Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates

 

Zobacz też:

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.

Before nominating an article here, it is highly recommended you receive feedback from the community by listing it at portal peer review.

Nominators are expected to make an effort to address objections. A portal should not be a featured portal candidate and at the same time be listed at portal peer review. Users are asked not to add a second nomination here until the first has gained support and concerns have been substantially addressed. Do not split a nomination page into subsections, which will cause problems in its archiving (if necessary, use bolded headings). Please respond positively to constructive criticism.

For a nomination to be promoted to featured portal status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among the reviewers and nominators, as determined by the portal directors: OhanaUnited, Giggy and Rudget. If, after sufficient time, objections considered actionable have not been resolved or consensus for promotion has not been reached, a nomination will be removed from the list and archived.

At present, there are 125 featured portals, of a total of 548 portals on Wikipedia.
Shortcuts:
WP:FPOC
WP:FPORTC

Featured content:

Featured portal tools:

Nomination procedure

  1. Before nominating a portal for featured portal status on this page, compare it against the featured portal criteria and ensure that it meets all criteria before nominating.
    • It is strongly recommended that you use the portal peer review process before nominating the portal. Peer reviews help to identify and fix basic improvement needs before they might be used as the basis for opposing a nomination.
    • You may also wish to observe other featured portals in the same topic to get ideas on how to further improve your portal before nomination.
  2. Place {{FPOC}} on the talk page of the nominated portal, and click the "initiate nomination" link – This will allow you to initiate the nomination in the correct format.
    • Note: If you are resubmitting the portal after a previously failed nomination, it is important that you follow the following instructions correctly:
    1. Use the move tab to rename the previous nomination to a new title:
      example: move Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Example to Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Example/Archive 1
      Go back to the template you left on the talk page of the nominated portal, and replace the code {{FPOC}} with {{FPOC|Archive 1}}. Save the page and re-click the "initiate nomination" link to start the nomination again.
  3. Fill in the blanks of the page, including why you are nominating the portal and other necessary details about the portal that need to be covered.
  4. Click this link and place the following code (replacing Example with the name of your portal) directly under the header, and above all previous nominations. This will transclude the nomination subpage you created for your nominated portal to be seen on the main candidacy page. Be sure to include an edit summary that clearly states which portal you are nominating: e.g., nominating Portal:Example.
  5. Nominator is strongly encouraged to watchlist the nomination page.

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.
  • Any registered user may vote. IP users will have their votes crossed out, but their comments on portal content should be considered. Users casting more than 1 vote by using alternate/different accounts will have all but their primary account's vote removed.

Consensus must be reached for a portal to be promoted to featured portal status. Consensus shall be determined by a nomination closer who is not materially involved in the portal's development or maintenance, or any related WikiProjects. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates list and archived.

Contents

Nominations

Portal:Peru

Self-nomination. After lots of work, it seems to me Portal:Peru is ready for a featured portal nomination. As there are very few active members at Wikipedia:WikiProject Peru, this portal is designed to be as low-maintenance as possible. It currently has 15 selected articles, 20 selected pictures and 10 DYK sets each with 5 hooks, all of which rotate randomly thanks to the {{random portal component}} template. All selected articles are either featured or good articles and all the DYK hooks are properly referenced in their linked articles. There is no selected biography component because there are very few high quality Peru-related articles at Wikipedia so it would make no sense to split them in two sections. The only portal section that requires manual updates is the Peru news section and this has been continuously and regularly updated for over a year. As for other components there's a things you can do section, a Peru topics section plus related portals and wikiprojects sections. Every now and then you might see an occasional red link, they are a reflection of the limited number of Peru-related issues currently covered at Wikipedia and an encouragement for further contribution. --Victor12 (talk) 17:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments
  1. The top image is a bit too self-referential for my taste, others may disagree. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. New section looks clunky, good be improved by standardizing with Wikinews Importer Bot (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Not sure what you mean here. Coverage of Peru at Wikinews is quite spotty so no point in using the Wikinews Importer Bot. Any format improvement suggestions? --Victor12 (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Wikinews Importer Bot (talk · contribs) could be used, in addition to a few chosen news events as used currently. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    The problem with the bot is that there aren't that many news about Peru at wikinews. According to http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Portal:Peru there are only four Peru related news items for all of 2008 at wikinews so it would not be very useful to use the bot. Could you be more specific about why this section looks "clunky". --Victor12 (talk) 01:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    It has redlinks. It has an awkward template-link to Wikinews at the bottom, instead of a different style which might mesh better with that subsection. Cirt (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
    Redlinks are there for a reason which I already explained in the first paragraph of this nomination. The purpose of this news section is not to serve as a link to Wikinews where, as I have said, coverage of Peru is virtually non-existant; the purpose is to point the reader to Peru related articles at Wikipedia. As for the template, I just changed it. Better now? --Victor12 (talk) 01:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. Category section text is a bit small, might look nicer if modeled after Portal:Sustainable development or Portal:Oregon. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Yeah this is a problem. I'll try to work on it. --Victor12 (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    I changed the format of this section. Does it look better? --Victor12 (talk) 18:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Done. Looks much better. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  4. Interesting style for Things you can do - I like it. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  5. Did you know footer could use a link to WP:Recent additions. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    But that link is not Peru related. --Victor12 (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Yes, but it provides links to other Did you know hooks for those that are interested. It is a fairly common feature on other WP:FPORTs. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    Not sure about this one. I'd like to read more comments on this issue. --Victor12 (talk) 01:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  6. Missing: - Selected biography section. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Already explained above. --Victor12 (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Hrm, could there be some other sort of Selected section instead of biography? Perhaps cities, notable events, something like that? Cirt (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    As I said above there are not many good articles to select from, plus adding one more section would unbalance the portal. --Victor12 (talk) 01:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    There are always ways to work to rebalance the portal. And most WP:FPORTs do not have just one randomized Selected article section. Cirt (talk) 22:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
    Well, there's not enough high quality content to make a new section of selected articles. A notable events section could be possible but it would take lots of work and time so if this is a major obstacle for this nomination, then the portal should be failed until such work is done. --Victor12 (talk) 01:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  7. Would look nice with a Selected quotes section, Portal:Sustainable development has a nice model to use. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    We had one such section but it had only two quotes, one of them not very relevant, so I removed it. A further problem with such a section is the need for reliable translations as most Peru related quotes are in Spanish. --Victor12 (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    I am sure that you could find plenty of quotes in secondary sources if you give it a try, however this is generally an optional section and just a suggestion. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  8. Selected picture - missing roll-over caption on the images. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Wouldn't this be redundant? I mean the picture already has a caption beneath it. See Today's featured picture at Wikipedia's main page, it has no roll-over caption, just the name of the pic file. --Victor12 (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Again, this is a common feature on WP:FPORTs, and it looks better to have a rollover caption then something.jpg when the mouse moves over the image. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    Fair enough. Just added captions for all pics. --Victor12 (talk) 01:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    Done. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 22:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  9. Peru topics - better to subst the template instead, and then reformat the entries, for example see Portal:Education. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Hmmm... the thing is the topics template is subject to changes so I think it is better to transclude to have it synchronized with articles such as Peru, which feature the {{Peru topics/Content}} template. --Victor12 (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Yes but it looks quite odd with the current formatting/style. Best if someone associated with the portal were to keep on top of the changes and change the Topics subpage accordingly. Or better yet, choose the most important topic links and include those in the subpage, and begin to differentiate from the template. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    Does it look odd? How so? Maybe I've been staring to much at this portal to have an unbiased opinion, ;-) --Victor12 (talk) 01:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    Well for one thing the color scheme of the template does not jive with the portal itself. Cirt (talk) 22:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
    I see what you mean. I'll try to work on this. --Victor12 (talk) 01:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Russia

Self-nomination. See archived peer review. Stats: 5 rotating images in the Intro, 23 Selected articles, all WP:FAs, 11 Selected biographies, all WP:FAs, 18 Selected pictures, all WP:FPs, 20 sets of 3 DYK hooks, all with free-use images, 20 Selected quotes, all with free-use images, Updated news with Wikinews Importer Bot (talk · contribs), and a Rotating In this month section. Things you can do has a cleanup listing, a new feature from WolterBot (talk · contribs), as well as a link to notability concerns, thanks to WP:WPNN.

All of the above sections are randomized and display new content when the portal is purged. News updates automatically from Wikinews, using Wikinews Importer Bot. I believe the portal meets the standards for Featured Portal status.

Thanks to Sardanaphalus (talk · contribs) for help with Portal:Russia/Featured content and Portal:Russia/Russia topics. Cirt (talk) 03:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I know - but if you use all Featured Content in a section you can label that section "Featured", otherwise it is best to just say "Selected" because otherwise it is sort of misleading. Cirt (talk) 19:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Schools

After receiving enthusiastic comments and running out of ideas, I've decided to nominate the Schools Portal for featured status. Many thanks, --Jh12 (talk) 18:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

What screen resolution and browser are you using? --Jh12 (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
1024X768 using IE7. RichardF (talk) 20:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll make sure to continue checking on on IE7 as well. --Jh12 (talk) 20:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I've reduced the images by about half. I've been checking the portal on Windows XP with Firefox 3.0.1 and Internet Explorer 7 on a 1024x768 screen resolution so I apologize if I messed up on the image sizes. --Jh12 (talk) 20:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Portal:Schools/Selected picture/Layout is set to width=200px. Portal:Education/Selected picture/Layout is set to width=300px. That seems to work just fine, as long as the frame is taken into account as well. RichardF (talk) 20:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I've changed the schools layout width to 300px. --Jh12 (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
The individual "size=" values seem to be set on the individual pages. These will override the default. You might want to remove those in some cases. RichardF (talk) 20:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it makes any sense, but I removed the forced pixel size for basically all the images unless their height was significantly greater than their width. --Jh12 (talk) 20:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, default for "landscape" and custom for "portrait." :-) RichardF (talk) 21:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
There certainly are notable educators associated with schools, e.g., Erin Gruwell and Joe Louis Clark. The question is more about whether any such articles are good enough to include in the portal. Also, a limited scope portal is fine, just don't expect it to make featured status. RichardF (talk) 01:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess I was actually hoping to focus people's attention on the countless Wikipedia school articles. Perhaps that's too narrow-minded, or part of a pipe dream that more people will join the chronically understaffed schools project. --Jh12 (talk) 04:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I still have mixed feelings about expanding the scope of this portal, given that WikiProject Schools already covers the complexities of over 21,000+ distinct school articles, almost seven times as many articles as WikiProject Education. Nevertheless, I would like to know how exactly one sets up WikiNews for schools, or would it be better to have a selected anniversary or events section? --Jh12 (talk) 23:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
What I've been suggesting doesn't involve expanding the scope of the portal, just adding sections within the existing scope. An automated WikiNews feed wouldn't work because it doesn't have a schools category. Any additions of news items from here or there would have to be selected manually. Doing something like "In this month," like at Portal:Oregon probably is more doable. RichardF (talk) 02:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
  1. Selected biography - section could use 3 or more selections added into rotation. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Selected picture - a majority of the credits could use wikilinks to the relevant userpages or external links to the relevant party credited. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Y Done I hope. Unfortunately, some of these users have apparently left Wikipedia, but I have credited and linked their user names as the image tags indicated.
  1. Things you can do - looks a bit clunky with everything pushed to the left side like that, take a look at Portal:Sustainable development for a good model. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Y Done
  1. Wikiversity - Not really sure this needs it own subsection, for one it is so small, and second it is a dup to the Associated Wikimedia section. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure it does either. It's a legacy from an older version of the portal. If it becomes an issue, I'll drop it down into associated wikimedia. --Jh12 (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  1. Selected anniversaries - Missing a whole bunch of sections (including August), and lots of redlinks. This should be addressed. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I just started adding the anniversaries and biographies two days ago per the comments above. I've been recruiting for help at WikiProject Schools, but we haven't come up with anything for August yet. --Jh12 (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I do apologize for taking so long with the anniversaries. I have upgraded the number of biographies to 10, but it's slow going finding stuff to place in the anniversaries section. --Jh12 (talk) 12:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  1. Related portals - I'd imagine there must be a few more related portals that could go in there. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Added a few more portals. Please let me know if it needs even more. --Jh12 (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  1. Optional - a Selected quote section like at Portal:Sustainable development would be a nice addition to the portal. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Archaeology

