Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost | Newsroom

Shortcut: WP:POST/N/S WP:POST/TIPS

Welcome to The Wikipedia Signpost's Tip Line. There are two ways to leave tips:

Add a tip on this page
Anonymously e-mail us at WikipediaSignpost@Gmail.com (for convenience, you may use this link)

Not every mention of Wikipedia in the media will make it into Signpost. Consider editing Wikipedia:Press coverage or Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a press source so we have a comprehensive record.

Front Page

About

[edit] $10,000 donation to Wikimedia

On October 10th, the W. Glen Boyd charitable foundation donated $10,000 to Wikimedia. Maybe this is worthy of a mention on the Signpost, even if it's a little late. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-11-08 18:51Z

Wow. I note in passing that http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors is a bit out of date. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I've updated that page to include this donation. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

And why have I only just found out about http://en.wikizine.org/ (it even has a project page at Wikipedia:Wikizine)? -- ALoan (Talk) 19:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The Signpost and Wikizine often work together and collaborate; both serve as news outlets for the community, but the Signpost is targeted toward English Wikipedia, while Wikizine is targeted toward more of international news. Walter has been doing a great job with Wikizine, and I encourage people to read that as well for more focus on other non-English and non-Wikipedia projects. Is there any way you think we can help improve its visibility? Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I am sure the Wikizine is a wonderful thing - I see you mentioned it back in March in Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost#Wikisource News but it must have passed me by. Perhaps it deserves some publicity in a Signpost article? -- ALoan (Talk)

Anyone know why the quarterly fundraising stopped? -Ravedave ^{(help name my baby)} 02:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

There will be another one very soon. The Foundation has been waiting for the completion of an audit so we can have financial statements showing how the money is being used. --Michael Snow 04:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Awsome. Is the audit why basically all edits to meta have dried up? There used to be all sorts of cool info on how money was spent etc etc. -Ravedave ^{(help name my baby)} 05:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Not really, as most of the info is now being done in the Foundation Wiki. However, the audit is taking forever, because several years of data have to be processed, not just one. However, it will be hopefully done soon, because it has be completed before the next fundraiser. Tito xd^(?!?) 02:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought that the foundation no longer needed to have quarterly fundraising: since 40k a month is being raked in it just about covers anything needed...at least, thats what i thought jimbo said at wikimania this year.... JoeSmack ^Talk(p-review!) 14:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It's my understanding that this is not exactly the case. While the steady stream of donations is helpful and has allowed the site to survive longer without an official fundraiser, recent increases in traffic (notably with the resumption of the school year) have again strained Wikimedia's resources, and the Foundation really needs more than just the existing financial reserves to address this. --Michael Snow 05:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Essentially, the need for hardware is growing exponentially, and the donations aren't. Ral315 (talk) 05:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

While it won't appeal to everyone, a "Vandalism Report" section might be useful. It could have a summary of levels and concentration of vandalism for the previous week, and a "forecast" to alert patrollers to whether an event may increase or decrease vandalism levels (e.g. a controversial current event, series of recent sockpuppet attacks, holiday, etc.) --Gray Porpois e^{cetaceans have large brains} 21:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Die Welt article

Here's an article from the German newspaper Die Welt concerning Wikipedia - specifically, a smear campaign by the Bild-Zeitung that apparently lead to an increased amount of vandalism on the German Wikipedia. The author also expresses his opinion that "stable versions" for articles should be implemented as soon as possible.

If you need a complete translation, feel free to ask me and I'll try to provide one. :) -- Schnee (cheeks clone) 12:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Decided not to cover - busy work plus work for translation, etc. --Trödel 15:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Media feature praises wikipedia's coverage of Arab-Israeli conflict

http://www.jewcy.com/feature/wiki_wars —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Babajobu (talk • contribs) .
- while the title is lacking it's interesting, and worth reading. -Ravedave ^{(help name my baby)} 17:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas Homer-Dixon

On yesterday's TVO show Allan Gregg: In conversation, the host and guest discussed The Upside of Down (Homer-Dixon's new book). Near the end of the interview, he praised the Wikipedia model, citing it as one of the social constructs which will add resilience to global systems (he also cited open source in general, using Linux as an example). Video of the show should be available from the show's archive soon; usually, an audio feed/podcast is also provided. Mind matrix 16:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Mention of wikipedi to remote (and very small part of interview) --Trödel 15:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay Nigger Association of America

Yup, GNAA again, only that the article was actually deleted at the 18th nomination. SYSS Mouse 14:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

See page for the gory details. - Banyan Tree 03:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I expect that'll get an article (especially given that the DRV looks like the deletion will likely stick). Ral315 (talk) 05:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

And given that Mikkalai restored it twice (deleted again now), even more worthy of an article. Ral315 (talk) 22:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

