Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-13 Thread Santiago Navarro Sanz
: maar...@mdammers.nl > To: wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high > time to admit it! > > Op 13-12-2011 13:39, Andre Koopal schreef: > > I think Multichill added WLM already to some general stats tool, maybe

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-13 Thread Maarten Dammers
Op 13-12-2011 13:39, Andre Koopal schreef: > I think Multichill added WLM already to some general stats tool, maybe > he can give the link although it wasn't working during GLAMcamp. http://toolserver.org/~magnus/glamorous.php?doit=1&category=Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011&use_globalusage=1

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-13 Thread Andre Koopal
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:15:31PM +, Nuno Tavares wrote: > Well, if I may, that was a main concern while building our tool: > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org.pt/tools/plist > > We wanted to know, in the end, the impact of WLM on everything we > already had. So through that tool we can know

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-13 Thread Nuno Tavares
Well, if I may, that was a main concern while building our tool: http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org.pt/tools/plist We wanted to know, in the end, the impact of WLM on everything we already had. So through that tool we can know which articles without photo got photographed, which photos don't even h

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-13 Thread Marco Chiesa
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Nicu Buculei wrote: > On a constructive tone, I think this is easily solved at the jury level, > just make the Wikipedia usefulness one of the noting criteria, even if > the picture is wonderful done technically and artistically, if there are > other reasonable pi

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Nicu Buculei
On 12/12/2011 10:40 PM, Maarten Dammers wrote: >> 2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter: >>> I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the proposal in >>> this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have the image >>> of the exterior, would we need the image of the interior?

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Lodewijk
We're going a bit too fast here :) Yes, there are things to be improved when it comes to the jury process - I agree on that with Tomasz. However, I don't agree on the specifics. But Most importantly: this is not the time yet to discuss that. If we start hammering out these details now, we get in t

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Jan Ainali
2011/12/12 Strainu > 2011/12/12 Jan Ainali : > > 2011/12/12 Maarten Dammers > >> > >> > 2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter: > >> >> I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the proposal > in > >> >> this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have the > >> >> image >

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Mike Dupont
Well this is why we should have prize money. I would be willing to even donate a small amount for prizes for kosovo if it was tax deductable (in germany where I live). mike On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Strainu wrote: > 2011/12/12 Jan Ainali : >> 2011/12/12 Maarten Dammers >>> >>> > 2011/12/12

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Strainu
2011/12/12 Jan Ainali : > 2011/12/12 Maarten Dammers >> >> > 2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter: >> >> I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the proposal in >> >> this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have the >> >> image >> >> of the exterior, would we need th

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Jan Ainali
2011/12/12 Maarten Dammers > > 2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter: > >> I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the proposal in > >> this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have the > image > >> of the exterior, would we need the image of the interior? What if we

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Maarten Dammers
> 2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter: >> I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the proposal in >> this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have the image >> of the exterior, would we need the image of the interior? What if we have >> several monuments under one cod

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Strainu
2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter : > > I think this is a good direction, but I can not support the proposal in > this form. What if we have just one crappy image? What if we have the image > of the exterior, would we need the image of the interior? What if we have > several monuments under one code?

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Tomasz Ganicz
W dniu 12 grudnia 2011 20:28 użytkownik Tomasz Kozłowski napisał: > #2: > > #3: >

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
> What I do note as something that could easily be avoided is having > "ten more crappy images of the Eiffel Tower" in order to get some more > obscure monuments on-wiki. I strongly suggest that in countries that > participate in WLM2011 we limit the eligible monuments to those > without an image.

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Nina Wikipedia
I miss pictures who document the monuments and is more then a nice picture. Nina Sendt fra min iPad Den 12. des. 2011 kl. 20:28 skrev Tomasz Kozłowski : > In chronological order: > #1: > > #2: >

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Strainu
While some valid points have been raised in these discussions, there was also a lot of bullshit (pardon my language, but there is no other way of putting it) from some people who can't look beyond the current project. It would be unfair from me to respond to those here, but I will most certainly re

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread A V
] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it! I have had the same issue with the Best Photo of Kosovo contest, but we had some small winners. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/BestPictureOfKosovoForWikipediaContest mike 2011/12/12 Tomasz Kozłowski : > In chronological ord

Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Mike Dupont
I have had the same issue with the Best Photo of Kosovo contest, but we had some small winners. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/BestPictureOfKosovoForWikipediaContest mike 2011/12/12 Tomasz Kozłowski : > In chronological order: > #1: >

[Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments was crap, it's high time to admit it!

2011-12-12 Thread Tomasz Kozłowski
In chronological order: #1: #2: #3: