User:The ed17/Archives/54

Great American Wiknic
In the area? You're invited to the Great American Wiknic.

Place: near Minnehaha Falls at Minnehaha Park, Minneapolis

Date: Saturday, July 7, 2012 (rain date July 8)

Time: 12–3 pm


 * Accessible from the Minnehaha Park light rail station, bus, walk, bike, or car
 * If driving, free parking available at 46th Ave. S, and pay parking in the park
 * Food and drink options nearby, or bring your own... maybe even to share!

See the meetup talk page for more. &mdash;innotata 00:10, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Highlights from May 2012
Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for May 2012, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement
 * Wikimedia Foundation highlights
 * New Wikimedia fellows working on dispute resolution and small language wikis
 * 1 million media files uploaded using Upload Wizard
 * Wikipedia Zero launches in Asia
 * Data and Trends
 * Financials
 * Other movement highlights
 * Two new chapter-selected Wikimedia Trustees
 * First demo of Wikidata
 * Monmouth declared "World's First Wikipedia Town"
 * WikiWomenCamp

About &middot; Subscribe/unsubscribe &middot; Distributed via Global message delivery, 02:56, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:40, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Arb report
Hey Ed. Sorry to be a pain, but I was wondering if you could take a look at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-06-18/Arbitration report. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 08:46, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've reworded the statement to allay any accusations of perceived "editorialising". My statement was made based on a casual observation, I have no opinion on the RM and I do not like to get involved in heated arguments such as that RM where it does not concern me.  James ( Talk •  Contribs ) • 9:21pm • 11:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * See also my comment there. Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've commented. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

For future reference
For whatever it's worth, happy reading : ) - jc37 18:05, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Archive_215
 * It looks like (from what I've been seeing) that I should have placed some emphasis on making it easier to remove adminship... harumph. I didn't think it played that big of a role. Thanks for the note. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:44, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. And btw, nice article. I've glanced over it twice, and will likely be spending some research time on it : ) - jc37 20:57, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The responses have been illuminating. Incidentally- I know you ran for bureaucrat a bit ago. I don't know if I !voted (I rarely go/vote there anymore), but I thought you would have made a fine 'crat. I'm sorry it ended the way it did. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Lol no worries. It seems it was an RfB (which went full term) with the lowest turnout in ages, so you're in good company for having missed it : )
 * And thank you, that's kind of you to say. - jc37 21:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Nice work with this article Ed - it's certainly had a significant impact! Nick-D (talk) 08:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, much more of an impact than I had been expecting! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Ed, just wanted to appologize if my comment on the article talk page came off as attacking you. I didn't mean it that way and I understand in a short article you're not going to hit on everyones viewpoint.  The removal of adminship issue is just one of those factors that I feel is key to RFA reform, but is often just dismissed by many of the people who participate in the "RFA is broken" threads on WT:RFA.  Overall good job.--Cube lurker (talk) 12:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I missed this with the comments below. There's no need for an apology. You and quite a few others hold that viewpoint, but I didn't realize that until the comments started coming in! Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Congrats and a story suggestion
Congrats on the new position as editor-and-chief, while its been a while since the title was bestowed on you I am now only learning about it. I have full faith and confidence in you that you will be able to bring us the news in the best possible way, and I hope that your tenure at the signpost works as well for Wikipedia as your tenur with the bugle has been.

On that note I have a story suggestion for you as it relates to the bugle: some days back Yahoo! ran a piece on the DD(X) destroyer class, which caused pages related to it see a massive influx of viewers from the net who arrived at Wikipedia to look at the destroyer's article here and learn more about it. Additionally, while we (milhist) are not credited with the article content that was up on Yahoo!, a lot of it did sound like it had come at least in part from Wikipedia. There could be a story in their somewhere, or perhaps an honorable mention for our project. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Tom. Thanks! Being EIC is certainly a big change from the previous, but it's gone well so far. If you'd like, you could propose that at WT:MHNEWS... the Bugle doesn't typically cover that sort of material, but that's because we mainly focus on in-house stuff, and discussion there could help. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost - In the news section
Hi there. I noticed the role was empty an took on the task of writing this weeks 'In the news' section. However, I have never written for The Signpost before and I was wondering if you could give me some feedback on my article which can be found here.

Thanks

Oddbodz (talk) 21:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. We haven't run "In the news" for awhile because there hasn't been enough outside news to cover. You should try to follow the format of Wikipedia Signpost/2012-03-12/In the news, and we'll need more than one item to cover (if we don't have more, we'll put it under "in brief" in news and notes). "In brief" is meant for brief mentions of other news items not worthy of a full-length story. Also Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Resources may help you. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:30, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

'Bogus' GA 'reviews'
I'm not quite sure what to do about this "review" I got for my GAN... - The Bushranger One ping only 02:51, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * (tps) I deleted the review; the user didn't modify anything else GA-wise, so it looks like a 'new user who doesn't know the process' deal. If he asks about it I'll explain it to him. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 03:07, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Wizard, I didn't know you have my talk page watchlisted! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:55, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposal
Per our discussion above, I thought you might be interested in this. Enjoy : ) - jc37 17:36, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Village pump (technical)/Proposal by Jc37
 * You're going to want a short summary/intro at the top; I wasn't sure what you were asking for until I got to the bottom! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I tried to make it clearer. Hope this helps : ) - jc37 17:44, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * And one more thought, if your usergroup isn't intended to moderate behavior, why are you calling it "moderator"? ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:49, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Best thing I could think of. In my experience moderators typically deal with the "substance"/text/discussions. (Though nod, depending on the website/software, some deal with policing behaviour.) And it nicely abbreviates to "mod". (Compare to admin - the abbreviated form of administrator.) If you have another suggestion, I'm all ears : ) - jc37 17:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, and now that I think about it more, I can't come up with a better name either. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I know the feeling. And believe me, I tried. Nothing I found came close to being as clear or as universally understood. If something comes to you though, please drop me a note. - jc37 18:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Uh oh
Was the current run of the Bugle supposed to be titled "GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive"? That is how it is being delivered. Cheers, ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 18:44, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ...whoops. I really do need to use preview. It doesn't look like I can stop or change it, so I guess I'll just edit the project news section with an apology. Thanks Berean. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:48, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Don't break the Bugle again! Nick-D (talk) 23:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey, he didn't break the bugle (dented it maybe...) - jc37 23:08, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I have high standards ;) Nick-D (talk) 23:31, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, as long as it still plays... : ) - jc37 23:37, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah yeah Nick, just remember that I'll be waiting with a trout for the next time you screw something up. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks Tom. xD Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXV, June 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Help needed with project banner code
Eddie.. are you aware of anyone with the coding skills to help out with the ships banner? All I ever get are plugs for the meta banner. Brad (talk) 13:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Brad, I was going to say that User:MSGJ is the one, but then I read the linked page. I'd try User:TheDJ, who I know can do it but isn't very active, or User:WOSlinker, who may also advocate for WPBannerMeta.. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Who takes care of the milhist banner and why hasn't milhist been brainwashed into accepting the meta banner? Brad (talk) 00:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh duh, that'd be Kirill. Not sure why I didn't think of him... and I'd suspect it's for many of the same reasons you have. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Long time without update but Kirill made some changes and never came back to address the remainder. So, fed up without the help I needed, I converted Ships over to the meta banner. The MB has its quirks but is not totally unworkable for what Ships needed. The change over happened about two weeks ago. Since no one seemed to care I didn't bother asking about going with the MB. Three months later and here we are. Brad (talk) 07:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Tb
(I love using this template, it's like getting a decal and sticking it on someone's user page.....) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

SignPost
I recently posted a suggested story for the Signpost and in poking around noticed we had a new Signpost editor. A long time ago (maybe six months or so) I was invited to write an op-ed on COI for the Signpost and I guess it must have faded away with the changing of the guard. If you're interested, the offer is still there.

