Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Archive/March 2009
I'm wondering if this would have a change at becoming a Featured Portal, and what I can do to improve it if it still needs work. Thanks! -Drilnoth (talk) 16:45, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm archiving this and will just take it to Featured Portal Candidates, since there's been no response in well over a month. –Drilnoth (T • C) 21:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
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 (along with the help of the ever effervescent Chubbennaitor and Cdhaptomos) expanded this portal about a month ago, and got the parts moving again. All of the Selected areas are either FAs or GAs (with the exception of two). I'm particularly interested in whether I should expand those areas to include other articles, to increase the numbers. Thanks in advance for any feedback, Apterygial 01:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- A "Topics" box is a must if reaching for a FP status. Otherwise it looks very sleek, although the new colours are nice maybe I'd test with something more "describing F1" (not pure black/red).feydey (talk) 22:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- I renamed the "See also" section "Topics". In terms of colours, the old one was a very McLaren based colours scheme, which I didn't think was a good idea, favouring one particular current team over another. The colours most closely resemble those Lotuses Andretti used to drive (see here). Apterygial 22:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Any black looked wrong and red just looks wrong. Chubbennaitor 17:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I renamed the "See also" section "Topics". In terms of colours, the old one was a very McLaren based colours scheme, which I didn't think was a good idea, favouring one particular current team over another. The colours most closely resemble those Lotuses Andretti used to drive (see here). Apterygial 22:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- I had never seen the portal be this clean and great!! I always see this page instead when I enter: Wikipedia:F1 . Great work here. I say the portal looks great and I can't think of any changes really. -- Guroadrunner (talk) 08:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Merging selected article and selected race seems like a good choice. I was wondering why there are selected articles and this month's selected article? Duplicated sections that serves same purpose? And I believe the image in introduction is too normal, improper use of zoom (didn't zoom in enough), and no "wow" factor. Find a picture that have better quality (and preferably a FP) OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- The months one is changed every month and picked. The selected article is a range of different articles that change randomly. They are just every FA and GA in the project. Chubbennaitor 16:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- I removed the month's selected article, as that was just confusing for everyone, merged selected article and selected race, brought DYK up to 15 (4 per set), selected picture up to 20, rearranged some stuff, and was quite bold and decided to forgo having a lead image at all, since there are enough pictures on the portal, even at the top, in my opinion, to make its existence vaguely negligible. Apterygial 09:54, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Chub, there is a strong tendency that after the portal is promoted, people neglect it and fail to choose one article and update the portal. It leaves the so-called featured portals with empty sections and showing red links that pages have yet to be created for that month. Very soon, we're going to have a drive to purge out these outdated featured portals. But please, don't be THAT bold and remove the lead image. Perhaps you can find a digital version of checker-flag and put it there? OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Was that all aimed at me. OK. I don't give up on something if it's watched by over 20 people. Plus the portal is n a rotational basis that will only get boring if left. There would be one possible red link before someone realised. Chubbennaitor 15:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- OK, the lead now has two lead images, which I think encapsulates the history of F1. Anything else? Apterygial 23:16, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm just worried about "word-squeeze", which is the pictures on both sides squeeze the words in the middle and making it difficult to read. One image should suffice. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Done. Just one image. Apterygial 05:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)