Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Featured log/March 2006

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal:Scouting[edit]

Self nomination as member of Scouting Wikiproject This portal has a very active WikiProject maintaining it (our Project membership doubled two weeks after creating it in Jan), is informative, and nicely laid out. The articles are updated regularly; with "Selected" items rotated bi-weekly. It is great starting point for those interested in Scouting.Rlevse 16:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I believe it meets all the criteria at Wikipedia:What is a featured portal?, and as already stated, it dose have a very active community constantly maintaining it in an effort to even further improve the articles related to Scouting. --Naha|(talk) 17:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Object; a good start, but still much to be done:
  1. The multiple levels of nested table markup make the ordinary width calculation fail. Notice that the 100% boxes—the introduction and Wikimedia links—overflow the inner border.
  2. Several of the Wikimedia links take the reader to a blank page.
  3. The "Selected anniversaries" box should be changed to make clear that it includes (I assume) the entire month.
  4. Using an asterisk to separate categories may not be the most visually clear idea.
Finally, on a more general note, I would like to see either the addition of auto-rotating content or a history of active maintenance somewhat longer than a week. The empty candidate pages are not particularly reassuring in this regard. —Kirill Lokshin 17:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed 2, 3, and 4. I see what you mean by the first comment, but don't know how to fix it. Any tips? For content, the portal is only a week or so old, so we don't have a history yet. How do I set up auto-rotating content?Rlevse 18:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a look at it later, but I suspect the easiest thing to do would be to remove the innermost of the two boxes that form the "shell" of the portal. As for auto-rotating content, there are a variety of examples on the existing featured portals (I think all of them use it at this point). The basic idea is to make use of things like {{CURRENTWEEK}} and {{CURRENTMONTH}} by setting up subpages like Portal:Scouting/Selected article/Week 7, 2006 and then linking to them by using {{Portal:Scouting/Selected article/Week {{CURRENTWEEK}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}}} in the portal page. —Kirill Lokshin 18:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed item 1 by "borrowing" code from your War Portal. I changed colors too.Rlevse 21:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the auto-rotating. Cricket and London do not appear to auto-rotate, so this does not appear to be a requirement. One does it monthly. One seems to do it weekly. I was interested in weekly or bi-weekly, so let me work on this as it seems to be a neat feature.Rlevse 21:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Update In addition to having fixed item 1, I have now completed setting up auto rotation for the requisite boxes. I did this on a monthly basis because I thought weekly was too often. Is there a way to do it bi-weekly? I believe this now addresses all your concerns. Thank you for the help. Rlevse 23:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Great work! Support now that there is some content queued up. —Kirill Lokshin 01:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Reinforces Earth Science upgrades like Oceanography. — RJBurkhart 13:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Sahasrahla 02:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Pureblade | Θ 18:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- many have worked hard on these articles and this portal. Well done. (this unsigned vote was by user Darthgriz98)18:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. --Myles Long/cDc 18:10, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A great contribution for the Scouting project. --Bduke 23:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Siva1979Talk to me 15:44, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. --L1AM (talk - 'tribs.) 06:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Terence Ong 08:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. NThurston 03:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Griz 05:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobyk777 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 3 March 2006
  • Comment: Looking at it, it would seem that Wikipedia's coverage of Scouting is too sparce and too under-developed for this portal to be of a standard similar to those already featured. I wonder then if the best format has been employed. Specifically, the limited nature of Scouting content is detrimental to both the portal's usefulness and attractiveness in this format (it's bland). I think that more access-oriented portal might be a better option given the circumstances - something along the lines of Portal:Constructed languages but probably closer to Portal:Europe. As it stands presently, there are some issues apart from that above that would lead me to object. Firstly, the green background is near-fluorescent and should be softened somewhat. Secondly, thumb mark-up should be avoided in portals because it conflicts with box background colours. Thirdly, the "Distinguished articles" box seems a little self-referential. Moreover, I don't think that DYK articles are necessarily distinguished. Finally, the portal overall doesn't seem comprehensive enough. For example, categories, lists, and DYK are all lacking. Though I acknowledge the difficultly with regards to extent of content available, I still think more effort could be made in these areas (you may like to cut DYK altogether). Also, "Scouting news" could follow the format used by Portal:New Zealand, Portal:Australia and Portal:Oceania. Overall, I think the Scouts have made a great effort, but I can't yet support and am not ready to object. Hopefully, fruitful discussion can follow.--cj | talk 02:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. I'll look over the Europe/ContLang portals for comparison
  2. Many people like the colors (colors are very POV-;), I'll look into other colors put softer color up
  3. I don't know what you mean by thumb mark up fixed by CJ, thanks!
  4. FA/DYK can be removed, I'll get to it soon removed
  5. Comprehensive...cats, but would you like it expanded some? WAR is a FP, and it's only got 13 cats listed. listed another tier of cats, that's about all of them (before I confused cats with articles)
  6. Lists...we only have 2 lists, well, this week a 3rd one arrivedadded our 3rd list, nothing more to add here
  7. News...it's very hard to find news on Scouting, esp outside the USA, but I can change the format fixed format, added news

