Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Calendar: current deadline is highlighted, and current UTC date is 2024-10-18 18:07:02.
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
November 2024
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
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
The Signpost currently has 5593 articles, 700 issues, and 13636 pages (4446 talk and 9190 non-talk).
Current issue: Volume 20, Issue 13 (2024-09-26) · Purge
issue page · archive page · single-page edition · single-page talk (create)
Articles and pageviews for 2024-09-26
Pageviews for 2024-09-26 (V)
Subpage Title 7-day 15-day 30-day 60-day 90-day 120-day 180-day
Community view Indian courts order Wikipedia to take down name of crime victim, editors strive towards consensus 3081 3081 3081 3081 3081 3081 3081
Traffic report Jump in the line, rock your body in time 580 580 580 580 580 580 580
Serendipity A Wikipedian at the 2024 Paralympics 1758 1758 1758 1758 1758 1758 1758
Recent research Article-writing AI is less "prone to reasoning errors (or hallucinations)" than human Wikipedia editors 1369 1369 1369 1369 1369 1369 1369
Opinion asilvering's RfA debriefing 2094 2094 2094 2094 2094 2094 2094
News and notes Are you ready for admin elections? 780 780 780 780 780 780 780
In the media Indian courts order Wikipedia to take down name of crime victim, and give up names of editors 1951 1951 1951 1951 1951 1951 1951
Gallery Are Luddaites defending the English Wikipedia? 4536 4536 4536 4536 4536 4536 4536
Previous issue: 2024-09-04 · issue page · archive page · single-page edition · single-page talk
Articles and pageviews for 2024-09-04
Pageviews for 2024-09-04 (V)
Subpage Title 7-day 15-day 30-day 60-day 90-day 120-day 180-day
Gallery Luddaites defending the English Wikipedia? -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
Wikimania A month after Wikimania 2024 536 680 772 772 772 772 772
Traffic report After the gold rush 508 721 879 879 879 879 879
Serendipity What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year 635 866 1052 1052 1052 1052 1052
Recent research Simulated Wikipedia seen as less credible than ChatGPT and Alexa in experiment 1081 1330 1535 1535 1535 1535 1535
News from the WMF Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election 634 881 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002
News and notes WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked 1044 1591 2039 2039 2039 2039 2039
In the media AI is not playing games anymore. Is Wikipedia ready? 819 1128 1441 1441 1441 1441 1441
Humour Local man halfway through rude reply no longer able to recall why he hates other editor 661 987 1202 1202 1202 1202 1202


20:14 News and notes

[edit]

I just wanted to let you know that João Alexandre Peschanski, the executive director of the Wiki Movement Brazil User Group, has co-signed a collective op-ed involving more than 150 international researchers and calling for more support and protection to those who study disinformation and its perceived impact on public opinion.

Do you think this might be notable enough for N&N, or should we just mention it on the ITM column? Oltrepier (talk) 19:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems more fitting in News and notes than ITM to me, given that it isn't really originating from a news outlet. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator elections

[edit]

Enforcing "no declarations of support or opposition"

[edit]

Each candidate's page has this notice:

I'm wondering how this will be enforced, and if we should mention either the notice, or the intended enforcement, at this issue's News and notes? ☆ Bri (talk) 03:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Election guides

[edit]

I suppose we aren't going to link to election guides prepared by members of the community, but thought I'd throw it out there for discussion. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

[edit]
graphic created for AELECT barnstar

Maybe worth a mention? Maybe afterwards? ☆ Bri (talk) 18:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri Yes, we could write about those afterwards! Oltrepier (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not worth a mention, but

[edit]

I thought this video [1] was a little funny since he's showing how to avoid the sponsored links from his own newsorg. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Well, ITM is never too tight for this kind of news! : ) Oltrepier (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:14 looks kind of light

[edit]

Only four columns have been started, and we are about 76 hours from our writing deadline. Just putting this out there in case more starts are on the way. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:07, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri: I didn't come across your own thread, so sorry for that... I've also noticed that the upcoming issue is currently a bit thin on contributions, and the main columns (especially N&N) still need a lot of work.
Maybe we could postpone the deadline to two-three days later, so we could solve these issues without having to rush it.
@JPxG: How do you feel about it? Oltrepier (talk) 20:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wow we posted 1 minute apart! Was it an edit conflict? Great minds think alike. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:15, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bri I don't really see myself as a "great mind", especially after my mistake, but this is definitely astounding! : D Oltrepier (talk) 19:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:14 In the media

[edit]

Signatures at the In brief section

[edit]

I noticed this month several bulleted items at In brief have writer's signatures. It doesn't particularly bother me, but to my recollection we don't think we usually do it that way. Should they be retained, and if so, should we add them to the remainder of the items? ☆ Bri (talk) 23:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added them, since it was the practice the last few times I was a co-writer (see User:Josve05a/The Signpost). Sorry if not the standard any more - feel free to remove if that would be better. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 05:32, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bri @Josve05a Sorry, I'm reading this just now, but I wanted to let you know that I've boldly removed any signature from the section. Oltrepier (talk) 16:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Under the radar"

[edit]

I found this great illustration of literal "under the radar" flight, but decided not to use it becuase considering the background of world events, maybe we want to un-link this commentary from literal military activities. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism in 2009 book

[edit]

I added some brief coverage of that new plagiarism case. This could still benefit from some more detail; perhaps we can add a bit of Wikipedia-specific perspective to the general news media reporting on the issue. Regards, HaeB (talk) 14:45, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very important item and I'm glad you included it. The Wikipedia plagiarism specifically is now mentioned at The Telegraph, The Times of India and other first-tier international newspapers, as well as US cable news media. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:14, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Might be worth including plagiarism today's fuller analysis, seeing as this was the dude quoted by NYT and he describes that the NYT had not given all the passages over. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 13:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated, thanks. Regards, HaeB (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

gone for 1.5 days

[edit]

I'll be out of touch for most of the next 2 days. @JPxG: don't forget the book reviews! 18:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC) Smallbones(smalltalk) 18:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the media warning (Google News glitch)

[edit]

A couple of times now I've added items to In the media, that were not recent. They popped up in Google News tagged as recent: in the latest case, Google News said a nine year old item was from 2 days ago. Just a caution to others not to get caught by this like I was. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google News has been completely cooked the last couple years or so. They have been messing with it for unclear reasons -- if you search for a string with quotation marks in it, it will now just start returning completely random dog shit: blogs, tiktoks, facebook posts, formatted like news sites. Their documentation gives no explanation for this other than the implied "get bent". I basically stopped writing articles about recent events because it's been made unusable, although it is not as bad now as it was a year or two ago (some genius decided that it should just return tiktoks for every search whatsoever). jp×g🗯️ 20:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:14

[edit]

Setting this forward -- I have some stuff from WCNA and am contemplating an interview/letter. jp×g🗯️ 14:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been away from my computer with IRL stuff. Another book review has been submitted, so I think we should publish them in the in the 'Book review' column with the earliest on top. I can write a humor piece that pokes fun at how we've mentioned this book in every of the past few issues. To make it clear, I support the book reviews being published, so the humor column will be self-deprecating. Does anybody have objections? Svampesky (talk) 16:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Svampesky Sounds good!
By the way, sorry for my very limited contributions this time around... Oltrepier (talk) 09:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forward again to be on the safe side rather than over publication deadline. jp×g🗯️ 23:46, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for keeping the deadline updated. We have been running a bit late with the preparations for RR, but I should have some time later today to get it in a publishable form before the deadline. I see there is also work still to do in N&N and ITM - I might be able to pitch in there too, but probably not before the deadline. Regards, HaeB (talk) 17:06, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who wrote the bit about the latest WikiConference North America over at ITM? Somebody forgot to add their signature, but I couldn't find any information from the talk page...
@Bri @HaeB @Josve05a @Gråbergs Gråa Sång @Robertsky Oltrepier (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Found it [2], added attribution to @Smallbones. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help copyediting?

[edit]

Spamming everyone listed as copyeditors on our staff page, @Gerald Waldo Luis, Headbomb, Isaacl, and Adam Cuerden: – both In the media and News and notes still need to be signed off, if you can help. Thanks! ☆ Bri (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a late submission, and a bunch of stuff still needing to get done; I have somewhere to be tonight, so I guess I will just put the damn thing forward another day. jp×g🗯️ 01:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
😿 jp×g🗯️ 02:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bri @JPxG Just so you know, I've managed to go through both ITM and N&N and do some more copy-editing myself: I hope this makes up for my deeply underwhelming contributions this time around...
On a side note, I must say I'm impressed with how the In the media column has turned out: it sounds like a very rich and interesting read! Oltrepier (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Oltrepier! Just to clarify for others reading along who might be inclined to help out too: Both ITM and N&N are still not yet marked as copyedited - see the Article status list - and (more importantly) still contain several open to-do items, look for the yellow markings. (I resolved one in N&N while also correcting a mistake, and may be able to help out with more, but will focus on getting RR publishable first.) Regards, HaeB (talk) 04:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the outstanding highligted to-dos in News and notes and it is ready for (another?) copyedit. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, things are shaping up a little better, I will have another go at it shortly. jp×g🗯️ 19:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably idiotic disclosure

[edit]

