← Newsroom

WP:POST/TIPS

Suggestions

The Signpost (talk  · chat)
About Archives Subscribe
Newsroom (talk) Coordination Submissions Suggestions
Writing Content + resources Formatting (cheatsheet) Style Technical (talk)
Recent changes: main · talk
Newsletters
v t e

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36

Settings: Discussions are archived by Cluebot III when marked with Template:Done.

This page has archives. Sections older than 60000 days may be auto-archived by ClueBot III if there are more than 8.

"WP:POST/S" redirects here. For the Signpost submissions page, see WP:POST/SUBMIT.

This page is for suggesting news to be covered in the next Signpost. We are a newspaper that covers subjects of general interest for our audience of Wikipedia editors. If you'd like guidance on editing for new editors, please inquire at the Teahouse. More general questions may be addressed to the help page.

Email a private tip to the EiC(s)

For general discussion, comments or questions regarding The Signpost, please see our feedback page. You can also write a piece yourself! See the submissions desk for details. Or send a news tip by email to our tipmail.

Do not use one click archivers on this page, they don't work correctly. Mark entries with {{done}} instead.

The Signpost should write about WP:BIAS specifically with reference to WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NEVENT. Recently a page on an event which happened days before in the USA was !kept at AfD on the basis of IAR and an accident that killed more than 30 in Pakistan was !deleted on the basis of NOTNEWS and NEVENT. It is clear that "news events" are not being consistently !kept or !deleted at AfD and this leads to long-standing BIAS.

JMWt (talk) 13:54, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like an op-ed that would be written by someone with strong interest in the topic. Are you interested in doing one? ☆ Bri (talk) 15:25, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

well I'm heavily biased and invested in the issue, I'm not sure I can write a balanced dispassionate piece. I can tell people what I think and why, I'm not sure I can do anything more than that JMWt (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Op-eds don't have to be objective or dispassionate. It's in the title: opinion/editorial. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll think about it. JMWt (talk) 17:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about... the sharp rise in identified AI-generated content in August 2025, much of which has been undetected since 2023-2024, and the increased attention to combating it.

• This has been in national news recently, e.g., the Washington Post, The Verge, Yahoo, et cetera.
• Much of this is spearheaded by the AI Cleanup WikiProject, which publishes an extensive list of common and less frequently remarked upon signs of AI text. WP:ANI has also had several related cases in the past week.
• The problem goes deeper than previously thought; around 600 instances of writing suspected to be LLM generated have been identified in around two weeks, on articles as high profile as Celebrity, Fashion, Foreign language, Culture of Mexico, History of Nigeria, Protest song, and Women's sports.
• A new speedy deletion criteria was just adopted for unambiguous AI generated content, which has also been reported by the media.
• English Wikipedia and the WMF have been somewhat at odds over this, as evidenced by the foundation's new AI strategy and its repercussions in things like the backlash against a project to show AI summaries to users. This also comes at the beginning of the new college semester, coinciding with new guidance to students in the WikiEdu program about responsible AI use.

Disclaimer: I am involved in this WikiProject and most of the efforts above. But given the mainstream media attention and the number of developments in the past two weeks alone, it feels important to cover. Gnomingstuff (talk) 15:20, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about... Wikipedia:Signs of AI writing has some press-coverage, as can be seen in the press-template on the talkpage.

And then there is Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF)#Wikipedia_under_US_House_of_Reps_Oversight_Committee, but I'm fairly sure you guys noticed that one anyway. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• https://www.theverge.com/cs/features/717322/wikipedia-attacks-neutrality-history-jimmy-wales

--Another Believer _(Talk) 18:24, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's long but worth reading. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:37, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also mentioned in the Cory Doctorow piece I just suggested below. Funcrunch (talk) 18:55, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to Trust and Safety Product/Temporary Accounts (IP masking), that thing is supposed to deploy this month. Wikipedians might voice opinions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:37, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We covered this in the last issue and there's a mention of the new (October 21) deadline in the draft News and notes in the upcoming issue. Thanks! ☆ Bri (talk) 03:09, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New article just published by Cory Doctorow on "Why Wikipedia Works". Among other things, highlights the importance of "Verifiability, not truth". Funcrunch (talk) 18:54, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about the fact that the number of edits made by users blocked for inappropriate use of LLMs is doubling every 100 days.

