Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Archive/November 2013

Portal:Star Trek

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Portal:Star Trek is a joint collaboration between Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and myself. I just helped out with the formatting and Miyagawa did the bulk of the legwork. We believe it's ready for Featured consideration and we're bringing it here for Peer Review first to get further opinions and comments about how to further improve its quality.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 19:38, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Notified: User talk:Miyagawa, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television, User talk:Cirt, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Science Fiction, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek. — Cirt (talk) 19:48, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Cirt: In the future, notify me too, in case I don't see them. I intend to get involved in every PPR and FPOC from now on. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

---

Comments by Sven Manguard

It's certainly nice to see some new faces in the portal namespace. Hopefully my comments don't scare you off . Keep in mind that these are all suggestions, and that this wall of comments isn't an indication that your portal is bad (it's actually quite good).

• I'm really not a fan of the way you've chosen to arrange the two selected article sections. The "Featured article" section only has 12 entries, and I generally prefer having sections of at least 20, so that there's a good rotation. Looking at what articles are FA and GA class, I'd actually split it into a "Selected article" section and a "Selected episode" section, both with at least 20 entries.
• Within a section, the summaries for each selection should be around the same size. That way, the section takes up around the same amount of space in the larger portal no matter which selection is showing. It doesn't need to be exact, just visually close. Portal:Star Trek/Featured article/3 is twice the size of Portal:Star Trek/Featured article/2, meaning that it will be twice as long when it shows in the portal. Because of how you've set up your sections, the gap isn't too bad on any of the standard screen widths except for 1024 x 768 (I use this site to do tests), but that's a really old resolution anyways.
• I don't like the selected picture section. When there aren't FPs, I still want the images to be visibly of decent quality. Too many of the images are of low technical quality, and when you've got a bad looking image as a focal point of the portal, the portal just doesn't look right. I'm not sure what to do, as there might not be 20 high quality images.
• The Quality content section is massive. I personally only include current featured content when I do mine, but at the very least I would remove the "Did you know? articles", "Good article nominees" and "Former featured articles" sections, leaving only the active featured content and GAs. That will cut it down to half of the current size.
• I'd add Portal:Speculative fiction to the related portals. You might find others too. The full list is at User:Sven Manguard/List of Portals.
• I'm not sure what the Wikiversity or Wikivoyage links add in the Star Trek on other WikiMedia Projects section. Especially the latter, which only mentions it briefly in their entry on Space
• File:Delta-shield.svg appears three times in the portal (header, categories, and main topics). I'm personally not a fan of filler images in sections like categories and main topics, but if you're going to have filler images, I'd choose three different ones over using the same image three times.
• The Anniversaries this month, DYK, Quotes, Main topics, and Things you can do sections are perfect, I wouldn't change a thing.

Anyways, this is in generally good shape. Let me know your thoughts on these suggestions. Please use {{u|Sven Manguard}} so that I know you've responded, and can respond to your response to my response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:43, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Responses by Cirt

1. Good idea, will re-arrange those sects and note it back here.
2. Good point, this is something that maybe User:Miyagawa could handle.
3. Another area maybe User:Miyagawa could take over fixing.
4. Trimmed size of Quality content sect. Next time the bot comes by, it'll trim it and update it.
5. Added Portal:Speculative fiction to related portals.
6. Trimmed both Wikiversity and Wikivoyage from sister links in WikiMedia projects sect.
7. Swapped out File:Delta-shield.svg in categories and main topics sects for two different images.
8. Anniversaries this month, DYK, Quotes, Main topics, and Things you can do sections -- Thanks very much, most appreciated.

Thanks very much, Sven Manguard, will update when the rest are done. — Cirt (talk) 05:57, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Responses by Miyagawa

• 2: I'll get that sorted once the FA/GA split is changed to Selected article/episode instead - that'll make it easier to make the balance is correct across all combinations.
• 3: I'll take another look at them - I'm not sure that we'll have twenty. Certainly we've got the single FP, plus the free use Original Series promotional shots. Anything after that might be a bit hit and miss. I'll report back here once I work out what the situation is. Miyagawa (talk) 13:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Update by Cirt

• Portal:Star Trek/Selected episode = now has fifteen (15) total selections.
• Portal:Star Trek/Selected article = now has seventeen (17) total selections.

