|
Turning 150: An interview and a discussion |
The editors are very pleased to mark the achievement of 150 editions of The Bugle.
The Bugle was first published in March 2006. Until October 2010 it was edited by the coordinator team as a whole. Climie.ca and The ed17 became the inaugural editors that month, in an edition which also established the current format. Ian Rose replaced Climie.ca a year later, and Nick-D replaced The ed17 in October 2012. There have also been several guest editors, including TomStar81 and Peacemaker67.
Throughout its history The Bugle has sought to provide members of the project with an update on recent activities, recognise editors' achievements and encourage new and improved articles. Over time its scope has increased, and it now regularly includes op-eds on military history topics or issues related to developing articles, as well as book reviews. Occasional features include interviews and review essays. Importantly, these have been contributed by many members of the project, for which we and previous editors have been grateful. As many other Wikipedia newsletters have struggled to put out regular editions, or have become defunct, reaching 150 continuous editions is a notable milestone for the project.
All 150 editions of the newsletter are available at its archives.
To mark the occasion, we've interviewed some of the key figures in the newsletter's history. We are also very keen to hear your reflections on The Bugle, and ideas for the future.
Interview
- Why did you choose to become involved with The Bugle? What kinds of contributions have you made?
- Many of the sections we know and expect today, like op-eds, were added in the months before Cam and I became the first official editors of the Bugle in October 2010. This increased the time commitment needed to get the newsletter out, and then-lead coordinator Roger Davies identified a need for at least one permanent editor charged with making sure the issues got out in time. Cam and I volunteered. It was a very informal process. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- My involvement in The Bugle was very much a one-off, caused by the absence of the editors during production. I make suggestions here and there, mainly for recognition of milestones achieved by the project and our members, and have done a review or two. I'd like to be more involved, we'll see how that fits in this year. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- In my case I became involved with the bugle when I first joined the project - primarily by reading it :) I had my first serious interaction with editing the bugle when I was elected our third Lead Coordinator about 10 years ago, at which point I did some contributing to the "from the coordinators" section. I had some on and off again contributions to the bugle up until 2014, when I started contributing to the World War I timeline and Op-Eds related to it. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- How has the newsletter and its role in the Military History Wikiproject evolved since it started?
- Certainly. The first issue was a short summary of the highlights and discussions happening in the project. Today, it's evolved to include a list of the project's newest improved content, book reviews of potential sources Wikipedians can use in their own articles, and op-eds that allow project members to explore areas of interest to them or explanatory 'how to' articles that allow others to learn from their experiences. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- In my relatively short time with the project, The Bugle has been pretty stable in terms of content areas. I've always read it with interest and have a great appreciation for those who have done the heavy lifting in getting it out on time and complete. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Way, way back in the day our newsletter was little more than an announcement that the news for the project had been updated. It graduated to a short table with boxes for information relevant to project users, then in 2010 it underwent another evolution to more closely resemble the signpost, which at the time was published on average once a week and had several independent sections linked to from a main page which allowed for a fuller, more complete version of the project new letter to grow. We've kept that format since, although like all things we've added to it and subtracted from it for account for changes in the times. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- What do you think that the highlights of The Bugle have been?
- The monthly celebration of the quality work of members of the project is the stand-out for me. I enjoy reading the blurbs for the recently promoted articles, and often end up reading the whole of each article I haven't reviewed because my interest has been piqued. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Broadcasting awards earned by contributors. Its always nice to see the project recognize those who through their diligent work and effort move us forward one article, list, review, or idea at a time. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Have there been any low lights?
- Not any I can think of. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Do you have any suggestions for how The Bugle could be improved?
