New contributor User:NabuKudurru would appreciate feedback on their submission, which is about Wikimedia Movement finance decisions.

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Op-ed

Bluerasberry (talk) 18:38, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@NabuKudurru: You could improve the impact of the writing by following inverted pyramid (journalism). Take your tl;dr section at the end and move it closer to the top, maybe right at the top. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bri,

Thanks for the feedback, i am trying to shorten it some now. also I put the tldr at the top so thanks

Best,

Brett NabuKudurru (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Shadestar474: Yes thank you for offering to copyedit. NabuKudurru here is a first-time Signpost contributor. If you have ideas while reviewing this text, then can you please also offer developmental editing suggestions to fit the text to the Wikipedia community's needs? Bri here has recommending getting to the point sooner, and maybe while reading this you will have another suggestion. But straightforward copyediting is also welcome. Review Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Formatting for guidance on the images. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:34, 30 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m also a first-time contributor to the Signpost, so I doubt I’ll have much additional value to add to the text itself, but if I have any thoughts, I’ll make sure to share them! And thanks so much for letting me copyedit it :) Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (they/he) In solidarity. 19:08, 30 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I’ve copyedited it; I changed some wording to make it more accurate and flow better, but definitely feel free to correct me if in any rephrasing I accidentally got a fact wrong or something. (I also deleted the extra TLDR section at the bottom of the page.)

I really don’t see any problems with it journalistically, except that it’s rather unclear who ‘we’ is. we suggest that a simple, straightforward strategy would be […] Could you state that a bit more clearly somewhere near the top of the article? Otherwise, it seems perfect. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (they/he) In solidarity. 19:48, 30 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank you, sorry for rechanging :D I am still editing it some - some edits got lost probably i left the edit screen open too long. I will have it finally soon. Best, Brett NabuKudurru (talk) 08:47, 6 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mk, that’s cool :) No worries about changing the phrasing, by the way; you made some really excellent changes that I didn’t even think of! Just let me know when you’re finished and I’ll get to copyediting it as soon as I can. Cheers! 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) In solidarity. 08:54, 6 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@NabuKudurru: I saw you added some content; would you mind if I copyedited it further for additional grammar/punctuation things? (In addition, if I see phrasing I want to change, should I just go ahead and do that like I did previously or discuss that with you? Asking since I saw you changed back some of the rephrasing) Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (any/all) In solidarity. 03:01, 3 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thank you for edits - it looks good. the end is a bit hasty but the longer it is the longer it takes.

I think its ok for publication from my end.

Best,

Brett NabuKudurru (talk) 09:06, 6 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By ‘ready for publication,’ do you mean I should copyedit it? Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) In solidarity. 09:15, 6 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist