Commons talk:Picture of the Year

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Picture of the Year 2023 || Introduction – Discussion – Committee || R1 Categories || R2 Finalists || Results

Voting not open?

[edit]

On the POTY 2023 page it says: "Round 1 begins on 1 February 2024, 00:00 and ends on 14 February 2024, 23:59:59 [UTC]". Well, I haven't been able to vote and still can't. My account is eligible. --Minilammas (talk) 16:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Minilammas: That was a placeholder. In theory the 2023 page shouldn't be linked from anywhere yet. :) @Legoktm: it may be a good idea to replace it with "soon" or something regardless. — Rhododendrites talk |  20:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So when will it take place, if all goes according to plan? Nardog (talk) 06:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites, @Legoktm: is there something we can help? Emha (talk) 16:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for being MIA. I'll try to have an update by the weekend. Legoktm (talk) 07:07, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Legoktm, It's been a month. Any update? Shawnqual (talk) 05:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting for it

[edit]

Any date? ★ 21:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support your question. Eryakaas (talk) 18:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 — Draceane talkcontrib. 19:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ZZZ ★ 01:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I received an announcement with a link to this misleading page. I was asked to check my participating images before voting will start. But the page tells me the voting has already been held in February 2024. August Geyler (talk) 08:48, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, it hasn't happened yet. BigDom (talk) 11:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Call for comittee members

[edit]

Dear Comittee members (@Legoktm, AntiCompositeNumber, and ZI Jony: ), please let us know if you are able to work on the contest. If not, it is time to look for new committee members to keep the contest going. Obviously the community would not be happy to see this project cease to exist. Jklamo (talk) 19:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jklamo: , we are working on it, will start at earliest. (@Legoktm, AntiCompositeNumber, and Rhododendrites: ). Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 13:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to hear that! The community is already looking forward to the launch of the contest in the coming weeks. Jklamo (talk) 13:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it may be time to look for new committee members who have enough time to utilize for this project. The current members seem to busy with other things in life and so far have not provided any answers to indicate if or when the contest will take place for quite a long while now. It has been one or another form of "we're on to it". @Legoktm last stated there would be an update over two months ago and has been MIA since then. If not new members then someone needs to have some level of oversight over the committee to ensure that the project goes ahead on time. Shawnqual (talk) 05:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shawnqual: , as I said earlier, we are working on it! I face some error in the tool, maybe because of the recent changes in toolforge or I still didn't get access to all over. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 07:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Close to two months now since your call and a month since my reply of urging to find new committee members...and nada! Nothing has transpired. Of the three members you called out, one has finally replied about burning out (rightfully so), another said 'working on it' and provided no update and another never replied! Like @ArionStar says below, this has indeed become a joke! Shawnqual (talk) 15:02, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimedia Commons Pictures of the Year: "The Commons Picture of the Year (POTY) was a competition that ran from 2006 to 2023." ★ 17:37, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RIP. It was fun while it lasted. Shawnqual (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

POTY runs on a complicated set of scripts with no real documentation. Legoktm is, as far as I know, the only committee member (and one of the only people) who knows how to use those scripts and, more importantly, how to fix things when the scripts don't work as expected. Lego seems to be busy with real life these last couple months, hence we have no updates. I don't think we should try to run the scripts without Lego around -- we don't want to promote it and start it just to be unable to fix a problem. Last year's was held in April/May, but the previous two years weren't held until the end of the year, so it's not like we're on a rigid schedule. If more time goes by and we don't hear from Lego there's only one other active user that I know of who understands the scripts, and I'll spare that person a bunch of pings for the time being. — Rhododendrites talk |  12:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the news and explanations Rhododendrites! I hope Legoktm is fine and nothing serious happened to him 🍀 -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe one of the previous committee members can also help you guys understand the scripts in case Lego doesn't come back any time soon? Here are the links : 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With the exception of Firefly (pinging now despite my "spare that person" comment above), people who ran it in previous years have been explicit about not wanting to do so again. I get the sense that Firefly was glad for Lego to take it over, but if we don't hear from Lego maybe they want to give it another go? The timing isn't as dire as when Firefly stepped up to make it happen a couple years ago yet, though. — Rhododendrites talk |  17:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June, and…

[edit]

