Welcome to the MedLibrary.org Wikipedia Supplement on Wikipedia:Portal peer review -- Please Click to Return to Front Page

This page has a backlog that requires the attention of experienced editors. Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.

Wikipedia's portal peer review process exposes portals to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality portals that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured portal candidate. This is not academic peer review by a group of experts in a particular subject, and portals that undergo this process should not be assumed to have greater authority than any other. For feedback on portals that are less developed, use the portal's talk page first. At present, there are 125 featured portals, of a total of 576 portals on Wikipedia.	Shortcut: WP:PPREV The path to a featured portal Start a new portal Develop the portal Check against the featured portal criteria Get creative feedback ← Featured portal candidates Featured portals
Nomination procedure Anyone can request a portal peer review. The best way to get lots of reviews is to reply promptly and appreciatively on this page to any comments. If you post a request, please do not discourage reviewers by ignoring their efforts. To add a nomination: Place {{subst:PPR}} at the top of the portal's talk page, creating a portal peer review notice to notify other editors of the review. Within the notice, click "request has been made" to open a new discussion page. Place ===[[Portal:PORTAL NAME]]=== at the top, with the name of your portal in the link brackets, and then note the kind of comments/contributions you want, and/or the sections of the portal you think need reviewing. Sign with four tildes (~~~~) and save the new page. Edit this page here, pasting {{Wikipedia:Portal peer review/PORTAL NAME/archive1}} at the top of the list of nominees. Add the portal to the current requests list. You can add this list to your talk page using {{Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Requests‎}} You also can use {{FPcandidates}} to include featured portal candidates. Optional steps: Start a new section on the portal's talk page using ==Portal peer review== Paste {{Wikipedia:Portal peer review/PORTAL NAME}} into that section. Add {{todo}} at the top of the portal's talk page, then save the page. Edit and paste the following into the to do list. Summarize recommendations and replies as they occur: [[Image:Evolution-tasks.png|left]] '''<big>Recommendations to improve page to featured portal status</big>''' List includes recommendations with replies/status. <br clear="both"> Your review may be more successful if you politely request feedback on the discussion pages of related articles, portals, and/or send messages to Wikipedians who have contributed to the same or a related field, including the list of portal peer review volunteers. How to respond to a request Review one of the portals listed below. If you think something is wrong—e.g., portal length, the introduction, poor grammar/spelling, missing topics—post a comment in the portal's section on this page. Feel free to correct the portal yourself. Please consider noting your edits here to keep others informed about the portal's progress. How to remove a request You may remove to the current archive any inactive listings or listings older than one month; inappropriate or abandoned listings (where the nominator has not replied to comments); portals that have become featured portal candidates. After removing the listing, contributors should replace the {{portalpeerreview}} tag on the portal's talk page with {{oldportalpeerreview}}. How to resubmit a request If your request has been removed, please feel free to renominate it for portal peer review at a later time: Place {{subst:PPR}} at the top of the portal's talk page as described above Place {{Wikipedia:Portal peer review/PORTAL NAME/archiveN}} (where N is the review number) at the top of the list of nominees below. Archive: Current – September 2008 Purge server cache

Contents 1 Requests 1.1 Portal:Feminism 1.2 Portal:Transport 1.3 Portal:United Nations 1.4 Portal:Japan 1.5 Portal:Islam 1.6 Portal:Hudson Valley 1.7 Portal:Ancient Near East 1.8 Portal:Star Wars 1.9 Portal:Catholicism 1.10 Portal:British Army 1.10.1 Hossen27 1.10.2 Kirill Lokshin 1.10.3 Cam 1.10.4 Kyriakos 1.10.5 Gaia Octavia Agrippa 1.10.6 BusterD 1.10.7 Alexf 1.11 Portal:Ohio 1.12 Portal:Sony PlayStation 1.13 Portal:Linguistics 1.14 Portal:Saskatchewan

Requests

Portal:Feminism

I have had lots of help with this portal, particularly with folks from Wikipedia:WikiProject Gender Studies subproject, Feminism Task Force. 25 Selected articles, all WP:FAs, 35 Selected biographies, all WP:FAs, 27 Selected pictures, all WP:FPs, 20 sets of 3 DYK hooks, all with free-use images, 20 Selected quotes, all with free-use images, and a Rotating In this month section. Things you can do has a cleanup listing, a new feature from WolterBot (talk · contribs), as well as a link to notability concerns, thanks to WP:WPNN.

