User talk:Peteforsyth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Peteforsyth demo)
Jump to: navigation, search
Handshake icon.svg
The Good Friend Award
For COUNTLESS good neighbor gestures and expert guidance and direction! ! !

Screenshot of user contributions[edit]

I like File:User contributions detail.svg but it was removed from Help:User contributions today as outdated.[1] Can you make an updated version with the red and green numbers described at Wikipedia:Added or removed characters? Also, "diff" and "hist" have swapped positions. An often overlooked detail is that the arrow at a section edit summary is a link to the section. It's a minor issue but perhaps this could be mentioned. PrimeHunter (talk)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins[edit]


Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers[edit]

Hi Peteforsyth.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Peteforsyth. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Tom Metzger[edit]

Is in the category Category:American neo-Nazis which is a direct or indirect subcategory of the other categories. According to the category rules, unless an exception is used, an article are not supposed to be both in a category and its parents. Please look at the category tree. Hmains (talk) 23:26, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hmains Got it, thanks. Self-reverted. -Pete Forsyth (talk) 01:17, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for checking Hmains (talk) 01:20, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

Re: editorial[edit]

Yes. I need to deal with some stuff IRL, but should have a draft for you to look at in a few days. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:07, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Everybody is invited to the November 30 Bay Area WikiSalon[edit]

Please join us in downtown San Francisco!
A Wikipedia panel discussion about journalism

Details and RSVP here.

See you soon! Pete F, Ben Creasy, and Checkingfax | (Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice here)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


Hello Peter.

I'm interested in the op-ed/editorial coordination position on the Signpost editorial board. Could you detail the responsibilities of this position? Thanks. Biblio (talk) 00:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Biblio, and thank you -- your interest is most welcome! I'm pinging Rosiestep, our Human Resources coordinator, who will probably have ideas about how to proceed. Also, please feel free to email me (and I will cc Rosie in my response). Let's talk some more and figure out the best fit between the Signpost's needs and your interests. -Pete Forsyth (talk) 05:03, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll send an email when I get the chance. I was just looking over the Signpost and I understand that there is a apparently a perpetual staff shortage, so I thought I would try to help out. I always take in interest in helping to improve things where improvement is needed. Biblio (talk) 05:54, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
(Now that I think about it, it would probably be more efficient to just discuss things here.)
Looking through the Regular Responsibilities table, I see that there are four open positions: Features, Editorial, Design Editor, and Social Media Coordinator. I am not especially interested in the last two, but I would consider either of the first two. However, I do take a particular interest in fresh ideas (I did contribute an op-ed of my own last year), which I why I specifically mentioned managing the Editorial section. I might have volunteered to help manage the News section, but I see that part is already staffed with three coordinators. The current publication manager seems to be mostly inactive, so if that area really needs attention I could consider taking on that role. I do also have some background in copyediting (I was at one time quite involved with the GOCE, and even served a term as assistant coordinator about a couple of years ago). I'm always quite meticulous in making sure that things are written properly, so if nothing else I would agree to filling to copy editor position in tandem with MBW.
Now that I have described some of my interests, perhaps you could specify which of these areas are in need of the most help. Biblio (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
So glad to hear from you @Biblio regarding your interest in working at the "Signpost". I'll defer to Peteforsyth regarding areas which are most in need of help, but do let me know if you have any other questions I can answer. Thank you, --Rosiestep (talk) 03:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Biblioworm, thank you for the more fleshed-out thoughts, and for the sample op-ed. It's quite an interesting one, and something I missed when it was first published, and it helps me get a sense of how you think. Very helpful. The page you referenced is not something we've diligently maintained, so don't take it as gospel. For a high level view, this "from the editor" note from Gamaliel over a year ago remains a pretty good representation of how we work. Some of our high priorities (in no particular order) right now are:

  • Some serious attention to our production process (first, we'll need a good high-level tech type, who can help think through possibilities and scope out a project...then, I'd imagine we'll need somebody with template editing and bot writing skills, etc.)
  • Writers who can either generate their own story ideas and write them, and/or take assignments (especially those with connections to other wiki projects and/or language communities)
  • Editors who can make a regular commitment to reviewing submissions and providing good feedback

Like Gamaliel, I will continue to take primary responsibility for editorials and op-eds. If there is a good fit, I would welcome assistance with that, but it's not the highest-priority need. I think what would work best is if we can find a few different kinds of tasks for you to take on over a couple of editions, and then have a more informed discussion about what the best long-term fit would be. Does that sound good? I'm sure Montanabw could use some help copyediting, and I'd be happy to point you toward some pieces to provide more substantive feedback as things start to come together. Are there any topics you'd be interested to write up? Have you ever used the web app Slack? That's what we use for coordination, and if you can send me your email address I could send an invitation to join us there. -Pete Forsyth (talk) 18:55, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Just to clarify, what specifically do you mean by a "high-level tech type", and what exactly would such a person do? Only then would I be able to know whether such a position would be a good fit.
Otherwise, my main interest would in reviewing submissions, cleaning them up, and providing feedback on them.
As for Slack, I have never used that program. What in particular does the Signpost team do on this program? Biblio (talk) 00:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, that was some shorthand I guess. "High level tech type" = somebody who has a fairly good idea of how various tech platforms work (what it's possible to do with bots, with templates, with custom javascript/gadgets or toollabs tools, and other platforms like WordPress or Medium...), enough to have some intuitive sense of how easy/difficult various tasks will be, how long they might take. The idea, as I see it, would be to work with me and complement my relative lack of in-depth tech knowledge, so we could produce a sort of road map/spec, that would guide specific tasks in support of revamping the whole thing. Some of the stuff included:
  • wrap your head around the manual version of our production process
  • we (and the rest of the team) should consider any substantial changes we want to make now, or in the future (e.g., how bylines are handled, any layout/design changes, page titles, naming convention of "Wikipedia Signpost" -> "Signpost", do we want to leave room to move from enwp to Meta, etc.
  • Brainstorm ways of getting a decent RSS feed, which could support SEO efforts, getting listed in places like Google News, and the occasional reader who wants to consume the SP via RSS themselves
  • Map out path forward, not in great detail, but with a broad view (that's what I meant by "high level")
I am hopeful that Tedder might be able to help, he is a good friend and lives near me. Kharkiv07 is very good at this stuff, but I believe as you surmised that he continues to have substantial demands on his time outside the SP.
Have you used IRC? Slack is very similar to IRC (heavily based on it) but is an integrated platform and more user friendly than any IRC client, and it has extended features like integration with Google Apps, Trello, etc. etc., you can post images, etc. We use it for discussing all aspects of the Signpost, from planning to finalizing each issue to planning out social media. -Pete Forsyth (talk) 01:58, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I am acquainted with some aspects of technology and coding (mostly in the area of websites), and I occasionally program things as a kind of hobby, but I'm actually much more of an intellectual sort and I do not have tech knowledge at an extensive professional level.
As for IRC, I have never used it. As I alluded to above, I'm actually still rather old-fashioned, all things considered, and to my knowledge I never used any kind of web-based instant communication (except for email, of course) before I started editing wikis. Biblio (talk) 23:11, 2 December 2016 (UTC)