Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-11-20/In the media

Comic-Contextualization

 * Skidmore is one of the finest Wikipedia (and Creative Commons) photographer, kudos for him for releasing images under Creative Commons licence.-- Vulcan  ❯❯❯  Sphere!  10:04, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Never in a million years I would've expected to see my entry at the very top of a Signpost article... Thank you so much for this opportunity! Oltrepier (talk) 20:48, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm grateful you wrote a contribution for the issue. Every Wikipedian is welcome to submit an idea, suggestion, or contributing in other ways like copyediting. Eventually we hope to increase the staff of The Signpost, always looking for help and there are a number of vacancies for regular columns, even. For others who might be wondering how to get involved: we created this helpful Quick Start page. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Take Notes

 * Isn’t that just editing the article and the existing NPOV stuff we have in place? Aaron Liu (talk) 14:08, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, yeah - given how anybody can edit the article or comment on the talk page on WP, it seems redundant. But the difference is that there would be a 3rd place, on the Notes page. We've already had something like that too, I think it was called something like "Reader's comments" or just "feedback" and only lasted a couple of years. I'm not sure why it was killed off, but guess that nobody used it - either readers to forward us new ideas or editors to get ideas on changing the article. It might have been useless rather than just unused, but in any case who wanted it? I don't think The Examiner really had much to say other than, in effect, "We don't like Wikipedia", but at least they included a pretense that can be discussed. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 14:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * After a bit of searching, I found this: Aaron Liu (talk) 15:04, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The article feedback tool was famously a disaster. The input it solicited was junk and had to all be revdeled, essentially. X's Community Notes are modeled off of Wikipedia, so citing them as something Wikipedia should emulate is a pretty inane argument. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 15:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 15:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see how the summary at the top could possibly work well, which may be one reason why the Feedback tool failed. It's easy to imagine a scenario: Hard-working NPOV editors A and B create a well-sourced article about an obscure person from the 18th century. Reader C posts a Community Note: "Obscure Person liked to eat babies." Editors A and B are the only people knowledgeable on the subject on all of Wikipedia and the only watchers of the article, but they can't do anything to counter the Community Note? It's unworkable on its face. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

More on WP and the Napoleon-film
[https://slate.com/technology/2023/11/napoleon-movie-ridley-scott-wikipedia-page.html Watching the Napoleon Movie? Don’t Forget to Read His Wikipedia Page.] I quote:

"Le petit caporal even has a stand-alone article on his genitals (only Jesus and Hitler can say the same)."

Wikipedians, I think we have been challenged. If nothing else, there is a gender-imbalance here that must be corrected. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Huh, I would have guessed that Rasputin's alleged penis might have made the cut, but apparently not. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:04, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Prince Harry's? It was on South Park. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:18, 28 November 2023 (UTC)