Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom

Welcome to the central hub of The Signpost! This is The Signpost Newsroom, a place where The Signpost team can coordinate with writers, both regular and occasional, and people who have suggestions for topics to cover. See the boxes below if you have suggestions (something for the team to write about in regular columns), proposal/submissions (for articles you want to write/have written yourself), or want to create a pre-formatted draft article in your userspace, with helpful links and easy-to-edit syntax. Discussion occurs both here and in the Signpost Discord. Discussion of upcoming issues is done at the newsroom talk page. For general feedback on The Signpost as a whole, go to our talk page. To learn more about The Signpost, see our about page. The Signpost currently has 5585 articles, 699 issues, and 13617 pages (4440 talk and 9177 non-talk). Links: Current issue: Volume 20, Issue 12 (2024-09-04) · issue page · archive page · single-page edition · single-page talk (create) Suggest a topic To suggest a topic to be covered by The Signpost, simply click on the button below or post to our suggestions page manually. Example of good topics are Editors who have done something extraordinary/wonderful Ongoing discussions Media coverage of Wikipedia Technical news Updates to important tools and templates Wikipedia-related events but many more exist. Email a private tip to the EiC Propose/submit an article If you have an idea for an article you would like to write, you can submit it for review by the editorial team. You can do so by clicking the button below or by posting to our submissions page manually. News articles should be kept relatively neutral and report on a specific piece of actual news. They can be on any topic of interest to Wikipedians, from general events, to technical news. Opinion pieces are evaluate on originality, relevance to Wikipedians, and the quality of the arguments. They should provoke thought and encourage productive discussion. Special pieces cover things that don't fall neatly in the above two categories. If it's interesting to you, it's likely interesting to someone else as well. Check with us and we'll see what can be done! Create a draft To create a draft of an article in your userspace, simply copy-paste {{subst:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload}} at Special:MyPage/Signpost draft (replacing USERNAME with your own username). You can also use the button below. This will preload a form, which you can then save and edit. We recommend saving without making any edits to the preloaded form before starting to write your article. Calendar: current deadline is highlighted, and current UTC date is 2024-09-21 12:29:35. August 2024 Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun 29 30 31 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 01 September 2024 Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun 26 27 28 29 30 31 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 01 02 03 04 05 06 October 2024 Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun 30 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 01 02 03

Article status

Below here is an automatically generated master list of every page whose title starts with Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/. It's automatically generated by SDZeroBot every day. Also consult the mockup page for the next issue to make sure all of their titles, images and blurbs are correct.

You should click the button to manually update it and make sure it's current before doing anything serious.

Update newsroom tasks

Also, these categories ():

Ready for copyedit	Copyedit done	Final approval	Cat	#
no	no	no	Signpost drafts, not ready for copyedit	47
yes	no	no	Signpost drafts, ready for copyedit	0
yes	yes	no	Signpost drafts, ready for final check	3
yes	yes	yes	Signpost drafts, ready for publication	1

Note: The below discussions are automatically transcluded from the newsroom talk page; to comment on a draft or submission, go there and create a section with the same name (i.e. "News and notes", "Arbitration report" etc).

From the editor Not started · Content guidance + resources

Arbitration report Not started · Content guidance + resources

Comix Not started · Content guidance + resources

Cobwebs Not started · Content guidance + resources

Discussion report Not started · Content guidance + resources

Disinformation report In progress · 140b last edited 2024-09-15 15:24:22 by Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist Content guidance + resources	Checklist N Headline N Subheading N Ready for copyedit N Copyedit done N Final approval by editor-in-chief No talk page section · click here to open one

Featured content Not started · Content guidance + resources

Next featured content Not started · Content guidance + resources

From the archives Not started · Content guidance + resources

Next from the archives Not started · Content guidance + resources

Gallery Done · 12,110b last edited 2024-09-20 15:34:30 by Bri Content guidance + resources

