Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-04-26/In the media: Difference between revisions
Smallbones (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
The flag of [[Vatican City]] is being incorrectly reproduced throughout much of the world according to [https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/254032/wikipedia-had-the-wrong-vatican-city-flag-for-years-now-incorrect-flags-are-everywhere\ ''Wikipedia had the wrong Vatican City flag for years. Now incorrect flags are everywhere''] from the [[Catholic News Agency]]. Father William Becker, of the St. Columbanus Parish in [[Blooming Prairie, Minnesota]], who wrote [https://s3.amazonaws.com/ClubExpressClubFiles/622278/documents/Raven_v25_2018_p089-134_chapter3_656647193.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIA6MYUE6DNNNCCDT4J&Expires=1680994916&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DRaven_v25_2018_p089-134_chapter3.pdf&Signature=MTZhz377dsK%2BJu2cbrvUEYBU7gU%3D the book on Vatican flags], says that a Wikipedian added a red disk at the base of the [[Papal tiara]] in 2017 which lasted as the main Wiki illustration of the flag through 2022. The illustration on the right shows a white disk below the tiara, as it has since 2022. Nevertheless the 2005 photo on the left shows the red disk on a Vatican City flag in [[Nazareth]]. The official Vatican City website gives [https://www.vaticanstate.va/it/stato-governo/note-generali/bandiera.html an illustration without a red disk]. |
The flag of [[Vatican City]] is being incorrectly reproduced throughout much of the world according to [https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/254032/wikipedia-had-the-wrong-vatican-city-flag-for-years-now-incorrect-flags-are-everywhere\ ''Wikipedia had the wrong Vatican City flag for years. Now incorrect flags are everywhere''] from the [[Catholic News Agency]]. Father William Becker, of the St. Columbanus Parish in [[Blooming Prairie, Minnesota]], who wrote [https://s3.amazonaws.com/ClubExpressClubFiles/622278/documents/Raven_v25_2018_p089-134_chapter3_656647193.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIA6MYUE6DNNNCCDT4J&Expires=1680994916&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DRaven_v25_2018_p089-134_chapter3.pdf&Signature=MTZhz377dsK%2BJu2cbrvUEYBU7gU%3D the book on Vatican flags], says that a Wikipedian added a red disk at the base of the [[Papal tiara]] in 2017 which lasted as the main Wiki illustration of the flag through 2022. The illustration on the right shows a white disk below the tiara, as it has since 2022. Nevertheless the 2005 photo on the left shows the red disk on a Vatican City flag in [[Nazareth]]. The official Vatican City website gives [https://www.vaticanstate.va/it/stato-governo/note-generali/bandiera.html an illustration without a red disk]. |
||
<gallery center heights=300> |
<gallery center heights=300> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
File:Flag of the Vatican City.svg|Currently displayed flag |
File:Flag of the Vatican City.svg|Currently displayed flag |
||
| ⚫ | |||
File:Vatican-City-Moon-Flag.jpg|Exhibit in the Vatican Museum, with the lower plaque stating "This flag of your state was carried to the Moon and back by Apollo 11." |
|||
</gallery> |
</gallery> |
||
We got scooped on this story by [https://twitter.com/depthsofwiki/status/1639326616563089422 @depthsofwiki] which has better illustrations and shows how [[Encyclopedia Brittanica]] includes the red disk in [https://www.britannica.com/topic/flag-of-Vatican-City their version of the flag]. But she should have scrolled down to their "Vatican City" article: the font of all Britannic knowledge renders an unexplained split decision. Reddit's version, which started this [[red herring|red hat-ring]] business, uncovered that NASA sent a red disk flag to the moon on [[Apollo 11]], which was put on display in the [[Vatican Museum]]. A later @depthsofwiki's [https://twitter.com/VinSlashLopez/status/1639478301885599745 post] shows the museum display and a red disk photo of a 2005 state visit of the Pope to Italy. So who's to blame? |
We got scooped on this story by [https://twitter.com/depthsofwiki/status/1639326616563089422 @depthsofwiki] which has better illustrations and shows how [[Encyclopedia Brittanica]] includes the red disk in [https://www.britannica.com/topic/flag-of-Vatican-City their version of the flag]. But she should have scrolled down to their "Vatican City" article: the font of all Britannic knowledge renders an unexplained split decision. Reddit's version, which started this [[red herring|red hat-ring]] business, uncovered that NASA sent a red disk flag to the moon on [[Apollo 11]], which was put on display in the [[Vatican Museum]]. A later @depthsofwiki's [https://twitter.com/VinSlashLopez/status/1639478301885599745 post] shows the museum display and a red disk photo of a 2005 state visit of the Pope to Italy. So who's to blame? |
||
Revision as of 01:05, 10 April 2023
 Article display preview: | This is a draft of a potential Signpost article, and should not be interpreted as a finished piece. Its content is subject to review by the editorial team and ultimately by JPxG, the editor in chief. Please do not link to this draft as it is unfinished and the URL will change upon publication. If you would like to contribute and are familiar with the requirements of a Signpost article, feel free to be bold in making improvements!