Both these should have only WP:GA or WP:FA quality selections. Both should get up to at least twenty (20) total selections each. Now the portal is reformatted for the rest of the work that User:Miyagawa can handle. :) Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 02:25, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem, I'll take the most common sort of size for the blurbs and make them all match over the weekend. I'll also top up the number of articles where I can (I'm certain that the episodes will easily meet the mark, not sure about the "others" - I might have to do some more GA's). Miyagawa (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay thanks, keep us posted here, — Cirt (talk) 18:46, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I've gone through and adjusted the list of selected pictures - it was fairly fortunate as we'd just had a couple new Original Series promotional shots uploaded to commons (including Spock's Brain!). So we've got 20 now. We'll need to double check that we haven't repeated the images elsewhere, but with the extra shots we should now have plenty of images to choose from. Plus, the guy who uploaded the images has done a check on the copyright status of the Star Trek promotional images and it seems that prior to 1969, they didn't copyright a single image. Not a one. Now we just need to source the other images! Miyagawa (talk) 20:10, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Miyagawa, any updates on this yet? — Cirt (talk) 23:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry - been caught up with some non-Wiki stuff. I'm going to aim for about 200 words per section if that sounds good - this means that they'll all be around the same size as "Yesterday's Enterprise". This means that mostly they'll be increased in size, and only really "These Are the Voyages..." will be reduced in size as that's currently 334 words. Does that sounds like a good size, or should I be aiming for a larger size? Miyagawa (talk) 18:41, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

That sounds fine, Miyagawa, just make sure to do that sizing for both the Selected episode sects and the Selected article sects. — Cirt (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Finally started on it, I'm just working my way through the episodes now - once I've standardarised the sizes I'll add more until we're back up to 20. Then I'll work on the "others" section and get those all to the same size as well. Miyagawa (talk) 18:29, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, all 20 episodes are now there and at the standard length. I've taken a look at the selected articles and we'll be able to do 20. At the moment we have 17, and I've identified three more articles that are GAs but not episodes that we can add (Nighthawk, Planet of the Titans and the second season of TNG). Miyagawa (talk) 19:35, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Sounds great, keep us posted here. Seems like when all that's done as mentioned above, we can probably close this peer review at that point in time. — Cirt (talk) 19:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, going to take a break for a few hours now - the selected articles 1 through 5 and 13 through 17 are done. I've also added three ones to take it up to 20, but 18 is currently very stubbish and I need to expand it. Most of the others should be trimming jobs with the exception of bat'leth which needs to be expanded slightly. I ended up adding Nighthawk and Planet of the Titans, but went with the novel Spock Must Die! instead of the TNG season article. Miyagawa (talk) 11:23, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, they're all around the same size now. The only thing is that the selected article box is narrower than the selected episode box, and so its still pushing it slightly out of alignment. Miyagawa (talk) 14:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

I modified the image widths of both columns, Miyagawa, does that look better now? — Cirt (talk) 15:35, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

That's much better. Miyagawa (talk) 16:30, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Sven Manguard, anything else to do, or did we address above successfully? :) — Cirt (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

@Miyagawa and Cirt: There seems to be a problem with the DYK section. Specifically, the DYKs I viewed appear to have never run on the main page. There were 77 of them in the recognized content section, so I don't see a reason who we can't use ones that have actually gone through the vetting process. If you want, I'd be happy to help do a switchover. Everything else looks good. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Sven Manguard on this one. I hadn't realized that was the case. Which ones do you see you think haven't appeared on the Main Page? It looks like either myself or Miyagawa left notes at the bottom of each DYK hook subpage noting confirmation of when they appeared on T:DYK, did you see that? Can you be more specific? — Cirt (talk) 03:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

