François Robere (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 134: | Line 134: | ||
*'''Author''': {{u|Icewhiz}}, {{u|François Robere}} |
*'''Author''': {{u|Icewhiz}}, {{u|François Robere}} |
||
*'''Discussion''':<br/>An investigation of how one conspiracy theory propagated through Wikipedia and remained "in the wild" for 15 years. [[User:François Robere|François Robere]] ([[User talk:François Robere|talk]]) 15:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC) |
*'''Discussion''':<br/>An investigation of how one conspiracy theory propagated through Wikipedia and remained "in the wild" for 15 years. [[User:François Robere|François Robere]] ([[User talk:François Robere|talk]]) 15:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC) |
||
*As noted at [[Wikipedia_talk:List_of_hoaxes_on_Wikipedia#Is_Warsaw_number_a_hoax?]], I do believe using the term [[WP:HOAX]] is incorrect as we are dealing with [[WP:FRINGE]] (and yes, a [[conspiracy theory]], perhaps). But not a hoax. It is a technicality, perhaps, but I really dislike using improper terminology. Other thoughts: 1) [[Polocaust]] should be wikilinked, even if it would be [[WP:RED]]. [[WP:BTW]], people. 2) the article wasn't deleted and recreated, just rewritten, so [[WP:TNT]] does not apply 3) IPN is nod disambiguated properly. 4) one of the two authors may end up topic-banned from the relevant area in matters of minutes or days given the vote tallies at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Proposed decision]]. It might be wise to inquire with an Arbitrator or such whether publishing this piece will not count as a topic-ban violation or some form of [[WP:GAME]] (related to trying to raise sympathy and/or preparing for an early topic ban appeal citing 'a prominent hoax hunting efforts written up in a Singpost'). Anyway, this is one hand a commendable effort cleaning up an article, reasonably well described, but on another, in all honesty, this is bread and butter for many editors, particularly ones who have written/rewritten multiple articles at GA to FA level. Still, given that Singpost, like Wiki, is not paper, we have room to publish such stuff, so it's not much of an issue to discuss such routine wiki adventures. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<span style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</span>]]</sub> 03:30, 23 September 2019 (UTC) |
|||
== Dealing with racism on Wikipedia == |
== Dealing with racism on Wikipedia == |
Revision as of 03:30, 23 September 2019
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Navigation
Submission DeskPlease 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, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Editor(s) in chief. 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; take note, especially, of the statement of purpose section. 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. News ProposalsNews stories present facts and analysis. We intend "news" in a broad sense (as distinct from opinion pieces); submissions may be for any of The Signpost's regular sections, as well as "special reports". These can cover a diverse range of topics, such as project history or statistical reports, and may have an investigative or evaluative focus. Simple narratives of interesting events, whether online or in person, that offer our readers an informative or entertaining glimpse into the Wikipedia or Wikimedia world, are also welcome. Opinion ProposalsPosition pieces, calls to arms, perspectives from other projects, debates and essays addressing important issues facing the English Wikipedia and the broader Wikimedia community. Have a project that you'd like to highlight? An issue that you'd like to bring to light? An essay you'd like to publish? Bring it to us and let us help you make it known. Book reviews are also welcome, for new books that explore topics of relevance to the Wikipedia community. Create a draftTo create a draft of an article in your userspace, replace Give a suggestion insteadIf you don't want to write a story yourself, you can just give The Signpost a suggestion or tip (but publication will be subject to staffing constraints, in addition to suitability). GuidelinesPlease comment on submissions below: share ideas about how to improve pieces that catch your interest, make suggestions as to whether a given piece is ready for publication, or pitch ideas for future pieces. Note that news submissions should be kept relatively neutral. We ask that comments be kept constructive; if you are unclear on any of the process or have questions related thereto, feel free to use the talkpage. Generally speaking special reports are less factional than op-eds are, so are not subject to quite as much approval. The criteria for publishing opinion pieces are quality of argument, originality, and relevance to the community, as judged by The Signpost. Similar to newspaper op-eds, opinion pieces should be accompanied by an extended byline (suggestion: one to three sentences), that briefly introduces the author and indicates why his or her opinion about the topic might interest the reader. The purpose of publishing opinion pieces is to provoke thought and discussion in a productive rather than antagonistic fashion, and so submissions should be well-researched and not factually misleading or unnecessarily inflammatory. A related set of submissions that address the same issue but from editors' different perspectives are especially encouraged. Unlike the weekly news reporting focus of the standard Signpost articles, and the investigative and evaluative focus of its special reports, opinion pieces are primarily editorial in tone. As The Signpost does not have a house point-of-view or political agenda, it does not endorse the perspectives of opinion pieces, which express only the views of their authors. To easily set up a new page with Signpost formatting, create the page with Alternatively, you can just focus on the writing, and Signpost editors can help with formatting later. Current submissionsCommentary on the 2019 WMF Board of Trustees election
How Wikipedia promoted alternative Holocaust history for 15 years
Dealing with racism on Wikipedia
|