Commons:Picture of the Year/2011/Committee/IRC Meeting 1
Thanks for your participation! The 2011 winners have been announced!
== Preliminary IRC Meeting ==
Sat 17:00:00 ‹+enhydra› so Sat 17:02:37 ‹+enhydra› mono_, wake up! :) Sat 17:02:45 ‹mono_› hi Sat 17:02:48 ‹mono_› one moment Sat 17:04:28 ‹mono› Hello, all Sat 17:04:48 ‹+enhydra› hiyyya Sat 17:05:30 ‹+mono› Today, the plan was to talk about the rules for the contest, prepare a list of resources we'll need, and just talk generally about the progress Sat 17:06:12 ‹+enhydra› I’m fine with that Sat 17:06:17 ‹+mono› For the record, this chat will be logged. Sat 17:06:27 ‹+mono› jg84 miya, are you there? Sat 17:07:12 ‹+enhydra› mono, according to FreeNode rules, the topic needs to have a warning about the channel being logged Sat 17:07:42 ‹+enhydra› ...logged publicly Sat 17:07:42 -!- ChanServ changed the topic of #poty2011 to: Preparation for the 6th Picture of the Year contest on the Wikimedia Commons. | http://twitter.com/CommonsPOTY | Voting system thread at http://bit.ly/zAXXWO | Sign up for the committee at http://bit.ly/wOB05t | Preliminary meeting Saturday - see http://bit.ly/AEAb6p | Publicly logged Sat 17:07:44 ‹+miya› yes, though sleepy Sat 17:07:54 ‹+mono› hello ceradon|webchat Sat 17:08:26 ‹+ceradon|webchat› hello mono Sat 17:08:44 ‹+miya› hello all Sat 17:08:50 ‹+ceradon|webchat› uhn, brb switching computers Sat 17:11:22 ‹+mono› So far, there have been a couple of discussions Sat 17:11:28 ‹+mono› (see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Picture_of_the_Year/2011#Infrastructure) Sat 17:11:32 ‹+mono› but nothing general Sat 17:11:50 ‹+mono› I think a good question is "How much do we want it to be like last year?" Sat 17:12:00 ‹+mono› and "What was good/bad about last year?" Sat 17:15:47 ‹+enhydra› as for the last year, I liked the look of page elements, and, of course, the pictures Sat 17:16:09 ‹+enhydra› what I didn’t like is how voting and counting was done, but we’re going to discuss it later, I think Sat 17:16:40 ‹+enhydra› the rules just serve their purpose well, so I don’t think they need changing (except, of course, updating registration date boundary) Sat 17:17:29 ‹+enhydra› ToAruShiroiNeko’s idea on “more winners” is also worth discussing Sat 17:19:05 ‹+mono› Last year, I recall that users with weird accounts were a problem. Sat 17:19:12 ‹+mono› Should we make SUL a requirement? Sat 17:19:27 ‹+mono› (Personally, I think so) Sat 17:19:40 ‹+enhydra› no, it might be discriminative Sat 17:19:44 ‹+miya› SUL or eligilbe in Commons Sat 17:19:50 ‹+miya› in Round1 Sat 17:20:02 ‹+miya› and secure poll in Round 2 Sat 17:20:39 ‹+miya› (just my personal idea) Sat 17:20:54 ‹+mono› enhydra: how so? Sat 17:21:01 ‹+mono› Here's another approach: Sat 17:21:07 ‹+mono› SUL is the ground standard. Sat 17:21:10 ‹+enhydra› mono, for example, for users who have their main username on Commons taken by someone Sat 17:22:01 ‹+mono› Users with special cases can have a "custom" vote where they explain the case to a helper and their vote is counted manually. There ought to be only about 20 of these at the peak. Sat 17:23:21 ‹+enhydra› we can have a special procedure for them, such as “send mails with a blablabla hash from [[Special:EmailUser/XXXPOTYBOT]] on both Commons and your wiki” Sat 17:23:59 ‹+enhydra› or “show us bidirectional connection of your userpages” Sat 17:24:17 ‹+miya› they can vote but cannot be counted by counting software (and counting manually causes delay Sat 17:24:40 ‹+mono› miya: it's possible there could be a manual input Sat 17:24:55 ‹+mono› I suppose having a talk page for this would work or it could be incorporated into some software I'd like to use for solving problems. Sat 17:25:03 ‹+mono› Take a look at toolserver.org/~mono/qua Sat 17:25:17 ‹+miya› if so, it's ok Sat 17:25:36 ‹+enhydra› I’m going to have sort of speech on software, so let’s bring questions about it later :) Sat 17:26:28 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› dammit I am late Sat 17:26:32 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› is it over? Sat 17:27:53 ‹+mono› To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne: nope :) Sat 17:27:58 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› phew Sat 17:28:02 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› my router got fried Sat 17:28:06 ‹+mono› enhydra: ;) Sat 17:28:24 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› dickheads had to have a demostration today Sat 17:28:27 ‹+mono› everyone take a look at http://pictureoftheyear.wufoo.com/reports/poty-results/ - it's the results from my survey Sat 17:28:29 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› -_- Sat 17:28:39 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› This Page is Not Accessible to the Public Sat 17:28:56 ‹+mono› hmm Sat 17:29:11 ‹+mono› fixed Sat 17:30:11 ‹+To_Aru_Shiroi_Ne› mono first of all I have a proposition for this year Sat 17:30:15 ‹+mono› the vetical column is the number of votes Sat 17:30:23 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› I feel we may want to increase the number of winners maybe Sat 17:30:26 ‹+mono› the horizontal is the score Sat 17:30:36 ‹+enhydra› that’s an excellent table Sat 17:30:39 ‹+mono› ToAruShiroiNeko: Do explain :) Sat 17:30:53 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› ok so each year we have 10 runner ups and 3 best pictures right? Sat 17:30:57 ‹+mono› enhydra: it's not perfect; I just threw the report together Sat 17:31:07 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› in addition to that we can have topic specific awards Sat 17:31:08 ‹+mono› ToAruShiroiNeko: and one grand winner Sat 17:31:12 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› yes Sat 17:31:26 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› well one grand winner, one second place and one third place Sat 17:31:32 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› like it is ow Sat 17:31:41 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› *now Sat 17:31:42 ‹+mono› For the categories, like Landscape of the Year or by subject like Kitten of the Year Sat 17:31:43 ‹+mono› ? Sat 17:31:55 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› well more like a topic we choose Sat 17:31:58 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› buildings, astronomy Sat 17:31:59 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› etc Sat 17:32:16 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› what topics we do each year could be seperately voted Sat 17:32:26 ‹+mono› interesting. Sat 17:32:30 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› and/or we could have a few fixed categories and then others people voe on Sat 17:32:32 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› *vote on Sat 17:32:35 ‹+mono› I like that, would it be scored any differently? Sat 17:32:38 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› we want variety with topics Sat 17:32:46 ‹+mono› and would the existing one still occur? Sat 17:32:56 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› mono its a continuation of the exisitng system Sat 17:33:01 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› people would still be voting the same Sat 17:33:19 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› but they would be voting on a "plant category" image Sat 17:33:31 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› best winners on each category would compete for the top 3 Sat 17:33:36 ‹+mono› I see. Sat 17:33:52 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› we currently have 10 runner ups that are not significant for any other reason than reciving most votes Sat 17:34:10 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› nikon copetitions try somehting like this which is where my idea is based on loosly Sat 17:34:44 * mono|away will be back in about 10 mins Sat 17:36:35 ‹+enhydra› ToAruShiroiNeko, so you’d rather disallow three images from the same category taking first three places, right? Sat 17:37:47 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› yes Sat 17:37:48 ‹+enhydra› the question is, do categories overlap? Sat 17:37:55 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› only #1 on each category would compete Sat 17:38:02 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› enhydra they shouldnt be Sat 17:38:15 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› the nominator has to pick one and only one Sat 17:38:35 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› quality of the image wouldnt really depend on category Sat 17:39:06 ‹+enhydra› then I think it would be good Sat 17:39:11 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› the voting could have two phases, one the "general" vote and then a vote for top three among the number 1s of each category Sat 17:39:32 ‹+enhydra› round 1 and round 1.5? Sat 17:39:36 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› to me we have far too many good images that are not recognised Sat 17:39:55 ‹+enhydra› in fact, all of them :) Sat 17:40:08 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› I mean being a "best landscape image" is far better than being a "runner up for best