Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Archive 1#Traffic on May issue's articles
Newsroom discussions prior to May 2018 are archived at WT:POST.
{{aan}}
Snapshot
;Volume 14, Issue 5 – April 27, 2018
- Snapshot of newsroom
- Newsroom participants / edits
- {{U|Bri}} 97
- {{U|Zarasophos}} 28
- {{U|Kudpung}} 28
- {{U|Eddie891}} 21
- {{U|Evad37}} 20
- {{U|Barbara (WVS)}} 11
- {{U|Pythoncoder}} 4
- {{U|Tbayer (WMF)}} 3
- {{U|Tony1}} 2
- {{U|Power~enwiki}} 2
- {{U|Chris troutman}} 1
- {{U|JoeHebda}} 1
::Note that this was inexplicably at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Archive. jp×g 04:36, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Next issue (May)
{{stack|
{{User:Bri/DateCountdown|2018|04|25|2018|05|23|width=500|label=Writing: }}{{User:Bri/DateCountdown|2018|04|25|2018|05|25|width=500|label=Publishing: }}
}}
:{{small|1=Discussion here is archived after the publication of each issue}}
I've archived the "Table of contents" that was used last issue. While it did its job, it really was unnecessarily duplicating the table below. We can just use the status part of the table to indicate if a section is going to be in the next issue (green/"Done") or not (anything else). Changing the order of sections might be slightly more effort, but it is possible - just need to change the numbers used in the parameters. Or maybe decide the order just using the section names, rather than duplicating links, titles, and statuses? - Evad37 [talk] 04:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
But if you think I'm wrong, feel free to add it back. - Evad37 [talk] 05:17, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hi all, sorry that I haven't been very active in this issue. I've been very busy, both in other areas of Wikipedia, and real life. I will try to be more active, but will be off-wiki for 5 weeks from the end of June, essentially making me 'absent' for the July issue(s).Eddie891 Talk Work 00:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
=Submissions=
Submissions for the next issue should be reviewed in a timely fashion especially when contributed by new writers. There are now two marked "unreviewed", and one has asked me for feedback. Is reviewing a task for the E in C, or can anybody in Newsroom list the submissions as reviewed? ☆ Bri (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
:Reviewing Submissions should be a task for the Editors, so currently Barbara and me. I reviewed the piece by a new writer and marked it as "in Development" for now. I would propose putting it into the main Newroom ToC right now for easier overview; and would also say the same for pieces by regular writers, i.e. starting them directly in the main Newsroom to avoid the whole "why are there two pages for discussions of the same articles" issue. Zarasophos (talk) 06:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
=Discussion report=
{{u|Pythoncoder}} Might wanna keep an eye out for this Zarasophos (talk) 15:10, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 15:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
::Are you sure you want this written in first person? I write in first person so no one else gets blamed for what I do, but this is a 'report' and may be more appropriate in a tone similiar to other reports. I'm not going to mess with what exists now unless there is some agreement to change to the third person. Best Regards, Barbara ✐ ✉ 12:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
:::Sometimes these things write themselves. I didn't realize I had been doing that until now. Fixed. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 12:35, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
::::I marked this ready to publish, but there is one more thing you could clarify. In the report you said Jimbo weighed in, but I don't see him as a contrubutor at Village Pump link given. If you are referring to the discussion on his own talkpage, then that could be clarified. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
::::Thanks for clarifying. The Discussion report looks completely ready to publish now. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:09, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
I'd say we should probably report on the Foundation discussion on last issue's AN/I report, but it doesn't really seem like there's anything noteworthy going on there... Shame to see the reporting go to waste. We should probably keep it in mind for a follow-up, though. Zarasophos (talk) 22:18, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Nevermind, just saw you already put it into the Discussion Report. We should definitely still do a follow-up once the discussion wraps up, though. Zarasophos (talk) 09:05, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
:Agreed :) — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 11:26, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
=Blog=
Can someone teach me how to import the Wikimedia blog? I've tried using the import tool and can't get it to work. Best Regards, Barbara ✐ ✉ 20:15, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
:I can help. Which blog item do you want to as a demo, but can do whichever you identify. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:27, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
