Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured Portals in Wikipedia

A featured portal is a portal which is regarded by the community as being particularly good. This page is where featured portal candidates are considered by the community.

Please see "what is a featured portal?" for general standards and criteria.

Before nominating an article here, it is highly recommended you receive feedback from the community by listing it at portal peer review.

Nominators are expected to make an effort to address objections. A portal should not be a featured portal candidate and at the same time be listed at portal peer review. Users are asked not to add a second nomination here until the first has gained support and concerns have been substantially addressed. Do not split a nomination page into subsections, which will cause problems in its archiving (if necessary, use bolded headings). Please respond positively to constructive criticism.

For a nomination to be promoted to featured portal status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among the reviewers and nominators, as determined by the portal directors: OhanaUnited, Dihydrogen Monoxide and Rudget. If, after sufficient time, objections considered actionable have not been resolved or consensus for promotion has not been reached, a nomination will be removed from the list and archived.

At present, there are 119 featured portals, of a total of 548 portals on Wikipedia.
Shortcuts:
WP:FPOC
WP:FPORTC

Featured content:

Featured portal tools:

Nomination procedure

  1. Before nominating a portal for featured portal status on this page, compare it against the featured portal criteria and ensure that it meets all criteria before nominating.
    • It is strongly recommended that you use the portal peer review process before nominating the portal. Peer reviews help to identify and fix basic improvement needs before they might be used as the basis for opposing a nomination.
    • You may also wish to observe other featured portals in the same topic to get ideas on how to further improve your portal before nomination.
  2. Place {{FPOC}} on the talk page of the nominated portal, and click the "initiate nomination" link – This will allow you to initiate the nomination in the correct format.
    • Note: If you are resubmitting the portal after a previously failed nomination, it is important that you follow the following instructions correctly:
    1. Use the move tab to rename the previous nomination to a new title:
      example: move Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Example to Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Example/Archive 1
      Go back to the template you left on the talk page of the nominated portal, and replace the code {{FPOC}} with {{FPOC|Archive 1}}. Save the page and re-click the "initiate nomination" link to start the nomination again.
  3. Fill in the blanks of the page, including why you are nominating the portal and other necessary details about the portal that need to be covered.
  4. Click this link and place the following code (replacing Example with the name of your portal) directly under the header, and above all previous nominations. This will transclude the nomination subpage you created for your nominated portal to be seen on the main candidacy page. Be sure to include an edit summary that clearly states which portal you are nominating: e.g., nominating Portal:Example.
  5. Nominator is strongly encouraged to watchlist the nomination page.

Supporting and objecting

Please read nominated portals fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

  • To edit nominations in order to comment on them, you must click the "edit" link to the right of the portal nomination on which you wish to comment (not the overall page's "edit this page" link).
  • If you approve of a portal, write '''Support''' followed by your reasons.
  • If you oppose a nomination, write '''Object''' followed by the reason for your objection. Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to "fix" the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored. This includes objections to a portal's suitability for the Wikipedia.
    • To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
  • Any registered user may vote. IP users will have their votes crossed out, but their comments on portal content should be considered. Users casting more than 1 vote by using alternate/different accounts will have all but their primary account's vote removed.

Consensus must be reached for a portal to be promoted to featured portal status. Consensus shall be determined by a nomination closer who is not materially involved in the portal's development or maintenance, or any related WikiProjects. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates list and archived.

