Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Failed log/May 2010

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 not promoted by Cirt 15:56, 6 May 2010 [1].

---

Portal:Barack Obama

I put this up for review more than a month ago with no response. I've tried to get it up to the standards, although this is admittedly a smallish topic. I hope to get some actual input here about its status and whether it should wait before reaching featured status.  fetchcomms☛ 16:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• The preloaded nomination template doesn't seem to exist either :P  fetchcomms☛ 16:07, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments from J Milburn

Just some general thoughts...

• Some more selected articles would be nice... There must be more, surely?
• I'd personally like to see some more images from before he was president, and perhaps more "related" images- pictures of family and the like. Non-photographs like maps showing election results would also be pretty cool. File:BarackObama-Basketball.JPEG is probably better than the current basketball picture. Some more iconic moments would be good- we got him winning the peace prize? That sort of thing may be better than the random "writing a note" type thing- they come across as a little fanboy/fangirlish, rather than encyclopedic.
• We have at least one featured picture, if you want to add that to the recognised content section.
• The news doesn't look to have been recently updated.
• Timeline of the Presidency of Barack Obama, in the topics section, is a dablink.
• The topics section could use some formatting- books in italics, songs/sayings in speech marks, that sort of thing.
• Portal would be good to add to Template:Barack Obama
• Not wild about the selected biography section... The articles on his family would make good selected articles, but I'm not sure the others have much of a place.
• Perhaps a "selected quote" section? That seems very appropriate for a portal on a single person.

Generally looks good. Great topic for a featured portal. J Milburn (talk) 20:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Right now there are 8 bios and 4 articles, which is all the FA/GA listed in the project's scope right now; I could combine them to make one single featured content section, although I think I'll try to find any other possible FA/GA the project didn't include but still should be included if it's relevant, before combining them is necessary. I tried to pick out some images that show a more personal side of him—which I admit now does strikes me as rather fangirly. I'll look through some more media from Commons to add/replace. I forgot about featured images (I've never been able to find FPs very easily) so I'm going to include it in the section (although I did include it in the selected pictures). The news is updated by the Wikinews importer bot directly from wikinews:Category:Barack Obama, so I just have to wait for more big stories (or people categorizing). I'll fix the topics section things, have updated the template (as well as the project assessment template), and will see what quotes I can find. If I cut out the other biographies, I'll probably just have one main recognized content section, but then it might seem odd not to have as many higher quality articles (right now, only two are GAs), although I'm not sure whether this would be a good thing or not. Thanks for the prompt reply, and I'll try and make some improvements quickly too!  fetchcomms☛ 21:54, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I can't seem to find any other recognized content outside of the project. I've changed a few images, although the basketball one you suggested is a bit grainy. Would one of these suffice?  fetchcomms☛ 23:36, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

A selected quote section has been added, with nine selections currently. I can certainly add more, if needed.  fetchcomms☛ 23:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Changed image to this one.  fetchcomms☛ 19:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Selected images is looking a lot better, and I like the quotes section. Still not wild about the selected biography section- I'd be inclined to say that only the direct family belong in the portal so prominently, and so would stick with my call to merge the section with the selected article section. This portal is about a single person- having content about other people seems a little odd. It'd be like having a "selected religion" section in the Christianity portal. J Milburn (talk) 22:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

← OK, making some changes now.  fetchcomms☛ 21:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Query

Have talk pages of relevant WikiProjects been notified? -- Cirt (talk) 16:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I do believe so, although I left the messages some time ago (almost two months ago).  fetchcomms☛ 20:57, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

There are no comments in support of promoting this portal at this point in time, will likely close it in another week. -- Cirt (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

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

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 not promoted by Cirt 02:05, 29 May 2010 [2].