Looking for any feedback/comments prior to WP:FPORTC. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 23:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Note: Placed a notice about this portal peer review at the talk pages for WP:LGBT, WP:HR, WP:SOCIO, WP:PHILO, WP:DISCR, WP:GS, and of course the Feminism Task Force. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Transport

I have been working on this portal for a while now, and I would like some feedback; I am hoping that it will soon be good enough for a featured nomination. Arsenikk ^(talk) 18:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Portal:United Nations

I've been at this portal for a week or two now and now feel that it's up to scratch. I'm in the process of adding more selected content but I didn't see why a review can't be done at the same time. Any comments would be appreciated. Many thanks --Joowwww (talk) 17:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Japan

Hello. Myself and a couple of other users have greatly overhauled this portal in the last few months. I think it has come along very nicely and I just wanted a fresh pair of eyes to look at it. I'm open for ANY comments, suggestions or recommendations. Anything at all that you would like to say about the portal is great. I'm hoping to get it to Featured status sometime in the near future. Thanks! --Torsodog^Talk 06:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

What happened to images 4 - 15? Bewareofdog 20:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

They simply haven't been added yet. As of right now, the portal automatically rotates images based on the week number, and since I started overhauling the article in April those numbers had already passed. So, basically, I just haven't gotten to them yet. --Torsodog^Talk 20:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Try to make the Selected articles the same length. For example , Portal:Japan/Selected article/1 is longer than Portal:Japan/Selected article/26. Bewareofdog 03:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Islam

I think this portal has reached Featured portal criteria, but I want to check it before nominating there.Seyyed(t-c) 15:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm relatively new to portals but here's what stood out to me.

• The lead paragraph has an awful lot of parenthesis, which I think breaks the flow.
• Does the Selected Picture have to be in a thumb format? Personally, I think it's distracting in this case.
• Same thing with the reference. If some one wants to check references, they can click the article link.

Everything else looks fine to me. Just make sure everything is updated regularly. I hope this helps some. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC))

Portal:Hudson Valley

I just created this this morning and I designed it using the random selected article/picture/biography/other. It uses largely B-Class or higher articles. I'd like to know what it needs. Thanks, Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Ancient Near East

Hi, I'm looking for feedback on a new portal for the Ancient Near East. Any comments or suggestions would be welcome!

Categorystuff (talk) 17:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe should we create specific portals about mesopotamia, phenicia, ancient Anatolia, etc… Therefore the Ancient Near East portal wouldn't be saturated by too large an amount of articles. Alexander Doria (talk) 13:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

There was so much interaction between all the groups in this area, that I think even if there were different portals for each geographic area, there would still be a need to have a central point to put it all together. IansAwesomePizza (talk) 00:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

But I don't want to dismantle the Ancient Near east portal. We should keep it as an introduction to the other portals. Besides even if there were a lot of interaction in this area, the hitites, the sumeriian, the phénicians and the Elamites were such different people, that they could claim for a portal each. Alexander Doria (talk) 09:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I do agree, but I'll probably leave the other portals to other editors. One of the problems is that this area attracts so much Fringe and Nationalism that there are very few articles that can be used in the "selected articles" section. The editors who make nonsense of so many of these articles are very agressive, so that it is nearly impossible to make the articles presentable without getting burned by a cabal of extremists and/or entrenched wiki-lawyers. IansAwesomePizza (talk) 18:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Giggy comments

• The portal is currently really wide on my screen, as in I have a left-right scrollbar at the bottom. My resolution is 1024x768, which is pretty standard.

Y Done formatted the portal on a smaller screen

• I'm not a fan of shortcut portal links (though others are... your call).

Y Done

• The map image on the Ancient Near East article would be good for the intro of the portal.

Y Done I was thinking of using an icon for the intro, but the map makes good sense too.

• Can the topic box be made smaller.... it's massive and takes up so much of the portal. Ideally you'll have most of the main content (once you've scrolled down past the intro) on the one page... see Portal:Music of Australia for a random featured example.

The ANE covers a *lot* of different groups and people all interacting with each other, and the chart is a way to show all the key topics in context with each other, in one central place. I really don't want to reduce the size of the chart just for the sake of its size, because I think it's a useful tool for the ground it covers.

Y Done put topic box on a separate tab

• Yeah, work on these things, expand (as in, get more) selected content... looking good for me!

giggy _(:O) 09:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, IansAwesomePizza (talk) 21:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments by John Carter

• Agreed that the width is a bit much, as I have the option of scrolling to the side as well, which I generally don't have, and it could be a bit offputting to some viewers. If there would be any way to reduce the width, it would probably help a lot.

Y Done

• Currently, the portal only seems to use one selected article. I think it would be at least possible to split that into two articles. The standard break-down is between biographical and other kinds of articles, but other options could be used as well.

There really aren't enough substantial biographies in the ANE for a biography section. Even for people who've done something notable, little else is known about them (e.g. En-hedu-ana the earliest known author, Mursili I the conquerer of Babylon)

• The size of the timeline is also a question. It is very long. I'm not myself entirely sure how to reduce the size, but if it would be possible it would probably help.

I think the timeline chart has to be sizable to accommodate all the (otherwise confusing) interacting groups. I suppose I could reduce the text size, but I'm not sure how small I can make it and still be readable on most screens.

Y Done put topic box on a separate tab

• No other real reservations, though. John Carter (talk) 13:02, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, IansAwesomePizza (talk) 21:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Star Wars

Hello, I believe that this Portal could be worthy of the featured portal rank but there are still a few things that may need changing. In 2006, this portal was put up for featured portal but was rejected because it was too new. Two years later, I believe it has a chance ...

• For instance, a lot of the portal pages do not have the portal link. This includes even the main pages such as Star Wars: Episode I and Star Wars: Expanded Universe. It would be very helpful if people could fix these pages by adding the following template below infoboxes and the like: {{portal|Star Wars|Star Wars Logo.svg}} It should end up looking like this on the pages. (See below)
  

---

---

If for any reason it does not, please feel free to contact me on my talk page.

Y Done I have placed the portal link on every FA- and GA-rated Star Wars article listed on WikiProject Star Wars (except Ian McDiarmid) and also on as many other Star Wars articles as I could find along the way. SunDragon34 (talk) 00:06, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

• The layout of the current portal page is good but at the moment does not contain any pictures. I am not very good at formatting (I'll admit) so if anyone else could help on that, that would be great.

• Also, if anyone else could regularly update this site (more than it already is perhaps) that should also lead to a better portal page!

• If there is anything else that you can think of that you think will improve the page please do not hesitate to either ask or just do it yourself!

Thanks, hopefully this should get moving on pretty well, pretty quickly, SkE (talk) 16:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Catholicism

I want to nominate this portal at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates but came here to know if I should make any improvements . Bewareofdog 05:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

There is a POV issue. I think at present this portal is about Roman Catholicism and should either rename to exclude Old Catholic churches etc or should include them. Although the Roman Catholic church defines Catholicism to mean those in communion with the pope this is not the exclusive use of the term in other parts of the church. This has been discussed at length in other places on WP. --BozMo talk 06:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

See for example all the "Affirming Catholicism" websites (try google) for Anglicans who use the term "Catholicism" self-referentially. --BozMo talk 06:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Portal:British Army

Hi. I'm after possible improvements and ideas before I nominate this portal for featured status. Jhfireboy Talk 15:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Hossen27

Very sound portal

Not much wrong here.

I made a few mostly minor changes to the layout and removed some redlinks.

just a few more things.

• make all the images in the selected articles the same size (around 200px), just for consistency.Y Done to 350px
• try to make the selected articles similar lengths, keeps the portal looking more uniform even though it automatically refreshes the content.
• Its not a necessity (in my opinion) but adding the source of the selected photo is always a nice touch. see Portal:Military of Australia/Selected picture for examples. Y Done

Go ahead and put it up for feature review if you think its ready. They will find the other little things that need a change that I missed in my 10 minute check.

Well done Hossen27 (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin

A very nice portal, as Hossen27 says. There are a few things that may need some fiddling, though:

• The background color seems a bit dark for me; it's difficult to read the blue links on it, at least on my screen. You might consider using a lighter shade of khaki instead.Y Done
• Selected pictures do, generally speaking, need sources. Y Done
• The "Things you can do" box shouldn't contain anything that's already been done. Y Done
• I'd avoid using thumbnail markup inside the boxes, for consistency; the captions can be positioned under the image via a table instead. Y Done
• The main portal navbar ("Culture · Geography ...") appears twice; I'd suggest removing the one at the top, to avoid needing the horizontal line there. Y Done
• A list of major topics would be good (and is likely to be requested during the featured portal review).

Keep up the good work! Kirill 02:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Cam

Well, as mentioned by Kirill & Hossen27, really good portal. However, there are a few minor things that I think could use some improvement.

• Kirill, you're not alone. it's difficult to see the blue links on my screen too (despite the fact that I have brightness turned to absolute max). Might I suggest a lighter colour. Y Done
• The "Related portals" seems a bit out of place. I'd argue that it is taking the place of something more important, such as Featured Article or Featured Event or something along those lines Y Done (incidentally, I notice you don't have a "featured event", perhaps you should add that).
• I think the whole page could benefit from a re-arranging of the boxes. Generally, Featured Article is the first one on the portal in most cases, rather than the featured picture. Y Done

Other than that, however, I think this thing's pretty much ready for Featured Portal nomination. Excellent work. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 04:11, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Kyriakos

Good work so far. The portal is looking good, I just a few comments:

• As mentiond above I would standardize the size of the images, I personally think that 150 px is a good size. Y Done to 350px.
• As stated by Kirill, a major topics section would be great as looking through several of the MILHIST Featured Portals they all have one.
• You might like to get rid of the thumb on the images. Y Done
• I would be good if you added images for every article when possible. In the selected units, Royal Horse Artillery and Scots Guards don't have images, when their symbols could possibly be used.

Otherwise, the portal looks very good. Kyriakos (talk) 07:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Gaia Octavia Agrippa

Very good portal. Only one problem and that is with the colouring. It is not very easy to read the first section. Can i suggest that you use something other than blue on green as the background. Great content though. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^T | _C 20:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC) Y Done

BusterD

Some good work here. Building a new portal is a lonely task. Much of what I'll suggest is intended to invite the casual reader to participate. I personally think that there's way too much background color showing (Selected picture, for example), but that's an artistic choice, and not by any means a deal killer. There are several issues that will come up during any promotion process and must be resolved in some way, if my recent experience at P:ACW is indicative. I'll also suggest you look at Portal:Norway (a newly featured portal maintained by User:Cirt, a frequent FP commenter) for examples of what is expected in that process.

