Wikipedia talk:Portal

Page update

Portals continually lose space on Wikipedia, the last one is perhaps the most emblematic,portals were removed entirely from the main page. All this is not the work of "enemies of the portals", but of the portals' own incompetence to prove themselves useful. Going further, the Portal space does not have any, that's right, any, active Manual of Style, Police or Guideline, and even this page, which defines it, is totally useless to reverse this situation.

What is expected from portals.
Portals today. (add some graffiti)
What could they be?

So I reversed that redirect, opening a new talk page. The objective is to bring together new ideas, to perhaps, recreate the concept of portal.Guilherme Burn (talk) 00:13, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is zero chance of success proposal to remove WP:Contents from sidebar. I am suggesting instead that maybe we should rename it to Explore Wikipedia. Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 00:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strike in 1966/7

Just looking for history of a strike at portals paper mill 81.111.41.90 (talk) 15:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This page is about improving Wikipedia's portal pages. You may be looking for Portals (paper makers), but I don't see details of a strike there. Certes (talk) 17:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Certes Tytifish (talk) 11:40, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do portal links belong on category pages?

Does anyone know if portal links should be included on category pages, as they currently are at Category:Dutch people by ethnic or national origin? Cordless Larry (talk) 09:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I dont see why not.....simply another navigation tool. Better question....should we have external links likes Commons Category:Canada. Moxy-

10:04, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. An editor has been adding them to many similar categories and not knowing much about portals, I wanted to make sure that they weren't wasting their time making edits that were likely to be reverted. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:33, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen portals removed before (took no action)....that said i have reverted the removal of nav templates before as they are clearly a navigation tool that help people find primary articles on a topic related to the cat.....that is also my POV on portals....they help. Moxy-

16:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also don't see why it shouldn't be. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:06, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What about portal maintenance?

There's a section here called "Portal development and maintenance," but the only information in it relates to linking to a portal from elsewhere and creating new portals. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Needs vary. Portals such as Mathematics need little maintenance. Major developments are rare and adding them isn't urgent, especially if our new article is still rough. Varying the content is automated (show a random/the <week number>th article from a list), and extracting the lead handles deaths etc. Bots update many featured content lists; for the rest, our "pick a page" templates handle moves (follow the redirect) and deletions (pick again). More topical portals such as sports need freshening more regularly, but that tends to be done by a few enthusiasts using their preferred methods to add welcome individuality. Perhaps they could share some hints and tips here. Certes (talk) 11:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mass portal deletion again

An increasing number of portals are being deleted in what seems to be a continuation of the old portal war by stealth. Surely we should be seeking to improve portals not scrap them? What's going on here? Meanwhile I have stopped work on portals again because I can see my work will just be wasted if this carries on. Bermicourt (talk) 11:23, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This year we have lost Tanks and War (two perfectly good portals which I couldn't be bothered to defend), a couple of half-baked new portals without potential (which I nominated for deletion myself), and a few redundant subpages (reasonable technical deletions). World War I is currently at MfD with the usual rationale that it is abandoned because no one is constantly changing it. There does seem to be a military theme to the deletions so let's hope they're confined to that topic. If the deletions escalate into the sort of disruptive editing that ArbCom had to deal with in 2019 then I'll be the first to spring into action, but I don't think we need to panic yet. Certes (talk) 14:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]