Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Feedback

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Video Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Feedback

Congratulations

Congratulations. Good idea well implemented. Wikipedia must be great to compensate for, without wasting too much time searching. I would be interested in writing articles occasionally. Ã,: ChrisG 20:13, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Congrats on me too. I hope to be a diligent reader.-gadfium 21:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Congrats on me too - I really enjoy this, and hope to see it flourish. I will keep my eyes open for things I can contribute. Catherine \ ^talk 07:37, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Congrats on me too. I hope to contribute sometimes. Are we going to go with gossip columns, small ads and mail pages ??? Apwoolrich 08:33, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Want to create rich Wikipedia? Start this: Wikipersonals, and charge $ 4.99 to register. Blair P. Houghton 21:15, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Let me add to the chorus; I enjoyed reading this, and it was very well done. Jayjg | (Talk) 21:45, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This is cool :) Dan100 00:12, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes very useful, well done. Paul August? 19:26, February 11, 2005 (UTC)

Maps Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Feedback

Description

Hello. I think that kind of newspaper on Wikipedia is very useful (mostly for those who do not stay every day on it but want to keep in touch with the project). I do not know how you would handle the archive but it might be interesting to save an old article somewhere. I would say that, for every link in the article on the main page, one should be able to know a little more in the article: when it was written and what the actual topic was. Do not forget that wp is read by audiences around the world and your English should be "simple" (I know, "simple" prose is harder to write, takes more time, but is worth the effort: it is often the way to write beautiful prose , here I am not criticizing the article body that is clear and precise, but their header, because I have to follow the links to make sure I understand the topic). One more: I often use "status bar" to check what connects with what, so I want the article file name not to be an obscure abbreviation. I think the publication date plus one or two keywords could be better. Anyway, good idea and good work. I am often completely lost in what is "happening" in wp, what are the major changes and events. Here, I will find this info. gbog 05:15, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Good work, Michael

When I saw the announcement of this project I was a little skeptical that there was a niche for it. The depth and quality of your writing prove me completely wrong. I really like it (and not just because you chose to quote me in one of the articles :). A small suggestion-

When it comes to the idea of ​​how best to integrate (if at all) events and signs, please also consider the future of Wikipedia: An announcement that has died since the incident began.

For maintenance purposes, consider using the subpage of the SignPost/Problem X form/Article title instead of the current SignPost/Article title.

Pcb21 | Pete 12:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I've been thinking about what roles the Announcements page may have as well. Brockert above mentions the ongoing issue of things like the new admin, which is currently hosted on Go-on. I wonder if such material (ie a brief administration announcement that does not really have news behind them) might be moved back to Announcements, while Plang takes over the news-report function from Goings-on, which could then be stopped from service.

The exact schema for organizing and naming subpages has not been determined, but I anticipate archiving by any issues, possibly in a way similar to your suggestion. --Michael Snow 20:06, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Agree fully with Pcb21. I was also skeptical at first, but now I think it's great! It's done well! - Chris 73 Talk 04:29, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

​​â € <â €

I stumbled onto Signpost today (I must have missed the memo) and how nice it was. For a typical user (vs. Wikiholic) he provides brief information about "None" events. I feel more like an "insider" without having to spend my energy/time on the arbitration page. I love your NPOV editorial style - very similar to a newspaper. Well done and thank you. hydnjo talk 23:41, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks also from me. After going for several weeks, it is the easiest way to pursue WikiHappenings, and it's very well written. Applause! - Matt Crypto 14:17, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

What they say. Thank you. - Hajor 14:39, 11 February 2005 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

wow

Michael I just want to say that your neutral writing is very good . --Alterego 17:40, February 14, 2005 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Issue 9 May?

Will there be a new edition this week? Just curious - I'm always looking forward to reading the Signboard every week! - Knowledge Finder? 06:46, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

1 August issue

I just want to know where the problem this week? Thryduulf 16:45, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

It's been delayed a bit because Worldtraveller has a technical glitch messing with his work, and I'm still trying to figure out if one other story will happen. It seems like it will be a smaller problem than normal once it's ready, which will hopefully be soon. --Michael Snow 17:09, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Current problem size

Congratulations to everyone for a larger than usual coverage of this event. Keep up the good work!