::I can do the formatting now, if you would like to move on to other tasks. What is my problem with importing, do you know? Barbara ✐ ✉ 20:29, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
:::Hmmm ... Did you give the [https://tools.wmflabs.org/signpost/blog.php tool] the right URL, i.e. {{xt|https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/03/why-i-women-wikipedia/}}, then click the button? Did you copy-paste into the blog column shell? The rest of copyediting and formatting is all yours! ☆ Bri (talk) 20:42, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
::::I certainly did not enter the correct URL. Now I know why it did not work. I can do the import for the Signpost on a consistent basis until someone else who wants to take over. Best Regards, Barbara ✐ ✉ 21:28, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
=From the editor=
See User:Kudpung/sandbox#Recurring themes for text of issue 6 "From the editors" (aka section zero). ☆ Bri (talk) 16:15, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
This is now at User:Kudpung/From the editor May 2018.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:07, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
:Regarding [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom&diff=841306253&oldid=841306159 this correction], "editor" or "editors" makes no difference to me, but it used to be "editors": Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2017-02-27/From the editors ☆ Bri (talk) 01:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
::Whatever the tradition says. I see that some E-in-C put their name at the bottom. Does this have to be done? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
::In this 2015 issue it was "editor". Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:16, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
:::On the content guidance, it says {{tq|generally titled "From the editors"}}, but then again the section heading is "From the editor(s)", suggesting either is fine. - Evad37 [talk] 15:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
=Irregular feature page moves=
Irregular features really ought to be in subpages of Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Next_issue – i.e Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Next_issue/Special report for a special report. As well as being a necessary part of the publication process (assuming the publishing script is to be used), it would make the article status templates in the section below work properly. I would do it myself, but
- (a) I don't want to step on anyone's toes, since {{u|Kudpung}}'s and {{u|Chris troutman}} are the EIC and publication manager;
- (b) It's not clear whether the submissions have been approved – i.e. planned to be published in an upcoming issue, subject to checklist completion / final EIC sign-off (like all the other sections);
- (c) The section names to be used, like "Special report", "Op-ed", etc., are usually chosen by the EIC, and while I think the ones in the table are what {{u|Kudpung}} wants, I'm not 100% clear. - Evad37 [talk] 01:36, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
::{{U|Evad37}} I still don't fully understand how the coloured table is supposed to work. Any help appreciated. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:28, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Kudpung}} The article status table basically tracks the status of everything that's definitely going into the next issue. Sort of like a Trello board (or other task management system), but instead having different columns for different stages (not started, in-progress, completed), it uses differing background colors (red, yellow, green). There are also spaces for notes about tasks to be completed (e.g. "needs copyedit", "Could use an image", etc) and/or discussion about the article. Thus the table gives an overview of what's planned for the next issue, whats been completed, and what's still left to be done.
:::For irregular articles – op-eds, special reports, other outside submissions – they should get proposed at the Submissions page first for approval by the EIC – i.e. that it is suitable for the Signpost, per the guidelines. Once approved, a section name should be chosen by the EIC (like "Op-ed", "Opinion", "Community view", etc), the draft should be moved from userspace (or wherever) to that section name as a subpage of {{tt|Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Next_issue/}} (e.g. Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Next_issue/Op-ed), and a row for the article should be added to the article status table.
:::In the template that generates the table, each article has a set of parameters {{para|task#}}, {{para|link#}} {{para|status#}} {{para|notes#}}, where # is a unique number for each article.
:::*{{tt|task}} is the article section (e.g. "News and notes", "Special report")
:::*{{tt|link}} is the article page (which should always be a subpage of Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Next_issue)
:::*{{tt|status}} is one of "Not started", "In progress", "Done", "Postponed" (or a couple of other values in rarer cases)
:::*{{tt|notes}} is for notes in the right-hand column.
