Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Electronics/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Electronics

Lots and Lots of work has been done.I wouldn't mind adding a bio section, but both sides are fairly even now, so...Anyways, looking for any comments.:)Joe I 05:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions from Sd31415 (talk • contribs)

  1. Needs a "More about electronics" link at the bottom right of the top box.
    Added More about... links, but not sure I like it.The bold links starting the paragraphs should be enough.
    Yes, now I see. You can remove it — it's up to you. —S.D. ¿п? 00:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Other portals, like the featured dog portal, use the wording "Show new selections" instead of "Switch content."
    That was a pun on the word switch(also used in electronics).
    :) I see. —S.D. ¿п? 00:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. More selected pictures, designs, etc. needed.
    More content is always a given.
  4. A break after the last box (portals: ...) needed.
    <br> added
  5. The two should be smaller.
    Made em smaller, but I think the problem is that the title is not centered horizontally in the bar.
  6. Possibly DYK and selected article boxes?
    Added bio box.

Otherwise, looks good. —S.D. ¿п? 14:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input :)Joe I 06:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions from Michaelas10 (talk • contribs)

Not very sure about this one, but it look pretty well-done. Suggestions:

  • Remove the images next to "The Electronics Portal", they are useless and don't go well with the green background.
It's an on/off switch, I thought it was cute.Maybe they go better with the new colors?
  • Create nomination pages for selected biographies, designs, pictures, and products.
Done. Ci good?
  • Reduce the size of the high voltage warning at the introduction. No need to bold "Consumer electronics".
The portal is about the "field of electronics" as well as "consumer electronics", which can be two tottaly different demons.Some distinction is needed.
  • "Switch content..." - "Switch selections". The selections switch, not the content.
Done
  • I'd personally prefer one paragraph for each image selection. You might want to take it right off the main article.
I don't understand.The images have a simple one line summary.All other content boxes, all of them are limited to one paragraph.Please point to where you see more that one.
  • Photo credit goes right below the image with an extra space between it and the description.
There is a <br> between the centered description and centered credit on every image.If not, please point out specifics.
  • Don't make the size of the selected picture larger than its original, or at least pick bigger images.
I'll look into it.Some of the designs look bad cause, yes, I pumped em up to 400px, but they are also png instead of svg.
  • "Electronics topics" > "Main topics". Avoid repetition of the portal's name or subject.
Done
  • Make the width of the "Related portals" section 100% and place it above the "Associated Wikimedia" section. The width of the portal images is larger than the width of the section on bigger font sizes and the section screws up.
Did that, but it made big blank spots on either side within the box.Maybe I'll just add another row.
  • Place the images at the bottom of the "Associated Wikimedia" section rather than in its middle. No need to make the links black.
Don't see how it matters much, but ok most other FPs have them in that order although the little links "news", "quotes" etc... are always black.(Found two FPs without a wikimedia box at all, oooo) :)
  • Create "Did you know..." and "News" sections. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Will work on a news.Thanks for the input.:)Joe I 02:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Rfrisbietalk 21:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Intro:
    • I'm not a big fan of the images in the header bar the way it looks. I prefer it like Template:Sikhism where there's no clash in backgrounds. Do you have something with a transparent background?
      • Removed
    • The image reminds me of the Philosophy of science intro. Could you rotate some set of images with linked captions?
      • Good idea, I'll look into it.
        • Done
  • Bio:
    • Interesting placement. I'm sure someone won't like it.
  • Design:
    • I would put the "Credit" line (they're not "Photos") directly under the image.
      • Done
  • Pic:
    • I would put the "Credit" line (they're not "Photos") directly under the image.
      • Done
  • Topics:
    • Centering groups with bolded titles looks weird to me. I would left-justify them.
  • Portals:
    • The ordering isn't totally apparent. Someone won't like it.
  • Showcase:
    • 150px images are too wide for a 67%/32% column layout, even at 1024X768. Some words are too long to fit next to the image.
      • 100px
  • Cats:
    • I'm ambivalent about category trees in portals, but it seems to work quite well in the narrow column with IE. For example, it wraps correctly when needed. You might want to ask the Usability project for their thoughts on it.
  • Projects:
    • Again, the sorting order might come into question.
  • Media:
    • The text looks too small to me. I didn't bother to test the links.
      • Increased text abit
  • Archive/Noms/Rotation:
    • I prefer including a direct link above an item on the archive page. "Anyone" should have simple access to a subpage.
      • Done
    • The "nominations" really aren't. They're already being used in the "archive" rotation. Just adding another section header should clarify the difference.
      • Done
    • Since none of the included items have any indication of going through the described process (that I saw), who knows what that's worth?
  • Header & Footer:
    • I don't think you'll get away with not including {{browsebar}}.
      • Added
    • I also like {{Portal nav footer}} better than {{Portals}} (even if I did make the former ;-), but I wouldn't be surprised if you get some flack for that. I made it less obtrusive by blending it into the background.
  • Boxes & Background:
    • Looks nice, although I prefer regular over italic headers.
  • 800X600 displays:
    • It's "broken" at this resolution. This is a featured deal breaker IMHO. Images need to be downsized for the columns to display properly.
      • Downsized 400px to 350px.
  • What's not there:
    • I prefer having a "Read more bla bla bla..." link in each applicable box.
    • "Quotes" and "Anniversaries" seem to be growing in popularity, but I really don't care.
  • Overall:
    • Top-notch overall!

  • One likely featured portal deal breaker (800X600 image/column display problem).

  • Thanks :)