Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Failed log/April 2011

< Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates | Failed log
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 not promoted by OhanaUnited 03:33, 11 April 2011 [1].

Portal:Jupiter

edit

I am nominating this Portal because it meets all of the FA Portal criteria and it has not been nominated before.--  Novus  Orator  09:11, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it will be more appropriate if you bring biography over to articles. Regardless, you need more contents in each areas of the portal. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. I will increase the content.--  Novus  Orator  04:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Doubled the number of biographies and increased article count.--  Novus  Orator  05:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When I mean each areas, I really mean each area (biography, article, picture). Right now it's still not enough. OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will double the biographies and pictures. I will add a few more articles as well.--  Novus  Orator  07:41, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Did it again, lookin' slick!--  Novus  Orator  08:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are some additional articles that you can use to further expand the number of selected articles. All of the inner moons of Jupiter reached GA status so they can be included in the portal. As for the introduction part of the portal, I don't understand why you used the selected articles layout along with "archives/nominations". Those aren't needed in the introduction box. You should take a look at Commons' featured pictures and Wikipedia's featured pictures for more candidates to be used in selected pictures section. OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:59, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Added the above, and fixed intro formatting.--  Novus  Orator  08:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Header improved.--  Novus  Orator  05:29, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Bencherlite:

  • Whilst a lot of work has gone into this portal so far, I don't think it's there yet.
  • Intro
    • The header and introductory text is a visual mess - too many images crowding the words.
    • Why is there a "P:MO" shortcut box in there?
    • Why is "Jupiter" not linked on first appearance?
  • Biographies
    • There are not enough biographies of a sufficient level of quality to meet the FPo criteria (1(a) "It showcases only high-quality content that is preferably already featured.") The 8 biographies are GA/stub/start/start/B/stub/B/stub. Only 1 out of the 8, really, is good enough.
    • The biography blurbs need to show why the people have been chosen for this portal - what have they got to do with Jupiter? Only biographies 2, 4 and 8 mention Jupiter, for instance.
    • The biography blurbs all ought to be of similar length for consistency.
    • Watch for dablinks ("orbital plane" in biography 2)
    • Redlinks are frowned upon in portal blurbs, according to 1(b): "Red links are limited in number and restricted to aspects that encourage contribution." Do the redlinks in biography 6 meet this?
  • Articles
    • This is a much better selection of articles, with plenty of FAs and GAs. I don't think "definition of planet" is sufficiently relevant to Jupiter to include, though - it's more of a general solar system article.
    • Watch for dablinks: the "read more" links from Metis onwards all go to dabpages, and the nymph Thebe in no.17 is a dab link too.
  • Pictures
    • Picture 10 is not by an early artist; calling picture 1 "stunning" is POV.
  • Topics
    • The box is messy: different sizes of font, unusual use of bold (other portals use stars to mark featured content), a explanation of what italic font is used for when no italic font is used...
    • I would have thought it a good idea to put {{.}} or  • or something between names. I would have thought mentioning all the moons, not just the major ones. I would have thought that if Kuiper and Cassi were important enough to mention in this topics box then they were worth mentioning in the biographies selection.
  • News
    • I would remove this, personally - nothing is about Jupiter, it's all general space stuff that belongs on the space portal but not on portals for individual planets.

BencherliteTalk 09:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_portal_candidates/Failed_log/April_2011&oldid=423754501"