Wikipedia:Featured portal review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Reviewing featured portals

This page is for the review and improvement of featured portals that may no longer meet the featured portal criteria. Featured portals are held to the current standards regardless of when they were promoted. Having said that, three to six months is regarded as the minimum time between promotion and nomination here, unless there are extenuating circumstances such as a radical change in portal content or design.

All users are welcome to contribute in the process.

Featured portal review (FPR)

  • The aim is to improve portals to the extent that they can retain their featured status rather than to demote them. Nominators must specify the featured portal criteria that are at issue, and should propose remedies where possible. The ideal review would address the issues raised and close with no change in status.
  • Reviews can improve portals in various ways. Portals may need updating, formatting, and general copyediting. More complex issues, such as a failure to meet current standards of being useful, attractive, ergonomic and well-maintained, may also be addressed.
  • Participants may declare "keep" or "remove", supported by constructive and substantive comments, and further time is provided to overcome deficiencies.
  • Reviewers who declare "remove" should be prepared to return toward the end of the process to strike out their objections if they have been addressed.
  • One of the featured portal directors, Cirt and OhanaUnited, determines whether there is consensus for a change in the status of a nomination, and closes the listing accordingly.

There is no set time limit for the review: if changes are ongoing and improvements are happening within a reasonable length of time, and it seems useful to continue the process, the review is likely to be kept open.

Older reviews are stored in the archive.

Purge the cache to refresh this page

Featured content:

Featured portal tools:

Nominating a portal for Featured portal review (FPR)

  1. Place {{FPR}} at the top of the talk page of the nominated portal. Write "FPR listing" in the edit summary box. Click on "Save page".
    Note: if a portal has already been through the FPR process, use the Move button to rename the previous nomination to an archive. For example, Wikipedia:Featured portal review/Portal:Solar System → Wikipedia:Featured portal review/Portal:Solar System/archive1
  2. From there, click on the "add a comment" link.
  3. Place ===[[name of nominated portal]]=== at the top of the subpage.
  4. Below this title, write your reason(s) for nominating the portal, specifying the featured portal criteria that are at issue. Click on "Save page".
  5. Click here, and place your nomination at the top of the list of nominated portals, {{Wikipedia:Featured portal review/name of nominated portal}}, filling in the exact name of the nominated portal. Click on "Save page".
  6. Notify relevant parties by adding {{subst:FPRMessage|Portalname}} to relevant talk pages (insert the portal name). Relevant talk pages include the main contributors to the portal (identifiable through the portal stats script), the editor who originally nominated the portal for Featured Portal status (identifiable through the Featured Portal Candidate link), any editors listed in relation to the portal at Wikipedia:Portal/Directory, and any relevant WikiProjects (identifiable through the talk page banners, but there may be other Projects that should be notified). Leave a message at the top of the FPR indicating notifications completed.

Contributing to the discussions

  • The nominator should list groups and editors notified, for example, :''Notified <main contributors, FP nominator, relevant WikiProjects>.''
    • You can consider using {{subst:FPRMessage}} notify the groups and editors.
  • The nominator should cite the specific featured portal criteria concerns that prompted the nomination for removal.
    • Useful (1a), attractive (1b), ergonomic (1c), well-maintained (1d); compliance MOS and project guidelines (2); images (3); not self-referential (4); links to other Wikimedia projects (5)
      • Use a format such as: :''Suggested FPo criteria concerns are <applicable criteria>.''
  • Discussions focus on how to improve the portal so that it meets the stated featured portal criteria at issue.
  • If you approve of a portal's current featured status, write '''Keep''' followed by your reasons.
  • If you oppose a portal's current featured status, write '''Remove''' 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 address 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.
  • Do not split review pages into sections using sub-headings.

Featured portal reviews[edit]


As with a significant fraction of Featured Portals, this one has problems with being Well-maintained. It is not "updated regularly to display different aspects of Wikipedia's content in an area", and since it contains time-sensitive sections, it probably qualifies for summary demotion under "Featured portals that require maintenance and are not updated for three or more months are summarily demoted".

It would be possible to "fix" this portal, e.g., by removing outdated material. However, given the finite time available to the very few experienced editors in this area, and the low number of page views (and therefore the low benefit to readers), I don't believe that we should realistically expect the long-term situation to change. If those volunteers haven't found it worth their while to maintain the featured articles section for the last seven or eight years(!), then it is highly unrealistic to expect them to do this at least four times a year from here out. It's probably better to remove the FP status and let the portal evolve outside of the FPC. (I left a note at WikiProject Comedy.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:09, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. Nothing needs to be done. Every single thing about this portal is designed specifically to not need maintenance. All sections of the portal are set for random selection to allow the reader to see a new entry each time the page is refreshed. If you'd like to suggest an entry to be added to the portal, you may do so at the portal talk page. Thank you. — Cirt (talk) 20:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks for removing the outdated Wikinews section. The DYK section implies a connection to the Main Page's section of the same name, and the same standards there. I think that the fact that nobody has proposed a new selected article or biography for years is evidence of no maintenance, and especially of no interest in maintaining it, but do you think it is important to remove articles that no longer meet the selection criteria from that section? Due to the lack of ongoing maintenance, that is a pretty significant fraction of articles. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
      • I'll work on making some additional changes. — Cirt (talk) 17:06, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Update: Added randomized intro image for intro sect. 40 randomized selections for Selected article sect, all WP:FA or WP:GA. Increased selections to 40 selected pictures. 33 entries in randomized Selected biography sect, all FA or GA. Removed the Wikinews sect. DYK does not require any manual updates, but any editor should feel free to add additional entries related to comedy into the randomized rotation of 165 random entries. Everything else now checks out okay. — Cirt (talk) 01:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep per update by Cirt. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 01:17, 18 July 2016 (UTC)


The definition of a featured portal, cut and pasted from the Portal:Featured portals page is "... portals that are regarded as being particularly useful, attractive, and well-maintained.". The Fish portal is useful and attractive, but unfortunately is not well-maintained; no significant maintenance has been performed on the portal since 2008. I posted a message on the portal's talk page on March 25 and did receive one response, but the page does not meet featured portal standards simply because it lacks somebody to volunteer to step up and maintain it. Until then, the portal will continue to be useful and attractive, just not a featured portal. Neil916 (Talk) 06:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

@Neil916: Have you contacted any WikiProjects? OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:55, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Yes. [1]. Neil916 (Talk) 17:08, 8 June 2015 (UTC)