@Miyagawa and Cirt: Upon re-examination, it appears that I somehow went from reviewing the DYK section to reviewing the anniversaries section without realizing that I was no longer looking at DYKs. My bad. This is, as far as I am concerned, ready to go to FPO nomination. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:11, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Ah, okay, no worries, easy mistake. :) Thanks very much for the input, about to go traveling soon. I'll close the peer review and we'll go from there maybe in a week. — Cirt (talk) 05:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Portal:Yorkshire

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I am requesting a peer review because I wish to get Yorkshire up to Featured Portal status. It currently has 11 DYK sets, 3 lists (all featured), 18 biographies (13 of which are Good or Featured), and 25 selected articles (all Good or Featured). Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 19:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Very nice; here are my thoughts:

1. In the "selected biography" section, some pictures are on the right and some are on the left. They should probably all be on the same side.
2. In both the "selected article" and "selected biography" sections, the article title (in bold) should be linked, so the reader doesn't have to search for the "Read more" link.
3. The "selected list" section has only 3 lists. I think you should either add more (they don't need to be featured, just high-quality) or remove the section.
4. The shortcut is in a somewhat awkward place, right next to the flag. Maybe move it next to the "Show new selections" link?
5. There's too much empty space between the intro and the selections.
6. Per WP:LINKCLARITY, "Northern England" should be only one link, to the article Northern England. England is linked later in the intro.

Good job and good luck! -- Ypnypn (talk) 00:56, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Portal:New Spain

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello. I would like to nominate this article potentially for a Featured Portal, but I haven't been able to figure out the process properly. I hoping to have a few people review it in order for to find out what exactly needs to be done before this portal can become a legitimate candidate for FP status. I feel I have enough articles to keep a consistent rotation (7 total GA & FA articles), and some related articles that can be used as featured content, but need to figure out how to rotate the material, among other issues. Thank you for taking your time to read this, and please contact me as soon as you can. LeftAire (talk) 22:34, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Sven Manguard

1. None of your "Selected ______" sections rotate because the random portal component is set to max=1. I'm seeing a total of two articles, three biographies, two images, and two locations. You're going to want 20 articles and 15-20 bios, images, and locations, ideally all of FA and GA quality.
2. You've got a Selected Panorama section with only one image, which really isn't a panorama. I suggest getting rid of the section and folding the image into your selected pictures section.
3. There are 21 related portals and only three related WikiProjects. I think you need to add in the WikiProjects for all of the items that you've included in the related portals, at the very least.
4. The image is way too large in the selected article section.

This portal isn't ready to be put up for Featured Portal nomination, you need to flush it out. I advise you look at portals that are already featured to see how Featured Portals should look. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I disagree about your third point. It makes sense to include only WikiProjects related to the subject of the portal, but Related Portals can include even marginally similar ones. For example, Portal:Napoleonic Wars links at the top to all sorts of war-related portals, but only to the most applicable WikiProjects. -- Ypnypn (talk) 20:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Lionratz

1. Have a standardized layout template for the Selected articles, Selected pictures and selected Biographies sections to make all the entries look the same. The selected article list should look something like this or this, while each individual entry should be listed in their own respective subpages like this, this and this. You can refer to the layout template that I used in the Singapore Portal here.
2. The colour is too glaring. Try to use a darker shade of yellow if possible.
3. The related portals sections should be reformatted to have easier maintenance and look nicer (see the film portal.
4. Add Did You Know and In this Month sections to the portal (see Portal:Norway)

These are other basic stuff to watch out for. Good luck in your work!--Lionratz (talk) 12:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Portal:Jainism

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I would like to nominate this portal for Featured Portal. Please provide suggestions on how to make this portal ready for it. Rahuljain2307 (talk) 17:57, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Sven Manguard

I apologize in advance for how long and intimidating this list is going to be.

1. There are only six selected articles. There really ought to be 20, using FA and GA quality articles whenever possible.
2. There are only six selected biographies. Like selected articles, there really ought to be 15 to 20, using FA and GA quality articles whenever possible.
3. There are only six selected pictures. There really out to be 15 to 20, using English Wikipedia FPs, Commons FPs, QIs, and VIs whenever possible. If there's a shortage, you still need to make sure that the images are of high quality.
4. One of the selected images is used as an image in a selected article. You can use very similar images, but using the same one multiple times isn't advisable, because it doesn't look good if the same image winds up on the front of the portal in multiple sections at the same time.
5. If you're going to do a selected scripture section, you really need to have more than one to select from. At least 10, although as with everything else, 20 is the goal.
6. I think you should take the DYK section and break it down into sets of five, that rotate out randomly like 'selected _____' sections do.
7. You need to make sure that all of the items within a section (i.e. all of the articles within selected articles or all of the biographies in selected biographies) are roughly the same size. That way, the portal is the same shape when items switch out.
8. You should try and keep the images in the corners of the 'selected _____' sections the same size, also because it helps the portal keep shape. You can have the images in Selected Articles larger than those in Selected Biographies, but all of the articles within the Selected Articles section should be the same size.

I know this seems like a lot, but once you get in a rhythm, it goes by very quickly. You can build up a portal to a high level in about a week and a half, and from there, it's just a matter of polish to take it to FPO status. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Portal:Millennium

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This is my first foray into portals but I'd like to bring it to FPO status if possible. This is a portal for the short-lived television series Millennium, and as such has a relatively small scope. However, I'm confident that I'll be able to bring most, if not all, articles within the subject to GA status or better, so every article featured in the cycles will be of good quality. At present there are ~25 articles being rotated automatically through the selected article and selected DYK boxes, while open tasks towards the bottom point out where the remaining articles needing help are. As I'm working within the wikicup this year a lot of my contributions will be articles within this scope so both of the selected content boxes will feature continually updated content until I've run through them all; which should see ~80 articles in total. I've kept the image adornments within a theme, using the ouroboros symbol favoured by the series' Millennium Group characters, although I'm open to expanding upon this if the theme seems too restrictive or repetitive. I've not included a full "selected picture" section as there aren't many free images directly related to the series, and those that are tend to be already used within the "selected article" blurbs. I'm also open to cutting down the number of related portals, I just jammed in as many as I felt were roughly connected. Thanks in advance for any help that can be offered here. GRAPPLE X 03:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC) GRAPPLE X 03:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Comments

• A selected biography section would be useful.

  I was planning to keep the selections to articles which have reached GA-class or better, which rules out a lot of the stub-class biographies associated with the series; Chris Carter (screenwriter), Glen Morgan, James Wong (producer), Chip Johannessen, Megan Gallagher, Klea Scott, etc. Some of the bios—Lance Henriksen and Terry O'Quinn mostly—are of better quality though. I'd definitely work such a selection in once I've managed to get sufficient work done on it but at the minute I'm not really convinced. Though it would be a good idea for me to get to work on those articles much sooner to get it going then. GRAPPLE X 10:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  That would take a lot of work, yes. Even five would be nice though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

• Wikilink episode titles in the selected articles box

  Done. GRAPPLE X 10:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

• Can't think of anything major right now, but I'm worried that you'd have trouble at FPOC because of the small subject matter. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  That's a fair point; I haven't had an exhaustive look but it seems that P:BO is the featured portal with the smallest scope—the accompanying wikiproject covers approximately 330 article-space pages. Episodes, season, characters, crew, and any other miscellany that works its way in there all combined this would probably reach half of that at maximum. If the scope is deemed too small then there's nothing I can really do about that but I still plan on being as exhaustive as I can to help that along. GRAPPLE X 10:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  Indeed. Hard to base a portal around a small subject. :-( — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  Perhaps maybe an The X-Files portal would be useful, since it is not created yet. JJ98 (Talk / Contribs) 20:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions and recommendations

1. Randomize image display and reformat the Intro section, see model at Portal:Norway.

   Aside from the images for the selected article, the image display is randomised; the DYK section is tied to a random ouroboros or similar symbol. I may try my hand at creating a few more as they're generally basic symbols (which is desirable, as the series dwells heavily on symbolism). GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

2. Reformat Things you can do section to make it look a bit nicer, see model at Portal:Internet.

   I've widened it, placed it on a row by itself. Its former space is occupied by a quote now. GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

