Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:FPOC)
Jump to: navigation, search

Featured Portals in Wikipedia

A featured portal is a portal which is regarded by the community as being an example of Wikipedia's finest work. This page is where featured portal candidates are considered by the community against the featured portal criteria.

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. 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. Consensus may be determined by any editor in good standing who is not materially involved in the portal's development or maintenance, or in any related WikiProjects. The process is overseen by the Featured Portal directors Cirt and OhanaUnited.

A bot will update the portal talk page after the portal is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FPOC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates {{ArticleHistory}}. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating—typically at least a few weeks.

At present, there are 166 featured portals, of a total of 1134 portals on Wikipedia.

Shortcuts:

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 {{Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Example}} (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.
  6. Nominator may wish to leave a neutrally worded notice at the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects.

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 editor may express an opinion. "Supports" and "opposes" from IP editors will be crossed out, but their comments on portal content should be considered.


Nominations[edit]

Portal:New York City[edit]

The city so nice they named it twice. I'm nominating this portal for FPO status.

The articles, biographies, lists, anniversaries, and did you knows are varied in their scope, from pre-Revolutionary facts to biographies of present-day celebrities, and with many items in between. As of this moment, there are...

  • 33 selected articles (All FA or GA)
  • 34 selected biographies (Most are FA or GA, some are B-class but of high importance to NYC. Some of them are Version 1.0 articles and others are deemed vital to Wikipedia. I removed a C-class one that wasn't. I can swap out the B-class if desired, but I'd like to defend them first)
  • 20 sets of DYK hooks, each with an image (All hooks are taken from DYKs that ran on the main page. Most of those images also ran with the hook, but I chose a few images that weren't used for varieties sake).
  • 18 selected images, most of which (but not 100%) are FPs
  • 9 selected lists (8 of them have an image, all are FL status. There are more that could be added, but they are all relating to NYC sport teams, and 3 of the 9 already included are also, so I didn't want to overwhelm the selected lists with one topic.)
  • 5 selected anniversaries per month (6 for February, because I couldn't decide on a final cut), with an image for each set
  • All other required FPO features

As I await comments, I will now notify related WikiProjects. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Muboshgu, thank you for this nomination and quality improvement effort. Please note here on this subpage talk pages and WikiProject discussion pages where you have left notices about this ongoing discussion. — Cirt (talk) 06:12, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I notified WP:NYC here, WP:USA here, WP:NY here, WP:CITIES here, and left a notice on the talk page of Portal:Chicago here. No responses to any of those. I'll post on those threads again, and at WT:Chicago, as well as some other specific city projects. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Review by Sven Manguard

Sigh... I ought to just change the nomination procedure to say "when you file an FPOC, go tell Sven". It's a shame that it took me this long to notice that this was here. Anyways, overall this is in really great shape, and I'm impressed. Here are my nitpicky changes:

  • Selected article 20 (Port Authority of New York and New Jersey) could use a different image. The one that is there now blends right into the text.
    • Good point. Image changed. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
  • The portal needs to have a consistent bottom-matter format. Selected picture has "Archives • Read more..." on the left, while selected article and selected bio have those two split, on on the left and one on the right.
    • Changed "Selected picture" format for uniformity – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Please add Wikidata and Wikivoyage to the Associated Wikimedia section.
  • There is something wonky going on with the spacing between the bottom matter and the bottom of the box in most of the Selected biography section. All of them except for 16 through 24 have unexplained empty space down there. It should be possible to fix that.
    • I think it was due to excess whitespace. Is it corrected now? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Any chance you could find two more featured pictures to put in? Commons is likely to have FPs that never got promoted over here. As far as I am concerned, if it's an FP on either project, it's fine for portals.
    • Two more added. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Let me know when you've addressed these points Muboshgu. Also, since you're in the CUP, you might want to list this here. I'd appreciate you reviewing my FPOC as well. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

