Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Minnesota

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 16:22, 29 February 2008.

Portal:Minnesota

Hi. Recently this portal was changed to adhere to the portal guidelines, and to mirror the appearance of several featured portals in geography. I'll do my best to make any changes suggested here. The "view" links in each section show what is under the hood (either random or static content). Atomaton instantiated the portal and its structure. Cricket02 created the suggestions structure (cleared at the moment), to welcome content ideas from any and all readers. Thank you. -Susanlesch (talk) 06:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks good, although some randomizing would be a recommendable boon.--Bedford 03:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Almost everything is set up for random. Maybe what you saw is the biography. It is purposely frozen because at this time, WikiProject Minnesota awards "selected biography" of the month on talk pages. If we don't see many suggestions, we can use random there too (six are already in that queue, just have to change the start and end values). Thanks. -Susanlesch (talk) 19:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support as an extremely minor contributor nearly a year ago. This portal has vastly improved and is immensely informative. Great job! ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 04:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support This Portal now looks very professional and consistent with other state portals. I contributed quite a bit to content, but not at all to formatting and that is really what sets apart the "excellent" from the "good" reading on Wikipedia.--Appraiser (talk) 14:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks very nice, a great portal for a dedicated and well constructed group of articles. --Bobak (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really has come a long way since Minnesota was an FA a year ago. --Marumari (talk) 21:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really nice. The tabs on the top is above and beyond FPORT criteria. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 03:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. And thanks to User:Patrick who figured out the #ifeq to make one-page tabs. -Susanlesch (talk) 04:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Selected Community, Selected picture, Selected biography, On this month (February in the History of Minnesota), Selected event???? Where are the archives?
Scenic Minnesota seemes to be a redundant section of the Selected picture.
Associated Wikimedia has most of the blank pages. Kindly redirect them to the correct ones. e.g. in Wikiquote, Minnesota can be Minnesota search etc.
Add purge link.
Place some Requested articles and Articles needing improvement in the Things you can do. - Shyam ^(T/C) 10:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments.

Archives are under the "View" link in each section. If content is ever delisted in the future then it can move to a section called archive per se. These sections exist already where they are in use.

I would recommend to have a related link in the end of each section. This would add more visibility. There should be more communities and events, as well. Shyam ^(T/C) 05:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can make a custom box-header with an archive link at top left based on the code in Portal:Box-header, and did at one point. But I very much prefer the present, simpler interface. Adding a bunch of links like archive would dilute the single, clear message: an invitation to visitors to make suggestions. Re: communities and events, yes I agree. Maybe you didn't see the queue of 43 communities. WikiProject Minnesota has at least three photographers with new photos in the process of being uploaded, and when we have them, the communities will be added. -Susanlesch (talk) 06:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's your wish. But, it should not be diluted the selected one, but let others know the list. I have seen the list of communities, but it makes me feel more of selected pictures, without having suficient contexts. Shyam ^(T/C) 06:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scenic Minnesota is panorama photos. It is also a placeholder for a set of iconic images developed earlier, something for future development.

As you wish. But, it lacks the sufficient back ups Shyam ^(T/C) 05:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Things you can do should not need maintenance. The WikiProject Minnesota pages are our dashboard.

Does it mean that there is no need to create Minnesota related articles in near future? Shyam ^(T/C) 05:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it means updating multiple sets of pages is error-prone and duplication (multiplication) of effort. -Susanlesch (talk) 06:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If so-called multiplication/duplication of efforts is helpful to create some goos articles, then I would say, it is worthful. You can avoid duplication by using the same template at both place. Shyam ^(T/C) 06:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent reason. I am not able to promise anything or redesign the project by myself, and there are both a long history and many other editors' preferences to consider, but yes maybe this can be coordinated someday. The template idea sounds great. Thanks for the idea. -Susanlesch (talk) 07:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: purge link, I removed it because it calls attention to itself.

I did not get you. Purge link is for refreshing the portal. Shyam ^(T/C) 05:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caching is a browser preference. Randomizing content isn't a value-adding feature, it is a convenience for minimizing upkeep. I know some people here think random is way cool so pardon the opinion. -Susanlesch (talk) 06:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An updation in the section will not automatically update the portal for some time. So, I would say, this is the pre-requisite for the portal to be featured. Shyam ^(T/C) 06:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link added. -Susanlesch (talk) 07:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will add a table for Associated Wikimedia, thanks for the suggestion and sample link! -Susanlesch (talk) 18:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I will do something with the month in Minnesota history. Thanks for spotting that. Archive sections added for the others. -Susanlesch (talk) 18:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. All done, comments above. Thanks so much for your review, Shyam. -Susanlesch (talk) 22:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very clean and easy to follow, I also like the tabs at the top which make it easy to navigate. Good Work--CPacker (talk) 02:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator. We have had nine or so days here for discussion, which is longer than the previous FPCs that I have seen. Thanks to each and every person who took time to make a review. -Susanlesch (talk) 07:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as successful by Rudget (talk · contribs) at 16:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC) - All points corrected, 8 supports, over 10 days, no opposes.[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.