Ã, ^talk 22:43, October 27, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I love the long edition this week. Fantastic. Babajobu 23:03, October 27, 2005 (UTC)

The biggest problem ever, actually. Good work for everyone... Michael Snow wrote a ton of articles this week, Flcelloguy continues his ArbCom series, and Karmafist writes articles for the first time this week. Ral315 (talk) 04:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)




src: upload.wikimedia.org




Happy Christmas Day !!




src: upload.wikimedia.org




Only thanks from me to the people who wrote for the signpost. I usually stop by to see what's happening in the Wikipedia world. Keep up the great work. - Akamad 12:55, January 17, 2006 (UTC)



src: upload.wikimedia.org




Thanks

I just want to thank everyone for the good work on the signpost! -Mirir, 3:18, January 18, 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your thanks! Glad to know work is appreciated. - Catherine \ ^talk 20:52, January 21, 2006 (UTC)

I want to say thank you too. Signpost is good! Ã, :-) --unforgettableid | talk to me 03:02, 5 February 2006 (UTC)



src: upload.wikimedia.org




Great!

Hey, I just want to say that this week's signpost is the most written issue I've seen so far! (I guess I can forgive you for being late with it lately.) May I suggest that you start saying that new problems come out on Tuesday, so when they do not come on Monday, people will not be disappointed. It's kind of stupid advice, but it's up to you. JaredW 12:19, February 1, 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment; we all contribute to appreciate it. I'm not sure about the date change - it would be something for Michael Snow or Ral315 to decide. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 20:57, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

We just need to do a better job following the schedule. --Michael Snow 22:53, February 1, 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Ral315 (talk) 19:11, 6 February 2006 (UTC)




src: upload.wikimedia.org




TROLL (Report on Litigation Length)

I will keep my two uncles here and say that I am always a little nervous about this name as well. I do not have time to figure out what it means, but my concern is the implication that arbitration is all about trolls, which is very far from the case. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to driver 11:20, February 8, 2006 (UTC) We use the "Report on Litigation Long" mainly. That the acronym is more a joke than anything. If you can not imagine that it is an arbitrage case by looking at the title, just looking at the story pretty much makes it clear. Ral315 (talk) 18:22, February 9, 2006 (UTC)

My sentiment is exactly like OpenToppedBus. I always try to avoid the word troll so avoid the possibility of personal attacks. If it's never used in its acronym then I'm fine with a joke inside, but the word troll is not necessary. - Taxman ^Talk 19:04, February 9, 2006 (UTC)

The only place the acronyms use is a navigation link at the bottom of each story, which needs to use the abbreviation title. If we find a suitable replacement there, will it be satisfactory? --Michael Snow 19:19, February 9, 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it will be fine, and I really have no big problems with it, I just never thought it was a very good idea either. - Taxman ^Talk 20:21, February 9, 2006 (UTC)

In accordance with Taxman, I also have no big problem with it, which is why I did not discuss it until someone questioned it. I certainly would not mind saving the name if the acronym is not used. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 09:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

TROLL and BRION are fine. Relax, man. If you are "enough" to recognize that there is a joke there, then it is not a "joke" at your expense. --FOo 10:12, February 10, 2006 (UTC)



src: upload.wikimedia.org




Weekly release date

The tagging board seems to be released on the day after the date stamp of the article. For example, this week's marker has a Feb. 27 time stamp, but is not available until the 28th (it may be available at night in the US = night in the EU). It seems to be more intuitive for me if the signs are available on the day of the timestamp, such as the newspaper where the 27th edition of February is an issue available on the morning of the 27th. Thue | talking 15:31, March 1, 2006 (UTC)

Well, Signboards are released weekly, summarize the events of the previous week, and Monday is the date of copy and date stamp. Inevitable, some articles are not ready by 0:01 UTC on Monday, let alone 0:01 local time for New Zealand, etc., (some Wikipedia do have life on weekends, some writers are in US) and things slip a bit past the deadline, like the way things are. Like most readers in Europe, I think, I usually read it on Tuesday, but I think the Monday date stamp is fine: think of it as identifying the week of trouble, rather than the day of trouble. - ALoan (Talk) 16:08, March 1, 2006 (UTC)

Why was not it released on Tuesday? -Copying 17:33, March 1, 2006 (UTC)

Yes, to be exact. When at first you do not succeed, redefine successÃ, :). I mean, seriously, just change the official weekly release date to Tuesday, and if not, continue as you do. Thue | talking 19:35, March 2, 2006 (UTC)

I'm still not sure why this is a problem... - ALoan (Talk) 20:36, March 2, 2006 (UTC)

Because the current release date is misleading. People looking for the next problem from the signpost will expect it the day before it is available. Thue | talking 08:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I've worked harder to get my article done on time (I found the FoxClocks Firefox extension, which gives me extra browser hours set to UTC/Wikipedia time, which helps.) Will put the Delivery and Assignment deadline on the Newsroom Page help the contributors to setting things up in a timely fashion? - Catherine \ ^talk 20:22, March 1, 2006 (UTC)

I can do that. Ral315 (talk) 00:55, March 2, 2006 (UTC)






admin admin currently

I think it would be better if, in addition to the list of users who passed RfA last week, we also include users who are ready for RfA at press time. I do not often go to RfA, usually only if I know the people involved. I read Signpost every week, and sometimes find that I have lost RfA that I really want to choose. what do you think? -supplier ^talk 12:39, March 28, 2006 (UTC)

Support. I sometimes have the same needs, so I regularly check VfA pages, and I would love to read them on the nameplate. - Chris 73 | Talk 15:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

In addition, I found that saving the User summary: Dragons flight/RFA in my watchlist is a good way to track RFA at this time. Leith p 15:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Gosh - a very useful page.