Data source: Quarry. I suggest that this trend is not sustainable. TestUser345 (talk) 18:33, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have a soft spot for graphs to communicate numerical data, so – included in the draft for the upcoming News and notes. Thanks! ☆ Bri (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Logarithmic graphs are generally confusing; this graph especially so because it mixes linear and logarithmic scales. -- Beland (talk) 21:43, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quite true. If you can suggest improvements I will try my best. TestUser345 (talk) 07:56, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The doubling number is highly contingent on that 2022-05 datapoint. Remove it and you'd have double blocks/edits every much shorter periods of time. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:55, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure tampering with data is a good solution. My suggestion would simply be to use a linear scale on both sides. If you want to show doubling time, use a curved line. Or don't, and just let the data speak for itself. -- Beland (talk) 13:58, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about data manipulation, I'm talking that doubling time is highly dependant on an outlier. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:32, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I interpreted "remove it" as a suggestion. -- Beland (talk) 20:43, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added 95% confidence intervals to the doubling times, which I feel still gets across the message that even though the number of accounts blocked doesn't seem to be increasing that quickly, the amount of edits they're making are. That was the original reason for mixing linear and semilog plots. Still interested in suggestions on how to make that main idea more obvious. TestUser345 (talk) 21:56, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feels there's two phases to that graph. Prior to circa 2025 and post 2025. There's been a lot of policy refinements from 2023+ and editors are also much more aware of the AI issue, twinkle and tools like my own WP:UPDS have been adapted to deal with LLMs and AI editors. Prior to 2025, the block count is effectively flat, always on the order of ~2-3/month, and then within a few months, you've skyrocketed to 15+/month. I also feel there's missing data in that graph. While I'm willing to believe there's be zero blocks for AI editing for large periods of time, I highly doubt there's been under 10 AI edits in the entirety of 2022-05 to 2023-05, all happening in 2022-05.

All in all, linear/semilog regressions really don't seem to apply all that well to the data. Hence why you have such large confidence intervals (504 ± 348, 100 &\pm; 40) in the doubling rates. The data does clearly show an increase though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:28, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about... Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) sent a letter to the nonprofit operator of Wikipedia alleging a pattern of liberal bias in articles on the collaborative encyclopedia. [1] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:01, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! We have a start on this and related matters in the draft In the media. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:03, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I am a bit late to notice this and to think of bringing this here, but The Signpost should write about the percentage of articles classified as WP:Good articles has reached 0.6%. Nice little good news story. I mentioned this at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#0.6% of all articles are now Good articles where others provided a bit of further commentary. I would ask that any maths I attempted is redone however. CMD (talk) 14:17, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JPxG @Bri @Smallbones Was this already reported in previous issues? If not, we might as well save this suggestion for the next edition. Oltrepier (talk) 21:09, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis Any update on this? We might save this suggestion for the next issue! Oltrepier (talk) 22:00, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's 0.606 now if that's an update. You can expect the next proper update in half a decade. CMD (talk) 02:34, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis Ok, we'll cover it in the next issue... albeit very belatedly. : D Oltrepier (talk) 08:12, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Statement_from_SFR_on_the_incident_at_WCNA and the resulting discussion etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:24, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should take note about Wikipedian humor about Grokipedia This is different topic then my above/ previous suggestion.

Thanks to @User:Anne drew at WP:RSN, I came across (dif) following humorous statement.

".. I'm personally glad Elon has his own encyclopedia to treat as a sandbox without disrupting ours. .."

 :)

May be some one writing about Grokipedia in "the signpost" wish to take note of the above humorous reaction.

Bookku (talk) 05:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku Oooh, I wish @Smallbones could have read this before writing its own Community View piece... this could be great for a future vignette! Oltrepier (talk) 20:52, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think Bookku should start writing for the Signpost. They have lots of good ideas - it's just hard to cram them in at the last moment! Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:55, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Signpost editors,

I’d like to propose a short feature or blurb about WikiLoop Galaxy (COI: I am the developer of it) — an open-sourced experimental visual interface for exploring the link relationships among Wikipedia articles as an interactive constellation.

