Hello my friends,
After many years of Wiki Loves Monuments around the world, finally we organized an edition of that important photo contest in Brasil.
Following the success of WLE Brasil 2015(supported by our fellows from Wikimedia Ukraine) and counting with a lot of support from Romaine we finally completed that task after years of procrastination.
The WLM Brasil 2015 was organized by the Wikimedia Community Brazilian Group of Education and Research, including contributions from teachers and students in a new approach for our educational program.
Teachers and students from local universities supported us with marketing/communication and in the final process of pictures filtering for the judges evaluation.
You can see the final result of WLM Brasil and the winners at http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html
Pictures uploaded: 4.443 Uploaders: 411 New users registered on Commons: 325 New users engagement: 79% Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%)
Best regards
Rodrigo Padula Coordenador de Projetos Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa http://www.wikimedia.org.br 21 99326-0558
"success of WLE Brasil 2015"
Success for whom?
*For the Wikimedia Commons **it was totally **innocuous. *
Less then 0,16% was a good quality image, including several snapshots (mobile made), downsized images....; the retention probably will follow WLE BR 2014 and goona be very close to 0. No work was developed in conjunction with the WCommons, and could created a problem, people got paid with thousands for bad photos, and volunteers there producing real content... And this money, more then 30'000 USD, come from WMF for the WLE 2014/15 and WLM in Brazil, and in the other hand, WP-en removed hundreds of people getting paid for contribution, how it's different? Oh yeah, the money did not came from donations...
*For the Wikipedia it was barely nothing.*
The volume of images used was very low, and even in the list of winners, a lot of those images do not have any education purpose, or do not properly illustrates the site. And very low involvement of the community, retention was none.
For the "off-line community" , :D...
Were are this people? The other coordinator named in the website [1], are not even close to be involved with the community, check his FB:[2], very active, none WLE/WLM publications... Commons: [3], any help with this contests. People listed in the WUG group did not signed by themselves[4]...
And " including contributions from teachers and students..."??? "educational program."??? I think that "they" are hidden it in a very deep place, not even "their" website have any clues fof that[5], or "their" Facebook [6], Meta [7]... "Their" partners are not related to educational programmes [8], most of them are related to photography, for obvious reasons. as far we can see, "they" are just burn WMF money to make this contests (for ???)...
*Two observation:*
.ORG.BR are websites restricted to ONG registered in legal terms here in Brazil, or they already have a legal association and are not telling to AffCom, or they don't have that and is putting the Wikimedia name in some scheme circumventing laws...
*The scope of the group, which can be found on their application, is "to support the participation of teachers, researchers and employees of several national institutions that participate in the Education Program of Wikimedia in Brazil, aiming to integrate the academic community to the Wikimedia movement, creating a more friendly and responsive environment for the development of projects, research, contests, events and other activities." *[9]
How this contests are related to this scope?
Again
Success for whom?
Links:
[1]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/sobre.html [2]https://www.facebook.com/pedro.napolitanomendes [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500&tagfilter=&title... [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_G... [5]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/projetos [6]https://www.facebook.com/grupowikimediabr [7] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Group... [8]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/parceiros.html [9] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Wikimedia...
On 30 October 2015 at 20:42, Rodrigo Padula rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br wrote:
Hello my friends,
After many years of Wiki Loves Monuments around the world, finally we organized an edition of that important photo contest in Brasil.
Following the success of WLE Brasil 2015(supported by our fellows from Wikimedia Ukraine) and counting with a lot of support from Romaine we finally completed that task after years of procrastination.
The WLM Brasil 2015 was organized by the Wikimedia Community Brazilian Group of Education and Research, including contributions from teachers and students in a new approach for our educational program.
Teachers and students from local universities supported us with marketing/communication and in the final process of pictures filtering for the judges evaluation.
You can see the final result of WLM Brasil and the winners at http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html
Pictures uploaded: 4.443 Uploaders: 411 New users registered on Commons: 325 New users engagement: 79% Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%)
Best regards
Rodrigo Padula Coordenador de Projetos Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa http://www.wikimedia.org.br 21 99326-0558
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
On 31 October 2015 at 02:26, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com wrote: ...
And this money, more then 30'000 USD, come from WMF for the WLE 2014/15 and
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 per photograph?
Fae
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote:
On 31 October 2015 at 02:26, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com wrote: ...
And this money, more then 30'000 USD, come from WMF for the WLE 2014/15 and
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 per photograph?
Fae
Probably the best is to look directly in the grants:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/UG_BR-ER/Wiki_Loves_Monuments_Bra... https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Gro...
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote:
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 per photograph?
Fae
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
Cool. So about $2.50 per image.
This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last 500,000 images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better when measures against other WLM projects.
Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value?
Fae
On 31.10.2015 12:12, Fæ wrote:
On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote:
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 per photograph?
Fae
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
Cool. So about $2.50 per image.
This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last 500,000 images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better when measures against other WLM projects.
Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value?
Fae
Using a bot to collect images in internet probably would have been lesser than 0$ per image.
Anyway the real calculation of an impact of a project is not so simple.
Because if we would use the same parameters, people reading this thread have spent more than 5 minutes, and calculating the sum of people reading this thread we can calculate a big time waste.
We can say that this thread is really time-expensive without producing a real impact. But we know that this mailing list is done to help the communication and not to calculate the time waste, so a thread like this is accepted.
I have put the links, it's sufficient to read the measures of the success to know that the aim of the project is not to produce only images.
Kind regards
I totally agree with Ilario here. We have yet to put a financial value on a Wikimedia contributor time unit, but I would venture to say that if such projects manage to procure even one Wikimedia contributor for the projects then that is money well spent.
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 12:12, Fæ wrote:
On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote:
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 per photograph?
Fae
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
Cool. So about $2.50 per image.
This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last 500,000 images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better when measures against other WLM projects.
Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value?
Fae
Using a bot to collect images in internet probably would have been lesser than 0$ per image.
Anyway the real calculation of an impact of a project is not so simple.
Because if we would use the same parameters, people reading this thread have spent more than 5 minutes, and calculating the sum of people reading this thread we can calculate a big time waste.
We can say that this thread is really time-expensive without producing a real impact. But we know that this mailing list is done to help the communication and not to calculate the time waste, so a thread like this is accepted.
I have put the links, it's sufficient to read the measures of the success to know that the aim of the project is not to produce only images.
Kind regards
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch
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
Hello Illario and Jane,
Thanks by your comments. That is exactly the point!
WLM and WLE are not only about the number of pictures loaded and the general quality of the pictures. It's about our mission and new users engagement too.
That is what our group is trying to do here, teach people about our mission and what Wikipedia and commons really is and how to contribute. Unfortunately we receive more international community support than local support #SadButTrue.
As you can read in all planning pages, grant requests and emails, Rodrigo Argentom is always there trying to create barriers, posting negative comments and generating unfruitiful discussions. We never received any contribution or constructive comment from him, so I decided to just ignore him and move forward with our ideas and objectives. Based on that bad behavior he was blocked in many Wikimedia projects (pt.wikipedia and etc) and as I know, he is not part of any group, he is only around with that old trash talking.
Based on the level of maturity of our Brazilian community and the low interest of that community in off-line activities like WLM, WLE, GLAM and etc, is a utopia to think that in a single project we will collect a huge amount of pictures, with high level of quality and that all the photographers will join on commons, will categorize properly all the pictures and they will look at Wikipedia and will add the good pictures there, it will never happens here, not without a massive support from the local community.
We will have to do it in many steps, right now we are just a small user group trying to move forward, we are not a chapter with payed staff and a lot of people working on this full time, we are just a group of students, teachers and researchers doing what we can, when we can.
