"WP:OP-ED" redirects here. For the guideline on not editorializing in article content, see MOS:OP-ED. For the policy on op-eds and original research, see WP:NOROPED. For the guideline on citing op-eds as sources, see WP:NEWSOPED.
The Signpost
← Newsroom
WP:POST/SUBMIT
Submission Desk


news specials opinion media research laughs 🔍︎ archives



Submission desk

[edit]

Please propose Signpost stories you want to write (or have already begun writing). Submitted stories are published subject to the approval of the Editor-in-Chief, JPxG. We value the involvement of Wikipedians, and appreciate your submissions. If you have ideas or questions that don't fit neatly into this framework, don't hesitate to address us on our user talk pages, by email, or as a last resort, on the general Signpost talk page.

The Signpost's content guidelines may be useful to aspiring writers. We encourage you to contact us early in the process of developing a story. Different writers have varying levels of interest in editorial input, and we pride ourselves on finding the right balance with each writer; but in most cases, a brief discussion early on can help all parties shape our expectations, and can help produce a strong finished piece. We aim to support Wikimedians wishing to share news with their peers, and look forward to working with you.

We say Wikipedia isn't a battleground. So why does it feel like one?

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed

MallardTV Talk to me! 20:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation publishes its audit report for fiscal year 2024-2025

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed
Thanks for the heads-up, @ELappen (WMF)! @JPxG:: Am adding this to N&N. Best, Andreas JN466 22:49, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia's 25th birthday party on January 15

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed

Short Descriptions: 1 Year Later

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed


Time for a health check: the Vital Signs 2026 campaign

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed

Resource support pilot

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed

Remembering Madhav Gadgil: An Ecologist Who Promoted Wikimedia in India

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Scheduled
@Pavan Santhosh (OKI): Excuse the late reply. I formatted your submission at User:Pavan Santhosh (OKI)/Signpost Opinion1. Can you please check it again? Format it as you like now that it is in this template, and ask if I can help you with anything.
I see also that this person has an obituary at https://doi.org/10.1038/d44151-026-00003-1 . Madhav obviously had high regard from his peers and seems to be one of the higher profile scientist supports that Wikimedia projects have had. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:53, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bluerasberry Thank you very much, and apologies for not being able to review this earlier. I’ve now added a blurb and a lead based on my understanding—please take a look and let me know if this works. I’m happy to add more details if needed.
About Madhav Gadgil: yes, I cherish my collaboration with him, even though it was a limited one. I was able to invite him to speak with Telugu-language Wikimedians, and we later shaped an idea he shared into a full-scale project. Pavan Santhosh (OKI) (talk) 01:11, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have this staged for publication in early March. Thanks for your submission. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:03, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If we allow AI-generated Wikipedia articles we'll increase the digital knowledge divide

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed

OKA Translation Initiative

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Needs drafting
@7804j: Please develop your submission at User:7804j/OKA: grants for translators assisted by LLMs. If it is not burdensome, then submit as much content as you would like, perhaps 500-2000 words. If you want interim feedback, then at least make a few section headings and put a few sentences under each, even if it does not tell a full story. I think you know your way around wiki and have a good sense of how to talk with the Wikimedia community, but this story does hit multiple hot topics including paid editing, inclusion of people in lower middle countries, AI, and putting a process on the table to address decades-old cross-wiki translation backlogs. I am grateful for your submission. Also I want to connect you with feedback before publication, to get some confirmation that you will not be misunderstood. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:43, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The pursuit of a button click

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Scheduled
@MSincccc: Would you like to submit this as an article for publication in The Signpost, or would you like for Signpost to report and link to this piece as a Wikipedia user essay? This piece works as either format, but not both at once. If you want this to be for Signpost, then either grab a template from one of the article formats at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom and put your submission into that standard. Please add illustration from Commons; all Signpost pieces need images. I can help with the formatting, just ask if it takes you longer than 5 minutes because it should not take longer than that to figure out. Thanks for submitting. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:33, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bluerasberry I would like the essay to be featured in the Signpost.
This is my first submission to the Signpost, so could you please assist me with the formatting and the template? Thank you. MSincccc (talk) 08:39, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@MSincccc: I have you queued for publication in second week of March. Please continue to develop your submission at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Essay. When you are done, mark "yes" on "ready to copyedit" in the template at the top of your submission. Ping me if you need anything. Before publication, other reviewers will check it also, and they may make a suggestion to you. Thanks for submitting. Also, good button image. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:15, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Independent coverage of WMF plan