Checklist Y Headline Y Subheading Y Copyedit done Y Final approval by editor-in-chief Discussion I'll take it a bit easy for the next issue and do the Gallery, as I want commit my time to creating a few more mainspace articles, as my two previous pieces consumed all of my 'Wikipedia-time'. The Trump piece was last-minute because I wasn't anticipating an assassination attempt, and the Twitter one was rushed since the move was relisted, and I wanted to use that headline. Svampesky (talk) 13:24, 19 August 2024 (UTC) Still ploughing though Commons with this. It will be completed well before publication deadline, and won't need much copyediting. Svampesky (talk) 20:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC) I'm fleshing out my draft (User:Svampesky/Drafts/Signpost/Luddaites). Is there a reason why paintings are used in medical articles on enwiki? I can't find anything in the policy or guidelines about it. Svampesky (talk) 19:30, 2 September 2024 (UTC) From what I can tell, they're used A. for things where a photograph wouldn't do much. A painting of Narcissus at least says something about the origin of the word narcissism. A photograph might risk the old 2000s trend of some person becoming connected with an emotion or thing. (Y'know, Overly Attached Girlfriend, etc.) Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 19:45, 13 September 2024 (UTC) On the AI image article I think this one is a cell that the AI gave its own personalised red tumour. That's... just not how cells grow. Or how cancer looks. Cancer cells don't have their own tiny tumours, for easy identification. As far as I can tell, this is based on images of cancer cells with an immune system cell attacking them (which would be the red thing - except that got turned into a tumor on the cell, because T-cells... well, just look up T-cells attacking cancer on Google images. You'll see: They just do not look like that). This tumour-on-a-cell was in a freaking article! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 10:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC) Thanks @Adam Cuerden, I'll include it. Svampesky (talk) 21:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC) I added a little context to the other awful cellular images. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 09:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Humour Not started · Content guidance + resources

Essay Not started · Content guidance + resources

Concept Not started · Content guidance + resources

Crossword Not started · Content guidance + resources

In the media In progress · 19,762b last edited 2024-09-21 12:29:23 by Oltrepier Content guidance + resources

Checklist Y Headline Y Subheading N Ready for copyedit N Copyedit done N Final approval by editor-in-chief Discussion This might be worth a mention [1]. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 17:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC) @Clovermoss Actually, I've already added it to the "In the media" section, but thank you for flagging it... and congratulations for featuring in the article! : ) Oltrepier (talk) 19:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC) We almost covered it twice! I added it too without realizing your link was to the same piece. Has been removed. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC) @Bri No worries! By the way, I did manage to write a short draft for this story, but I don't know if I'll have enough time to complete it; plus, as a Gen Z user myself, it would feel a bit strange, and maybe even braggadocious to report on an article praising young contributors... Everyone who wants to help expand the blurb is more than welcome! Oltrepier (talk) 20:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC) People who use the word "braggadocious" automatically raise suspicions. Just kidding!!! I'll try to weave some non-gen-Z perspective into it later. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC) Zionism Just wanted to flag he rewrite of the Zionism article is creating a bunch of angry emails to VRT. Probable due to articles such as https://www.jns.org/wikipedia-defines-zionism-as-colonialism-sparking-outrage/. I think it is worth a mentionsomewhere this upcoming publication. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC) Thanks, I added it to the existing Bias in religion/ethnicity related articles? bullet at In brief. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC) The historian Simon Sebag Montefiore has also criticised the changes to the Zionism article in a tweet; see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions § Suggestion by Ham II (2024-09-17). Talk:Zionism § Bat Signal has a link to another piece of news coverage, in The Jewish Press. With this much coverage I don't think the accusations of anti-Semitism/anti-Israeli bias should be lumped together with the Indian article and the one about Buddhism in a "Bias in religion/ethnicity related articles?" bullet point. Ham II (talk) 16:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

News and notes In progress · 8,859b last edited 2024-09-21 05:05:23 by Smallbones Content guidance + resources

Checklist Y Headline Y Subheading N Ready for copyedit N Copyedit done N Final approval by editor-in-chief Discussion Hello! Sorry for this very belated message, but I just wanted to let you know that Finnish MEP Henna Virkkunen is officially the candidate to serve as the Executive Vice-President for Tech-Sovereignty, Security and Democracy in the upcoming European Commission. I think this might be interesting for us, considering that Virkkunen followed the development of the Digital Services Act for the EPP. It should be noted, though, that her appointment is still subject to official hearings and approval by the European Parliament. Do you think it would be worth it to squeeze a brief blurb in the N&N section (also considering there are three lead stories already), or should we wait until she finally gets the green light? I'm tagging Jayen466 and HaeB, since they previously wrote about the DSA. Oltrepier (talk) 09:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC) On the 1st Global ban reported, there is a link to a proposed WikiNews article. It's a good article, but has not been approved for publication by Wikinews. I don't think that we can link to it. Just like people shouldn't link to, quote or republish our draft articles, we can't scoop Wikinews by linking to their own drafts. "Not published" means that it couldn't possibly be a reliable source and a global ban is a serious matter. I'd say that if the authors want to submit it here, that would be another matter, but they haven't submitted it here and stealing an article from another publication is also a serious matter, so everything would have to be done by the book. I'll write something short using SCMP and Hong Kong Journalist Association Smallbones(smalltalk) 04:23, 21 September 2024 (UTC) I would be inclined to wait so we can include the perspective of Wikimedia Europe's policy monitoring report (cf. the comments in their July issue about other EU personnel changes). In any case, as those reports show, there is usually a lot going on in EU policy that is relevant from a Wikimedia perspective, and we only cover a fraction of it in the Signpost, so highlighting a particular still speculative appointment would seem a bit uneven. Regards, HaeB (talk) 06:41, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

News from Diff Not started · Content guidance + resources

Obituary Not started · Content guidance + resources

Op-Ed Not started · Content guidance + resources

Opinion Not started · Content guidance + resources

I wanted to clarify that this column is already reserved. I've reached out to an editor to write for it, and I'll wait for them to submit it, if they choose to do so. It's unrelated to the Kolkata discussion. Svampesky (talk) 20:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC) Let's not try to preempt the discussion on the talk page. The WMF has asked (on that talk page) for some kind of reading on the community view. We shouldn't have a one-sided opinion piece in that case, we may not be able to get the other side for another month. Maybe somebody involved could present why they agree in part with both sides. Maybe we could use the Op-ed page to present a second view if this page is strongly in favor of one side. Having readers think that The Signpost favors one view is exactly the wrong thing to do right now. BTW, my reading of the talk page discussion is that almost everybody has a very strong view one way or the other, but that the outcome will be "no consensus". This one is not for us to chime in on. Smallbones(smalltalk) 22:24, 18 September 2024 (UTC) The opinion piece for the next issue is Asilvering's RfA debriefing. Svampesky (talk) 22:27, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Recent research In progress · 2,392b last edited 2024-09-15 05:33:02 by HaeB Content guidance + resources

Checklist N Headline N Subheading N Ready for copyedit N Copyedit done N Final approval by editor-in-chief Discussion As usual, we are preparing this regular survey on recent academic research about Wikipedia, doubling as the Wikimedia Research Newsletter (now in its fourteenth year). Help is welcome to review or summarize the many interesting items listed here, as are suggestions of other new research papers that haven't been covered yet. Regards, HaeB (talk) 05:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Serendipity Not started · Content guidance + resources

Technology report Not started · Content guidance + resources

Tips and tricks Not started · Content guidance + resources

Traffic report In progress · 31,741b last edited 2024-09-19 14:34:33 by Igordebraga Content guidance + resources

