Portal talk:Australian roads

Nominations

Please suggest new content for the portal's selected article, picture, video, and Did you know? sections

Selected article nominations
Please make sure that articles are high quality – assessed as B-Class or higher

Selected picture/video nominations
Please make sure that pictures and videos are high quality. As well as being visually interesting, and available in high resolution, the media needs to have encyclopaedic value, and should therefore be used for in an Australian road article (linked from the caption). Images need to be released under an appropriate free licence, preferably uploaded to Wikimedia Commons.

Did you know? nominations
Please make sure the article the fact comes from is not a stub. The fact itself needs to be referenced with an inline citation, and the article should conform to the core policies of Verifiability, Living Person Biographies and Copyright. Any fact that has appeared on the Main Page's Did you know? column is eligible (but that is not a requirement).

Capitalisation

Should the title on this page be "The Australian roads portal", capitalised per MOS:CAPS? If not, why not? (See also: WT:WikiProject Australian Roads#Capitalisation of project name) Mitch Ames (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Aren't portal titles considered proper names? If you disagree, then we probably need to discuss the matter somewhere that will get more attention / form a wider consensus. - Evad37 [talk] 01:46, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Although {{Portal}} and {{Portal-inline}} don't treat it the portal name as a proper name... (template output below)

Australian Roads portal

... so maybe it should be in common name form, at least in articles... - Evad37 [talk] 02:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

The portal name appears to actually be "Australian roads" with a redirect from Portal:Australian Roads, so I suggest that the banner should also be "The Australian roads portal" - lower case "r", lower case "p" ("portal" is not a proper noun here). Or may be just "Australian roads" - "portal" is redundant.

".. we probably need to discuss the matter somewhere that will get more attention / form a wider consensus"
I'm happy to move the discussion elsewhere if appropriate - but where? Perhaps Wikipedia talk:Portal. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:10, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

That seems like a good location, if you want to do the honours. Looking through the Featured portals, most seem to use title case for their title banner on the portal page, and sentence case for the actual page title. - Evad37 [talk] 04:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

I've raised the matter at WT:Portal#Capitalisation of portal names. Mitch Ames (talk) 06:38, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Roads in Brisbane and Category:Streets in Brisbane - do we need both?

I notice that these two categories exist and wondered if:

• there should be just one category covering both
• if we should have both categories, what can we document as the difference between them, so entries can end up in the right category

I don't have any particular preference, but I do find myself editing these articles and wondering ... Kerry (talk) 03:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

This sort of structure exists for other Australian cities. The roads category should contain the (generally) longer arterial roads, while the street subcategory should contain the shorter/smaller streets such as in the CBD, and highways/freeways/motorways should be in a separate category. You could use similar wording to that at the top of Category:Roads in Perth, Western Australia and Category:Streets in Perth, Western Australia - Evad37 [talk] 03:51, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

OK. Also, I just noticed that Streets in Brisbane is in the category Roads in Brisbane. Is that the general principle to be followed? Kerry (talk) 04:02, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be done that way, but it does make sense in a way, in that a street is a type of road, ie if the streets category didn't exist, then everything currently in it could go in the roads category – but its better to have more specific categories. - Evad37 [talk] 05:50, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Portal talk:Molecular and Cellular Biology which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Time for an update

Given the current deletion discussion for all portals I believe it is time for a serious update of many (perhaps all) aspects of this portal. Some suggestions:

• Change selected article, picture and video on a regular basis.
• Update international news and Did you know at least monthly.

Downsize43 (talk) 00:23, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Status report from the Portals WikiProject

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018.

Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, and design the portals of the future.

As of April 29th, membership is at 56 editors, and growing.

There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for each component of portals.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject.    — The Transhumanist   03:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Proposal to delete all portals

The discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal to delete Portal space. Voceditenore (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Accessibility

Please don't use grey font on grey background. It's very hard to read and just unprofessional. Nemo 06:14, 1 October 2019 (UTC)