Well this is why we should have prize money. I would be willing to even donate a small amount for prizes for kosovo if it was tax deductable (in germany where I live). mike On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2011/12/12 Jan Ainali jan.ainali@wikimedia.se:
2011/12/12 Maarten Dammers maarten@mdammers.nl
2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanterputevod@mccme.ru:
I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the proposal in this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have the image of the exterior, would we need the image of the interior? What if we have several monuments under one code?
Let's put it a bit stronger. I would never support such a proposal. I support positive steering ("we encourage you to upload photo's of monuments that not yet have a (good) picture"), not negative steering ("WLM2011 we limit the eligible monuments to those without an image").
Then you're bound to encounter the same kind of criticism as this year.
Yes, I agree that positive steering is better. We could have one of the judging criteria to be uniqueness or value adding, and explain that when images are similar in other criterias, the ones that bring in new aspects to Commons will be regarded higher.
What you want (and what people are saying on these pages) is a Commons contest, not a photo contest. That is, with a Wiki(p|m)edia jury and all. You can't reasonably expect to have professional photographers in the jury and ask them to rate based on the utility for a certain site.
This would be a big step backwards from this year's contest in my opinion and a huge failed opportunity for a lot of content to be freed. I'm fairly sure many photographers will be reluctant to participate with hi res images.
Strainu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu