User:The ed17/Archives/79

Wikimedia Highlights from May 2014
Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for May 2014, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement About &middot; Subscribe/unsubscribe, 16:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikimedia Foundation highlights
 * 12 new individual engagement grants
 * Inviting anonymous editors to join the Wikipedia community
 * Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) recommendations announced
 * Data and Trends
 * Financials
 * Other highlights from the Wikimedia movement
 * Annual Wikimedia Hackathon in Zürich, Switzerland
 * "Wikidata Game": A fun new way to improve Wikidata
 * Wiki Loves Earth goes international

Signpost talk page
I'm following up on your talk page about the issue I raised on the Signpost talk page (on audio transcripts). I'm presuming you are aware of that discussion. Could I ask if you intend to respond at some point? I'm asking because the point has been raised (with hindsight) that different actions here by you might have helped head some of this off (I can expand on this if needed). The thought has also crossed my mind that an open letter to the Signpost (signed by some of those that commented there), or an article for the Signpost on the accessibility issues, might help. Would you be willing to publish something of that nature if I and others were able to put something together? Carcharoth (talk) 06:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Carcharoth: talk page stalker here. Ed is usually open minded about op-eds if they are written to address a specific issue so an op-ed about accessibility would probably be ok. --Pine✉ 07:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your comment here. My intention was to delay a transcript by a couple days to satisfy Tony's desire while not unduly inconveniencing users. He and I fought viciously over it, as I was well aware of the problems deaf users face. In the end, he threatened to quit, so against my better judgement, I compromised on a short wait.
 * Then the community, in the form of, impressively stepped up on their own and made a transcript. With that out, I felt that the 'deal' between Tony and I was off; edit-warring to keep the transcript off the article would make the Signpost, and everyone involved, look (and personally speaking, feel) far worse than we already did. As you can see, Tony disagreed, so that's the exact road we went down.
 * Having said all that, I don't intend to respond on the Signpost's talk page. I view it as a reader comment section that I don't want to unduly influence, although I will of course be taking all of the posts there on board in the future. I think it goes without saying that if we do an audio interview again (this was the first, to my knowledge, that we've ever done), that we will endeavor to provide a transcript—and if something prevents us from doing so, we will explicitly ask the community to pitch in.
 * As for your accessibility article idea, I think your energies may be best focused on an op-ed that explains the barriers deaf users face on Wikipedia, and forcefully argue for changes that positively benefit you and the countless other deaf editors on the projects. Using this experience as a catalyst and making your case to the wider movement may have more impact. What do you think?
 * Thank you for your comments, both here and on the two Signpost talk pages. You have my deepest apologies. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Ed, as one of the more vocal annoyed people I do appreciate the response and explanation. You can probably tell I was pretty narked over it. Your explanation of how it happened was pretty much what I expected. However I dont think even in the pursuit of content compromises should be made over your principles. As EIC its also your responsibility to help set the moral and ethical standards by which your writer's/contributers follow. I hope in future that the next time someone threatens to take their ball and go home, you let them. There are always more balls out there Ed. Only in death does duty end (talk) 18:13, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ed, for explaining what happened here. Your apology is accepted and appreciated. I will try and find the time to do an op-ed piece though I'm not sure about the timing or when I'd find the time. I'll try and get back to you on that by the end of the weekend (I may find some time to make a start tomorrow). Carcharoth (talk) 19:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Blind men and elephant3.jpg offhand, there were a couple of other individuals on that thread talking about, I think, file hosting options. Might be good to get the folk with pieces to the accessibility puzzle all together in the same Signpost issue, so they can get to know each other better....—Neotarf (talk) 21:46, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , thank you. You may find it easier and more rewarding to collaborate with two of the other editors here? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:22, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Accessibility is hard. For instance, as I understand it, for a couple years, Wikipedia has used a CAPTCHA system unusable by the blind, and requires it for every edit, I think up to autoconfirmed. Could Ed have done better? Yes, but it's probably better to explain how, ideally with accessibility checklists. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I, too, am grateful for your comments, Ed. It is always sad to see an immensely talented person go off the rails and sink into rage over the most minor sort of criticism, and I am sure that you were in a terrible bind. Take care, Ed, your work at the Signpost is appreciated. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  22:00, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, —you're much too kind. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:22, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Sturmvogel
Thanks for the catch - I knew he was a prolific MILHIST author, but hadn't realized he worked so much on ships. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:22, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem, I work (on and off...) in the same topic area, so it was an easy catch for me. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Öland FAC
Since you provided helpful comments and/or reviewing in related quality assessments, I'm dropping a notice that battle of Öland is now an FAC. Please feel free to drop by with more input!

