Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page/Draft/Portal poll
One important discussion, relating to the main page redesign is what browse/portal topics to include on the main page? I have gone through the above discussions and counted the number of times support/opposition was expressed for a particular topic. I encourage more discussion here, pros/cons of the portal topics, and I will keep updating the table below. --Aude (talk | contribs) 01:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Portal topics
| Support | Oppose | |
|---|---|---|
| Art | 5 | 2 |
| Culture | 8 | 0 |
| Business | 1 | 1 |
| Economics | 4 | 0 |
| Geography | 7 | 0 |
| Health | 6 | 2 |
| History | 7 | 0 |
| Humanities | 2 | 3 |
| Law | 2 | 1 |
| Mathematics | 9 | 1 |
| People | 6 | 0 |
| Philosophy | 6 | 1 |
| Politics | 5 | 0 |
| Religion | 2 | 2 |
| Science | 7 | 0 |
| Society | 6 | 1 |
| Technology | 6 | 0 |
- My own preference is that 'must haves' include: Art, Culture, Geography, History, Mathematics, People, Science, Technology.
- Nice to have: Society (is this social sciences? what? not entirely clear to me), Law & Government.
- Possible: Economics, Philosophy (might fit under humanities, or grouped with something else), Health (portal needs major improvements)
- Not necessary: Politics, religion
--Aude (talk | contribs) 01:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm for having an even dozen portals. I'm not sure what the 12th one should be, but definitely support these eleven: Culture, Business, Geography, Health, History, People, Philosophy, Politics, Science, Society, Technology. I support Economics, but think it should be called Business, which is the wider subject to which it belongs. I oppose Art and Mathematics and the rest. Art fits nicely under culture, while Math can go under Science. I've updated the chart and have added my votes already. --Go for it! 02:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that health is a key topic, but have concerns about the status of that portal. Though, maybe putting the link on the main page will expose the fact that it needs improvement.
- I don't like the term "Politics", but would support "Law & government". The Portal:Law is pretty good and government encompasses politics, but more. Politics is a term that just doesn't agree with me, and NPOV. It invites the opposite.
- And "Business", I like but see problems too... It sounds like maybe an invitation for spam and advertising. Wikipedia is not a business directory. "Economics" is more narrow than "Business" but sounds less problematic. --Aude (talk | contribs) 02:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
An equally important issue is HOW MANY portals to include. A lot of people voted for expanded coverage above. Drafts A, B, and C had 12 portals listed in a 3x matrix, while some others had expanded browsebars. I think an even dozen would suit us well, and allows us to include Business and Politics, both members of the "Big Three:" Business, Science, & Politics. --Go for it! 02:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
How about the Top 10, health (with some improvements to the Portal itself), and Politics?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 02:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Right now, I think we have ten solid topics: Art, Culture, Geography, History, Mathematics, People, Philosophy, Science, Society, and Technology. Depending on how the browse topics are presented in the header, we can accommodate 12 (in Draft A, B, C, D), or up to 15 with the icons (Draft I, J, K), and with plain link in Draft G, H, I'm not sure what the maximum would be. --Aude (talk | contribs) 02:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- All. They are the speediest way for users (not editors) to find what they are looking for. Thus, the more the merrier. Also, there should be a link to a list of country portals. --GeLuxe 02:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I've thought about this issue many times. The goal of this is, in my opinion, to give as few as possible choices while still covering "all" of Wikipedia. The reason being that too many choices actually makes it harder for users to choose, so I think we should shy away from the practical maximums of page design, anyways. I think the spectrum of articles is covered by (I support): Culture, Geography, History, Mathematics, People, Science, Society, Technology. (conveniently that is 4 fuzzy and 4 techie portals). I accept (neither support nor oppose) Art, Religion, Economics, Philosophy as they are very broad, despite being covered by the above. I oppose Business, Health, Law, and Politics for being too specific and covered by others. Lastly, I oppose Humanities, because it is so broad I think those browsing Wikipedia casually (the target for this selection of portals) will pass by it. —siroχo 06:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I strongly support Culture, Geography, History, Mathematics, People, Science, Society, Technology. I am ambivalent about Art, Philosophy and Politics. I strongly oppose Health and Business – neither are top-level and do not fit with the portal hierarchy (that is, they both don't and doubtlessly won't have subportals).--cj | talk 09:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Whereas I'm leaning for J with its fifteen portals, I certainly have no problem with portal "overload". It's not cluttered and IMO presents a more diverse set of options. Each portal offers an invitation and the more that are displayed the more likely it is that everyone's fancy will be tickled. hydnjo talk 17:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm for the following: Culture, Economics, Geography, Health, History, Law, Mathematics, People, Philosophy, Politics, Religion, Science, Society, Technology; and against: Art (redundant with Culture), Business (red. w. Economics), Humanities (too broad). —Nightstallion (?) 07:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
I would oppose Health, Business, and Humanities; and support Sports and Games.. why hasn't Portal:Sports and games been suggested? i think it's a great portal, and would attract a lot of interest. The others are alright for me, though - I'm a big fan of having a lot of portals.. like 15, with (nice) icons. Mlm42 00:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)