Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Archive/November 2010
I have recently developed this portal to include randomly selected components. Statistics: 34 Selected articles, all FA or GA, 12 Selected biographies, all FA, GA or B, 9 Selected pictures, 89 DYK hooks, most with free-use images, 22 Selected Settlements all FA or GA. Looking for any feedback/comments prior to WP:FPORTC. Thanks, — Rod talk 21:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- My major concern, which I have to acknowledge may be only a personal opinion, is that it might be a bit long vertically. I'm not sure that the "recognized content" section in particular is really something that we would want to maintain, particularly because it would need to be updated presumably every time an article were promoted or demoted. I have some reservations about the navboxes at the end as well. But in terms of the more generally encountered sections of the portal, I can't see any real reservations there. John Carter (talk) 18:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comment. I based this on Portal:Law of England and Wales (a current FP candidate) which has nearly as many sections. The recognised content is updated by a bot every few weeks. I could loose the navboxes if that would help, but they should should present collapsed so don't add much to the length. What would you suggest is removed?— Rod talk 19:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- As there have been no further comments, I'll close this & nominate for featured portal.— Rod talk 11:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comment. I based this on Portal:Law of England and Wales (a current FP candidate) which has nearly as many sections. The recognised content is updated by a bot every few weeks. I could loose the navboxes if that would help, but they should should present collapsed so don't add much to the length. What would you suggest is removed?— Rod talk 19:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)