sincerely, Peter Isotalo 05:45, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Spontaneous challenges
Hi Ed,

I'm wondering if I could lean on your better knowledge of WikiProjects and community contests and related things. I recently came into a cache of reproduction WWI and WWII posters from the the NARA Trust Fund (like these) which we thought would make excellent contest prizes. I'm interested in having spontaneous, non-self-serving challenges (like "there is no article on the concept of national archives, like the existing national library article; free poster to the first person who writes one!"). But I'm not sure where to list that where it would actually get enough visibility to be successful (without spamming), and I'm not interested in anything that would involve a lot of overhead, like creating a new contest page at WP:NARA and then investing a lot of time promoting it to the community. Any idea where this kind of thing could go? Dominic·t 20:43, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Well. Ruling out the quick and dirty way (spamming) kind of limits your options. ;-) Just ideas from the top of my head, but you could work through the Military history coordinators (oh which I am one) to create a central page and promote it to the project members? And perhaps you would monitor the page and approve/deny article suggestions ("is fall of Constantinople important enough? Yes. Is USS LST-198? Probably not")? Granted, this does hinge a bit on what you meant by "spontaneous". Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Putting it in the Signpost might not be a bad idea, but I'd suggest telling Ed alone, so that noone'll get a heads up by reading it before publication day. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:06, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Adam does have a point... you might consider keeping the start date quiet so there's no bad blood later ("you started early!"). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, I wasn't being so optimistic that it would get that competitive. I was just hoping for any response. :-) Let's try the WikiProject first and see how it goes. I guess all I meant by "spontaneous" was that I want this to be informal; I'll keep doing this as long as I have supplies/postage and people are happy with the idea, but I didn't want to make a big deal out of it (or use the Signpost megaphone, probably) unless the community is clamoring for it. Anyway, here's a draft of the idea: User:Dominic/Challenge. Do you think that could be supported by the Military history WikiProject? (I'm not necessarily seeing this as limited in scope to the topic area of military history, but I'm not sure if that is a problem for you.) Dominic·t 19:17, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see—fair enough :-) I'll post this on the coordinator's talk page and see what we can put together. It's not a problem to promote the page even if it's not limited to milhist (we're pretty informal), but can you find at least one milhist article so that we have a raison de etre to send it around? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:00, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Just following up here—any chance of adding a Milhist article to the mix before I go to the coords? :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Just added one that I am aware of now, though I haven't compiled a list yet so it's pretty specific (but passes the notability test in my opinion). Dominic·t 20:38, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I've added a query on the coordinator's talk page! You may want to think up a couple more articles so that you can attract a broader segment of participants, though. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:04, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It's been advertised in Milhist's Bugle, and I'll put a blurb on WT:MILHIST once you've put a couple more articles up (both are currently taken :-) ) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:40, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

FC
Think I've got FPs; think you'd be willing to do lists? I'll probably do them if you can't, but with the two articles in this week, I want to get ahead a little. How's the WikiCup report look? Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey Adam, I'll try to get to them after work tomorrow. I'm working on a Wikimania financials piece, so it's a little complicated at the moment. :p The WikiCup report looks pretty good to me. I like the gallery ... I can't wait for regular images to look like that (aka no frames). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:00, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks to some excellent work by SchroCat, I woke to find I just had to btweak the images and write to he last FP description. By the way: I used a gallery for the Pont du Hard at the bottom. It now automatically scales to the window: very convenient for a panorama. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It scales to the width of a user's window? Absolutely brilliant! Nice work, Adam. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: June 2014
Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 22:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

August
I should probably warn that I'm going to be very, very busy in August. I should still be able to do image selection, but the writeups take a few hours, so I really can't promise too much on that account. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I'm still working on finding someone to help you out! :-) Heading over to SchroCat now, actually. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Signpost next week
(As in, not the one about to be published, but the one after)

