![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Good work on the portal so far, everyone. I think it's in good enough shape that I've added it to the List of portals - they note "Not add some new portals until you have Finished Construction." I think we've done that. — Zaui ( talk) 20:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking it might be better to re-direct the "suggestions" for the "article", "bio", and DYK to this page. That way it is all centralized. Aboutmovies 04:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Anyone interested in getting the portal featured? If so, we should make sure it meets the Featured portal criteria and then send it through Portal peer review. I think there's enough content and with some judicious clean up, it will pass. — Zaui ( talk) 15:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I forgot one thing, the only disagreement I have is with the pictures part where you suggest they be featured or could be. All the featured content is already in a spot, and shows up everytime the page loads. I think the other rotating items, pictures included, should be of good quality (thus the B class minimum I think we agreed on above), but not limited to FA status. This allows for a lot more options, and can help better cover the entire state instead of 3-4 pictures of the Portland skyline and a couple others. With the ones I added I tried for two things when adding non-FP class: fair to decent looking, and wide geographic coverage (plus not fair use). But that's my thoughts Aboutmovies 18:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Selected Photo Ideas (please add more)
— Zaui ( talk) 19:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Are there any there we want to remove? If so, let's start there, since some of the above listed topics are covered. Aboutmovies 05:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Here are some of my photos that I suggest: Image:OregonCoastEcola.jpg, Image:Pioneer-SquareDaytime.jpg, Image:MtTaborPortlandHood.jpg, Image:HaywardFieldPano.jpg, Image:PaintedHillsPano4.jpg, Image:PortlandStreetcar5.jpg. I have also been improving my skills at stiched panoramic images (see Image:HawthorneBridge-Pano.jpg for an example). These are a higher in difficulty and take lots of time, but it is worth it when they work out. If you have any suggestions please let me know. I probably won't be traveling out of the Portland Metro area for a while though. Right now I'm thinking that I'll try to improve the images for Pittock Mansion, all the Portland bridges, Rose Garden Interior, PDX airport entrance. Someday I'll make it back down to Salem to give another go to the capitol buildings. Also, there is pretty strong possiblity that I will be renting a helicopter for some aerial photography in the downtown Portland area sometime in the near future. Yee Haw! Cacophony 23:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey, we don't have a Portal-class section in our assessment scheme. Can someone take care of that so this page doesn't show up in the "unassessed" section? (I assume that's why it was put in List-class up until recently.) Katr67 ( talk) 22:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
My suggestion for filling out the bios is to take all the bios in the B class and up ratings bios from Top & High importance sections. That should be 20 or so, and they should be decent quality plus these are our more important people. Thoughts? Aboutmovies 02:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the links. Using those, here are all articles that are high-importance and
B-Class:
GA-Class:
A-Class: none
FA-Class: none
— Zaui ( talk) 21:26, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, in the Selected article section, this is currently the only Selected article without an accompanying free-use image. Any chance of getting a related free-use image for this article? The "blurb" text for its use as a Selected article could also be expanded by about 4 lines or so. Cirt ( talk) 08:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC).
This ( Oregon Ballot Measure 37) is a mess. Especially the Measure 49 section (did it pass with 61 or 62%?). I can't tell if 37 is still in effect or not. Whether it highlights the best that WP has for Oregon, and thus merits inclusion in the portal, is hard for me to justify. I propose we either clean up the article find something else to replace its spot in the portal. — Zaui ( talk) 21:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
There are enough WP:GA and WP:FA Oregon-related articles such that "Selected article" section should be limited to quality content. (The "Selected biography" section is a different matter entirely, and we can address that later.) Checking the latest list at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Oregon articles by quality/1, I count (18) WP:GA/ WP:FA articles (excluding Lists and Bios). Therefore, we should strive for a high quality-content section for the Selected article section, and require that articles there all have a rating of WP:GA or WP:FA. This will also serve as a motivation in the future for others to work on and improve the quality of Oregon-related articles. It will also be nice at some point in the future when the portal goes for WP:PPREV and later WP:FPORTC discussion, to be able to have (at least) one section of the portal relegated to WP:GA/ WP:FA content. Cirt ( talk) 09:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC).
All of the above are either the FA/GA quality, or are the B class of Top or High importance. I think all of them have a free use image, but some will need some alteration to the exiting lead (Intel, Mt. St. Helens, Itanium, and other none Oregon only articles) to better tie it into Oregon, and others will need some expansion of the lead. But this would put us over 50 for the category, so more than enough for FP I'm sure, and it expands to the three largest universities, 4 of the 5 most populous cities, and some good geographical/historical items. I'll make similar list for the bios. Any others I missed? Aboutmovies ( talk) 23:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI - I set up auto-archival for this talk page - discussion threads with zero new posts or activity for over one month will be archived. Cirt ( talk) 07:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC).
