[Wiki Loves Monuments] 'evaluation'

Tue May 5 11:59:42 UTC 2015

It's un unclear.

A god shot on the market costs more than 50 dollars.

Everything in high quality is a benefit.

So the aim is not to calculate a cost per shot but the relation costs
benefits.

Basically the delta.

If there is the need to evaluate the success considering the poor relation
costs per upload, there is no sense to have a photo contest. An editathon
will produce more results.
 Il 05/Mag/2015 12:21, "Ivo Kruusamägi" <ivo.kruusamagi at gmail.com> ha
scritto:

> I've collected photos for Commons with cost lower than 0.01 $ per image,
> so I don't like claims, that "A god shot of a professional artist doesn't
> cost 0.90 dollars". Considering the fact, that average upload in WLM is
> usually out of rather poor quality and will not find itself a place in an
> article, then thous things aren't that easily comparable.
>
> I specially like the comment about Romaine, and I have taken somewhat
> similar approach. Only if I'm able to provide constant work for the
> newcomers there is some chance of keeping them with the program. Getting
> images vs getting users are two rather different aims. I have also set
> interest towards getting quality images as we have so many contributors per
> capita in Estonia, that it isn't very likely to get an increase there
> without some rather desperate means. But just focusing on images could help
> to get significantly better quality contributions.
>
> As of this evaluation I'd actually like to get some selected examples,
> that would explain somewhat on what others have done and what kind of
> differences there are. For instance, if someone spends thousands of dollars
> for this campaign, then I'd like to know where the money went, as I can't
> personally think of any places on where to spend that much. Or what kind of
> outreach approach was taken to achieve the x goals etc.
>
> Regards
> Ivo Kruusamägi
>
> 2015-05-05 11:06 GMT+03:00 Ilario Valdelli <valdelli at gmail.com>:
>
>> To specify what I am saying:
>>
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Evaluation/Evaluation_reports/2015/Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Outputs
>>
>> In the paragraph "Content Production and Quality Improvement" it's not
>> mentioned any paragraph about the quality of the photos.
>>
>> It's a photo contest and the photo contest gives a prize to the best
>> photos not to the biggest uploaders.
>>
>> This is an example of divergence between the real aim of the projects and
>> the measures of the evaluation.
>>
>> Probably there is a misunderstanding in same place.
>>
>> A god shot of a professional artist doesn't cost 0.90 dollars.
>>
>> To measure the success the best approach is to consider that a god shot
>> can costs around 50-100 dollars.
>>
>> Replying to people that agree that the measure is to cover articles, I
>> agree with them but I also agree that there is no sense to have bad photos
>> even if these photos are not "descriptive".
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Ilario Valdelli <valdelli at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lodewijk,
>>> it's not the fisrt time that I am saying that the measures of the
>>> evaluation are able to measure quantities and not qualities.
>>>
>>> If the aim of Wikimedia is to improve also the qualities, it's clear the
>>> direction that the movement is taking.
>>>
>>> I know that measuring quantities is easier, but it's not an evaluation,
>>> are simple numbers without a clear "strategy".
>>>
>>> regards
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Lodewijk <lodewijk at effeietsanders.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> it seems that the WMF evaluation department has once again put together
>>>> an evaluation of Wiki Loves Monuments. Out of curiosity, were any of the
>>>> organizers involved in this? A quick glance suggests some factual errors,
>>>> and again a big focus on assuming WLM is a consistent project, that is
>>>> similar in each country (while in reality it is a diverse collection of
>>>> projects, tailored to the needs of each country, by its community) and with
>>>> a focus towards number crunching.
>>>>
>>>> Statements that begin with 'the average Wiki Loves Monuments
>>>> implementation/contest' make my eyes bleed... Did anyone make a more
>>>> thorough analysis of the report?
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Lodewijk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
>>>> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
>>>> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/attachments/20150505/7dd631bd/attachment-0001.html>