Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Failed log/December 2013

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 OhanaUnited 18:13, 23 December 2013‎ [1].

Portal:Judaism

[edit]

I finished working on this a few months ago, but I haven't had time to submit it until now. Anyway, the portal has:

  • 19 featured articles
  • 15 quotations
  • 48 pictures, changed on a quasi-weekly basis
  • 8 sets of 5 DYKs each
  • an "In the News" section

...and a lot more. -- Ypnypn (talk) 22:01, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How did you pick those articles for the selection? OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't spent any time doing a depth search of featured articles, but it would appear that there are only 19 Judaism related FAs, which seems to be how they were selected. That being said, I would rather have a selection that uses GAs and FAs, if that allows for a selection of articles that more closely relates to Judaism. The prompt for Issy Smith, for example, indicates nothing that would suggest that it belongs on Portal:Judaism. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I replaced Issy Smith with Tefillin, A Rugrats Chanukah with Biblical Hebrew, and Sandy Koufax with Kashrut. All these replacements are GAs. -- Ypnypn (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Sven Manguard
See my above comment on selected article selections
The selected quote appears broken. I am seeing "[[Category:Portal:Judaism/Quote" in the box, rather than a link
I appreciate what you're trying to do, using the Hebrew calendar and pegging relevant images to it, however I'm concerned that the quality of the images varies heavily, with some of them being quite bad. I have a hard time believing that there isn't a better freely licensed image of an etrog, a sheet of matzoh, a Yahrtzeit candle, or Hamentashen, for example. I would rather see high quality images, even if they're not timely, than timely but low quality images. Featured portals are supposed to be a showcase of the best work in the area.
More later, possibly.

Sven Manguard Wha? 06:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The selected quote is fixed now.
I can try to find some better pictures, although there aren't many good ones here on Wikipedia & Commons. Are there any other pictures you want replaced? -- Ypnypn (talk) 13:17, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was just naming off a few. A lot of them have what I would consider to be serious quality issues (bad lighting, clipping, poorly done editing, etc). I'll head over to Flickr and see what I can come up with. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Found on Flickr and uploaded, found on Flickr and did not upload. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:47, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't have time for detailed comments but I'd say generally there isn't enough content for a featured portal. I'd suggest at minimum splitting Selected articles into articles & biographies, and getting at least 20 items in each. For such a broad topic there should be no trouble with this if the pool is expanded to GAs and even good-quality B class articles. The DYKs could also probably be expanded. The customised news box is useful, but it could do with being updated more often than around once a month. I agree with Sven Manguard about the quality of some of the Pictures of the Week. I also think the Weekly Torah Portion is too long, though I'm aware that there are problems with cutting it -- perhaps give the opening and a link to the full text? Hope this helps, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with splitting off bios is that there are very few of them which are high in both quality and importance. In fact, I recently removed some very low-importance FA bios. Even including GAs and "good" Bs doesn't give many important people – definitely not 20. Maybe another section would be better?
You're right about the DYKs. About the News, it's usually been updated more often, but I've been busy in the past month or so. I'm trying to improve the POTW, but I'm afraid I'm not very good at art :-( and I'm sick of arguing about Weekly Torah Portion (everyone has a different opinion, and a discussion got nowhere).
Thank you for your comments. -- Ypnypn (talk) 00:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think 2 text boxes with 20+ decent articles is my minimum for support, but it doesn't matter whether they are articles & biographies or some other split that makes sense for your content. (Or ~30 & ~15, if that's any easier?) I know the news is hard work, I keep missing it in the two portals I maintain! Can you rope in other WikiProject members to supply news? I don't practise any religion, so perhaps the Weekly Torah Portion should be left to meet the needs of those who do, but it does interrupt the flow of the portal visually. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think about having one section for the religious topics and one for the historical/cultural topics? -- Ypnypn (talk) 02:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds a plausible split. I took a look at Wikiproject Judaism's article stats and there seem to be ~850 articles of B class or above, so there's plenty of material to sift through! With these broad portals, it always seems to me to be best to have content of high relevance (and decent quality) rather than just sticking to the oddities of what's passed FA, but I'm aware others disagree. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ypnypn / Espresso Addict / Sven Manguard / OhanaUnited -- any updates on this one? — Cirt (talk) 18:47, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've split the Selected Article sections; unfortunately it's been taking a lot longer than I'd hoped. – Ypnypn (talk) 19:29, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When Ypnypn says it's ready for me to take another look at, I'll take another look at it. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ping me when it's done, and I'll re-review. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, Ypnypn, keep us posted, — Cirt (talk) 00:51, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ypnypn, any updates on this? — Cirt (talk) 04:59, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Closed as not promoted. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:13, 23 December 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

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 OhanaUnited 18:13, 23 December 2013‎ [2].

Portal:Singapore

[edit]

I have been working on this portal and believe that it now meets the Featured Portal status. It contains:

  • 20 Selected Articles
  • 20 Selected Biographies
  • 20 Selected Pictures
  • 15 Selected Panorama
  • 10 Sets of 5 DYK lists

I had some helpful comments by Sven Manguard in the previous portal peer review, and I have implemented his suggestions. Although the portal is not really frequently edited, I modified it so that it requires little maintenance, if at all.--Lionratz (talk) 05:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in the PPR, I'm not the most thorough of reviewers. I recommend asking Espresso Addict for his assessment. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Looks pretty good, I like the simple colour scheme, that the selected articles are mostly GAs, and the idea to have a selected panorama. The weaknesses are mostly related to the general weaknesses of portals on en.wiki (i.e. mostly random content rather than maintained content, focus on selected articles and minimal index function only, reliance on the disappointing content of Wikinews, etc), and probably can only be overcome with a more sweeping improvement drive of portals. Otherwise, some very minor suggestions:

  • The intro does not mention the population of the island-state while less important figures such as GDP and foreign reserve are included
  • Added the population figures.
  • In the selected articles section, SA8 Durian - is not explained in the blurb how this relates to Singapore. I think if included a more customised blurb is needed.
  • Done. Have changed some references to "South East Asia" to Singapore, as well as to add some Singaporean examples.
  • In the DYK section, "Singapore" is overlinked
  • Removed all links to Singapore
  • The inclusion criteria for the "related portals" section is unclear, with many but not all Asian countries included. I would suggest less "see also" type links is better, and limit the listed countries to Singapore's neighbours (Malaysia, Indonesia), and countries with which Singapore has strong cultural or economic ties (i.e. India, China), etc.
  • "Related portals" is a term commonly used on many portals (eg: Portal:Indonesia and Portal:Norway), so I don't really think that there is a need to change it. The portals were included on such a basis: Asia (Singapore is part of Asia), Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam (fellow member states of ASEAN, as well as the Hong Kong, Taiwan (Singapore's direct economic competitors; all share a very similar culture and a history of friendship), India, People's Republic of China (reasons as mentioned by you), Japan (Singapore and Japan share deep economic and cultural ties, and the fact that Singapore was only ever invaded by Japan)

Hope some of the above is of help. --ELEKHHT 00:09, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. Have addressed the individual points above.--Lionratz (talk) 02:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work, I think it is better now. --ELEKHHT 14:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. Simple striking colours, useful map in the introduction, good length blurbs. I like the panoramas.

  • Is the wide fixed width necessary? If the width of the panoramas is a problem, they can be given a scroll box.
  • I thought it would look nicer if the whole image is ahown. Anyways, the whole length is intended as a sort of division between the content side of the portal and the projects side of the portal--Lionratz (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The styles of the headers for the boxes are different for In this month & In the news (lower case italics) than the other boxes.
  • In this month section needs a copy edit. It uses a hyphen as a separator; should be en rule or colon. Date ranges should use an en rule. In this month sections are usually organised by day in the month, not by year. Items use both present tense and past tense; needs standardisation. Can more items be added to the short sections?
  • Done. More entries not feasible unless we really want to go into much less important anniversaries. Singapore only has a recorded history since 1819, after all.
  • I'm not convinced of the utility of using Wikinews for In the news. The most recent item is over a month ago, and others go back over a year. Few if any items appear strongly linked to Singapore.
Well, it means that it is not simply the opinion of one reviewer. As it does not add anything to the portal, there seems to be no compelling reason to include it. Also, IMO it is not a generic issue: Wikinews is strongly biased towards a number of topics, so might be ok for portals like Disasters, but that doesn't mean that it helps make other portals featureable. So why not just simply remove it?--ELEKHHT 14:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did you know & In this month need links to their archives.
  • Can images be added to the Selected biographies?
Some have free images, but Sven Manguard mentioned that whether pictures are included or not should be standardized.--Lionratz (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you give a date in the credits for Selected picture & Selected panorama?
  • In Selected articles, can pictures be added to Cabinet of Singapore, Toa Payoh ritual murders and I am Not Stupid?
  • Not possible. I could add a picture of Singapore's Parliament house for the Cabinet of Singapore (that is where the cabinet sits anyways), but for the latter two, I cannot find any free images that can be used.--Lionratz (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image mouseover text should not have full stops unless full sentences.
  • Yip Pin Xiu Selected biography has red links.
  • Several of the Selected biographies cut off in an odd place.
  • In DYKs, Speakers' Corner image has incorrect mouseover text. Singapore Power Building lacks mouseover text. Limicolaria flammea mouseover text needs a capital.
  • Related portals could do with the two rows being better balanced.

Hope this is of assistance in improving the portal further. Espresso Addict (talk) 14:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the long time it took for me to reply; I was swamped by my real life commitments. Thanks Cirt for the reminder. Added some replies above.--Lionratz (talk) 01:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, you're back, Lionratz! It's been such a long time since we were both active! I must admit I've forgotten what a few of my above points were about. I do still think someone who knows about access issues should take a look at the fixed-width panorama; it might be an unnecessary access problem for those on old-resolution screens. Perhaps an expert could weigh in here?
Personally I would much prefer to have images in the biographies -- it makes the people come alive, in a way text can't -- even if a few were missing. You can always use images that represent the people (eg institution named for them, place associated with them) or just replace the bios with no plausible free image. I'd also suggest adding an image to Cabinet of Singapore in articles, as there's one available.
Re the bios cutting off oddly: I can't recall which I meant originally. Rereading, several of the earlier ones seem to have the problem that there's an initial general summary paragraph, followed by a second paragraph which starts with the beginning of their life (often the least interesting part) and then stops abruptly. Examples include Ho Yuen Hoe, Gan Eng Seng & Reginald Hugh Hickling. Denise Phua Lay Peng also seems to have got a bit scrambled. The other thing I note rereading is that you sometimes use the forename to refer to people, which isn't usual practice. (I don't think it's just that I don't understand naming order conventions, as it includes Westernised forenames.)
As to the related portals box, you could trim the number, make the flag icons smaller, or use a table structure to put them into two rows of six. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some comments:
Otherwise, this portal looks very good. -- Ypnypn (talk) 00:29, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have taken the liberty to fix the issues that were raised by you for the nominator. OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you check wikisource project link?!Gire 3pich2005 (talk) 21:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks OhanaUnited for the help!--Lionratz (talk) 01:30, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like progress is being made here. Perhaps User:Sven Manguard and User:Espresso Addict could revisit? — Cirt (talk) 21:10, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You caught me at a bad time, actually. I'm checking to make sure nothing is on fire, but I can't spend too much time on it tonight. Just going on first impressions, I have the following thoughts:
  • Excellent work choosing visually appealing, high technical quality images. That's what I'm looking for when there aren't relevant FPs. That being said, I really don't like selected image 4, because the side of the building and the wire crossing the bottom half are distracting (and the caption doesn't mention that the image was taken from the balloon, which made things confusing).
  • The Wikiversity logo you're using in the interwiki section is wrong. You need File:Wikiversity-logo.svg, which looks totally different. I've renamed the file you're using so that people won't make that mistake in the future.
Detailed comments to come. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:58, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • [To Cirt] I had another look on 1 November (see above comments); on a quick look, it doesn't seem as if those comments have been addressed as yet. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lionratz and Espresso Addict - I checked the panoramas on several common small resolutions (1024 is the smallest width still in common use, 1280 is the smallest width Wikipedia works well on in Vector). On 1024 the portal itself doesn't crimp to the screen size (compare Singapore with Boston). That being said, a large number of portals don't work in 1024 with Vector, and that shouldn't be held against the project as a) People using 1024 should not be using Vector, and b) people using 1024 should not be using 1024. In 1024 if you scroll horizontally all the way to the right, you get a perfectly decent looking portal with nothing cut off (you just don't see the Vector navigation bar on the right). So, IMO, it's fine in 1024. It's also fine in 1280. Even the widest selected panoramas don't go off the sides in either resolution. I'll check other things after lunch. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pardon me, Sven Manguard, I dont really get what you are talking about (too much technical stuff...) So do I need to make any changes and if so, is it possible to give me some tips on how to do so? Thanks! To others, will be looking through your comments in the next few days. I am being swamped with real-life commitment now.--Lionratz (talk) 01:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Espresso Addict, perhaps you could help with posting some specific comments, below, on what is left to address for Lionratz ? I'm just trying to keep things moving along here, — Cirt (talk) 18:49, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bullet-pointing the outstanding issues from my comments of 1 November, for clarity. My main problem is with the biographies.
  • Images in the biographies; personally I would much prefer to have these -- it makes the people come alive, in a way text can't -- even if a few were missing. You can always use images that represent the people (eg institution named for them, place associated with them) or even just replace the bios with no plausible free image if other high-quality biographies are available.
  • Some biography blurbs still cut off oddly. Several of the earlier ones seem to have the problem that there's an initial general summary paragraph, followed by a second paragraph which starts with the beginning of their life (often the least interesting part) and then stops abruptly. Examples include Ho Yuen Hoe, Gan Eng Seng & Reginald Hugh Hickling.
  • The blurb for Denise Phua Lay Peng also seems to have got a bit scrambled.
  • The blurbs sometimes use the forename to refer to people, which isn't usual practice. (I don't think it's just that I don't understand naming order conventions, as it includes Westernised forenames.)
  • I'd also suggest adding an image to Cabinet of Singapore in Selected articles, as there's one available.
  • The related portals box still looks messy and unbalanced. You could trim the number, make the flag icons smaller, or use a table structure to put them into two rows of six.
Espresso Addict (talk) 20:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Espresso Addict, much appreciated. Lionratz, please update here when you feel these are addressed, — Cirt (talk) 00:50, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lionratz, any updates on this? — Cirt (talk) 05:00, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as not promoted. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:13, 23 December 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_portal_candidates/Failed_log/December_2013&oldid=766905663"