Grants:IdeaLab/WLX Jury Tool : improved tool and great service
WLX Jury Tool : looking for improved tool and better service
Wiki Loves events are great means to collect images to illustrate our projects and fabulous means to get contributors together. Unfortunately... these contests end up with MANY images, which must be evaluated, reviewed, noted... Some time ago, the WLX Jury Tool was developed to support that need. However... the application could still enjoy improvements. And the service do need more attention.
created on23:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Project idea
[edit]Wiki Loves events are great means to collect images to illustrate our projects and fabulous means to get contributors together. Unfortunately... these contests end up with MANY images, which must be evaluated, reviewed, noted... Some time ago, the WLX Jury Tool was developed to support that need. However... the application could still enjoy improvements. And the service do need more attention (set up of the voting sites when a team needs it, login and password management, set up of rounds etc.)
See: WLX Jury Tool
What is the problem you're trying to solve?
[edit]- tool could be further developped
- tool could be translated
- we need an organization (WMF ? Chapter ? Other ?) to support the tool management on a regular basis so that when teams need it... or we need a mean to have this works in an autonomous way.
What is your solution?
[edit]Hoping to raise awareness on the issue of Wiki Loves Jury Tools and stimulate people to come with creative solutions.
Goals
[edit]Get Involved
[edit]About the idea creator
[edit]user:Anthere. Organized c:Commons:Wiki Loves Africa 2014 and c:Commons:Wiki Loves Africa 2015. Suffered like hell in 2014 using only google docs to identify the winning pictures. Was happier in 2015 using WLX tool to a certain extent (nearly one month delay to get the round 1, same for round 2. Never got it for round 3 so reverted to google docs).
Participants
[edit]- As the delevoper I go here. The issues of tool configuration are long overdue and I raised them to my chapter a lot to have time to finish the implementation. However this is needed for WLE in May-June, so it needs to be done before that. I plan to do it before April and come with other ideas. --Ilya (talk) 11:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- and thank you for your work so far!--Alexmar983 (talk) 01:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Endorsements
[edit]- support. I was a jury member for WLM Italy and I think the tool can be better. I took part in some Commons:Photo challenge and I think they could be upscaled to some more organized competitions if a decent and flexible infrastructure were provided. An example is the European month of Scientific illustration that will be repeated in 2017. I also speak 6 or 7 languages, I can help with some translation if necessary. Another idea is to provide more statistics to the jurors, or at least to use the tool to collect them more efficiently.--Alexmar983 (talk) 09:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Support Touzrimounir (talk) 11:21, 4 March 2016 (UTC)- Support - As core organiser of Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves Earth and Wiki Loves Africa I can say that the development of this tool is important for all of these projects and many other projects as well. Romaine (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support - The tool looks great! And I think is better designed than WP itself. I find it sad that everyone has to develop these tools over and over again (Germany.. Poland.. Ukraine..) when it should be WMFs job to co-ordinate and support development by talented people like this guy. SSneg (talk) 15:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Comment The WLX Jury Tool has been largly advertised during the last European Science Photo Competition as a recommended tool. Actually it was never delivered to the organizers of the local competition in Greece (as far I know also to other local competitions), despite the efforts of the Estonian organizers, our repeated emails, or our communication also with people from Wikimedia Ukraine chapter in our effort to mediate in order to save the situation. The programmer of the tool didn't even reply that he is not available. We had almost 20 days of delay to announce the results of the contest, and it was the last moment that we avoided the whole fiasco thanks to the efforts our colleague Geraki and the creator of the Wiki Loves Jurytool who responded directly to our requests for help. Sorry, but I would never support a tool that is not supported and his programmer is totally indiffirent, even though he consented in one way or another to provide the tool (otherwise it wouldn't have been featured as recommended in the Competition's page on Commons). --Γλαύκος (talk) 10:25, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
- This is exactly WHY I proposed this to the IdeaLab. I think all of us like to do certain things and do not like doing other things. I believe (correct me if I am wrong Ilya) that Ilya loved coding the tool and I think Ilya would love to further improve the tool. But Ilya does not like managing the use of the tool. This is simply not his thing. And that is fine. What we do need is someone or an organization jumping in and agreeing to actually do that. It would be lovely if some coding could help automat this to a certain extent, but I think we will always need a *human* to help with the support. This is what I am looking for. Free Ilya time to code and do what he likes doing. And find others to help on the user end. Anthere (talk)
- Dear Anthere, I explicitly explained the reasons why to support this tool and the person behind this tool is a bad idea, based on the frustrating experience we lived as local organizers. My comment has nothing to do with his coding capacities, which might be great, though I don't know the tool because I had never had the chance to use it. I don't even know if this software is publicly available in Github or some other repository. I would agree that we need a free licensed automated tool that we could share, set up easily, or use as a free web service for Wikimedia Photo Contests. What I don't understand is why to choose a software whose programmer is not cooperative at all, as software in many occasions can be a collective work and its success depends on how the chief programmer is able to co-work in a team. I apologize in advance if I am getting wrong on your idea. --Γλαύκος (talk) 17:50, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- I understand what you say Glavkos. I have no idea if the tool has been published on GitHub (obviously... if it is not published.... it is a problem). As for quality of the tool... the feedback from those who have used many tools would be welcome. I think we should not reinvent the wheel and duplicate efforts. Anthere (talk)
- I've worked with Wiki Loves Monuments - US with 20,000 photos to judge. I'd hope that there would also be a tool that could also use and easily set up for a few dozen photos. This tool needs to be very flexible and robust Smallbones (talk) 23:46, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- I agree that this would be a very useful tool. And could be designed to make it much much easier for relatively new user to participate in a review process that is at least partially based on specific policies and guidelines. Sydney Poore/FloNight (talk) 20:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
- O 129.45.18.58 10:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support There is a great need for such a tool for many of the photographic competitions we (Wikimedia ZA) runs. Having a tool like this when we were hosting Wiki Loves Monuments would have made our lives much easier and will make it much easier in future similar events. Discott (talk) 14:12, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Expand your idea
[edit]Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.
user:Ilya submitted a grant request : Grants:IEG/ScalaWiki data processing toolbox. It was not approved. Anthere (talk) 10:11, 20 June 2016 (UTC)