Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured Portals in Wikipedia

A featured portal is a portal which is regarded by the community as being particularly good. This page is where featured portal candidates are considered by the community.

Please see "what is a featured portal?" for general standards and criteria.

Purge page cache

Shortcut: WP:FPCAN

Featured content:

Featured portal tools:

Nomination procedure

Check the featured portal criteria and make sure the portal meets all of them before nominating.
Place {{portalnom}} on the talk page of the nominated portal.
From there, click on the "leave comments" link.
(If you are resubmitting a portal) Use the Move button to rename the previous nomination to an archive. For example, Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Foo → Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Portal:Foo/Archive 1
Place ===[[Portal:Foo]]=== at the top.
Below it, write your reason(s) for nominating the article.
Finally, place {{Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Foo}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of the page, and then pasting, making sure to replace "Foo" with the name of the nominated portal.

Supporting and objecting

Please read nominated portals fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

To edit nominations in order to comment on them, you must click the "edit" link to the right of the portal nomination on which you wish to comment (not the overall page's "edit this page" link).
If you approve of a portal, write '''Support''' followed by your reasons.
If you oppose a nomination, write '''Object''' followed by the reason for your objection. Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to "fix" the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored. This includes objections to a portal's suitability for the Wikipedia.
- To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.

Consensus must be reached for a portal to be promoted to featured portal status. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates list and archived.

To archive a nomination:

Remove the transcluded discussion from this page. While removing it, mention the name of the portal in the edit summary.
Transclude the discussion to this month's log of promoted portals or log of failed candidacies, as appropriate.
Update the log tallies in {{Featured portal log}}.
On the article's talk page, change {{portalnom}} to {{featuredportal}} or {{portalnomfailed}}, as appropriate.
For promotions:
1. update Wikipedia:Featured portals.
2. add a notice to Wikipedia:Goings-on.
3. add {{FA}} to the appropriate entry at Wikipedia:Portal/Directory.
4. add {{Featured portal}} to the portal page, just above any interwiki entries.

1 Nominations

[edit] Nominations

[edit] Portal:Dogs

This portal meets all of the featured criteria. All recommendations listed at Portal talk:Dogs for improving it to featured portal status have been addressed. Rfrisbie^talk 19:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Support, looks good. Kirill Lokshin 20:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Support, per Kirill. Regards, Gphoto ^talk 22:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Support Much better than the cats :) Joe I 11:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Support - seems to meet the criteria for featured portal status. And kudos to User:Rfrisbie for creating both this and the Portal:Cats below. Badbilltucker 14:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Asia

Portal:Asia is a well designed and informative portal, that meets featured portal standards. The portal was created early this year and is currently updated monthly, with much time and effort put into constructing and mantaining it.--TBCΦtalk? 00:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

There are a few things that should be changed on the portal:
- Text is too small.
- No image credit.
- The link for more featured articles goes to the featured article page; I do not know if this a mistake or not, but it does not seem logical.
- The consensus seems to be that shortcuts to portals follow the format of P:PORTAL instead of WP:PORTAL. Regards, Gphoto^talk 00:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  - Replying to your comments:
    - Changed font size
    - Which image?
    - A link for "featured articles" goes to the "featured articles" page. Seems logical to me.
    - Created redirect.--TBCΦtalk? 00:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
      - Good work, looks much better!
        
        The image I was talking about is in the Featured box.
        
        About the featured article link, I was just a little bit surprised that it did not take me to Asia content, but no matter.
        
        Support. Regards, Gphoto ^talk 01:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
        
        Replying to your comments:
        
        I've replaced the image, thanks for reminding me.
        
        Asian featured articles are under Portal:Asia/2006 Featured article archive--TBCΦtalk? 01:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Give credit to the creator of the work at the end of the description in this format <small>Photo Credit: [[User:Fir0002]]</small>. Obviously the creator of the image will not always be fir0002 so replace that with whoever made the image. Regards, Gphoto ^talk 01:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe that's a bit incorrect. The description of an image needs to include the source, not the uploader. The uploader's username is already listed under the history, so there's no point in listing it again. For example, in this case, User:Fir0002 was only the uploader of the image, not the source.--TBCΦtalk? 01:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

You are probably right, I was referring to several comments by Kirill Lokshin on this matter on this (the FPC) page, so you might want to look at them. As a side note, the main page has the photo credit for all of the featured pictures, so even if you do not have to add the credit, you might want to put up anyway. Regards, Gphoto ^talk 02:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Two things that need fixing:

The news box needs an archive.
The image needs an explicit image credit (see, for example, how the Main Page POTD is shown.)