:::As the publishing deadline approaches, sections should be marked as "Done"/green if it should be published, or "Postponed"/grey if it isn't ready for publication (or remain in red if not started). Thus the publication manager knows to publish only those sections that are meant to be published, and not any unfinished work.
::: Does that help? - Evad37 [talk] 08:42, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
::Also, I've been bold and done the page moves [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AWikipedia_Signpost%2FNext_issue%2FFrom_the_editor&type=revision&diff=841511527&oldid=841500280][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AWikipedia_Signpost%2FNext_issue%2FSpecial_report&type=revision&diff=841511847&oldid=840624033] Evad37 [talk] 09:23, 16 May 2018
=Style question for titles and blurbs=
Regarding the title and blurb recorded in the draft header template: should either one of these have a terminal full stop? ☆ Bri (talk) 19:09, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
:Titles: no, since titles and headings generally (on Wikipedia and elsewhere) do not. Blurbs: yes, since they are a sentence describing the article. Plus the publishing script stitches them together as {title}: {blurb} for the RSS feed description. - Evad37 [talk] 01:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
=WikiProject Report=
The Portals Wikiproject is a good idea for the article. I'm sure {{u|The Transhumanist}} would be willing to say a few words on it (heck, they've already written an article on it with their RfC comments). — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 00:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
:Also, who's doing the article? Because the person previously listed as the writer now says they're retired. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 12:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
::I'm doing it, waiting for answers now Zarasophos (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
:::Close to deadline, is this going to run in issue 6 or ...? ☆ Bri (talk) 18:08, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
::::Waiting for The Transhumanist, but good to run otherwise Zarasophos (talk) 06:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
=Facebook information button=
Is anyone able to find or make a picture of Facebook's new "information" or "More About" or whatever it's called button that links to Wikipedia? I don't seem to be able to find any (looking for News and Notes) and don't use Facebook myself. Zarasophos (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
:{{ping|Zarasophos}} I do not FB either, but see second paragraph of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-04-26/In the media ☆ Bri (talk) 15:39, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
::The problem is attribution, all of those pictures are probably copyrighted... Zarasophos (talk) 15:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
:::I think we are OK, they are using a generic button. The image published in last issue was created in 2007 and is CC BY-SA. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
:::There is also a PD icon 20px ☆ Bri (talk) 16:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
::::Oh, I thought you were referring to the illustrations in the articles. I wanted to use one of those mock-ups of what the button will be showing for the sidebar, not sure if a 300px button really shows that much... :P Zarasophos (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
::::Both are vector graphics and scale nicely 30px 60px 120px / 30px 60px 120px ☆ Bri (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
:Bri, you are always so good with the graphics. Barbara ✐ ✉ 23:21, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
::I'll accept credit for finding them, but really talented people other than me created them. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
=Arbitration report=
to the case for 'BLP reverts by blocked editors: Case rejected 3 May'. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
:"BLP reverts by blocked editors" is covered briefly in Arbitration report. Is there more you'd like to see? ☆ Bri (talk) 15:53, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
:I found a bad wikilink in that report and a missing case request. Standing by if there's more you see needs my attention. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
=News and notes=
I think a different ordering might represent reader interest. The two items of higher interest IMO include the attempted account break-ins, which led to multiple extensive discussions. Also perhaps but not necessarily the Facebook tie-in resulting in 500,000 additional Wikipedia views a day. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
:Could someone please reduce the size of that photo by at least half. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Could someone please try to mention [https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/21/wikimedia-foundation-privacy-approach/ privacy policy change]. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
