Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Sustainable development

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Portal:Sustainable development

I propose this candidate meets the featured portal criteria. The portal peer review has been addressed. RichardF 02:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Even though it meets all the criterias, I suggest that it should be put on hold until more people contribute to the portal to represent different perspectives. OhanaUnited 06:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
How does this suggestion relate to the featured portal criteria? The portal already contains Wikipedia content from the full range of sustainable development topics. RichardF 14:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Support: I've made a few changes. The portal is informative, uses randomization, and fulfills the criteria. Happy editing, [sd] 22:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the support, although I'm not a big fan of the changes. The "More..." → "Read more..." changes break to two lines at 800X600. The browsebar inside the frame looks "yucky" to me. But hey, it's a wiki. ;-) RichardF 02:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • I changed it back. Here's a couple changes that I didn't undo:
    More quotes... → More...
    ...Archive/Noms → ...Archive/Nominations
Feel free to keep or remove these changes. Happy editing! [sd] 02:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I suppose at some point it would be nice for the criteria to come down one way or another on 800X600 displays – they should be supported or not. ;-) RichardF 02:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Support This looks like an excellent portal. I like the randomization idea, and it looks like there are twenty of each section of the portal, which is great. Nishkid64 (talk) 14:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Thoroughly excellent work, as always, from RichardF. I hope you continue to work on existing/new portals; they're incredibly useful when created as well as this. --Quiddity 17:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Support: I'm not particularly experienced at reviewing these, but I must say that it looks slick. From the testing that I saw set up for it, I am sure that everything was thoroughly considered. --After Midnight 0001 03:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)