Wikipedia:Portal peer review/West Bengal/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Portal:West Bengal

There no seperate peer review process for portals, so Portal:West Bengal is being nominated for a peer review here. The Portal: West Bengal is a relatively new portal, and is well-maintained. Please provide suggestions/comments for improving this portal and elevating to featured status. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Please note: For archived old peer review of the article West Bengal, please see Wikipedia:Peer review/West Bengal/archive1

  • After visiting Portal:Current Events everyday, I was a bit suprised that this portal did not link back or cite which news source it used. Just an observation, everything else looks very well. Also whats the point of that red link category in the categories section? Is it going to be created or was it recently deleted? - Tutmosis 19:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Reply: The category in red is going to be created soon. Yes, no link/citation of news source in "In the news" section is a major drawback. This will be taken care of. Thanks a lot for the observation. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
All newitems are now being put up with the source mentioned. -- P.K.Niyogi 02:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Nice work on the overall! Some comments:
  1. A fair use pic is currently in use in the DYK section. Please replace/change.
  2. I couldnt figure out how the selected biography is selected and rotated.
  3. The edit link on the "selected article" box goes to a page containing a template. Would it be possible to avoid this, as this would probably lead to confusion to less familiar users.
  4. A link to Portal:Current events and to wikinews would be nice in the news section.
  5. Just something that struck me: When archiving, isnt it a better practice to put the latest on top, rather than the bottom as done presently at Portal:West Bengal/West Bengal news/Archive?
Done and it will be followed -- P.K.Niyogi 15:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Other things look fine.--thunderboltz(Deepu) 18:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

  • There are a few areas that need improvement.
    • Archives need to be created for selected article, picture and biography.
    • There's a Fair-use image in the DYK section. Remove it ASAP.
    • The news section needs summarisation.
    • Tasks lists should also preferably have a "create" sub-heading.
    • Inconsistent dash usage in Tasks list.
    • Why are pipes used in all WB Topics except "people". Standardise. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 06:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)