No worries, I've been busy with things in real life and I'm patient with this. This is my first time here, and I gathered that there are fewer reviewers than at GA or other featured statuses. I'll work on this tomorrow, and lend my eyes on other nominations. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Okay Sven Manguard, I believe I have fixed those issues. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Muboshgu - Sorry about this, but while you were fixing those, I found one more thing that needs fixing; there are no bold links on selected lists 5-9 (but there are on 1-4). Other than that, I am fully prepared to support this. Unless my nomination clears up and we both get promoted at once, it looks like you'll be scoring the first FPO points for this year's cup. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
No problem. I've added bold links, though not all in the first paragraph. I'm not sure the exact location of the bold link is regulated by any rule or guideline. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
No, that's fine. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - As far as I am concerned, this is ready. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Thank you! – Muboshgu (talk) 15:45, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Review by Espresso Addict

Appearance generally clean & neat; I like the red border. The intro blurb is perhaps a little long and felt a bit like a tourist brochure to me. Good number and variety of articles/biographies. Pictures of reasonable quality, though a little sparse for such a heavily photographed city; is it worth broadening to a few more non-featured pictures? As long as the photograph looks strong at the chosen size I'm not sure how much it matters whether or not it is featured, though Sven might disagree. DYKs also a little sparse, perhaps -- was this all there were? Appreciate the variety in Selected lists; was pleasantly surprised to find it wasn't all sport.

  • The image in Selected picture pokes out of the box for me at all window sizes.
  • There is quite a bit of variation in the length of the Selected article & Selected list blurbs.
  • Campbell's Soup Cans in Selected articles and many of the biographies don't explain the connection with NYC.
  • Generally the variety of articles looks ok, but four synagogues seems a little over-represented, given lack of representation of other religions.
  • Inconsistencies in box headers. Did you know & Associated Wikimedia are italicised; selected lists is plural where other headers are singular; browse articles by borough has colon; Topics has capital where others are lower case.
  • Full stop missing in a few Selected anniversaries.

Otherwise looking good. Please ping me when you've addressed my comments (I've given up using watchlist). Espresso Addict (talk) 23:56, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Canada[edit]

For the 2010 nomination, see Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Canada/archive1

Sell-nomination - I've looked at all of the comments that were made at the last Featured Portal Review and, I believe, dealt with all of them. I'm hoping to get some feedback as to other issues the portal might have before bringing it to FPOC. Some stats: 46 Selected articles; 22 Selected bios; 27 Selected pictures; 37 Selected symbols; 59 Sets of 5 DYKs; 19 Selected panoramas. Achowat (talk) 20:12, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Support - Wonderful portal - "Wikinews section" should be the norm on large topics of this nature. -- Moxy (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
    • I tend to remove them, and strongly advocate against the inclusion of a Wikinews section. There are 13 items in that section, and only one is from this year. All but three of the items are over six months old, so old that I don't feel that they any value to the portal. As a news service, Wikinews doesn't produce enough content to be useful, and that problem is heavily magnified when you filter only for news on a specific subject. Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 23:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
If this is the case should we not expose Wikinews to more people and perhaps gain new editors for the Wikinews project over hiding them? All that said no big deal if removed. -- Moxy (talk) 23:40, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
It's been tried for years, and that approach has failed. Leave aside portals - it was prominently linked from the "in the news" section on the main page and this had no effect in boosting participation there. Unless one of the few Wikinews regulars happens to be producing regular news articles within the scope of a portal, a Wikinews section will be full of out-of-date news and it will drag down the overall appearance of the portal. I agree with Sven on this. BencherliteTalk 14:53, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Review by Sven Manguard

Major issues

  • The pictures in the Selected picture are too small. 220px is good for articles, but not for selected pictures on a portal, where you want that element to visually 'pop'.
  • While I can understand wanting to have Parliament of Canada and National Flag of Canada as selected articles, even though they're not featured. That being said, a lot of the selected article selections seem kind of random (Liberal Party of Canada leadership election of 1968, Superman, etc.) and if you're going to choose random articles, why not select from FA (and GA) class articles?
  • Is there any way to center the contents of the "Related Wikiprojects" and "Selected wikiproject" sections? On wider screens, there's a ton of white space on one side (right side for related, left side for selected) in those boxes.
  • I really dislike the Wikinews section. It's just so out of date.