The WLE and WLM are generating a good impact in Brasil with a good media coverage and a lot of positive external comments.
We had many posts published on blogs, important portals, printed magazines(60.000 copies) and newspapers regarding the contest, spreading our objectives and the final results.
- WLE 2015 media coverage: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Earth_2015_in_Brazil/P... - WLM event page access statistics: http://stats.grok.se/pt/latest90/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2015/Br... - WLM 2015 media coverage: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2015_in_Braz...
For both contests we used strategies and campaigns on social media, reaching hundreds of thousands of people.
During WLM we get an important structured list of monuments from the Brazilian gov and now we are in touch with IPHAN, the institute responsible by protect and register the national monuments in Brasil. So, for the next years we will have conditions to improve and increase the list of monuments. This king of stuff are positive impact
WLE and WLM are only the beginning of our efforts to move forward with the Wikimedia Movement here in Brasil.
I know that I shall meet many barriers and many "R. Argentoms" along the way, but I will continue fighting for our mission, that is bigger than anyone of us ;-)
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 09:37:31 -0200 Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com> escreveu ----
I totally agree with Ilario here. We have yet to put a financial value on a Wikimedia contributor time unit, but I would venture to say that if such projects manage to procure even one Wikimedia contributor for the projects then that is money well spent.
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Ilario Valdelli <valdelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 31.10.2015 12:12, Fæ wrote: > >> On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" <valdelli@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote: >>> >>>> Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 >>>> per photograph? >>>> >>>> Fae >>>> >>> 30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD. >>> >> Cool. So about $2.50 per image. >> >> This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last 500,000 >> images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better when >> measures against other WLM projects. >> >> Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value? >> >> Fae >> > > Using a bot to collect images in internet probably would have been lesser > than 0$ per image. > > Anyway the real calculation of an impact of a project is not so simple. > > Because if we would use the same parameters, people reading this thread > have spent more than 5 minutes, and calculating the sum of people reading > this thread we can calculate a big time waste. > > We can say that this thread is really time-expensive without producing a > real impact. But we know that this mailing list is done to help the > communication and not to calculate the time waste, so a thread like this is > accepted. > > I have put the links, it's sufficient to read the measures of the success > to know that the aim of the project is not to produce only images. > > Kind regards > > -- > Ilario Valdelli > Wikimedia CH > Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre > Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera > Switzerland - 8008 Zürich > Tel: +41764821371 > http://www.wikimedia.ch > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 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>
We have many years of running these very similar projects. It should be possible to compare the value of outcomes against each other to see if some use better practices than others, and then to help assess future grant proposals for their potential value against estimated costs.
I agree that outcomes are more than quantity of images, and the large WMF programme evaluation training had precisely the aim of ensuring that all funded projects would apply non-subjective measures of value (i.e. investment per image, investment per new editor, investment per new article are all measurable). One issue raised was the poor quality of a significant number of images, and quality should be part of the measurability of claimed outcomes. The original post in this thread mentioned that 86 photographs have been used on Wikipedia, this is a reasonable measure of quality, though investing $11,000 for this outcome is probably an unfair comparison, so others are needed.
When programmes include competitions with prizes, then this requires special attention at the grant stage due as, again, we have experienced several controversies around programmes reliant on this method.
We may wish to change the thread title, but the governance questions raised are relevant and are best not dismissed with "stop wasting our time on an email thread which should be about good PR".
Fae
On 31 October 2015 at 11:28, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 12:12, Fæ wrote:
On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote:
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 per photograph?
Fae
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
Cool. So about $2.50 per image.
This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last 500,000 images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better when measures against other WLM projects.
Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value?
Fae
Using a bot to collect images in internet probably would have been lesser than 0$ per image.
Anyway the real calculation of an impact of a project is not so simple.
Because if we would use the same parameters, people reading this thread have spent more than 5 minutes, and calculating the sum of people reading this thread we can calculate a big time waste.
We can say that this thread is really time-expensive without producing a real impact. But we know that this mailing list is done to help the communication and not to calculate the time waste, so a thread like this is accepted.
I have put the links, it's sufficient to read the measures of the success to know that the aim of the project is not to produce only images.
Kind regards
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH
Gerard,
This "you" is for me? Right?
Well I'm really asking here for whom this was successful, and tried to explore the several layers that could be impacted by this.
My point is not important here, but this is a conversation, so:
Measure of success: Wikimedia Commons receiving a good impact by this, new active volunteers that understand "free" "elaborative" "volunteers", new good quality images, new documentation to facilitate the penetration of new comers. [1] At least 100 featured pictures for each 1'000 USD invested[2], and at least 10% of retention with those characteristics listed.
Wikipedia having a bunch of articles illustrated, with good quality image, and receiving more volunteers willing to help, increasing not only the illustration of the article, but also the article it self. [3] At least 10 featured articles or 30 four stars articles, of those National Parks mentioned for 1'000 USD invested. For being a Featured Article amd fou star at WP-pt, images are a must have.
"off-line", this activity involving several volunteers that would create activities to spread the Wikimedia Movement outside the Wiki word, facilitating the journey to get in the Free Culture.
And the more 30'000 USD that I was referring was about WLE 2014/15 and WLE. WLE 2014 they talked about 20'000 USD in this event, and we will not have a clearance on that, because they use the Brazilian Program to burn this money, and we don't have any serious report, and evaluation from the community, see the report [4].
Fae, I did some raw comparatives for this WLE 2014: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Bad_usage_of_money_in_B...
And tried to bring the readers to the local reality, this waste of money was totally ridiculous. WLM made this comparatives also. We can put some "price" to that.
I started this email before Padula's answer, "we receive more international community support than local support ", because the local community know you, don't trust in you, they isolated you, and some of them have very strong opposition to your permanence in Wikimedia Movement. [5] But we are not talking about you.
[1] 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, ignoring the community, and creating some issues, as massive deletion necessities. Also they have participate in Commons community, because during those contests volunteers of Commons had to help their contester, not knowing what is going on, or having a unexpected demand, as several questions in Portuguese in help cafes, and none volunteer who speaks pt ready there (I tried to help, but I'm not omniscient and omnipresent). (Same happened for Mexico contest). And they did not oriented about Wikimedia Commons, the legacy left by the contest was a ocean of "humm... okay", or over-processed downsized images. The ones that received the quality approval of the community, normally had to be edited by us. New volunteers, new documentation, quality images or else, nothing was created.
[2] I know how much cost me to produce a Featured Picture, and it's something very close to that.
[3]Lets take the first five images of the contest, and their respective articles:
1° - https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lajedo_de_Pai_Mateus 2° - don't have a article for that. (image not in use) 3° - don't have a article for that. 4° - article about the city: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Jos%C3%A9_dos_Ausentes (image not in use) 5° - https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tambaba (image not in use).
All of those had images to illustrate the article before it shows up, and 3 of 5 are not in use in any WP... 3 of 5 in the winners, less then 2% in total are in use, and normally just adding one more photo to the article, not illustrating the article, or receiving better images. This would be avoid, if the coordination had a conversation with the local community and listed articles without any picture, or very poor ones. Most of those stills with none image... samples: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_da_Amaz%C3%B4nia https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_Serra_da_Mocidade https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_da_Serra_da_Cutia https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_de_Paca%C3%A1s_Novos https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_de_Serra_das_Lontras .... check: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_de_parques_nacionais_do_Brasil, see the number of red links
and just for fun, try to open the first articles about beaches in this list: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_de_praias_de_Santa_Catarina
Understand four star articles. https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predefini%C3%A7%C3%A3o:Escala_de_avalia%C3%A7%...
[4] the only report https://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Earth/2014
values on this report 13.000 + 6.950,00 + 13.900,00 + 2*( 2.500,00 + 1.500,00 + 1.000,00) = 43'850 BRL ~ 20'000 USD at the time. So 11'000 + ~20'000 = 30'000 USD!
and how long it takes to WMF gating 30'000 USD? Any one know how much Latin America donated to WMF? 30'000 USD is money.
[5]some samples of local community interacting with Padula's "ideas":
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Brazilian_Group_of_Education_... https://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Rodrigo_Padula follow the thread: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediabr-l/2014-August/015754.html ...
On 31 October 2015 at 09:52, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
We have many years of running these very similar projects. It should be possible to compare the value of outcomes against each other to see if some use better practices than others, and then to help assess future grant proposals for their potential value against estimated costs.
I agree that outcomes are more than quantity of images, and the large WMF programme evaluation training had precisely the aim of ensuring that all funded projects would apply non-subjective measures of value (i.e. investment per image, investment per new editor, investment per new article are all measurable). One issue raised was the poor quality of a significant number of images, and quality should be part of the measurability of claimed outcomes. The original post in this thread mentioned that 86 photographs have been used on Wikipedia, this is a reasonable measure of quality, though investing $11,000 for this outcome is probably an unfair comparison, so others are needed.
When programmes include competitions with prizes, then this requires special attention at the grant stage due as, again, we have experienced several controversies around programmes reliant on this method.
We may wish to change the thread title, but the governance questions raised are relevant and are best not dismissed with "stop wasting our time on an email thread which should be about good PR".
Fae
On 31 October 2015 at 11:28, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 12:12, Fæ wrote:
On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote:
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really $7 per photograph?
Fae
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
Cool. So about $2.50 per image.
This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last 500,000 images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better
when
measures against other WLM projects.
Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value?
Fae
Using a bot to collect images in internet probably would have been lesser than 0$ per image.
Anyway the real calculation of an impact of a project is not so simple.
Because if we would use the same parameters, people reading this thread
have
spent more than 5 minutes, and calculating the sum of people reading this thread we can calculate a big time waste.
We can say that this thread is really time-expensive without producing a real impact. But we know that this mailing list is done to help the communication and not to calculate the time waste, so a thread like this
is
accepted.
I have put the links, it's sufficient to read the measures of the
success to
know that the aim of the project is not to produce only images.
Kind regards
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
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
Hoi, So you did not answer the question. What is it that you aim to achieve. I get words, no ideas, nothing. Only negativity.
Money is there to burn as long as it probably leads to results. The results should not be compared with what is done elsewhere when elsewhere is incomparable. When your point of view is that other people spending money is wrong because it does not conform to your ideas, then I pity you because why did you not do this job, why did you allow that situation to exist in the first place. When your ideas do not work, you may indeed blame others. Fine, move on. Thanks, GerardM
On 31 October 2015 at 16:15, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton < rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com> wrote:
Gerard,
This "you" is for me? Right?
Well I'm really asking here for whom this was successful, and tried to explore the several layers that could be impacted by this.
My point is not important here, but this is a conversation, so:
Measure of success: Wikimedia Commons receiving a good impact by this, new active volunteers that understand "free" "elaborative" "volunteers", new good quality images, new documentation to facilitate the penetration of new comers. [1] At least 100 featured pictures for each 1'000 USD invested[2], and at least 10% of retention with those characteristics listed.
Wikipedia having a bunch of articles illustrated, with good quality image, and receiving more volunteers willing to help, increasing not only the illustration of the article, but also the article it self. [3] At least 10 featured articles or 30 four stars articles, of those National Parks mentioned for 1'000 USD invested. For being a Featured Article amd fou star at WP-pt, images are a must have.
"off-line", this activity involving several volunteers that would create activities to spread the Wikimedia Movement outside the Wiki word, facilitating the journey to get in the Free Culture.
And the more 30'000 USD that I was referring was about WLE 2014/15 and WLE. WLE 2014 they talked about 20'000 USD in this event, and we will not have a clearance on that, because they use the Brazilian Program to burn this money, and we don't have any serious report, and evaluation from the community, see the report [4].
Fae, I did some raw comparatives for this WLE 2014:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Bad_usage_of_money_in_B...
And tried to bring the readers to the local reality, this waste of money was totally ridiculous. WLM made this comparatives also. We can put some "price" to that.
I started this email before Padula's answer, "we receive more international community support than local support ", because the local community know you, don't trust in you, they isolated you, and some of them have very strong opposition to your permanence in Wikimedia Movement. [5] But we are not talking about you.
[1] 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, ignoring the community, and creating some issues, as massive deletion necessities. Also they have participate in Commons community, because during those contests volunteers of Commons had to help their contester, not knowing what is going on, or having a unexpected demand, as several questions in Portuguese in help cafes, and none volunteer who speaks pt ready there (I tried to help, but I'm not omniscient and omnipresent). (Same happened for Mexico contest). And they did not oriented about Wikimedia Commons, the legacy left by the contest was a ocean of "humm... okay", or over-processed downsized images. The ones that received the quality approval of the community, normally had to be edited by us. New volunteers, new documentation, quality images or else, nothing was created.
[2] I know how much cost me to produce a Featured Picture, and it's something very close to that.
[3]Lets take the first five images of the contest, and their respective articles:
1° - https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lajedo_de_Pai_Mateus 2° - don't have a article for that. (image not in use) 3° - don't have a article for that. 4° - article about the city: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Jos%C3%A9_dos_Ausentes (image not in use) 5° - https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tambaba (image not in use).
All of those had images to illustrate the article before it shows up, and 3 of 5 are not in use in any WP... 3 of 5 in the winners, less then 2% in total are in use, and normally just adding one more photo to the article, not illustrating the article, or receiving better images. This would be avoid, if the coordination had a conversation with the local community and listed articles without any picture, or very poor ones. Most of those stills with none image... samples: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_da_Amaz%C3%B4nia https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_Serra_da_Mocidade https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_da_Serra_da_Cutia https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_de_Paca%C3%A1s_Novos https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_de_Serra_das_Lontras .... check: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_de_parques_nacionais_do_Brasil, see the number of red links
and just for fun, try to open the first articles about beaches in this list: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_de_praias_de_Santa_Catarina
Understand four star articles.
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predefini%C3%A7%C3%A3o:Escala_de_avalia%C3%A7%...
[4] the only report https://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Earth/2014
values on this report 13.000 + 6.950,00 + 13.900,00 + 2*( 2.500,00 + 1.500,00 + 1.000,00) = 43'850 BRL ~ 20'000 USD at the time. So 11'000 + ~20'000 = 30'000 USD!
and how long it takes to WMF gating 30'000 USD? Any one know how much Latin America donated to WMF? 30'000 USD is money.
[5]some samples of local community interacting with Padula's "ideas":
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Brazilian_Group_of_Education_... https://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Rodrigo_Padula follow the thread: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediabr-l/2014-August/015754.html ...
On 31 October 2015 at 09:52, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
We have many years of running these very similar projects. It should be possible to compare the value of outcomes against each other to see if some use better practices than others, and then to help assess future grant proposals for their potential value against estimated costs.
I agree that outcomes are more than quantity of images, and the large WMF programme evaluation training had precisely the aim of ensuring that all funded projects would apply non-subjective measures of value (i.e. investment per image, investment per new editor, investment per new article are all measurable). One issue raised was the poor quality of a significant number of images, and quality should be part of the measurability of claimed outcomes. The original post in this thread mentioned that 86 photographs have been used on Wikipedia, this is a reasonable measure of quality, though investing $11,000 for this outcome is probably an unfair comparison, so others are needed.