And it sticks, according to closed DRV. End of a weird chapter, indeed. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 12:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Was the timing inspired by Michael Richards? -- Zanimum 14:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Heh. Seriously, I don't think it had anything to do with it. Ral315 (talk) 22:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

looked at one of wikipedia's many mirror sites and WOW. that was a really good page, i feel the loss of wikipedia now it is gone. think the deletion process it went through was bad, when it was closed there was no mention of the actual numbers of keeps and deletes. because there where a hell of a lot of keeps, it should have clearly been closed due to no consensus instead. Mathmo ^Talk 11:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

While there are some concerns about the way it was handled, AFD isn't about the number of keeps or deletes, it's about the validity of arguments presented. I've no real opinion on whether consensus was achieved, but Wikipedia should not decide things based on percentage alone. Ral315 (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service

Have you seen an article on wikipedia that needs a photograph but you can't travel a thousand miles to take it? Do you love taking pictures for the wiki but aren't sure what our needs are? An effort is underway at Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service to solve both problems by matching photographers with articles that need photos. Photographers can list themselves under the locations where they are able to take photos. Editors looking for photos can use Template:Reqphotoin, add their request to the Photo Matching Service or contact one of the photographers listed on that page (or all three). This project is just getting underway and we would greatly appreciate both participation and feedback. GabrielF 22:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

To judge the newsworthiness of this, one would probably want to know more about the difference between this and the existing page Wikipedia:Requested pictures. regards, High on a tree 21:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, the new one keeps track of people with cameras, for future reference. It also focuses on things that are regional, unlike the mostly unregional requests on Requested pictures. -- Zanimum 20:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] German Wikipedia is planning an "Article-free Sunday"

At de:Wikipedia:Artikelfreier Sonntag there are plans afoot for a (voluntarily) "article-free Sunday" (based on the idea of a car-free Sunday), where people will focus there energy on improving existing articles rather than creating new ones. —An gr 09:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heavily edited FA

History of Erotic Depictions got 421 edits during its time on the main page, falling just short of the record (453) set my LOTR in October. (The previous record-holder before LOTR, cheese, got 410) Raul654 03:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

We may have a new record this week; Down syndrome has 365 edits with another 8 hours to go, if I'm doing my math and time zone calculations correctly. I wondered a few days ago if it might break the record... Ral315 (talk) 16:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Depth

Maybe this could make a little blurb in the next issue: Mutante's a set of multilingual statistics scripts, some of which are used on Meta (m:List of Wikipedias, for example), has added a new way to gauge the relative quality of a Wikipedia language edition: depth. It's calculated as:

$\frac{edits}{articles}\times\frac{pages-articles}{articles}$

For Wikipedias with less than 1,000 articles, a depth of more than 200 isn't counted. If you'd like something more mathematical-looking (and thus more impressive):

$\tfrac{e}{a^2}(p-a) : a \ge 1000 \lor \tfrac{e}{a^2}(p-a) \le 200$

But really, it's just a small way of deemphasizing the article count as an indicator of a Wikipedia edition's progress.

– Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 08:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom elections updated tally link

User:Gurch/Reports/ArbComElections might be a good link for an update to the ArbCom election stories. Carcharoth 11:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Another bot-generated summary at User:Mathbot/ArbCom Election December 2006. Carcharoth 14:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiChix

Alleged male bias to foundation-l has caused former Foundation board member Angela to create a WikiChix mailing list and website. -- Zanimum 20:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, most of the site is blocked from public viewing. One of the only pages available to the public reads "[http://wikichix.org/wiki/Comments I strongly feel that a leader is necessary for a successful wiki, even if (after a while) they end up being primarily a figurehead that reports on the activities of others... So, perhaps one way in which to improve the state of women in the community of wikis would be to provide training in wiki leadership and promotion, and its importance in building a community." (Obviously, they fail to realise the head of the Foundation is female.) -- Zanimum 20:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

See also threads started on foundation-l and wikien-l. — Matt Crypto 20:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

In response to criticism, WikiChix have been asked to move their mailing list off Wikimedia servers: [1][2]. — Matt Crypto 12:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I know very well who Anthere is. I was presenting at Wikimania, after all. :-) But my point stands. As stated elsewhere in those comments, I have seen very little in the way of female leadership in my area of specific expertise, separate wiki projects. I've not seen women going out there and starting projects, while at the same time I have seen them making very good contributions. Many seem to prefer to take on roles adding content rather than be the head. I think there has to be a reason why this is, and I want to know why, and if it needs to be (or even can be) changed. Conversely, I am not a Wikipedia expert, but I have read on the list that there has been little interest from women in recent elections. Mindspillage stands out as one counter-example that I know of, in the candidacy for the board - but the fact that she stands out is somewhat concerning to me. Another thing to consider is Angela's statement for why she left the board - "...the collaborative consensus-based nature Wikimedia had before the start of this year continues to deteriorate and it's no longer an environment I can work effectively in." Does Wikimedia reflect Wikipedia? GreenReaper 12:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Of the eight Wikimedia chapters, I can identify that at least half have one or more female board members: Wikimédia France, Wikimedia Italia, Wikimedia UK, Wikimedia Nederland. The Swiss and Serbian chapters board lists are inaccessible. -- Zanimum 14:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

