Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Archive/April 2008

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This archive contains the peer review requests that are older than one month, have received no response in the last two weeks, are not signed, have become featured portal candidates, or did not follow the "How to use this page" principles in some way. If one of your requests has been moved here by mistake, please accept our apologies and copy it back to the main peer review page with your signature (~~~~).

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:Textile Arts[edit]

This portal had a prior peer review, and after giving some feedback there, that's when I began to get involved and do some formatting rework, with a lot of help from WikiProject Textile Arts.

Stats: (17) Selected articles, all with an associated free-use image, all of "B" class or higher, (9) Selected bios, all with an associated free-use image, all of "B" class or higher, (30) Selected pictures, (11) sets of 3 WP:DYK hooks, each with one free-use image per subpage, (25) Selected quotes. All of these subsections are randomized. The portal also has (10) Featured Pictures, which are displayed in the featured content section and the Selected pictures section.

Looking for some pre-WP:FPOC feedback. Cirt (talk) 11:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Posted a notice about this portal peer review at the talkpages of WP:TA, WP:KNOTS, WP:WPArts, WP:FASHION, and WP:WPVA, when the review was started. Cirt (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks good on a quick survey nothing comes to mind, I'm afraid. Johnbod (talk) 19:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No prob, that's quite fine, a valid response at a portal peer review, thanks. :) Cirt (talk) 21:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like a nice, solid portal. The original color scheme is an "old fashioned" setup that's difficult to read. I tried out matching the project's color scheme to give it more of a signature look. RichardF (talk) 03:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Coloring changes look good to me. Cirt (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The images in the intro, article and bio selections are pretty small and hard to make out (can you tell I have old geezer eyes? ;-). They probably would look nice at around twice the size. The selected bio image would balance out more as left-justified. RichardF (talk) 03:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Increased the default image sizes, and left-justified the selected bio image. Cirt (talk) 03:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • To see what you think about it, I added a frame of the same hue as the boxes (H42) to add a little more texture. RichardF (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Looks great. I changed the "Show new selections" to white, but changed it back because the present way looks better with your formatting changes. Cirt (talk) 01:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I love the new look, thanks so much; the new colors work really well with our nav templates (consistent branding!) and set off the images nicely as well. - PKM (talk) 19:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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.

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:Mars[edit]

Hi, I would like some new thoughts on this portal. I have developed it in the recent months so it updates every month. Particularily, I would like comments about the news section and the image section. Thanks for taking your time to review this! Shrewpelt (talk) 17:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Like the colors, for the news section try the WikiNews Importer Bot.
  1. All of the selected articles should be generally the same length.
  • Do you mean the length of the actual article, or the summary shown on the portal? Shrewpelt (talk) 14:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. It would be nice if all the selected images had credits.
  1. The DYKs are missing a May section.
  1. Lastly, the edit section in the box headers would look cleaner without the arrow, and maybe a lighter blue by a few shades. If was hard to read on the LCD but fine on the CRT.
  •  Not done I don't know how to do that. Could you direct me to a page that would tell how? Thanks, Shrewpelt (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done I changed the code around, hope that's okay with you. Still same colors. §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 16:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 23:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I doubt it's just me, but with Firefox 2 on MacOS X the boxes look off: the header bar is below the line of the top of the box, but the "edit" link at the right of the box doesn't line up with the box title (so it's half in and half out of the header bar). If you can't see what I'm seeing, let me know and I'll fiddle with it myself. Msanford  T  03:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe it's most common to put the Related Wikimedia, Related Portals, and Categories at the very bottom of the portal page. Not that not doing so is particularly problematic in itself, but people will probably expect to see it elsewhere. Others, feel free to give counter-opinions! Msanford  T  03:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, on the visual side of things, it looks sort of crammed together. Maybe add a few pixels between the boxes. §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 05:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. This page (Portal:Mars/Mars news archive) Isn't needed with the bot functioning as it stands. But that doesn't matter really, just a pointer. §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 16:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am just using it as an archive for the news. Shrewpelt (talk) 22:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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.

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:Wales[edit]

I worked on this back in December and I've just got back into portals again, so I was wondering whether I could receive any feedback on the Wales Portal. Updates will be given and I am open to other suggestions. Rudget (?) 12:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looks nice. Please add instructions/information how to add new Selected articles and SPs. Add DYK and News archives. Fix "Associated Wikimedia" links. It would be great if the Sel. articles (and SPs) were wikilinked at the beginning, at the subject's name. Any updates on news? feydey (talk) 13:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Will be adding them all soon. Thanks for the swift response. Rudget (?) 13:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some points:
    • DYKs - there are currently none relating to Wales - according to WP:WALES  Not done
    • News -  Done
    • Selected article and SPs:  Doing... (may need some help from you on that) That's probably the only thing I don't know what to do with portals. :P
    • Hopefully that wraps it up. Rudget (?) 14:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • For DYK's, you could trawl through the archives at Wikipedia:Recent additions (all 203 of them!) to find some interesting Wales related ones to get you started. It's not essential though as many portals prefer to produce their own. Nanonic (talk) 06:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All done. Now going to WP:FPOC. Rudget. 15:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Portal_peer_review/Archive/April_2008&oldid=1146198089"