I would like to start adding some more quotes from other former Governors of Oregon that are not currently represented at Portal:Oregon/Selected quote, selecting only those for which free-use images exist. Anyone wish to comment, or is it okay for me to go ahead and add more quotes w/ accompanying free-use pics from former Oregon Governors to Portal:Oregon/Selected quote ? Cirt ( talk) 00:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC).
I've gotten three portals to WP:FPORT status so far. If you all like, and you don't mind seeing a few WP:BOLD formatting changes to the portal, I could work on getting this one to Featured Status as well. With the great content you have here, and the good start you have going on the portal, it wouldn't take too long. Cirt ( talk) 08:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC).
Is there a way to get rid of the (explorer) qualifier on the William Clark wiki link here? Nothing I tried worked.
I would swap the selected biography and picture on the main portal page - just so the first look folks have is the selected article and a high-quality picture side by side. There's too much text right now - especially when the biography doesn't contain a photo - and the photos that are in the bio section aren't much to look at.
Does anyone have a problem if the selected article photos are bigger? It's hard to tell what some of them are at the current size. — Zaui ( talk) 00:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
(combining my comments)
That's it for now of GA/FA or B w/Top or High. I have one bio at GA, and about 6 others I'm planning on getting there in the next month or so which will help expand this out to at least 25. If people want to help increase the number, go through Category:High-importance Oregon articles and find start class articles that just need a little work to get to B class and improve them to B if not GA class. For instance Mark Hatfield needs the lead improved, the honors section turned to prose, and some copy editing and it would be B class. Again, add any that were missed. Aboutmovies ( talk) 23:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
This portal has had a portal peer review, which has since been archived. Please see Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Oregon/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 16:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Just curious, what became of the Willamette Meteorite bit I put on the portal a while back? Seems that the nature of a portal makes it tough to track such changes, but it's a little disconcerting that something I worked on was removed without explanation (as far as I can tell). Not the end of the world, but I do think it was a good part of the portal.
But in general, thank you all very much for your diligence in improving this portal. It's come a long way, and is looking very good. - Pete ( talk) 01:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Cool, thanks Z! - Pete ( talk) 21:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I've been doing something that I realized should probably be brought up for discussion: changing the dates in the lead sentence of bio summaries to include only the year. It seems to me that these blurbs, since the are constrained by space, should be as tightly focused on essential information as possible. The full dates take up a relatively large amount of space, and also require creating extraneous links (to make dates display according to user preferences.) Seems to me that just the year of birth and death is enough, and if the reader needs the full date, it's only a click away. Any objections? (The closest thing I could find to a guideline covering this is Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates of birth and death.) - Pete ( talk) 03:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Those articles left that meet both the B class minimum and being Top or High importance:
Reproduced from archived section, may need to add a few since list was made in early Jan 2008. Aboutmovies ( talk) 20:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity - Are any of these relatively close to getting to WP:GA status? Cirt ( talk) 20:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
AM, did you intentionally exclude biographies? It would be nice to have a similar list for bios, I suppose I could do it myself. Just noticed Joel Palmer is not here. - Pete ( talk) 01:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Blurb for this one is a bit long - text could be cut down by about half, for better appearance on main portal page. Cirt ( talk) 06:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Should Collaboration of the Week be included here (or did I miss it)? Awotter ( talk) 02:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Re-visiting old ideas, and proposing a new one. Regarding the year old proposal to add a "locations" section, I think we still don't have enough high quality articles at this time (seems we haven't improved the quality on most of the cities).
As to a new idea, I was thinking we might be able to have some sort of animated/sound spot after I came across this, but I'm not sure if there would be enough, so this might be maybe later type item. Then as a matching compenent to keep two columns, I was thinking a B&W image section. I know we have a lot, and some have to be of decent quality. Thoughts. Aboutmovies ( talk) 10:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Articles still to be added:
All are B class and either High/Top importance, meeting the criteria. All FA and GA (minus 2 that don't have proper images) have been added. Aboutmovies ( talk) 16:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
... was promoted to Featured article status. Should it be removed from this list? -- Another Believer ( Talk) 20:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Portals is back!
The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.
As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.
There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.
Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.
And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.