Godot13 has hit 100 featured pictures since the start of the year. I would like to do a short interview with him. Any objections? Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:03, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * None at all. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:30, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay?
Hi Ed! It seems that most of the new issues of the Signpost are published with an edit summary of "Sorry for the delay". Are they all missing some publication deadline, or is there some in-group joke that I've missed? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:37, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey GoingBatty, we're technically supposed to publish on Wednesdays (or for this week, 9 July), but we rarely make it due to a combination of factors... mostly contributor availability. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Multiple pinging
Your revision of Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions at 17:45, 14 July 2014 (edit summary: "a lot of pings") reminded me of Village pump (technical)/Archive 127 (July 2014). I found some of the replies difficult to understand, but you might be able to understand them well enough to use them. —Wavelength (talk) 19:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC) and 19:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, I think I was supposed to use ping group. Thanks for the note, as I wouldn't have found it otherwise! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:14, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm stopping the top 25/Traffic Report
Sorry to spring this on you, but it's a thankless job and I'm sick of the abuse. So I hope you can find someone masochistic enough to take it on.  Serendi pod ous  23:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thankless is definitely understandable, and I'm sorry that I didn't remember to watch the page this week. Had I done so, I would have stepped in long ago. Is there anything I can do to convince you to stay? Otherwise, I'm going to be very sorry to see you go. I've always liked the section as something different than our normal material. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:14, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I dunno. I'm going though a difficult time right now and I really don't need this additional pressure. Maybe when I've sorted some things out in real life, then I'll come back.  Serendi pod ous  00:19, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Same reason I'm out: 10 days of abuse, mockery, insults (some of them sexualised and violent); then Wales' referring to me as an abuser on his high-traffic talk page, an accusation for 3000 watchlisters to see for day after day at the opening: that sealed it. Why would I want to bust my guts every week serving a community I now despise? And that's aside from the related internal issues. Go to hell and burn, I say to the community. Tony   (talk)
 * I hear ya. In the meantime, I'll try to find someone to fill the gap created by your departure, but even if I get a person, you're always welcome back (smaller workload for you, right? :-) ). Best of luck, and let me know if I can help with anything on-wiki in the future! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:04, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry to butt in, came here for something else but saw this and wanted to say that I'm sorry to see you go. I've always enjoyed reading the traffic report.  I can't imagine why someone would subject someone else to abuse over something like that, but people always manage to amaze me with their stupidity.  I hope we can preserve this feature in some form or recreate it when you return from your wikibreak.   Gamaliel  ( talk ) 21:46, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thankfully, Milowent is going to take it over for the moment. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Invisalign
Hey Ed. I was wondering if you had time to take a look at a Request Edit here to add a History section, create a more neutral Lead that isn't UNDUE with lawsuits, introduce an Align Technology section about the product's manufacturer, and optionally cut out a massive body of OR/synth for medical claims. It should make it almost GA-ready, once I add a more proper section about all the medical studies on the subject.

John Broughton reviewed the draft already, but he typically just provides feedback without actually performing the request edit - he's asked me to only rely on him as a backup for such tasks. CorporateM (Talk) 23:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey CM, I'm far too busy at the moment to look into this thoroughly. Sorry! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

In other news
May be a bit proofread out, but I'm still plotting images a bit. So, South Carolina-class battleship. I think File:USS New Hampshire c1910 LOC ggbain 04455.jpg, File:Photograph of the Battleship USS Michigan at the Brooklyn Navy Yard - NARA - 19-N-61-6-25.jpg and - although it has some very awkward damage - see the bright horizontal stripe in the middle? File:Photograph of the Battleship USS Michigan - NARA - 19-N-13573.jpg are the potential FPs in it. What do you think? Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey Adam! I'd go with File:Photograph_of_the_Battleship_USS_Michigan_-_NARA_-_19-N-13573.jpg. The other Michigan image is from the stern, and New Hampshire is a comparison image of an earlier ship (and not representative of the South Carolinas!) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, I'd like to publish before work tomorrow (about seven hours) or at least on my lunch break (ten to eleven) as I have a time-sensitive SR to go out. Can you get the FPs finished by then? Sorry for the short notice! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Update to MediaViewer
Hi The ed, there is an update to MediaViewer, the story you recently covered in the Signpost, see. Would it be possible for me to have a chat with Adam (here or on IRC) when we both have time so I can learn the ropes? Thanks, Mat  ty. 007 19:28, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I've commented on that one at meta:Research_talk:Media_Viewer_preference_elicitation - I think the WMF sometimes doesn't quite realise the distinction between new functionality (generally fine) and replacement to old functionality (much, much more likely to cause problems/upset.) Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link, Matty -- I'll put it in an IB for next week. As for IRC, I'll let you and Adam agree on a time that works best for both of you :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014
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 Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Book review
I've finished reading the books and am starting to work on the review. (Thanks again for the invitation.) What's the deadline for the next Signpost and how do I submit the draft? Thanks, Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:50, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey, the deadline for this edition is Wednesday, but I'd like to run the review on the 30th, as I have a different opinion piece ready to go for this coming week, and I'd rather not dilute theirs or yours by running them together. As for submitting the draft, we normally have opinion writers submit them by Google doc or email (but if you're uncomfortable with that, I've created a spot for you in our newsroom). :-) Thanks again! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:17, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to run on the 30th. What would the deadline be for that issue? Thanks, Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The 30th, as we typically publish a day or two after the listed date. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:27, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:30, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

