Maybe it is time to reconsider some of our standard metrics for wiki loves monuments.
One of the big gains in several countries has been to get a list of monuments into Wikipedia maybe in future direct into wikidata. I think that the standard metrics should reflect that, OK it is metadata, but our metrics should put more value on the metadata we achieve.
Sometimes wiki loves monuments gives us lots more images of something we already have reasonable pictures of. Sometimes it gives us images of notable monuments that we don't yet have articles about. Or it gives us interior shots of a building that already have a featured photo of the exterior.
I suggest we think of three metrics here: How many monuments have we gone from no images to images? How many monuments do we have better quality images for? How many monuments do we have images for more of their features?
Number of images used is an over hasty metric, perhaps five years after the contest we could measure this and get a very different statistic. Sometimes we need much more patience to see how wikipedians will use materials over time. This is likely to be especially true in countries where we don't currently have much coverage in terms of articles.
Another way to tell the story is to give us examples of gaps that we have filled. For example, the article on ******* church explained that it was listed as a national monument because of the quality of the frescos inside it, as a result of WLM we now have photos of those frescos available for the article.
~~~~
Message: 5 Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 16:23:45 -0200 From: Rodrigo Padula rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Enc: Re: WLM Brasil 2015 - Winners / Numbers Message-ID: 150bf24187a.1270e0110548608.5396703623173748158@wikimedia.org.br Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I see a lot of good results and contributions here and as pointed by Ilario, we reached great part of our measures of success
WLM 2015 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaign:wlm-br
- 4.453 photos
- 411 uploaders
- 325 new users registered on commons
WLM 2014+2015 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaign:wle-br
- 20 095 photos
- 2866 uploaders
- 2727 new users registered on commons
Only to complete, the first place on WLE 2014 was elected the second place on the WLE 2014 International and that same picture was selected in 7# place during the picture of the year on commons.
Now in 2015 we have more pictures selected in the WLE international contest.
Including all the media coverage and all impact on social media, for a small User Group approved in 2015, it's huge!!!
Rodrigo Padula Coordenador de Projetos Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa http://www.wikimedia.org.br 21 99326-0558
---- Em Sáb, 31 Out 2015 15:43:49 -0200 Ilario Valdelli<valdelli@gmail.com> escreveu ----
Again, and again.
"Success for whom"?
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Gro...
The section "measure of success" reports:
at least 400 participants uploading one photograph or more; at least 5,000 photos uploaded; at least 15% of photos used on Wikipedia; at least 50% of new users engagement during the contest; at least 10 new articles about natural heritage sites in Brasil; at least 10% of new user retention after 2 months of the contest.
Rodrigo reports:
Pictures uploaded: 4.443 Uploaders: 411 New users registered on Commons: 325 New users engagement: 79% Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%)
Are the goals reached? Basically yes. When the project has been financed it was clear that the definition "success" was based on those measures.
There is no success for a specific person on an individual and personal criteria.
The user group of Brazil has not asked nothing special, this is a normal budget for any WLM or WLE in several countries.
WereSpielChequers,
I talked about that in the thread, if WLM and WLE would be closer (some countries are) to communities WP, Commons,... the result would be better. " I would like to see Wikimedia Commons volunteers be involved in the process, to create more clear, précised, and aligned rules for the contest, otherwise they will use Commons as a uploader" same for WP. This communities, directly impacted by this contests should develop the metrics, not the ones requesting money.
How this projects will help WP/Commons if they are not listening the communities? They probably are creating more problem than solutions.
This talk is about that: https://www.ted.com/talks/ernesto_sirolli_want_to_help_someone_shut_up_and_l...
On 31 October 2015 at 18:57, WereSpielChequers werespielchequers@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it is time to reconsider some of our standard metrics for wiki loves monuments.
One of the big gains in several countries has been to get a list of monuments into Wikipedia maybe in future direct into wikidata. I think that the standard metrics should reflect that, OK it is metadata, but our metrics should put more value on the metadata we achieve.
Sometimes wiki loves monuments gives us lots more images of something we already have reasonable pictures of. Sometimes it gives us images of notable monuments that we don't yet have articles about. Or it gives us interior shots of a building that already have a featured photo of the exterior.
I suggest we think of three metrics here: How many monuments have we gone from no images to images? How many monuments do we have better quality images for? How many monuments do we have images for more of their features?
Number of images used is an over hasty metric, perhaps five years after the contest we could measure this and get a very different statistic. Sometimes we need much more patience to see how wikipedians will use materials over time. This is likely to be especially true in countries where we don't currently have much coverage in terms of articles.
Another way to tell the story is to give us examples of gaps that we have filled. For example, the article on ******* church explained that it was listed as a national monument because of the quality of the frescos inside it, as a result of WLM we now have photos of those frescos available for the article.
> > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 16:23:45 -0200 > From: Rodrigo Padula <rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Enc: Re: WLM Brasil 2015 - Winners / Numbers > Message-ID: > <150bf24187a.1270e0110548608.5396703623173748158@wikimedia.org.br> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > I see a lot of good results and contributions here and as pointed by Ilario, we reached great part of our measures of success > > WLM 2015 > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaign:wlm-br > - 4.453 photos > - 411 uploaders > - 325 new users registered on commons > > WLM 2014+2015 > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaign:wle-br > - 20 095 photos > - 2866 uploaders > - 2727 new users registered on commons > > Only to complete, the first place on WLE 2014 was elected the second place on the WLE 2014 International and that same picture was selected in 7# place during the picture of the year on commons. > > Now in 2015 we have more pictures selected in the WLE international contest. > > Including all the media coverage and all impact on social media, for a small User Group approved in 2015, it's huge!!! > > Rodrigo Padula > Coordenador de Projetos > Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa > http://www.wikimedia.org.br > 21 99326-0558 > > > > > ---- Em Sáb, 31 Out 2015 15:43:49 -0200 Ilario Valdelli<valdelli@gmail.com> escreveu ---- > > Again, and again. > > "Success for whom"? > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Group_of_Education_and_Research/Wiki_Loves_Earth_Brasil_2015#Measures_of_success > > The section "measure of success" reports: > > at least 400 participants uploading one photograph or more; > at least 5,000 photos uploaded; > at least 15% of photos used on Wikipedia; > at least 50% of new users engagement during the contest; > at least 10 new articles about natural heritage sites in Brasil; > at least 10% of new user retention after 2 months of the contest. > > Rodrigo reports: > > Pictures uploaded: 4.443 > Uploaders: 411 > New users registered on Commons: 325 > New users engagement: 79% > Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%) > > > Are the goals reached? Basically yes. When the project has been financed > it was clear that the definition "success" was based on those measures. > > There is no success for a specific person on an individual and personal > criteria. > > The user group of Brazil has not asked nothing special, this is a normal > budget for any WLM or WLE in several countries. > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org