★ 16:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check replies by Rhododendrites above in the 'Callfor Committee members'. There is no set timeline for POTY. Moreover, there are a very select few who know how to use scripts to run this project. One of whom is missing in action. Shawnqual (talk) 09:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well good news : seems like Lego came back yesterday ;) But if for any reason he's still not available, here is a list of rust programmers, a list of 215 Javascript experts and a list of 152 Javascript professionnals that might be able to understand the scripts if needed -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is becoming a joke… ★ 14:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've just accepted that there'll be no POTY anymore. If it will happen one day — cool, but if not — it is already settled for me. Красный wanna talk? 05:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is it! I had no idea such an immense and popular competition was run this way. Disappointing. Shawnqual (talk) 15:06, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry y'all, as I've explained elsewhere I burned out and had to take a break and am now slowly getting back into things. I'm not sure when I'll be ready to do POTY things again, but I'd like to clarify that everything I've worked on related to POTY is open source and public, and if there's something that I alone have access to (I don't think there is) I'm happy to add others. Legoktm (talk) 01:56, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the much needed news Legoktm. I hope you'll end up recovering all of your burnt energy and motivation in the future 🍀
In order to better enlighten people that would be interested to help I would have a few questions if you would accept to answer them:
1) What are the next needed steps to run POTY this year ?
2) Are the scripts broken and need repair or is it just the usual proceeding that has to be done ?
3) Does the usual proceeding need programming knowledges (if yes, what langages?) or is it doable by anyone but time consuming to run ?
I would be very grateful if you could answer these questions. I'm sure it will allow people to decide if they want to join in to help and allow them to know if they are qualified for the job. Also here is an idea that I had : maybe it would be helpful to have a step by step video guide of how to run POTY (for the usual proceeding of course, not for specific repairs as they are unpredictable). It could be made by simply recording the screen when running it (even if there's no voice or written explanation) and then just uploading it to YouTube, so that future committee members might have a visual guide of what to do to run it. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
also @AntiCompositeNumber and ZI Jony: ). ZI talked about facing "some error in the tool". Shawnqual (talk) 15:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the "error in the tool" mentioned at 07:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC) was referring to this issue that has been solved 09:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC). But there might be new errors since then. Also I'd like the point of view of Lego on the situation because he has excellent programming skills. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your service in the past and also taking the time to reply here. I completely understand burning out from wiki and hope you get better. Take your time, and don't feel any pressure. Shawnqual (talk) 15:11, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jimbo Wales, help us! ★ 22:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IIRC I proposed the creation of a POTY tool in some past Community Wishlist, because having a set of poorly documented scripts that are so cumbersome to use that we can barely find one volunteer a year to take the burden is not workable. In general, Commons really needs more people who can develop and maintain technical tools... or for the Wikimedia Foundation to take some of those projects over. That proposal got very little support. — Rhododendrites talk |  02:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can anyone contact Jimmy? ★ 10:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think a post should be made on Village Pump (and any other places where help may be found) to inform the community that POTY committee needs a new member with programming skills but I'm not sure what level of skills is needed and for what programming langages. It would also have been nice to be able to tell beforehand what are the next steps needed to run POTY this year (Repair code? Or simply understand how to use the functionning actual code? What to do next : fix dates? Inform uploaders? Etc.) -- Giles Laurent (talk) 11:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, please go ahead and post on Village Pump. I believe the main obstacle here is of understanding and Using the scripts required to run POTY. At this rate, our best bet might be to ping various users from the lists of rust programmers and Javascript experts you posted above. Alternatively, another idea could be to move the competition entirely to a simple and easy to use website, instead of relying on these likely outdated scripts. Shawnqual (talk) 16:57, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: I have posted on Reddit to bring some attention to the matter. Shawnqual (talk) 17:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can probably help if needed. I'm not super familiar with POTY, but I do have quite a bit of experience with Javascript (and a little bit with Rust). Ingenuity (talk) 20:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moving to toolforge: (with OAuth login) might be a good idea if it works better over there, although a rewrite would almost certainly mean additional delay this year (even if it would make the procedure smoother in the future). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think they already use toolforge : click here. Also, source code is available here -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ingenuity: check the comment by Giles above. Shawnqual (talk) 03:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While it doesn’t look bad (except for the internal server errors caused by phab:T299947), it’s still not what I imagined, the stuff is still fragmented:
  • Rust scripts running on Toolforge (hopefully all of them are on Toolforge?), making direct SQL queries
  • Wiki pages created using the Rust scripts and manually, many translatable on Special:Translate
  • JavaScript voting gadget
It might be the best possible user experience, but it isn’t the best possible developer experience, as several programming languages (Rust, JavaScript, wikitext, SQL) are used and different permissions are needed to change different bits (Toolforge and GitLab access to change the Rust scripts; Commons admin right to edit some of the wiki pages, Commons translation admin right to finalize changes to translatable pages, Commons interface admin right to change the voting gadget).
It’s also not the best possible committee member experience, since (as far as I understand) those Rust scripts still need to be started manually, they don’t automatically run on pre-set dates.
What I imagined is getting rid of at least the JavaScript voting gadget, sending users to vote on Toolforge: this would eliminate one programming language (JavaScript), one access level (Commons interface admin) and one manual step (checking for ineligible votes – ineligible voters could simply be denied from casting the vote). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 14:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback Tacsipacsi. I'm not sure I understand your remark about the internal server errors. Does the actual code work or does it need some fixes to make it work ? If the code already still works, rewriting the code to make it more user and developper friendly would be a nice thing to have but considering the time left I think the priority should be on simply running POTY this year. After POTY finishes this year might be the best time to rewrite the code. Now that you've seen the code and the interface, do you think you might be able to help the committee run POTY this year Tacsipacsi ? Same question to Ingenuity. If yes, I invite the committee to give you access to the toolforge scripts. Also, everyone else that has the skills to understand the code and run it is welcome to help -- Giles Laurent (talk) 07:17, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The code is currently broken, for example https://poty-stuff.toolforge.org/stats/2023 errors out. However, it’s not that broken (or at least I’m not aware of such breakage) that a complete rewrite would be necessary to fix it; just a few database queries need to be tweaked. I can try to send a merge request with the fixes as I’m familiar with the database changes that broke it.
Unfortunately, I have zero experience with Rust, and the project lacks a README, so I fear I can’t be of much help for the Toolforge part other than this merge request. I’m comfortable sending a merge request (which fortunately doesn’t require any extra rights), but I wouldn’t be comfortable actually merging and deploying the code. On the other hand, I’m happy to help with the Special:Translate stuff (I have both experience and rights), and I can also try to help with the JavaScript part (I have experience but no rights), although I’m not aware of anything that currently needs to be done in JavaScript. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 14:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve opened the merge request at toolforge-repos/poty-stuff!2, let’s see how it goes. (The automated tests succeeded, so I haven’t done anything incredibly wrong.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 18:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am in support of any ideas which can make the process of running this competition more developer friendly. Not sure how the process of rewriting the code to remove elements could be started. I am in agreement with Giles that the priority should be run to the comp this year and then start on the next steps of simplyfying the code and looking for new committee members. Shawnqual (talk) 11:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

