Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2010-06-21

Comments

The following is an automatically-generated compilation of all talk pages for the Signpost issue dated 2010-06-21. For general Signpost discussion, see Wikipedia talk:Signpost.

Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation (381 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2010-06-21

Discuss this story

• So I guess Arbcom will now also declare the outcome of the review to be "not satisfactory"? ;P œ^™ 17:53, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Features and admins: Approved this week (1,276 bytes · 💬)

Design again!

The design is largely settled. Two suggestions remain outstanding, which I am not sure of. Quiddity has suggested that the color of the sidebar be a grey (as in this revision) instead of the current color. He also suggests that the first two parts (the admins and the TFA sections) each be given a heading. I am disinclined to do either, as I prefer it the way it is, but if his opinion is widely shared I would likely make the change. So if you have thoughts—please share! Otherwise, thanks again to everyone who has made comments through this process. ÷seresin 19:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Be certain to test any design against all of the skins; not everyone uses monobook or vector. This is a common oversight many people make when changing the appearance of pages, & the result is that those of us who use the alternative skins experience all sorts of accessibility problems. Thanks. -- llywrch (talk) 05:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it is better as is. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:04, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

In the news: Wikipedia better than Britannica, Pending changes as a victory of tradition, and more (1,156 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2010-06-21

Discuss this story

Is there an English version of the "Wikipedia is better than Britannica" article? It sounds interesting.SPNic (talk) 00:43, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Sort of [1].--Chaser (talk) 02:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

The article mentions some statistics about Wikipedia and some glamorous factoids about Bergenholtz, but it doesn't give any details about his rationale for the comparison. It doesn't surprise me that this hasn't broken into mainstream English media, as it doesn't actually provide any new information or perspective. Besides, we already know we're 83 times better than Britannica, so who cares what Bergenholtz's reasoning is? :P --Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

News and notes: Collaboration with the British Museum and in Serbia, Interaction with researchers, and more (455 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2010-06-21

Discuss this story

Pity we still haven't done a single thing for Witty lama at Wikibooks... Kayau Voting IS evil 00:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Sister projects: Picture of the Year results declared on Wikimedia Commons (2,056 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2010-06-21

Discuss this story

• Excellent job; kudos to Tony and Nilotpal. I hope we can depreciate straight interviews in favor of this sort of thing in the future. Juliancolton (talk) 18:29, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

• I'm thinking a trial run for next week's WikiProject Report. monosock 21:20, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

• The winner is a fine image but I admit to some confusion as to just why it was so popular. The subject doesn't seem particularly compelling. Powers ^T 19:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

• I have no training in photography, but it looks superb technically at full res. I love the man's poise, his trajectory. The composition is beautiful: the water he's been swimming in is suffused with the gold of the temple, and the human activity on top of the gold temple and behind is an elegant counterpart to his figure. Tony (talk) 04:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

• I agree with Powers, the image simply doesn't carry any punch for me that the other ones do :/ ResMar 02:14, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

The 2009 picture of the year embodies exactly what I meant earlier: The future is... peeking behind the past . Great picture. --The Nut (talk) 14:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC

WikiProject report: WikiProject U2 (397 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2010-06-21

Discuss this story

• Great interview!!  Miss Bono (zootalk) 16:16, 8 April 2013 (UTC)