Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Sports
- 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 OhanaUnited 14:42, 1 May 2013 [1].
Informed all 59 active sports related WikiProjects
Participation Guide | |
---|---|
Support | |
Sven Manguard - Support as nominator | |
AGK – Support | |
Cirt - Support | |
Neutral/No vote | |
none | |
Oppose | |
none |
Alright, so what I've done is broken Portal:Sports and games into Portal:Sports and Portal:Games because the previous format didn't really work, and it I was going to rebuild a major portal from scratch, it had better damned work. So this is the first of the two. It has:
- 23 Selected articles, all FAs or GAs
- 22 Selected biographies, all FAs or GAs
- 20 Selected teams (like biographies, but for teams), all FAs or GAs
- 32 Selected pictures, all FPs either on English Wikipedia, Commons, or (in most cases) both
- 23 sets of five DKYs
- 12 sets of selected anniversaries (one per month)
- The standard suite of portal items (related content, categories, associated Wikimedia, things you can do)
My selection methodology is heavily based off of "not too much of one sport, not too much of one country". While I could add more teams to the selected teams, for example, the overwhelming majority of the ones I haven't tapped yet are association football related, and I would rather not have it seem like it's just a portal for association football and baseball (which has a few untapped biographies and a few untapped pictures).
I gave it a peer review, and added in a section. Having worked with Portal:Massachusetts recently, I think I'm a bit more experienced with the process. My sections are, while not 200 words a piece, shorter than last time, and I think all of the proportions are good. I know that this isn't going to happen, but if at all possible I'd like to be able to get any feedback ASAP, because I've got a very narrow slot (March 9th and some of the 10th) in which I am going to have several hours of editing time, and after that I'm not sure when I'm going to have another opening. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:26, 4 March 2013 (UTC) [reply]
Comments by AGK (addressed) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Thanks for the review. It's difficult to describe how frustrating it was to have had no one review this for so long, so I really do appreciate it. I've fixed the top border issue. As to your other concerns:
Please let me know your thoughts on these matters and whether or not you support this portal's promotion. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
- That's all very reasonable. Thanks very much for your prompt response, and again for your efforts in improving the portal. With your follow up, I cannot say I've found any way in which this portal falls short of the FPO requirements, so I am firmly in support. AGK [•] 19:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Recommendations by Cirt (addressed) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Support. Portal looks excellent. Thanks for being so responsive to my recommendations. :) — Cirt (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Close as promoted. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:42, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.