Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Business and economics/archive2

Portal:Business and Economics

I previously submitted this portal for FP status more than two months ago, and I received a lot of constructive criticism and feedback telling me what I still had to do with the portal. I feel like I've done a great deal of work with this portal, and I believe it is now of exemplary quality. Therefore, I am re-nominating this portal for consideration to join the ranks of other great portals across Wikipedia. Nishkid 64 02:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Good work on the portal and dealing with the suggestions. I really like the colors and images in the portal and the even position of sections. Michaelas10 (Talk) 12:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Great work! However, I don't know if it's just me, but I think the featured picture's caption should not be centered. s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 12:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, it's fixed now. I was meaning to change that, but it slipped my mind. Nishkid 64 15:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Are the stock tickers updated automatically? This was an issue last time around through this process because the portal maintainer must update every day. --Gphoto^talk 14:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, they are. I got a friend of mine to run an approved bot to take the quotes from Yahoo! Finance. Nishkid 64 15:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Great! Regards, --Gphoto ^talk 23:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Well-done all around. Ongoing commitment by Nishkid64 to maintain portal. Rfrisbie^talk 16:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Simply excellent. — Seadog 14:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. --Gphoto ^talk 23:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - It would be helpful if we could get other people involved in maintaining the portal, though. Badbilltucker 16:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm hoping, but I haven't really gotten that much help. I have posted at the WikiProject's talk page, but I haven't gotten the response I would like to see for portal help. Nishkid 64 22:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strange idea here. But, as the portals seem to be more or less the work of a small group of editors anyway, maybe there could be some sort of collaboration effort set up? Particularly with portals that might share a somewhat similar scope, maybe we could arrange to have one group of editors update all the portals in a field at the same time. That would decrease the amount of work involved, and probably help to include more articles. Anyway, just a thought. Badbilltucker 15:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea, I think. I mean, it would really shape a lot of portals that have not been taken care of recently. Try posting your ideas at Wikipedia talk:Featured portal candidates. Nishkid 64 22:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support, a good portal. But there are some more points to consider before:
- It would be better to regular archiving of selected articles. There should be a fixed criteria for a selected article that for how much time it would be on the portal page. By seeing previous archive, it seems to be random. Is there any back-up for the future selected articles?
- Providing source(s) for market indices would be better because anyone could update the indices if (s)he is aware of it(them).
- I think, topics are less in number. The list could be more expanded. I do not see the topic related to companies ranking from various magazines, like Fortune 1000 etc. I suppose, it is non-forgettable part of the portal's topics section. Shyam ^(T/C) 15:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I only recently created the monthly archive for selected articles, economy and pictures. It is in effect starting with December, and a new economy, article and picture will be featured on the portal page each month. Also, I will add the source for the market indices info. The topics section was probably the hardest part of the portal, and I hadn't even created it! I'll see what I can do, though. Thanks for addressing some minor issues. =) Nishkid 64 15:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very great work. But, I think, the bot for updating market indices does not make it regularly. It was last updated on 21:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC). Could the bot make more regular updations? Shyam ^(T/C) 09:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't think it is wise to update the bot more than once a day. The markets are around the world, and they close at different times. So, if I decided to run the bot at 14:00 UTC, I would get the final Asian markets, but the realtime quotes for the American markets. By doing it at exactly 21:20, I can guarantee that the bot will have that specific day's final stock market results at around this time. If I update later, the Asian markets are already open for the next day and Yahoo Finance will clear the market info. It just seems better to do it once, and not have to worry about any potential problems. Nishkid 64 23:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the case, then I totally support the portal to be featured. Shyam ^(T/C) 04:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Does the news section need an archive? I've heard yes sometimes, then sometimes no one says anything. Other than that, great job getting it up to speed. Jo e I 20:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the news links provided are from WikiNews, then you don't need an archive. I get my news from WikiNews for this portal, so I don't think archive is necessary here. However, for the other portal I manage, Portal:Disasters, I get the links from news websites and I have to keep an archive for that. Nishkid 64 20:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the logic of that. I get my articles from Wikipedia, so why do they need an archive. This seems to be a double-standard. Rfrisbie^talk 19:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is that as wikinews already archives all news. They can be found there at anytime there for any particular dates. But the news which came from other sources, could not be get back without going to history. So it is better to have archive section separately for the news section if they do not come from wikinews. Shyam ^(T/C) 19:18, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't address my point. Wikipedia archives articles and pictures. If portals are expected to archive those, why aren't they expected to archive news? Rfrisbie^talk 19:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiNews is archiving the news, though. Why do you we need to archive the news when WikiNews is already doing that? I have a link at the bottom of that portal sub-section that has a link to WikiNews. People can just go there and get old news if they wish. I think the articles are archived so that people will be able to see what the actual entry was in the portal, and see what it looked like, etc. Nishkid 64 20:35, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no guarantee portal news and WikiNews are identical, which is the assumption here. If I'm the only one who cares about this, then I'll stop archiving news too. Rfrisbie^talk 20:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would still be a good idea for portals to archive news no matter where it's from. It serves as a central hub for people to see what's been going on in a general arena. Jo e I 22:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frisbie, you bring up a good point. The news I put up is not the same. I've noticed a strong New Zealand showing at the business news portal at WikiNews, and I tend to not include such local New Zealand biz news. I generally use only half of WikiNews' articles for BEP. Nishkid 64 02:25, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, that would explain it. :) Jo e I 22:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well maintained, useful portal Dinojerm 01:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Featured portals are expected to conform with provisions of the Manual of Style. This portal would seem to violate the MOS's convention on capitalisation. This needs to be addressed before promotion.--cj | talk 17:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point. Use the lower case for Economics and make relevant changes. Shyam ^(T/C) 18:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - So it goes to Business and economics now? I thought it would be appropriate to leave it capitalized since they are two different topics. Well, if it's at MoS, then I guess I have to fix that. Nishkid 64 19:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I moved all the pages to Business and economics from Business and Economics. Nishkid 64 20:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]