:{{tick}} Zarasophos (talk) 09:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
:*[https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Privacy_policy&diff=18063543&oldid=17995859 Here] is a diff of the May 21 policy change, if someone wants to try to summarize in their own words. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
:I think the problem is that the attempted break-in is by now a month old, and the Facebook thing has been exhaustively reported on before and is just getting rolled out today. Zarasophos (talk) 06:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Another late-breaking item - Wikipedia:General sanctions/Blockchain and cryptocurrencies is now in force. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
:{{tick}} Zarasophos (talk) 09:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- One more thing I'm struggling with neutrality on involving Brave:Edit which we covered in ITM. Maybe Z can do better. See my short synopsis of the on-wiki discussion [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABri&type=revision&diff=842522304&oldid=842521914 here]. I'm not even sure if this belongs alongside the ITM item or elsewhere such as News and Notes? ☆ Bri (talk) 17:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
:Okay, I just read into the thing a little and I gotta say, I'm terribly confused. The event was held in a coordination between the Foundation and that one local organizer, going completely over the heads of everyone here at the Wiki? And then she is confused when people ask her why she did this? This is really strange. However, I'm really not to sure if/how we should include this on-wiki debate in our coverage. I mean, the thing happened and apparently created articles - though I guess the New Pages patrol now has problems with them; the only angle I could see this as an interesting story is if we talk to both sides and the patrollers and then make it about how you shouldn't go above the heads of on-wiki people. However, I think that would be a bit disproportionate for what little has apparently happened (it's what, 16 new articles?) and would also need much more time.
:What I'm trying to say: In its current fashion, your ITM coverage seems all we can do without stirring up a hornet's nest that would need much more effort to be made into an interesting story. Zarasophos (talk) 18:20, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
=Technology report=
I asked for a screenshot to use in the TR feature. Pending answer. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
:Got the screenshot, added to TR. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:31, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
{{ping|Bri}} I knew the bullets were intentional, it's just that I don't think section headers should have bullet points next to them Zarasophos (talk) 09:52, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
:(I think you mean me) But they are subsections of tech news. Having them at the same same level is semantically wrong. If you don't like bullets, indentation (:) could be used - Evad37 [talk] 10:06, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
::Consider [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Next_issue/Technology_report&diff=842602291&oldid=842575875 this] merely a proposal ... Evad37 owns the layout as far as I'm concerned. It got a little wonky with fifth-level deep section headers. ☆ Bri (talk) 13:44, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Evad37}} Yeah, sorry. {{U|Bri}}s proposal looks good, though! Zarasophos (talk) 18:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
=Recent research=
Style question for the team: do we want each review to mention the title and author of the thing being reviewed? I think this is standard for published book reviews, for example. In the current issue's prepared item, some reviews don't even mention the title of the research report they are reviewing. Although it is in a footnote, which may be good enough. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:52, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
=Ready to go?=
Are we inked up and ready to roll? Is {{U|Chris troutman}} ready? RSS feeds and Social Media sorted? Can I have a UTC time/date when the machine is intended to be turned on. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
:I'm standing by for the word to publish. I was actually about to go to sleep. I'll be back in ten hours. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:15, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
::OK, sounds good {{U|Chris troutman|Chris}}. Just waiting on {{U|Bri}} for a final update. I believe there is a preview feature - I'd like to see that. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:28, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Kudpung}} Is the article order in the status table okay? "From the editor" has to be first to get the proper formatting (in certain places like the single-page edition), but the other sections could go in any order. - Evad37 [talk] 03:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
::::{{U|Evad37}} I think this should be it for this issue. En.Wiki relevant articles come first.
