Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Signpost
WP:POST/N
Newsroom

This is the Signpost central hub. To learn more about the Signpost, see our about page. To subscribe, see our subscriptions. To suggest coverage, see suggestions. For general feedback, see our talk page.


Submission deadline: 6 days' time!  Publication scheduled for late Wednesday, April 8, 2015.
Once all tasks are complete, editor(s)-in-chief Gamaliel or Go Phightins! will complete the publication process.

Weekly schedule[edit]

Our current standard weekly schedule:

  1. Thursday–Sunday: start. Start all pages that are to be included in the next edition, either on-wiki or in Google Docs. Please note that "News and notes", "In the media", and the "Arbitration report" are typically drafted in the latter, but suggestions for them are always welcome through our suggestions page. Note that Featured content, due to using a weekly schedule based on WP:GO, will not have a finalized content list until the Sunday (UTC) starts, and will thus usually be a little bit behind the others at this point.
  2. Monday: draft. A rough outline of topics to be covered should be in place by the middle of Monday, so that if a regular reporter is unavailable, the editor can find a replacement for that week.
  3. Tuesday, early Wednesday: mature versions. Aim to have reasonably mature drafts of all pages for comments by the managing editors, fellow journalists, and other interested editors. Signpost editors recommend any structural changes, reductions in length, expansions in scope, necessary coordination between pages, postponement to subsequent issue.
  4. Wednesday: finish! Last-minute tweaks and copy-editors go through the drafts; publication in the evening. However, due to its prominent position at Portal:Featured content, the Signpost cannot publish if every single section of the Featured Content report isn't finished, and this section can't even really be started until Sunday mornings. Please pitch in if Featured Content is falling behind.

Current discussion[edit]

Ideas for Signpost features can be pitched and discussed by any interested parties here. Items should be listed directly at the opinion desk or the special desk, submissions from which are automatically transcluded here.

From the opinion desk[edit]

The following proposals have been transcluded from the opinion desk.


Are we quietly drowning in spam?[edit]

WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg
Status:
Needs drafting
  • Submission: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Opinion desk/Proposals/Spam
  • Author: Piotrus
  • Rationale:For a while, I've been increasingly concerned about a certain type of spam, that has low visibility, but also - nobody seems to be doing much about it. At the very least, I would like to bring to others attention through Signpost. I have a draft ready, through I am sure it may benefit from various comments and suggestions.
  • Discussion:
I moved the proposal to here. This is definitely publishable once formalized but we're going to want to sit on this for a little bit, as the April 1 issue already has a lot of content. Are you OK with a provisional April 8 publication date? ResMar 18:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
@Piotrus: ResMar 19:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Certainly, no hurry. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:00, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

WiR for WikiAfrica[edit]

WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg
Status:
Needs update

I served as WiR with the WikiAfrica Project for all of last year. I wanna write about the experience and the achievements. Fits in here? Under what category will it be under? Can I write in google docs and later transfer here or ask for review on there? Thanks --Nkansahrexford (talk) 11:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Given that you were involved in it, it would have to be an op-ed. Otherwise, go for it! Create it as a personal sandbox page and leave a link to it here. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:51, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey Nkansahrexford. Any update on this? We would still be interested in running it. Go Phightins! 23:06, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Go Phightins!, I started the article after receiving the notification today. The draft can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1diQaf0WF5gxrpPVKMFWRpfH-syKzjYaBKsli5KUHf3k/edit?usp=sharing . Still working on.--Nkansahrexford (talk) 19:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, let me know when it's ready for review. Thanks, Nkansahrexford. Go Phightins! 02:37, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
@Nkansahrexford: bump =). ResMar 03:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
@Nkansahrexford:, you're already half-way there but you've not updated in a while, what are your prospects of finishing the draft? ResMar 02:40, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Do modern Wikipedians understand foundation values?[edit]

WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg
Status:
Needs drafting

Mostly in reference to the five pillars.

I think that it is imperative that we have an op-ed (at least) that covers whether the Wikipedians of today agree with the same principles of the early Wikipedians, or if there has been a shift in outlook since 2001 within the minds of Wikipedians.

Thoughts? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 20:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Conceptually, I think this is an okay topic, however are you planning to write one via research, conjecture, personal opinion, or what? The angle should be fleshed out. Thanks for your submission. Go Phightins! 20:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Research is imperative to getting any sort of potential and/or possible accuracy in it whatsoever. So yes, absolutely. Conjecture is... iffy. I mean, I would wonder if statements such as "The study's results show A to be the majority view on the subject, as well as showing B and also C to be seemingly common concerns and beliefs of Wikipedians as well. It may be that A's high presence as the most common outlook here is due to influence from X. A study done by Q concludes that A ______, often due to _____, _____, and _____. However, counter studies done by _____ and _____ seem to say that A is in fact _____, often due to _____. The overall conclusion seems to be that _____ is _____. Personally, from my experience _______. etc. etc." would be all right. Thoughts? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 21:32, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
@Tharthan: Can you swing it? (write it, I mean). ResMar 03:07, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
I would need to obtain working studies first. Plus, this needs further discussion before it can go anywhere. 70.188.164.87 (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
@Resident Mario: I can write it, yes. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 11:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
You can go on ahead, then. Tough topic, something I'm really interested in myself but haven't (yet) had the time to dig through research for, so I'm certainly enthusiastic to hear your take. Our archives are the best place to start looking for research, particularly the monthly research report, and if you ask HaeB he can probably point you in the direction of some studies to look at. I think that in writing it, though, you should make a focused effort to make this technically simple reading. That framework will work well but only if you give it enough descriptive space that you don't lose readers in the statistics. Some references in terms of writing style could be here and here. ResMar 01:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Oh and @Tharthan:. ResMar 04:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
I've just been a bit busy as of late. I'll get to draughting this soon, though. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 06:20, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Take your time, I don't think that this is one you'd quite be able to dash off in one go anyway. ResMar 19:14, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


