The Signpost
WP:POST/N
Newsroom


Welcome to the central hub of The Signpost!

This is The Signpost Newsroom, a place where The Signpost team can coordinate with writers, both regular and occasional, and people who have suggestions for topics to cover. See the boxes below if you have suggestions (something for the team to write about in regular columns), proposal/submissions (for articles you want to write/have written yourself), or want to create a pre-formatted draft article in your userspace, with helpful links and easy-to-edit syntax. Discussion occurs both here and in the Signpost Discord.


Discussion of upcoming issues is done at the newsroom talk page. For general feedback on The Signpost as a whole, go to our talk page. To learn more about The Signpost, see our about page.

The Signpost currently has 5717 articles, 713 issues, and 14023 pages (4580 talk and 9443 non-talk).

Links:

Suggest a topic

To suggest a topic to be covered by The Signpost, simply click on the button below or post to our suggestions page manually. Example of good topics are

  • Editors who have done something extraordinary/wonderful
  • Ongoing discussions
  • Media coverage of Wikipedia
  • Technical news
  • Updates to important tools and templates
  • Wikipedia-related events

but many more exist.


Email a private tip to the EiC
Propose/submit an article

If you have an idea for an article you would like to write, you can submit it for review by the editorial team. You can do so by clicking the button below or by posting to our submissions page manually.

  • News articles should be kept relatively neutral and report on a specific piece of actual news. They can be on any topic of interest to Wikipedians, from general events, to technical news.
  • Opinion pieces are evaluate on originality, relevance to Wikipedians, and the quality of the arguments. They should provoke thought and encourage productive discussion.
  • Special pieces cover things that don't fall neatly in the above two categories. If it's interesting to you, it's likely interesting to someone else as well. Check with us and we'll see what can be done!

Create a draft

To create a draft of an article in your userspace, simply copy-paste {{subst:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload}} at Special:MyPage/Signpost draft (replacing USERNAME with your own username).

You can also use the button below. This will preload a form, which you can then save and edit. We recommend saving without making any edits to the preloaded form before starting to write your article.



Calendar: current deadline is highlighted, and current UTC date is 2025-07-10 08:01:06.
June 2025
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
26 27 28 29 30 31 01
02 03 04 05 06 07 08
09 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 01 02 03 04 05 06
July 2025
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
30 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 01 02 03
August 2025
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
28 29 30 31 01 02 03
04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Article status

[edit]

Below here is an automatically generated master list of every page whose title starts with Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/. It's automatically generated by SDZeroBot every day. Also consult the mockup page for the next issue to make sure all of their titles, images and blurbs are correct.

You should click the button to manually update it and make sure it's current before doing anything serious.

Update newsroom tasks
Note: There are also a bunch of things in /Drafts and /Next next issue. When prepping an issue, make sure that articles in this expand-o-box are accounted for.

Sometimes titles will get messed up -- anything between here and the next horizontal line has a title error and needs to be fixed.

End of parseable title errors


Also, these categories (Purge):

Ready for copyedit Copyedit done Final approval Cat #
no no no Signpost drafts, not ready for copyedit 50
yes no no Signpost drafts, ready for copyedit 4
yes yes no Signpost drafts, ready for final check 5
yes yes yes Signpost drafts, ready for publication 5

From the editor

Not started ·
Resources


Arbitration report

Not started ·
Resources


Comix

Not started ·
Resources· next-next issue draft· staging area


Cobwebs

Not started ·
Resources


Disinformation report

Not started ·
Resources


Discussion report

In progress · 123b
last edited 2025-06-22 08:51:01 by HaeB
Resources· next-next issue draft

Checklist

  • Red X symbolN Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
No talk page section · click here to open one


Not started ·
Resources


Not started ·
Resources


From the archives

Not started ·
Resources


Next from the archives

Not started ·
Resources


Not started ·
Resources


Humour

In progress · 4,474b
last edited 2025-07-09 15:22:01 by Relativity
Resources

Checklist

  • Green checkmarkY Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
No talk page section · click here to open one


Essay

Not started ·
Resources


Concept

Not started ·
Resources


Crossword

Not started ·
Resources· staging area


In the media

In progress · 16,244b
last edited 2025-07-09 17:16:11 by Jayen466
Resources

Checklist

  • Red X symbolN Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
Discussion

I just removed an article published in the right-wing JNS by Aaron Bandler on the basis that it was unattributed to its author -- a prolific RW advocate (formerly employed by the Daily Wire among others). The Signpost published two briefs in the last issue which identified neither his participation nor his POV. The article I removed is an interesting case in point. Only after very strongly worded citations from various pro-Israel thinktanks and NGOs (unwatch.org, NGO monitor, Simon Wiesenthal Center, Foundation for Defense of Democracies) is it mentioned that the NGO EMHRM was actually downgraded in a recent RSN discussion. I think if this is published, at the very least, mention needs to be made of Bandler's energetic advocacy campaign. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 00:47, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this criticism directed at me for posting the link? I'm not sure what you mean "unattributed to its author"; none of the items I included in this edit did include the author, except one that I noticed was notable and written about himself. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:39, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that the Signpost should not become Aaron Bandler's in-house megaphone. I can see that you probably didn't realize that the author was on a mission. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 04:11, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted this. I sense some fundamental misunderstandings here about the role of ITM. It's not the Signpost's journalism award section where we honor and recommend the best press coverage of Wikipedia (or even serve as their in-house megaphone), but much closer in function to a press review or media monitoring service for the community. Throughout the Signpost's two-decade existence, this section had featured countless news articles that got basic facts about Wikipedia wrong (unsurprisingly, cf. Gell-Mann amnesia effect), or were highly opinionated in ways that are not compatible with various Wikipedia's values or community consensuses, or made unfounded bias accusations. (Of course, under general Wikipedia policy there are limits to what sites can be linked at all. If you feel that the Jewish News Syndicate should never be linked on-wiki even outside mainspace, perhaps submit a request to put it on the URL blacklist and see if the community agrees with you?)
While context like the name of a journalist who wrote a linked piece, their political allegiances, their previous publications about Wikipedia or their former employers can be very useful for our readers (and I'll see to add something in this particular case based on your hints), it is by no means required. (Also BTW, I'm a bit confused by this edit summary - seems you actually said there that you had yourself added the kind of context to the last issue whose omission you are now criticizing?)
Lastly, it seems that you sidestepped Bri's question. I find your edit summary here problematic (Last month the same editor added two briefs Aaron Bandler was involved with) - insinuating that there might be a systematic effort by Bri to push this particular author, rather than just him having done the bulk of the usual ITM preparation work of adding items from Google News etc. (Not to speak of the fact that "involved with" seems to be doing a lot of work in case of that first "brief", an article in The Jewish Journal by someone else about a panel where Bandler was 1 of 12 participants.)
Regards, HaeB (talk) 06:29, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the podcast was 2.5h long and Bandler was one of the most talkative that for me constitutes involved. All that I corrected last month was the claim that Bandler's article was by rather than in RealClearPolitics. In do doing I did warn in the ES that he was a former Daily Wire journalist (generally unreliable publication). I see he also had unattributed publications back in an January, February, and April Signposts as well. I guess I was indeed under the misapprehension that someone actually read the articles which were posted in ITM and so would notice recurring authors and axe-grinding tone. My apologies to Bri for misunderstanding the authorial responsibilities for the briefs. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 08:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I've seen a Bandler-WP piece that's not focused on the "WP is unfair to Israel" view. Presumably it's an angle that has a market, and they are often published in mainstream (mostly Israeli-ish, I think) media. Afaict, he's written about 10-15 such articles in 2024-25, someone could make a Category:Wikipedia beat reporters page for him. So, with this output, I don't think it's strange he keeps turning up in the Signpost. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:06, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SashiRolls: I do not want to obligate you beyond your interest, but I invite you to make an editorial recommendation to The Signpost or write an opinion piece, however brief that is. I was unaware that this author is repeatedly publishing Wikipedia criticism of this sort. I would like wiki user opinions on how Signpost should evaluate what seems to be hate-based material, and how we should share it.
There is limited editorial organization available to read these pieces and note that the same author is publishing the same kinds of stories. It takes a little while for the insight to come, so thanks for making it. Thanks also for your apology to Bri, because yes, I confirm that the media reporting in the Signpost is just a round up and we depend on people like you to help evaluate things like this. I really appreciate your compliant, and I really appreciate that apology. Now that we know, what should we do? Keep linking, mark the stories with some kind of disclaimer, avoid linking like we do with blacklisted publications, or what? Bluerasberry (talk) 15:53, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have always been in favour of including comment from ideologically motivated critics in ITM, if they have a reasonably large audience. The community should know what is being written and read out there. A little contextualisation doesn't hurt, as long as it doesn't come across as polemical. Andreas JN466 17:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:05, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We do not publish Breitbart because it is on WP:BLACKLIST, but they have a lot bigger audience than Jewish Journal, and they publish a lot of articles attacking Wikipedia ht tps://www.breit bart.com/tag/wikipedia/ . So Andreas, that goes against your wish to cover news with large audience. This Bandler person seems to want Wikipedia extinguished and is rallying for anyone to attack it, as in the Tax-Exempt Status.
Breitbart is blacklisted for not doing minimal fact checking. I do not know anything about JJ's content, but it seems there is a new and recent protest by some who felt strongly enough to try to establish a competing Jewish journal.
Contextualization seems helpful from newspapers that have a strong agenda in mind. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:35, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure we have never published Breitbart ... I seem to remember we did a few times way back when ... (checks old issues) ... See e.g. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-06-10/In the media, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-01-06/Arbitration report, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-10-28/In the media, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-03-31/In the media and so on.
I hadn't realised TDA was still so busy! At some point it becomes repetitive. At any rate, I'm really not in favour of listing three or four Breitbart pieces in each issue's ITM. I am also against a blanket ban though. If an article of theirs gets attention elsewhere I would mention it. Then again, Breitbart is not an issue over which I would lose sleep. Andreas JN466 00:27, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your text does exactly what you described: contextualizing without being polemical. Thanks! -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 11:49, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and notes