Minor issues:

  • Selected panorama 11 has visible stitching quality issues. I would get rid of it or replace it.
  • Selected symbol 37 (ice hockey) needs a different image, as it's hard to see what's going on in the current one.
  • I don't really see a value to the "In the News articles" section on the second tab. That's not really recognized content in the way that FAs, GAs, and FPs are.
  • I would also remove the "Picture of the day pictures" section on the second tab, as all POTDs are FPs, and you have an FPs section right there too.

This portal is in really great shape. I can see that a ton of effort has been put into it, and it's certainly not far away from Featured Portal status. Please let me know your thoughts on these issues. Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 23:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Response to Sven

  • Picture size - Do you have a proposal for a more appropriate size? I totally agree that they should be bigger; is there a best practice about that?
  • Non-GA articles - These were at FA when they were built into the Portal. I'm going to replace any articles that are not FA or GA with more appropriate articles. There are quite a few FFAs in the SA section, so this won't be an easy fix, but it'll get done.
  • Wikinews - I'm not in love with the WikiNews Section, but it seems contentious (Moxy seems to like it). I don't know if there's a good solution.
  • Centering - I'll see what I can do.
  • Panorama 11 - has been removed
  • Ice hockey picture - replaced by File:McGill hockey match.jpg. The Commons don't have many good images of Canadian hockey.
  • Second tab issues - Agree entirely; fixed. Achowat (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Drive-by comments from Bencherlite
  • Check that all the blurbs for selected articles / biographies are up to date. Ray Emery, for example, now plays for the Philadelphia Flyers; Martin Brodeur has played for 21 years for the same team now, not 13; Eric Brewer has moved teams etc etc.
  • Install one of the various dablink finding scripts and check the list of selected articles/biographies etc for dablinks. Celine Dion blurb "Unison"; Louis Riel "Divine right" etc.
  • Ursula Franklin's article doesn't have a link at the start
  • Removal of the "in the news" box (a decision I agree with) leaves the columns unbalanced.

That's all for now. BencherliteTalk 15:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Achowat, how's it going with addressing above comments? — Cirt (talk) 06:11, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Literature[edit]

For the 2006 nomination, see Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Literature/Archive 1

Self nomination: This portal was promoted in 2006 and delisted in May 2013, having gone several years without an update. I have rebuilt it completely, with only the "Today in literature" remaining from the old version. It has been built in such a way that it no longer needs updating, so it should remain healthy for the long term. The portal contains:

  • 38 selected works (FA class articles)
  • 25 26 selected illustrations (FP class pictures)
  • 25 28 selected excerpts (public domain quotes taken from Wikisource, except the last three, which are featured sounds)
  • 25 sets of 5 DYKs (all ran on the main page)
  • "Today in literature" (366 daily birth and death pages)
  • Bottom matter (categories, WikiProjects, Portals, Topics, etc.)
  • 24 selected biographies (FA class articles)

I can think of only one additional work to put into the selected works section, but I skipped it due to a lack of a free image. There are other illustrations that can be added, but I kept to a rule of "one illustration per work", and all of the remaining FPs are from large sets. There are plenty enough excerpts and DYKs, I feel, and as they are both a massive time sink to produce, I would prefer to leave them at 25 apiece. I will begin the notification process shortly, and will report back with the projects I hit up once I am done.