FYI - I run a firm called EthicalWiki that helps educate and consult companies on how to improve articles they have a COI with, ethically and with quality content. You can see some of my works at User:King4057 12:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I'll look into this tonight when I have more time. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright then, I'm back. I'm going to be writing about your suggestion in our "In the news" section tomorrow (UTC) shortly before we publish for this week. The topic faded away because it faded away on-wiki, which is our principal readerbase, but I'd be happy to run an op-ed from you on the subject as they do not have to be timely. Would 30 July or 6 August work for you? (and when you have it done, listing it at the opinion desk would be appreciated!) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Happy to help. I know the CIPR was asking in a video interview about the response of the Wikipedia community and this should be a good way to potentially get some feedback. I'll shoot for 7/30. User:King4057 19:06, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Newsletter
Anything to add? J Milburn (talk) 17:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * EdwardsBot has been unable to send it all of today, and I know that if I try to get my bot to do it, I'll make a hash up. I'll try again when I'm a little fresher tomorrow... J Milburn (talk) 23:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh, gotcha. The bot has been having Toolserver-related issues lately, which I'm sure annoys MZM to no end. :/ Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 June newsletter
Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's, who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's, whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's, with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 11:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

FYI
Wikipedia Signpost/2012-07-02/Discussion report. Is the entry accurate? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi.
 * I didn't edit it directly, as I don't know who is "allowed" to. (Don't want to step on anyone's toes. : )
 * There's a typo: [nd] > [and]
 * And to me, it makes it sound like a moderator receives block and protect. And WMF said that it needs to be the standard RFX process.
 * As a suggestion (to try to keep your existing phrasing), replacing the first sentence with:
 * "Moderators" would face the standard RFX process but would receive fewer tools. Moderators would not receive: "Any tools which directly deal with the assessing of editor behaviour. In particular: block or protect."
 * Otherwise, looks good to me. And thank you for the note : ) - jc37 13:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * From what I can tell press time is an hour away, so I went ahead and was "bold" - Obviously feel free to revert. - jc37 05:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've been at work but was going to fix it when I got back. Plus, I'm the one who publishes it, so I wouldn't have let it go out without being corrected. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * (facepalm) - Oh.
 * Incidentally, I've withdrawn the proposal (for various reasons).
 * For my next proposal on this (whenever that is), I may ask you to look it over first. You seem to have a good eye for clarity : ) - jc37 17:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't facepalm, it's fine! I saw the withdrawal, unfortunately. I'd be happy to look over a finetuned proposal before you submit it; feel free to drop me a note here or send an email. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 13:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Re:Newsletter delivery
Thank you!-- Midgrid (talk)  19:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

COI op-ed for the Signpost
I thought I would share my draft op-ed so far. I'm asking a few editors for feedback and making some tweaks from there. User:King4057 15:47, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm literally running out the door right now, but my first-glance thought is that I wouldn't make it much longer. Some detail is good, but people won't read the whole thing if it's too long. :-) I'll provide more detailed feedback later. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I was thinking that too. I just cut it back quite a bit, but it may still need some shortening. User:King4057 20:33, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That length is fine. Another thought is that the SP, or Wikipedia in general, does not use bolding like you do. Is there a different way of framing your principal points? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Flip. Flop.
Re this. . . by a "Romney-like stand", do you mean they 'd have to play the leading role in implementing PC in some sector of the project, pat themselves on the back for years for a job well done, and then make opposing wikiwide PC a central tenet of their Arbcom campaign, while waffling on exactly what PC is and is not? Rivertorch (talk) 06:29, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sort of. I didn't mean a literal interpretation. Mostly I meant that they'd have to waffle between the two to cater to both sides or they wouldn't get elected... but the overarching thought in the comment was that we probably don't want to bring that much politics onto WP. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: June 2012
Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 12:49, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikimania
Ed, as we mentioned a while ago at WT:MIL, there will probably be an informal Milhist session during the unconference. Please let me know if you want to meet for anything else. I'm going to be attending mostly tech sessions during the conference, and I'll have access to email and to Wikipedia several times a day throughout.