- In 2012, I wrote a piece that summarized the Bugle's past, present, and potential future, and many of my suggestions there remain possible. I would especially point at the op-eds, which over the last few years have become short histories from the First World War. That's not in itself a bad thing; I think the Bugle should always run relevant content like this when someone's willing to write it. It does, however, mean that the op-ed slot is perennially occupied and has moved away from its original intention of providing space for provocative, thought-provoking proposals and in-depth looks at arcane Wikipedia processes. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- I echo Ed's comments about the op-ed department of The Bugle. Now that the WWI centenary is almost over, I'd like to see a diverse approach to op-eds from the December issue on, perhaps approaching newer editors to write a short piece about aspects of the project that they have learned about recently or their area of focus, or asking longer-term editors to expand on a perennial issue that comes up or content creation they are working on, as well as the suggestions Ed made above. I can think of several editors that I'd really like to hear from about why they work in the subject area they do etc, along the lines of an interview, perhaps as a quarterly thing. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- In light of the above I do feel a little guilty occupying the Op-Ed slots for World War I related commentary, although it should be noted that others have chipped in as well to the WWI Op-Ed train. As for the Bugle improvements, the answer is always yes because there is always room for improvement. I would personally like to see an interactive section with a monthly word search or crossword puzzle or such, and as quality content improves and boundaries shift on Wikipedia I'm also of the mind that linking to one of our academy articles in the monthly bugle may be a good idea. It may be a good idea at this point to reach out to the community and see what they like/dislike about our newsletter and then update it accordingly. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Do you have any parting comments?
- I see the Bugle as an important thread tying together the members of the Military History Project, but it can always use your help. The editors can't do it alone (I suspect you would be surprised at the amount of time that goes into this newsletter)! If you have an idea for a Bugle post, whether it's a book review, information project editors should know, or something else, drop a line in the newsroom. We'll all be the better for it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- To me, The Bugle is also a window into the project and a place to celebrate our collective and individual achievements. I believe it is a key part of why our project continues to thrive when many projects have died. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Over to you
The editors are also very keen to see your reflections on The Bugle, including what you like most about it and how the newsletter could be further developed. Please leave your comments in the 'discuss this story' field below.
|
|
Turning 150: An interview and a discussion |
The editors are very pleased to mark the achievement of 150 editions of The Bugle.
The Bugle was first published in March 2006. Until October 2010 it was edited by the coordinator team as a whole. Climie.ca and The ed17 became the inaugural editors that month, in an edition which also established the current format. Ian Rose replaced Climie.ca a year later, and Nick-D replaced The ed17 in October 2012. There have also been several guest editors, including TomStar81 and Peacemaker67.
Throughout its history The Bugle has sought to provide members of the project with an update on recent activities, recognise editors' achievements and encourage new and improved articles. Over time its scope has increased, and it now regularly includes op-eds on military history topics or issues related to developing articles, as well as book reviews. Occasional features include interviews and review essays. Importantly, these have been contributed by many members of the project, for which we and previous editors have been grateful. As many other Wikipedia newsletters have struggled to put out regular editions, or have become defunct, reaching 150 continuous editions is a notable milestone for the project.
All 150 editions of the newsletter are available at its archives.
To mark the occasion, we've interviewed some of the key figures in the newsletter's history. We are also very keen to hear your reflections on The Bugle, and ideas for the future.
Interview
- Why did you choose to become involved with The Bugle? What kinds of contributions have you made?
- Many of the sections we know and expect today, like op-eds, were added in the months before Cam and I became the first official editors of the Bugle in October 2010. This increased the time commitment needed to get the newsletter out, and then-lead coordinator Roger Davies identified a need for at least one permanent editor charged with making sure the issues got out in time. Cam and I volunteered. It was a very informal process. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- My involvement in The Bugle was very much a one-off, caused by the absence of the editors during production. I make suggestions here and there, mainly for recognition of milestones achieved by the project and our members, and have done a review or two. I'd like to be more involved, we'll see how that fits in this year. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- In my case I became involved with the bugle when I first joined the project - primarily by reading it :) I had my first serious interaction with editing the bugle when I was elected our third Lead Coordinator about 10 years ago, at which point I did some contributing to the "from the coordinators" section. I had some on and off again contributions to the bugle up until 2014, when I started contributing to the World War I timeline and Op-Eds related to it. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- How has the newsletter and its role in the Military History Wikiproject evolved since it started?