In the spirit of sharing, I found Wikipedia: No angry mastodons and Wikipedia: Beware of the tiger yesterday. - ALoan (Talk) 15:30, March 28, 2006 (UTC)




• Weakly opposed. I think it might be a bit overwhelming, considering Dragon Flight and the ability to type RfA into the search box. But still, this is not the worst idea or anything. young Americans (talk) 15:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
• Conditional support; requires a lightweight copyedit. - ALoan (Talk) 15:30, March 28, 2006 (UTC)
• I personally do not see the need to enter RFA at this time... if people do not bother checking it once a week, then that's their fault. Someone named admin is newsworthy; someone who applied no, in my opinion. Ral315 (talk) 18:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Ral315, it's as simple as writing WP: RFA and seeing TOCs quickly... Mi kk er ^... 19:09, 28 March 2006 (UTC)






Features & amp; admin

For a recently displayed and imperfect image, article et al, I think you should link to the nomination as well as the item itself, similar to how you link to both the user and nomination pages for RfAs. I am lime to read the nominees. :) pfctdayelise (translated?) 13:37, March 31, 2006 (UTC)

Can be done. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 16:33, May 9, 2006 (UTC)






B.R.I.O.N. - Software

The Bugs, Repairs and Internal Operational News section is great for users who want to keep up with some of the administrative issues that are happening behind the scenes, but it seems to cover the hardware with enough bias. What's wrong with adding something to report changes to the software; which often happens, and which end users are not often notified? Rob Church (talk) 14:37, April 9, 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure Ral315, who wrote that part, will be happy to report the change, if he is made aware to them. Raul654 17:19, April 9, 2006 (UTC)

It is true that the scope of technical issues, either by Ral315 or myself, always comes from people who are not sufficiently involved in them to do justice. We will be glad if anyone is more familiar with the things that can give us information or even help in writing this report. --Michael Snow 04:11, April 10, 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, I'd love to. Is there an easy way to get new fixed bugs, like server admin logs? Ral315 (talk) 06:34, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

One of them has the necessary details, which... do not know - [1] according to Consanguinity in # wikimedia-tech [2] -Ravedave 05:51, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

There is a Subversion log commit, and also a mailing list tracked by bug trackers. If the volume is too high (and they can be very busy) then I have no problem with giving you a list of things that are changed or corrected every week; I'll go and review the log now and put something together. Rob Church (talk) 15:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

It would be interesting to hear if any new server has been purchased/installed. As far as I can see from the serverlist there has not been a new server since last year, although there has been a huge fundraiser earlier this year. Ulflarsen 17:00, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

That would be greatly appreciated, Rob - thanks! Wherever you build your list, drop the link in the News Room, and it will be included in the next Signboard of the next issue. - Catherine \ ^talk 15:54, April 19, 2006 (UTC)

Done I will negotiate with Domas Mituzas about getting the purchase info. available, when he's around. Rob Church (talk) 00:40, April 22, 2006 (UTC)




Wikimania Report

Just a hint that Wikipedia: Wikipedia Signpost/2006-04-10/Wikimania reports are not connected from WP: POST. I do not want to stuff the beautiful formats so I have not done it myself... enochlau (talk) 12:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

There is a link on the main page for me... - Pureblade | ^? 16:31, April 12, 2006 (UTC)

There is also. What am I thinking... enochlau (talk) 16:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)






PUBLISHING!

Are the signs ready for publication ?! Otherwise, when is the publication time (late 11 1/2 hours).

- P ri m a t e # 101 04:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Adil pergi... itu hanyalah hanya Paskah! - Ta bu shi da yu 04:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)






Menyoroti pembaruan secara visual

I would like to suggest that somehow we highlight Signpost when it is a new update (Monday). My eyes tend to pass through (in the community portal), because the layout is homogeneous enough from week to week, and I only remember to check it occasionally.