Contents

[edit] Nominations

[edit] Portal:Chicago

User:Cirt and I have continued the work of other wikipedians and cleaned up this page. He did most of the automated randomization (although I added the randomized quote section). We have had some debate on the talk page about the main image for the Portal introduction and the length of its text. I am willing to modify either of these, but like what I am presenting.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments
  1. I still think the Intro text is way way too big/long, I think RichardF (talk · contribs) had already brought this up as well. Cirt (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    Houston, Texas is the fourth largest city in the country and Chicago, Illinois is third. I would expect Chicago would have just a little bit more to say than Houston and Portal:Chicago does not look that much longer than Portal:Houston.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
    Compared to other WP:FPORTs and per this comment from RichardF (talk · contribs). But hopefully others will comment on this as well. Personally I like the Randomized-Intro format used at WP:FPORTs like Portal:Oregon, Portal:Indiana, Portal:Iceland/Intro and Portal:Philosophy of science/Intro. Cirt (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
    I have shortened it even more, but I think our project is doing a little better than most on figuring out what things are important to it and thus may have more to say.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    Still looks a bit long to me, and I still think all those images mashed together in the right corner looks unseemly. Cirt (talk) 13:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. The multiple pictures at the Intro page (in my opinion but I would like to see what other WP:FPOC regulars think please) could be randomized and looks cluttered all bunched together like that in a box. Cirt (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    I thought we settled that on the talk page. If we must make a change, my choice is visible there as well.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
    I stand by my opinion on this. Hopefully others will provide some feedback. Cirt (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  3. Something is messed up with the overall width of the portal, it goes off my screen. Could be the Related portals section, which probably needs to be smaller, and in more rows. Cirt (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    I added a third row.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
    Good - though I notice some images need to be addressed. Cirt (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
    What do you do for Portals with no representative image?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    Surely there is a state flag or city flag or free use map or something that could be used. Cirt (talk) 13:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  4. Selected quotes section is a bit large and unwieldy, try modeling after Portal:Criminal justice instead. Cirt (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    That is an easy change to make, but right now the left right balance seems to be pretty good as it is with it on the right partition. If I removed it and put it at the bottom the right side would be a little short on my preferred screen resolution. What resolution are you using?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
    I meant more stylistically. Also, generally the selected quotes section is better off at the bottom at 100% spacing, so as to have less variability in each randomization. Cirt (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
    If we move quotes out to the bottom then we have to add Portal:Chicago/Selected list back in for left-right balance.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    No, there are much easier ways to achieve balance, like simply moving a couple subsections around. But I will leave that decision up to you, personally I think the quote sections generally are better at the bottom, though not always. Cirt (talk) 13:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  5. "Chicago has seen illegal corruption of Al Capone and the Cook County Democratic Organization run by Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley." did you intend to call the Mayor corrupt? It doesn't seem supported in his article. Rmhermen (talk) 22:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
    How is that?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments

Great work; the portal's very informative. A few comments —

  1. Right now, Related portals has this image twice.
    • I could actually use some advice on this because I want to use all city Portals, but two don't have appropriate images. Maybe I should just use USA and Illiois.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. The box's headers aren't uniform throughout the portal. For example, Selected article and Topics are italicized, while Selected landmark and News are not.
  3. In Things you can do, I'd suggest commenting Peer Review out while there's nothing to do there. * '''[[Wikipedia:Peer review|Peer Review]]:''' → <!--* '''[[Wikipedia:Peer review|Peer Review]]:''' -->.
  4. The Selected landmarks box has both ...Archive/Nominations More... and Suggest • More landmarks... I would suggest deleted Suggest • More landmarks... and just using ...Archive/Nominations More... as the other Selected boxes do.
  5. The article names in selected articles 57 and 58 (e.g. Northern Illinois University shooting → Northern Illinois University shooting) need to be linked.
  6. Some of the Selected Biographies have dates of birth (and death), but most do not. Also, some had born while others have just b. Please make them uniform; the easiest way is to not have those dates for all the biographies.
  7. More Selected Quotes are needed — at least ten.
  8. Both the Quote and Selected landmark pages have Selected biographies list, which should be changed to Selected quotes list and Selected landmarks list, respectively.
  9. In the quotes, I think "-Mark Twain should be changed to something like " — Mark Twain. But maybe that's just my preference. :) On a side note, I like the panorama here! Best regards, [sd] 12:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Weather

After a complete overhaul of the format, automation of all the selected content, and hours of blood, sweat, and tears, WikiProject Meteorology humbly presents this lovely Portal for review by the community. -RunningOnBrains 07:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • I'm confused by your automation of the selected content -- is it possible to get another random selection? Espresso Addict (talk) 16:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
    • The format we have now is that we have one article selected to be featured on the Portal each month. Maintaining it is currently a collaboration between me and another editor from WikiProject Meteorology, but we are hoping to bring in more editors from the project to help.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Runningonbrains (talk • contribs)

