Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2022-09-30/Discussion report

This report was written with the assistance of GPT-3, OpenAI’s large-scale language-generation model. More information on Signpost GPT-3 articles can be found here. Upon generating draft language, the authors reviewed the text and take ultimate responsibility for the content of this publication.

Y'all heard about politics? The closure of this RSN discussion, which stretched to 637,011 bytes – long enough to get media attention in this month's In the media – has left the community divided on the reliability of the web publications of the famously contentious Fox News. Some believed that the online version of Fox News should be considered generally unreliable, while others believed that it is only marginally reliable. All believed that posts online were of great importance. The community did not reach a consensus on the matter, aside from agreeing that the reliability of Fox News is unclear and additional considerations apply to its use. The debate is likely to continue.

This letter is from the English Wikipedia New Page Patrol team to the Wikimedia Foundation and Board of Trustees. They express their concern that the PageTriage software, which is essential to their work, is not being given the attention it needs. They explain that the software is outdated and full of bugs, and that there are many enhancements that have been requested but not implemented. They argue that if the software was better maintained, it would improve the workflow of the relatively small number of active reviewers and make it easier to recruit new members.

See related Signpost coverage this month at In focus.

The request for comment is about whether or not to deprecate the entire website Royal Central because it lacks editorial oversight and has been found to plagiarize from Wikipedia articles. There is consensus amongst editors that the website should be deprecated.

This village pump request for comment is about whether to keep the old icon or use the new icon for external links. Closer ScottishFinnishRadish said "There is consensus to keep the old icon, and a weaker consensus that the old icon isn't very good either. I think the real consensus here is that the community would prefer approving a new icon, or having input on the design, before implementation."

• Review of English Wikimedia fundraising emails
• Process for changing Wikipedia's default appearance