My own peculiar suggestion is to lighten the font with the shadows on Wednesday and Saturday, then on Monday it becomes black again, making it visually appear. But I'm sure you can compile something better :)

Just a thought. -Quiddity 20:31, May 17, 2006 (UTC)

Watchlist is your friend. :) Rebecca 20:44, May 17, 2006 (UTC)

Alternatively, you may want to join our "message" list and receive updates to your user's talk page. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 21:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I mean more to the benefit of others. To improve the casual reader. As I thought it was a common problem. Maybe something as simple as adding a "Fresh on Monday" line, or something similar? Or a second "Signpost" logo with different colors, and both can alternate each week. See what I mean? -Quiddity 22:11, May 17, 2006 (UTC)

I understand what you mean now. Well, it includes the issue/volume number and publication date in the template, so in each update they will change. I'm not sure if people want different colors; first, it will be difficult to determine when the "new" problem becomes "old", and some people may see the color as tacky and tacky. I am open to suggestions, though.Ã, :-) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 23:34, May 17, 2006 (UTC)

Very few variations. for example. 1 black, 1 dark blue. Every monday you will change to another.

I imagine a boy 1920 in the corner, shouting "Extra, extra! read all about it!" Ã, :)

Or other ideas from logos that get a little grayer for a week. Then suddenly black again on Monday.

Just a few ideas, I'll leave them to sink in;) -Quiddity 06:11, May 18, 2006 (UTC)

I like the two-colored idea back and forth, or maybe the color for the moon's ninth edition. Maybe just a little red 'Red' icon for 24 hours after it's updated. -Saving 15:21, May 18, 2006 (UTC)






deep jokes

I do not find acronyms that are very funny but highly contrived (like T.R.O.L.L.) on a very helpful content page. For the benefit of broader accessibility, it would be better to remove jokes and rename the titles to the names of the pages they point to (such as Arbitration Reports). This is mainly because the content list, as it appears on Wikipedia: Community Portal, is one click away from the main page, so it should be more outgoing. thanks. Random user name 21:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

There was some previous discussion about this. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 00:59, June 6, 2006 (UTC)

There may be, but I must say that I agree with the Arbitrary username. It's not too funny and looks unprofessional. Rebecca 02:39, June 6, 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the acronym is highly contrived. But that's what makes it fun. I am not personally trying to make this Wall Street Journal or The Times. This is a joke in a community that's been there for almost a year and a half, and one that most people forget without knowing its significance. I guess I do not see how someone recognizes an acronym as "TROLL" (if they do) can be unfriendly. Ral315 (talk) 06:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, I use "outsiders" in the context of accessibility. I certainly do not think the acronym is "unfriendly" in a hostile sense, but that is less helpful than a more descriptive title. Random user name 16:04, June 8, 2006 (UTC)

I think the fact that they've been around for a year and a half can also mean that the joke is a bit stale, though I'm really flattered by asking everyone to imitate my original model. What I tend to suggest is that we continue the acronym through Wikimania this year, so as not to interfere with its use for that particular series, and then gracefully retire it. I'm sure we can still find a way to inject a bit of fun into Signs . --Michael Snow 16:25, June 8, 2006 (UTC)

T.R.O.L.L. does not seem to be too professional when taken in the context of WP properties that are different from conservative publications such as the Wall Street Journal. There seems to be a usefulness in a cute and light approach to the area that is often heated, and that is consistent with the general view of WP readers and editors.-- Nectar 17:04, June 8, 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Users: Arbitrary usernames and Users: Rebecca that acronyms are contrived and unprofessional. Also, I did not realize at first that they were acronyms, and I changed the capitalization [3] only to be returned and was told that it was an acronym. Well, in that case, they should be explicitly displayed like that, and I made this change instead [4], just to be restored again. I do not understand the reasoning behind this. If the editor supports the use of acronyms, then why try to hide them, make capitalization look very weird and unprofessional for viewers from the Goalkeepards who do not know the acronyms? And if my change is returned because it explicitly noted the acronym makes the sign board look unprofessional, then does that not raise the question of whether we should use the acronym altogether in the first place? --Lowellian (reply) 11:33, June 12, 2006 (UTC)

I would be interested to know why you would think that internal bulletins for the fun and enlightenment of Wikipedia contributors should look "professional". This is not the kind of road where we want to start the journey, because the next thing is war-editing between groups of people with their own ideas about what is "professional". This is not a place to enforce strict nomenclature, it should be fun and informative. HTH HAND --Phil | Speak 13:34, June 12, 2006 (UTC)

Ditto Phil. I do not see what's wrong with jokes, considering this is a publication for home consumption. It's like suggesting a company bulletin should not make references to internal terminology that no outsider will ever get. (Of course, this newsletter is publicly shameless, nevertheless, its first audience is a Wikipedia editor.) If we want to change the acronym, then we should find a better reason for (for example, a better title?) Than they only a joke or self-reference. Johnleemk | Talk 13:40, June 12, 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Keep their titles just fine. It's not a press release or a wikinews, so the joke is fine. I remember, when I knew the title was B.R.I.O.N and Brion Vibber was one of the main developers. -Watching 14:25, June 12, 2006 (UTC)