Support. Looks nice. I too am confused and wonder if the portal is random or static. But if you mean you are going to maintain it manually that is a valid approach. Congrats on your hard work. —SusanLesch (talk) 05:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment, it would be nice to see monthly updates (or the random portal component) used on Portal:Weather/Did you know to prevent it from becoming stale. Qst (talk) 16:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Currently DYK articles are added as new Weather-themed articles are added (see here and here). Did you mean we should bring in older articles as well, updating the DYK monthly? -RunningOnBrains 03:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment- introduction needs to be worked out. its too brief. Sushant gupta (talk) 02:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Will work on it. -RunningOnBrains 03:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Y Done although I think it still needs a little tweaking, will work on it in the next few days.-RunningOnBrains 03:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment The "Quality articles" box doesn't open correctly, it gets all messed up. Also, the selected biography has been the same for several months IIRC. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I've tried fixing the "Quality articles", it works correctly in Firefox, it only seems to get messed up in IE as far as I can see. Do you know where I can get help with that? -RunningOnBrains 03:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Additionally, the selected biography should update tomorrow (June 1st). -RunningOnBrains 03:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
        • Ah, ok. The quality articles box still doesn't work for me, but I guess there's not much you can do about it. One more comment: I'd add one or two of the many tropical cyclone FAs to the quality article box. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
          • Do you think? I've always been iffy about including TCs since they have a separate portal, but if you think there should be some I'm willing to add them.-—Preceding unsigned comment added by Runningonbrains (talk • contribs)

[edit] Portal:Earth sciences

  • Support as nominator- a very nice portal with clean layout. it is good in its coverage and is well structured. thank you, Sushant gupta (talk) 13:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Y Done It's really neat. Is there archive/nominations for DYK? If yes, please provide a link to the box in the portal. I want to ask the selected picture #11, shouldn't that picture belongs to biology instead of earth sciences? OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
    • i have replaced the selected picture #11. i will soon meet the dyk section too. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 03:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
    • fine i have addressed both the things. thank you, Sushant gupta (talk) 12:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Comments
  • Y Done The collapsible Featured content area makes no sense to a newbie...add relevant links (what's a featured article? etc.)
have a look at the portal:music. it is a featured portal. though it also shows recently featured article subsection. the fact is that there are many featured portals having these terms used. even many websites uses such terms like featured and it is already understood that what these terms actually means. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 12:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Y Done I purged four times, and every time there was a fair bit of white space below the WikiProjects bit. Needs resorting
thats your screen resolution problem. i have an iMac (21 inches) and a PC (17 inches). the portal looks clean with properly placed sections. Sushant gupta (talk) 12:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Y Done There are only two DYK options...I'd suggest you try something like the DYK rotation on P:AUSMUSIC...it's not really randomised at the moment.
  • Y Done I'd merge the categories and related topics areas as they seem a bit redundant at times...
  • Y Done Introduction's prose is not good...copyedit please.

dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Y Done Comments. Nice-looking portal with good content. I'm confused by the current layout for "Related topics" and categories; I think the latter should state that it is linking to categories, not articles. Also it would be nice if the box behind the category listing were beige to match the "Related topics" boxes. The current format for "Quality content" seems hard to use; not only do readers have to know what the various classes of article mean, but they have to click through multiple times to get to the lists of categories, and then most are only linked to talk pages. It would be much easier to use if the articles were simply listed. The introductory section could do with some further copy editing; for example capitalisation is inconsistent in multiple places. It would be nice to have more than four selections of DYKs and thumbnail pictures here would also be a bonus. A couple of minor points... "Related Portals" should probably use lower case for consistency with other headings. The hyphen is not style for introduction of following sections (under WikiProjects & "Quality Content"). Hope this is helpful. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
i have addressed most of your comments, i will improve DYK section soon. Sushant gupta (talk) 06:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Y Done Question and Comments.
  • Appearance is really nice. The title "The Earth Sciences Portal" is beautiful and a great idea. The white bordered tables (at least in my Firefox) help legibility and look good to boot.
  • On what basis are articles included in "Quality content: Featured articles"? They seem to be geography articles.
  • I removed two hyphens from Portal:Earth sciences/Wikiprojects to illustrate what an earlier commenter mentioned. They could be removed from headings throughout.

—SusanLesch (talk) 05:02, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

thanks for your comments. i do appreciate them. well geography is a field within Earth sciences. thats why i placed featured articles within that section. Sushant gupta (talk) 03:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


All the above stated issues have been addressed. Sushant gupta (talk) 05:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support – succinct, clean lines, acceptable length of blurbs, good use of contrast and randomisation is a good technique to prevent staleness in portals. Good work indeed. Additionally, I appreciate all the comment above being addressed. Rudget (Help?) 11:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Portal

Portals:  Featured (Criteria, Candidates) | List | Directory | WikiProject | Guidelines | Instructions | Peer review | Category
Languages