Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Archive/October 2016

Portal:Briarcliff Manor, New York

I believe this meets FP criteria, however I would like another set of eyes before nominating it. Thank you. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 20:51, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

• It's a nice tidy portal but I don't believe you have enough content highlighted for featured status. Usually at least 15 to 20 items per section is required. Espresso Addict (talk) 09:51, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

@Espresso Addict: Thanks for your reply. I have two problems with that idea; the first is that the Featured Portal criteria don't mention that you need a lot of content highlighted, and the criteria therefore also doesn't present any numbers. It however simply states that a portal "may be designed to have a higher turnover of content" (emphasis added). The other problem with that idea is the scope of a topic, where Briarcliff Manor only has about 20 directly relevant articles. With biographies, that number expands considerably of course, so I could potentially do what you mention to the Article, Biography, and Picture boxes. However if you want more DYKs I would have to fabricate some from scratch. There should be an exception for smaller portals; I really wouldn't like to have to do all of that work if it's not fully necessary. What do you think? ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 18:51, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Portal:Latin music

I'm nominating this portal for a review because I want to nominate it for featured portal in the near future. This portal was created by Moxy for the Latin music project when the project was created and I have done some revamping since then. I used the definition of "Latin music" based on the Latin Grammy Awards (see its categories) and Billboard magazine meaning that the portal mainly includes Spanish- and Portuguese-language recordings. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks! Erick (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2015 (UTC) Erick (talk) 18:05, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments by AJona1992

• I would suggest that if we are using Billboard's (and the Latin Grammy's) definition of Latin music; shouldn't we include not only the Top Latin Albums and the Hot Latin Tracks charts but all Latin-field music charts from Billboard to include all Latin music subgenres?

My major gripe with that is that would take too much space. Besides, the Hot Latin Songs is factored by all the other Latin subcharts anyway (same goes for the Top Latin Albums).

• This is empty

As far as I know, it's the articles that appear on the portal page that matter (by using the max counter). I don't think the subpages are factored.

• A lot of the selected articles are inconsistent with dashes (example The Sun Comes Out World Tour vs. Metamorfosis World Tour)

I purposely decided not to those articles appear on the portal page because I haven't see any other tour articles listed on any featured music-related portal.

• Shouldn't all articles featured on the portal be similar to the way TFA runs theirs? (one paragraph blurp)

I agree, but some of them exceed 200 words which is not allowed per the criteria.

Any way we can shorten them to be straight to the point and point interested readers to their perspective article? Right now it looks cramped; unless we can widen the template boxes for better flow? jona^(talk) 00:08, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

• Some of the DYK articles redirect to disambiguated articles.

I'll have those fixed in a jiffy.

• Some of the articles featured on the portal are not up to date.

Same as above.

• Currently there are two Shakira articles featured, any way of having a more diverse chronological order?

I really wish we had more featured content, but we only have four FAs (it's a shame that the article for Selena got demoted). I guess I could replace Shakira's discography with Selena's awards for the time being. ~~

It doesn't have to be Selena , just would be nice to have other Latin articles for readers. Well the newly promoted Luis Miguel article could take that place. jona^(talk) 00:08, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

As part of the Latin music project I decided to voice several comments. Best, jona^(talk) 19:49, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for taking your time to review the portal AJona1992. Erick (talk) 20:08, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem buddy, let me know if you would like help on any of the concerns I raised and I'll jump in =) jona^(talk) 00:08, 2 May 2015 (UTC)