place" Sat 17:40:18 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› enhydra that is true Sat 17:40:23 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› but this is best among the best :/ Sat 17:41:37 ‹+enhydra› I hope that tallies will be browseable this year Sat 17:45:00 ‹+miya› then how many categories should we have? Sat 17:45:00 ‹+mono|away› who is that? Sat 17:45:18 ‹+enhydra› something like 15–20, as always? Sat 17:46:03 ‹+miya› and who would categorize all of 600 images? Sat 17:46:24 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› nominators Sat 17:46:30 ‹+mono› I believe enhydra wanted to talk about software Sat 17:46:32 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› in the future Sat 17:46:49 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› I dont know, this is up for discussion Sat 17:46:49 ‹+miya› well software is important Sat 17:49:09 ‹+enhydra› so, yes Sat 17:49:59 ‹+mono› I suggested using an extension for vote counting Sat 17:50:21 ‹+enhydra› there are three options that come to mind: an external application (like we did in 2007), an extension and an on-wiki vote Sat 17:50:49 ‹+enhydra› the problem with an external application is that it needs to be developed, and that it would be nearly impossible to prove that the voting was fair and we didn’t mangle with the votes Sat 17:51:03 ‹+mono› My prepared statement on the history: Sat 17:51:04 ‹+mono› In the past, with the notable exception of a community-developed JavaScript Sat 17:51:04 ‹+mono› interface, the galleries, voting, and counting has been done manually. This Sat 17:51:04 ‹+mono› hurts the efficiency of the contest significantly, as these somewhat Sat 17:51:04 ‹+mono› tedious tasks will be repeated year after year. Sat 17:51:49 ‹+enhydra› the problem with an extension is that it can’t be deployed in a month or two, or it probably can, but not for us: code review is a lengthy process Sat 17:52:03 ‹+mono› My full remarks are located at http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-February/057957.html Sat 17:52:24 ‹+enhydra› so here we come with an on-wiki vote, the problem with which was that it wasn’t done right Sat 17:52:53 ‹+enhydra› I have a big experience doing an important onwiki vote (Russian Wikipedia Arbitration committee), and I’ve learned much from it Sat 17:53:14 ‹+enhydra› so, what was done is not how a big voting should be done Sat 17:53:58 ‹+enhydra› first, voting needs to be assisted with JavaScript interface enhancements. nobody is going to edit many and many pages manually Sat 17:54:34 ‹Mono2› Sorry, my connection just dropped Sat 17:54:37 ‹Mono2› what did I miss? Sat 17:54:50 ‹+enhydra› parts of my speech. I’ll send you the log Sat 17:54:54 ‹Mono2› OK Sat 17:56:09 ‹+enhydra› assisting editing is simplier than implementing “voting” from scratch. MediaWiki’s editing API will do the thing Sat 17:56:22 ‹Mono2› I agree that manual editing is silly Sat 17:56:33 ‹+enhydra› Mono2, *hush* :) Sat 17:56:45 ‹Mono2› ;) Sat 17:56:51 ‹+enhydra› second, counting votes must be totally independent from these wiki pages Sat 17:57:24 ‹+enhydra› that is, it must not require any editing of pages, with an exception of that done to fix errors accidentally brought by users Sat 17:58:12 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› what does foundation votes use? Sat 17:58:13 ‹+ToAruShiroiNeko› we may use that Sat 17:58:27 ‹+enhydra› SecurePoll. no we can’t Sat 17:59:11 ‹Mono2› @enhydra re SecurePoll how come? Sat 17:59:13 ‹Mono2› but the verification and counting is really difficult. Last year was a mess. Sat 17:59:19 ‹+enhydra› third, tasks that can be automated should be automated Sat 17:59:58 ‹+enhydra› this includes “verification” (what was that, anyway?), eligibility checks, and everything else Sat 18:00:23 ‹Mono2› checking that people were eligible, didn't vote ten times, etc. Sat 18:00:47 ‹+enhydra› and finally, because a voting system’s vision is different from what is seen on wiki pages, it needs to clearly list what votes have been discarded and why Sat 18:01:48 ‹Mono2› See, I think an extension would be just as efficient, if not more Sat 18:01:49 ‹Mono2› so Sat 18:01:51 ‹+enhydra› as a bonus, we can publish machine-readable parsed votes for those who would ever want to re-analyze them Sat 18:01:55 ‹Mono2› Hi @Guerillero_ Sat 18:02:16 ‹Guerillero› hey mono Sat 18:02:17 ‹+enhydra› these are the principles I used for ruwiki’s arbcom, and here’s what it looks like: http://toolserver.org/~kalan/arb13 Sat 18:02:47 ‹+mono› I think it really comes down to whatever is easier Sat 18:03:19 ‹+enhydra› in our