Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2017-02-06/Traffic report

• I frequently enjoy The Signpost's content, especially the Traffic Report but I think I like the report with less political axe-grinding. Typically the writing is good on the report but there's a very fine line between witty snark and pathetic bitterness. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chris, I am interested to hear what comments you found unfavorable. E.g., we are finding a split of opinion over Trump where there are almost no non-U.S. readers who don't want us to flay Trump alive (which we try not to do), and where in the U.S. there are some people who have expressed dislike for comments about Trump that are negative even when factual. That's why I tried to play it light in the Trump entry in the topmost top 10. We are in interesting times where politics are dominating the chart more than usual.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 23:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree these are difficult times and I know there's a wide variety of opinion but I noticed comments like"the United States doesn't seem to have a system for dealing with botched elections","literal rape", and"everybody seems to be talking about how successful his administration has been" miss the mark. I don't mind Maplestrip registering her opinion. I balk when that opinion is presented as fact. I understand these are divisive issues; I just think Signpost can do better since it usually does. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:23, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As for"everybody seems to be talking about how successful his administration has been", I was actually referring to people criticizing the Obama administration for various reasons. At the time of writing, I saw a lot of posts and articles in my feed related to how Obama would be remembered compared to other US presidents. That was not intended to be a compliment. The "literal rape" comment may have been a bit on the nose, but per various dictionary definitions ("unlawful sexual activity ... carried out forcibly ... incapable of valid consent ..."), any kind of sexual assault can also be referred to as rape. I'm sorry if this word usage has been uncomfortable. As for the first statement regarding botched elections: that was indeed a somewhat personal statement, or even a personal frustration as someone who follows international news. Clearly, the United States election was messed up, right? Even the president has said that voter fraud has taken place. Whether or not this means that there should be a "do-over" is subjective, but I found it odd that the US doesn't even seem to have a system in place for such a situation. I never read anything along the lines of "if this Russian hack is confirmed, we should do X." I hope I manage to justify my use of language somewhat. I agree with the fact that adding me to the traffic report group wouldn't exactly result in more political diversity here, which has been an issue for a while now... ~Mable (chat) 10:40, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, to clarify, I did not state that tax invasion, rape, or illegal usage of a private mailing server actually took place. I just stated that the election happened while investigations and court cases regarding these situations were still ongoing. Surely that is an issue worth addressing? ~Mable (chat) 10:44, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said, our current situation leads to difficult editorial decisions. I won't argue the facts of what has been in the news because I don't want to derail this discussion nor do I deny we're in some really odd political territory. I'd certainly shy away from coverage that can be divisive although I guess that perception of what's divisive depends on what communities you interact with. I'm a student in Pittsburgh so I see both ends of the US spectrum here. Serendipodous has continually been on the money with his writing so I'd only suggest you follow his lead for where to draw the line. I value Traffic Report and I'd hate to have editors like me become alienated by a descent into the filthy world of wholesale politics. I totally understand where you're coming from, though. I'm just not where you are. Having international voices in The Signpost is important so I encourage you to continue. Chris Troutman (talk) 11:05, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to do better next time - thank you for the criticism! ~Mable (chat) 11:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Slipping in with my Editor in Chief hat on, I'm glad to see this discussed. As we do for almost every edition (since politics are a running theme), we considered the extent and nature of the political commentary prior to publication; while we may have reached a different conclusion than you did, Chris troutman, I want to assure you it was not out of a lack of consideration, or a lack of sensitivity to the issues you raise. As far as I'm concerned, one of the important and valuable aspects of the Traffic Report -- which distinguishes it from the Top 25 reports that are its basis -- is the voice of the author. (And the voice of the writers is one of the core assets of the Signpost, going back to 2005.) One way of addressing your concerns that I'm very open to is recruiting more people, of more backgrounds, to offer their own analyses -- and this is a good time for that. But I'm not inclined to ask our contributors to tone down their views, at least not in this case. I consider the quality of research and writing to be the determining factors in what we publish here, not the "slant" of the author's views. Chris, thank you for articulating your position. Maplestrip, thank you for your work on this, and for taking the criticism in stride -- and {{u|Milowent]] and Serendipodous, thanks as always for your leadership on this section! -Pete Forsyth (talk) 21:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• The Week of January 8 to 14, 2017 section seems to either have the wrong view count numbers for Donald Trump article or have it in the wrong place in the list. Mm? —{{u|Goldenshimmer}}|✝️|ze/zer|😹|T/C|☮️|John15:12|🍂 09:54, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P. S.: Personally, I enjoyed getting to hear the author's commentary. I assume NPOV doesn't apply to this, so IDK what the fuss is about; it certainly gives a nice change of pace from reading article content. Just my 2¢. —{{u|Goldenshimmer}}|✝️|ze/zer|😹|T/C|☮️|John15:12|🍂 09:54, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Goldenshimmer, thanks for the note re Trump viewcount, I have put the correct number - the old one probably was an artifact from a prior report that we forgot to update, he was still #5 that week. And thanks for weighing in on our commentary as well.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 13:59, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I feel it should be officially noted here that plenty of men also lust after Ryan Gosling. --Roisterer (talk) 03:09, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]