Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Star/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates‎ | Portal:Star
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 Cirt 02:08, 29 May 2010 [1].

Portal:Star

edit

I have got it done very well with Moxy. So, nominating here would be a good thought. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 04:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think a better title for this portal would be Portal:Stars, though it could still be referred to as "the Star Portal"- the names normally refer to the subject (if a concrete noun) in the plural. J Milburn (talk) 10:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Redirect made till now. Portal:Stars --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 10:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from J Milburn

I'm here now, so I'll give a fuller review.

  • Why is File:5 Star.png used? That gives the impression that the portal is featured already.
I had for beautification, but per you I have removed. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to be a conspicuous lack of specific stars- in the article section, the picture section- even the topics. Additionally, that seems to go a little off-topic when it talks about galaxies, which I would claim are only loosely related- there needs to be something that differentiates this from Portal:Astronomy, and when the topics section doesn't even list the likes of Sirius or the pole star, it doesn't really seem to live up to its name.
Done --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selected picture is a little messy. In adding all the text, it detracts from the picture itself, and, let's be fair, we've got some great pictures of space. Using three pictures like that on the aurora entry doesn't really work, in my eyes.
I will see. But all pics are too beautiful, in aurora, but if you say I have removed one. Done, as much I could. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • We have a great number of astronomy FPs, yet these ones seem to have been chosen rather haphazardly- some selected are not overly star-based (arora) while others clearly focussing on stars (File:Sunspot TRACE.jpeg, for instance) have not been selected. In a portal like this, I think you should be aiming for more images than you already have, and more specifically star based images, in order to avoid crossover with Portal:Astronomy.
Correct. But this portal has a very tough work to do as it is like a selected article of Portal:Astronomy. Aurora cause is related to star, somehow. I will see for this also. Done, as much I could. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 11:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plasma is a dablink in the intro.
I don't think. It has something there. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 11:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • In the introduction, the link on plasma points to a disambiguation page. It needs fixing. J Milburn (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done, linked to plasma (physics). --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 02:15, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully these thoughts will give you something to work with. J Milburn (talk) 10:40, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Have talk pages of relevant WikiProjects been notified? -- Cirt (talk) 12:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see here. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 14:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by 70.29.208.247 (talk)

The issue about weight raised at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Star/archive1 has never been addressed. The DYK section is badly wrong in that element. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The portal should not be promoted when it is disseminating factually incorrect information. Just because the source the data is from is wrong, does not mean that Wikipedia should be disseminating incorrect information to the masses. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 05:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Removed. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 11:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from • ɔ ∫ →

The topic sections is extremely lengthy; can you make a "tab" at the top and transclude the topics section there, into a separate page? • ɔ ∫ → 02:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK.Let me see. --Extra999 (Contact me + contribs) 05:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What code do you want me to add Extra..lets collapse all after main start stuff?... Moxy (talk) 09:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ......tabs all done tks for the help!!!..pls make sure they are linked ok..Moxy (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Everything seems fine, need to base my test protal off of this. Besides, it's the star portal, it needs a brown star on it. Buggie111 (talk) 13:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Open for a significant amount of time with not a great deal of support, will likely close and archive after one more week. -- Cirt (talk) 15:07, 17 May 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:Star/archive1&oldid=365337260"