Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Failed log/October 2010

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 not promoted by OhanaUnited 03:30, 30 October 2010 [1].

Portal:Cheshire

The Cheshire Portal was created by Ddstretch and has been maintained & expanded by me on behalf of the small but active Cheshire WikiProject. It uses a rotating content system with 24 selected articles, 15 biographies, 28 pictures, 11 lists, 144 DYKs, 13 quotations, customised news & a monthly anniversaries section, and is frequently updated. All suggestions from a very helpful peer review in July by Bencherlite have been incorporated, and I believe the portal now meets all the criteria for featured portal status. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified WP Cheshire, the parent WP England and the English Wikipedians' noticeboard. As WP England is not very active, I have also notified the closest subprojects, viz WPs Derbyshire, Greater Manchester, Yorkshire, Merseyside, Lancashire and Cumbria, North East England and West Midlands; I hope this is acceptable. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh goody, thank you for doing all those notifications!!! :) -- Cirt (talk) 04:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support all my (very minor) issues were promptly resolved at peer review and I think that this deserves the star. Excellent work! Bencherlite ^Talk 07:08, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good work! The JPS ^{talk to me} 07:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Cheshire is a county which was altered more than most by the 1974 boundary changes. The portal deals with both the pre 1974 county and the present county, but does not seem to provide an easy way of identifying the places which were in the pre 1974 county. For example, although we have a Category:People from Cheshire (before 1974) we do not have a list of places that such people might have come from (as we do for some other counties which were substantially altered in 1974). This really points to a gap in the WP coverage of the county, rather than in the portal itself, but it would be good to see it addressed at some stage.--Mhockey (talk) 09:10, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting question. The portal material deals predominantly with the post-1974 boundaries, as far as I'm aware. The project covers only post-1974 geography/settlements, although obviously there's a broader coverage in historical articles (so the former Tintwistle Rural District is tagged for Cheshire, while the modern Tintwistle is tagged for Derbyshire) and some geographic entities, such as the Wirral, are now split. History of Cheshire covers the boundary changes in detail in the appropriate section. People who were born before 1974 in former parts of Cheshire are a tricky subject; they are often covered by both relevant projects.

The portal does list the main districts which moved in 1974 under April's "In this month" and also links to History of Cheshire in the "Topics" box. It would be certainly be possible to summarise the information briefly somewhere (perhaps within the "Administration" box), although I'm not sure that the main portal audience would be interested in a set of places the portal doesn't cover! I'll put a note at the project talk page to suggest creating a list of places that were formerly within Cheshire so that the portal can at least link to something. Espresso Addict (talk) 14:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Left a query for response to this, at User talk:Mhockey. -- Cirt (talk) 00:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay in replying. I have responded at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cheshire#List_of_places_formerly_within_Cheshire, which is probably a better place for this discussion.--Mhockey (talk) 15:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As long as someone remembering to put correct month's info from Portal:Cheshire/Calendar/Archive onto the main portal page, I'm happy to support. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 01:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No-one has to "remember", since it's rotated automatically using {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}; unless you meant something else and I've misunderstood you? Bencherlite^Talk 08:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - In that case, I'm happy. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can the title be made larger, and less padding used at the very top? Also, the DYK uses bullets, but the news and calender boxes do not. I think using bullets is bit neater. What are recommended articles? If they're all GA/FAs, I think "Recognized articles" sounds nicer, and the GA icons could be used as the FA stars are already there. For Categories, why not use category tree, which is faster to navigate? Why is the selected list at the bottom? Lastly, if it's not a huge bother, maybe add a "Related WikiProjects" box in there somewhere? Otherwise, this seems very nicely done. /ƒETCH COMMS / 01:29, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You'll have to wait until User:Espresso Addict comes back. He hasn't edited in a month. I'll keep this nom open for another week and if he's not back by then I will close it and ask him to nominate again when he's ready. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 22:20, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sounds like a good plan, -- Cirt (talk) 06:53, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't know when Espresso Addict will return and I have virtually no involvement with this portal, but I do have some questions in response to Fetchcomms. I think using bullets for in the news and in this month is unnecessary. The way I see it, the bulleting for the did you know section is to separate out each hook; that's not necessary with the other sections as the bolding does that job. The "recommended articles" are, as far as I see as I've not checked them all, GAs and FAs but what are the benefits of calling them recognised content as opposed to recommended articles? Are portals meant for Wikipedia's writers or readers? Will the average reader know what recognised means in this context? I think recommended suffices. While category tree is sometimes a useful tool, again I don't see why it would be preferable to the current set up. It's a streamlined version of the categories, cutting out the stuff which would be of minimal interest but they can still be accessed by following the categories. If you were putting this portal together, where would you put the selected list and why? Nev1 (talk) 16:51, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Overall, I think that the minor points raised by Fetchcomms aren't enough to make me qualify my support; there's more than one way of getting a portal looking good and, even though I might not have done everything like this, I don't think the overall result is at all bad. As for the title size / padding, that might be a monitor / browser issue, as it looks OK to me on my home laptop (Firefox) and work desktop (IE). Perhaps Fetchcomms could try tweaking the title / padding x-self and see how how it looks? Bencherlite ^Talk 20:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - great work! Dincher (talk) 19:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Closing this nomination as failed because nominator is on extended leave. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 03:30, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.