Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:London transport/archive1

Portal:Tube
I think the portal should be a featured portal because it meets and betters all the criteria. The portal also is clean without any clutter. Provides enough to do for the visitor. And links with other main portals. Therefore I think it should be a featured portal. Unisouth 09:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The portal's layout and content is good. I still would like to see automatic rotation at least for SA and SP. So for now I'll object, see below.
 * 1) Archives for the selected picture, DYK and news sections are needed.
 * 2) The selected picture needs an image credit of some sort.
 * 3) The edit link in Selected picture is linked badly.
 * 4) I wonder why there should be a shortcut: WP:TUBE (aka WikiProject:TUBE) for the portal, no other has such.
 * 5) Associated Wikimedia links go to "404 Page not found pages". feydey 10:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * There will be archives for all those mentioned once there are enough to make one. Unisouth 06:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, let's see:
 * The "Did you know" section needs to rotate its content somehow (and, by extension, needs an archive).
 * The news section needs an archive.
 * The Wikimedia links should be centered.
 * Get rid of the WikiProject navigation box at the bottom; it's too self-referential. Kirill Lokshin 16:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: The current title might confuse people from other parts of the world; consider renaming (e.g. to '''London Underground"). 68.111.72.167 04:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * object
 * The portal does not seem to meet the criteria of being both broad in topic area and of interest to users of Wikipedia.
 * It would be nice if the content was automatically rotated.
 * DYK should be rotated, if even just once a month.  -G  photo  00:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Portal seems to be of too limited a scope to be of interest to a wide variety of wikipedia users, considering the subject of the portal is only one small field (rapid transit) in only one area (London). This is in no way a criticism of the quality of the portal, which is fine, provided all existing concerns are addressed, just of it's scope. Badbilltucker 16:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * object