Hi all,
Thanks for the comments on the first two program evaluation reports. This is the kind of feedback we are looking for coming from the community, and for that reason, we want to continue this conversation and learn more about what goals and metrics make more sense to program leaders.
As many of you know, today we held an open virtual event to introduce the first Wikimedia Programs Evaluation Reports 2015. You can now watch the recorded event online [1].
We have also captured some of the conversation that started on Wiki Loves Monuments list on the report's Talk Page [2]. Many community members have already contributed their views there. We want to encourage everyone to keep the conversation on the talk page, which will allow us to document all the feedback and keep track of it.
Looking forward to your feedback and happy editing!
*María Cruz * \ Community Coordinator, PE&D Team \ Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. mcruz@wikimedia.org | : @marianarra_ https://twitter.com/marianarra_
[1] Video of the reports presentation
https://youtu.be/PN3TN4wrFZs [2] Wiki Loves Monuments Evaluation Report - Talk Page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:Evaluation/Evaluation_reports/20...
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I think that this may be considered the central problem.
It's easier to compare two different scenarios with a standard measure and to use kilos to compare apples and oranges, for instance.
The problem is to understand that oranges will continue to be oranges after this measure, and apples will continue to be apples.
This is an example to say that several countries focus their contest in quality, some others in quantity.
The prize and the contest, anyway, is focused to select the "better photo" and not the biggest uploaders.
It means that there is no sense to force the quantitative parameters while the incentives are focused to increase quality.
Personally I find the same measure costs/uploads a lot far from the most correct measure costs/benefits because we cannot consider a single upload automatically as a "benefit".
In my opinion the most critical point is how measure costs (the workload of a community is it a cost?) and the benefits (a huge amount of worst photos is it a benefit?) because it involves several not measurable parameters.
Regards
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Figuring out what ideas are repeatable, scalable, or awesome but one-time only, is complex. We probably need many different approaches, not one central approach, to understand and compare.
-- 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 Wikipedia: Ilario https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario Skype: valdelli Facebook: Ilario Valdelli https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli Twitter: Ilario Valdelli https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli <http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469
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