Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Earth sciences

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[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)