I started an article on The Editors, duly logged with my other September creations, and it got deleted. IMHO this has nothing to do with anything, but there it is on the record. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:14 Recent research

[edit]

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) 16:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this missed the writing deadline, in fact it is now 3 hours past the publishing deadline. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, the paper I was writing up during the time I had earlier today turned out to be a bit trickier to review than expected. I'm back at this now, but am also not offended if the issue goes out without it in the meantime. (That said, several other sections also still look unfinished at this point or are at least marked as needing copyedits.)
Regards, HaeB (talk) 04:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there somewhere the intermediate versions of the column are kept? It may help things out for others to be able to contribute to it during the writing process. jp×g🗯️ 01:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure this is what you mean, but the Etherpad has starting ideas and can be used for drafting. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I always post the Etherpad link here inviting people to contribute, which also helps to keep track of which papers are being worked on (and which are not). As for posting partial drafts and unfinished notes on-wiki, we don't do that for most other Signpost stories either, and I'm generally unconvinced that it would speed up the process (in fact it might well slow it down). That said, I did in fact post an intermediate version yesterday after seeing JPxG's question (and knowing that I would not be able to resume work on it for a bit), with remaining to-do items marked - but except for one typo fix (thanks Smallbones!) this doesn't seem to have had an effect. (Btw for context about this particular review and its timing: This is about a very recent paper which I had tweeted about on Monday based on a quick skim only - as we usually do on the WikiResearch feed -, and which has received quite a bit of attention since, e.g. [3]. After reading the paper more fully, I think it would be valuable for us to provide timely context in form of a full review; in the "Wikimedia AI" Telegram group, folks raised questions about the paper's results too.)
I'm back at this now and should have RR publishable within less than two hours from now.
Regards, HaeB (talk) 00:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A book that plagiarized Wikipedia

[edit]

Hi fellows. I think that this book chapter deserves a mention in Signpost. Its available from WPLibrary. I tried to summarize the findings from chapter 4, that deals with our entries. Learn about it after this excerpt in Retraction Watch: "A look at plagiarism at the Pontifical Gregorian University".

References

  1. ^ Michael V. Dougherty (21 May 2024). New Techniques for Proving Plagiarism: Case Studies from the Sacred Disciplines at the Pontifical Gregorian University. Leiden, Boston: Brill Publishers. doi:10.1163/9789004699854. ISBN 978-90-04-69985-4. LCCN 2024015877. Wikidata Q126371346.
  2. ^ Kidane Dawit Worku (2012). The Ethics of Zär'a Ya'eqob: A reply to the historical and religious violence in the seventeenth century Ethiopia. Tesi Gregoriana, Serie Filosofia 30. Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana. ISBN 978-88-7839-222-9. OL 43974394M. Wikidata Q126414328.

Cheers! Ixocactus (talk) 22:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:14 Contest

[edit]

The article contains a big pile of MOS:FLAGRELEVANCE violations. However a) I know that The Signpost doesn't necessarily follow formatting rules employed in the rest the encyclopedia article space and b) I might be going out on a limb already in aggressively addressing this in beauty pageant articles so I will stop with this comment. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you @Bri & @Smallbones for helping copyedit. that section of the article is a copy-paste of a talk page comment not written by me, and i have no opinion on whether the flagicons stay or go - it's not in mainspace, so i think it's up to our preference more than anything in the MOS. courtesy pinging @GreenLipstickLesbian in case she has any thoughts. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 21:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good title and image? I'll try but please replace as needed. Smallbones(smalltalk) 21:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ready when you are!

[edit]
"Tourists taking photos of a horse's ass at Rievaulx Terrace, Yorkshire" would have made a good Humour illustration.

@HaeB, JPxG, and Bri: With a few exceptions, I think this issue is ready to go!

  • HaeB, I know you want to complete Recent research, but your review is pretty good already.
  • JxPG The tripartite book review needs to be copyedited (bottom 2 reviews only IMHO). Also we need to let the reader know that 3 reviews are coming about the same book. Otherwise they might be surprised. So a Simple 3 line editor's introduction up top would be enough, explaining why we have 3 reviews (without overwhelming the reader). Yeah, there might be a few things with pics, titles, etc.
  • Bri Just 'cause I always ping you when something needs to get done.

Smallbones(smalltalk) 22:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

taking a nap and waiting on a final submission and will then be ready jp×g🗯️ 07:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I think you need to hold up publication for a bit and reconsider. Smallbones(smalltalk) 15:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oh? D: ... sawyer * he/they * talk 15:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because of humour, or something else? I got part way through the book review copyedit but didn't finish. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've been drafting it off-wiki with JPxG's approval to make sure everything is appropriate and kept general. Svampesky (talk) 15:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]