I benn working on this portal and think that the portal is ready for being featured. Bewareofdog 23:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

—Giggy 09:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand you when you say ""it is a humanistic endeavor." - the layman asks "so what?" Wikilinks, layman's terms, etc..." Bewareofdog 02:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Basically, what's a humanistic endeavor? —Giggy 06:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I fixed some of these things. Bewareofdog 03:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Association football

previous FPOC

I started editing this portal in December 2007 to re-inject some life and update it. It now uses randomised content and I used the tab format as on Portal:Religion to break the page up somewhat. There are 25 selected articles (all FA), 15 selected bios (all FA or GA) and 30 selected pictures. Other content includes a randomised selected association (to show FIFA, UEFA, CONCACAF etc), current tournaments (which is pre-filled until 2014), news from Wikinews via the bot and the DYK element automatically shows the last five football related hooks that appeared on Wikipedia's main page from the archive at WikiProject:Football.

Instructions on how to edit/add/nominate the portal and what each element does are documented at Portal:Association football/Instructions.

A request for this to be PPR'd sat for 5 months with no reply so I'm hoping that no responses there means that there are no major problems with this portal. Your comments are welcome. Nanonic (talk) 21:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

That's a good idea! I'll scrabble around and see how many I can get that are up to standard, but will hold off on adding it yet as it will need a lot of thought as to how to alter the layout. The empty Selected association entry is there purely to make it easy for whoever wants to add it, it isn't in the selection that displays on the Portal. Nanonic (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
  1. Intro - "More about the game..." would look better simply as "More about Association football..." Cirt (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    I've changed it to a basic "Read more" to avoid having too many uses of "Association football" in the opening section. Nanonic (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Portal:Association football/Projects and Things - first subsection, IMO looks awkward with the Association football projects blue box stuck in there like that. Cirt (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    Working on it now, I'll see if I can either simply lose it and let the prose take over or display it icon form like Related portals. Nanonic (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    Have changed it to non-tabular format. Nanonic (talk) 23:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. News and events - Would be better simply as News. Cirt (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    Done. Nanonic (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  4. Did you know - The preceding extracts from newly created articles were displayed on Wikipedia's Main Page on the date shown. - This bit is not really needed, and as it is self-referential should probably just be removed. Cirt (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    I can remove this in a second, but I think it will raise the problem as to what the dates in parentheses mean. As the dates are added on the transcluded archive page, they can't be removed. Nanonic (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    In that case I would recommend removing all the dates from the transcluded archive page itself. After all, the dates are already present on the talkpages of those articles themselves. Cirt (talk) 22:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    I've commented out the dates on the archive page and removed the text as suggested. Nanonic (talk) 22:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    Brief in-the-news coverage of Association football is also available at Sports current events. - This is also not needed as it is a dup reference to a link provided below-left in the same box. Cirt (talk) 22:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    Removed as suggested. Nanonic (talk) 23:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  5. Related portals - Would look better with the text below each icon, instead of to the right. Cirt (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    With the text below each icon, the box will look fine at 800x600 and 1024x768, at higher resolutions - the grouping will be central to what is a very wide box. The text was placed to the right as a compromise between these res's - they fit perfectly at 800x600 and don't look as clumped together as the text under version does at other screen sizes. Nanonic (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    Not a dealbreaker, just my opinion, but I still think it would look better with those text/captions below the icons. Portal:Sustainable development is a good example of this. Cirt (talk) 22:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  6. Selected association - For uniformity with other selected subsections, suggest wikilinking the bolded article title in each blurb. Cirt (talk) 23:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    Done for these and all the ones in Selected bio that I'd overlooked. Nanonic (talk) 23:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Portal

Portals:  Featured (Criteria, Candidates) | List | Directory | WikiProject | Guidelines | Instructions | Peer review | Category