[Wiki Loves Monuments] Jury tools [2nd turn]

[Paul Selitskas]

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Bas vb <basvb_wikipedia at live.nl> wrote:
> My answer would be: browse the categories and store the links (the
> prehistoric way) in wikiformat with 500px, so you can use the previewpage
> thing to watch them in a list on full scale together. This is the way I've
> done it the last 2 years, and a nice extra is that after the contest I could
> publish my lists with one click on the save button. See for example
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Basvb/100 and other subpages there.
> This way even years later you can look at the best pictures and nominate
> some for QI or FP if you want, or when you have the 11th article and want to
> use a picture other than one of the top 10 winners. So publishing a longlist
> for you country would be a real benefit.
>
> Mvg,
>
> Bas
>
> ________________________________
> Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 18:25:42 +0200
> From: itzik at infra.co.il
> To: wikilovesmonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Jury tools [2nd turn]
>
>
> I hope tomorrow we can present the tool that we build and planning to use in
> Israel
> - Sent from my mobile device
> On Sep 29, 2012 5:44 PM, "Paul Selitskas" <p.selitskas at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi guys.
>
> I'm in the very best way shocked by results of the almost finished
> Belarusian contest. That is more than 100 contestants with more than
> 5000 submissions! I'm very happy with great results in other countries
> as well.
>
> But as the contest is going to its end, there is a question about the
> reviewing proccess. How should jury members pick the best photos?
> Which software tools should they use? I'm even thinking about
> developing a new one which would just retrieve photos via MWAPI and
> then just give the jury members a choice out of hundreds of photos
> (beforehand filtered to eliminate all low-quality, non-encyclopedic
> stuff).
>
> Looking through the mailing list archives, especially the Jury tools
> thread, I haven't yet received an ultimate answer.
>
> So, what is yours?
>
> --
> З павагай,
> Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas
> Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects
> p.selitskas at gmail.com, +375257408304
> Skype: p.selitskas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing
> list WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org

That's a good way for just viewing a bunch of photos uploaded to get
the average quality level of submissions. That's a quite acceptable
way for Wikimedians in the jury.

That is definitely not in this world a good way of reviewing the
photos for other jury members, who although can click a photo to set
its rating mark or just discard the submission, they may be not
computer geniuses (few photographers or heritage experts). Moreover,
are we going to record the good photos and the bad ones down in a
notebook?

It's a reasonably acceptable way of things to be, but I believe there
is something a bit more easy to work with, like clicking "I approve
this" or setting the mark and the thing is done. Anyway, thank you
very much for the suggestion! Maybe it will be used as a Plan B, who
knows... :)

And thank you, Itzik! I'm waiting further news from your team!

-- 
Cheers,
Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas
Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects
p.selitskas at gmail.com, +375257408304
Skype: p.selitskas