- From the Editor
- Op-Ed
- Opinion
- Wikiproject report
- Discussion report
- Featured content
- Arbitration report
- News and notes
- In the media
- Traffic report
- Technology report
- Blog
- Recent research
- Humour
- Gallery
- From the archives
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:54, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
::::I think the publishing preview is really only visible when you run the script. I can post a screen shot if you want it. Otherwise I'm good to go. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:51, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
:::::The script logs a bunch of stuff to the browser console, which can be previewed with Special:ExpandTemplates. The main thing that's worth previewing in this way is the main page, in case the column balance is too uneven - Evad37 [talk] 03:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
::::::{{ec}} Here it is with the above order:
{{cot}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-header|{{Str left|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|2}}|9}}|{{date|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|dmy}}|{{Str right|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|2}}|10}}}}
{{Signpost-main-page-body-begin}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|From the editor|Another issue meets the deadline|A busy office with minimal staff.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Op-ed|Has the wind gone out of the AdminShip's sails?|Kudpung has some thoughts on the reasons for becalmed forums and the reluctance of candidates to (wo)man the rigging.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Opinion|Integrating my many lives on Wikipedia|Thoughts on how looking for the truth on Wikipedia brings out unexpected things in the real world.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|WikiProject report|WikiProject Portals|After a recent Village Pump discussion, the Signpost looks at WikiProject Portals.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Discussion report|Discussion Report|User rights, infoboxes, and more discussion on portals.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Featured content|Featured Content|Science, sportspeople, video games, and history feature heavily in the community's picks this month.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Arbitration report|Managing difficult topics|Has an attempt to prevent historical revisionism become a content battleground?}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|News and notes|Lots of Wikimedia|De-recognition of Brazil user groups; brute-force attack on Wikipedia; Wikimedia Conference 2018; and assorted other silly things.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|In the media|Wikipedia in Turkish politics; COI politics in Wikipedia; most cited work|And the burning question of the day, is the the monkey selfie going to space with the rest of Wikipedia?}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Traffic report|We love our superheros|No surprises here as the summer movie season begins.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Technology report|A trove of contributor and developer goodies|Improved mobile app, searching, citations, inline maps, voting, and more.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Blog|Why I write about women on Wikipedia|Editor SusunW delves into reasons why she has created hundreds of article about women.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Recent research|Why people don't contribute to Wikipedia; using Wikipedia to teach statistics, technical writing, and controversial issues|Too many women still don't know that Wikipedia is editable.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Humour|Play with your food|Down the rabbit hole into the realm of third-grade mind.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|Gallery|Wine not?|May 25 is National Wine Day in the United States.}}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-snippet|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}}|From the archives|The Signpost scoops The Signpost|The dark and twisted world of Wikipedia's most powerful media institution: The Signpost.}}
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue{{#ifexist: Book:Wikipedia Signpost/{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|1}} | {{·}} Book:Wikipedia Signpost/{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue | }}
{{Wikipedia:Signpost/Template:Signpost-footer|{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Issue|3}}|}}
{{cob}}
:::::OK, {{U|Bri}}, please do a final check on format, image sizes and placement, column widths etc. and that there are no extraneous formatting comments or default images left appearing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:02, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
File:Signpost 20180524 main page mockup.png
We have a title mismatch on Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Discussion report and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Featured content ... checking more ... no weird placeholders and every individual page looks OK at a glance. Checking main page as Evad suggested, next. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:14, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
:I'll have to figure out exactly how Evad got that main-page code generated, but it looked fine to me, and he also filled in a missing blurb. I think it's 100% ready to launch. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
:{{ping|Chris troutman}} make sure to de-select Special report on the first dialog page when you publish ☆ Bri (talk) 04:33, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
::Also make sure to select the checkbox for 'Use announcement ("from the editors") formatting for first item' - Evad37 [talk] 04:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
:::Chris, about that: it's a little finicky. You have to check that box after moving the sections around to the right order on the second dialog, or it will deselect itself. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:57, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
::::{{small|1=Yeah, the script could do with a few improvements, like remembering the previous state of things unless the page is reloaded - Evad37 [talk] 05:08, 24 May 2018 (UTC)}}
::I figured out the "dry run" code gen. Issue 6 main page mockup appears good as shown. I trust the date and issue number will get corrected when the script is run for real. And the redlinks definitely exist because it didn't actually publish the pages, so don't worry about that. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