POTY used to work fine without any scripts. Just go back to using Wikitext like this. Nosferattus (talk) 00:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would be an option if the competition wasn't getting voters in multiples of 100s and if there weren't a plethora of images in multiple categories! Shawnqual (talk) 10:53, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that POTY was ran in python programming langage before the source code was rewriten in rust and javascript programming langages. I think more people master python than rust. So if we can't make the rust code work, switching back to python might be a solution. But if the rust code was working for years and that the only problem was the database queries, maybe Tacsipacsi repaired it and the code might work again. But someone needs to approve his merge request and test if it works again -- Giles Laurent (talk) 12:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shawnqual: The Community Wishlist Survey gets thousands of voters, but all the voting is done purely by WikiText (at least the last time I saw it). Nosferattus (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's enhanced by gadget JavaScript just like PotY. Nardog (talk) 16:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
People in the past changed it from wikitext to other languages for a reason. It also sounds like a drastically regressive idea. Pretty sure we can get some volunteers soon. Shawnqual (talk) 16:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August

[edit]

★ 00:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So I posted on Village Pump Technical and there was no help and the conversation since uas been archived. Another relevant discussion on Jimbo Wales' user talk page has also been archived.
The only open discussion now is on Village Pump (WMF) here: [1]. @JPxG: did offer help but things aren't looking promising overall. :-/ Shawnqual (talk) 04:45, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Begging for Jimbo's help again. ★ 00:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's much he can do. It was clear from the conversation which happened that there are other priorities and all we can do is make suggestions and hope that they will be implemented. Meh!
There is no central authority here which can aid in case the competition isn't on track, it's always been run with the help of other users. I am over it. Shawnqual (talk) 00:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fed up with so much neglect too. For now and as a form of silent protest, I'm overwriting my FPs with this message. ★ 00:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can still help with this. There are a few main problems facing us:

  • The gadget which runs the user interface of POTY is a 2700-line behemoth written 12 years ago that is almost completely undocumented.
  • The Rust app which is used as the back-end is broken and likewise undocumented. I have a little bit of experience with Rust, but probably not enough to diagnose and fix the problem in the time I have available.
  • Even if I do manage to fix it, we'll have the same problem next year.

The only real long-term solution for this is to rewrite everything in a way that it can be easily taken over in the future, even by someone with limited technical knowledge. Ideally, this would be something done by WMF developers, but I doubt that'll happen. I can do this, but I'd like the support of the community before making such a big change; what say ye? Ingenuity (talk) 13:56, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, and increased usability for the future is an unlooked-for boon, tbh. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:14, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Many thanks for your volunteering to help Ingenuity. Since we have no answer/news from Lego and that Rust is a very complicated langage that only a few people master and that the whole POTY script is undocumented I think that rewriting everything is probably the best thing to do. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:28, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I  Support too, any help is welcome! Thanks! ★ 23:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have added comments in the section below. This contest is ongoing and important, so please stop the gloom-and-doom language, although Commons should probably say that it skipped POTY-2023 and is starting up again with the 2024 contest. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason to skip POTY 2023. It can still be held in 2025 if needed. The goal is simply to elect the picture of the year 2023, no matter if we do it in 2024 or 2025. But of course it's better to do it as soon as possible. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:36, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to have icons on the top right of files that became POTY finalists and winners This file was awarded first place in Picture of the Year This file was awarded second place in Picture of the Year This file was awarded third place in Picture of the Year This file was a finalist in Picture of the Year

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi! There already are icons on the top right of each file considered Featured picture , Picture of the day , Valued image , Quality Image , Wiki Loves Earth winner and Wiki Loves Monuments winner .

Could we also add an icon on the top right of each file that was assessed Picture of the Year winner or finalist ?

There is two ways to do it.

One would be to copy paste the following code on each individual file page :

For 1st place files: This file was awarded first place in Picture of the Year 

{{Top icon|imagename=POTY barnstar.svg|wikilink=Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2021/Results/All|description=This file was awarded first place in Picture of the Year 2021|imagesize=64px|sortkey=001}}

For 2nd place files: This file was awarded second place in Picture of the Year

{{Top icon|imagename=PODY 2nd barnstar.svg|wikilink=Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2021/Results/All|description=This file was awarded second place in Picture of the Year 2021|imagesize=64px|sortkey=002}}

For 3rd place files: This file was awarded third place in Picture of the Year

{{Top icon|imagename=PODY 3rd barnstar.svg|wikilink=Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2021/Results/All|description=This file was awarded third place in Picture of the Year 2021|imagesize=64px|sortkey=003}}

For finalist files: This file was a finalist in Picture of the Year

{{Top icon|imagename=PODY ribbon.svg|wikilink=Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2021/Results/All|description=This file was a finalist in Picture of the Year 2021|imagesize=64px|sortkey=004}}

I have tested it and it works perfectly.

Another way is to edit the template {{Assessments}} and to edit the top code of the page to something that looks like this. For the template code I’m not 100% sure because I can’t test it. I'm also not sure if {{{POTYyear}}} is the right way to display the year it won.

I hope this can get implemented and I wish you all a nice day.

-- Giles Laurent (talk) 12:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if this was the right page to post this suggestion and I just found out that it should maybe have been posted on this page instead so I just posted it there now. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like this idea, Giles Laurent, but I'd actually post it to COM:VP instead. Neither this page nor the template talk page have many pagewatchers. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the suggestion! Just posted it there -- Giles Laurent (talk) 19:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like the only place people are active on this matter is here so I propose that those who agree or disagree with this proposal comment down bellow to know if there is a consensus to add a top right icon for POTY winners and finalists files. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 18:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → implemented. /-- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:27, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This proposal was implemented with this edit
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Second call for comittee members

[edit]

Dear Comittee members (@Legoktm, AntiCompositeNumber, and ZI Jony: ), if you are unable to work on the contest, please resign from the comitee so that we can find new members to keep the contest going. Finding new members when a current one drops out (which can happen, we're all just volunteers) is an absolutely essential part of the committee's responsibility. I still think that the community would not be happy to see this project cease to exist.

Note, for example, that the Wikimania Hackathon starts tomorrow, where some technical difficulties could be solved, but this would have to be properly communicated. Jklamo (talk) 10:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For many years, there has been one committee member that runs all the scripts, and the others are mainly there for some sort of oversight, making categorization, making decisions, helping with announcements/logistics, etc. (everything other than running the scripts). There's no shortage of people who can do this latter job, and I don't think any of us currently on the committee would have any problem removing our names if someone else wants to. It's not the case, however, that there are lots of people willing to jump in and run the scripts if only there were an empty committee or something. What you're looking for are not "committee members" but someone with the technical competency to run the scripts. — Rhododendrites talk |  11:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As Shawnqual said, RIP POTY. ★ 00:42, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bull, the contest isn't going anywhere. It has been around too long to drop it. I'm new to all of this, having never participated or put much attention on it, so a couple questions. Why does anyone have to "run scripts"? I don't know what that means. Are there present photographs waiting to be judged for winners? Let's just do that, pick the top ten or something and let editors vote (by running a banner and publicity?). I'm asking all of this not knowing any of the rules etc., just saying that the contest must go on regardless of what's been said, and things like the above comment are nonsense (but thanks for pushing the question). Randy Kryn (talk) 03:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just read the section above talking about this thing and, being computer illiterate, don't know anything about what a "script" is and the rest. But one thing seems clear, why the h-double hockey sticks (writing or saying that phrase for the first time in my life) doesn't the WMF tech department put the thing together? What are people contributing money to unless it is to the maintenance of the projects, and this contest is a storied and historical part of both Commons and Wikipedia. Things like this are what funders think is being done with their money. Just common(s) sense. Get some WMF tech people and whoever else needs to get involved. Eiether that or start paying some of the better techies who volunteer on the projects to get this thing running. I guess pinging Jimbo Wales could help, and maybe other editors can ping the WMF board members. WMF has to have this contest's back, yes? Randy Kryn (talk) 03:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Based on how long it took to assemble a team to tackle the graphs/charts extension I doubt WMF engineers could be freed for this in this year, it would require new staff that would also need to be trained which would also not give a short term solution. It just shows the risks of relying on one technical contributor. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 14:17, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to POTY

[edit]

Hey everyone! Because of the rewrite I am doing to the code running POTY, there are some changes I've made that I'd like to inform people about.

