Misplaced Pages

talk:Misplaced Pages Signpost: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:12, 4 May 2017 editTony1 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Template editors275,880 edits Time for a simpler approach?← Previous edit Revision as of 03:49, 6 May 2017 edit undoPeteforsyth (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators35,167 edits Overdue note from Editor in Chief: new sectionNext edit →
Line 75: Line 75:
::If we are willing to accept more ad hoc contributions that would simplify things some I think. ] (] · ] · ]) 19:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC) ::If we are willing to accept more ad hoc contributions that would simplify things some I think. ] (] · ] · ]) 19:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
:::], I'll hold you to that! ] ] 08:12, 4 May 2017 (UTC) :::], I'll hold you to that! ] ] 08:12, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

== Overdue note from Editor in Chief ==

Hello all,

I'm sorry for the extended lapse in ''Signpost'' publication. I've been in communication with {{u|Tony1}} about how to move forward, and I have been the bottleneck in making a statement.

I'm pleased to see that many community members have expressed an interest in what needs to be done to get back on track. To be perfectly honest, I don't see a clear path forward, but I'd like to find one soon. Both Tony and I have been buried in off-wiki responsibilities, and the simple fact is that in recent months, the two of us have been the core of the team that produces each edition. Many excellent contributors have done a great deal, but in terms of writing, soliciting, and editing the main news content, it has mostly fallen to the two of us.

At this point, I am pretty out of touch with what's needed in the short term to resume publication, though I believe I have a clear view of what's needed in the longer term. I'd like to get back on track in some form as soon as possible, even if it's at a somewhat reduced quantity and/or frequency of coverage. But to do so will require substantial help. In the next few days, I plan to put some time into planning out what that will look like, and figuring out how to incorporate any assistance that's offered. I'll start by reviewing and responding to the many kind and helpful messages that have come in.

Best, -] (]) 03:49, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:49, 6 May 2017

The Signpost
← Current issueWT:POSTFeedback

Please use this page for general or technical issues, praise, queries, or complaints related to The Signpost as a whole.
  • For article-specific comments, please add them to that article's comment section.
  • To suggest a topic to cover, see Suggestions.
  • To propose or submit your own writing, see the Submissions.
  • To discuss the next issue, see the Newsroom talk page.
To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, all talk pages of subpages of Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost except /Newsroom redirect here.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15


This page has archives. Sections older than 45 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
The Signpost
The Signpost
(talk  · chat)




Recent changes:
main · talk


March 2017 skipped

The Signpost skipped the whole month, March 2017, for the first time. Response? --George Ho (talk) 20:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah. I hate to add pressure, but just wanted to say I miss Signpost! Can't wait for the next one, whenever that is. Stevage 00:48, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
This workhorse is tired. Tony (talk) 02:23, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
So am I. I don't have time and I'm already a month behind on reading.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
I feel your pain, Tony1. Burn-out is real! Look after yourself. Stevage 05:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Stevage. Just one problem the Signpost has faced more recently is the lack of IT maintenance. We went through many years when the editor-in-chief could just press a button for largely automated publication—and we had good, reliable tech-skilled people on board. The automated system broke down some time last year, and we've had no IT person since. It has meant that the act of publishing, which typically comes after a big heave of late nights by the editor-in-chief and others, then requires up to two hours of fiddly clerical work and crossed fingers. Tony (talk) 09:29, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Make a WP:BOTREQ? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:50, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Headbomb—We probably should have gone down that route last year. I'll check with colleagues. Tony (talk) 12:05, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
@Tony1: Last December I offered to be the nerd-in-chief, but at the time it sounded like Jarry1250 and/or Kharkiv07 were going to revive their bots. Again, offer is on the table! I'd love to be a part of the Signpost :) — MusikAnimal 23:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
I would like to take full responsibility for this, and deeply apologize to The Signpost team. I went through hell IRL, some of which I explained to them, so of which not. I more or less fell of the face of the earth without and support left behind. Sorry all. I can't commit to helping anytime soon, but I'm more than happy to send some of my stuff to anybody who wishes to take over. Kharkiv07 (T) 01:39, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Clearly the current editor is too busy. That is unfortunate, but it is time to move on. (And it is one of the foreseeable problems with a single person left in charge since the previous co-editor resigned last November and was not replaced - without the one person, we have a single point of failure, and everything falls apart.)

Is there anyone else with the time and the inclination, willing to step up to the plate and help make the Signpost happen again? One or two of the regular authors perhaps? Or of the previous editors? No need for perfection here - something would be better than nothing for two months. There must be someone who wants to continue the 12 year tradition of weekly fortnightly monthly regular periodical community journalism. (I expect someone will tell me to do it. Sorry, not happening.)

If not, if everyone is just too exhausted to carry on, perhaps we should just mark this project as historical and close it down. A shame, but to everything there is a season: a time to be born, and a time to die. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.251.27 (talk) 11:29, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I've posted over at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous). Perhaps that might elicit some attention if the current editorial and writing teams are exhausted..