If that should be fun and informative, how about coming up with something good a) fun or b) informative? This is just annoying. Rebecca 06:41, June 13, 2006 (UTC)

I really like Signpost. These are generally well written, and I really appreciate the work of those who contribute to it. It plays an invaluable role in keeping the most involved Wikipedia editor well informed, but more than that: it is also a newspaper for the larger Wikipedia community of ordinary editors, and extends beyond that, to the point that sometimes, Sometimes Viewers from Wikipedia read it outside and outside bloggers and media/news agencies use it as a reference and source of information. Thus, I want to be as good as possible. Of course it should look professional! Otherwise, let's dispose of good grammar and spell windows as well. --Lowellian (reply) 18:30, June 13, 2006 (UTC)






Given other comments...

I just want to give you a note and say that, in general, I think you all do a very good job with this. People tend to focus on issues with the Wikipedia newsletter, not paying, and not on the exciting stories that are released every week by the free Wikipedia newsletter and do not pay this. By the way, that's it, keep up the good work :) - Jersyko Ã, Â · talk 13:06, June 12, 2006 (UTC)




Laudatio

• 1: You did a great job!
• 2: Thanks for mentioning the two logo contests I've pioneered, hopefully we'll get more feedback right now. =]

- a llion (?) 06:15, June 13, 2006 (UTC)




• I want to add my praise. TWS is a very good idea. - Heartofgoldfish 16:21, June 25, 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support Wikipedia Signpost is the best way to keep the community informed! --Donar Reiskoffer 18:59, June 25, 2006 (UTC)
• 100% agree - great job, bookmark :-) The self-compulsory reading every Tuesday, I'm looking forward to it! Ta bu shi da yu 14:02, June 26, 2006 (UTC)





One-page version date not updated

For some reason, the date on WP: POST/1 has not been updated: new articles for July 3, 2006 are all there but the top header still says "June 26, 2006". I've used the "cleanup" link to make sure it's useless. Not a big deal, but there's a mistake somewhere.

(And BTW, thank you very much for that one-page version I have suggested it a few months ago, and it has been done, what, 6 hours later?

- 62.147.113.238 01:31, July 5, 2006 (UTC)

I only need to edit (which I just did). This is a wiki - you can fix the error yourself! - ALoan (Speech) 11:35, July 5, 2006 (UTC)

But, as I understand, the One-page version is generated from the Multi-page version automatically by transclusion, not by hand; not the header The one-page version (and the date) also automatically comes from the Multi-page version? - In other words, I think it's a bug in the transclusion process that produces a Single-page version, a bug that will skip the header and date. Thus, I think that fixing it on its own will not help in the long run, compared to reporting bugs. Oh, all right, sorry. - 62.147.113.80 12:16, July 5, 2006 (UTC)

No problem - content is transcluded automatically, but the sing-page version is manually updated to retrieve articles for relevant issues, to update the index, and to change the date (see the history page). Anyhow, thank you for showing it. - ALoan (Talk) 13:15, July 5, 2006 (UTC)

Oh, right, I understand. But then, I think it should be possible to avoid duplicate TOP Signpost by making it into subpages like articles, and using in it three template variables (for subtitles, links to other versions, and shortcuts), so to call from both front pages, :

 {{Wikipedia: Wikipedia Signpost/2006-07-03/TOC |  Â| subtitle = Multi-Page Views  Â| switchlink =  Single Page View   Â| shortcut = WP: POST  }}  

And:

 {{Wikipedia: Wikipedia Signpost/2006-07-03/TOC |  Â| subtitle = One-Pageviews  Â| switchlink =  Home   Â| shortcut = WP: POST/1  }}  

Just a thought. - 62.147.113.80 13:58, July 5, 2006 (UTC)

Where is B.R.I.O.N.????

There is no B.R.I.O.N. for two problems now... I miss... Jon Harald SÃÆ'¸by 14:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. -Mirate 16:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

On this topic, I'm working on it, but Rob Church, who used to give me articles about software changes, left last month, so it's hard to do. Ral315 (talk) 18:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Have you tried differentiating release notes each week? If you download a Subversion client, you should be able to do that, and since any trivial changes should be added to the release notes, you should get a list of things that are reasonably changed. - Symmetrical (talk about) 22:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Anyone tried to email him how he collected it? -Mirate 01:22, August 5, 2006 (UTC)

There are * LOTS * information circulating from the days of hacking. Raul654 18:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you can ask Brion Vibber, or Tim Starling if they will provide you with software information. C a rm el apple 22:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems that you do not need an SVN client after all. Here's a link to the changes made on the release notes since July 17th. Is it useful? --Simetrical (talkÃ, o contribs) 04:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