  • I've created a prototype for a new interface, which I'd appreciate any feedback on. To do so, add importScript("User:Ingenuity/POTY-interface.js") to Special:MyPage/common.js, and then navigate to this page. It's very basic at the moment, but more features will be added later.
  • The categories have been changed somewhat due to technical reasons. The new ones can be seen at User:Ingenuity/sandbox.
  • Right now the eligibility requirements for voting are complicated. Unless there are any objections, I'd like to simplify this to:
  1. Registered before the start of the year, and
  2. 75 edits on any single project.
  • To use the new code, I will need to delete the pages already created for this year's contest (specifically, Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2023/R1/Gallery and its subpages). Again, unless there are objections, I'll tag these pages as G6.

Courtesy pings to people who have commented above: @AirshipJungleman29, Giles Laurent, ArionStar, Randy Kryn, and Chipmunkdavis: Ingenuity (talk) 15:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should also ping everyone currently on the committee: @Legoktm, Rhododendrites, AntiCompositeNumber, and ZI Jony: Ingenuity (talk) 15:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ingenuity, thanks for your work on this. It’s looks good to me! However, I'd suggest to develop full version and test on beta before implement. I expect Rhododendrites will give some advice soon. Let's clear something, why can't you use the same gallery pages? Where can our vote be seen/how will it be counted? Will it connect to the POTY Admin tools to automate actions? Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 04:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ZI Jony: The current gallery pages rely on Module:POTY, which needs the candidates page, which requires the old scripts to be run. I'm rewriting these scripts, and changing how the candidates are sorted (using JSON format; for example, User:Ingenuity/Arthropods.json.) This has the added benefit of eliminating the need for Module:POTY at all, reducing the number of moving parts and making it simpler for future organizers while keeping the same functionality. The votes will be counted in a similar way to previous years, with a voting page for each image. These pages will have the form Commons:Picture of the Year/2023/R1/votes/<filename>. I'm not sure if it'll be connected to Toolforge right now, but the goal is to make it simple to run, even for people with limited technical knowledge. Ingenuity (talk) 14:00, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ingenuity, thanks for your response and work. Please continue and keep us posted, I believe we are on a better way to get something. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 19:52, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for your work on this! I'm at wikimania at the moment but happy to take a look when I return on Monday. I will say categorization is a recurring tricky issue. The archives of this page may be useful. In general, some year to year flexibility would be useful because what gets nominated is so dependent on who happens to be active at FPC that year. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:13, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categorization is definitely tricky - it'd probably be best to have around the same number of pictures in each category, but that could be difficult. Maybe changing the way finalists are selected could work? Right now it's top 30 overall, plus top 2 in each category; we could change this to top 30 overall, plus top 5-10% in each category. That would reduce the impact of having different category sizes. Ingenuity (talk) 17:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just tried the new prototype interface and it looks very good to me! Congratulations on doing this so quickly!
  • I think the most important thing is to be able to keep the contest running and as long that we have a basic interface that allows to do so, the rest is just extra bonus. But maybe one thing that should be added : images should maybe be displayed in a random order every time that you reload the page (or other possibility : to have a random display order for every different user but the order then stays the same for each user). The reason behind this is because for big galleries, people will tend to maybe just check the first or last images and not the middle ones. The random order would give more fairness for all candidates in my opinion.
  • I'm okay with the new eligibility requirements as there's not significant difference.
  • For categories I think categories with like 4 images are too small and should be combined, but if there's no other way that's still better than not having POTY
  • I'm fine with top 30 overall + a certain percentage for categories instead of +2 of every category. But maybe 10% is a bit too much for categories with 100 images as it would make a lot more finalists than previous years. Maybe 4 or 5% is better ?
Anyway thanks again for your amazing work that is really appreciated! -- Giles Laurent (talk) 23:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll definitely randomize the galleries - I was actually just about to implement that! I think 5% of each category, rounding up, is good, since it'll keep the number of finalists around the same as last year (~50). I'll probably merge the categories with under ten candidates if possible. Ingenuity (talk) 23:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes 5% seems good. Thank you for your feedback! -- Giles Laurent (talk) 01:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good progress! Thanks to all! ★ 13:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After thinking about it again, 5% will probably make it harder for small categories to be represented in the finalists. That would be a significant change from the previous years and such a change should probably not be decided by a few comments of the only few people that read about it but by a proper vote. I will start a new topic about it so that people can vote for if they want to keep the top 30 + top 2 of each category rule or switch to percentages. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 01:14, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New scripts nearing completion!