When programmes include competitions with prizes, then this requires special attention at the grant stage due as, again, we have experienced several controversies around programmes reliant on this method.
We may wish to change the thread title, but the governance questions raised are relevant and are best not dismissed with "stop wasting our time on an email thread which should be about good PR".
Fae
On 31 October 2015 at 11:28, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 12:12, Fæ wrote:
On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote:
Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really
$7
per photograph?
Fae
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
Cool. So about $2.50 per image.
This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last 500,000 images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better
when
measures against other WLM projects.
Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value?
Fae
Using a bot to collect images in internet probably would have been
lesser
than 0$ per image.
Anyway the real calculation of an impact of a project is not so simple.
Because if we would use the same parameters, people reading this thread
have
spent more than 5 minutes, and calculating the sum of people reading
this
thread we can calculate a big time waste.
We can say that this thread is really time-expensive without producing
a
real impact. But we know that this mailing list is done to help the communication and not to calculate the time waste, so a thread like
this
is
accepted.
I have put the links, it's sufficient to read the measures of the
success to
know that the aim of the project is not to produce only images.
Kind regards
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
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
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com +55 11 979 718 884 _______________________________________________ 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
Funny.
Gerald: "What do YOU hope" [again YOU*] Me: "My point is not important here" Gerald:" When your point of view is that other people spending money is wrong because it does not conform to your ideas"
???
I don't have a point, I'm asking "Success for whom?" I asked that, and "you did not answer the question", I'm not have a argumentation, I'm asking because I can't see any benefit, as a Brazilian, as a Wikimedia Commons volunteer, as a Wikimedia Movement volunteer. You did not answer that also, and use some ad hominem for??
And:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk%3APEG%2FWikimedia_C...
WMF ignored us and approved this. And WLE and WLM at this moment in Brazil is not a good investment to donated money. I'm doing other thinks that are resulting in Featured Pictures and Quality Images, and approaching the university, you are not seeing, because we don't burn WMF money. And money is not to burn, is to invest. Sample of work: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Illustration_Programme, see the rate of QI and FP per photo, and the money used (zero), and WP used. I will not list all here because this is not about me, it was just to refuted your statements "When your ideas do not work", "did you not do this job", ...
"Money is there to burn as long as it probably leads to results"
Results, results for whom? Which results? For the Wikimedia Movement? If it is, I can't see they delivering any good result, that's why so many "negativity".
I'm not worried about spending money, I'm worried about the bad used of money, pay for contribution, and to make it worse, receiving very low quality of work.
Again "Success for whom?"
On 31 October 2015 at 14:06, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, So you did not answer the question. What is it that you aim to achieve. I get words, no ideas, nothing. Only negativity.
Money is there to burn as long as it probably leads to results. The results should not be compared with what is done elsewhere when elsewhere is incomparable. When your point of view is that other people spending money is wrong because it does not conform to your ideas, then I pity you because why did you not do this job, why did you allow that situation to exist in the first place. When your ideas do not work, you may indeed blame others. Fine, move on. Thanks, GerardM
On 31 October 2015 at 16:15, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton < rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com> wrote:
Gerard,
This "you" is for me? Right?
Well I'm really asking here for whom this was successful, and tried to explore the several layers that could be impacted by this.
My point is not important here, but this is a conversation, so:
Measure of success: Wikimedia Commons receiving a good impact by this, new active volunteers that understand "free" "elaborative" "volunteers", new good quality
images,
new documentation to facilitate the penetration of new comers. [1] At least 100 featured pictures for each 1'000 USD invested[2], and at
least
10% of retention with those characteristics listed.
Wikipedia having a bunch of articles illustrated, with good quality
image,
and receiving more volunteers willing to help, increasing not only the illustration of the article, but also the article it self. [3] At least 10 featured articles or 30 four stars articles, of those
National
Parks mentioned for 1'000 USD invested. For being a Featured Article amd fou star at WP-pt, images are a must have.
"off-line", this activity involving several volunteers that would create activities to spread the Wikimedia Movement outside the Wiki word, facilitating the journey to get in the Free Culture.
And the more 30'000 USD that I was referring was about WLE 2014/15 and
WLE.
WLE 2014 they talked about 20'000 USD in this event, and we will not
have a
clearance on that, because they use the Brazilian Program to burn this money, and we don't have any serious report, and evaluation from the community, see the report [4].
Fae, I did some raw comparatives for this WLE 2014:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Bad_usage_of_money_in_B...
And tried to bring the readers to the local reality, this waste of money was totally ridiculous. WLM made this comparatives also. We can put some "price" to that.
I started this email before Padula's answer, "we receive more
international
community support than local support ", because the local community know you, don't trust in you, they isolated you, and some of them have very strong opposition to your permanence in Wikimedia Movement. [5] But we
are
not talking about you.
[1] 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, ignoring the community,
and
creating some issues, as massive deletion necessities. Also they have participate in Commons community, because during those contests
volunteers
of Commons had to help their contester, not knowing what is going on, or having a unexpected demand, as several questions in Portuguese in help cafes, and none volunteer who speaks pt ready there (I tried to help, but I'm not omniscient and omnipresent). (Same happened for Mexico contest). And they did not oriented about Wikimedia Commons, the legacy left by the contest was a ocean of "humm... okay", or over-processed downsized
images.
The ones that received the quality approval of the community, normally
had
to be edited by us. New volunteers, new documentation, quality images or else, nothing was created.
[2] I know how much cost me to produce a Featured Picture, and it's something very close to that.
[3]Lets take the first five images of the contest, and their respective articles:
1° - https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lajedo_de_Pai_Mateus 2° - don't have a article for that. (image not in use) 3° - don't have a article for that. 4° - article about the city: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Jos%C3%A9_dos_Ausentes (image not in use) 5° - https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tambaba (image not in use).
All of those had images to illustrate the article before it shows up,
and 3
of 5 are not in use in any WP... 3 of 5 in the winners, less then 2% in total are in use, and normally just adding one more photo to the article, not illustrating the article, or receiving better images. This would be avoid, if the coordination had a conversation with the local community
and
listed articles without any picture, or very poor ones. Most of those stills with none image... samples: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_da_Amaz%C3%B4nia https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_Serra_da_Mocidade https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_da_Serra_da_Cutia https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_de_Paca%C3%A1s_Novos https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Nacional_de_Serra_das_Lontras .... check:
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_de_parques_nacionais_do_Brasil,
see the number of red links
and just for fun, try to open the first articles about beaches in this list: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_de_praias_de_Santa_Catarina
Understand four star articles.
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predefini%C3%A7%C3%A3o:Escala_de_avalia%C3%A7%...
[4] the only report https://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Earth/2014
values on this report 13.000 + 6.950,00 + 13.900,00 + 2*( 2.500,00 + 1.500,00 + 1.000,00) = 43'850 BRL ~ 20'000 USD at the time. So 11'000 + ~20'000 = 30'000 USD!
and how long it takes to WMF gating 30'000 USD? Any one know how much
Latin
America donated to WMF? 30'000 USD is money.
[5]some samples of local community interacting with Padula's "ideas":
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Brazilian_Group_of_Education_...
https://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Rodrigo_Padula follow the thread:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediabr-l/2014-August/015754.html
...
On 31 October 2015 at 09:52, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
We have many years of running these very similar projects. It should be possible to compare the value of outcomes against each other to see if some use better practices than others, and then to help assess future grant proposals for their potential value against estimated costs.
I agree that outcomes are more than quantity of images, and the large WMF programme evaluation training had precisely the aim of ensuring that all funded projects would apply non-subjective measures of value (i.e. investment per image, investment per new editor, investment per new article are all measurable). One issue raised was the poor quality of a significant number of images, and quality should be part of the measurability of claimed outcomes. The original post in this thread mentioned that 86 photographs have been used on Wikipedia, this is a reasonable measure of quality, though investing $11,000 for this outcome is probably an unfair comparison, so others are needed.
When programmes include competitions with prizes, then this requires special attention at the grant stage due as, again, we have experienced several controversies around programmes reliant on this method.
We may wish to change the thread title, but the governance questions raised are relevant and are best not dismissed with "stop wasting our time on an email thread which should be about good PR".
Fae
On 31 October 2015 at 11:28, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com
wrote:
On 31.10.2015 12:12, Fæ wrote:
On 31 Oct 2015 11:00, "Ilario Valdelli" valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 31.10.2015 11:46, Fæ wrote: > > Hang on. Could I have an independent reality check; is that really
$7
> per photograph? > > Fae
30.000 is exact, but they are 30.000 Real which means 11.000 USD.
Cool. So about $2.50 per image.
This looks expensive compared to my upload projects (the last
500,000
images have cost $0.00 in total) but perhaps the benchmark is better
when
measures against other WLM projects.
Anyone have the numbers to show comparative value?
Fae
Using a bot to collect images in internet probably would have been
lesser
than 0$ per image.
Anyway the real calculation of an impact of a project is not so
simple.
Because if we would use the same parameters, people reading this
thread
have
spent more than 5 minutes, and calculating the sum of people reading
this
thread we can calculate a big time waste.
We can say that this thread is really time-expensive without
producing
a
real impact. But we know that this mailing list is done to help the communication and not to calculate the time waste, so a thread like
this
is
accepted.
I have put the links, it's sufficient to read the measures of the
success to
know that the aim of the project is not to produce only images.
Kind regards
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
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
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com +55 11 979 718 884 _______________________________________________ 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 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
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.
On 31.10.2015 18:20, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton wrote:
quality of work.
Again "Success for whom?"
"this is a normal budget for any WLM or WLE in several countries."
WLE Brazil prizes: 3'300 EUR (2014) 3'000 EUR (2015) WLM 1800 EUR (2015) [1]
WLE Thailand: 510 EUR (2014) Tunisia: 558 EUR (2015) Spain and Portugal: 1400 EUR (2015)... WLM: Ireland: 550 EUR (2015) Latvia 500 EUR (2015) Spain 700 EUR (2015)
normal? normal would be 500 EUR in prizes. Not 6 times more.
[1] and the currency sky rocketed between 2014-15 http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=BRL&view=2Y
On 31 October 2015 at 15:43, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
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.
On 31.10.2015 18:20, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton wrote:
quality of work.
Again "Success for whom?"
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch
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
We did a long research in 2014 to define the prizes as described in the budget request and reports to WMF.
A lot of contests in Brasil pay prizes around R$10.000-R$60.000, the value of the prizes that we gave in Brasil are considered low by many participants and professionals in that field.
As described on the grant requests, the prizes was approved by GAC and WMF staff my friend.
I really cant get your point here! You had the opportunity to organize this contest for many years and nothing was done.
Why you never tried to organize that contests by yourself following your recomendations, ideas and values of prizes since you are so interested in that subject?
Our planning pages are always open to contributions, not fallacies. To criticize is always the easiest way to feel contributing. Just do something my friend and help us to move forward, not backward!
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 16:22:14 -0200 Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton<rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com> escreveu ----
"this is a normal budget for any WLM or WLE in several countries."
WLE Brazil prizes: 3'300 EUR (2014) 3'000 EUR (2015) WLM 1800 EUR (2015) [1]
WLE Thailand: 510 EUR (2014) Tunisia: 558 EUR (2015) Spain and Portugal: 1400 EUR (2015)... WLM: Ireland: 550 EUR (2015) Latvia 500 EUR (2015) Spain 700 EUR (2015)
normal? normal would be 500 EUR in prizes. Not 6 times more.
[1] and the currency sky rocketed between 2014-15 http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=BRL&view=2Y
On 31 October 2015 at 15:43, Ilario Valdelli <valdelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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. > > > > > On 31.10.2015 18:20, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton wrote: > >> quality of work. >> >> Again "Success for whom?" >> >> >> >> > > -- > Ilario Valdelli > Wikimedia CH > Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre > Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera > Switzerland - 8008 Zürich > Tel: +41764821371 > http://www.wikimedia.ch > > > _______________________________________________ > 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> >
On 31 Oct 2015, at 18:34, Rodrigo Padula rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br wrote:
A lot of contests in Brasil pay prizes around R$10.000-R$60.000, the value of the prizes that we gave in Brasil are considered low by many participants and professionals in that field.
Isn't that something like 5-30 times the monthly average wage in Brazil, with the R$2.000 1st prize for WLM being around the average monthly wage? http://www.tradingeconomics.com/brazil/wages http://www.tradingeconomics.com/brazil/wages
Thanks, Mike
I cant see any relation in the "literature" regarding photo contests prizes and monthly average wage :-)
So our study was based on local photo contests prizes, international prizes and a reasonable value for a non-profit organization in a way that the value is interesting for a amateur or a professional to spend some time loading photos on commons, since great part of the Brazilians don't know our mission and what Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons our Wikimedia Foundation really is!
During WLE 2015 we spent R$10.000 in two categories: best photo and best contributions
For each category the prizes was:
1º R$2000 2º R$1500 3º R$1000 TOTAL: R$10.000
- 4.453 photos - 411 uploaders
Now for WLM 2015 we announced just one category, best photos with R$6.000 in prizes
1º R$3.000,00 2º R$2.000,00 3º R$1.000,00 TOTAL: R$6.000
- ~13.000 photos - ~2.000 uploaders
There are a lot of variables, but the value of the prizes and categories can influence the final results for sure.
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 16:49:05 -0200 Michael Peel<email@mikepeel.net> escreveu ----
> On 31 Oct 2015, at 18:34, Rodrigo Padula <rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br> wrote: > > A lot of contests in Brasil pay prizes around R$10.000-R$60.000, the value of the prizes that we gave in Brasil are considered low by many participants and professionals in that field.
Isn't that something like 5-30 times the monthly average wage in Brazil, with the R$2.000 1st prize for WLM being around the average monthly wage? http://www.tradingeconomics.com/brazil/wages <http://www.tradingeconomics.com/brazil/wages%3E;
Thanks, Mike _______________________________________________ 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>
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.
On 31.10.2015 18:20, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton wrote: > quality of work. > > Again "Success for whom?" > > >
On 31 October 2015 at 17:43, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote: ...
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.
The comment here puzzled me, especially from an involved GAC member, as grant targets should not be "stretch targets" but realistic commitments to be met with the invested money. I went back to read the grant page and accurately it can be stated (traffic light colours added by me):[1]
1. [GREEN] at least 400 participants uploading one photograph or more; 2. [RED] at least 5,000 photos uploaded; 3. [RED] at least 15% of photos used on Wikipedia [i.e. > 666 photographs in use]; 4. [GREEN] at least 50% of new users engagement during the contest; 5. [RED] at least 10 new articles about natural heritage sites in Brasil [no report]; 6. [RED] at least 10% of new user retention after 2 months of the contest [no report].
There are a number of clarifications on the grant talk page, especially Wang's (WMF) significant questions raised under "WMF comments". The clarifications add detail to the above 6 measures, but also make some further commitments which have yet to be reported on. Based on this detail, it would not be possible to "close-out" the grant against reported results until December 2015. I recommend that the Wikimedia Community Brazilian Group of Education and Research go the extra mile to measure and report the detail so that their 2016 grant applications can demonstrate learning from the targets that were met or not met in this project.
