Grants talk:Project/Improve 'Upload to Commons' Android App/Renewal

User case nearby Grave missing Grave pictures

We have one special case its for graves missing pictures

• when Property:P119 is set
• with coordinates Property:P625
• and missing grave picture Property:P1442

- Salgo60 (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, could you please clarify the question? Thanks! Misaochan (talk) 16:00, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

This is about an item (a person) who has a precise place of burial but no picture of their grave. By the way, this item's normal picture would presumably be the person's portrait. Salgo60, could you please give us the Wikidata query for that? Thanks! Enhancement request on Github Syced (talk) 05:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Syced: query finding graves with no pictures but coordinates

#Cemetery Northern Cemetery in Stockholm wd:Q252312 without a picture of the grave
#defaultView:Map
SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?itemDescription ?coord (SAMPLE(?picGrave) as ?picGrave) ?article (SAMPLE(?graveplot) as ?graveplot) 
	WHERE { 
 					?item wdt:P119 wd:Q252312 .
                    ?item p:P119 ?placeofBurial .
                    OPTIONAL { ?placeofBurial pq:P965 ?graveplot}
                    { ?placeofBurial pq:P625 ?coord}               # Has coordinates
                    minus { ?item wdt:P1442 ?picGrave }            # No pictures
    OPTIONAL {
      ?article schema:about ?item .
      ?article schema:inLanguage "en" .
      ?article schema:isPartOf <https://en.wikipedia.org/> .
    }
    OPTIONAL {
      ?article schema:about ?item .
      ?article schema:inLanguage "sv" .
      ?article schema:isPartOf <https://sv.wikipedia.org/> .
    }
    SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en", "sv". }
}
GROUP BY ?item ?itemLabel ?itemDescription ?coord ?article

Salgo60 (talk) 06:29, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

See also blogpost with examples - Salgo60 (talk) 08:14, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion Salgo60, we will look into incorporating that Wikidata query if we can. :) Misaochan (talk) 09:15, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Another problem primary/secondary coordinates

Maybe you now the process for change the Wikipedia Iphone client when retrieving coordinates. In Extension:GeoData we have Primary and secondary coordinates. We need to change the Wikipedia Iphone App to also retrieving secondary coordinates ==> gsprimary=all

See a Change request I have written link but dont know where to send it ;-) - Salgo60 (talk) 06:29, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

- Salgo60 (talk) 06:29, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello Salgo60! The Wikipedia Iphone client is managed by another team, actually I have no idea who. Sorry but you will have to find them and send them your idea. Cheers! Syced (talk) 06:19, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

• Wikipedia-ios-app-backlog
• Wikimedia Apps/Team/Bug reporting

- Salgo60 (talk) 09:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Renewal process

Hi @Mjohnson (WMF):,

Hope you are doing well. I was hoping to be able to talk to you about this proposal if possible, and about where we should go from here for the grant renewal process. Please do let me know if you would be available for a brief chat, thanks! Misaochan (talk) 16:04, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Metrics of success - Google Play ratings vs survey

Hi Popo le Chien,

Thanks for your feedback and endorsement, we greatly appreciate it. Deciding how to measure user satisfaction is indeed something that we have been discussing at length. Using Google Play ratings would certainly be easier and less time-consuming than a survey, I agree. However, my concerns about it are:

• We have had quite a few irrelevant Google Play ratings by people who either (1) have a bone to pick with WMF and are taking it out on us, like the guy who was complaining about English Wikipedia, or (2) don't know what the purpose of the app is, like those who are complaining that it doesn't have Photoshop functionality. I was hoping that using a survey sent via mailing lists would at least ensure that the responders are those who are reasonably familiar with our app and Wikimedia projects, which is the target of most of our improvements
• Our Google Play rating is currently 4.272, measured over 151 ratings for the past couple of years. I'm not sure what a realistic target would be for the next 6 months. Even if we do get a string of '5's, it would not pull the average up by much I think

What do you think, are there ways to mitigate these issues? Many thanks! Misaochan (talk) 09:05, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Misaochan: There are a few standard quantitative metrics apps use, such as DAUs, MAUs, net installs (i.e. installs minus uninstalls), and more. Some of these metrics are available inside Google Play, whereas others would require instrumentation using something like EventLogging. Hopefully that's helpful. --Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:49, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Dan, thanks for the suggestions! The DAUs and MAUs look interesting indeed. We did use active installs (number of Android devices that have been active in the previous 30 days on which our app is installed) as a measure in the previous grant, but we were unsure if it would be useful in this round, as our focus is currently on quality/usability/impact of pictures submitted. I will bring up your suggested metrics to the others in our team and see what they say. :) Cheers, Misaochan (talk) 07:45, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Misaochan: I don't think that the active installs statistic provided by Google Play a useful substitute for DAUs or MAUs; that statistic doesn't say whether the app is used by those active devices, so usage could be anywhere from 0% to 100% of those users. Active installs is useful as a rough indicator, of course. In the case of quality and usability, I agree that quantitative statistics are not as valuable as qualitative feedback. :-) --Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 10:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Misaochan: Also, to be super clear, I am not involved in the grant process in any way. My advice is based on my time as a mobile apps product manager, but these are entirely my own opinions. --Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 10:54, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Review Period through 9/25/17

Hello Misaochan,

Thank you for submitting this renewal request. Starting now, I'm giving the Project Grants committee and the broader community 10 days to share any additional thoughts on this request before we move forward with a final decision on whether to renew. I'll be notifying the Project Grants committee today. Thanks again for all your efforts so far!

In the wake of the review period, I will be making a final decision on this renewal.

Cheers, --Marti (WMF) (talk) 19:07, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Mjohnson (WMF):, thanks for carrying out the review period! Would it be possible for us to know the results of the review? We would love to be able to start work on this soon if approved. :) Cheers! Misaochan (talk) 07:32, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments from Ruslik0

I do not see significant problems with the project though I personally can not try the app as I use iOS devices only. So, I support this renewal request. Ruslik (talk) 17:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Renewal approved

Dear Misaochan,

I am approving your renewal request in full. Congratulations on your progress to date. I look forward to seeing your work on further improvements to the app. Our grants administrator, Jtud (WMF) will be in touch soon to setup your Project Grant agreement.

Warm regards,

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thanks so much Marti (WMF). We will be starting work on the planned improvements ASAP. :) Misaochan (talk) 06:26, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Project page not yet set to "approved"?

Hi @Mjohnson (WMF):,

Thanks for approving our renewal request. We have set up our Project Grant agreements with Jtud (WMF) at the end of October and have been working on the grant tasks for the past 2 months. We would like to share our progress here, however this page needs to be set to "approved" to allow creation of project tabs and writing of reports. Would it be at all possible to have this done soon?

Many thanks! Misaochan (talk) 09:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)