Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Free software/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Free software
I would like to apply for featured portal status in the near or mid term future. Portal:Free_software has been around and regularly updated for over two years. It failed a featured portal nomination eight months ago, but I think all issues raised have been addressed. Gronky 20:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey, ok:
- Alittle intro expansion would be ok, not sure about what, but it seems alittle short.Joe I 20:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, I do some thinking on it. Gronky 15:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Featured articles should not be at the top of the page. It's alittle self-referential, which is in the criteria.
- Ah, ok. I previously understood "self-referential" in terms of the portal, not wikipedia in general. Will demote. Gronky 15:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done: Portal:Free software/selected_article_archive. Gronky 15:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- You should have more than one rotated content box. That shows a good size feild of articles to draw upon.Joe I 20:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- I can't think of another. There are not enough good biographies. News is one idea, but free software news is generally ephemeral, so it would be mostly out of date. Gronky 15:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Terminology should be more than just "free software", which should be explained in intro.Joe I 20:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- The intro mentiones open-source software, FLOSS, FOSS, and Libre software. I think that's prominent enough. Gronky 15:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- As for the contributing part at the bottom, you may want to consider adding a tab for such a thing.Joe I 20:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Good idea. I'm trying to implement this now - having some problems with the syntax, but I'll sort them out in time. Gronky 15:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! Gronky 15:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Honestly, this needs to be redone:
- No archives, no nomination systems for most of the sections. Even if some do exist, they at least need to be properly linked.
- The only archiveable thing is the selected article box, and that's archived: Portal:Free software/selected_article_archive. The nomination system is quite basic - it's on the Talk page, I'll make a better system. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Improper external link formats, image thumbnails, and section headers for a portal.
- I don't see which of any of these things are improper. Can you give me more info on this? Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- External link references are against Manual of Style, especially since references shouldn't be on portals by default. As for image thumbnails and section headers, they simple don't look go with the background. Section headers may be formatted into bolded text. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ok. The external references are gone, the section headers are in bold instead of bold italics, and the image thumbnails are gone (actually all the images are gone, NicM has suggested a source of images we can use). Gronky 12:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- External link references are against Manual of Style, especially since references shouldn't be on portals by default. As for image thumbnails and section headers, they simple don't look go with the background. Section headers may be formatted into bolded text. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- The "Operating systems" selections have a point of view.
- I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Is it the mention of "GNU/Linux"? I'll change this to "systems based on Linux and GNU". Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- "Top 5 most well-known" has a point of view as being a selection of what you believe to be most well-known operating systems. As similar to the "Legal and legislative" and "Free software licenses" sections, operating systems simple need to be linked through a topics section. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ok. I've removed the numbering from the lists and made the text clear that these are just 5 examples. And I've merged the "Legislative" and "Licences" boxes into a new "topics" box - which is quite good. Gronky 12:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- "Top 5 most well-known" has a point of view as being a selection of what you believe to be most well-known operating systems. As similar to the "Legal and legislative" and "Free software licenses" sections, operating systems simple need to be linked through a topics section. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- "Categories" tab doesn't work.
- My mistake. This is a work in progress. I'm adding the tabs now at the suggestion of the peer review from User:Searchme. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- All fixed. Gronky 12:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- "Contribute" is exactly the same as "Things you can do", and both sections aren't properly formatted.
- I've renamed "things you can do" to "todo". I'm working on the formatting, it's also an issue caused by the transition to tabbed format which is giving me unforeseen problems. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- These are still the same. Please merge both of the "Contribute" section inside the "Things you can do" section. As for proper formatting, please see this as an example. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've kept the "requested articles / needy stubs" box and the "todo" box seperate, but I've renamed them to "general" and "specific". The "general" box is for lists of articles that need help, and the "specific" box is for articles where there is a suggestion plan for improving them, but they need someone with the right knowledge to work on the suggestion.
- These are still the same. Please merge both of the "Contribute" section inside the "Things you can do" section. As for proper formatting, please see this as an example. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Introduction is way too short.
- Hmm. I tried to keep it as short as possible because (a) the portal is not an article, and (b) This can be a controversial topic, so it's better to say as little as possible and go straight to introducing the wikipedia content.Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, although portals do need an introduction with a proper length. Again, please see our featured portals for comparison. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Still working on this. Gronky 12:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, although portals do need an introduction with a proper length. Again, please see our featured portals for comparison. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- A portal isn't an article, please remove the "Legal and legislative" and "Free software licenses" sections.
- Free software has legal and legislative issues, and licences are a core issue, so it would be incorrect to leave out those topics. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Note that portals aren't build that way, such sections should generally be merged into a "Topics" section by linking their articles. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done, they're in the new "topics" box. Gronky 12:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Note that portals aren't build that way, such sections should generally be merged into a "Topics" section by linking their articles. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Associated Wikimedias don't exists.
- I'll go and try to make relevent pages on those projects. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done. Gronky 15:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- "Wikipedia featured articles" should be renamed to "Featured content", otherwise is completely redundant to the "Selected article" section.
- Ok, I'll do your suggestion, although your reasoning makes me wonder if there's a misunderstand. "Selected article" is not related to Wikipedia's "Featured article" process. Selected is just an arbitrary article from Wikipedia on a free software topic. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Selected articles should be of the highest quality, and that's usually means featured articles.
- Unfortunately, there are only five free software articles that have featured status, so I've chosen topical or interesting articles as well as high quality ones. Gronky 12:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Selected articles should be of the highest quality, and that's usually means featured articles.
- Fair use images and logos aren't acceptable for portals.
- You mean the logo at the top of the GNU, Tux, and BSD, and the photo of a free software badge? Well, I think the rules are wrong, but if the rules say they have to go, I'll remove them. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Lacks some of the most important portal sections, including selected picture, related portals, topics, and WikiProject sections.
- Selected picture is impossible because fair use is not allowed, so logos and screenshots are not allowed. The only allowed thing would be a photo of a free software user/developer/advocate, so that means there'd not be enough pictures, and choosing people politicises the portal ("Stallman Vs. Linus" etc.), which I really want to avoid.
Related portals are there.I'll add a topics section, and there are no active wikiprojects. Gronky 14:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)- I just noticed that the Related portals box wasn't actually there. It must have gotten eaten in the flurry of edits. Fixed. Gronky 14:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well there are some related WikiProjects, such as WikiProject Computing and WikiProject Software. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- I just noticed that the Related portals box wasn't actually there. It must have gotten eaten in the flurry of edits. Fixed. Gronky 14:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I suggest you to take a look at our featured portals for comparison or at least try to fix some of the issues described at the previous featured portal nomination. Michaelas10 (Talk) 13:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
