The focus of the evaluation is very much biased.
The focus is too much on money, it gives me a horrible feeling, the
community/participants are not a factory plant in what every employee needs
to work a minimum number of hours. The goal of Wiki Loves Monuments is to
get all monuments with a good picture on Wikipedia, not just of the most
popular or easy monuments. The first time a contest as such is organised
the low hanging fruits are done first, but they forget to mention that
getting the low hanging fruits is not the core goal of Wiki Loves
Monuments. The goal of Wiki Loves Monuments is to get a photo of every
monument. The more monuments get a picture, it becomes much harder to ge a
picture of the other monuments. It are too much easy thoughts without
thinking it through. It is failing in describing the actual situation and
misses totally what Wiki Loves Monuments is about.
WMF has set some objectives for itself, and now the evaluate those
objectives/goals, even while Wiki Loves Monuments has a different focus.
To me the evaluation is a signal that WMF is too far away from the actual
2015-05-02 13:26 GMT+02:00 Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org>rg>:
it seems that the WMF evaluation department has once again put together an
evaluation of Wiki Loves Monuments. Out of curiosity, were any of the
organizers involved in this? A quick glance suggests some factual errors,
and again a big focus on assuming WLM is a consistent project, that is
similar in each country (while in reality it is a diverse collection of
projects, tailored to the needs of each country, by its community) and with
a focus towards number crunching.
Statements that begin with 'the average Wiki Loves Monuments
implementation/contest' make my eyes bleed... Did anyone make a more
thorough analysis of the report?
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list