Checklist Y Headline Y Subheading N Ready for copyedit N Copyedit done N Final approval by editor-in-chief Discussion @Igordebraga Is it OK if I expand the write-ups for Linkin Park myself? I feel like the controversy currently surrounding the band also played a part in boosting pageviews for them and Armstrong, so I wanted to address that, as well. Oltrepier (talk) 11:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC) Go ahead, remember to put your name in the authors and remove the byline where I note the short write-ups. (almost considered adding a mention of the discussion raised by putting a female singer; but as made clear, I hate this band and wanted to say as little as possible) igordebraga ≠ 12:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC) @Igordebraga Er, unfortunately, the controversy I was referring to is much more serious than that... Anyway, thank you! Oltrepier (talk) 13:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC) Expansion This is not a criticism, just pointing it out so the Signposters are aware. There has been what I'd call noticeable expansion of the draft Traffic report, such that our published version really doesn't match the TOP25 report. The addition in that one edit was almost 10% of the original size of the Traffic report – maybe to the point where the Signpost editor should be added to the byline. We don't usually work it this way, so I'm bringing it up in case it needs discussion. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC) @Bri That's on me, sorry for that... Aside of the two write-ups on Linkin Park, where I felt like the current controversy surrounding the band was just too notable to get left on the cutting room floor (for further context, look how big is the talk page discussion about it, already), I was just trying to focus on copy-edit the blurbs and add some minor details, so I did not expect my changes to be this evident. @Igordebraga allowed me to add my name to the credit list, though, so I don't think this is going to be a big deal. Oltrepier (talk) 15:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC) Note: I've just clarified my involvement in editing both the reports on the article's page. Oltrepier (talk) 16:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC) @Oltrepier Just in future cases, you could've added your commentary to the WP:TOP25 as well. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 06:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC) @Vestrian24Bio You're right, I'll keep that in my mind for future occasions. Oltrepier (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC) Political concern This column has had trouble in the past IMHO concerning political views, but I usually let it slide. This time I think there's a real problem that could call The Signpost into question as a source of disinformation. The blurb for the Democrat U.S. presidential candidate includes the statement below: [H]er rival talked about immigrants in Ohio abducting and eating dogs and cats, as well as transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison. The first claim was debunked almost as soon as it was spoken. The problem for us is that the second half of the sentence, lumped in with the first as if it were equally absurd, is taken by many to reflect the opponent's true characterization of her position in the record. This fact is even elaborated in the last sentence at the section Political positions of Kamala Harris#Immigration, including sourcing to CNN. Just for context, here is Susan Glasser being fact checked on equating the veracity of precisely these two statements made in the debate. We should carefully consider how we may appear to take sides in this. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC) @Bri, the closest thing I can find is WP:SYNTH, is there anything closer to what you're describing? I also think there needs to be a broader discussion on how The Signpost handles WP:NPOV, which is a Wikipedia policy. I've probably violated this somewhere in my Signpost reports, but a discussion would be useful. Svampesky (talk) 18:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC) I think we have treated Traffic report somewhat like an op-ed in that there's a great deal of latitude for the authors' opinions and commentary. It would be a pretty dry report without that aspect, and I support making it more interesting and readable, including not following NPOV for this feature. We've hashed this out in the Newsroom before, and I was OK with the outcome. My significant objections in the past came up with some stuff that had let's say a preference for one nationality or one national view of the world. But this one seems different in that it clearly supports one particular candidate in an ongoing election process, and does so with debunked information from their opponent/s. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC) We can start by adding the "This report contains the opinions of its writers" disclaimer, and that should address most of my concerns. In terms of making it interesting and readable, the report should aim for a 1:1 ratio of commentary about each candidate. The article about the debate reads Harris also made some misleading and false claims during the debate, including that Trump left the succeeding administration with "the worst unemployment since the Great Depression." Harris also falsely stated that "there is not one member of the United States military who is an active duty in a combat zone", with the United States military's Central Command shortly thereafter issuing a statement that it had engaged various Houthi targets in Yemen within the past 24 hours. It could balance out the report by including something about that, where WP:DUE. Svampesky (talk) 18:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC) I generally do a "tourist view" of this column, just looking for things like this. The idea is that it always hurt my ability to copy edit when I sometimes see something that just sticks out and would have people staring at it, as well as might be against Wikipedia rules or journalistic standards. Ultimately, this job belongs to the EiC, but I just got used to doing it. I'd say it's important every 2-3 issues, so it needs to be done every issue. I'll take a look. Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC) Well the tourist view of just the Harris and Trump blurbs looks ok to me - for the the part about the pets is just fine. Yes people will just stare with their jaws dropping, but it's just the way it is, sorta like the first time you see the Statue of Liberty, or something else truly amazing. A+ reporting there. The second part is problematic. Is there a grain of truth to what DT said? If so somebody who knows more than I do about the topic should rewrite it, or just take it out. It'll leave more space for the tourists. Smallbones(smalltalk) 18:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC) I agree and thank User:Bri for raising it. We should take the second bit out or rewrite it; Trump was essentially right there. [2] (I am "old enough" to remember the Signpost's 2016 Trump debacle ...) Andreas JN466 21:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject report Not started · Content guidance + resources

Community view In progress · 1,511b last edited 2024-09-20 20:19:10 by Bri Content guidance + resources

Checklist Y Headline N Subheading N Ready for copyedit N Copyedit done N Final approval by editor-in-chief Discussion Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view Per the WMF statement: It will never be sufficient to just say, "Wikipedia is not censored"... We therefore encourage you to explain clearly why you feel the balance of interests lies one way or the other, in order to reach consensus accordingly. Not only does this enrich and support the functioning and content of the projects, but it allows the Foundation to support and explain those decisions to the extent possible, and to ensure that authorities and Wikipedia readers at large take into consideration the function and purpose of the encyclopedia when they have concerns about content. We should all collaborate on the explanation of our decision in some form. This section serves as a suggestion of how we might respond. I'm not creating the page because there is currently not a consensus that the community will respond in this way. I also don't want to imply that there's a rush to close the discussion, so the header of this section can be changed to 20:14 Community view or we can push the deadline back a few days to accommodate. Svampesky (talk) 23:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC) Pinging @Chaotic Enby, per Special:Diff/1246457628, to notify them of this section. I wasn't sure if I was allowed to just copy-and-paste your comment over. Svampesky (talk) 02:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC) I was just about to post a slightly edited version of it, thanks! (I should probably write more but it's 4am right now where I live so I might do it tomorrow) Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC) @Chaotic Enby, I've now BOLDly created the page, feel free to make your edits there. The page is currently for drafting and is not intended to rush the closure of the discussion, as consensus still needs to be formed on what our response should be. Publishing it in the Signpost, is still only a suggestion. Svampesky (talk) 03:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC) As one of the participants in the RfC, I support making it clear that, if the closing decision is to oppose inclusion, it will have very much been due to consensus supported by multiple policies and guidelines (WP:BLPNAME, WP:DUE, WP:ONUS have all been mentioned), and that pressure from the Indian government didn't play a role. Whatever its result, this RfC is explicitly not an invitation for India's Supreme Court to use legal pressure to influence Wikipedia's contents. Although, of course, individual members are welcome to participate in our consensus-building discussions like anyone else. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Forum Not started · Content guidance + resources

In focus Not started · Content guidance + resources

Special report Not started · Content guidance + resources

Interview Not started · Content guidance + resources

Update the table now

This table is generated by querying the database replica and is periodically updated by a bot.
Edits made within the table area will be removed on the next update!

Book review In progress · 10,620b last edited 2024-09-02 22:54:31 by Smallbones Content guidance + resources	Checklist Y Headline Y Subheading Y Copyedit done N Final approval by editor-in-chief No talk page section · click here to open one

---

∑ 1 items  | Query runtime: 0.03 s | Last updated: 17:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

End of auto-generated report.