[edit]

Hey all! I've been doing a lot of programming over the last few days and am ready to share the first draft of the scripts. Unfortunately, due to annoying technical restrictions, it's not practical to have people test the scripts on testwiki themselves; I've attached some images below to show what the new interface looks like at this point.

  • Categories page
    Categories page
  • Results page
    Results page
  • Gallery page
    Gallery page
  • Admin interface
    Admin interface

The actual interface for voters is very similar to previous years, with some UI changes. The biggest change is that creating pages for POTY, categorizing candidates, tallying votes, selecting finalists, and posting results has been completely automated, so running the contest is basically as simple as pressing four buttons (through a user script, so no Toolforge needed!)

There's still some polishing up that needs to be done, but I'd say around 80% of the work has been done. I'd appreciate any feedback, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Pinging the people in the discussion above: @ArionStar, Giles Laurent, Rhododendrites, and ZI Jony: Ingenuity (talk) 00:56, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will there also be a page containing the number of votes and who voted? ★ 01:34, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean voting pages for each file? If so, yes; for example, see this page. Ingenuity (talk) 02:02, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great! ★ 02:05, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, you are amazing, thank you so much!
A few questions/suggestions :
  • So in the end you were able to merge some categories? Is it automated or does it need to be done manually every year ?
  • Maybe on result page add the following icons depending on the image ranking : This file was awarded first place in Picture of the Year 2023 This file was awarded second place in Picture of the Year 2023 This file was awarded third place in Picture of the Year 2023 This file was a finalist in Picture of the Year 2023
  • Can we see a screenshot of round 1 page ?
  • Can you also make a function that notifies uploaders/nominators on their talk page of the chosen POTY dates ? Here is what the draft of the actual message looks like.
  • Is it necessary to have admin rights to run the contest ? I think abuse filters might be involved for creating many pages, notifying many people, etc.
Thank you again and I'm excited for the contest to start ! -- Giles Laurent (talk) 01:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I merged a few of the smaller categories, to try to keep the sizes above 10 in each. Categorization is fully automated, but if organizers wish to change the categories in the future then that would need to be done manually.
  • That's definitely possible. The vote count uses Template:POTY/VoteConstructor, which could be modified to display those icons.
  • The interface of the round 1 voting pages is the exact same as the finalist voting page.
  • Maybe? At the least, I could automate the creation of a MassMessage list using the script.
  • No, admin rights aren't necessary to run the contest.
Ingenuity (talk) 02:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice, thank you for your answers!
A few more questions :
  • How do you navigate through different categories in round 1 ? Are they on different pages or all on the same page ?
  • Could you also add on the vote count page the display of the image at the top and maybe a timestamp for each vote ? If not possible there's no problem !
  • Could you also add at the top of each page a new template that looks like this one (but without the unnecessary links that will not be needed anymore) and also this one for the navigation
Giles Laurent (talk) 22:30, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • See the "categories page" screenshot above. It'll look very similar to the current categories page.
  • Technically yes, but I'm not sure if it's needed. The voting page isn't meant to be edited manually.
  • Yes, I'll be designing a new header.
Ingenuity (talk) 17:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ingenuity, for admin we required first round end option also. Vote pages will be created automated or we have to create manually? @Giles Laurent, I believe, admin rights to run the contest. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 01:49, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clicking the "start second round" button automatically ends the first round as well. Vote pages are created automatically. Ingenuity (talk) 02:15, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome! We can set the round 1 contest date for September or something like that… ★ 14:37, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That should work. I'll be busy starting in around a week, so I'll need someone else to handle the actual running of the contest, along with watchlist notices, maybe MassMessages, etc. Ingenuity (talk) 17:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rhododendrites, AntiCompositeNumber and ZI Jony : can at least one of you confirm if you will be able to handle with running the contest in September/October 2024 with the new scripts? No programming skills are needed -- Giles Laurent (talk) 11:24, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Each time I've been on the committee, I express reservations given I have photos in the competition. Each time, folks assure me that it's good to have someone involved with FPC on the committee for input (and that I can be useful with things like categorizing, etc.). However, IMO it would cross a line for me to be the one to formally be running the competition. — Rhododendrites talk |  12:45, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My available time is limited, but I should be able to provide the same level of administrator support that I have in previous years. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 13:20, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ AntiCompositeNumber, since Rhododendrites expressed reservation about running formally the contest himself, would you agree to be the one clicking on these 4 buttons ? -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:54, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ingenuity is there a point at which you'd be available again? Regardless of who pushes the buttons, I'm wary of kicking off the competition using new tools while you're not available to jump in for fixes. — Rhododendrites talk |  12:45, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites: I will definitely be available for bug fixes, but probably not bigger stuff like adding features. Over the next few days I'll iron out as many bugs as I can. I've already tested it fully, but there's always the possibility something goes wrong when there are 100k votes to process vs. the 20 I tested with. Ingenuity (talk) 13:42, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rhododendrites, AntiCompositeNumber, ZI Jony and Ingenuity, can we already set dates ? For example Round 1 of POTY 2023 from 15 September 2024, 00 until 30 September 2024, 23:59:59 and Round 2 of POTY 2023 from 1 October 2024, 00 until 15 October 2024, 23:59:59? Or is it a bit too soon you would prefer start round 1 at beginning of october for example? -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest round 1 of POTY 2023 from 1 October 2024, 00 until 15 October 2024, 23:59:59. Before we start, we should have an online meeting to get a better understanding of the new tools. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 20:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ingenuity, please let me know when your tools are completely ready to launch to fix an online meeting. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 02:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New POTY rules for finalists

