Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Textile Arts

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 13:15, April 24 2008.


[edit] Portal:Textile Arts

Self-nomination. See most recent archived peer review. Stats: (17) Selected articles, all with an associated free-use image, all of "B" class or higher, (10) Selected bios, all with an associated free-use image, all of "B" class or higher, (30) Selected pictures, (11) sets of 3 WP:DYK hooks, each with one free-use image per subpage, (25) Selected quotes. All of these subsections are randomized. The portal also has (10) Featured Pictures, which are displayed in the featured content section and the Selected pictures section. I believe the portal meets the standards for Featured Portal status. Cirt (talk) 15:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Note: - This WP:FPOC is a Co-nomination with Durova (talk · contribs). I also want to acknowledge PKM (talk · contribs), who helped out a lot with the portal, and also the WikiProject Textile Arts. Cirt (talk) 15:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Co-nominating with many thanks to Cirt for his assistance helping our little wikiproject get this far. We couldn't have done it without him. :) DurovaCharge! 15:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Comment. A good-looking portal, with an excellent complementary colour scheme, a functional layout and lots of good content. I have a few comments and queries. For an industry that has traditionally been performed by women in many cultures, the selected biographies seem light on women (2/9), but presumably this reflects articles available? The selected pictures in the current gallery format is spacy and the white/grey boxes spoil the colour scheme -- could another format be used? The two columns are significantly unbalanced under many random selections -- more consistency in length of blurbs to minimise this would be useful. The image in the selected article could be enlarged somewhat throughout; it needs to be larger for comprehension in some cases, eg weaving, goldwork, Silk Road; also Emil Rieve (selected biographies). My other concerns are extremely minor nitpicks. Consistency over full stops and bolding to legends in the gallery of featured pictures is needed. The "Featured and Good quality content" heading reads a little awkwardly, and could probably do without the capital for "Good". "More..." vs "Read more..." needs standardisation. That's all I could see -- hope this is helpful! Espresso Addict (talk) 10:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Responses
  1. Yes, the biography selection was due to availability of articles of a high enough quality, though WikiProject Textile Arts is continuing to work on other related bio articles. Cirt (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. The Selected pictures section is modeled after other WP:FPORTs such as Portal:Criminal justice. Cirt (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    Portal:Criminal justice isn't a good comparison because it has a white background to its text boxes. Espresso Addict (talk) 11:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    Some other portals that I have worked on with the exact same format for highlighting the Featured pictures in that subsection include Portal:Comedy, Portal:Film, Portal:Journalism, and Portal:Oregon. All of these were promoted as WP:FPORTs without an issue about that subsection - I think the <gallery></gallery> style formatting for that subsection to highlight Featured pictures related to the theme of the portal works fine. Cirt (talk) 11:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    All these examples have either a white textbox background or a colour such as pale blue that harmonises well with white/grey. Only Oregon has anything like the number of featured pictures, and personally I think that looks a little messy. Espresso Addict (talk) 11:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    Personally no one else as far as I can remember has ever had an issue with this before, and I do not feel that this should hold up the portal's promotion to WP:FPORT, particularly as the exact same formatting is used in lots of other WP:FPORTs. But RichardF (talk · contribs) has been at this longer than me and is also pretty knowledgeable about color-formatting in portals, and I have asked for his input here. Cirt (talk) 11:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    I looked at Wikipedia:Gallery tag and it doesn't appear to offer any option to pass a background color parameter. The choice here is either to use it or lose it. I say use it. :-) RichardF (talk) 16:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    Should be possible to do something with tables? Unless there's some glitch to using tables in portal boxes of which I'm not aware. Espresso Addict (talk) 17:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    Of course, it's possible. It's just that no other featured portal has gone to that much trouble for featured pictures. RichardF (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    (outdent) Well, I finally managed to track down the "undocumented" gallery parameter options at b:Editing Wikitext/Pictures/Images in Containers#The Image Gallery! >;) For example, "...many other font and formatting options have been added. These formats use style-sheet rules. (See CSS2 Properties Reference for more). All of the font family, style, color, ect, can be adjusted, as well as the text padding. Some properties remain obstinate; the notion of background color does not extend to the off-white photo mask, but works on the space between the border and the mask." I made the changeable portion of the background "transparent." RichardF (talk) 01:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
    I created a few different versions of gallery formatting that can be seen in the difs. Pick one or try something else. :-) RichardF (talk) 02:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
    I think the changes to Portal:Textile Arts/Quality content look great, but I will defer to RichardF (talk · contribs)'s opinion as far as stylistic/coloring issues for WP:FPORTs. Cirt (talk) 03:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
    I like the progression from the dark brown frame to the off-white photo mask. I definitely wouldn't try to reformat the pics using a table. RichardF (talk) 03:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
    That's a definite improvement! Thanks, Espresso Addict (talk) 09:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. I just tried purging the portal to look at 10 different randomized versions and the columns do not appear significantly unbalanced to me. Lengths of the blurbs in the selected sections are purposefully uniform throughout. Cirt (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Images are of a standard size, uniform with the sizing used at other WP:FPORTs such as Portal:Sustainable development - but I went ahead and increased the image sizes in all of the above-mentioned selections. Cirt (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. Fixed consistency over full stops and bolding to legends in the gallery of featured pictures. Cirt (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Featured and Good quality content - fixed, as per above suggestion, just changed it to "Quality content". Cirt (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. Fixed layout for "Selected article" from "Read more" to "More..." like the others. Cirt (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support. Great portal, great work. I was worried at first about the small number of selected biographies, but seeing as this seems like a problem which is out of Cirt, Durova or KPM's hands, I'm willing to let it drop. Qst (talk) 13:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - Typical Cirt work. Rudget 18:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support as project participant, with all due thanks to Cirt and Durova. - PKM (talk) 03:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Update: - Thanks to PKM (talk · contribs) on the article Bess of Hardwick (plus previous work by others from WP:TA, as mentioned above) we now have (10) Selected biographies in rotation, each with an accompanying free-use image. Cirt (talk) 18:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Looks decent, support. OhanaUnitedTalk page 04:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support. Wow. The featured pictures are wonderful. Layout looks perfect. Colors are very good contrast with blue links. Beautiful job. -Susanlesch (talk) 03:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Promoted --Rudget 13:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.