situation, on-wiki vote would require the least effort Sat 18:03:34 ‹Guerillero› yes Sat 18:03:56 ‹Guerillero› and it would make the foundation the happiest Sat 18:04:31 ‹+mono› the Foundation doesn't care... Sat 18:04:47 ‹+mono› enhydra: I'm not convinced of that yet, though Sat 18:05:33 ‹+enhydra› mono, well. I can assure you that I can technically organize the on-wiki voting if we agree on that Sat 18:05:48 ‹+Guerillero› Would we need to check every vote for on wiki voting Sat 18:06:00 ‹+enhydra› of course not Sat 18:06:06 ‹+mono› enhydra: Basically, if it works, I'm fine with it :) Sat 18:06:21 ‹+mono› How soon could you set up the system? Sat 18:06:32 ‹+mono› Our target is before May. Sat 18:07:00 ‹+enhydra› my bet is two to four weeks Sat 18:07:33 ‹+mono› then I'm fine with it. anyone else? Sat 18:07:50 * mono has to go once again for about 20 mins Sat 18:08:08 ‹+mono› but afterward, I can talk promotion and timing Sat 18:08:11 ‹+enhydra› we will do a test voting in a testing environment (test.wikipedia.org or my local MediaWiki if I’ll be kicked out from there) and then run it on Commons Sat 18:08:44 ‹+enhydra› during the testing phase, someone has to categorize the 600 images Sat 18:08:47 ‹+mono› Let me know if you need any help. I can rally some devs if necessary. Sat 18:09:18 ‹+mono|away› and also that support software I was talking about Sat 18:09:26 ‹+mono|away› which I want to use just to test it Sat 18:09:43 ‹+enhydra› what “support software”? Sat 18:10:12 ‹+mono|away› urm toolserver.org/~mono/qua thingy Sat 18:10:45 ‹+enhydra› what’s wrong with the talkpages? Sat 18:11:51 ‹+mono|away› I want to use it so we don't answer the same question over and over again. Sat 18:12:12 ‹+mono|away› but mostly for the heck of it - to see how well it works in case it needs to be used somewhere else Sat 18:13:42 ‹+enhydra› regarding not answering same question again: people would use Ctrl+F here and there, what’s the difference? :) Sat 18:18:49 ‹+enhydra› the only help I’m going to need is some sort of access to admin actions on Commons, but I’m afraid that nobody is going to give me this flag just for one purpose Sat 18:20:51 ‹+miya› I'd support you to have admin flag (jawp has made interface editor flag recently Sat 18:21:16 ‹+miya› how about temp admin Sat 18:23:30 ‹+enhydra› that would be excellent Sat 18:26:16 ‹+mono|away› enhydra: temp admin Sat 18:26:37 ‹+mono|away› I could have become an admin if I had applied last year, but oh well Sat 18:27:06 ‹+mono› In conclusion, I wanted to briefly touch on promotion. Sat 18:28:39 ‹+miya› I'd support you, mono, if you would promise not to block anyone as a temp admin Sat 18:29:04 ‹+mono› miya: I don't really need the privileges at this point Sat 18:29:17 ‹+miya› hum Sat 18:29:32 ‹+mono› Last year, I'd say we did a great job with getting user participation. Sat 18:29:44 ‹+mono› This year, we should continue that. Sat 18:31:50 ‹+enhydra› sitenotices, sitenotices everywhere! Sat 18:32:16 ‹+mono› enhydra: /methinks CentralNotice Sat 18:32:28 ‹+mono› The timing of the contest revolves around that in a way. Sat 18:32:29 ‹+enhydra› sure :) Sat 18:33:23 ‹+enhydra› we don’t promise any time when voting starts, is it correct? Sat 18:33:25 ‹+mono› last year, we also had Twitter engagement through @WikiCommons, posts on the Wikimedia Blog, Signpost stories, etc. Sat 18:33:55 ‹+mono› enhydra: No, just a ballpark. The voting needs to work around the WMF banner schedule. Sat 18:34:49 ‹+enhydra› is there anything that could impede us, say, in March? Sat 18:34:56 ‹+mono› let me look Sat 18:35:46 ‹+mono› I've blocked out mid-March for POTY, but that puts us close to Wikimania Sat 18:35:59 ‹+mono› which takes April and early May Sat 18:36:52 ‹+mono› So we have March 18th thru April 21 tenatively. Sat 18:37:00 ‹+mono› I've started working on banners as well. Sat 18:39:48 ‹+mono› As far as other things, I'll talk to Jay sometime soon, enhydra Sat 18:42:36 ‹+enhydra› which Jay do you mean here? Sat 18:44:08 ‹+mono› Jay Walsh, head of communications at WMF Sat 18:47:07 ‹+mono› enhydra: http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?banner=GreenSlideTest Sat 18:47:44 * mono or http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?banner=Banner1 Sat 18:48:02 ‹+enhydra› GreenSlideTest is too aggressive, I think Sat 18:50:21 ‹+miya› (I made a temp table to check images [[Commons:Picture of the Year/2011/Galleries/ALL/table]] Sat 18:51:00 ‹+miya› categorizing may be unnecessary, i suppose. Sat 18:51:40 ‹+Guerillero› I like both banners Sat 18:52:22 ‹+miya› now i go to bed and read the log next mornig . by all