== Technical Note == Most of the measurements can be produced from using SQL on the Commons and Wikipedia(s) databases, if the more web-friendly tools such as Catscan are not up to the job. It may be worth asking for help at [2] or [3] if this gets stuck/seems a lot of effort, as such scripts are fairly easy to re-run each month and can be 'recycled' in coming years once worked out.
== Community Observation == It might help future on-wiki discussion if questions are enumerated/logged and seen to be responded to in a non-personalized style. Even if the perception is that someone is griefing the project or organization, if you can bat back questions with formal and direct replies with hard measurements and statistics, or a clear explanation of why it is not worth the volunteer or staff time to report in some areas, then not only would the questions dry up, but they form a useful foundation for future more robust grant requests. Keep in mind that testing questions do add value.
Links: 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Gro... 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bots/Work_requests 3. IRC #wikimedia-tech https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Channels#MediaWiki_and_technical
Fae
Hoi, What is your aim? What do YOU hope to achieve with such comments and do you really contribute in this way?
You may be as you like, but does it mean that we further our cause in this way. I have not seen one positive comment. It is negativity galore and it pains you in a corner. Thanks, GerardM
I missed the t deliberately.
On 31 October 2015 at 03:26, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton < rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com> wrote:
"success of WLE Brasil 2015"
Success for whom?
*For the Wikimedia Commons **it was totally **innocuous. *
Less then 0,16% was a good quality image, including several snapshots (mobile made), downsized images....; the retention probably will follow WLE BR 2014 and goona be very close to 0. No work was developed in conjunction with the WCommons, and could created a problem, people got paid with thousands for bad photos, and volunteers there producing real content... And this money, more then 30'000 USD, come from WMF for the WLE 2014/15 and WLM in Brazil, and in the other hand, WP-en removed hundreds of people getting paid for contribution, how it's different? Oh yeah, the money did not came from donations...
*For the Wikipedia it was barely nothing.*
The volume of images used was very low, and even in the list of winners, a lot of those images do not have any education purpose, or do not properly illustrates the site. And very low involvement of the community, retention was none.
For the "off-line community" , :D...
Were are this people? The other coordinator named in the website [1], are not even close to be involved with the community, check his FB:[2], very active, none WLE/WLM publications... Commons: [3], any help with this contests. People listed in the WUG group did not signed by themselves[4]...
And " including contributions from teachers and students..."??? "educational program."??? I think that "they" are hidden it in a very deep place, not even "their" website have any clues fof that[5], or "their" Facebook [6], Meta [7]... "Their" partners are not related to educational programmes [8], most of them are related to photography, for obvious reasons. as far we can see, "they" are just burn WMF money to make this contests (for ???)...
*Two observation:*
.ORG.BR are websites restricted to ONG registered in legal terms here in Brazil, or they already have a legal association and are not telling to AffCom, or they don't have that and is putting the Wikimedia name in some scheme circumventing laws...
*The scope of the group, which can be found on their application, is "to support the participation of teachers, researchers and employees of several national institutions that participate in the Education Program of Wikimedia in Brazil, aiming to integrate the academic community to the Wikimedia movement, creating a more friendly and responsive environment for the development of projects, research, contests, events and other activities." *[9]
How this contests are related to this scope?
Again
Success for whom?
Links:
[1]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/sobre.html [2]https://www.facebook.com/pedro.napolitanomendes [3]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500&tagfilter=&title... [4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_G... [5]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/projetos [6]https://www.facebook.com/grupowikimediabr [7]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Group... [8]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/parceiros.html [9]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Wikimedia...
On 30 October 2015 at 20:42, Rodrigo Padula < rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br> wrote:
Hello my friends,
After many years of Wiki Loves Monuments around the world, finally we organized an edition of that important photo contest in Brasil.
Following the success of WLE Brasil 2015(supported by our fellows from Wikimedia Ukraine) and counting with a lot of support from Romaine we finally completed that task after years of procrastination.
The WLM Brasil 2015 was organized by the Wikimedia Community Brazilian Group of Education and Research, including contributions from teachers
and
students in a new approach for our educational program.
Teachers and students from local universities supported us with marketing/communication and in the final process of pictures filtering
for
the judges evaluation.
You can see the final result of WLM Brasil and the winners at
http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html
Pictures uploaded: 4.443 Uploaders: 411 New users registered on Commons: 325 New users engagement: 79% Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%)
Best regards
Rodrigo Padula Coordenador de Projetos Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa http://www.wikimedia.org.br 21 99326-0558
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
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com +55 11 979 718 884 _______________________________________________ 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
Argentom, only to demonstrate how wrong and misinformed you are, the guy you cited on your email is a very active contributor with more than 50.000 edits on the main domain of pt.wikipedia and near 100.000 edits including all domains. Thinking in personal privacy, it is not a good approach to point here names and social media accounts, that is why I will not identify the user name of this very important contributor of our movement.
As you can read on the official announcement http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html all the pictures uploaded for WLM was evaluated and filtered by teachers and students of the University http://www.ucs.br/portais/curso164/ under the coordination of the Prof. Edson Correa. All press releases and content published and sent to our media partners was created and revised by the teacher Prof. Dr. Marcio Gonçalves and students from a local university in Rio de Janeiro.
I know you're just trying to attack me personally, but what you are doing is disqualifying all the efforts of all Wikimedia movement responsible for devising and organizing competitions like the WLE and WLM around the world and for that you have no contributions and much less support any group that can give you legitimacy for this.
I recommend to you to change your strategy and try to do something positive for the Wikimedia Movement and for your life.
Your votes against and all that hate speech will not take you anywhere.
Kind regards
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 00:26:50 -0200 Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton<rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com> escreveu ----
"success of WLE Brasil 2015"
Success for whom?
*For the Wikimedia Commons **it was totally **innocuous. *
Less then 0,16% was a good quality image, including several snapshots (mobile made), downsized images....; the retention probably will follow WLE BR 2014 and goona be very close to 0. No work was developed in conjunction with the WCommons, and could created a problem, people got paid with thousands for bad photos, and volunteers there producing real content... And this money, more then 30'000 USD, come from WMF for the WLE 2014/15 and WLM in Brazil, and in the other hand, WP-en removed hundreds of people getting paid for contribution, how it's different? Oh yeah, the money did not came from donations...
*For the Wikipedia it was barely nothing.*
The volume of images used was very low, and even in the list of winners, a lot of those images do not have any education purpose, or do not properly illustrates the site. And very low involvement of the community, retention was none.
For the "off-line community" , :D...
Were are this people? The other coordinator named in the website [1], are not even close to be involved with the community, check his FB:[2], very active, none WLE/WLM publications... Commons: [3], any help with this contests. People listed in the WUG group did not signed by themselves[4]...
And " including contributions from teachers and students..."??? "educational program."??? I think that "they" are hidden it in a very deep place, not even "their" website have any clues fof that[5], or "their" Facebook [6], Meta [7]... "Their" partners are not related to educational programmes [8], most of them are related to photography, for obvious reasons. as far we can see, "they" are just burn WMF money to make this contests (for ???)...
*Two observation:*
.ORG.BR are websites restricted to ONG registered in legal terms here in Brazil, or they already have a legal association and are not telling to AffCom, or they don't have that and is putting the Wikimedia name in some scheme circumventing laws...
*The scope of the group, which can be found on their application, is "to support the participation of teachers, researchers and employees of several national institutions that participate in the Education Program of Wikimedia in Brazil, aiming to integrate the academic community to the Wikimedia movement, creating a more friendly and responsive environment for the development of projects, research, contests, events and other activities." *[9]
How this contests are related to this scope?