Rlevse 16:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I've done some reformating to the portal that I hope you agree with. I think you might want to consider beefing up the DYK section - one fact makes the box seem a little frivolous. Other than that, good work. --cj | talk 04:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I still remember opposing BSA merit badge collecting, only to support it later after a brilliant rewrite by Rlvese. This portal is yet another example of the good work the Scouting project here on WP can do. Staxringold 13:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:New Zealand[edit]

Self-nom. User:Cyberjunkie created this portal in May 2005, but I have been the major maintainer ever since. Cyberjunkie is still involved, mainly on the layout side, and several other people are regular contributors.

We've had a weekly "Selected article" and a weekly "Selected picture" since the end of May 2005. We've had a frequently changing DYK section over the same period of time, and the ITN section is normally updated at least once a week. In mid-January 2006, a queue system was implemented to automatically change the selected picture and article each week.

There are very few featured articles on New Zealand (those that exist are Giano's articles on 19th century architects), and so our selected articles and pictures have not for the most part been Featured. We don't have a rule that DYK nominations must be for newly created articles. For the most part, we try to have ITN give a bold reference to an article updated with the news item, but we allow ITN stories which don't have such an article. We have a policy of no redlinks on the portal page other than in the "Things you can do" section.

We don't have a formal relationship with Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand, but we overlap a little bit in the "Things you can do" section.

I believe the New Zealand portal is an example of the best Wikipedia has to offer.-gadfium 19:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I don't see a way for users to make nominations to the selections. How is this handled? I know this isn't a requirement, but I'm curious how portals without a mechanism for this handle it.Rlevse 19:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Nominations are handled informally on the talk page. See Portal_talk:New_Zealand#Useful_stuff, and if you want more history, Portal talk:New Zealand/Archive01.-gadfium 20:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Rlevse 23:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Brian | (Talk) 01:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Brisvegas 11:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support brilliant work by Gadfium. --cj | talk 04:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Outstanding work. -- Siva1979Talk to me 15:43, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Terence Ong 08:20, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose sure this article looks good, but it doesn't have a section for amny of the topics about new zeland. The catagories section links to catagories that make little sense. Sure the features of this portal are great, but the whole reason for portals is to make it easier to find what you want. This portal just seems to be new zeland featured content, not the catagorization of new zeland. Tobyk777 06:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure exactly what you are asking for. If you want to find out more about New Zealand, then your first stop is certainly the New Zealand article, which is listed twice in the "introduction" and again under "Wikiprojects". The "categories" section is supposed to give you listing of articles related to New Zealand under useful headings. If there are headings you think are more useful, please suggest some. The "Wikiprojects" section includes the various places on Wikipedia where the writing of articles about New Zealand are co-ordinated.-gadfium 08:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unless Toby can further clarify his objection, I think it can be discounted as inactionable.--cj | talk 04:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can clarify it. Many portals have sections titled: "Topics in ---" This is an essential section. this portal does not have this, and the catagories section leads to too general of catagories to find any specfifc info. Tobyk777 06:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've thrown together a draft topics section at Portal_talk:New_Zealand#Topics_section. I'll wait a couple of days for feedback and then add it to the portal.-gadfium 08:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Actually at the moment there isn't such a guide line and an portal has been featured without it.However I made a proposition to make more requirements so that portals can be more than a "pretty" front and more usefull see : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:What_is_a_featured_portal at the bottom.However there wasn't much participationin the discussion or changes made.--Technosphere83 15:15, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've now added a topics section to the portal page. Toby, does that address your issue sufficiently?-gadfium 08:26, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My objection has been adressed. Changae vote to 'Support'. Tobyk777 07:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Christianity[edit]