Interested writer

I'm interested in helping and I see the Signpost needs help. Can I help? I made a short submission yesterday. 68.233.214.74 (talk) 16:03, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, 68. We're very keen to have more writers/editors on the Signpost. But you'd need to log in and get a username; then Pete, the editor in chief, would be in a position to talk. Would that be possible? Tony (talk) 04:11, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't wanna be that guy, but...

...how long does it take to get this out to the people? Its been 8 weeks already, I've already gotten 2 editions of the Bugle, and Milhist publishes those monthly. Is there some reason why this hasn't shipped out in over two months, or is it just another sign of the slow death of Misplaced Pages as whole? TomStar81 (Talk) 17:37, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Editor-in-chief apparently too busy in real life. Armbrust 19:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Conversation ongoing over at WP:NEWSROOM. :-) Ed  03:01, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
From weekly newspaper to bimonthly magazine? – Athaenara 13:03, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
The election for the board has begun. Would be good to at least see a special issue (one section if that is all contributors can manage) on the topic. I would take the lead but am running in the election myself. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
I second this! The Signpost has played a really valuable role in raising awareness of previous elections and contributing to the debate around them, particularly because of the very static "statement and questions" format of the formal election process. It would be wonderful if anyone was able to whip up an election special. The Land (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC) (also a candidate so can't help)
I third ;) this! I came here with the precise question: could we get the special issue for the Elections? I did like your coverage, and having been a FDC candidate 2 years ago, I did enjoy Tony's questions and I hope they helped everyone to make their decision. Seeing how Q&As are limited this year, any additional questionnaire, debate among candidates, diligent coverage would be appreciated. Best, aegis maelstrom δ 11:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I think it's fantastic that people recognize the need for community journalism, but I don't think any of you realize the amount of work required to create something like this. If the volunteers can't put out a regular issue of the Signpost because of their real-life commitments, then it is time for new volunteers to step forward instead of demanding more from the existing ones. Gamaliel (talk) 17:19, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Agree to keep the Signpost alive a larger group of people need to care sufficiently to put in the work. And yes a high quality paper is a huge amount of work. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:22, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Just to throw in a totally different approach: German-language Misplaced Pages's "Kurier", which is treated as the Signpost's German counterpart (and interwiki-linked), doesn't have any designated editors or an editor-in-chief and isn't published in "volumes" and "issues"; rather, anyone who feels that some news or issue calls for a Kurier-style article, can write and post it immediately. Most articles are kept; only rarely they are removed if there's a consensus on the talk page that something isn't really suitable as a "Kurier article". This has advantages and disadvantages, of course. The main advantage ist that the "Kurier" is updated continuously (there are several articles in most weeks, often one or more per day). The main disadvantage, probably, is that the quality and importance of the articles is fluctuating a lot. Gestumblindi (talk) 17:23, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Now we've skipped April as well. I had a comic strip joke about Misplaced Pages to submit. I'm not sure whether it was in the strip or the comments, but whichever it was, it's yet another example of how Misplaced Pages is part of our world.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:01, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

I think I broke it

After I added my name to the subscribe list, the page blanked. What did I do wrong? SGPolter (talk) 13:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea, but I purged the page and now it's back. Sam Walton (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! SGPolter (talk) 13:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Time for a simpler approach?

It seems like one of the primary issues with running the Signpost, and in getting it running again by interested editors, is that it's a huge amount of work. Perhaps - in the interests of getting issues out again - it would be best to trim out the unnecessary sections, simplify processes where possible, and then slowly add them back in at a later date. For what it's worth, I'd love to help but really don't have the time for at least another couple of months. Sam Walton (talk) 11:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

If we are willing to accept more ad hoc contributions that would simplify things some I think. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Sam, I'll hold you to that! Tony (talk) 08:12, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Overdue note from Editor in Chief

Hello all,

I'm sorry for the extended lapse in Signpost publication. I've been in communication with Tony1 about how to move forward, and I have been the bottleneck in making a statement.

I'm pleased to see that many community members have expressed an interest in what needs to be done to get back on track. To be perfectly honest, I don't see a clear path forward, but I'd like to find one soon. Both Tony and I have been buried in off-wiki responsibilities, and the simple fact is that in recent months, the two of us have been the core of the team that produces each edition. Many excellent contributors have done a great deal, but in terms of writing, soliciting, and editing the main news content, it has mostly fallen to the two of us.

At this point, I am pretty out of touch with what's needed in the short term to resume publication, though I believe I have a clear view of what's needed in the longer term. I'd like to get back on track in some form as soon as possible, even if it's at a somewhat reduced quantity and/or frequency of coverage. But to do so will require substantial help. In the next few days, I plan to put some time into planning out what that will look like, and figuring out how to incorporate any assistance that's offered. I'll start by reviewing and responding to the many kind and helpful messages that have come in.

Best, -Pete Forsyth (talk) 03:49, 6 May 2017 (UTC)