[edit]

It's pretty clear that everyone is at least okay with top 30 with a 5% minimum in each category. This has now been implemented in the contest scripts. Ingenuity (talk) 21:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per discussion above, POTY script was rewritten so that POTY can happen this year (thank you again Ingenuity for your awesome work). The previous years the rule had always been that finalists are top 30 overall + top 2 of each category. There was a proposal above to change it to top 30 overall + top 5% of each category. Such a change will probably make it harder for small categories and easier for big categories to be a finalist. I think a proper vote should be held to know what people prefer as the rule.

Please vote below for the rule you prefer. Total score will be counted as follows : total supports minus total opposes equals score. Voting on this matter will end at 23:59 on 30 August 2024 (UTC) -- Giles Laurent (talk) 01:25, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Votes in favor of top 30 overall + top 2 of each category (if that number is not already present in top 30 overall and only to reach that number) (status quo)

Votes in favor of top 30 overall + top 5% of each category (if that percentage is not already present in top 30 overall and only to reach that number) (new rule)

Votes in favor of an alternative solution (please develop the alternative solution)

Votes in favor of top 30 overall + top 3% of each category (if that percentage is not already present in top 30 overall and only to reach that number) (new rule)

  •  Support There are approximately 1000 candidates a year. If we want 30 + 30, the right pourcentage is 3%. In case the candidates are both among the 30 and the 3%, then it's fine. The goal is just to get at least 3% diversity -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:07, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nearly  Support IMO the best solution, but we should add "at least 2 of each category if possible". 3% are 3 pictures of 100. That's 1 candidate per 33 1/3 pictures. A percentage value may be good for large numbers of files, but not for small numbers of files. --XRay 💬 06:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Votes in favor of top 50 (or 60) overall (new rule)

  • We should also bear in mind that not only the pictures are not evenly distributed, but also the people who vote. This leads to an imbalance. I know it's difficult to handle. Someone who is enthusiastic about bird pictures might not vote for architecture pictures, even if a picture from the architecture section is clearly better. I think that all categories should also be represented in the second round, at least with 2 pictures. (The “2” can be discussed, it can actually be any other number greater than 0). --XRay 💬 08:52, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Vice versa, each candidate artificially qualified to satisfy a small group with specific tastes takes the place of another nomination that may delight a greater number of people democratically.
  2. Nothing proves that these categories fit any voter's taste in their arbitrary or apparent diversity. They are just categories based on the FP nominations, chosen by many regulars. Each year, there are pictures of ceilings nominated FP, but it does not mean that there are groups of fans of ceilings on Wikipedia and other projects. On the contrary, there might be more diversity between a church and a temple, that will be both classified in the same gallery "architecture", or between a desert and a forest, both in "landscape", than between a ceiling of church / facade of church sorted in two different categories. -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Usually it is between 56 and 59 finalists every year so top 60 would be better than top 50 to not make number of POTY finalists more restrictive than previous years, especially as number of FPs each year keeps increasing -- Giles Laurent (talk) 12:45, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not increasing. 1102 candidates in 2022, 1050 in 2021, 1104 in 2020, 1257 in 2019, 962 in 2018, 1259 in 2017...
50 is a round number -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:17, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right but 60 is also a round number and I don't think number of finalists should be more restrictive -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:22, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But... sixty is not the half of one hundred :-)
Fifty finalists is a lot to review. However, the issue is less the exact quantity than the fact to favor the most striking images, independently of which style they are. If many people love a painting or an animal, they will tell it with a "yes" at round 1. And if 500 people say "yes" to an amazing picture of wildlife, for example, why promoting an ordinary bridge that only gathers 100 supports instead, just because "we have a category bridge"? Basile Morin (talk) 14:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like prime numbers. ;-) --XRay 💬 14:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was 59 to review in round 2 in the past and often numbers similar to it and people managed to review it eventhough it is a lot ;)
I understand the argument of deleting the influence of categories and am not against it but I would only support it if it would be top 60 overall and not top 50 overall -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:54, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
60 if you prefer. Feel free to change -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:09, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe other people will agree 50 is better. You can create a new rule with 60 overall and I will leave a small support on it. But if you prefer you can also just edit this one as you created it -- Giles Laurent (talk) 15:15, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do as you like. I have updated the number so as to comply both with your request and your suggestion to satisfy the highest number of participants -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose 50 ( Weak support 60) per above -- Giles Laurent (talk) 11:30, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Votes in favor of top 30 overall + top 5% of each category (if that percentage is not already present in top 30 overall and only to reach that number) + at least top 1 of each category (new rule)

