Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Volcanoes/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Bencherlite 10:08, 1 September 2010 [1].

Portal:Volcanoes[edit]

I am nominating this for featured portal because I've put a lot of work into the portal, and it's vastly improved. The tips left from the first nomination way back when were particularly helpful. ResMar 15:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...could this be a sign from the gods? ResMar 04:22, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This page is not showing up on Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates for some reason. Volcanoguy 10:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is for me...perhaps it is the redirect. ResMar 14:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have relevant WikiProject talk pages been notified? -- Cirt (talk) 04:15, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you know the answer to that one...ResMar 15:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please note the info, here on this page, regarding what notifications have been given. -- Cirt (talk) 01:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Volcano Project, Geology Project, Volcao talk, WP Rocks and minerals, Mountains project. ResMar 15:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Hey Mario, do we have Happy Ending drive enabled?" "Duh Luigi." "Well, check anyway." "Oh for Pete's sake look it's right here and it's set to...off?" "...Crap." "This might end unhappily." "Zomg." ResMar 02:39, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The current page seems very U.S.-centric to me. --Avenue (talk) 00:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to say "nonsense", but that's a really valid point. FAs are 6 for NA, 1 for Europe, 2 for Asia, and 3 for other planets, and FPs are 6 for NA, 3 for Europe. 2 for Asia, and 3 for other planets. It's pretty late now but I'll handle it tommorow. ResMar 02:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added two more South American articles to the listing, but the bias is still there. Truth of the matter is, the listing uses 15 of the 23 featured articles in our scope, and the rest are all American or Canadian. The bias can only be removed by deleting existing FAs, something I'm not going to do. ResMar 02:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've also added List of volcanoes in Indonesia. Now, for featured pictures (on second thought, maybe tommorow...). ResMar 02:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It looks much better now, thanks. The bias in featured content is not really the portal's fault. (It's probably due to some combination of editor interests, how complete and accessible research in different countries is, and the public domain nature of US federal government publications.) --Avenue (talk) 04:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we really don't have anything in Africa, for example. Pity. ResMar 16:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - It's come a long way since I worked on it, and now it's aesthetically nice, well-designed, and a good resource. ceranthor 13:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment in general this is an attractive portal. Just a quick comment or two, but Enceladus in the SA section is missing a caption for its photo, as is the Io moon SP. Can these be corrected? Imzadi 1979 → 02:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And done. ResMar 01:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, and looks like the portal meets all the criteria in my opinion, so Support. Imzadi 1979 → 02:21, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There's lots of good stuff here, but a few parts still don't look as good as they could.
1. The "collaboration of the month" hasn't been updated since January.
Perhaps I should rename it Project collaboration? I don't like cycling collabs if no work has been done on them. ResMar 13:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree there's no point changing the topic just for the sake of change, but a six-month-old "collaboration of the month" makes the portal look stale. Renaming it would be fine. --Avenue (talk) 00:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Renamed "Project collaboration." ResMar 19:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. --Avenue (talk) 12:03, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2. It seems odd to me that the "Featured content" list includes good articles, and doesn't even mention featured pictures.
I believe you are refering to Mount Pinatubo? I've kept it despite its delisting to help counteract the centricity. ResMar 13:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I was referring to the list of "featured work" further down, between the "What you can do" and "Related portals" sections. Good articles may be worthy in their own right, but they are not featured articles, so either they should be removed or the title of the section should be changed. The problem is especially glaring when featured pictures are omitted from the list. Maybe the gallery would take up too much space here, but we should at least include a link to it. --Avenue (talk) 00:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a link to the gallery, enough? I could remove the GAs, but I'm not so hot on that...ResMar 19:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the GAs are worth highlighting (and valued pictures like this would be too). So the problem is the title. I've changed it to "Featured work and other approved content" - is that okay? --Avenue (talk) 12:03, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've also added a link to a new gallery of relevant valued pictures. --Avenue (talk) 12:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the harm with it. ResMar 13:41, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
3. Project-related tasks seem to be given undue prominence in the "What you can do" section, especially given the maturity of the project.