- Certainly. The first issue was a short summary of the highlights and discussions happening in the project. Today, it's evolved to include a list of the project's newest improved content, book reviews of potential sources Wikipedians can use in their own articles, and op-eds that allow project members to explore areas of interest to them or explanatory 'how to' articles that allow others to learn from their experiences. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- In my relatively short time with the project, The Bugle has been pretty stable in terms of content areas. I've always read it with interest and have a great appreciation for those who have done the heavy lifting in getting it out on time and complete. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Way, way back in the day our newsletter was little more than an announcement that the news for the project had been updated. It graduated to a short table with boxes for information relevant to project users, then in 2010 it underwent another evolution to more closely resemble the signpost, which at the time was published on average once a week and had several independent sections linked to from a main page which allowed for a fuller, more complete version of the project new letter to grow. We've kept that format since, although like all things we've added to it and subtracted from it for account for changes in the times. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- What do you think that the highlights of The Bugle have been?
- The monthly celebration of the quality work of members of the project is the stand-out for me. I enjoy reading the blurbs for the recently promoted articles, and often end up reading the whole of each article I haven't reviewed because my interest has been piqued. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Broadcasting awards earned by contributors. Its always nice to see the project recognize those who through their diligent work and effort move us forward one article, list, review, or idea at a time. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Have there been any low lights?
- Not any I can think of. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Do you have any suggestions for how The Bugle could be improved?
- In 2012, I wrote a piece that summarized the Bugle's past, present, and potential future, and many of my suggestions there remain possible. I would especially point at the op-eds, which over the last few years have become short histories from the First World War. That's not in itself a bad thing; I think the Bugle should always run relevant content like this when someone's willing to write it. It does, however, mean that the op-ed slot is perennially occupied and has moved away from its original intention of providing space for provocative, thought-provoking proposals and in-depth looks at arcane Wikipedia processes. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- I echo Ed's comments about the op-ed department of The Bugle. Now that the WWI centenary is almost over, I'd like to see a diverse approach to op-eds from the December issue on, perhaps approaching newer editors to write a short piece about aspects of the project that they have learned about recently or their area of focus, or asking longer-term editors to expand on a perennial issue that comes up or content creation they are working on, as well as the suggestions Ed made above. I can think of several editors that I'd really like to hear from about why they work in the subject area they do etc, along the lines of an interview, perhaps as a quarterly thing. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- In light of the above I do feel a little guilty occupying the Op-Ed slots for World War I related commentary, although it should be noted that others have chipped in as well to the WWI Op-Ed train. As for the Bugle improvements, the answer is always yes because there is always room for improvement. I would personally like to see an interactive section with a monthly word search or crossword puzzle or such, and as quality content improves and boundaries shift on Wikipedia I'm also of the mind that linking to one of our academy articles in the monthly bugle may be a good idea. It may be a good idea at this point to reach out to the community and see what they like/dislike about our newsletter and then update it accordingly. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Do you have any parting comments?
- I see the Bugle as an important thread tying together the members of the Military History Project, but it can always use your help. The editors can't do it alone (I suspect you would be surprised at the amount of time that goes into this newsletter)! If you have an idea for a Bugle post, whether it's a book review, information project editors should know, or something else, drop a line in the newsroom. We'll all be the better for it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
- To me, The Bugle is also a window into the project and a place to celebrate our collective and individual achievements. I believe it is a key part of why our project continues to thrive when many projects have died. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Over to you
The editors are also very keen to see your reflections on The Bugle, including what you like most about it and how the newsletter could be further developed. Please leave your comments in the 'discuss this story' field below.
|