3. Reformat Highlighted content display, see model at Portal:Film.

   Not really sure what you mean here, as the film portal has a much larger variety of articles (biographies, lists, etc, which this one doesn't really have). GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

4. Reformat Topics section, expand it a lot more, and create original display, see model at Portal:Television.

   Not sure what this is referring to; do you mean the list of "Highlighted content" or something else? GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

5. Add a Selected quote section, like Portal:Supreme Court of the United States.

   Good idea. I've added a section with random quotes; each one has been used in an episode of the series as an opening legend. GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

6. Add a Selected picture section, see model at Portal:Russia.

   This is going to be difficult as there aren't many free images which work devoid of context for this one; a few of some of the cast and crew are all we have (a few of Lance Henriksen and Chris Carter). Given that they're all older white men—and therefore don't show much variety—I don't know if it's going to work as well as would be hoped. GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

7. Add an In this month section, see model at Portal:Theatre.

   I could be amenable to this but aside from cast and crew birthdays, episode air dates and perhaps "in universe" dates, I don't know what would actually be useful to add. GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

8. Add an Associated Wikimedia section, see model at Portal:Comedy.

   Aside from Wikiquote there's not really anything to add (nothing at wikisource, not enough images to justify a useful commons cat, etc)

Hope that's helpful, — Cirt (talk) 22:41, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I think the field here is too narrow for a lot of these suggestions, as the portals you've cited are for huge fields like film, theatre or sovereign nations, rather than this small field. I've been able to act on some of them though, and I think it's looking better as a result, so thanks helping me expand out another section here. GRAPPLE X 00:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, no worries, I mean I respectfully disagree on a few of the responses, there might be some areas to pursue in the future (for example if there's no page yet on a sister project ... create one!) but after all, the above are just suggestions, so no problems either way. :) — Cirt (talk) 01:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

All I could think that could be created would be a commons category, unless there's other sister projects I'm overlooking (wikisource is out as scripts are the only real things to be presented there and they're not free; news is next to non-existent for wikinews, etc). If I've overlooked something you think would be viable I'm happy to work on it. GRAPPLE X 01:15, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah that sounds like a good idea :) — Cirt (talk) 03:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Took me a while but I created a commons category ( Media related to Millennium (TV series) at Wikimedia Commons). It currently contains other categories more than anything as I wasn't sure if placing files in the category would be okay if I was already using it to place the other categories those files are in. That sentence confused me. GRAPPLE X 21:07, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Portal:Buenos Aires

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I am requesting a peer review for this portal as I am interested in nominating it to be a Featured Portal. Bleff (talk) 02:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions and recommendations

1. Randomize image display and reformat the Intro section, see model at Portal:Norway.
2. Randomize and reformat Did you know section, see model at Portal:Theatre.
3. Reformat Things you can do section to make it look a bit nicer, see model at Portal:Internet.
4. Reformat Related portals for easier maintenance using template, see model at Portal:Arts.
5. Add in Featured content display, see model at Portal:Film.
6. Reformat Topics section, removing use of template and instead create original display, see model at Portal:Television.

Hope that's helpful, — Cirt (talk) 02:54, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Portal:Sailing

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I think that the Portal it's now complete (7, but soon will be 10) articles and biographies runs. I create the Portal to meet a specific need at the WikiProject Sailing, and just I have a feedback. Kasper2006 (talk) 18:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC) --Kasper2006 (talk) 18:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I think you would need to add more selections than 10, since thee benchmark is 20. Anyways, a Did You Know? or Current news section could help. e^xtra999 (talk) 15:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Tnx for your suggest. I hope to resolve it in next days. --Kasper2006 (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Has that suggestion been responded to and addressed? — Cirt (talk) 01:11, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Any chance of a status update on this? I'd be willing to look it over, but I'm not going to do that unless I know that the project hasn't been abandoned. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

All your help is welcome. I am willing to work with you to bring you groped portal between FP. Alone there was riusciuto, I was discouraged, but if there is anyone else who helps me, it can take on new life. --Kasper2006 (talk) 07:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.