---

Portal:Music of Canada

Just think its a good portal..never done a Featured portal before only articles ..so lets see what you guys think!!
Moxy (talk) 05:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Espresso Addict
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Query Have talk pages of relevant WikiProjects been notified? -- Cirt (talk) 16:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC) There are no comments in support of promoting this portal at this point in time, will likely close it in another week. -- Cirt (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC) -- :( my poor little portal!! LOL ....Moxy (talk) 21:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC) Comment. It seems a shame that this portal gets closed with no attention from anyone, so I will add my thoughts, for what they're worth, despite the fact that I know nothing of Canadian music. The colour scheme is pleasing, and I particularly like the introduction with the clickable map. I don't know whether it's possible to make the regions clickable, rather than just the labels? It would make it easier to use. The layout felt a bit messy or bitty, particularly the way the larger of the two boxes kept switching from left to right, and the fact that the box headers were not incorporated into the boxes. I found the heavy red borders to the boxes a little distracting, particularly in association with the images in boxes. Also in the Topics box. The picture in the Biography box seems a bit wide for the box width at my screen resolution. I'd like a way to review all the featured content on a single archive page, rather than having to keep clicking show new selections. Also I think there should be a way for people to nominate new content. Something seems awry with the randomisation -- I always got say 4 of 5 for both Biography & Article. I'm no expert with dynamic portals, but I think putting in different randomisation seeds might perhaps help? Five Selected Articles & Biographies seems a little light. Most featured portals have a minimum of 10 of each, and many have far more. You seem to have 18 GAs & 4 FAs tagged for the project so there seems no problem in expanding. Also do you have any "Did you know" entries? It's a fun way of highlighting shorter articles. I hope this is helpful in improving the portal! Espresso Addict (talk) 23:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC) Thank you for taking the time to write this ...all will be done!!..Moxy (talk) 02:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Update... pls take a look now!..Have change the coding... It now to allows people to suggest new content and link to archives as suggested above and all the other benefits with that come with the modern coding.. As for more content..we are currently talking about what should or should not be included in the portal...I will update here if this process is still open. If not will renominated t the proper time. Again thank you for all your suggestions ....Moxy (talk) 22:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC) That looks greatly improved -- I hope you can add more content before the process gets closed. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC) Update again!!! Now has more content - with over 25 selections and i added a Did you know? section as recommended ... : ) ... Moxy (talk) 19:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC) ..Ok as per talk.... selections now at 40 ..plus DYK at 20..what else ?? ...Moxy (talk) 16:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

• I think there's sufficient variable content now to Support. Kudos for your continued hard work on this, Moxy. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Open for a significant amount of time with not a great deal of support, will likely close and archive after one more week. -- Cirt (talk) 15:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

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

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 not promoted by Cirt 02:06, 29 May 2010 [3].

---

Portal:U.S. Roads

This portal is supported by the U.S. Roads WikiProject with regular monthly updates. Unlike some other portals I've recently browsed, our project as a whole updates it with monthly nominations for selected article, photo and DYK hooks. The portal is also updated one extra time of the year for April Fool's Day, where the introduction and other sections of the portal change with alternate versions for the day. Additionally, a special selected article and photo are used. For 2008, the entire contents of a stub article were used as the SA, with a bad photo used as the SP. For 2010, we used an article blurb previously nominated for TFA for AFD on the Main Page. The photo was a road sign error, the hooks were funny, but accurate facts from articles, and the News section was set to change to a humorous, roads version of the Main Page's "On This Day" section. We strive for regional balance with our selections, attempting to shine the spotlight each month on states that have never been selected for articles or photos. Later this year, we've discussed using the video of "Galloping Gerty" (the Tacoma Narrows Bridge), for the anniversary of its collapse, instead of a still image. Any comments are appreciated.

On behalf of several members of WP:USRD, Imzadi 1979 → 05:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Query

Have talk pages of relevant WikiProjects been notified? -- Cirt (talk) 16:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:USRD has been notified through its announcements template {{USRD Announcements}}, and ArticleAlerts will pick up the nomination as well. Imzadi 1979 → 00:19, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks fine from a quick look through, although the navbox at the bottom looks out of place. Perhaps just add its contents to a portal subpage and use the same color box?  fetchcomms☛ 21:02, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Created a new subpage, customizing the navbox for the portal. Imzadi 1979 → 02:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