From the special desk[edit]

The following proposals have been transcluded from the special desk.


Gender ratio[edit]

WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg
Status:
Needs drafting
  • Submission: ---
  • Author: Rich Farmbrough
  • Rationale: This is a strategic piece to be publishing now during WikiWoman's Month and on a high-priority topic.
  • Discussion:

Submission via the Suggestions, creating the ticket now. I'm hoping to time this with closing reporting on WikiWoman's Month end-of-March. ResMar 21:45, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


Other proposals[edit]

This space is for irregular reports which do not belong to categories above.


The following proposals have been transcluded from the review desk.



The following proposals have been transcluded from the dispatch workshop.




Ideas[edit]

This space is for editors sharing internal ideas about topics or issues the Signpost should focus on or find writers to address, but for which reports or proposals have not yet been drafted. Items here are automatically transcluded to the opinion and special desks so that contributing editors may be aware of our current editorial focus.


  • Gender ratio: This month is WikiWoman's month and a lot of scrutiny is being placed across the project on the gender gap. We will summarize the state of play in our end-of-March issue, with a special report on the gender ratio currently in draft.
  • Copyright: How overly strict copyright limits are hurting Wikimedia contributors? Alternatively, how Wikimedia contributors' copyrights are violated on a daily basis?
  • Public release I've seen a couple of stories about major releases of materials into the Creative Commons of large numbers of literary and scholarly works in the languages of India, specifically Kannada and Tamil, thanks to the efforts of Wikipedians. Perhaps a talk with some of the participants or an overview of these kinds of efforts?
  • Wikimedia Ukraine: Possible follow-up with Wikimedia Ukraine on editing WP in the midst of war? (see previous coverage)
  • Guerrilla Skepticism: Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia is still a hot topic amongst proponents of alternative medicine and science. This seems ripe for a news feature or perhaps an interview with Susan Gerbic.


Note from editor(s)-in-chief[edit]

We are aiming to publish Wednesday April 1 at 10pm UTC/6pm EST. This is not an April Fool's joke. Please let me know by Tuesday if this may be a problem or you need help with a section. Gamaliel (talk) 22:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Will this issue contain jokes and pranks? What's the plan/tradition? I'll go along with anything, I just want to know what sort of mood to be in when I start editing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
We will have some very serious sections. The rest is fair game for hiaritity, especially FC, which is always fair game for hilarity. If anyone wants in on anything we cook up behind the scenes - which may be nothing, fair warning - email me. Gamaliel (talk) 00:36, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
@Jonesey95, Adam Cuerden, Xanthomelanoussprog, WPPilot: Special issue! :) ResMar 23:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi all, we'll be publishing the serious/normal stuff on Thursday. Rest be assured, we're not canceling any sections! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Article status[edit]

Irregular articles

See current proposals Add irregular article



News and notes

Not started


Will do a big one next week, not this one. ResMar 03:42, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

In the media

Not started


Discussion report

Not started


WikiProject report

Not started


Featured content

Ported over from the April 1 issue.

Arbitration report

Not started


Traffic report

Not started


Technology report

Not started


Gallery

Not started


Blog

Not started




Regular responsibilities[edit]

Compilation[edit]

WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg For more on the responsibilities of being a regular writer see our content guidelines.
Feature Lead editor(s) Contributing writer(s)
New and notesR Resident Mario The ed17, Tony1
In the mediaR Gamaliel Jayen466, Peaceray
WikiProject reportR (open) Rcsprinter123 (on break), Buffbills7701, Mabeenot
Discussion reportR (open) Rexford
Featured contentR Adam Cuerden Xanthomelanoussprog, WPPilot, Pine, The Herald, Ian Rose and Dank
Arbitration reportR Harry Mitchell (open)
Technology reportR (open) Jarry1250, Edokter, Rcsprinter123 and Godisgood737
Traffic report Serendipodous, Milowent (open)
Recent research In collaboration with the Wikimedia Research Newsletter.
Copy-editors (open) Graham87, Wavelength

Coordination[edit]

WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg For more on project administration see our coordination guidelines.
Task User Backup
Editors-in-chief Gamaliel and Go Phightins! Resident Mario (associate editor)
Editor emeritus The ed17
Publication manager
Responsibility shared by editorial board
Jarry1250 (publication tool engineer)
Social media coordinator
Responsibility shared by editorial board
Designer Resident Mario Ebe123, Matthewrbowker, Pretzels
Home About Archives Newsroom Subscribe Suggestions