The Signpost

Documentation[view] [edit] [history] [purge]

This template uses Lua:

Module:Template parameter value (sandbox)

Newsroom/Task

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Task is transcluded mostly by Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom. It is a wrapper for Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Task/core.

Newsroom/Task/Core

Of particular note is a series of preload templates this invokes for the "create" links.

News and notes	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload/NAN
In the media	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload/ITN
Featured content	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload/FC
Next featured content	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload/FC
Next month's featured content	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload/FC
Technology report	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Tech-preload
Blog	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload/Blog
Traffic report	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload/Traffic
#default	Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload

Comments

This template uses section transclusion to automatically show the comments from Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom. This corresponds to the task name, so that e.g. "News and Notes" will try to transclude Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom#News and notes. If there's no section, you can create one at that title on the talk page and it will show up.

Usage

{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Task
|Task=News and notes
|Status=
|Notes=
}}

produces this:

News and notes

In progress · 12,396b
last edited 2024-12-22 23:23:43 by Smallbones
Content guidance + resources

Checklist

Y Headline
Y Subheading
? Ready for copyedit
N Copyedit done
N Final approval by editor-in-chief

Discussion

Anybody know what this supposed audit is all about? I've never heard of the company, nor the audit itself. There's more about the company and what they do here (dated 2022). ☆ Bri (talk) 21:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've got some stuff. I saw the same businesswire press release and it checks out. The audit is more or less published at the WMF website. It might have some interest for the conspiracy theorists who think that the foundation conspired with the feds to steal an election, but not really. Please don't push that. I suppose I could write a paragraph right now for ITM, but there's some more digging to do. Does anybody want to take this over and write a full Special report? I'll send you my "notes". It might not be that special though. 1 sentence take-away. Following EU regulations, WMF and 16? other large websites need (non-financial) audits to confirm that they are following EU regulations and HolisticAI did the work for WMF saying everything is more-or-less ok, with 1 mild shocker recommendation. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 22:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is challenging to summarize the audit and I'm thinking of not even doing it. Smallbones What did you find to be the "mild shocker"? Only this popped out to me, and I'm not sure it's newsworthy: acknowledged WMF cooperation with a US intelligence-slash-law-enforcement entity: WMF, being based in the United States, is a private sector partner of the NCRIC [Northern California Regional Intelligence Center], which handles international escalations for platforms within its jurisdiction through the US State Department directly into appropriate national law enforcement partner workflows of foreign jurisdictions, including EU countries. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The consultants suggested that it might help to have another set of terms of use for some people - presumably those effected by EU regulations, which might include those who write in any European language. Whoops! that includes maybe 90%+ of all editors. The WMF's stiff non-reaction to that suggestion says to me that they see the same probable reaction from users and others that I'd predict. Perhaps a small reaction from our readers would give the WMF enough to say, "no that doesn't sound like a good idea." Smallbones_(smalltalk) 16:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I saw where they recommended completing translation of the ToU to all the official EU languages (which is kind of a no-brainer IMO), but didn't see the other recommendation. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the Foundation said "The Wikimedia Foundation will review the ToU to make it less US-centric and to ensure contact information is easily accessible." I'm not sure that that means nation-specific editions of the ToU (probably not) so I'll just quote that in the writeup. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is ready to go. Back to the top, Smallbones suggested running this as a Special report, which I forgot when I created it as News and notes. I'm agnostic as to the title used, especially since it's currently the only thing in News and notes other than the tiny article for improvement note. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri I think I'll actually manage to sneak in one last article about the EU and Wikipedia, so that might solve the problem, I guess? Oltrepier (talk) 09:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri Ok, I've posted just one more article about new European Commissioners; please, don't kill me for this... Oltrepier (talk) 13:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above documentation is transcluded from Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Task/core/doc.

20:18 {{{Task}}}}}