Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Featured log/February 2006

Portal:Australia

Self-nom. One of the first country portals on Wikipedia, I established the Australia Portal early last year and have been looking after it since then. It has evolved over time as I've either developed new ideas myself or incorporated the best of other portals. Many of its features have been employed by other portals, and it has a sister in Portal:New Zealand. It is well laid-out and I believe it useful for users of Wikipedia.--cj | talk 06:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support, good content and layout. I should declare my bias here, as I'm the chief maintainer of the New Zealand Portal which was also established by cj and which is indeed a sister in layout.-gadfium 06:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Some minor issues:

The "featured" picture isn't.
While having the list of topics layed out without a proper box is interesting, will it still work if/when the relative column heights change?
There's no (obvious) archive for the "Did you know" and "Featured picture" sections. Are they new, or are you just not archiving them?

Overall, though, the portal looks quite good. —Kirill Lok s hin 14:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kirill. 1) I've renamed the image from "featured" to "selected". 2) I'm not sure what you mean? It is in a proper box - just not in a column. It's similar to the topics list on Portal:London. 3) I've been archiving images to Portal:Australia/Previously featured - I'll make this more prominent. I don't archive "did you know...", partly because I don't see a reason to. Thanks for commenting, --cj | talk 14:46, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me (on FireFox, anyways) like the color from the topic list is bleeding out into the rest of the portal. You might want to check your div tags. —Kirill Lok s hin 14:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it; apparently it was a case of overlapping floats. Support from me, incidentally. —Kirill Lok s hin 14:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think this is a fine portal.Rlevse 16:22, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I based the styling for the London Portal on this - definitely worthy. Deano (Talk) 22:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Tropical cyclones

Self nom as member of WikiProject Tropical cyclones. This portal has a very active WikiProject maintaining it, and it has evolved over time to be what I consider featured quality. The pictures and articles are updated regularly, the content is stable (and increasing in quality, as several articles featured here are planned to undergo FA candidacies) and the Portal will become very frequented once the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season picks up again and rekindles interest in the subject. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 23:11, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object, as the edit links on the article and picture lead to redirects. It also seems that the edit link is somewhat difficult to see with that background, but it could be just me. Other than that, a great portal. —Kirill Lokshin 00:00, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I see what you mean, it is a result of an old page move from Portal:Tropical Cyclones. I'm fixing that. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 00:11, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed now, as well as the edit links' color. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 00:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Excellent; support from me, then. —Kirill Lok s hin 00:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support, nice portal. Rlevse 16:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support, TC news not updated as much as some may like to believe (esp. with Southern Hemisphere storms) and has a way to go, but good nevertheless. -- Sarsaparilla39 00:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support It is one of the most maintained poratals that exist. Tarret 22:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment whilst I find it a very attractive portal, I'm concerned its topic area is too narrow and that a portal on climate or weather might be more useful. --cj | talk 15:24, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Portal:Weather already exists, but it isn't maintained as much as this portal. However, there are at least hundreds of articles on tropical cyclones, and they are divided per basin, per intensity, per year, to name a few large categories of articles. Also, with the events that happened last year, interest in this area is large enough to overwhelm the Weather portal, so they should be split. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 23:47, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was just a minor concern. I wasn't sure how comprehensive Wikipedia's coverage in the area was.--cj | talk 01:20, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Support Great portal, but a few formating glitches do need to be fixed. I've fixed the formating of the current selected article to remove an IE glitch; however, this needs to be carried over to the other articles in the queue. --cj | talk 01:20, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, we'll fix that, but I'm trying to figure out what the problem was in IE, and I can't find it. What was the glitch? Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 01:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When we transfered the edit link to the header in the Portal:Box-header, we found that in Internet Explorer, wherever an image was present in a box with text alongside, the text was forced lower against the image. It doesn't occur in Firefox. The only way to avoid it is by beginning the text immediately after the mark-up, with no breaks or spacing.--cj | talk 01:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that should be fixed now. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 02:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]