Again
Success for whom?
Links:
[1]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/sobre.html [2]https://www.facebook.com/pedro.napolitanomendes [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500&tagfilter=&title... [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_G... [5]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/projetos [6]https://www.facebook.com/grupowikimediabr [7] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Group... [8]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/parceiros.html [9] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Wikimedia...
On 30 October 2015 at 20:42, Rodrigo Padula <rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br> wrote:
> Hello my friends, > > After many years of Wiki Loves Monuments around the world, finally we > organized an edition of that important photo contest in Brasil. > > Following the success of WLE Brasil 2015(supported by our fellows from > Wikimedia Ukraine) and counting with a lot of support from Romaine we > finally completed that task after years of procrastination. > > The WLM Brasil 2015 was organized by the Wikimedia Community Brazilian > Group of Education and Research, including contributions from teachers and > students in a new approach for our educational program. > > Teachers and students from local universities supported us with > marketing/communication and in the final process of pictures filtering for > the judges evaluation. > > You can see the final result of WLM Brasil and the winners at > http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html > > Pictures uploaded: 4.443 > Uploaders: 411 > New users registered on Commons: 325 > New users engagement: 79% > Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%) > > Best regards > > Rodrigo Padula > Coordenador de Projetos > Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa > http://www.wikimedia.org.br > 21 99326-0558 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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>
OK both of you Rodrigo's, please stop with the snarky emails directed at eachother. What you are doing is indeed not very productive as Gerard is pointing out. The problem as I see it is an old one. Fae's mail is definitely worth taking to another thread, because what has happened here in the reaction to contest results is really just a repetition of our perennial communication gap regarding Wikipedians and Wikimedia Commonists. At the end of the day, both Wikipedia and Commons want to increase quality content. The problem is how you measure this and what sort of incentives can you dream up to attract this. For Wikipedia, we want high quality text that satisfies WIkipedia policy, and for Commons, we want high quality images that satisfies Commons policy. Unfortunately in many cases these don't match and we have lots of highly active contributors who can do one but not the other, and very few who understand the difference. Personally I have uploaded many snapshots to Commons with the idea that "any picture is better than none", and I have seen lots of my less than mediocre images get reused whilest some of my best pictures are rarely used. No one can say for sure what will be a good image and what it should be used for. Once a poor image is uploaded, this might even be more of an incentive for someone else to take a better picture - who knows?
Certainly our current proposals for organizing and reporting on contests can be improved, and yes, we have lots of experience, but not many cross-cultural contacts who can parse all of the reports and make sound improvements. In the meantime, we do things the wikiway, which is everybody doing the best they can with the tools at hand. Let's try to remember that we are all still on the same team here!
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Rodrigo Padula < rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br> wrote:
Argentom, only to demonstrate how wrong and misinformed you are, the guy you cited on your email is a very active contributor with more than 50.000 edits on the main domain of pt.wikipedia and near 100.000 edits including all domains. Thinking in personal privacy, it is not a good approach to point here names and social media accounts, that is why I will not identify the user name of this very important contributor of our movement.
As you can read on the official announcement http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html all the pictures uploaded for WLM was evaluated and filtered by teachers and students of the University http://www.ucs.br/portais/curso164/ under the coordination of the Prof. Edson Correa. All press releases and content published and sent to our media partners was created and revised by the teacher Prof. Dr. Marcio Gonçalves and students from a local university in Rio de Janeiro.
I know you're just trying to attack me personally, but what you are doing is disqualifying all the efforts of all Wikimedia movement responsible for devising and organizing competitions like the WLE and WLM around the world and for that you have no contributions and much less support any group that can give you legitimacy for this.
I recommend to you to change your strategy and try to do something positive for the Wikimedia Movement and for your life.
Your votes against and all that hate speech will not take you anywhere.
Kind regards
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 00:26:50 -0200 Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton<rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com> escreveu ----
"success of WLE Brasil 2015"
Success for whom?
*For the Wikimedia Commons **it was totally **innocuous. *
Less then 0,16% was a good quality image, including several snapshots (mobile made), downsized images....; the retention probably will follow WLE BR 2014 and goona be very close to 0. No work was developed in conjunction with the WCommons, and could created a problem, people got paid with thousands for bad photos, and volunteers there producing real content... And this money, more then 30'000 USD, come from WMF for the WLE 2014/15 and WLM in Brazil, and in the other hand, WP-en removed hundreds of people getting paid for contribution, how it's different? Oh yeah, the money did not came from donations...
*For the Wikipedia it was barely nothing.*
The volume of images used was very low, and even in the list of winners, a lot of those images do not have any education purpose, or do not properly illustrates the site. And very low involvement of the community, retention was none.
For the "off-line community" , :D...
Were are this people? The other coordinator named in the website [1], are not even close to be involved with the community, check his FB:[2], very active, none WLE/WLM publications... Commons: [3], any help with this contests. People listed in the WUG group did not signed by themselves[4]...
And " including contributions from teachers and students..."??? "educational program."??? I think that "they" are hidden it in a very deep place, not even "their" website have any clues fof that[5], or "their" Facebook [6], Meta [7]... "Their" partners are not related to educational programmes [8], most of them are related to photography, for obvious reasons. as far we can see, "they" are just burn WMF money to make this contests (for ???)...
*Two observation:*
.ORG.BR are websites restricted to ONG registered in legal terms here in Brazil, or they already have a legal association and are not telling to AffCom, or they don't have that and is putting the Wikimedia name in some scheme circumventing laws...
*The scope of the group, which can be found on their application, is "to support the participation of teachers, researchers and employees of several national institutions that participate in the Education Program of Wikimedia in Brazil, aiming to integrate the academic community to the Wikimedia movement, creating a more friendly and responsive environment for the development of projects, research, contests, events and other activities." *[9]
How this contests are related to this scope?
Again
Success for whom?
Links:
[1]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/sobre.html [2]https://www.facebook.com/pedro.napolitanomendes [3]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500&tagfilter=&title... [4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_G... [5]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/projetos [6]https://www.facebook.com/grupowikimediabr [7]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Group... [8]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/parceiros.html [9]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Wikimedia...
On 30 October 2015 at 20:42, Rodrigo Padula & lt;rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br> wrote:
> Hello my friends, > > After many years of Wiki Loves Monuments around the world, finally we > organized an edition of that important photo contest in Brasil. > > Following the success of WLE Brasil 2015(supported by our fellows from > Wikimedia Ukraine) and counting with a lot of support from Romaine we > finally completed that task after years of procrastination. > > The WLM Brasil 2015 was organized by the Wikimedia Community Brazilian > Group of Education and Research, including contributions from teachers and > students in a new approach for our educational program. > > Teachers and students from local universities supported us with > marketing/communication and in the final process of pictures filtering for > the judges evaluation. > > You can see the final result of WLM Brasil and the winners at > http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html > > Pictures uploaded: 4.443 > Uploaders: 411 > New users registered on Commons: 325 > New users engagement: 79% > Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%) > > Best regards > > Rodrigo Padula > Coordenador de Projetos > Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa > http://www.wikimedia.org.br > 21 99326-0558 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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>
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com +55 11 979 718 884 _______________________________________________ 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 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
Hello Jane,
Moving forward with a positive discussion, we know that problems and we have some ideas in mind to try to fix that, improving the usage of the pictures on pt.wikipedia.
We was planning a photo exhibition since the end of WLE 2015 (including we requested budget for that).
Now our idea is to do it in a local library here in Rio de Janeiro and in parallel we will promote talks, trainning and edit-a-thon to improve and create articles related to both contests.
