Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Music/archive1

Portal:Music

The Music Portal has been radically revamped over the last few months. It now has many active and enthusiastic contributors who keep the portal completely up-to-date, and it really has become an excellent showcase - and of course portal - to all the excellent music-related articles that are on Wikipedia. It deserves no less than to become a featured portal. Madder 19:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I'm always a fan of things that break from conventions, and this is an excellent example of how succesfully it can be done. DJR (T) 13:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity, how does this portal break from convention? Λυδ α cιτγ 03:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The opening two boxes really... they're very different and very classy. Nice work. DJR (T) 15:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object as follows:
- ~~The featured articles "archive" should be limited only to those articles which have actually appeared on the portal.~~
- The lack of updates to the "Music News" section is embarassing. There is absolutely no reason why events from four months ago shold be listed as "news". There is, additionally, no archive for that section.
  - Comment: The archive is simply the old pages. I linked to them at Portal:Music/Music news. Also, I made the new only link to the most recent two months. Λυδ α cιτγ 00:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~Having the "Anniversaries" section rotate only monthly is bad enough; but what in the world is the last item doing there?~~
- I'm concerned that the "Today's Birthdays" section is either significantly under-wikified or an end-run around the notability guidelines.
  - Comment: I don't quite understand what you mean by this criticism. Madder 22:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - There are people mentioned who don't have articles; I'm wondering whether it's because they haven't been written yet (why not leave them as redlinks?) or because they don't meet the notability requirements (why mention them at all, then?) Kirill Lokshin 06:17, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - The "Today's Birthdays" section is a list of musician's birthdays. The fact that the day of their birthday is well-known would indicate that they are notable. I've looked through a few of the days and yes it is true that red links do appear here and there, but mostly the red links are to artists mentioned that the person in question performed with, though I agree this isn't always the case. I've already written a few articles for red links appearing here, hopefully others will do the same. For today, there are already no red links. Madder 18:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The "Contribute" box is a bit too self-referential; while calling for contributions on music articles is fine, doing so for the portal itself is rather crude (especially were this portal to become featured). Kirill Lokshin 23:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Thanks for your points, they've been addressed. Madder 22:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely, I think. Kirill Lokshin 14:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes the opening two boxes are neat, the second tho "Explore..." leaves an extraordinary amount of white space. Birthdays and anniversaries seem way to long. Jo e I 01:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment: I have to disagree. I think if all the text was packed so close together, it would not be so accessible or so easy to read. As for the birthdays and anniversaries, Music is a huge subject, and as such many people are involved, so I think not having a smaller list of birthdays and anniversaries is justifiable. Madder 15:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]