WikiLoop Galaxy offers an intuitive way to navigate and make sense of the web of article connections. With a few clicks, editors can visualize how concepts cluster and relate across the encyclopedia, sparking insights about category completeness, navigation gaps, or conceptual silos.

We’d love for Wikipedians to:

• Use Galaxy to explore topics and understand Wikipedia’s structure visually;
• Share ideas for how this interface could support editing, curation, or education;
• Contribute code or feature proposals, as the tool is open source and welcoming of collaborators.

• The project page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiLoop_Galaxy
• Release note: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiLoop_Galaxy/Release/v0.0.2
• A demo video: https://www.loom.com/embed/5ccb54c0ce934939aee0458d23fa0cb2?sid=77210291-f6a8-4351-ac9d-a347152a00db

The tool itself is here: https://galaxy.wikiloop.org/

If a brief mention or shoutout in The Signpost is possible, it could help bring in new perspectives and energy from across the community. Happy to provide more info or answer questions if helpful. Thanks and warm regards,

xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 01:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about...

Harry Bruce, son of Charles Tory Bruce, was a prolific Canadian writer and journalist well-known in Atlantic Canada for his biographical novels and essays. He died nine months ago in August 2024, but somehow never had an article on Wikipedia even after his seven decade career. A little over a week ago I came across his grandson, User:GabrielMABruce, editing articles on my watchlist related to Guysborough County. After extending an invitation to WikiProject Nova Scotia, GabrielMABruce and I talked back and forth on his talk page and he expressed his family's wish to see a Wikipedia article created about his grandfather. We worked together on a draft since then before publishing what we have now. I thought it would be poetic if GabrielMABruce were to write a piece for The Signpost detailing his experience joining Wikipedia to do this, given the fact that he comes from a long line of journalists and this was an explicit goal of the family. GabrielMABruce has expressed interest in doing so, and I thought this would be the best place to start to see if other editors think this is as cool of a story as I do. Thanks, MediaKyle (talk) 02:59, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the aforementioned Gabriel here. Thank you to MediaKyle for suggesting this to me! I joined Wikipedia a year ago to try and create an article for my grandfather and improve the existing one for my great-grandfather. Ultimately, confused by aspects of editing and concerned about COI, I gave up shortly after beginning. I came back to Wikipedia editing recently to improve articles relating to Guysborough County. MediaKyle contacted me about getting involved with WikiProject Nova Scotia, and collaborating on an article for Harry. I'm very proud of what we developed, and look forward to continuing my work with MediaKyle to bring it to GA status.

I would be happy to write something about my experience as a new editor, the meaning this endeavor has had to me and my family, and my renewed appreciation for the power of Wikipedia and the people behind it. GabrielMABruce (talk) 04:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about... For the In the Media section: Rethinking Wikipedia from a Library Perspective by Nathan Sonnenschein on the blog of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), a division of the American Library Association. The author argues for increased contributions of librarians to Wikipedia since we have similar goals and because the obstacles to freely accessible and accurate knowledge are growing stronger.

kosboot (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about... the upcoming July 2025 administrator elections. More details can be found at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025. The call for candidates will begin on July 9, and voting will end on July 22. Results will hopefully be posted within a week of the voting ending. Thanks! –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:19, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost should write about...

Like many libraries, The New York Public Library has a site for digitized material. And like many libraries, each digitized item comes with templates for citing the item based on various citation styles (MLA, APA, Chicago/Turabian). But where The New York Public Library is different is that they also provide wikitext in case you want to post to Wikipedia (or other Wikimedia projects). See the example on their website:: Original order suspending the writ of habeas corpus between New York and Washington. Signed by Abraham Lincoln.Countersigned by William Henry Seward

The Signpost should write about... I finally finished User:Ixtal/Analysis on administrators' activity. I recall some time ago talking about sharing it through the Signpost, but it's been a while since then so I'm not aware of the current stance on it in the newsroom. — ♠ Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum ♠ 13:59, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Initially for my own interest, I created a series of bar charts to evaluate the link counts Wikipedia's top-level policy pages (as of the first full week of November). I'd like to offer these up if anyone working on the Signpost would like to use them for an article:

• User:Rjjiii/Core content policy link counts

Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]