Dan
 * We'll figure it out as we go along. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

DC
Ed, any chance I'll see you at Wikimania this week? -- Lord Roem (talk) 02:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hopefully! I'm flying in late Wednesday and leaving in the evening on the 16th. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: CSS question
Try that :) It's a very common CSS problem, because, as you say, there's no float:center. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 10:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That's ... frustrating. :-) Thanks for the help! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)
Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:


 * Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasit &#124; c 17:34, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Drmies (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Four million
Thank you. --Meno25 (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Ed! You noted that "that kind of change would need more discussion", but the banner went up despite a clear lack of consensus (due to concerns that the compromise wording addressed). —David Levy 04:15, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi David! My view is that if we're going to have a banner, like we've done in the past, it needs to be focused on the reason we're posting one. That reason is the 4,000,000th article, not a repeated call for contributors (we already have "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."). The banner text currently in place has been previously used and agreed upon; your wording involved discussion with three editors over a matter of minutes. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The idea wasn't to fundamentally alter the banner's purpose; it was avoid implying that we care only about the quantity of articles.
 * Perhaps this attempt was less successful than intended, but the concern on which it was based remains (and is the reason why the current wording lacks consensus).
 * But when the banner was discussed this time, it clearly failed to achieve consensus. For some reason, it went up anyway.
 * Yes, but it replaced wording that definitely lacks consensus (and specifically addressed the reason why). If it lacks consensus too, the banner should be removed for the time being.  —David Levy 05:25, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * But when the banner was discussed this time, it clearly failed to achieve consensus. For some reason, it went up anyway.
 * Yes, but it replaced wording that definitely lacks consensus (and specifically addressed the reason why). If it lacks consensus too, the banner should be removed for the time being.  —David Levy 05:25, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it replaced wording that definitely lacks consensus (and specifically addressed the reason why). If it lacks consensus too, the banner should be removed for the time being.  —David Levy 05:25, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * And just how many outside people (non-editors) do you actually think read it that way? Obviously we care about the quality of the articles or we wouldn't have a "featured" article right beneath. Anyway, I'm not going to argue with you about it here; it won't achieve anything besides unneeded acrimony. Good luck on Talk:MP, though. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I didn't intend to debate it here (which I agree serves no practical purpose). My point is that you undid the revision on the basis that "that kind of change would need more discussion", but the current version was discussed and shown to lack consensus.
 * Why, in your view, should it nonetheless be displayed? Why shouldn't the banner be removed until consensus is reached?  —David Levy 06:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Removing the banner celebrating a significant achievement would look really silly, as would changing it significantly now it's been posted. Nick-D (talk) 06:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * So consensus (or the lack thereof) should be ignored?
 * To be clear, I don't aspire to eliminate the banner. I opposed its display (as did others), but I sincerely seek a compromise that addresses both sides' concerns.  I thought that we'd found one (wording collaboratively devised by a strong proponent of the banner and me), and I'm prepared to continue brainstorming.  —David Levy 06:44, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