| ||||
YOUR ARTICLE'S DESCRIPTIVE TITLE HERE
Optional: Give a short WP:LEAD-like introduction statement here.
Russia
Slate covers World War II arbitration case
Stephen Harrison in Slate writes about the ongoing arbitration case on World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (see previous Signpost coverage: 1, 2). Commenting on the historical context, Harrison says:
It is hard to convey the sheer magnitude of the underlying historical tragedies at issue—From 1941 to 1945, Nazi Germany murdered some 6 million Jews. Roughly half of these victims had resided in Poland, which claimed prewar Europe's largest Jewish population. The Auschwitz complex of concentration and extermination camps was located in Poland, as were others.
The suffering of Poland's non-Jewish population was also extraordinary, even by the standards of World War II. Poland was the only nation to be attacked simultaneously by the Third Reich and the Soviet Union, both of whom rejected Poland’s right to exist as a sovereign nation and set about eliminating the country’s political, cultural, and military elites. More than 2 million non-Jewish Poles are estimated to have perished during the war, which left the country in ruins.
Polish Jews and the broader nation of Poland were thus victims of previously unimaginable horrors, and acknowledging one tragedy, and the suffering of one population, shouldn't detract from the other. But the historical record remains subject to intense political scrutiny, unresolved wounds, and understandable sensitivities.
Harrison notes that there are competing historical narratives. According to the one promoted by Poland's current right-wing government, World War II marked "a period when the nation achieved the peak of moral virtue", exemplified by its steadfast refusal to collaborate with the Germans. Scholars like Jan Grabowski – whose paper in The Journal of Holocaust Research, co-written with Shira Klein (User:Chapmansh), sparked the current arbitration case – would like to see greater acknowledgment of the fact that Poland saw some of the same antisemitism that existed elsewhere in Europe and that there were cases of Polish involvement in Jewish suffering.
Looking at how Wikipedia deals with this topic area, Harrison revisits the 2019 story of the "fake Nazi death camp" as one example of misinformation raised by Grabowski and Klein that lasted for more than a decade in Wikipedia before being corrected in 2019 (see previous Signpost coverage). He also explains that addressing such cases is made more difficult by the fact that Wikipedia's arbitration committee is not permitted to rule on content but can only decide conduct disputes.
Harrison argues that there is something "deeply unsatisfying" about this dichotomy, but he sees no easy solution. He quotes Chapmansh and Piotrus – both university teachers who have worked with Wikipedia in the classroom, though they are on opposite sides in this case – as saying that it would be good to have more academics contributing to Wikipedia. Harrison is sceptical, however:
Could experts really save Wikipedia? On the one hand, there is a lot to be said for greater collaboration between scholars and Wikipedia; after all, Wiki pages often have far more reach and page views than traditional scholarly papers. But some Wikipedians are understandably cautious about handing the site over to an exclusive club of specialists. Previous experiments have flopped, such as Nupedia – the predecessor to Wikipedia – which required volunteer contributors with appropriate subject matter expertise for every article. That project was shut down in 2003 after producing only 21 articles during its inaugural year.
Contentious issues, moreover, don't cease being contentious when experts are called in, and there are other ways that involving experts in Wikipedia's adjudicative process could backfire in future cases. Consider the two other topics that, along with the Holocaust in Poland, Wikipedia has placed in its highest category of concern: India–Pakistan and Israel–Palestine. If the precedent is established to invite experts into an ArbCom trial, each side would enlist its own champion advocate in Court TV fashion. The volunteer arbitrators would have to decide who won the battle of experts, despite having no formal qualifications to do so.
More fundamentally, looping in experts at a content trial would undercut the ethos of Wikipedia. The spirit of the site is that volunteer editors curate information by following certain policies, such as using reliable sources. So long as those policies are followed, it's not supposed to make a difference whether experts are actually involved in the article-making process.