None of the associated Wikimedia links point to an existing page or useful search page. I'll see if I can fix it sometime son. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Eh, I see it's a default template. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

My attempt at a redirect on en.wikinews to a portal news importation page used for the project newsletter was summarily deleted. I may try to recreate that page by transcluding the content. As for the other projects, maybe we can set up a high-level gallery on Commons, but for now I might just remove the template. Imzadi 1979 → 17:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I've recreated the Wikinews page in another format, and I've set up the category on Commons with some image subcategories. Now I just have to get pages going later on Wikiquote, Wiktionary, etc. Imzadi 1979 → 18:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

A few comments: The layout is generally well-layed out; however, the related Wiki-stuff is not very useful. The titles are excessively long; perhaps they could be changed to "U.S. Roads in Wiki-Blah" instead of "Roads in the United...." Also, having New York Roads portal on the related portals area makes it look to an unfamiliar user that USRD is focused mainly on New York or perhaps that New York is worked on separately from the rest of the U.S. But otherwise, I think it's well-organized. --PCB 23:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

The related wikimedia stuff was just changed to accommodate the category naming scheme on Commons. It used to have "U.S Roads" instead of "Roads in the United States". I might just pull the related Wikimedia template though for now.

I disagree on the comments about the NY Roads portal. It clearly is a related portal and should be included. I'm not sure why the NY sub-project felt a need to create their own portal, but as long as it exists, it should be linked from this portal in some fashion. Imzadi 1979 → 23:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

It was created partially because I felt that New York was being blackballed at the US Roads portal. Every time a New York item (article, picture, etc.) was nominated, it was instantly opposed regardless of how good or not it was. I stopped contributing to the USRD portal several months ago for that reason. I also disagree with the portal's practice of favoring regional balance over quality content. The other reason the portal was made is that NYSR already had its own SA system, so creating a full portal was a logical extension of that. – TMF 08:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

To clarify, I'm a fan of regional balance if the content from the "less well known" regions are as good or better than the content from the "popular" regions; however, if they aren't, I'd rather bypass regional balance in favor of ensuring that the content that's featured on the portal is of high quality. – TMF 08:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Until we can resolve the issues with the "Associated Wikimedia", I commented out that section. Imzadi 1979 → 05:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Open for a significant amount of time with not a great deal of support, will likely close and archive after one more week. -- Cirt (talk) 15:06, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

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

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 not promoted by Cirt 02:08, 29 May 2010 [4].

---

Portal:Star

I have got it done very well with Moxy. So, nominating here would be a good thought. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 04:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

• I think a better title for this portal would be Portal:Stars, though it could still be referred to as "the Star Portal"- the names normally refer to the subject (if a concrete noun) in the plural. J Milburn (talk) 10:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Redirect made till now. Portal:Stars --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 10:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments from J Milburn

I'm here now, so I'll give a fuller review.

• Why is File:5 Star.png used? That gives the impression that the portal is featured already.

I had for beautification, but per you I have removed. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

• There seems to be a conspicuous lack of specific stars- in the article section, the picture section- even the topics. Additionally, that seems to go a little off-topic when it talks about galaxies, which I would claim are only loosely related- there needs to be something that differentiates this from Portal:Astronomy, and when the topics section doesn't even list the likes of Sirius or the pole star, it doesn't really seem to live up to its name.

Done --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

• Selected picture is a little messy. In adding all the text, it detracts from the picture itself, and, let's be fair, we've got some great pictures of space. Using three pictures like that on the aurora entry doesn't really work, in my eyes.

I will see. But all pics are too beautiful, in aurora, but if you say I have removed one. Done, as much I could. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

• We have a great number of astronomy FPs, yet these ones seem to have been chosen rather haphazardly- some selected are not overly star-based (arora) while others clearly focussing on stars (File:Sunspot TRACE.jpeg, for instance) have not been selected. In a portal like this, I think you should be aiming for more images than you already have, and more specifically star based images, in order to avoid crossover with Portal:Astronomy.

Correct. But this portal has a very tough work to do as it is like a selected article of Portal:Astronomy. Aurora cause is related to star, somehow. I will see for this also. Done, as much I could. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

• Plasma is a dablink in the intro.