John's got a stomach bug
If anyone is trying to find me, I'm going to hang with John until we see whether he needs to go to a doctor. I'll be back as soon as I can. - Dank (push to talk) 16:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We were worried, we flew back to NC, he saw the doctor, he's fine. Sucks to come back early, but I understand the videos of the conference are going to be up shortly on Commons, and I already got a chance to see most of the people I wanted to see, so ... meh. Great to meet you, Ed, you gave me a lot of ideas. - Dank (push to talk) 22:50, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That's sad, but you do what you have to do! I'm disappointed I couldn't meet him, but I'm very glad to hear he's okay. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Nice meeting you at Wikimania
You've come a long way since your "Disruption, trolling, vandalism, no useful edits" days :-P Keep up the good work. -- Cyde Weys 01:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. :P Nice seeing you too, and I hope we all get together again sometime! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Probably should go here too... nice meeting you in person! Hopefully it won't be the last time. Keep up the good work on the Signpost. Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 05:03, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Same to all that. Note that I won't be sad if you ever stop clerking and come back to the SP, even if it's not on the now-occupied Arb report. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Last week's Signpost still up?
If I knew something about your template, I would fix it myself. - Dank (push to talk) 10:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries, that's manual for now while we test it. I'm updating it now. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It seems to be fixed for me :) Nick-D (talk) 10:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Not for me ... for instance, the Featured Content is last week's, and I think others as well. - Dank (push to talk) 10:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:SIGNPOST is still off though. ;-) Am updating. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Fantastic job on your write-up of the conference, btw. - Dank (push to talk) 15:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Duplicate Signpost postings
Hi. It looks like LivingBot updated Global message delivery/Spam twice, resulting in double postings. This led to EdwardsBot being blocked on de.wikipedia.org. I don't think there's much to be done now, but we should try to avoid this. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 15:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * My internet died partway through Jarry's automated process. I made sure it wouldn't break anything on en.wp when I redid the step ... but I forgot to check the meta implications, as you are aware. Sorry! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Agincourt FAC
I've updated the article in response to the last few comments from the ACR, so you can nom it whenever you get a chance.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The 'Special report' in this week's Signpost
Hi Ed. I'm a long-term fan of the Signpost, but I'm really disappointed by the 'Special report' in this week's edition. It is conflating two entirely separate issues - the establishment of the WCA, and the arbcom case against Fæ - and appears to be manufacturing non-existent controversy around the WCA as a result. I would strongly urge you, as editor in chief, to separate the two issues into two articles - one covering the WCA, and another covering the arbcom case around Fæ. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I know nothing about the WCA and very little about WMUK ... but I have to admit that I thought it was quite striking that the WCA would choose a leader who may be about to be banned from Wikipedia; it suggests there's a disconnect somewhere, and certainly struck me as newsworthy. But again ... I know nothing at all about the merits. - Dank (push to talk) 16:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I must disagree – they are very related. Fae is both the chair of Wikimedia UK and the elected chair of the WCA (the election took place during Wikimania). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * While I think that this is an important issue to cover (and the obvious problems with the WCA selecting an editor in poor standing on this Wikipedia as its first chair clearly need to be covered as it does decrease the organisation's credibility considerably), the breathless tabloid style of the article really does it no favours. The first of the dot points about Fæ's alleged misconduct should have been omitted as it's obviously not actionable (if people want to upload photos of themselves with no clothes on to Commons for some reason, this seems to be fine - and probably rightly so, I guess). Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Queering Wikipedia edit-a-thon
Hi! I'm helping to organized a Queering Wikipedia edit-a-thon in Los Angeles. I was wondering if we could publish a report in the Signpost after the event? It is Sunday, so there is not much time to write it up. Let me know if that is possible. Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 20:56, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * To clarify, you are looking to author a separate page for this week's Signpost? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * A separate article would be nice, yes, but if that is not possible, a small notice would still be good! Wadewitz (talk) 22:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't typically have separate pages for anything but the biggest events, but I'll make sure it's in News and notes. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 17:15, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia talk:Meetup/LA/7 - short summary of the event. Wadewitz (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for adding Brandon Harris tot he Signpost article
and nice to meet you, however, briefly, at Wikimania. SPhilbrick (Talk)  15:12, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Anytime. I had meant to add him before publishing, but it slipped my mind -- thanks for the reminder. Nice to meet you too! See ya around the wiki, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Shocking language!
I thought you wrote a bit nicer than this.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  @ 20:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I got a little angry that day. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the Signpost work


Hello, ed17! I want to thank you for your hard work writing the Signpost every week. You don't just collect some links and quotes, you actually analyse and comment in depth a lot of stuff. That's why I'm giving you the Content Creativity Barnstar. Feathers are really old fashioned, but fortunately good writing isn't. Good luck! --NaBUru38 (talk) 01:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'm not sure that I'm quite as good as you say I am, but I'm continuing to learn as I go! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Shannara location
Template:Infobox Shannara location has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2012
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Signpost feedback
You know, if you are looking for constructive feedback, might I suggest a new feature? I've had in my head that the post may benefit from a "classifieds" page that lists the weekly articles up at the bounty board and the reward board, and in my mind's eye, would allow editors looking for help or interested in testing the waters to place an "ad" such as it were on the page to see if they could find other liked minded people for whatever project or goal they need help with (ie: "project x is being reactivated, any interested editors are asked to join", "seeking an editor adept at .svg conversions for photo project", etc). It could be worth a look into if the other post members think the idea has a chance.