To some extent. The only thing is not weekly. Someone tapped JeLuF about this a day or two ago; if nothing happens, I'll pinch Brion or Tim. Ral315 (talk) 05:30, August 8, 2006 (UTC)

You can make it weekly. Just go here (take a long time to load), find the version before you want the earliest changes (ie, recent changes included in previous BRION), click "choose to diff" next to it, wait a few seconds for the page to reload , find the top revision, and click "diff to selected #####". --Simetrical (talkÃ, o contribs) 19:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)






Next problem

Is everything okay with a pointing board? When will the next issue mature? - Ta bu shi da yu 22:19, September 5, 2006 (UTC)

Ral has not logged in yet; and if he does not go in the next few hours, someone may have to cover it up. All items have been proofreaded, and moved for publication, only he has not signed in to finish his article and do the finishing touches on aritcles. The problem had to be out at 03:00, if Ral was not one of them. Should Ral login before that he will publish. Some of the stories that can be seen in the newsroom are not finished like wikicharts etc. ForestH2 t/h/c 00:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Published. ForestH2 t/h/c 02:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Bumper issues: worth the wait! Great people work. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)






Let's drop the title "Good Article" , eh?

Almost every report on foreign foreigners has mentioned that they do not have the same good article or deWiki. It's clear that almost everyone has some standard form of Featured Articles, but almost no one has something like GAs. So why continue to mention it unless they do it? --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - & lt; * & gt; 17:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Good point, though I think the point is partly to emphasize that GA's standard is still in its early stages because it has not been adopted by many languages. I fully expect to hold many other wikis in the next 3-6 months. Ral315 (talk) 03:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Can also illustrate that GA is never a good idea and is ignored by 200 other wikis... --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - & lt; * & gt; 02:50, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Missing: Wikipedia in the news

Why is this section missing from this edition? Is not anyone writing a new article about us this week ?? Or do we need more volunteer power to 'post? - _{Piotr Konieczny aka Proconsul PiotrusÃ, | Ã, talk} 02:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

More volunteers always help. This week, nobody took it and I can not get it, so we publish it without it. We've never actually done it every week since July, so if someone wants to handle it, that's good. Ral315 (talk) 03:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I would love to take part because I consider that part as one of the most interesting and valuable :) What are templates, tips (Google News: Wikipedia?) etc. for info on where to find a new story? - _{Piotr Konieczny aka Proconsul PiotrusÃ, | conversÃ,} 17: 43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

TrÃÆ'¶del actually just offered to do it this week. Do not hesitate to help him in that, or if you see an article that is worth a full story (I think the Jimbo/China censorship story in this week's news will get the full article, for one thing), go ahead and destroy it there.

To find stories where, we mostly use Google News and such in the past. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Ral315 (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, just a note, there were not many stories in the news last week; so it's not worth it for an article. If you remember we published 9/6 so there are only a few days for an ITN story, and nothing really big. pine ^t 23:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Tnx for info. Where is the draft article being prepared? - _{Piotr Konieczny aka Proconsul PiotrusÃ, | Ã, talk} 04:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Some people gather articles on Wikipedia: Press coverage, if you need a list. - Symmetry (talk) 21:23, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Trodel does this here. User talk: Sugarpine 23:03, September 17, 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I am out of doing this one; I'm a little tired of that and then busy summer is full of paying jobs... when I do it regularly, I find it useful to subscribe to Google alerts (search Google News for "wikipedia", then search for "Warning News" in your sidebar can set up separate alerts for "according to Wikipedia" or "Jimmy Wales" or whatever suits your taste Then you get a daily summary email there is news about us, and if you're smart you can collect a little every day for "In the news "instead of fighting night/morning before the deadline. Ã, :) Also makes it easy to watch duplicate stories (many stories are syndicated or reprinted), and you get what the BIG story is. There are some unknown sources that are cataloged by Google; we do not need to report everything. And remember that Google does not get everything; I always try to do a quick search on Yahoo News or the like before closing it. BBC News is also great for capturing non-US stories. I also save Wikipedia: Pump village (news), Wikipedia: Press coverage and Wikipedia: Wikipedia as the 2006 press source (and the linked page in the sidebar) on my watchlist to catch things recorded by other Wikipedians. Hope that helps - Catherine \ ^talk 02:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion - TrÃÆ'¶del 03:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)






Tech report

Just wondering why Tech's report is no longer a regular tap. Not enough important stuff? - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 20:58, October 24, 2006 (UTC)

More like no one has the time and talent to write it. We want to revive him if anyone wants to step in and volunteer. --Michael Snow 06:52, October 31, 2006 (UTC)






"Litigation"

Is it possible to rename the article "Litigation" into something in connection with the Arbitration Committee? When I see that I think it's talking about real litigation and someone has sued Wikipedia... Just H 01:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It's kind of funny (depending on the person who judges) the acronym. Arbitration, in practice, is roughly equivalent to litigation, in fact, although it is not mentioned as such. Ral315 (talk) 12:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)






Subscribe

Do not know where else to ask but my subscriptions to Bookmarks seem to have stopped. Curious as to what might happen. I have missed reading. thanks. Ekotkie 01:08, March 26, 2007 (UTC)




My agreement...