From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 07:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
The following articles should be added to the selected article list:
All of these articles are ranked "B" class. Some may be already on the list. SouthParkFan65 ( talk) 23:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Good work on the portal so far, everyone. I think it's in good enough shape that I've added it to the List of portals - they note "Not add some new portals until you have Finished Construction." I think we've done that. — Zaui ( talk) 20:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking it might be better to re-direct the "suggestions" for the "article", "bio", and DYK to this page. That way it is all centralized. Aboutmovies 04:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Anyone interested in getting the portal featured? If so, we should make sure it meets the Featured portal criteria and then send it through Portal peer review. I think there's enough content and with some judicious clean up, it will pass. — Zaui ( talk) 15:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I forgot one thing, the only disagreement I have is with the pictures part where you suggest they be featured or could be. All the featured content is already in a spot, and shows up everytime the page loads. I think the other rotating items, pictures included, should be of good quality (thus the B class minimum I think we agreed on above), but not limited to FA status. This allows for a lot more options, and can help better cover the entire state instead of 3-4 pictures of the Portland skyline and a couple others. With the ones I added I tried for two things when adding non-FP class: fair to decent looking, and wide geographic coverage (plus not fair use). But that's my thoughts Aboutmovies 18:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Selected Photo Ideas (please add more)
— Zaui ( talk) 19:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Are there any there we want to remove? If so, let's start there, since some of the above listed topics are covered. Aboutmovies 05:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Here are some of my photos that I suggest: Image:OregonCoastEcola.jpg, Image:Pioneer-SquareDaytime.jpg, Image:MtTaborPortlandHood.jpg, Image:HaywardFieldPano.jpg, Image:PaintedHillsPano4.jpg, Image:PortlandStreetcar5.jpg. I have also been improving my skills at stiched panoramic images (see Image:HawthorneBridge-Pano.jpg for an example). These are a higher in difficulty and take lots of time, but it is worth it when they work out. If you have any suggestions please let me know. I probably won't be traveling out of the Portland Metro area for a while though. Right now I'm thinking that I'll try to improve the images for Pittock Mansion, all the Portland bridges, Rose Garden Interior, PDX airport entrance. Someday I'll make it back down to Salem to give another go to the capitol buildings. Also, there is pretty strong possiblity that I will be renting a helicopter for some aerial photography in the downtown Portland area sometime in the near future. Yee Haw! Cacophony 23:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey, we don't have a Portal-class section in our assessment scheme. Can someone take care of that so this page doesn't show up in the "unassessed" section? (I assume that's why it was put in List-class up until recently.) Katr67 ( talk) 22:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
My suggestion for filling out the bios is to take all the bios in the B class and up ratings bios from Top & High importance sections. That should be 20 or so, and they should be decent quality plus these are our more important people. Thoughts? Aboutmovies 02:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the links. Using those, here are all articles that are high-importance and
B-Class:
GA-Class:
A-Class: none
FA-Class: none
— Zaui ( talk) 21:26, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, in the Selected article section, this is currently the only Selected article without an accompanying free-use image. Any chance of getting a related free-use image for this article? The "blurb" text for its use as a Selected article could also be expanded by about 4 lines or so. Cirt ( talk) 08:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC).
This ( Oregon Ballot Measure 37) is a mess. Especially the Measure 49 section (did it pass with 61 or 62%?). I can't tell if 37 is still in effect or not. Whether it highlights the best that WP has for Oregon, and thus merits inclusion in the portal, is hard for me to justify. I propose we either clean up the article find something else to replace its spot in the portal. — Zaui ( talk) 21:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
There are enough WP:GA and WP:FA Oregon-related articles such that "Selected article" section should be limited to quality content. (The "Selected biography" section is a different matter entirely, and we can address that later.) Checking the latest list at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Oregon articles by quality/1, I count (18) WP:GA/ WP:FA articles (excluding Lists and Bios). Therefore, we should strive for a high quality-content section for the Selected article section, and require that articles there all have a rating of WP:GA or WP:FA. This will also serve as a motivation in the future for others to work on and improve the quality of Oregon-related articles. It will also be nice at some point in the future when the portal goes for WP:PPREV and later WP:FPORTC discussion, to be able to have (at least) one section of the portal relegated to WP:GA/ WP:FA content. Cirt ( talk) 09:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC).
All of the above are either the FA/GA quality, or are the B class of Top or High importance. I think all of them have a free use image, but some will need some alteration to the exiting lead (Intel, Mt. St. Helens, Itanium, and other none Oregon only articles) to better tie it into Oregon, and others will need some expansion of the lead. But this would put us over 50 for the category, so more than enough for FP I'm sure, and it expands to the three largest universities, 4 of the 5 most populous cities, and some good geographical/historical items. I'll make similar list for the bios. Any others I missed? Aboutmovies ( talk) 23:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI - I set up auto-archival for this talk page - discussion threads with zero new posts or activity for over one month will be archived. Cirt ( talk) 07:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC).