[edit]
Status:
V ?
In development
@Czarking0: I did some formatting of your content. Can you work it a bit more, add some illustrations, and complete the template at the topic with title etc if you are comfortable with that? Bluerasberry (talk) 18:28, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Will do Czarking0 (talk) 00:30, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I tried a couple things with the template. I am not sure how to format the piccy thing but I have the image I want there. My interviews are still awaiting some responses. Czarking0 (talk) 19:08, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I am more or less happy with the article. If I get additional interview responses, I may need to update that section. What should I take as a next step. Do you think it is ready for copy-edit? Czarking0 (talk) 19:22, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have marked this as ready for copy edit Czarking0 (talk) 16:01, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, you've asked to answer a couple of questions about the annual plan. You wrote about some meta-commentary and I wondered whether you could also cover the thread I started there called "The problem that underlies most issues and challenges noted here and elsewhere" which includes ideas how to get more community wishes implemented and some analysis of WMF work on the Community Wishlists (I intend to work on the statistics / chart further later). On the other hand, I suggested the subject of concerns about too little technical development or potential ways to increase software development / wish implementations to be covered separately. Nevertheless, at least if you do mention meta things, I think it may be good to at least mention this or this aspect of technical development being required for tackling most community concerns and goals, there being too little of it, and this analysis+set of ideas regarding this underlying problem there. Thanks for your consideration, Prototyperspective (talk) 01:29, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@JPxG and Bluerasberry: I submitted this and basically got no feedback. I get that that means it was not selected for publication but it would be much more respectful to say that directly. Czarking0 (talk) 03:23, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Oltrepier: you too Czarking0 (talk) 03:32, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Czarking0, sorry for the late reply, although I'm not sure I was the one who reviewed your submission... Oltrepier (talk) 10:39, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Czarking0: I apologize for picking this up but not carrying it through. I staged it for publication in the next issue. I know this is a time sensitive issue, but the call for comments is open till May and there are specialized options for giving comment till June.
This is not an excuse, but this submission page is backlogged and I am trying to clear it out. I missed your comments. You are doing everyone a favor by making a submission, and I know it is not ideal to ask favors of people who are already giving favors, but if you choose to submit again, then please do the favor of pinging Signpost editors if we are not responsive. Yes we want your submissions.
Also, I apologize for my own error in not staging your submission immediately to be visible and reviewed by others. The fields in the template, "ready for copyedit" and such, are not actually seen by other editors until you or I or anyone else moves the draft into any of the categories in Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom. I just moved your submission to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view.
May I still publish your submission? Can you work a bit more with me on it, before the next issue comes out in March? Now that it is staged, other editors will review it too. If you can edit a bit more, can you consider clarifying the following:
  1. You mention some WMF people. Can you put their WMF titles in the article, to help contexualize what these people have to do with the matter
  2. Can you clarify when and where people can comment
  3. The Signpost emphasizes community views and opinions, in contrast to WMF views. Are you able to highlight your own or anyone else's community perspectives, especially to show any differences between WMF views and strong community views?
  4. In the interview section you said, "Three discussion participants interviewed by the Signpost..." can you link to that? I am not aware of these 3 people. Can you summarize what they discussed?
  5. Finally, the lead image is a blue rectangle from the art of the annual plan. Can you somehow find a more relevant image that fits the space?
Thanks, I also am willing to edit more, and you can kick any of this back to me also. Again, I am sorry, I both missed your updates and failed to process your submission properly. I appreciate that you submit and want this to be a positive experience for you. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:48, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. This is encouraging. I'll respond with more detail later. Czarking0 (talk) 15:17, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be happy to work this more and appreciate all the feedback I receive. I plan to take care of #1 and #2.
I hear you on #3 but I struggle with how to accomplish this a little bit. I did not want to make this about my personal views. I am happy to share those in my own capacity with the WMF staff but I do not believe in them so strongly as to write what I would see as my own opinion piece. That being said I know that the editor that anonymously responded to me had some strong critic of the WMF and that Prototyperspective has more to say. I also had another person reach out that I would probably have to interview anonymously but I think their perspective could be valuable here. I am not sure what The Signpost's standards are around anonymous sources but I believe my sources would be ok with other Signpost authors verifying their identity as long as they are not published.
I also do not want to focus solely on the differences between WMF and community views as I think there is value in celebrating alignment as well as acknowledging differences.
With a little more guidance on these thoughts I think I can beef up the article and satisfy #3.
I pinged you for #4
I am a little concerned on what to do for #5 an idea may come to me while working on the other parts. Czarking0 (talk) 05:46, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How puzzles translate to page views

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Postponed
Thanks for the reminder - I'd love to be working on it, but IRL factors mean it might take a while. I'm most likely to get it done for the issue after next, but we'll see - could be sooner, could be later. Suntooooth, it/he (talk | contribs) 17:21, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, let's keep this here at the submissions desk, and check in with you in the March 2026 issues. Bluerasberry (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A Bold Proposal for Wikimedia at 25: Spend 25% of Donations on the Community.

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Postponed

Wikimedia Worker Union

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Needs drafting

I will write about the new union effort that just launched publicly https://wikiworkersunited.org/ and what it means for the Wikimedia movement and why we should support this. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:04, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Shushugah: Yes, please start drafting. The next issue is in about two weeks. You can choose one of the article formats at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom. Perhaps "Special report", "Opinion", or "Concept" would work. If you want to try Signpost formatting, then submit at the newsroom, otherwise write it anywhere then ping me and I will help with formatting and move it to the newsroom. Thanks, what an exciting topic. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:55, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

archive.today deprecation article

[edit]
Status:
V ?
Unreviewed
The article will need to undergo copyediting, review, and have a column chosen, potentially at discussion review or possibly as a standalone column.
If major developments occur across other Wikimedia projects before the deadline, I may add coverage on that, otherwise another Signpost editor could do so if I don't manage to.
Mitchsavl (talk) 05:42, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]



       

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