Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Signpost

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.


The Signpost is usually published over the weekend period and is currently on a fortnightly publication schedule. Signpost contributors can contact the editors-in-chief for updates on the publication date below. Once all tasks are complete, the publication manager will complete the publication process.

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.

From the special desk[edit]

The following proposals have been transcluded from the special desk.

Report on the impact of the GA Cup[edit]

Needs drafting
  • Submission: User:Wugapodes/GAStats/Draft No draft, per se, but will expand upon previous work at User:Wugapodes/GAStats
  • Author: Wugapodes
  • Discussion:
    A few months ago, based on a discussion about the GA cup and the GA backlog, I built a bot to gather data and did some preliminary analysis on the GA Cup and backlog about nomination rate, clearing rate, rate of passes vs. fails, and how the GA cup affected those. The third GA cup ended on June 30th, and it has been a remarkable success in reducing the backlog. I thought doing another round of analysis and writing a special report on this year's GA Cup and how it's managed to reduce the backlog, as well as some insight into the overall trends of the GA backlog. It would cover the effects of the GA cups, trends in nominations, passes, fails, etc over time, and some insights into the process as well as possible opinions on how the cup and GA process as a whole can be improved. Wugapodes [thɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 21:02, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Sounds good, Wugapodes. Do you intend to draft the piece in your user space? --Andreas JN466 19:52, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
      • The new data would be added to the existing data page, but I never really gave much thought to where the draft would be done. I can draft it in my user space, but if there's a more appropriate venue you'd prefer I have no strong feelings. Wugapodes [thɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 01:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
        • Google docs (with the text, links etc. written in wiki markup) work well. Once the draft has matured, you can send us the link, and we can review and discuss it there prior to publication. --Andreas JN466 11:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
          • On second thought, I will probably draft it off wiki and then finish it it in my userspace, or somewhere else on-wiki. As I've been working on it, I realized I'll probably have a few complex charts that will need to use {{Graph:chart}} and I would want to preview those (and presumably others would want to see those as well). Wugapodes [thɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 01:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
    • @Jayen466: I think I'm finished with my edits of the draft. What do you need from me next? Wugapodes [thɔk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɻɪbz] 15:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

From the review desk[edit]

The following proposals have been transcluded from the review desk.

From the WikiProject desk[edit]

The following Interview requests have been transcluded from the WikiProject desk.

* Not previously covered

This would work well, since this year is Wikipedia's Year of Science.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
  • WikiProject Theatre (Not previously covered) WP Assessment of 15,000 articles. Theatre article has about 15,000 hits per month.  JoeHebda (talk)  18:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
  • WikiProject Science - this is the Year of Science on Wikipedia, so it would be nice to feature this WikiProject. I'll conduct the interview and submit the request for interviewees myself, if that helps. I'm pinging Ed Erhart (WMF) since they said to let them know if I had any other interview ideas.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:26, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Happy to work under the same arrangement as above! The blog and Signpost have mostly different audiences, so I don't think it'll hurt one or the other if we both publish. Thanks, 3family6. Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 21:37, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

* WikiProjects previously covered

Hi Megalibrarygirl, good work on the WikiProject TV article. It's a solid core, but to be complete, it should start off with a bit more context about the WikiProject on the whole. When was it started; how many active editors do they have/have they had (which can be either based on precise data, or based on asking one or two project members); what have they focused on as a project; what kinds of things come up on their talk page; what they want help with. That's not a precise list -- but a paragraph or two covering those types of points would make a good intro. Then you can introduce CAWylie in that context. Has he been a project member for 5 years? If the project has been around for 8 years, suddenly that info conveys more about who he is and how he fits in. I'll try to dig up a WP Report or two you might use as a guide. Long ago, Cryptic C62 used to do a good job with these -- I'll start by poring through his older pieces.

It would be nice if we could include this in the upcoming issue. We're behind schedule, and currently aiming to publish by 8am Pacific time Thursday. Please let me know if that's a timeframe that works for you, if you'd rather put it off to the next issue, etc. -Pete (talk) 03:46, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Peteforsyth, I'll try to get it done by then. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl, as promised (but a bit delayed), I'd suggest the lead paragraph from this 2009 report on WP Michael Jackson as a model. (You can also scroll through the "previous WikiProject Report" and "Next WP report" links at the bottom of that one, to browse a few others.) Ideally, I'd like to see a touch more detail about the project than that one, but the general model is a pretty good one. Something to help the reader wrap their head around what the project has done, is doing, and would like to do in the future -- before delving into the specifics of the interview. -Pete (talk) 21:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl, we're going to hold this piece for next issue, to make sure you have a chance to look at the suggested changes from Tony1, and give us a bit more time to talk it through. Will be good to have a piece almost ready to go for next time, as well. Let me know when you've had a chance to look at comments and changes. -Pete (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Peteforsyth, that's good. I'm still gathering some of the info you suggested I get into. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:14, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

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

Next edition scheduled for week of Monday 29 August. Tony (talk) 02:30, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Article status[edit]

Irregular articles

See current proposals Add irregular article

News and notes

Not started

In the media

In progress

Discussion report

Not started

WikiProject report

In progress

Featured content

Not started

Arbitration report

Not started

Traffic report

In progress

Technology report

Not started

@Peteforsyth: – I've got some in briefs at User:Evad37/Next Signpost tech - Evad37 [talk] 04:17, 28 August 2016 (UTC)


Not started


Not started

Recent research

Not started

(CC Peteforsyth) As usual, we are preparing this month's survey on recent academic research about Wikipedia, doubling as the Wikimedia Research Newsletter (now in its sixth volume). Help is welcome to review and/or summarize the many interesting items listed here, as are suggestions of other new research papers that haven't been covered yet. Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 21:22, 26 August 2016 (UTC)


In progress

Probably won't be this week; newsletter that gets used for this isn't even out yet. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:36, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

  • @Adam Cuerden: Any ideas, whether/when this can be published? (It looks like, there will be no newsletter for this.) Armbrust The Homunculus 11:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Honestly, I don't know. I'm going to be very busy for the next week, so it's going to get pretty late. I could finish it if you think it's still going to be relevant? Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:52, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Regular responsibilities[edit]

Editorial board[edit]

WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg For more on Signpost administration see our coordination guidelines (being revised, see here for more current information).
Task User Backup
Editors-in-chief Jayen466, Pete Forsyth
Editor emeritus Go Phightins!
Content editors
News Jayen466, Tony1, Milowent, Pete Forsyth
Features (open)
Editorial (open)
Special reports and interlanguage desk Tony1
Publication editors
Publication manager Kharkiv07
Design editor (open)
Personnel/outreach Rosiestep
Social media coordinator (open)
Copy editor Montanabw


WikipediaSignpostIcon.svg For more on the responsibilities of being a regular writer see our content guidelines.
Feature Lead editor(s) Contributing writer(s)
News and notesR Jayen466, Peteforsyth Tony1, Go Phightins!
In the mediaR Milowent, Jayen466 Peteforsyth, 3family6
WikiProject reportRD Megalibrarygirl
Discussion reportR Esquivalience
Featured contentR Armbrust The ed17
Arbitration reportR GamerPro64
Technology reportR (open)
Traffic report Serendipodous, Milowent EllenCT
Recent research
(last issue of each month)
Tbayer (WMF) In collaboration with the Wikimedia Research Newsletter.
Copy-editors Montanabw Graham87, Wavelength, Liz
Backup writer (open) (open)
  • EllenCT (Traffic, Tech, Discussion, CEing)

Home About Archives Newsroom Subscribe Suggestions