Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:London transport/archive3
- 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 promoted by Cirt 01:50, 2 July 2011 [1].
This portal was last nominated in November 2009 and is being resubmitted for new consideration following an overhaul. The portal has:
- 53 selected articles (12 are GA, 10 are FA)
- 15 selected biographies (4 are GA, 3 are FA)
- 30 selected pictures
- 40 DYKs
In total, the portal has 25 featured articles, 3 featured lists and 26 good articles to its name.--DavidCane (talk) 01:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Overall, my reaction to the portal is very positive. It's good-looking and appears complete. I have a few comments and a question: --Stemonitis (talk) 07:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- While there is nothing wrong with the colour scheme, it doesn't immediately convey the topic to the reader. I notice that Transport for London have been kind enough to list their corporate colours in various useful formats. I recognise that we cannot impinge on their corporate identity too much, but choosing a colour scheme close to theirs (probably on a white background) would provide a means of making the portal more immediately recognisable as relating to transportation in London.
- The colour scheme hasn't worked out quite as I wanted. I am working on this at the moment. It was intended to be something closer to the traditional red of London buses, but not too vibrant.--DavidCane (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- My understanding of the conditions of the CC-BY-SA licence is that the image must be linked to. This would mean that Portal:London Transport/Maps would need to be altered to either provide attribution by another means, or to remove the
link=parameters (perhaps replace the image links with text links to List of stations in London fare zone 1 and London Underground below the maps).- I'll just remove, the link= code. There are other links to the same articles elsewhere on the page.--DavidCane (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The usual term is "recognised content", rather than "superior content".
- Done.--DavidCane (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- If many of your selected articles are neither FAs nor GAs, and you have FAs and GAs that are not used in the selected articles, how did you make the selection?
- As the featured articles and good articles are heavily skewed towards London Underground and bridges, just to use them would not have covered the broad spread of the Portal's scope. Until recently, monthly selections were made by Wikiproject London Transport members nominating articles, biographies and pictures here. The process ran out of steam, so the lists of previous selections here, here and here were used as the basis of the random lists. --DavidCane (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- While there is nothing wrong with the colour scheme, it doesn't immediately convey the topic to the reader. I notice that Transport for London have been kind enough to list their corporate colours in various useful formats. I recognise that we cannot impinge on their corporate identity too much, but choosing a colour scheme close to theirs (probably on a white background) would provide a means of making the portal more immediately recognisable as relating to transportation in London.
- Support ~~EBE123~~ talkContribs 22:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Support David has done a terrific job updating and automating the portal, including some customized templates. Lionel (talk) 10:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Two supports and no opposes. No outstanding unaddressed suggestions or objections, or actionable issues to fix. Ready to promote without objection, in a little over one week or so. — Cirt (talk) 08:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Very nice job. I have one comment: is the red background of the section headers the same red as the London Underground logo? The color in File:Underground.svg appears less glaring on my computer screen than does the red current used in the portal's headers. Other than that, I think this portal is in excellent shape and meets the FPO criteria. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 03:10, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I haven't gone with the official TfL colour from the roundel (#CC3333 according to their design standard), as it seems a bit dreary to me in the headings. The one used is intended to be a bit more vibrant and have better contrast with the black text. Comparison below.--DavidCane (talk) 01:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
| TfL Red | Portal Red |
|---|---|
| #CC3333 | #FF2300 |
| Example | Example |
- Would it be OK slightly darker, like #ee2000? I only ask because the current shade makes it hard to read the black text on my laptop screen, which is usually at full brightness. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 02:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- that looks OK. I'll change it.--DavidCane (talk) 22:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Would it be OK slightly darker, like #ee2000? I only ask because the current shade makes it hard to read the black text on my laptop screen, which is usually at full brightness. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 02:05, 25 June 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.