• Current style is that instructions appear on each content page. See how I've adapted this for Portal:American Revolutionary War/Selected event (in Kirill's new portal effort).
• A page layout is also a good idea (same examples), in order to make it very easy for a new portal contributor to make finished, correctly styled entries all by themselves.
• A redundant link to each subsection entry (look at the page code for Portal:American Revolutionary War/Selected event to see what I mean) is another handy handle a new editor can use to see exactly where to click.
• Your "Things to do" subsection references things to do on the portal itself, and strangely, that's not the task the section normally performs in a featured portal. Look at similarly intended (but very different from each other) subsections in Portal:Comedy and Portal:American Civil War. I'd use a {{todo}} template on subpages to tell the new editor what tasks need doing. On the main page subsection, I believe the accepted style should be pointing the editor toward helping content-area articles. If there was a British Army task force, you could simply transclude their to do list. Since you have a Britsh military history task force, you can pull from that. Keep the red-links to high-priority requests.
• IMHO, you're going to need way more selected sub-articles and pictures. Six of each is a very small number. Size of each entry should be roughly similar; right now when one cycles the selection, page composition varies widely, when it should be fairly stable. Read current FP process to see what metrics are currently being applied to such issues. It's a good idea to start reading FP process anyway.Y Done - now have ten sub-articles and pictures.
• Maybe it's my browsers or platform, but the "Show new selections" link is partially hidden behind the two top subsection boxes. Y Done - I have tried three browsers that do not show this mistake.
• Intro box needs a footer: (More about the British Army)

I suspect there's more to do, but since you need many more sub-articles and pictures, remind me to look again after you've built those quantities up a bit. BusterD (talk) 00:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

This looks better. I'm not sure what the ideal number of entries will be, but keep adding a few a week, and then you're ready. Expect some sharp critique at featured portal (you'll be busy for a week or two); the accepted practice is to self-nominate your own work, so you can choose your moment. Congratulations on important work done well. BusterD (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Alexf

Very nicely done. My only complaint, one already noted by other editors, is the dark green background at the top provides low contrast and makes it hard to read. -- Alexf⁴² 11:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC) Y Done

Portal:Ohio

I started this portal in late February and since then User:Spencer and I have really made something out of this, in my opinion. Just looking for general opinions of what could be made better? Thanks! §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 03:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, from me too. User:Stepshep has done a great job and we've really added a lot of content. We just want to be nudged in the right direction if needed. Spencer^T♦C 00:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

• Looks not bad at all! However, with Firefox 2 on OS X the boxes line up...oddly. They have irregular vertical space between them, some nearly touch, others are quite far apart. This is probably because the main page seems to have a set of divs for each box, where you really only need three divs for the entire page: left column, right column, and the bottom full width. See Portal:Peer review (which, admittedly, has a few nested divs but is easy to make out). Msanford  T  03:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Y Done Thanks for that, I was wondering what they were doing. §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 05:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Sony PlayStation

Playstationdude (talk) 01:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

1. In the "Did you know..." ...that the PlayStation Portable Slim and Lite, at 189 grams, is 29 grams lighter than the Nintendo DS Lite? reads a little like an ad, but if it's, say, the lighest portable console, that would be noteworthy. Msanford (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• Finished

2. I would strongly suggest increasing the number of Selected articles (currently 8), pictures (currently 5) and, possibly most importantly for you, games (currently 5). If your idea is to get people to write more articles, then make that a big, bold item in the "Things you can do" section, usually in the format "Requested articles: game 1 game 2 game 3" as red links so people will click them and write an article. Make as many as you can think of! Msanford (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• Finished, but can always grow.

3. You may consider phasing in more standardized reference tags for your news items with a {{reflist}} at the bottom in a separate box. But that's just my personal preference because I'm a citation maniac. Msanford (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• I didn't know portals take refs. I've been taking them out when I use articles for the portal.

Everything should be referenced, always, everywhere. That's my take at least, others may have a different idea :) Msanford  T  16:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The ref links don't take you anywhere on the portal. I say leave them out. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{tell me a joke...} 22:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Aside from that, the portal is visually pleasing: you've used a great colour scheme which is directly realted to the content, and I like the related boxes at the bottom. Msanford (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Linguistics

I have updated the portal and made significant changes to it, adding much content on a timed rotation. More content will follow if the core concepts are proven by peer review (like featured phone, for example, which I really like).

I know the category list is a bit long and bloated, but that's managed by WikiProject Linguistics and I don't want to make sweeping changes to their categorization system for the sake of the portal.

