am using this Template:WikimediaForPortals which is the template suggested to use for all portals.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 19:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In that case I would suggest creating a new subsection for Wikimedia, and modeling it after featured portal, Portal:Religion/Wikimedia. Cirt (talk) 22:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Comment-Done.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 23:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see you made the changes which look alright, but I'm still seeing weird spacing in that section of the portal on my screen. Is anyone else seeing this? Cirt (talk) 02:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  • Associated topics -- could use a creative/colorful icon in the upper right corner, just a thought. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The same spacing appears on my screen for the Religion Portal.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 02:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Related WikiProjects -- Just list the related wikiprojects, perhaps with an associated graphic, IMO adding all this extra text looks bad. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-Done--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Related lists -- Should just be named "Lists". Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Coment-Done--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Categories -- "The following are categories relating to wine:" - this is self-evident, just remove this text altogether. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-Done--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selected article -- Hyperlinks in the text look bad, are these supposed to be in-line citations, just copied from the original article? Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • To other readers coming from WP:FPORTC, take a look through the "blurbs" used at Portal:Wine/Selected article, you'll see what I mean here, as far as the cites/links embedded in the blurb text that could be removed/formatted better. Cirt (talk) 08:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Comment-Removed all links and citations.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 18:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great. Cirt (talk) 22:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  • Selected personality -- Should be "Selected biography" Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-Done--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selected winery -- Same issue, hyperlinks within the text look bad. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-Removed--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should you really be featuring relatively poorly-sourced stubs or Start-class articles in a portal?
All of the "selected articles" are GA's.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 19:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selected quote -- Selected quote is unsourced. Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-It is sourced, the source is right after the author and is linked to the article on the source.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see there is some random stuff, but no "show new selections" or "purge" function in order to change the selected material? Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-It is on the bottom of the page.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Should be moved to the top, center, below the Introduction, as per featured portal example, Portal:Sustainable development. Cirt (talk) 08:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Comment-Has been moved.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did all of the entries in "Did you know..." appear at some point on the Main Page? If not, are all of the facts presented sourced with references, or are they original research ? Cirt (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-They are all from the linked, bold article title in each statement. All but the last DYK were featured on the Main page DYK.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, good. Is that fact for that last one sourced somehow? Cirt (talk) 08:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
The entire article is sourced, I wrote it. The fact comes from a text.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 12:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If that last fact for the last DYK never appeared on the Main Page, it would be best to also provide a source for that fact on its subpage. Cirt (talk) 01:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
That seems ridiculously over redundant, so that means that the fact being on the main page is the only thing that makes it warrantable to be on a portal page? That would mean that nothing should be featured on a portal page that hasn't been on the mainpage or it would have to have citations on the portal page, but as you stated, the citations should not be present because they are "ugly".--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 04:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstand, the actual references don't actually have to show up in the portal if you use <noinclude><noinclude>. But at any rate, take a look at the Featured Portal, Portal:New South Wales, specifically their WP:DYK section. I believe that all of their DYKs appeared on the Main Page in the T:DYK section at one point, though I may be mistaken. They also randomly generate different DYKs when the page is purged. Cirt (talk) 08:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
DYK's shouldn't have to appear on the Main Page before appearing on a project. That means that every new article would have to have something posted on the main page and honestly, not everyone does that. If it comes to the point where I will not be updating monthly, I will change it to random.—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|User:]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs)
No, they don't all have to have had appeared on the Main Page, but they should all be factual. One way to ensure this is to put citations on the subpages of those that did not appear on the Main Page, because we WP:AGF that those that did appear on the Main Page were already vetted for factual accuracy by WP:DYK folks. Cirt (talk) 22:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Commet-Gotha, I'll add a citation to the archive page then. Although the fact is easy to just look up on the "highlighted" article's page, but that would require reading throught the article I suppose.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 23:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note, portal nominator having computer trouble: -- Per DIFF, the portal nominator, Tanner-Christopher (talk · contribs), is having some computer/internet problems. This should be taken into account if he's having trouble or slow to respond to points brought up at this discussion. Cirt (talk) 01:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Few concerns
Comment - Removed link.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 21:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still, there are some. Charles Heidsieck (wine) in 5 Côte des Blancs, Côte de Sézanne Montagne de Reims, Vallée de la Marne in 11, Gaston Bazille in 17. Shyam (T/C) 05:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Center items in Associate Wikimedia section.
I'm not following, they are centered from what I can see.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 21:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not able to see. Shyam (T/C) 05:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • More articles in Main topics section would be appericiated.
  • Archives of all the section lack some back up, i.e. February, currently.
They are lacking because I just took over the portal which was not being updated.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 18:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • News section misses reference of all the news and require updation on regular basis.
I added back the sources which I removed when I took off the weblinks to the original articles. I haven't updated them in a couple weeks as I am quite busy getting ready for a thesis proposal meeting, plus I teach and my classes begin next week and a myriad of other issues. I will update with some new items early next week.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 22:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is not the right way of adding references. Please add the links of the news from where they come. Shyam (T/C) 05:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I had that before and was asked by the reviewr above to remove them as they were deemed to be "ugly".--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 13:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly retain them as links. Sorry for the inconvenience. Shyam (T/C) 05:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--- Shyam (T/C) 10:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully disagree, no need to see the external links, using <noinclude></noinclude> easily satisfies Verifiability, as the links could then still be seen on the talk page. But this isn't really a big issue. Cirt (talk) 12:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an issue of verifiability, it's an accepted practice of usability. Wikipedia's "Topics in the news" have internal links to encyclopedic articles and external links to news source articles. RichardF (talk) 04:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted. I left this discussion opened for a little longer to gather more opinions. I personally believe that browser compatability issues will occur in all portals and not just particular ones. They should not be on the grounds to not promote this or any portal unless it affects the majority of editors. --OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_portal_candidates/Featured_log/January_2008&oldid=905827675"