... to anyone who makes comments about the color of legal writing. 68.39.174.238 19:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

This will be a reference to the latest article about a court quote written by Michael Snow. I imagine that, as a lawyer himself, he may have experienced a flashback of law school and needs to solve some problems: P - BanyanTree 19:39, January 31, 2007 (UTC)






Good work

Just wanted to thank everyone who wrote/edited/published Signpost-it made great reading, especially helping to stay up to date with great things while I was not very active :) Petros471 14:33, April 24, 2007 (UTC )




Historians detained after the Wikipedian article was destroyed

This Plang article says:

This story was first reported by the Minneapolis Star Tribune on February 21, but received little attention (the original article is not available online, but the quote is available here). The story was published by professor Juan Cole in an April 14 blog post. On April 15th,

But in fact, two days after being reported in the Star Tribune, I mentioned here on this page of talks. However, only in April appears on the sign board. I will put it there in February, but I am completely unfamiliar with Plang's convention. I think someone who is familiar and who is editing Plang will find it worth mentioning there.

Should I conclude that those who edit the Chalkboard pay more attention to Juan Cole's blog than this talk page? Michael Hardy 17:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Michael, I'm sorry we missed your suggestion, but actually you did not post it to this talk page. Looking through your contribution, I found that you left a note on Wikipedia speaking: Wikipedia Signpost/2007-02-19/In the news. That's the talk page for individual Indang-Striped articles, which are usually for discussion of a particular story, rather than a suggestion for a new one. In addition, the record was posted rather late in the week, when the time activity on previous stories usually subsided as we focused on upcoming issues.

The best place to leave suggestions is our "tip line" on Wikipedia: Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions. This is where we realize it after other readers post about the incident there. One of them seems to see it on Professor Cole's blog, which I understand is pretty much readable, and brought it to our attention as a result.

I will add that as a volunteer, we do our best we can, but we can not guarantee that potential stories will not be missed. We need more people to write stories, because there are always issues that may be worth discussing, but we do not have time to do them. --Michael Snow 17:28, April 30, 2007 (UTC)

Would it be better to direct all the talk pages from individual Signpost articles here, or maybe to Signpost's front page for the week? I'm sure this page gets more readers than any Signpost article talk page.- gadfium 20:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

No, I do not think so. You will end up with crosstalk on too many subjects, and sometimes confusing posts here that do not make it very clear which stories relate to comments. Keeping discussions related to published stories is different from the newsroom planning of upcoming stories helping our work stay at least organized. --Michael Snow 21:23, April 30, 2007 (UTC)






Book review

I'm very happy with the new book review section. Thank you for coming up with a new way for The Signpost to inform readers. - Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 13:26, July 17, 2007 (UTC)

Very good! Ã, :-) Ta bu shi da yu 13:31, July 17, 2007 (UTC)

I like it, it seems very "professional". It's done well! Walkerma 01:29, July 18, 2007 (UTC)

Ditto. I happened to read the book as well, and the reviews were pretty good (although I would have liked a stronger critique, especially in terms of economics). --Gwern (contribs) 03:26 July 18, 2007 (GMT)

Unfortunately, I'm not ready to really get into the economic side; and this book is less focused on that. I mostly just find it interesting that after I write reviews, and I go to see what others say, I find others saying the same thing I am trying to say. He made great calls for user-generated content to disappear and expert content for redomination, but in parts of the book I qualified to discuss (I have been on the network bulletin board since I was 13 years old, got the first USENET Account in 1987 on age 16 years, and have been using the web since Lynx and I are sometimes paid to write newspapers and I studied in j-school and have read much about journalism history over the last 20 years), I find that he is in 'enough knowledge to sound competent at VC meetings. ' area about the things I know, but he lost the key argument that pierced and supported his premise. I include links to economic criticism because I can not judge that, but here there are others who have the same reaction. I'm a bit surprised at that, but after a bit of searching on Google News for reviews about it, you'll find a large number of reviewers saying, 'he has some points about X, but I know a bit about Y, and he may not get to this. 'I am getting more and more suspicious of things as I meet, the more I will also be lost. Not * unfounded *, just not fully supported by a deeper understanding. --Thespian 09:40, July 18, 2007 (UTC)