Your comments are much appreciated, thank you in advance! -Msanford (talk) 00:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I noticed the backlog and thought I'd check the bottom of the list. Sorry this is five months from your request. I'm relatively new to portals but here's what stood out to me.

• The lead paragraph has an awful lot of parenthesis, which I think breaks the flow. Maybe list the major sub fields first: phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Then describe them. I think that will be easier for a layman to follow.
• The featured phone and picture are good ideas. My only comment is that the picture is rather large and pushes the column down a bit much. Maybe shrink the image size a bit.

Every thing looks fine to me. Just make sure the did you know is updated regularly. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 21:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC))

Portal:Saskatchewan

Content is randomized, and I would greatly appreciate feedback on the portal. Thanks for your time! Happy editing,SriMesh | talk 22:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments

All the portals mentioned below to use as models/examples are currently Featured Portals:

1. Y DoneConsider randomized images in the Intro, model Portal:Iceland. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)SriMesh | talk 00:50, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
2. Y DoneNo need for the references in selections at Portal:Saskatchewan/Selected article. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)SriMesh | talk 01:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Y DoneYou are using 2 different footer models, the "Selected picture" says "suggest", and the "Selected article" says "Archive/Nominations". Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Y DoneThe "Did you know" section could be standardized (as mentioned above, so could lots of sections) and a good model to go with for that is the Featured Portal Portal:New South Wales - which has sets of three hooks per subpage, with a free-use image used for every set. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)SriMesh | talk 04:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Y DoneCategories could have a nice little icon/image somewhere in that section, see Portal:Sustainable development. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)SriMesh | talk 04:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
6. Y DoneCould add a Featured content section, the Featured Portal Portal:North West England is a good example of this. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)SriMesh | talk 04:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
7. Y Done'Have a Question? Ask here!' and Help - I want to add to the SK portal are both a bit too self-referential. Consider moving these to some sort of header on the portal talk page or WikiProject page instead, for those looking for help/ways to contribute - because Things you can do is usually the section for that in Featured Portals. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)SriMesh | talk 04:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
8. Y Done'Selected biography' is currently using both footer systems, "...Archive/Nominations", and "Suggest • More Biographies...". Pick one and go with it for all footers in the portal. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)SriMesh | talk 04:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
9. Y Done'Selected Quotes' section could be reformatted, a good model is Portal:Religion. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hope that helps. Cirt (talk) 23:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, will get on the improvements over the next two daysSriMesh | talk 04:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Started changes, will have to skip a day and get back again. Thank you very much!SriMesh | talk 04:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

completed all the tasks for the portal aforementioned. Thank you very much for your time. Would it be ready for submission for Feature Portal?SriMesh | talk 04:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The image in the intro makes the horizontal bar appear - you may want to resize/remove it. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{it seems the winds have stopped...} 23:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

1. Y Done Re-sized image. I have a wide screen monitor, does the bar appear nowSriMesh | talk 17:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope, just right. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{that one guy who buried stuff} 22:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I am still seeing the bar across the screen on the portal. You should make the portal look friendly for all sizes of monitors. Mr. C.C. (talk) 05:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Have addressed these concerns. Does a portal need 10 articles at feature or good article status in each section to be eligible for feature status? Is Portal Saskatchewan ready for review for feature? SriMesh | talk 00:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Portal Portals:  Featured (Criteria, Candidates) | List | Directory | WikiProject | Guidelines | Instructions | Peer review | Category

Wikipedia content modification information:

• This page was last modified on 11 August 2008, at 23:07.

Wikipedia Authorship and Review

Wikipedia content provided here is not reviewed directly by MedLibrary.org. Wikipedia content is authored by an open community of volunteers and is not produced by or in any way affiliated with MedLibrary.org.

Wikipedia Usage Guidelines

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article on "Wikipedia:Portal peer review".

The URL for this specific entry is:

• http://medlibrary.org/medwiki/Wikipedia:Portal_peer_review

All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details). Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.