Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:West Bengal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Portal:West Bengal

This is the portal portraying West Bengal, a state in eastern India. The portal underwent a peer review some months back. Thereafter the portal has undergone major changes like automated features. Thanks to the works of riana_dzasta, Sd31415 and P.K.Niyogi, the portal, I believe, now meets Featured portal criteria. Please help it become a featured portal. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Support Despite my obvious bias, I still think this portal meets featured criteria. If not, any and all suggestions are welcome! riana_dzasta 17:44, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support: Of course, as I am involved in maintaining the portal. Even otherwise, the portal meets the requirements of being featured. Any suggestions for further improvement is welcome. -- P.K.Niyogi 01:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - The portal really educates the reader about the shining region that is West Bengal. On the "biography" section, the box is a little too long compared to the categories box, phps someone could make the two the same size. ITs more aesthetically pleasing.Bakaman 02:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Regarding the biography section, it depends on which biography you're getting. Happy editing! S.D. ¿п? § 03:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Reply - I understand, but you can cut out some info from the relevant subpage/box so that it always fits.Bakaman 04:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Yes, we can work on this suggestion and see that biography summaries be of a standard size. -- P.K.Niyogi 04:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I was asked to have a look into this one, so I will not be "Supporting" or "Opposing". Based on my experience, I can say that the portal is good enough to be a featured portal. There was a minor problem where the selected image overflew the border, but I fixed that. One of the selected pictures (RajBhavanKolkata.JPG) has a wrong license. It has a {{PD-self}} license, while the correct license would be {{PD-author}}. Also, IMG 1709.JPG is missing author credits in the selected picture summary. There is also a technical problem with 394 baul-singers-sml.jpg. The image is said to be uploaded on enwiki first and then to commons. However, in order to verify if indeed this was the case, we need a proof of it being uploaded to enwiki first. A check of upload log of User:Mukherjee (said to be the author) fails verification. So technically, the issue is still unresolved. Other than those mentioned, I think the portal is going good and should not have any problem getting featured. — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 09:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks Ambuj for the comments. However, being asked to have a look does not preclude the scope of support or oppose!! Will see into the issues raised by you ASAP. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks. All issues raised by me stands resolved. I expect this portal to get featured. Best of luck to the contributors. — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 05:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support- I support the portal as this portal have all criterian to be featured. Amartyabag TALK2ME 10:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Support very nicely done. Meets all the criteria as far as I can see. ~ Arjun 15:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Extreme Support - very nice portal. Just a few concerns: is the colour scheme the best possible? Are the selected things meant to change every time I refresh the page? Should Bengali be the only language in the "Wikipedia in Bengali" section? Otherwise, it's fine! --Wolftalk 17:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: To answer your questions, please feel free to suggest any better color schemes! Yes, the selected things are meant to change every time you refresh or purge the cache of the page. Since Bengali is the language most spoken in West Bengal, in my opinion, "Wikipedia in..." should only have the Bengali Wikipedia. Also in Official languages of India, the only language listed next to West Bengal in Bengali. Happy editing, S.D. ¿п? § 20:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, please feel free to change the colours (they're located here). I personally love greens and blues, but I understand if not everybody does :) riana_dzasta 13:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, a well-maintained portal. Shyam (T/C) 21:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Just move West Bengal news to News and West Bengal topics to Main topics/Major topics. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Done. Regards, S.D. ¿п? § 23:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - a very well kept, illuminating and active portal, even if I am slightly biased about its contents. ray 09:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Been following this portal since it was created. I had participated in its last peer review. The portal has developed quite well, and certainly meets the criteria. Good job!--thunderboltz(Deepu) 18:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - A brilliant example for all geographic region or state-related portals. — Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 22:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support One thing, the shortcut in the intro should not be there. Everything else has been taken care of, Good job. Joe I 21:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Done. Happy editing, S.D. ¿п? § 00:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Just curious! Many featured portals portray the shortcut at intro, whereas many do not. Is there any consensus? IMO, the shortcut should be portrayed, as it proves to be handy sometimes.--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  • No, there is no consensus. Personally I think portals should act more like main namespace articles, which don't use shortcuts. And if one is needed for whatever reason the {{portalpar}} template should be used, as this is what it was designed for. Joe I 18:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Actually, {{portalpar}} serves a different purpose. The template is used to link to a portal from an article. Whereas the three letter acronyms like WP:PIN are helpful to link to portals easily during talk page discussions. Also, accessing the portal when typing the URL becomes much easier, as its name always has to be prefixed with "Portal:".--thunderboltz(TALK) 05:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I can certainly see the use of shortcuts in that way. My main thing is that portals function more as an article than anything else(they feature and consolidate articles as well as being laid out and read as an article). Articles don't have shortcuts. If a portal is to have a shortcut, I don't believe it should be displayed as it is in the intro. Joe I 06:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Do you imply the shortcut can be displayed somewhere other than intro? --Dwaipayan (talk) 06:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't be opposed if we can find a suitable place. The only thing to come to my mind is the talk page, tho. Joe I 06:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • ← I don't have much of an opinion about this, but many featured portals do display shortcuts in the intro - see P:CHEM, WP:FOOD, P:PHOTO, WP:PIN... – riana_dzasta 13:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Right now, I agree with Joe I — that the only place the shortcut could be place other than the introduction is the portal talk page, although other portals place shortcuts in the introduction. Earlier, I placed the shortcuts at the bottom of the portal talk page along with a comment. — S.D. 13:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • That's fair enough. Not really a big deal :) – riana_dzasta 13:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • No, it's a big deal! And since there are two shortcuts, we should have to rotate the shortcuts using {{Random portal component}} and create subpages with Portal:West Bengal/Shortcut/1 and so on!! (just kidding) =D Cheers, S.D. 13:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, sure, have fun with that. :p – riana_dzasta 13:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • He he! Everyone seems to be in good mood! Happy editing, guys! --Dwaipayan (talk) 06:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)