I want to add my praise to the people above. The reviews are well written, and a great addition to Postings. Confusing Manifestations 07:12, July 19, 2007 (UTC)

Add my vote to the "good job" choir for the new book review section. You choose a good title to open and reviews are well written. I hope this becomes a regular feature. --Bookgrrl ^holler / lookee here 17:08, July 19, 2007 (UTC)




Kudos

I do not know if you people get enough credits for what you do, so here's a little something from an appreciative reader: I wait for the sign board every Monday and read it with pleasure. I have not read the book reviews this week, but will definitely do it. Thank you for your hard work! Cheers from KrakÃÆ'³w, Ouro (bla bla) 20:02, July 18, 2007 (UTC)




This issue

First, I want to be clear. I like the signs.

However, this latest problem is very different - it has the usual features, etc, but no stories. I know they do not write themselves, but in such cases you should consider updating updated stories from archives, or something similar. It becomes tedious to read, like a newspaper with just a list of comics and movies. I assume there are only a few inactive editors, but I'm sure you should take steps and consider running the story again, or running smaller ones. I'm a little disappointed.

Anyway, keep the job fantastic (if not)! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 07:59, July 24, 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, nothing important happened, as far as I know. I tried in vain to find something I could write more than one paragraph, but could not find anything. Next week will have at least some stories. The problem is the rerunning story does not make sense to us, as it is often outdated very quickly. If you ever have a suggestion for a story, we always welcome the story idea at the end. Ral315 Ã, Â »21:04, July 24, 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know that often not much happens. I would recommend, in such cases, have some stories throughout the paragraph. They will not be the best, but better than nothing. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 21:46, July 24, 2007 (UTC)






Litigation?

Litigation, by definition, is a legal process. Thus, I think that the title "Report on Long Litigation" to describe our internal arbitrage procedure is not accurate. - Rice Rice 06:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a play of words. Abbreviations detail TROLL. - Ta bu shi da yu 10:50, July 30, 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate that, but the title does not explain its contents. It should take precedence over the joke. It's as if there's a title about football when it's an article about golf. - Giant Rice 14:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

LOL, I never had an acronym! Maybe I should have more trolls... How about using O to make it a bit clearer for all of us? HG | Talk 14:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC) PS I love Signpost!

Ok, try adding the capital 'O' but maybe the editor can do it right? HG | Talk 15:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, it's not 100% litigation, but it's almost quasi-litigation, the way some people approach it. enochlau (talk) 16:09, July 30, 2007 (UTC)

Litigation means a lawsuit. That's very different from the related non-court dispute settlement. After opening the article, my first impression was that CharlotteWeb sued Wikipedia. I do not understand why people are opposed to an accurate title for this section. - Chunky Rice 16:20, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

In addition to your very restrictive interpretation of one word, I'm not sure what's in the article will give you the impression that someone is suing Wikipedia. If you really think deeply not to understand how litigation can mean anything less than the actual lawsuit filed in court, I'm not surprised you did not get a joke. But I can assure you that many lawyers describe their work casually as "litigation" even gradually long before lawsuits are filed, on matters that might be resolved without being put forward in the end. In terms of etymology, litigation only means disputes, and that is a very accurate characterization of Wikipedia arbitration. The language is flexible and flexible; reading it too flexibly will lose a lot of color and nuance, and often leads to completely wrong conclusions. --Michael Snow 08:05, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

In 7 years working in civil litigation, I have never heard anyone use the term to describe anything other than a suit. Moreover, that's how I define it, not just how I define it. I looked for it and everything. - Giant Rice 12:34, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

I've never heard anyone use that term to describe anything but a suit.

Well, you have now! There is a descriptive linguistics for you. - Kjoon lee 16:02, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

Quite clearly, it presents a case before ArbCom is equivalent to Wikipedia litigation. The lawsuit is just a case in court. Even if your interpretation of "litigation" is literally dogmatic, ArbCom is the place where people file a case before a panel of arbiters issuing a verdict. Maybe you forget the legal definition. From Merriam-Webster: "Law 1) binding custom or community practice: rules of conduct or action that are determined or officially recognized as binding or enforced by the controlling authority." Is that not right? --JayHenry 16:18, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

The "definition" is closer to the description of how people use those words, rather than formal definitions that must be obeyed. (Heh, the word "definition" has many definitions.Woah..) - Kjoon lee 17:03, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

I just think it's confusing, because Signpost runs a story about real litigation. -Fruits 17:14, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

Well, it will continue to bother me, but if others think it's great, I'll just deal. I will admit that I am very special t

Source of the article : Wikipedia