Votes in favor of top 30 overall + top 5% of each category (if that percentage is not already present in top 30 overall and only to reach that number) + at least top 2 of each category (new rule)

Votes in favor of top 1 of each category (new rule)

This would result in only 22 finalists which is almost 3 times less than what we had all previous years so I can not support this sorry -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:12, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fewer finalists would help to make analyses more accurate. Round 2 would be just for the top of the top. ★ 17:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Votes in favor of top 3 of each category (new rule)

Calculating percentage

[edit]

The current approach is this: top 30 images from round one (from any category) plus the top two images from each category if they were not among the top 30. It's not top thirty plus two from each section.

I don't think the relationship between the e.g. top 30 and the top 5% has been clearly articulated in the proposals above, but it sounds like people are talking about removing that "if"? Which of the following makes the most sense:

For a category with 51 images, where 3 of them are among the top 30 overall, how is 5% calculated:
(a) 5% of 51 is 2.55, which rounds to 3. Therefore, finalists from the category are the 3 in the top 30 and no additional finalists (most similar to current system)
(b) 5% of 51 is 2.55, which rounds to 3. Therefore, finalists from the category are the 3 in the top 30 and 3 additional images (percentage based on total size of the category)
(c) 5% of 48 is 2.40, which rounds to 2. Therefore, finalists from the category are the 3 in the top 30 and 2 additional images (percentage based on the remaining category after the top 30 is selected)

— Rhododendrites talk |  11:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understood that option a applied in the past and that it was the reason behind different numbers of finalists every year. I didn't mean to change that. I should have added something like "if that number/percentage is not already present in top 30 overall and only to reach that number" -- Giles Laurent (talk) 11:22, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just edited for more clarity -- Giles Laurent (talk) 11:27, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

Stepwise function

[edit]

i have a different idea.

first, i took a look at stats of 2022 poty categories Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2022/R1/Gallery (16 17 18 22 23 24 26 29 29 31 31 32 32 34 40 40 50 54 63 66 69 76 84 97 99):

average = 44
median = 32
20% percentile = 24

so i'd make a stepwise, logarithmic scale. let x be the number of candidates in a category. finalists should be: top 30 + top n of each category, where n = 1 if x <= 25, n = 2 if 25 < x <= 50, n = 3 if n > 50. (which i think is also equivalent to roundup(x*4%) ).--RZuo (talk) 10:13, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the same analysis for 2023 is
average = 49.4
median = 47
20% percentile = 30
so maybe we can do n=1 if x∈[1,30], n=2 if x∈[31,60], n=3 if x∈[61,999] (equivalent to roundup(x*3.33%) ). RZuo (talk) 10:20, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
or, we just get the set A of all numbers of candidates in categories.
set B = set A - min(A) - max(A).
for all categories below 25% percentile of set B, n=1; above 75% percentile, n=3; in the middle, n=2. RZuo (talk) 10:33, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Repechage stats

[edit]

is there any analysis of results of R2 candidates by virtue of being category top 2 instead of overall top 30? their eventual placement?--RZuo (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Translators needed!

[edit]

Hey everyone! Because the new scripts don't use the same phrases as the old ones, some new translations are needed. These can be found at Commons:Picture of the Year/i18n.json (click edit to format). I've already filled out the English and French versions as examples (the French may need editing, since I used Google Translate). I've already added sections for English, French, German, Spanish, and Italian - feel free to add additional languages. Ingenuity (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should the content model be changed to "Translatable message bundle" for that page? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should probably just be changed to JSON, actually. Ingenuity (talk) 18:18, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AntiCompositeNumber, could you please change content model of Commons:Picture of the Year/i18n.json to JSON format? Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 02:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. mw:Help:Extension:Translate/Message Bundles is probably a better idea, but I haven't used it and don't know the details. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scripts are complete

[edit]

I am pleased to report that the new scripts are complete! The contest can start at any time (once some interface-edit requests are implemented; hopefully that won't be too long!). I've written a step-by-step guide for organizers (@Rhododendrites, AntiCompositeNumber, and ZI Jony: ); I've already done steps 2, 5, and 6 for setting up the contest, but someone else will need to do the rest. Please let me know if you have any questions, or experience any issues with the scripts. Ingenuity (talk) 21:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons_talk:Picture_of_the_Year&oldid=914983490"