Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Architecture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Portal:Architecture

This is a re-nomination. We've addressed the issues identified in the last candidacy and now believe the portal is up to featured status.--Mcginnly | Natter 19:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Support. It looks like you put a good deal of work into fixing the previous issues with the portal. Everything looks up to par to me. Nishkid64 23:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Looks pretty good, but the thumbnail markup clashes (subtly) with the background color. I'd like to see it removed in favor of raw captions. Kirill Lokshin 23:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support in the News section, use bold links for highlighted ones. Shyam (T/C) 12:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support: Great portal! However, personally, I think the Major Categories section should be moved down below the columns. sign here • HAPPY HOLIDAYS! — s d 3 1 4 1 5 21:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Thank you all for your consideration - I'll try and deal with them tomorrow. Kirill - could you expand your comments a little, I'm not sure I understand - are you saying that putting the category images and featured pictures in a piped table format is causing problems and you'd prefer we used a gallery code? --Mcginnly | Natter 01:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
      • No, I meant that the color of the margin area around the images in the "Selected article" and "Selected picture" sections—the ones that use the thumb attribute—doesn't match the background of the rest of the box. The images should be set without the thumb attribute, and the captions should just be aligned below them; see, for example, here. Kirill Lokshin 04:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
        • Thanks, I get your drift - how does it look now? --Mcginnly | Natter 11:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Looks good! —dima/s-ko/ 20:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Minor object due to image clutter in Did you know; please limit to one or two. Also, the In the news section is very out-of-date; nothing listed could be considered "new". Are there any plans to introduce automated rotation? --cj | talk 13:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I've address the "did you know" image issue - nothing the news section goes back to last May but is updated with significant global architectural news, as and when it arises. What is automated rotation - is that like the war portal where featured articles and imagesa are rotated? We considered that but prefer human selection, and the nomination pages are quite active. --Mcginnly | Natter 14:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for fixing Did you know (though a single image might still be better). My objection with regards to the News section still stands. A News section is supposed to feature current events; the section on this portal does not do this. In fact, it contains items which are not even relevant to the portal's subject (I refer to this). This indicates poor maintenance. My raising of automation was a suggestion. There are two types: there is random rotation (like on P:WAR) or there is date (daily/weekly/monthly) rotation (like on P:NZ or the Main Page). Neither of these options eliminate human selection; they simply automatically rotate articles/images set in advance by portal maintainers. --cj | talk 16:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • That's great cj - I'll reduce the images to one if you'd prefer. mmmmm current events in architecture - we'll we could pepper the news with xyz firm has won this contract, abc minister announces this initiative - none of which would be of interest to a global readership - the simple fact is buildings are put up rather slowly and the number of really great ones completed in a year is small - how about we rename the section to something like Architecture of 2006-2007 and leave the content as it is? As to the plane crash I'm afraid I'll have to argue that one, since 9-11 plane crashes into buildings are definitely newsworthy from an architectural point of view for all sorts of reasons such as how the building deals with the subsequent impact and fire, buildings codes, evacuation, air traffic control in built up areas and issues relating to what extent designers should respond to terrorist threats. The automatic rotation system sounds interesting and I must confess my ignorance to the process - could you point me in a direction to further information - if it takes the ball-ache out of doing the rotations, then it sounds good to me :-) I'll put the idea to the wikiproject for comment I think. --Mcginnly | Natter 16:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm still concerned this section has only limited usability, especially while remains much the same as the News section. It has the potential to become quite unwieldy. For example, the NYC aeroplane crash; this is only tangentially related and doesn't express the relevance you suggest. The suggestion for an anniversaries feature, while requiring significant effort, is very worthwhile and I hope it is pursued by yourself and the WikiProject. I'll support once the (now) Events section is rewritten more concisely and in the style of a timeline. (Unfortunately, we haven't yet produced a guide on automated rotation, but if you need further explanation, leave a request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals and someone will hopefully oblige).--cj | talk 14:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I could update the in the news section but I have way too many other things to do. True there is little mention of buildings on the main page in the news section - that is where I copied the part you are concerned about but haven't seen much since then. I could find news elsewhere, there is plenty going on, I just find myself succumbing to the notion that a portal is a topic specific main page and the content is derived from there, however portals should be more creative than that imo. My main concern is that I'm losing interest in portals and wikiprojects especially portals about portals and wikiprojects about wikiprojects so if anyone else wants to tend to these concerns they should, because I am not likely to. DVD+ R/W 16:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
So cynical, so young - where did it all go wrong DVD? ;-) I'll step up - I've found a few google locations that are quite good for snappy little archinews bites. --Mcginnly | Natter 16:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Very good. I happily support.--cj | talk 12:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment/Suggestion. Since the news comes rather slowly in architecture, how about changing that section to an "anniversary" style? What's there could remain, but other historical items could be added as well. Perhaps a monthly rotation similar to the one at Scouting would work. Rfrisbietalk 21:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I've approached the wikiproject for some feedback on the news section - in the interim, it's renamed as "Events in architecture 2006-2007". Does anyone else have any suggestions here? --Mcginnly | Natter 01:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
→Comment: The particular completion date of significant architecture is usually vague, before the industrial revolution. 366 pages of anniversaries could be generated from the timeline of architecture. Perhaps 366 pages of High-importance articles? "On this day" (see Portal:Cars) is another option for a heading. — Dogears (talk • contribs) 04:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I think we might struggle with specific days - the categorisation for building completions only specifies years......--Mcginnly | Natter 11:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
But we could create something like a weekly Facts of the week section. --Mcginnly | Natter 11:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok I've updated the news section and I've got some good sources now for it's maintenance. How's it looking? --Mcginnly | Natter 03:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Good job! :-) Rfrisbietalk 03:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)