Other than that, looks good. Kirill Lokshin 20:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Cats

This portal has been reviewed by members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals who offered several recommendations at Portal talk:Cats for improving it to featured portal status. The general consensus was that some minor improvements could elevate this portal to featured status. All recommendations were addressed either by implementing the recommendation or by explaining why no change was made in that area. Rfrisbie^talk 18:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Support, looks good. Kirill Lokshin 20:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Support, well maintained by Rfrisbie, good work. Shyam ^(T/C) 22:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Support, I love cats. Regards, Gphoto ^talk 22:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the biased remark. This portal really does look good though. Gphoto ^talk 02:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Support from an obviously biased party, based on portal's meeting criteria, not personal feelings. Badbilltucker 00:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Support - Very eyepleasing, cats are cool. Joe I 11:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Military of the United States

I started this portal over three months ago. After much time updating and refining it, there's no doubt that it meets criteria. Much of everything is on auto rotate, and I've been zealous of the addition of new items and daily entries. There are a few unusual items, mainly the tabs, which are newly added. Any problems, I'm sure can be worked thru and overcome. Joe I 10:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Support Looks good to me. I like how the boxes do not just follow the conventional featured picture, featured bio, DYK, etc. form. Gphoto ^talk 13:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Support - looks good. Badbilltucker 23:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Support Well done.--Eupator 00:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Support, everything looks good. Kirill Lokshin 20:47, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Support A place for everything and everythings in its place. Well Done. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Cetaceans

I have been maintaining this portal now for quite a few months and feel that it has probably reached FP standard. I feel that it meets the required criteria to be a featured portal. Automatic rotations of content is set up on everything that i feel it can be set up for. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. C hris_huh^talk 12:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

This is quite good, but two things to look at:
- The selected picture box should include an explicit image credit.
- The intro could really stand to be a bit longer; a full paragraph or two wouldn't be a bad idea. Kirill Lokshin 03:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Those changes have now been made. Lots of effort has been put into improving the portal, and I support it as a featured portal candidate. --Gray Porpoise^{Phocoenidae, not Delphinidae} 19:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, looks good now; support from me. Kirill Lokshin 20:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Support. Well done. Neil916 (Talk) 20:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Support - Noticed the "todo" list mentioned voting on the portal, but that can't be helped. Portal seems well constructed and seems to meet all the criteria. Badbilltucker 14:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Support Sobre, joli, efficace. (A kind of translation : ? , pretty, efficient ) Alvaro 04:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Literature

The Literature Portal was created in 7 March 2005, but was very modest during the first year of operation. I have been paying more attention to the portal since June 2006. The portal now gives a comprehensive gateway to the literary content in Wikipedia (I hope). It meets the criteria at the featured portal guidelines. Most of the content, like selected article (FAs used mostly), picture (width 340px) and biography (a recent feature), are on an automatic schedule. All relevant boxes have archives. It receives regular updates from me and KF (DYK), but it is also supported by the WikiProject Books and its sub-projects. I would note the excellent Trains Portal for giving the impetus to move to automatic updates.

Selected article and picture on automatic monthly rotation since June 2006
The daily anniversaries section (A day in literature) is working since 14 June 2006.
The news section has been operating since 14 July 2006.
DYK and Quotes are on a weekly rotation since June 2006.

Naturally some improvements can be still done to the portal, but in my opinion it is not missing anything vital to reaching the featured portal status. With these notes I look forward to comments and suggestions. Best, feydey 20:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Support - Everything looks nice, and the rotation seems alright. The only thing I reckon would improve the quality is the introduction, try to make it slightly longer. Maybe about the history, current influences and stuff. Apart from that, it looks cool. All the best -- Imoeng 00:31, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Indeed it would be better if expanded, but I have seen the vast amount of topics that literature contains as a challenge. Literature includes fiction, non-fiction, comics, screenplays, poetry and numerous sub-genres so the intro would get too long if these are added and the stuff You mention (history, current influences). I kind of like it short and unspecific. But I will think about it. feydey 09:32, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Good point, well you can just put 1 or 2 sentences about when it was discovered. Again, I am not really familiar with literature :). But yeah, I think some more sentences won't hurt. Cheers -- Imoeng 10:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I expanded it now. Thanks for the advice. feydey 10:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it is nice, no problem. Good luck! -- Imoeng 20:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Support, looks good. Kirill Lokshin 03:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Support seems to meet all the criteria. Badbilltucker 16:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Object great portal, but there are a few things that prevent me from supporting. Firstly, there are red links in the Did you know... section; per criteria, these are prohibited in content sections (or rather, limited to contribution/project sections). Secondly, I oppose outright the Quiz feature. I realise it is something which is present on other portals, but it is not something I would like to see enjoying prominence on featured portals. In any event, they are self-referential and thus contrary the criteria. Thirdly, I feel the News section should be better placed – eliminating the quiz would free up space in the right column. Finally, I would look at shortening the selected content sections to decrease the portal's length.--cj | talk 14:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)