I don't think. It has something there. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

• • In the introduction, the link on plasma points to a disambiguation page. It needs fixing. J Milburn (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Done, linked to plasma (physics). --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 02:15, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully these thoughts will give you something to work with. J Milburn (talk) 10:40, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Query

Have talk pages of relevant WikiProjects been notified? -- Cirt (talk) 12:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, see here. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 14:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments by 70.29.208.247 (talk)

The issue about weight raised at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Star/archive1 has never been addressed. The DYK section is badly wrong in that element. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The portal should not be promoted when it is disseminating factually incorrect information. Just because the source the data is from is wrong, does not mean that Wikipedia should be disseminating incorrect information to the masses. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 05:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Removed. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment from • ɔ ∫ →

The topic sections is extremely lengthy; can you make a "tab" at the top and transclude the topics section there, into a separate page? • ɔ ∫ → 02:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

OK.Let me see. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 05:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

What code do you want me to add Extra..lets collapse all after main start stuff?... Moxy (talk) 09:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done ......tabs all done tks for the help!!!..pls make sure they are linked ok..Moxy (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

• Support Everything seems fine, need to base my test protal off of this. Besides, it's the star portal, it needs a brown star on it. Buggie111 (talk) 13:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• • :D  Done See here --Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 05:02, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Open for a significant amount of time with not a great deal of support, will likely close and archive after one more week. -- Cirt (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

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

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 not promoted by Cirt 02:10, 29 May 2010 [5].

---

Portal:IPhone OS

• Useful: Covers a topic that is broad and interesting. Future expansion is possible as time passes.
• Attractive: With the color scheme pulled from the device itself, the simple black and white look frames the content without disrupting the flow of the articles. Content is illustrated and formatting issues are nonexistent.
• Ergonomic: It is coherently constructed to display Wikipedia's content logically and effectively in ways that enhance usefulness and attractiveness. The key subject is displayed at the top, while supporting articles and content is shown further down.
• Well-maintained: It is updated regularly to display different aspects of Wikipedia's content in an area and updated for the latest of content.
• Adheres to WP:MOS and other guidelines, while showcasing other projects, illustrating content, and avoiding self-references.

--moɳo 00:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Selected pictures ought to be larger and prominent over caption. Selected articles need to have a link to the full article/nomination page if applicable. Articles should not have refs in the boxes. "The iPad showing it's home screen." is grammatically incorrect, no apostrophe. Try using Wikinews Importer Bot for the news maintenance. Needs more related portals--computing, software, etc.? For categories, use <categorytree mode="subcategories">iPhone OS</categorytree>. Should have a DYK section, a recognized content section too. The selected articles should be FAs/GAs, and the images FPs, if possible--put those up first, then if you only have 3 or 4, add more. "The IPhone OS Portal" should be lowercase "i". None of the interwikis in associated Wikimedia go anywhere useful (get rid of Wikibooks/source/versity/tionary, they probably won't have search hits anyhow). • ɔ ʃ → 00:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it needs rotating/random contents for all the selected bits. And use {{purge}} at the bottom. • ɔ ʃ → 00:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Can we move this to Portal peer review instead...? • ɔ ʃ → 00:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I agree. It's a little premature to get FP status. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ message • changes) 00:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Um, no no. That's WP:FPOC. Right now, we are at the place for already featured portals to be reviewed and then kept featured or delisted... • ɔ ʃ → 02:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

So we're in the wrong place to begin with. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ message • changes) 02:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Moved and transcluded to FPOC, though the person might be looking for peer review instead? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 06:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah... it's in no shape for FPOC yet, without rotating contents at all, and whatnot. I don't know whether it'd be better to close this and open a peer review or just move the page yet again. • ɔ ʃ → 14:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, peer review is the right place. It's premature to worry about FP at this time with this portal. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ message • changes) 19:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Open with most individuals commenting portal is not ready for featured portal consideration and recommending to go to WP:PPREV first, will likely close and archive after one more week. -- Cirt (talk) 15:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

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