In progress · 6,164b
last edited 2025-07-10 05:44:45 by Md Mobashir Hossain
Resources

Checklist

  • Red X symbolN Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
No talk page section · click here to open one


News from Diff

Not started ·
Resources


Obituary

Not started ·
Resources


Op-ed

Not started ·
Resources


Opinion

Not started ·
Resources


Recent research

In progress · 2,392b
last edited 2025-07-08 02:08:10 by HaeB
Resources

Checklist

  • Red X symbolN Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
Discussion

As usual, we are preparing this regular survey on recent academic research about Wikipedia, doubling as the Wikimedia Research Newsletter (now in its fifteenth volume). Help is welcome to review or summarize the many interesting items listed here, as are suggestions of other new research papers that haven't been covered yet. Regards, HaeB (talk) 02:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Serendipity

Not started ·
Resources


Technology report

Not started ·
Resources· next-next issue draft


Tips and tricks

Not started ·
Resources· staging area


Traffic report

In progress · 37,047b
last edited 2025-07-10 01:53:15 by Igordebraga
Resources

Checklist

  • Red X symbolN Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
No talk page section · click here to open one


WikiProject report

In progress · 124b
last edited 2025-06-23 02:32:13 by HaeB
Resources· next-next issue draft

Checklist

  • Red X symbolN Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
No talk page section · click here to open one


Community view

In progress · 15,415b
last edited 2025-06-25 03:14:26 by Bri
Resources

Checklist

  • Green checkmarkY Headline
  • Red X symbolN Subheading
  • Red X symbolN Ready for copyedit
  • Red X symbolN Copyedit done
  • Red X symbolN Final approval by editor-in-chief
No talk page section · click here to open one


Forum

Not started ·
Resources


In focus

Not started ·
Resources


Special report

Not started ·
Resources


Interview

Not started ·
Resources


Update the table now

This table is generated by querying the database replica and is periodically updated by a bot.
Edits made within the table area will be removed on the next update!

∑ No items retrieved | Query runtime: 0.09 s | Last updated: 09:25, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

End of auto-generated report.



       

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