Thank you for your consideration, Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 07:36, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Informed WikiProjects Literature, Novels, Books, and Poetry, as well as users Expresso Addict, Prsephone1674, Feyday, and KF (per reasons at delisting). Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 07:53, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

You're not going to like me much, and I really apologise, but...
This has a very Western bias. I'd like to see more world literature added. Offhand - and only including ones that should fairlyeasily be illustrated - Journey to the West, The Romance of the Three Kingdoms, the Water Margin (this has an FP!), One Hundred Years of Solitude, Gilgamesh, The Golden Ass, The Tale of Genji, A Thousand and One Arabian Nights, The Adventures and Misadventures of Maqroll, The Iliad, The Odyssey, the Mahabharata. All are world-known. Also, your definition at the top includes non-fiction, I don't see any though. How about Frederick Douglass' autobiography, and, hmm. Nellie Bly and Ida B. Wells might be good. They wrote very famous exposés. Voltairine de Cleyre might not be bad either - I mean, I just got talked into doing an FP of her, and, y'know, no need to stick to the mainstream too much. Cicero, Plato, Herodotus, and Thucydides were highly foundational to a lot of Western work, Confucius might not be bad for eastern philosophy; you could arguably do the literary sections of the Bible - Book of Lamentations, say, which has an FP. Drama is a bit under-represented, despite being named in the opening; I'd suggest some of the works of Plautus, Aristophanes, Euripides, Aeschylus, Sophocles W.S.Gilbert, Ben Jonson, Molière, Thomas Dekker, one of the traditional Chinese dramas, perhaps, etc.
It would also be worth asking User:Crisco 1492 for some Indonesian suggestions. Again, I am sorry. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:33, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • If the definition includes non-fiction, I'd suggest something like Theory of Literature... a bit dated, sure, but influential in its time. Indonesian... the most significant novel currently a GA is Sitti Nurbaya, but looking back that needs quite a bit of polish. Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang is probably the best suited for this portal, although we also have FAs on Drama dari Krakatau and Sair Tjerita Siti Akbari (although if importance was the only consideration, I'd recommend Hang Tuah... but that's in terrible shape. We also have FAs on an Indonesian poet, Amir Hamzah, and an Indonesian dramatist-turned-director, Andjar Asmara. Of course, that would be swamping the portal with Indonesia, so obviously you can't choose all of them. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Adam Cuerden: What we have here is one of the fundamental conflicts in the featured portal process. I am keenly aware of how poorly represented non-English language, non-Western canon is in the portal, but none of the articles you suggested are Featured Articles, and indeed none of them are anywhere close to being Good Articles. Featured portals are supposed to be organized collections of the project's best work, which means that in broadly focused subjects like this, they are especially vulnerable to being hit with the project's existing systemic bias. The decision whether to use the highest available quality articles/images available or lowering the level of quality of article/image in order to get a more interesting selection is a difficult one. I tried my hardest to incorporate lots of non-Western DYKs, because those existed. There are not, however, very many non-Western literary FAs or, for that matter, FPs. I could, and probably will, incorporate the other two of Crisco 1492's suggested FAs (he suggested three, but Sair Tjerita Siti Akbari is already in the portal). That will still bring the ratio of works from outside North America and Europe from 4:38 to 6:40 (from 10.5% to 15%). It's not great, but it is reflective of the percentage of featured work on non-Western subjects on Wikipedia. I could add in a selected biography section, but we only have six or seven usable (has a freely licensed image) FAs on authors from outside North American and Europe, so the best ratio I could possibly do in that section would be 7:20 (35%), and if I included a larger selection, it would be 7:25 or 7:30 (28% or 23%). That's better than the selected works, but it's still woeful. As for the shortage of drama articles/mentions in this portal, that is because the inclusion of drama in literature is by no means universally accepted. There are lots of scholars that don't see drama as literature, and lots of scholars that consider certain drama like Shakespeare, which is constructed using poetic principles, to be literature but most other drama as not literature. I have struggled with the best way to handle drama throughout the entire process. Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 16:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Question: Why are you limiting the biographies to those which have free images? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Crisco 1492 - Having the portrait there breaks up what would otherwise be a large chunk of plain text. Since portals are supposed to be visually appealing, I tend to like to have not only the selected illustration, but also an image in one or two of the other sections. Much like the "today's featured article" section of the main page can function without an image, it (and the main page) looks better with one. Additionally, if every other entry in that section has one, having one entry that doesn't makes it look rather out of place. I've never run into a situation where this restriction became problematic. It might remove one or two options, but almost every FA has at least on relevant freely licensed image. Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 18:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Fair enough, although personally I consider it appropriate to use articles without any free images if necessary. I've got a busy day ahead of me, but I'll try and review this portal later. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, fair enough, but we can probably pull in a few of those with featured pictures. How about Water Margin, which has an FP related to it? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:39, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • That would go in the featured pictures / selected pictures category, generally. The SA section is for those with really good articles. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Adam Cuerden: I can add that image into the selected illustrations section. I didn't see it before because it's not in the illustrations section of the list of FPs, which is where I drew the original list of candidates from. Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 02:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • You know, I don't see any selected biographies at all. Or selected articles that are not works (i.e. literary schools, publishers, etc.). This is, in my opinion, a wholely unjustified structuralist limitation. We have mountains of author GAs and FAs (I should know, I've written four or five myself), and there are some FAs on movements (Imagism) and genres (poetry)... that feels like a pretty big shortcoming. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:52, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Crisco 1492: Yeah, I meant to do a selected biographies section when I planned this out. I ended up skipping it because I thought that the excerpt section would be a better use of the space, but I will go ahead and build that now. Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 02:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
I think I can accept the issue with the FAs; what's going on with the issues Crisco raised? Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:07, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Sven Manguard, how's it going with addressing above comments? — Cirt (talk) 06:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Cirt: It's second on the list of things I want to get done in the next week or so (behind finishing the work needed for an ongoing GAN). I will hopefully be able to work on it this weekend. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:48, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Sure sure, no worries, take your time, no rush, was just curious. — Cirt (talk) 10:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Crisco 1492, Adam Cuerden, and Cirt: There is now a biography section with 21 items. Over the weekend I will be adding in a few more (Ann Bannon, Edgar Allan Poe, and Anton Chekhov have proven difficult to do in 200-220 words), but as it stands right now, it has considerable non-Western Europe/non-North America coverage, with 11 of the 21 people from outside of those regions. There's only one that I really wanted to get in but couldn't, Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo, and it's a shame that there are no freely licensed photographs of him. Without dipping into GAs, which I don't want to do because there are so many FAs to choose from, this is the best I can do on the diversity front. I'm just as upset about it as you all are, but there aren't any good options here. On a side note, Adam: I am pretty sure that you'll approve of this choice. smile. Anyways, if the three of you could please let me know of your thoughts on the portal in its current state, that would be much appreciated. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll go through the FPs to see if there's any lurking in weird corners of the folder tree. Oh, actually, one question: Would adaptations be significant? Because Featured Sounds may not be collecting new entries, but there are a few settings of poems in there, and operas based on books and plays. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
I can't say that I'm enthusiastic about that idea. We don't have much poetry at FS, and I don't want to include too much opera in the portal, as opera is by no means universally recognized as part of literature. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:00, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, it would be nice to get the Walt Whitman, Ordo Virtutum, and Auld Lang Syne in, maybe the Winston Churchill (Nobel Laureate in Literature, in part for his speeches, you know). 05:27, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
I will see if I can come up with something. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:43, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Sounds like good progress is being made here, keep us posted. — Cirt (talk) 09:22, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden - Take a look at what I rigged up at Portal:Literature/Excerpts. The Featured Sounds are numbers 26, 27, and 28. It's a shame that there's nothing on Wikisource for Ordo Virtutum, but I worked around that. I decided not to put the speech by Churchill in because I feel that I am already stretching the boundaries of "literature" a bit in the portal already, and speeches aren't what I would consider literature. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:45, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden, Crisco 1492: I've finished adding Bannon, Chekhov, and Poe, which finishes the featured biography section. I think that this is ready for you to take another look at. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:02, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support this is easily among Wikipedia's best work and all concerns about systemic bias is fixed. Secret account 01:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Portals Featured (Criteria, Candidates) | List | Directory | WikiProject | Guidelines | Instructions | Categorizing | Peer review | Categories