I've added <small> tags. ResMar 13:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My concern is more about the ordering and length of the list. I think putting project-related work at the top and bottom of the list makes this portal seem quite inwardly focussed on the details of the Volcanoes WikiProject. Is tagging talk pages with a project banner really the most important task we can think of? I think it would be better to prune this back to the three or four most pressing content-related issues, and perhaps also include a link to a separate project-focussed list. --Avenue (talk) 00:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
--Avenue (talk) 11:32, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging talk pages is a pretty common first item. I designed to portal to have as little maintainance as possible, so the To do list is forked from the project list. I've trimmed it down to the five most pertinent items. ResMar 17:37, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I think it now meets the criteria. --Avenue (talk) 03:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. After deciding that I don't really know enough to help extend some prose in of all places a Featured List Candidate, this was my first port of call. Aesthetically it's very good, the selections of content are interesting, the pictures are absolutely beautiful, and I found several of the most useful articles directly from this portal. I'm oblivious to any Manual of Style considerations, but on all other criteria I think this is worthy of joining our other featured content. --WFC-- 01:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It seems to meet the criteria. Volcanoguy 00:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I think this portal is quite close to Featured standard. I liked the strong & appropriate colour scheme, and I particularly enjoyed the interesting & varied selection of images. Some relatively minor comments follow:
  • Are there any more biographies of a suitable standard available?
Not really. Geologists and volcanologists are an under-represented caste on Wikipedia, mostly because sources are pretty sparse: they write a lot of things, but usually not about themselves. ResMar 01:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are there any more DYKs available? They seem to come up relatively often; I'd be very surprised if there had only been 32.
I've been keeping active track of that. I think that there may be enough content for another listing, yes. ResMar 01:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps not. Apparently I did a crummy job on that, because searching archives gave me 23 more dyks, almost enough for 3 listings :) ResMar 02:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some sections had typos/grammatical errors in the blurbs as well as in the instructions -- I've fixed those I saw, but a careful copy edit would be useful.
Looked over them again. ResMar 16:31, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not clear why Triton is included in Selected Articles. The blurb should mention something related to volcanism.
Added references to cryovolcanism. ResMar 02:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found the frame around the Selected Pictures detracted from the layout -- is it necessary?
I liked it really. It predates my involvement with the Portal, and I found it very appealing. ResMar 01:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found the layout with a single column for 5 boxes at the bottom of the portal a little dull. Could some of these continue in the two-column format?
Slid two items into the left column. ResMar 02:50, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's usual to link the subject in the bold start to the blurb, not in Read more. You do this in Selected Articles but not in Selected Biographies.
Fixed. ResMar 02:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the Introduction, I'd suggest joining up two short paragraphs which both relate to intraplate volcanos.
Done. ResMar 02:58, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The portal is inconsistent with using full stops at end of image captions and no punctuation; also at end of attribution to quotations.
Done I think. ResMar 16:31, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you need the link to Recent additions in Did you know?
Pretty much. ResMar 01:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it possible to add images for all the biographies? Possibly pictures of the volcanoes with which they are associated, if no image of the person is available?
Most geologists don't stick around any particular volcanoes, but work a lot of them in their time. As for the images, almost all of them are on their ~sites on copyrighted university networks. ResMar 02:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does News need to have the header News monitor? The format of dates in the archive should be standardised.
Done. ResMar 02:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • A couple of minor tweaks in Selected pictures: there is a redlink in Selected picture 19; in Selected picture 6 units need translating.
Done. ResMar 02:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hope this is helpful in improving the portal. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:03, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some very good points, thanks :) ResMar 02:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[Sorry, holiday weekend over here.] Looking good, support. Espresso Addict (talk) 09:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've handled all the issues, Addict hasn't been on since the 27th (taking a break, I think). Is it ready for archiving? The nom has been open for a mean 35 days. ResMar 16:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note This nomination has been closed as "promote" but there may be a delay until the bot processes this. BencherliteTalk 10:18, 1 September 2010 (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/Portal:Volcanoes/archive2&oldid=1091466943"