New quote from Bryan Tong Minh on Foundation-l: "I think the problem for most objectors on this list is not the fact that a seperate list is created, but rather the fact that there is a problem on the usual lists, and that this will not be solved by seperating the women to another place." -- Zanimum 21:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimania 2007bulletin: 2006-12-4

Just a note that the latest Wikimania 2007 team bulletin has been released, and may include some points worth covering. Daveydw ee b (^chat/_review!) 01:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Digg, Timecop, the war on blogs, and Wil Wheaton

[3] (posted by Wil Wheaton!). User:Timecop's war on blogs attracts the wrong sort of attention, utterly destroying the AfD nomination and resulting in timecop being banned for a short while. --humblefool® 04:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

*shrug* Pages get hit with {{high-traffic}} from time to time, I don't know that it's particularly notable. For instance, Gracenote got linked from Slashdot two days ago, and the Slashdot article dealt solely with possible COI/NPOV issues in our article. Maybe these are part of a new trend of furthering on-wiki disputes by trying to publicize them off-wiki and win in the court of public opinion, I don't know. But it's not like we haven't had smaller forums and other sites crash AfD's before, but maybe our disputes are starting to be more frequently exported rather than imported. --Interiot 08:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

But it's Wil Wheaton!!!! -- Zanimum 14:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD, notability

It seems like there has been a flood of media attention lately to Wikipedia's notability and deletion policies and practices. Maybe an article summarizing and synthesizing the public reactions is in order. (And IMO, we should be putting more effort into creating a more coherent notability policy that is less susceptible to (the appearance of) systematic bias, which is at the root, at least implicitly, of many of the recent articles. See also recent discussions on WikiEN-l) --ragesoss 21:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The washington post article was covered last week. --Trödel 19:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unified login in test phase

[4]

Thanks. Ral315 (talk) 11:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{Lowercase}}

I think it's pretty big deal that article titles can be lowercase now. Impressive template work; it should be widely known and the work acknowledged. Now iPod can be titled iPod. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 17:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, this is still a JavaScript hack, and people who don't use JavaScript get the old warning. The article is still titled IPod if you hit the history tab. Yes, it's cool, but not as elegant as it could be =) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 17:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I know, but it's still a pretty impressive work-around. I was impressed, at least. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 19:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimedia Foundation board expanded

Major breaking news: As discussed on Foundation-l, effective immediately, the Wikimedia Foundation has three new board members. Mindspillage, one of the best-known names around here, was appointed, as well as Oscar. Finally, Jan-Bart de Vreede will receive an appointment on December 15, following the resignation of Tim Shell. Tito xd^(?!?) 23:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, yeah; that'll be a big story this week :) Ral315 (talk) 11:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Audited financial statements released

As announced on Foundation-l. The statements are on [5].S Sepp 17:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citynews International on The Shiny Diamonds

http://www.citynews.ca/international/day/12-4-2006_325.aspx -- Zanimum 18:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia discussed on CBS Sunday Morning

I don't know if this is already slated for inclusion in the upcoming edition, but I can't figure out how to check... Anyway, this national (USA) TV segment was titled, "The Good And The Bad Of Wikipedia: The Online Encyclopedia Has Revolutionized Information Sharing, But There Are Downsides", and while it doesn't say too much new, it does quote me (Adam Krellenstein)! I was interviewed at Wikimania, see, so it's significant to me, at least. Just thought I'd mention it... See here for more info. -- Rmrfstar 02:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Covered - though I didn't mention the quote :) Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-12-11/In the news --Trödel 10:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Google Earth layer

Has this been covered yet? I've been talking with Greg Maxwell via email, and he's explained a lot of FAQ that hasn't been discussed so far elsewhere. I'd be willing to forward the email to any of the 'post's writers. -- Zanimum 20:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe this was covered here under Other news. let me know if you are referring to something else. --Trödel 22:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's it. I though I remembered something being in. If I were to do a small, say 300 word article on how it works, would that be welcomed? What coordinate templates work and which don't, why some markers are out of place (our fault, it seems!), how it gets updated and at what rate, that sort of thing? -- Zanimum 22:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia%7EWikipedia_Signpost_Newsroom_Suggestions_9a54.html"