On an unrelated note, read that you got flack this week for your controversy article. I wanted you to know that in my case at least this was the first I was hearing of any controversy, and while the article in the post was apparently controversial, I found it illuminating in that it did sum up an interesting issue for me. Nice to know that when push comes to shove some people still have the balls to tell it like it is for the rest of the world to know. TomStar81 (Talk) 14:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We already have that in the WikiProject Report, Tom! ;-)
 * Thanks for the feedback! We're doing our best. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Help requested...
Ed, can you take a look at the edit-war underway at Roger Federer (and the discussion heatedly underway at its talk page), brought to my attention here, and see if it needs full protection to ensure proper discussion? My Internet is being 100% derp today so I can't do much. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not The ed17, but... done. - jc37 01:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry Bushranger, I wasn't online, but it looks like one of my talk page stalkers got it for you. ;-) Thanks Jc! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Signpost op ed
Hi Ed, I'm hoping to do an opinion editorial on my dispute resolution work - is it too late to get something in for the upcoming issue? <font face="Verdana"><font color="#078330">Steven <font color="#2875b0">Zhang  <font color="#d67f0f">Get involved in DR! 01:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Steven, it's not too late, and we don't have anything scheduled for this week right now, so I'm fine with a preliminary green light. Let me know when you have a draft ready. :-) (not to censor it or anything, just copyediting) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll do my best to get a draft ready in the next day - I've got a lot on but it'd be great to have an opinion piece on dispute resolution to coincide with the Wikiproject Dispute Resolution report. I'm not a good writer though so I'll do what I can. <font face="Verdana"><font color="#078330">Steven <font color="#2875b0">Zhang  <font color="#d67f0f">Get involved in DR! 07:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have a wiki friend interested in DR too, you could always have him/her coauthor it to help you out! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:39, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey there - heads up - Wikipedia Signpost/2012-09-03/Op-ed - I'll have it up by the next issue :-) Szhang (WMF) (talk) 23:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Highlights from June 2012
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for June 2012, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement
 * Wikimedia Foundation highlights
 * Advisory group discusses future funds dissemination structure
 * Second Visual Editor prototype launched
 * "Teahouse" pilot concludes with encouraging results
 * Hackers convene in Berlin
 * Data and Trends
 * Financials
 * Other movement highlights
 * "Afripedia" brings offline Wikipedia into remote African areas
 * Second "Iberoconf" summit in Santiago de Chile
 * "Wikipedia Academy" on research about Wikipedia

<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">About &middot; Subscribe/unsubscribe &middot; Distributed via Global message delivery, 21:30, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Re:Afd
There are two reasons why I did not restart a merge discussion: Its extreme, but it works, and right now with the FTRC open we really do not have time for diplomacy (IMO). TomStar81 (Talk) 06:13, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merging has already been discussed from Hell to Breakfast and back to Texas with no consensus, and restarting the age old merge debate is unlikely to get any fresh blood on the case, which is what we need here, and
 * Our hand has been forced on the matter on account of this: Featured topic removal candidates/Iowa class battleships/archive1. I am not going to work alone or with others to bring up Kentucky and/or Illinois if our entire workload is gonna end up null and void by merging. This forces the issue, but in its resolution we will know which of the two options we are going to take to keep the Iowa's as an FT.
 * Well, I was under the impression that we had a consensus to merge&mdash;just no one had done it yet. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:55, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Which is ironic, because I was under the impression that all had ended without consensus. Which just proves a point that this afd will force the merge issue at the same time it serves as a motion of confidence for or against the retention of the individual articles. Incidentally, you should weigh in at the afd, the more people that do the clearer the consensus will be for or against retention and the more people who weigh in the sooner consensus can be reached and the afd closed. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:21, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh, well, to each our own view! I'll go !vote to merge over there. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:53, 29 July 2012 (UTC)