Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Connecticut

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 promoted by Cirt 02:34, 18 June 2009 [1].

Portal:Connecticut[edit]

Relatively new portal, been through portal peer review, seems to be ready. Thanks for any comments. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

It appears the portal peer review has not been closed/archived. One of these discussions should be closed, before the other can proceed further. Cirt (talk) 07:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done; archived the peer review, hopefully correctly. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Cirt (talk) 09:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. 1a) Selected quotes could use sources besides the author and <noinclude> is not really working. Use for example: "Anne Rice, The Witching Hour, 1990, p. 261" to source the quotes. 1b) What's with the huge white space below the "Archives" text in the SQ box? 2) I'm not sure how these new intros, with changing images, are useful -- if anyone wants to add or edit the image there are no instructions, the edit link is useless as only 0.001% of users know what a {{Random subpage}} template is and how to edit it. Either use one image or make clear instructions how to add more and edit current. The intro image with coin is confusing, as it isn't mentioned in the intro. 3) Under "Associated Wikimedia" the Wikiquote and Wikibooks links should be fixed or depreciated. 4) "Topics" --> "Counties and cities" as it contains no other topics? Finally: Should have been longer in Portal peer review. feydey (talk) 12:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on these today. Cirt (talk · contribs) actually suggested the rotating lead image feature, so I'm not sure what to go with... –Juliancolton | ^Talk

Further responses:

1a) Not sure what's wrong with the current sources.
1b) Should be fixed.
No, it's still there. Here's a screenshot (with the WikiProjects box for reference): i40.tinypic.com/sz9bmg.png. [sd] 17:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3) Fixed.
4) Done. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Appears to meet all the criteria. Would like an assurance that it will be updated on a regular basis, but I have faith in Juliancolton, and hope WikiProject Connecticut would get involved. -RunningOnBrains^{(talk page)} 05:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I'll maintain it as necessary. Thanks for the support, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment

In addition to WP:CONN, you may also wish to notify WP:STATE and WP:USA. Cirt (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - have looked through the portal, changed a little bit around, and questioned JC about some things on IRC; I am now satisfied that it meets all of the criteria. Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 02:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Added a little to the pics. Durova^Charge! 02:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - problem with sourcing of quotes

The quotes seem to be sourced to random quote websites - it'd be best if they were instead sourced to WP:RS sources. Cirt (talk) 07:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of them seem fairly reliable to me; which ones in particular do you find concerning? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None of them would be acceptable as a WP:RS source in a WP:BLP. Try WP:RS secondary sources, printed medium like books, newspaper articles, magazines, interviews with the subjects, etc. Cirt (talk) 21:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What if there are no reliable sources, per se, but instead numerous semi-reliable sources? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, that doesn't really cut it. Cirt (talk) 11:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not much I could do here, but I switched some of the sources. BrainyQuote seems sufficiently reliable, and it's widely used on Wikiquote if I recall correctly. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: BrainyQuote and other such quote aggregating sites are not reliable sources here on this project, or at Wikiquote. Cirt (talk) 02:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, alright, wasn't aware of that. I'll see what I can do. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, keep us posted. Cirt (talk) 02:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should be all sorted now. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Suggestions from [sd] 16:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Some of the box titles are italicized; others are not – I'd suggest making them one or the other.
  - Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Selected article: Add a photograph to X.
  - Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- In the news: Add a link to Wikinews.
  - I personally think that would be unnecessary, as Wikinews is already linked in the Associated Wikimedia box. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - sd is right, this link in the News section is generally standard. Cirt (talk) 11:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Selected picture, Did you know?, and Selected quote: Shouldn't ...Archive/Nominations be aligned to the left for uniformity? Or, you could shift the ellipsis (…) after Archive/Nominations. Then, also for the quote box, Archives → Archives...
  - Doing... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Selected panorama: For the layout, is the border necessary? You don't have it for selected pictures. Also, link parts of the descriptions to articles. For instance, in III, you can link to Enfield-Suffield Veterans Bridge, Connecticut River, Enfield, and Suffield.
  - Doing... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Locations: You can convert this section to a main topics section that's found in other featured portals, using this outline as a guide.
  - I actually like it better the way it is, but I'll change it if necessary. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Quality content: Right now, I'm seeing the text wrap around under the icons (screenshot: i44.tinypic.com/10cvt76.png). Perhaps you can introduce a table to align the text.
  - That's what I was aiming for, but again, I'll change it if necessary. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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