Harrison reports that some issues in Wikipedia's coverage identified by Graboswki and Klein have since been addressed, due to an injection of new blood in the topic area, although he says this can be a hit-and-miss process given the prevalence of battleground behaviour and cases of entrenched editors being hostile to newcomers.
At the end of his article, Harrison notes that some of the editors at the centre of the controversy are vigorously defending their actions in the court of public opinion. He comments on how engaging with such emotive subject matter can be a risky affair, linking to a press report on how Grabowski himself was taken to court in Poland over some of his academic writing and noting that some of the editors with whom Grabowski and Klein disagree are reporting sustained off-wiki harassment.
Their situation serves as a stark reminder that the boundary between "real" life and Wikipedia activity can be perilously thin, and that engaging with this painful history poses risks for everyone involved.
—AK
Can we blame this on Brittanica? NASA? the Vatican?
The flag of Vatican City is being incorrectly reproduced throughout much of the world according to Wikipedia had the wrong Vatican City flag for years. Now incorrect flags are everywhere from the Catholic News Agency. Father William Becker, of the St. Columbanus Parish in Blooming Prairie, Minnesota, who wrote the book on Vatican flags, says that a Wikipedian added a red disk at the base of the Papal tiara in 2017 which lasted as the main Wiki illustration of the flag through 2022. The illustration on the right shows a white disk below the tiara, as it has since 2022. Nevertheless the 2005 photo on the left shows the red disk on a Vatican City flag in Nazareth. The official Vatican City website gives an illustration without a red disk.
-
Currently displayed flag -
Flag in Nazareth, 2005 -
Exhibit in the Vatican Museum, with the lower plaque stating "This flag of your state was carried to the Moon and back by Apollo 11."
.svg)
We got scooped on this story by @depthsofwiki which has better illustrations and shows how Encyclopedia Brittanica includes the red disk in their version of the flag. But she should have scrolled down to their "Vatican City" article: the font of all Britannic knowledge renders an unexplained split decision. Reddit's version, which started this red hat-ring business, uncovered that NASA sent a red disk flag to the moon on Apollo 11, which was put on display in the Vatican Museum. A later @depthsofwiki's post shows the museum display and a red disk photo of a 2005 state visit of the Pope to Italy. So who's to blame?
In brief
- Subtitle: Text text text.
- Podcast on diversity in Wikipedia biographies: Economist and media personality Tyler Cowen hosts a podcast interview with scientist and Wikipedia personality Jess Wade.
- Subtitle: Text text text.
- Subtitle: Text text text.
- Subtitle: Text text text.
- Subtitle: Text text text.
This page is a draft for the next issue of the Signpost. Below is some helpful code that will help you write and format a Signpost draft. If it's blank, you can fill out a template by copy-pasting this in and pressing 'publish changes': {{subst:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload}}
Images and Galleries
|
|---|
To put an image in your article, use the following template (link): This will create the file on the right. Keep the 300px in most cases. If writing a 'full width' article, change
Placing (link) will instead create an inline image like below [[File:|300px|center|alt=Placeholder alt text]] CAPTION
To create a gallery, use the following to create |
Quotes
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
To insert a framed quote like the one on the right, use this template (link): If writing a 'full width' article, change
To insert a pull quote like
use this template (link):
To insert a long inline quote like
use this template (link): |
Side frames
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
Side frames help put content in sidebar vignettes. For instance, this one (link): gives the frame on the right. This is useful when you want to insert non-standard images, quotes, graphs, and the like.
A caption
For example, to insert the {{Graph:Chart}} generated by in a frame, simple put the graph code in to get the framed Graph:Chart on the right. If writing a 'full width' article, change |
Two-column vs full width styles
|
|---|
|
If you keep the 'normal' preloaded draft and work from there, you will be using the two-column style. This is perfectly fine in most cases and you don't need to do anything. However, every time you have a However, you can also fine-tune which style is used at which point in an article. To switch from two-column → full width style midway in an article, insert where you want the switch to happen. To switch from full width → two-column style midway in an article, insert where you want the switch to happen. |
Links and such
|
|---|
By the way, the template that you're reading right now is {{Editnotices/Group/Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue}} (edit). A list of the preload templates for Signpost articles can be found here. |
Discuss this story
Elon Musk has essentially shown why you shouldn't use Wikipedia as a source. In all honesty, Elon Musk is basically an example of everything you should not do if you control something. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:19, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Washington Examiner doing the "mainstream bad" thing again. --Firestar464 (talk) 20:42, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]