Self nom. One of the first religion portals to be created, it has inspired the creation of many others, including Portal:Judaism, Portal:Islam, and Portal:Buddhism, to name a few (I helped with the setting up of some of these). Originally based on other portals, it has progressed to have its own character and features - the "showcase scripture" section was proposed by another Wikipedian and has since been used in other religion portals as well. Showcase articles, Biblical passages, pictures and Christian biographies rotate monthly, while the Did You Know? section rotates every day. If you have any other suggestions to improve the portal, they are most welcome. Brisvegas 01:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Object. There is no future content queued up and the nomination links are all red. Rlevse 17:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Rlevse 12:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have worked to address your concerns:
1. A new article, picture, passage and biography have been queued up for March. I had been hoping for more time to be allowed for suggestions to be received for these choices, but they have now been done.
2. All the nomination links are now blue, and you can even see that the Picture Suggestion Feature has already been used.
I hope this clears up your concerns. Brisvegas 11:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You NEVER strike out someone else's comments. You let them come back and do that. You merely address their comments.Rlevse 12:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for any offence caused, as I was unaware of the Wikiquette regarding strike-thrus. I will take your suggestion on board and adhere to it in future. Brisvegas 01:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's okay. I did it my first time I fixed someone's objections to my FA when it was a FAC. Rlevse 03:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, nice portal. --Terence Ong 08:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Netural this portal is good, but the catagories section is too far down the page. It needs to be moved up Tobyk777 06:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    One cannot be neutral in featured considerations. It is not a vote, but a review.--cj | talk 06:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object:
    • No box of major topics/articles.
    • The "Information" box is too self-referential, and needs to be removed.
    • Red-links to future articles in the archives should be hidden or replaced with "Not selected yet" messages.
Other than that, looks good. —Kirill Lokshin 17:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have addressed each point you raised.
1. I modified a version of the "Christianity series" to match the portal style and it is now shown on the portal.
2.The Info box was moved to the discussion page and I agree that the portal looks better without it.
3.I have add Not selected yet to the relvant articles
Thanks for your tips - hopefully you are now satisfied with the result. Brisvegas 09:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Much better! No objections now. —Kirill Lokshin 14:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good work. The expanded introduction is much better. I made a series of format changes over the past week that I'd like to see carried over to future months. Also, you may like to consider keeping the selected articles and bios a little shorter so that the portal is easier to digest. And out of curiosity, does the colour green have any significance in the Christian faith?--cj | talk 08:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all your assistance - your various minor tweaks have definitely improved the portal's usability and appearance. Regarding the colour green, I mainly chose it becuase it is my favourite colour :) But it is also the colour of the cloth generally worn by Catholic priests on a "normal" Sunday, unlike Lent when they wear a purple drape over their white robes or Christmas/Easter when the drape colour is red. I might even include this in the "Did you know?" at some point, so thanks for the idea. Brisvegas 08:53, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I love it - with the exception of the green! I would have chosen yellow and blue, but that's just me (green has more of an association with Islam). Nice work to all involved. michael talk 13:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Colour scheme changed. Brisvegas 11:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to everyone for their support and suggestions. Brisvegas 11:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_portal_candidates/Featured_log/March_2006&oldid=213872272"