The Signpost

Features and admins

This week's highlights

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Tony1
"Man from Ramallah spinning wool", picture of the day on 1 July. The hand-tinted photograph from 1919 was restored by User:Durova, involving cleaning, rotation, cropping and colour-balancing.

Thirteen articles were promoted to featured status:

Choice of the week: The Signpost asked reviewer/nominator Casliber for his number-one choice among these FA promotions. He picked Royal Gold Cup: "It came together very nicely, and is such an interesting one to read. This is the first nomination to qualify for the Wikipedia:GLAM/British Museum's joint Featured Article Prize, and we look forward to seeing more of these." (See Signpost coverage of the British Museum collaboration).

Four featured articles were demoted:

Eight lists were promoted to featured status:

Choice of the week: We asked Dabomb87, a director of the featured list process, for his personal choices. "My favorite was 2009 College Football All-America Team – I'm a fan of American football, and the extended lead makes this article interesting; as well, the references make it a valuable resource. Second for me was List of number-one singles from the 1970s (UK) – I had nostalgic memories of old cassette tapes in my parents' house reading through this list and seeing some of my favorite songs (ABBA, especially). Good supplementary text and images, and good use of color in the main table."

One list was demoted: List of popes (graphical)

Eastern Great Egret, Tasmania, Australia
Eight images were promoted:

Choice of the week: Raeky, a regular reviewer at featured picture candidates, told The Signpost, "My favorite was the panoramic view of the Great Court of Baalbek temple complex in Lebanon. Panoramas of this size, I believe, are a prime example of how photography makes an article come to life. This one allows the viewer to delve into an area in a way that a simple snapshot can't do." The image appears at the bottom of this page. Raeky has a helpful hint, too: "Readers might be interested in a feature that lets you easily navigate through these large images on almost any connection: interactive flash viewer."

Three topics were promoted:

This week, among the highlights on the Main Page were those on the best, the biggest, and the greatest:

Picture of the day

Aside from the image above, the pictures of the day included:

Administrators

No editors were granted admin status via the Requests for Adminship process.

Panoramic view of the Great Court of Baalbek Temple Complex in Lebanon
+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

I like the new format very much, and I appreciate all your excellent hard work, but I'm not sure I like the "choice of the week" paragraphs. Keep It Simple. There is already too much competitiveness on Wikipedia, and we don't need subjective commentary on why X's FA is better than Y's. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words, Ssilvers. Concerning "subjective comment", I wanted to bring out the human element of these rich and competitive processes—the fact that real people have opinions there—as well as printing those interesting comments by nominators. The "Choices of the week" are clearly marked as opinions, and The Signpost has the journalistic capacity to give light to good-faith opinions. The message, I guess, is: hey, what do you, the reader, think? Go have a look at these excellent articles, lists, images, and see if you agree or disagree with those opinions. Tony (talk) 17:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to applaud the editors involved for the overhaul; introducing attribution, blurbs and critical commentary has made what used to be a dull, brief list into a must-read. Contrary to Ssilvers, I think an injection of a modicum of competitve spirit is a positive development, and the choices of the week will be understood by all to be somewhat subjective in any case. Commendations, all. Skomorokh 18:04, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great work, Tony! I especially enjoyed the sentence or two summarizing the new Featured Articles. However, I found myself clicking on the links to all the new Featured Pictures, and I really did like the format used until last week in which all of them were included. Perhaps the new format with only one featured picture is less cluttered, but I really enjoyed seeing all the new FPs on this page. They are all such beautiful images! Thanks again and keep up the good work! TFCforever (talk) 23:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also really like the brief attributed blurbs and critical commentary, especially when it's unintentional (and therefore hilarious) damning with faint praise. - BanyanTree 02:25, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ta, but perhaps you'll email me or talk-page me as to which one has been thus damned? I thought the array of featured contect was superb. Tony (talk) 02:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC) Ah, Banyan says it's the "rather interesting" comment by the nominator that is quoted here. Tony (talk) 04:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Love the modifications to this, though if I may ask, will the other featured areas (i.e. portals, topics, etc.) be included as well in future issues? Granted, that may make this more time-consuming, though those naturally have fewer or none in a week to note. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all who've said nice things here; and yes, they are only modifications to the structure that seresin has developed over the years. Portals and topics (and sounds) should be covered if there are any changes, and oops, there was movement in topics, I see now. I'd be inclined to shift the emphasis away from the main-page appearances (they've just had their day of glory) and to cover portals, topics and sounds. My glitch; it was all done in a hurry because of RL work deadline just before the SP deadline. I'm adding mention now, but I'd have delved more into them if I'd done this properly. Tony (talk) 18:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please maintain the comment saying that no featured articles were delisted? I had to go and check, to make sure, because the report didn't say anything about FA delistings. 203.217.95.11 (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's up to User:seresin. But to be consistent, it means you'd have to say that for all categories of featured content in which there are no delistings in a a particular week—which is usually most in most weeks. I thought it could be the default not to mention if there have been none. But to tell you the truth, I neglected to check. I'll add a note now about FA demotions. Thx. Tony (talk) 13:57, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]



       

The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0