User talk:Oltrepier/New Signpost column

General discussion

Hello! This space is intended to discuss how to improve and implement my idea for a new Signpost column: see the "Inspiration and major goals" and "Key questions and feedback" sections on the main page for reference. Be honest, but constructive... : ) Oltrepier (talk) 11:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the proposal for a new column, or a series within the existing 'Interview' column? Svampesky (talk) 15:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Svampesky Well, either way, to be honest! That's one of the reasons why I really wanted your feedback, to see which format is the most suitable. : ) Oltrepier (talk) 22:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get back to you with my initial impressions within the next few days. Just know that I'm trying to ease back from increasing expectations and that I don't really see myself as a symbol for all young editors out there or anything. I see myself as someone doing normal things that just got extra recognition. I didn't realize that Gen Z is saving the world was going to be the ethos of that piece and while I think people always like to have a stake in the next generation, I think everyone should feel like their perspective is valued and appreciated (and that means the older folks too!). I'm not entirely sold on the idea of a new Signpost column specifically for younger editors, but I do think that maybe we could run more essays on a variety of perspectives on welcoming newcomers or whatever because that's really what I see most of what I do as being about. Bring that sense of community to the people who don't have established ties within in yet. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In general I think The Signpost could use a "specialized" column about just about any group of editors that represent 10% (or maybe even 5%) of all editors. If it has very limited interest outside of the group, it is not as attractive, but I don't see that as a problem with this group, and it could be made very inclusive. For example, there could be a column about people who started editing when they were very young, let's say 12 years old. You could fill that up with lots of veteran editors! But make sure to reserve about 20% for people who are currently under, say, 18 y.o. (watch out please for giving out too much info about 18 y.o. and under though, we need to respect their privacy and even assume that they don't fully understand the benefits of maintaining privacy - in some cases.) I don't see the benefit of limiting the column to just interviews. Technically, interviews can be tough, even in just getting the words down on paper. Sure, just using e-mail interviews is possible, but it reduces spontaneity and can be too formal and it would get boring after a while. You could use a transcription service, but that takes some setting up and a bit of money.

I'd actually encourage a couple of people to not over-plan this, just wing it if 2 people have exciting ideas and can each commit to tackling a column every 2 months (i.e. average 1 column per month in total). It doesn't have to be every issue of even every month, but if you go 3 months without a column (even once), that will certainly lower your chances of having a long run successful column. These are just random ideas - somebody needs to just take this under their wing and run with it. @Clovermoss and Oltrepier:, you are the obvious folks. If just one of you say "I'll commit to writing a column every other month", somebody else will come along and say "Let's do it!"

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 17:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Clovermoss Well, even if people just do "normal things", they usually don't get the WOTY prize by pure chance... ; )

But anyway, thanks to you and @Smallbones for your feedback! On second thought, I realize that I've over-committed to a very specific idea (as usual) and forgot to see the "bigger picture" about the diverse groups of editors who are constantly involved in improving Wikimedia projects; I agree that it would make a lot of sense to reflect these differences in the column, as well.

I do acknowledge that handling interviews can be pretty difficult, even though Sensei @Bluerasberry might give us some good suggestions on that front. I also love the idea of writing new essays targeted to newcomers, because it would actually help us to kill two birds with one stone: we could manage to get many different voices involved in the conversation and connect newbies with the sources and the mentors they are looking for, an aspect I admittedly struggled with at the start of my journey on Wikipedia. This would mean that, rather than hosting full-length interviews, we might just contact users and embed their comments in our essays, or even host some kind of "round table" about a certain subject from time to time, as it already happens with WikiProject reports.

I'll try to update the draft with your bits of advice in the next few days, and I'm hoping we can create and build a fully-structured column out of these great ideas! Oltrepier (talk) 13:19, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(arbitrary break)

I like the idea of a column from the perspective of a new generation of 'pedians. We've thought about the issue of generational change in a few contexts before, and this is a good continuation of that, IMO. Example, "wikigeneration gulf" in the title at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-08-09/Admin stats. I'd just say that limiting it to Gen Z might not be the best idea. First, there will be generations after that -- Gen alpha is about ready to start contributing, if my math is right. Plus, it might be worth a thought, is this about younger people, or is it about new people, whatever their age may be? I'm okay either way. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:36, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri Thank you for your suggestion.

Yes, like I wrote before, I now realize that focusing on new faces, rather than young faces, might be the best solution to go with. Oltrepier (talk) 21:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a suggestion, but a comment: I just wanted to say that this is a great idea. I definitely think Gen Z Wikipedians are contributing as much as the Generation X/Ys did back in the older stages of Wikipedia and even now. We have to have a column on this, to detail the specifics and aspects how Gen Z Wikipedians are leaving as much impact here in terms of everything: article creation, anti-vandalism work, even becoming administrators and handling work as much as our preceding generations did. Now, with that said, I could be biased here since I'm part of the generation myself (very late stages, just revealing that), but just saying: a column a month dedicated to the work of Generation Z Wikipedians sounds awesome. I'm not saying this to overshadow the work of Generation X/Y Wikipedians – they did a huge, huge amount of work on this encyclopedia as well – but rather to show how this generation has contributed and worked so far here, and how it can build on the work of Wikipedians from preceding generation(s). To show how this encyclopedia is evolving as we progress through the generations. And in broader terms, how Wikipedia was maintained and how it will be maintained in the future through the work of Generation Z Wikipedians next. That's my speech there. And if anyone's taking interviewees, I'm down for it. ~ Tails Wx 05:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tails Wx Thank you for your feedback, I appreciate it a lot!

I must say that the previous suggestions up above sound good, too, so that leaves me with a slight dilemma... We've got plenty of time to find a common solution, though! Oltrepier (talk) 19:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Title?

Hello! I haven't been able to come up with a good title for this proposed column so far, so if anyone wants to throw their hat in the ring, your help is hugely appreciated! Oltrepier (talk) 11:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Schedule planning

Hello! This is a space intended to discuss the schedule for the proposed column.

Let's start from a comment left by @Smallbones up above, for more context and clarity:

I'd actually encourage a couple of people to not over-plan this, just wing it if 2 people have exciting ideas and can each commit to tackling a column every 2 months (i.e. average 1 column per month in total). It doesn't have to be every issue of even every month, but if you go 3 months without a column (even once), that will certainly lower your chances of having a long run successful column. These are just random ideas - somebody needs to just take this under their wing and run with it.

Any kind of suggestion is appreciated! Oltrepier (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from bluerasberry

I am supportive of any new efforts to recruit more people to contribute journalism to The Signpost
My recommendation for the best way to start is by actually producing journalism as soon as possible, before redesigning anything. I welcome the idea of a new column, but for example, over the years I have observed that the usual way that anyone starts an outreach plan to encourage people to edit Wikipedia articles is to design a new outreach strategy or format. Feel free to design new systems if you like, but in my view, the plain focus on submitting journalism / writing Wikipedia articles is the starting strategy with the greatest record of success.
This proposal is framed as a new column for The Signpost, but the idea here seems like community-building for a demographic. If your idea includes things like being a community point of contact, providing editorial support and strategic guidance, and maintaining conversation in a group, then I understand that. I am indifferent to The Signpost getting a new column - it already has a lot as listed at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom - but I am excited about anyone who wants to bring a new community of journalists into Signpost, and it makes sense that a new community would want its own column to control their voice especially in a transitional period before moving into all the established spaces.
In my opinion, Wikipedia is not short on stories, but is very short on storytellers. Lots of people have something important to say of broad interest, but it is really hard to recruit anyone who will actually put those stories into media. If you find a journalist who will write stories for others, then you have something magic.
Video is a legitimate journalism media format and if you want the next generation recruit for it. Now is totally the time to recruit would-be video personalities to tell more Wikipedia stories. Do text journalism if you like but gen Z and next generation content definitely includes video. MP4 comes off patent in 2028, and getting ready for that now is timely.
If I can support, then let's talk https://calendly.com/bluerasberry

Bluerasberry (talk) 17:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry Thanks for your feedback, I appreciate it! Oltrepier (talk) 11:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Initial thoughts from Svampesky

Oppose a new column; support a series.
When developing a publication, it's essential to consider the longevity of its columns. Columns that are overly specific will become outdated, leading to a trend of new ones which would quickly make the archives become disorganized. It is, however, acceptable for a series to eventually lose relevance allowing for new ones to be created. The Signpost currently has a comprehensive range of columns, including 'Discussion report', 'Deletion report', 'Traffic report', 'Technology report', and 'Gallery'. This structure facilitates flexibility, allowing reports in a series to be published between columns.
As an example, I would be leaning oppose on the inclusion of an 'Artificial intelligence report' column, as the existing columns allow for adaptability, but would support an artificial intelligence series published within these existing columns. The recently published AI image gallery fits within the gallery column, and discussions about AI on Wikipedia could be published in, 'Opinion', 'In focus', or 'Discussion report'. I have created a mock-up of what a series could look like on the Signpost main page, to make it clearer to the reader.

–

Discussion report

How Gen Z are saving Wikipedia

Gen Z series
The landscape is changing and Wikipedia needs to keep up.

Svampesky (talk) 14:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Svampesky Great point, thank you for your suggestion.

I guess "Discussion report" or even "Interview" would be the best options in this case, although I agree with the others that this hypothetical column might actually do a better service to the community as a whole by focusing on newcomers, rather than just Gen Z users. Oltrepier (talk) 11:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]