+1 to Lodewijk post. Moreover, some monuments like cathedrals or museums could easily reach the 10 photos limit.
But I think the proposal is flawed from the beginning. It comes from the assumption that it would significantly reduce the number of photographs the jurors need to review without a loss of quality images. I went to the data of WLM-ES 2011 and looked at the count of instances of the pair (monument, photographer) where they were more than 10: 11 pairs: 33 12 pairs: 31 13 pairs: 19 14 pairs: 11 15 pairs: 12 16 pairs: 16 17 pairs: 11 18 pairs: 10 19 pairs: 12 20 pairs: 8 21 pairs: 8 22 pairs: 4 23 pairs: 4 24 pairs: 6 25 pairs: 1 26 pairs: 2 27 pairs: 8 28 pairs: 3 29 pairs: 1 30 pairs: 1 31 pairs: 3 32 pairs: 2 33 pairs: 3 34 pairs: 4 35 pairs: 1 36 pairs: 2 37 pairs: 4 38 pairs: 1 40 pairs: 2 41 pairs: 1 46 pairs: 1 56 pairs: 1 58 pairs: 1 FYI, the 58 photos of the same monument is a monastery, with many details being photographed: http://toolserver.org/~platonides/wlm2011/gallery.php?bic=RI-51-0000058&author=1661583 I analysed direct uploads to commons only, that's a total of 15063 files. Had we put a maximum of 10 files per user and monument we would risk having 1951 files less. That's a shocking 12.95% Most of them appear to show clearly different images, but I haven't reviewed them all, you can view the list at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Platonides/MultipleMonumentPhotosPerUser Also note that in several cases that user has been the only one providing images for that monument. _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