We are under negotiation with some local possible partners and with the managers of Biblioteca Parque http://bibliotecasparque.rj.gov.br/, including we are planning to do the commemoration of 15 Wikipedia's Aniversary there too.
Probably our photo exhibition will be exposed there from November to January, so we will have the photo exhibition running during the Wikipedia's aniversary in the better case scenario :-)
My ideia is to have a Wikimedia Brazilian Conference during 15-17 January, but we have a lot of issues to define and negotiate until there, my priority is to do a good photo exhibition.
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 14:51:38 -0200 Jane Darnell<jane023@gmail.com> escreveu ----
OK both of you Rodrigo's, please stop with the snarky emails directed at eachother. What you are doing is indeed not very productive as Gerard is pointing out. The problem as I see it is an old one. Fae's mail is definitely worth taking to another thread, because what has happened here in the reaction to contest results is really just a repetition of our perennial communication gap regarding Wikipedians and Wikimedia Commonists. At the end of the day, both Wikipedia and Commons want to increase quality content. The problem is how you measure this and what sort of incentives can you dream up to attract this. For Wikipedia, we want high quality text that satisfies WIkipedia policy, and for Commons, we want high quality images that satisfies Commons policy. Unfortunately in many cases these don't match and we have lots of highly active contributors who can do one but not the other, and very few who understand the difference. Personally I have uploaded many snapshots to Commons with the idea that "any picture is better than none", and I have seen lots of my less than mediocre images get reused whilest some of my best pictures are rarely used. No one can say for sure what will be a good image and what it should be used for. Once a poor image is uploaded, this might even be more of an incentive for someone else to take a better picture - who knows?
Certainly our current proposals for organizing and reporting on contests can be improved, and yes, we have lots of experience, but not many cross-cultural contacts who can parse all of the reports and make sound improvements. In the meantime, we do things the wikiway, which is everybody doing the best they can with the tools at hand. Let's try to remember that we are all still on the same team here!
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Rodrigo Padula < rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br> wrote:
> Argentom, only to demonstrate how wrong and misinformed you are, the guy > you cited on your email is a very active contributor with more than 50.000 > edits on the main domain of pt.wikipedia and near 100.000 edits including > all domains. Thinking in personal privacy, it is not a good approach to > point here names and social media accounts, that is why I will not identify > the user name of this very important contributor of our movement. > > As you can read on the official announcement > http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html > all the pictures uploaded for WLM was evaluated and filtered by teachers > and students of the University http://www.ucs.br/portais/curso164/ under > the coordination of the Prof. Edson Correa. All press releases and content > published and sent to our media partners was created and revised by the > teacher Prof. Dr. Marcio Gonçalves and students from a local university in > Rio de Janeiro. > > I know you're just trying to attack me personally, but what you are doing > is disqualifying all the efforts of all Wikimedia movement responsible for > devising and organizing competitions like the WLE and WLM around the world > and for that you have no contributions and much less support any group that > can give you legitimacy for this. > > I recommend to you to change your strategy and try to do something > positive for the Wikimedia Movement and for your life. > > Your votes against and all that hate speech will not take you anywhere. > > Kind regards > > 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 00:26:50 -0200 Rodrigo Tetsuo > Argenton&lt;rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com&gt; escreveu ---- > > "success of WLE Brasil 2015" > > Success for whom? > > *For the Wikimedia Commons **it was totally **innocuous. * > > Less then 0,16% was a good quality image, including several snapshots > (mobile made), downsized images....; the retention probably will follow WLE > BR 2014 and goona be very close to 0. No work was developed in conjunction > with the WCommons, and could created a problem, people got paid with > thousands for bad photos, and volunteers there producing real content... > And this money, more then 30'000 USD, come from WMF for the WLE 2014/15 and > WLM in Brazil, and in the other hand, WP-en removed hundreds of people > getting paid for contribution, how it's different? Oh yeah, the money did > not came from donations... > > *For the Wikipedia it was barely nothing.* > > The volume of images used was very low, and even in the list of winners, a > lot of those images do not have any education purpose, or do not properly > illustrates the site. And very low involvement of the community, retention > was none. > > For the "off-line community" , :D... > > Were are this people? The other coordinator named in the website [1], are > not even close to be involved with the community, check his FB:[2], very > active, none WLE/WLM publications... Commons: [3], any help with this > contests. People listed in the WUG group did not signed by themselves[4]... > > And " including contributions from teachers and students..."??? > "educational > program."??? I think that "they" are hidden it in a very deep place, not > even "their" website have any clues fof that[5], or "their" Facebook [6], > Meta [7]... "Their" partners are not related to educational programmes [8], > most of them are related to photography, for obvious reasons. as far we can > see, "they" are just burn WMF money to make this contests (for ???)... > > *Two observation:* > > .ORG.BR are websites restricted to ONG registered in legal terms here in > Brazil, or they already have a legal association and are not telling to > AffCom, or they don't have that and is putting the Wikimedia name in > some scheme > circumventing laws... > > > *The scope of the group, which can be found on their application, is "to > support the participation of teachers, researchers and employees of several > national institutions that participate in the Education Program of > Wikimedia in Brazil, aiming to integrate the academic community to the > Wikimedia movement, creating a more friendly and responsive environment for > the development of projects, research, contests, events and other > activities." *[9] > > How this contests are related to this scope? > > > Again > > Success for whom? > > > Links: > > [1]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/sobre.html > [2]https://www.facebook.com/pedro.napolitanomendes > [3] > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500&tagfilter=&a... > [4] > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_G... > [5]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/projetos > [6]https://www.facebook.com/grupowikimediabr > [7] > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_Community_Brazilian_Group... > [8]http://www.wikimedia.org.br/parceiros.html > [9] > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Wikimedia... > > > > > > > > > > > > On 30 October 2015 at 20:42, Rodrigo Padula & > lt;rodrigopadula@wikimedia.org.br&gt; > wrote: > > &gt; Hello my friends, > &gt; > &gt; After many years of Wiki Loves Monuments around the world, finally we > &gt; organized an edition of that important photo contest in Brasil. > &gt; > &gt; Following the success of WLE Brasil 2015(supported by our fellows from > &gt; Wikimedia Ukraine) and counting with a lot of support from Romaine we > &gt; finally completed that task after years of procrastination. > &gt; > &gt; The WLM Brasil 2015 was organized by the Wikimedia Community Brazilian > &gt; Group of Education and Research, including contributions from > teachers and > &gt; students in a new approach for our educational program. > &gt; > &gt; Teachers and students from local universities supported us with > &gt; marketing/communication and in the final process of pictures > filtering for > &gt; the judges evaluation. > &gt; > &gt; You can see the final result of WLM Brasil and the winners at > &gt; > http://www.wikimedia.org.br/wiki-loves-monuments-brasil-2015-vencedores.html > &gt; > &gt; Pictures uploaded: 4.443 > &gt; Uploaders: 411 > &gt; New users registered on Commons: 325 > &gt; New users engagement: 79% > &gt; Pictures user on Wikipedia: 86 (2%) > &gt; > &gt; Best regards > &gt; > &gt; Rodrigo Padula > &gt; Coordenador de Projetos > &gt; Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa > &gt; http://www.wikimedia.org.br > &gt; 21 99326-0558 > &gt; > &gt; > &gt; > &gt; _______________________________________________ > &gt; Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > &gt; https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > &gt; Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > &gt; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > , > &gt; &lt;mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org > ?subject=unsubscribe&gt; > > > > > -- > Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton > rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com > +55 11 979 718 884 > _______________________________________________ > 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, > &lt;mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe&gt; > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 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