Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Featured log/October 2009

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the portal's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured portal candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The portal was promoted by Cirt 06:42, 23 October 2009 [1].

Portal:Horses[edit]

I created this portal several months ago, and have been steadily improving it since then. It recently went through a portal peer review that garnered comments from one other editor, and I believe that it is now ready for featured portal status. This is my first attempt at portal creation and the featured portal process, so go easy on me, please :) Dana boomer (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC) Update: Equine, Veterinary, Thoroughbred racing and Agriculture Wikiprojects notified. Dana boomer (talk) 23:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. My only concerns were addressed at the Portal Peer Review, and it's definitely reason to be featured in my opinion. My only remaining suggestion would be to add a couple categories, but that isn't a big deal. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks! Categories now added, please let me know if there are any obvious ones I've missed. Dana boomer (talk) 23:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Nice, neat, and enjoyable. Great subject too. Looks good to me. -- œ™ 00:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think the active members of WPEQ are all behind this effort! Montanabw(talk) 03:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the portal's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured portal candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The portal was promoted by Cirt 17:45, 23 October 2009 [2].

Portal:United States Air Force[edit]

I'd like to get the Air Force Portal to featured portal status. It was peer reviewed from 27 July-4 September and only received minor comments. I'd appreciate any help that reviewers could offer to help me improve the page.--Ndunruh (talk) 07:25, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Query: Did you notify talk pages of relevant WikiProjects? Cirt (talk) 04:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Negative, I didn't see that in the nomination instructions. I will notify them now, thanks for the head's up.--Ndunruh (talk) 14:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This portal looks great. Every other portal I've visited seems way too busy. Too much stuff on the main portal page to the point where it's almost overwhelming. You don't know where to start. I like how streamlined this portal is. Sometimes less is more. I especially like how the featured articles are right at the top. I don't have any suggestions. Perhaps I didn't read closely enough but it meets the criteria for featured status from what I can tell. // Gbern3 (talk) 18:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the input!--Ndunruh (talk) 23:20, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Jh12 (talk) (addressed)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Added links to existing nomination page.--Ndunruh (talk) 17:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • With the Show new content... link, you may want to go ahead and remove the purge link at the bottom of the portal. I do not know why, but it is not appearing correctly on my Firefox 3.5.3 browser. --Jh12 (talk) 19:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I believe Portal:United States Air Force demonstrates the content, quality, and polish of a featured portal. --Jh12 (talk) 22:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - After a thorough review of this portal and the criteria, I believe that all of the points have been fulfilled and that the portal is of the quality that is acceptable for a featured portal. -MBK004 20:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the portal's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured portal candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The portal was promoted by Cirt 17:52, 23 October 2009 [3].

Portal:Baseball[edit]

In 2007 Djrobgordon got the ball rolling with a Portal Peer Review. Then in 2008 Borgarde did some nice fixing up. Finally, I've fixed up and expanded the various content areas (along with replacing the single-entry selected topic section with selected list). I now believe, with 16 articles, 20 21 bios, 19 21 pics, 10 20 lists, and 5 10 sets of 4-each DYKs (and all can grow) this Portal is featured quality. Notifying Wikiproject Baseball and the two previously mentioned users as soon as I post this. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Query: Did you notify talk pages of relevant WikiProjects? Cirt (talk) 01:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes but there might be other WikiProjects related as well, for example, Sports. Cirt (talk) 01:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
10 lists is a bit on the short side. Have you tried to add good-quality B-class lists? OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
20 sounds like a good number. OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The dates should be delinked in the selected articles' leads, as well as the articles themselves. Also, full date ranges (including lifetime dates) have spaces around the en dashes. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was also surprised not to see Jackie Robinson as a selected biography; it's a GA (and is probably FA-quality), and is an icon in US baseball history. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks great, but I did notice one issue. The "Selected list" section has an excellent rotation of pages, but it seems to overlap with "Selected article" in that it's just a paragraph of prose (ie. you can't really tell that it's a list). Does this make any sense? –Juliancolton | Talk 16:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. I just think this is the best formatting, since the lists themselves (for the most part) are far far far too large to reproduce. Like the Selected Articles the lead from the list is presented to draw people in to read, it's just the lists have lists to read and the articles articles. Staxringold talkcontribs
  • Cool. Just one more thing – some of the pictures have too much accompanying text. I think the captions should be around two sentences at the most. Thoughts? –Juliancolton | Talk 21:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps maybe just a really basic intro, like "Ty Cobb was an American baseball player who played center field for the Detroit Tigers from XXXX-YYYY", that kind of thing? In case it wasn't obvious I just snatched the leads from the related article. Gimme an idea/example (snip one down yourself) and I'll happily alter em up. Staxringold talkcontribs 21:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, that's basically what I was thinking. I'll just trim them myself and let you take a look to make sure I didn't mess up anything. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. –Juliancolton | Talk 15:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Kudos to Staxringold for the good work. Did a few restorations for this portal and was hoping to contribute enough to merit conomination, but he's an energetic fellow. Looks great. Durova333 03:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured portal candidate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the portal's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured portal candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The portal was promoted by Cirt 03:03, 30 October 2009 [4].

Portal:Rhode Island[edit]

I've been working on this one on-and-off for months, and after a helpful peer review, I think it's ready to be featured. One editor at the PR suggested that I replace the selected quotes with selected biographies, and while I'm not entirely sure it's necessary, I'd be happy to implement this change if others agree. –Juliancolton | Talk 18:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just add Selected biographies, as well? Cirt (talk) 23:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mainly because as far as I can tell there simply aren't enough high-quality relevant biography articles. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm... Have you considered Gilbert Stuart and Roger Williams (theologian)? Neither is a featured article, but both look to be in pretty good shape. --Orlady (talk) 18:54, 11 September 2009 (UTC) Actually, Gilbert Stuart is a GA. The other is rated "start," but appears to be past that stage. --Orlady (talk) 19:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Query: Did you notify talk pages of relevant WikiProjects? Cirt (talk) 09:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I left a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states. Cirt (talk) 16:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Other than those minor discrepancies, it seems fine to me. The two portals above seemed not ready for !votes yet, but I guess this one is. ceranthor 00:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, in IE8, the picture, ITN and categories boxes slide to the right but below the left hand boxes. –Moondyne 05:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for delay in replying. [www.filefactory.com/file/a0d5215/n/PortalRhode_Island_screenshot-0001_jpg]. Seems to be working OK on my home PC but not my work one. Work screen res is 1280x1024. –Moondyne 03:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, I see. I think it should be fixed now. –Juliancolton | Talk 04:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. Unchanged (purged also). –Moondyne 04:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How 'bout now? –Juliancolton | Talk 16:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
50% fixed it but the l&r boxes were butted up hard against each other.49% might be a compromise. See File:PortalRhodeIsland-FF3-49%.jpg and File:PortalRhodeIsland-IE8-49%.jpg. You can delete those 2 images when you've finished with them. If I look at another random portal, say Portal:Angola, the middle separator column width is almost identical in both IE and FF. –Moondyne 04:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, odd. I'll ask around to see if anybody knows an easy fix. –Juliancolton | Talk 14:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - "In the News" is kind of stale. Two items are over a year old. --Orlady (talk) 13:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • King Solomon would be proud of that solution. --Orlady (talk) 23:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cirt was kind enough to write a new Wikinews article, so it's back up to 3. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 04:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments/suggestions by Jh12
  • Unfortunately, I believe I've exhausted all possible selections for these. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update, I think all outstanding concerns have now been resolved. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

anything else? –Juliancolton | Talk 19:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support
Sorry, I guess I was waiting for slightly more content. But if it's not there it's not there, and really as long as you continue to maintain and add to the portal over time I have no problems adding my support. --Jh12 (talk) 10:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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/October_2009&oldid=322857652"