Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:New York City


 * 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 promoted by OhanaUnited 15:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC).

Portal:New York City
The city so nice they named it twice. I'm nominating this portal for FPO status.

The articles, biographies, lists, anniversaries, and did you knows are varied in their scope, from pre-Revolutionary facts to biographies of present-day celebrities, and with many items in between. As of this moment, there are... As I await comments, I will now notify related WikiProjects. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 33 selected articles (All FA or GA)
 * 34 selected biographies (Most are FA or GA, some are B-class but of high importance to NYC. Some of them are Version 1.0 articles and others are deemed vital to Wikipedia. I removed a C-class one that wasn't. I can swap out the B-class if desired, but I'd like to defend them first)
 * 20 sets of DYK hooks, each with an image (All hooks are taken from DYKs that ran on the main page. Most of those images also ran with the hook, but I chose a few images that weren't used for varieties sake).
 * 18 selected images, most of which (but not 100%) are FPs
 * 9 selected lists (8 of them have an image, all are FL status. There are more that could be added, but they are all relating to NYC sport teams, and 3 of the 9 already included are also, so I didn't want to overwhelm the selected lists with one topic.)
 * 5 selected anniversaries per month (6 for February, because I couldn't decide on a final cut), with an image for each set
 * All other required FPO features
 * , thank you for this nomination and quality improvement effort. Please note here on this subpage talk pages and WikiProject discussion pages where you have left notices about this ongoing discussion. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:12, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. I notified WP:NYC here, WP:USA here, WP:NY here, WP:CITIES here, and left a notice on the talk page of Portal:Chicago here. No responses to any of those. I'll post on those threads again, and at WT:Chicago, as well as some other specific city projects. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Review by Sven Manguard

Sigh... I ought to just change the nomination procedure to say "when you file an FPOC, go tell Sven". It's a shame that it took me this long to notice that this was here. Anyways, overall this is in really great shape, and I'm impressed. Here are my nitpicky changes:


 * Selected article 20 (Port Authority of New York and New Jersey) could use a different image. The one that is there now blends right into the text.
 * Good point. Image changed. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The portal needs to have a consistent bottom-matter format. Selected picture has "Archives • Read more..." on the left, while selected article and selected bio have those two split, on on the left and one on the right.
 * Changed "Selected picture" format for uniformity – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Please add Wikidata and Wikivoyage to the Associated Wikimedia section.
 * Discovered Wikimedia for portals and used that. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * There is something wonky going on with the spacing between the bottom matter and the bottom of the box in most of the Selected biography section. All of them except for 16 through 24 have unexplained empty space down there. It should be possible to fix that.
 * I think it was due to excess whitespace. Is it corrected now? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Any chance you could find two more featured pictures to put in? Commons is likely to have FPs that never got promoted over here. As far as I am concerned, if it's an FP on either project, it's fine for portals.
 * Two more added. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Let me know when you've addressed these points Muboshgu. Also, since you're in the CUP, you might want to list this here. I'd appreciate you reviewing my FPOC as well.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  01:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries, I've been busy with things in real life and I'm patient with this. This is my first time here, and I gathered that there are fewer reviewers than at GA or other featured statuses. I'll work on this tomorrow, and lend my eyes on other nominations. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I believe I have fixed those issues. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Muboshgu - Sorry about this, but while you were fixing those, I found one more thing that needs fixing; there are no bold links on selected lists 5-9 (but there are on 1-4). Other than that, I am fully prepared to support this. Unless my nomination clears up and we both get promoted at once, it looks like you'll be scoring the first FPO points for this year's cup.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  21:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've added bold links, though not all in the first paragraph. I'm not sure the exact location of the bold link is regulated by any rule or guideline. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * No, that's fine.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  17:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Support - As far as I am concerned, this is ready.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  17:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! – Muboshgu (talk) 15:45, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Review by Espresso Addict

Appearance generally clean & neat; I like the red border. The intro blurb is perhaps a little long and felt a bit like a tourist brochure to me. Good number and variety of articles/biographies. Pictures of reasonable quality, though a little sparse for such a heavily photographed city; is it worth broadening to a few more non-featured pictures? As long as the photograph looks strong at the chosen size I'm not sure how much it matters whether or not it is featured, though Sven might disagree. DYKs also a little sparse, perhaps -- was this all there were? Appreciate the variety in Selected lists; was pleasantly surprised to find it wasn't all sport.


 * The image in Selected picture pokes out of the box for me at all window sizes.
 * There is quite a bit of variation in the length of the Selected article & Selected list blurbs.
 * Campbell's Soup Cans in Selected articles and many of the biographies don't explain the connection with NYC.
 * Generally the variety of articles looks ok, but four synagogues seems a little over-represented, given lack of representation of other religions.
 * Inconsistencies in box headers. Did you know & Associated Wikimedia are italicised; selected lists is plural where other headers are singular; browse articles by borough has colon; Topics has capital where others are lower case.
 * Full stop missing in a few Selected anniversaries.

Otherwise looking good. Please ping me when you've addressed my comments (I've given up using watchlist). Espresso Addict (talk) 23:56, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Have you been addressing these comments by ? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I wasn't aware that these comments were made. Thanks for pinging me. I'll work on them in the next day or so. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:21, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Starting to respond...
 * I don't know what to do about your comment about the selected picture. It doesn't "poke out of the box" on my home or work monitors. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * |1280|800 This is what the portal looks like on a 1280x800 screen. That's about the minimum size I worry about for portals, as only 7% of screens are smaller than that. 15% of screens are at 1280 width, however. While the current layout looks fine at 1366 width, it should also look fine at 1280.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  14:00, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Nothing is showing up for me (probably my computer, Buzzfeed pages and other websites don't load right on this computer for some reason). I presume the notion here is that the images should be made a little smaller. Can you tell from that what the proper pixelation should be? – Muboshgu (talk) 14:36, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed that four synagogues is too much. As an explanation (not an excuse), I didn't add any of the four. I will either add churches or delete synagogues. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * "Selected list" is now singular, italics removed from DYK and Associated Wikimedia, colon removed from borough box, topics decapitalized. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I found two missing full stops in the anniversaries, one in November and one in December. I also hadn't bolded the November entries. These are fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


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