FC and the Signpost
I really wish you wouldn't publish when the one part of the Signpost seen by 20,000 people a day - about a hundred times the views of any other part of the Signpost - isn't done. It automatically updates Portal:Featured content, and makes all of us look bad. If you do that again, I'm going to resgn, because you've just basically told me that I'll be spending the next three hours dropping any plans I had for tonight, such as sleeping. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:34, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey Adam Cuerden, it took me a few minutes to find it, but this is why I made this change—to give you time to complete it. Don't worry, I had the portal in mind when I published, but I do apologize for not letting you know in advance. Sleep and come back tomorrow when you're refreshed. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:40, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * That would probably have best been told me before I put in an hour and a half of panicked work, but... never mind, it's done. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Well... I tried to say it fast enough. Apologies again. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:51, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Village_pump_(miscellaneous)
Heads up for the Signpost. Also, note that next week's FC is the last one before August starts up, and I will not be able to do anything like last night's work again, someone else will need to write all of it, I can help with images, but that's it until the end of August. I mean, maybe I could do more, but it cannot be my responsibility. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:15, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * That's fine, Adam. We have Matty, who's agreed to help out; SchroCat is keeping an eye on it; Ian can pitch in if needed; and I can always call in a favor or two. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:51, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
For the administrative assistance at SMS Goeben. Srnec (talk) 18:58, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Anytime! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

FC for this week
Well, I've done all the FPs. There was worries about inaccuracy in your description of The FP, but I got the author of the article to do a replacement, so that's fine. Not very many good illustrations in the articles or lists this week. Only one that was close was the Alastair Sim list, but those were tiny images, and I do like to give people something they can click on and be impressed by. Title's a horrible old wordplay joke, but tell me that you wouldn't make it given that FA and that FP. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I like the title! Will comment on your page about the inaccuracy. And remember, there's no need to be 'fair' in the imagery. We're here to make the page and P:FC look good. :P Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, I know, but I do like to try. Hence why there's suddenly a Red Skelton image at FPC. ;) That happens more often than you'd think... Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:58, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, one warning: I've noticed a lot of FPs have been promoted already this week. Shouldn't be too many more - looks like probably about 15 total - but FPs are the ones I find most time-consuming. If you'll finish the FLs this week, I'll ease the way towards the changeover by starting the documentation work instead. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Never mind. Turns out most were in a set. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:34, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Prep work's done at Wikipedia Signpost/2014-08-06/Featured content
 * Thanks, Adam! Just how much will you be able to do in the coming month? Some, I hope? :p Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:21, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's not plan on anything more than layout - choosing images and such. Anything above that is a bonus. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:52, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, we'll do what we can. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Could always fall back on quotes from the articles. I'll try to do more, but if I say I can do more, it removes the point of me asking for the time off, to make sure I needn't put in time I don't have. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * "It's a lovely painting, and I rather wish this issue of the sign"... Adam, I don't think that sentence is done. I'm so curious, wish that the Signpost what? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, um, I was originally going to say "I rather wish this issue of the Signpost had room for it." Then I made room. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmm... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:40, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, nice work Adam. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:21, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Main_Page
Because it is. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:34, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, speaking as the editor, of course I'd like the extra views ... but I think people will take issue with the occasional miscues that we have. We'll see. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Redlinks and the Signpost
Hi- are you open for suggestions for op-ed pieces in the Signpost? Something I've come across recently, which I find slightly baffling, is an aversion some people have to redlinks. How would you feel about me knocking together a little piece in praise of redlinks for the Signpost? It'd probably take a week or two. J Milburn (talk) 15:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Sounds interesting. Care to mention that a low number of redlinks is actually a featured article criteria on some Wikipedias? (Say, the Indonesian one). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:00, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm completely open to it. I have a spot open on the 13th; does that work? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:53, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ed: Perfect. Crisco: Thanks, I didn't know that. J Milburn (talk) 11:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep. In the Indonesian WP, criteria 1b: "... tidak memiliki pranala merah yang terlalu banyak" (does not contain too many redlinks). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:48, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * } VGAs (Very Good Articles, the FA analog) on the Simple English Wikipedia can't have any redlinks last time I checked the criteria.  Imzadi 1979  →   12:55, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you both; very interesting. The closest we have on enwp, AFAIK, is the rejected proposal WP:STABLE, which says that a stable article "has not red links". A load of tosh, to my eyes. J Milburn (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I've started drafting at User:J Milburn/Signpost opinion piece. It may change yet. J Milburn (talk) 19:48, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't mind it being around 1000 words or so, but if it goes over that, you could consider splitting it into two parts. It may have more impact that way, as people will read through the entire thing. Your call; I don't mind either way! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:10, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Book review
It's pretty much done; I'm proofreading it now and trying to make it more concise. Can I have another hour or so? Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * You've got time; I don't anticipate publishing for another 24 hours or so. Just wanted to ping you early enough so you'd have time to complete it! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * In that case, I'll give it a final readthrough in the morning with a fresh pair of eyes. Thanks. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:55, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * That's fine—thank you again! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Done and in my sandbox. Sorry it's so long! Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I did a quick proof-read and made a couple small edits. NYB will want to look at the first one, as I had a question about word choice. —Neotarf (talk) 00:45, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Good edits; thanks very much. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Glad you don't mind, everything needs new eyes on it. Wonder what Ed would think about an illustration? My personal favorite is File:Books (7003021898).jpg, the tan and blue gilded hardcovers, looks like a lawyers bookshelf, but maybe a graphic would be more sedate. . —Neotarf (talk) 02:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * , have you ever heard of using a gallery? ;-), thanks. I'm exhausted and about to go to bed so I have enough sleep for work tomorrow, but I will publish either while I'm out to lunch or as soon as I get off. Neotarf's suggestion of admitting images would be very helpful, as they can break up the wall of text. A couple section headers could help too, but it's up to you. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I was thinking about section headers; I will go ahead and add some. I defer to your and Neotarf's discretion on adding images. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Gallery? Okay, I got it to work, sort of.
 * Section headers: This could probably be done more creatively, but I have added the book titles as section headers. Since the books are alternately referred to by title and author, making the title of the book clear in the section title could avoid some confusion.
 * Editor's note: Does Ed want to add some introduction here? I have tentatively started one.  Not sure if NYB wants to use his real name here, or if it's traditional with the SP.
 * Images: I have added an image of Pundit, the only free one I could find. I could not find a free image of Charles Seife. I got as far as finding an image of an elephant, with the thought of linking to tripling of elephants hoax so that section would have an image.  It's at  but not sure how to copy-paste the fancy new mediaviewer thing.  Not sure if it's a good idea anyhow. Ed is really the image guru. —Neotarf (talk) 13:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Adding my real name is fine if it's customary, up to the two of you. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I say use it. My preference is to credit people, unless they really, really prefer a low profile. And it will probably add to the pageviews. ;-) —Neotarf (talk) 16:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, please feel free to add it. I haven't done it myself because I'm not sure where exactly it would go. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:17, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I added it to the note at the beginning. The sentence now seems overly complex, but maybe I've just been looking at it for too long. Hopefully Ed will have a chance to do his magic on it when he goes on break. I also resurrected part of the previous section title and used it in the main title. —Neotarf (talk) 17:36, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help, Neotarf! I've made a few formatting changes. I've credited your RL name, but feel free to revert. I'll try to find at least one more image tonight, just to break it up... probably not an elephant, though. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Nicely done, the larger image too. But now with the title changed, is the book review part clear?  Would a new topic sentence serve as an introduction to the purpose of the piece--summer reading, interest in Wikipedia, whatever, or just the fact of the publication of two books on the subject--and help tie the piece together? —Neotarf (talk) 20:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, it's located under /Book review, so I think that's enough. ;-) I'm not sure what you're proposing with the latter? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:08, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh perfect, I thought it was going to say "feature" or somesuch. BTW, do you know anything about freezing talk pages?  I've gotten some weird manifestations lately and won't be around to revert things for a while. —Neotarf (talk) 08:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you protect it for, say, a week, starting any time?—Neotarf (talk) 08:10, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey Neotarf, full-protecting talk pages is pretty much never done. See PROTECT. Sorry :/ Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 13:11, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, thx :/ —Neotarf (talk) 18:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)