← Newsroom

WP:POST/SUBMIT

Submission Desk

Please propose Signpost stories you want to write (or have already begun writing). Submitted stories are published subject to the approval of the Editor-in-Chief, JPxG. We value the involvement of Wikipedians, and appreciate your submissions. If you have ideas or questions that don't fit neatly into this framework, don't hesitate to address us on our user talk pages, by email, or as a last resort, on the general Signpost talk page.

The Signpost's content guidelines may be useful to aspiring writers. We encourage you to contact us early in the process of developing a story. Different writers have varying levels of interest in editorial input, and we pride ourselves on finding the right balance with each writer; but in most cases, a brief discussion early on can help all parties shape our expectations, and can help produce a strong finished piece. We aim to support Wikimedians wishing to share news with their peers, and look forward to working with you.

Status: V ?
submitted

• Submission: User:MallardTV/We say Wikipedia isn't a battleground. So why does it feel like one?
• Column: Opinion
• Author: MallardTV
• Discussion:
  This is my opinion, and I really wouldn't be surprised if some people don't share it.

MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 20:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MallardTV: Thanks for making this submission some months ago. I am just getting through the backlog.

You are up! Can I send this for review to the other editors as a Signpost submission, even after this break? The topic is as evergreen as ever.

If we publish, then can you add a link to Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground, which is what the piece references? Also please consider whether you want to link to anything else, anywhere else. Thanks for submitting, and I am sorry for the delay, but I did enjoy reading your submission. Bluerasberry (talk) 20:25, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Staged at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Opinion. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:51, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Status: V ?
Needs drafting

• Submission: User:Lijil/AI increases the digital knowledge divide
• Column: Opinion
• Author: Lijil
• Discussion:AI slop is flooding the internet, and it is harder and harder to find reliable information. The digital divide of the future will be between people who can afford to pay for high quality, fact-checked content, and people who only have access to cheap, AI-generated texts full of hallucinations, promotional content and scams. In this world, the Wikipedia must remain a reliable and trustworthy source that is free to all users. To stay reliable, the Wikipedia has to keep relying on human editing, because LLMs are not reliable and they are not accountable for the words they generate. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2026-01-15/Special report argues that using LLMs will help Wikipedia serve the Global South better. I disagree - to use LLMs means we will lower quality to the extent that the Wikipedia will lose its role as a reliable encyclopedia accessible to anyone. I'm both a Wikipedia editor and a professor doing research on LLMs and their cultural effect so would like to write something about this if it seems suitable for the Signpost. Lijil (talk) 20:33, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Lijil: Thanks for your submission. Yes, it seems that for the foreseeable future, Signpost readers want and will react to perspectives on AI.

Thank you so much for making this submission. If you drafted anything, then I think you would be the first person with professional expert insight into this, and I would be delighted to help you get something to reviewers. This is a standing offer. Our next issue is in 10 days, but we are always publishing, so take the time that you want.

I apologize for the delay in getting back to you but I think just now, we have cleared our submissions backlog, and you have our editorial attention now.

I appreciate your strong opinions. Feel free to take this in the direction you like, whether a soap box for making bold claims, or reacting to anything else, as long or as short of a piece as you like. I think it would mean a lot to readers to get any sort of input from a person who edits Wikipedia, but who also has research insight into the broad effects of LLMs. Thanks for considering and let me know how I or the other editors can support you. Feel free to start drafting. Bluerasberry (talk) 20:38, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you! I'll try to draft something in the next few days - not sure I can get anything ready soon enough for the next issue but definitely want to do this. What is the ideal word count? Lijil (talk) 07:47, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Lijil: 1000 words is a good length for an op-ed. We have plenty of shorter and longer submissions, but for this audience, it is reasonable to expect people to read submissions of that length. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:13, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Status: V ?
processing

• Submission: User:7804j/Ten thousand translated articles: what OKA learned about AI-assisted Wikipedia translation
• Column: Opinion
• Author: 7804j
• Discussion: We'd like to share OKA's story — how we went from a small experiment in 2022 to coordinating translation work across 80+ editors who published 13k+ articles, what we've learned (sometimes the hard way) from community feedback, and what our recent empirical study revealed about which LLM models actually work well for translation versus which ones just make things worse. Recent ANI discussions surfaced real concerns about our quality control processes, and we want to walk through how we're addressing those issues, including our upcoming peer review system. 7804j (talk) 20:42, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@7804j: Please develop your submission at User:7804j/OKA: grants for translators assisted by LLMs. If it is not burdensome, then submit as much content as you would like, perhaps 500-2000 words. If you want interim feedback, then at least make a few section headings and put a few sentences under each, even if it does not tell a full story. I think you know your way around wiki and have a good sense of how to talk with the Wikimedia community, but this story does hit multiple hot topics including paid editing, inclusion of people in lower middle countries, AI, and putting a process on the table to address decades-old cross-wiki translation backlogs. I am grateful for your submission. Also I want to connect you with feedback before publication, to get some confirmation that you will not be misunderstood. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:43, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: the draft is now ready for review 7804j (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• In review at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Drafts/Opinion Bluerasberry (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Status: V ?
Postponed

• Submission: N/A
• Column: Serendipity
• Author: Suntooooth

Thanks for the reminder - I'd love to be working on it, but IRL factors mean it might take a while. I'm most likely to get it done for the issue after next, but we'll see - could be sooner, could be later. Suntooooth, it/he (talk | contribs) 17:21, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, let's keep this here at the submissions desk, and check in with you in the March 2026 issues. Bluerasberry (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Status: V ?
Postponed

• Submission: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vyVTZPwLr3eYiPF65YW6O98ptH2Q2TEUb6sxzNmIDJ8/edit?tab=t.0
• Column: Opinion
• Author: NabuKudurru
• Discussion: This piece examines the recent problems in the community and makes a modest proposal: Spend 25% on the community. We show how currently WMF is spending about 15% of its budget on the community in terms of grants and awards. We outline what essentially doubling the funds for community could do in terms of solving the problems outlined recently, and look at where the funds could come from.

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next next issue/Opinion

Status: V ?
Needs drafting

• Submission:
• Column: Opinion
• Author: Shushugah
• Discussion:

I will write about the new union effort that just launched publicly https://wikiworkersunited.org/ and what it means for the Wikimedia movement and why we should support this. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:04, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Shushugah: Yes, please start drafting. The next issue is in about two weeks. You can choose one of the article formats at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom. Perhaps "Special report", "Opinion", or "Concept" would work. If you want to try Signpost formatting, then submit at the newsroom, otherwise write it anywhere then ping me and I will help with formatting and move it to the newsroom. Thanks, what an exciting topic. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:55, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]