Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Fish/archive1

< Wikipedia:Portal peer review

Fish edit

Please add any tips here on how this page can be improved to Featured portal status. Thanks. Rfrisbietalk 13:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Good work with this portal, Melanochromis! As Rfrisbie says, it already looks up to featured standard. I'm sure it will go through if you nominate it. riana_dzasta 03:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, riana_dzasta. It took me hours and hours to figure out how to make the portal work like Rfrisbie's cats and dogs portal. I'm talking to Rfrisbie now and I hope I could learn some more tricks. At the moment, the fish portal still needs more works. Then we'll see if it will or will not get the featured. --Melanochromis 08:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I said before - really, really excellent work! I can't think of anything to object to, at all. Question, though - are such new portals usually promoted to featured status? If so, I'm sure it will go through :) riana_dzasta 13:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Really nice! Some suggestions:
  • I don't like the positioning of the sections. Please split it to subpages like done on Portal:Science, this can be used as a ToC as well.
  • I've striked this suggestion for now, I really like the new positioning. Michaelas10 (Talk) 18:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace the image of a drawn fish at the beginning with an image of a real fish, I suggest a goldfish.
  • Remove the "web resources" section, this belongs in the WikiProject. Michaelas10 (Talk) 14:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only things I can see:
  • The "Web Resources" section could be deleted.
  • Change to a fish photo on the top right. My suggestion would be Image:Goldfish2.cropped.jpg. Otherwise, this looks wonderful. :Great work! Badbilltucker 15:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks good. I like the layout and the chioce of color, its very apeasing to the eye. Some sugestions I have for improvement:
  • Add three periods before the text for the comments in the "Did you Know?" section; its done that way on the main page and I think :its should be done that way here too.
  • Expand the Featured material; having only one article/FP does not look to good from a Featured Portal Candidate standpoint.
  • As per the others, the "Web Resources" part ought to be moved to the project page. TomStar81 (Talk) 15:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't mind the logo as opposed to an actual fish. Probably saves worrying which of thousands of fish to use. However, see if you can do something about the way that 'Associated Wikimedia' and 'Related Portals' overlap each other at lower resolutions... the 800x600 users get cranky when things don't work right for them. --CBD 16:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow...I don't know what to say, It looks simply excellent. — Seadog 18:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • My tips:
  • A real picture of a fish, instead of a logo.
  • Fish news--Add a news website link, so people can have access to the actual news source
  • Instead of using 4-5 small images at DYK, consider consolidating it to two large images
  • Add {{purgepage}} link at bottom. Did that myself.
  • Add view, talk, edit, history link for Things you can do template. Did it myself.
  • Besides those few small things, everything looks good. =) Nishkid64 22:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a great portal! However, this has been mentioned before, the introduction needs a real picture of a fish. s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 23:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is one of the best new portals I've seen - I usually use Portal:London as the basis for a good start but it doesn't have a thing on this one. It has my full support for an WP:FPORT nomination. DJR (T) 00:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the idea is to have a logo for the portal and maybe project (at least use the portal logo on other pages) but i still think that a photo of what a fish is would be a better thing to have in the intro section. I made a quick test design for a logo at Image:Fish portal logo.png. I am not too sure about this myself at the moment though. Chris_huhtalk 01:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That reminds me of another version of Image:Darwin fish.svg. Rfrisbietalk 01:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As many reviewers requested, I replaced the logo on the portal with an image of a real fish. Image:Tuna.jpg is used. This picture goes perfectly with the color theme of the portal and it does represent what a typical fish look like. --Melanochromis 12:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes of the fish portal according to the reviewers edit

  • Replace the logo with an image of real fish
  • Remove the "Web resources" section.
    • Done.
  • Use standard "Did you know" format.
    • Done.
  • Expand number of "Selected" content items.
    • Contents are selected at the beginning of each month via the nominations/voting systems (see example here). At the moment, there are already many nominated articles waiting to be selected.
  • Fix layout for 800X600 displays.
    • Done.
  • Add news item link(s).
    • In progress. Update (May 03, 2007): This section is entirely removed due to lack of significant fish-related news stories in the mainstream media as well as to give space to DYK and other more popular section.

--Melanochromis 21:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC) Updated: --Melanochromis 21:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some more improvements edit

  • I think Fish is singular. If yes, then please make appropriate changes in Introduction section and the article itself.
  • Noted. The 'Introduction' was a part of the fish article, changes should be made there first. This portal will follow the article, for the purpose of consistency.
  • Reduce image size for the present article.
  • Which article? The introduction or other sections?
  • Where is the Selected fish for January?
  • Limit image size to "300px" in Selected pictures. Present image size could be reduced to 200/220 px.
  • This is probably a matter of aesthetic preferences. In my opinion, the showcase picture should not be small. I think 300px is quite ok for most pictures.
  • Use refernces in the News.
  • I agree. In progress.
  • DYK seems very big section. They are long sentences. Could they be shortened? I would say to use single image at a time in the section.
  • Noted. Will be determined.
  • Merging Fish lists in the Topics section could be a better idea.
  • Is that really necessary? Even featured portals didn't merge the lists and the topics.
  • I have to disagree. Fish are not mammals.

Replied by --Melanochromis 01:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I haven't read to see if these issues have been brought up...
  • News articles should have a source or better, link to.
  • Fish lists, the "List of" should be implied being within a "list of" box.
  • Same with Wikiprojects box.
  • Same with the title of the topics box. Should simply be "Selected topics" since we are on the fish portal.
  • Other than that, looks good, colors are nice. Joe I 06:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe. Thanks for the comments.

  • News sources. I agree. In progress.
  • Lists, wikiprojects, topics. I agree and have fixed it. Now they all follow the same format
  • On the lists and projects, I actually meant inside the boxes. Instead of "List of fish common names", simply "Common names", or "Fish common names". Joe I 03:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, --Melanochromis 20:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update (3 May 2007) edit

  • News section removed entirely as there aren't many significant news stories related to fish in the mainstream media as well as to give space to DYK and other sections.
  • the new wikiproject Fishing has been added --Melanochromis 17:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Portal_peer_review/Fish/archive1&oldid=845662412"