I would like to start adding some more quotes from other former Governors of Oregon that are not currently represented at Portal:Oregon/Selected quote, selecting only those for which free-use images exist. Anyone wish to comment, or is it okay for me to go ahead and add more quotes w/ accompanying free-use pics from former Oregon Governors to Portal:Oregon/Selected quote ? Cirt ( talk) 00:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC).
I've gotten three portals to WP:FPORT status so far. If you all like, and you don't mind seeing a few WP:BOLD formatting changes to the portal, I could work on getting this one to Featured Status as well. With the great content you have here, and the good start you have going on the portal, it wouldn't take too long. Cirt ( talk) 08:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC).
Is there a way to get rid of the (explorer) qualifier on the William Clark wiki link here? Nothing I tried worked.
I would swap the selected biography and picture on the main portal page - just so the first look folks have is the selected article and a high-quality picture side by side. There's too much text right now - especially when the biography doesn't contain a photo - and the photos that are in the bio section aren't much to look at.
Does anyone have a problem if the selected article photos are bigger? It's hard to tell what some of them are at the current size. — Zaui ( talk) 00:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
(combining my comments)
That's it for now of GA/FA or B w/Top or High. I have one bio at GA, and about 6 others I'm planning on getting there in the next month or so which will help expand this out to at least 25. If people want to help increase the number, go through Category:High-importance Oregon articles and find start class articles that just need a little work to get to B class and improve them to B if not GA class. For instance Mark Hatfield needs the lead improved, the honors section turned to prose, and some copy editing and it would be B class. Again, add any that were missed. Aboutmovies ( talk) 23:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
This portal has had a portal peer review, which has since been archived. Please see Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Oregon/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 16:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Just curious, what became of the Willamette Meteorite bit I put on the portal a while back? Seems that the nature of a portal makes it tough to track such changes, but it's a little disconcerting that something I worked on was removed without explanation (as far as I can tell). Not the end of the world, but I do think it was a good part of the portal.
But in general, thank you all very much for your diligence in improving this portal. It's come a long way, and is looking very good. - Pete ( talk) 01:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Cool, thanks Z! - Pete ( talk) 21:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I've been doing something that I realized should probably be brought up for discussion: changing the dates in the lead sentence of bio summaries to include only the year. It seems to me that these blurbs, since the are constrained by space, should be as tightly focused on essential information as possible. The full dates take up a relatively large amount of space, and also require creating extraneous links (to make dates display according to user preferences.) Seems to me that just the year of birth and death is enough, and if the reader needs the full date, it's only a click away. Any objections? (The closest thing I could find to a guideline covering this is Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates of birth and death.) - Pete ( talk) 03:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Those articles left that meet both the B class minimum and being Top or High importance:
Reproduced from archived section, may need to add a few since list was made in early Jan 2008. Aboutmovies ( talk) 20:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity - Are any of these relatively close to getting to WP:GA status? Cirt ( talk) 20:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
AM, did you intentionally exclude biographies? It would be nice to have a similar list for bios, I suppose I could do it myself. Just noticed Joel Palmer is not here. - Pete ( talk) 01:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Blurb for this one is a bit long - text could be cut down by about half, for better appearance on main portal page. Cirt ( talk) 06:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Should Collaboration of the Week be included here (or did I miss it)? Awotter ( talk) 02:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Re-visiting old ideas, and proposing a new one. Regarding the year old proposal to add a "locations" section, I think we still don't have enough high quality articles at this time (seems we haven't improved the quality on most of the cities).
As to a new idea, I was thinking we might be able to have some sort of animated/sound spot after I came across this, but I'm not sure if there would be enough, so this might be maybe later type item. Then as a matching compenent to keep two columns, I was thinking a B&W image section. I know we have a lot, and some have to be of decent quality. Thoughts. Aboutmovies ( talk) 10:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Articles still to be added:
All are B class and either High/Top importance, meeting the criteria. All FA and GA (minus 2 that don't have proper images) have been added. Aboutmovies ( talk) 16:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
... was promoted to Featured article status. Should it be removed from this list? -- Another Believer ( Talk) 20:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Portals is back!
The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.
As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.
There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.
Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.
And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.
From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 07:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
The following articles should be added to the selected article list:
All of these articles are ranked "B" class. Some may be already on the list. SouthParkFan65 ( talk) 23:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)