[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Camera users - the Android app is for you!

[Philip Chang]

FYI

-- Forwarded message --
From: Philip Chang 
Date: Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 3:41 PM
Subject: Camera users - the Android app is for you!
To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition <
wikilovesmonume...@lists.wikimedia.org>


Greetings WLM Members,

Version 1.2.3 of the WLM Android App is on Google
Playand
here . We have made some
improvements and in particular, there is an important enhancement related
to camera photos.

Yes, camera photos. Please let me explain.

The app is a great way to find monuments, but many participants in WLM use
cameras to take the photos they will submit to the contest.

It is great to submit mobile photos to the contest as well, but cameras
generally offer better quality and control. So why not upload mobile photos
as placeholders, to make camera submissions easier?

The following blog post, which will be published tomorrow, explains how
this works.


Using the Wiki Loves Monuments App as a travel
log
Posted by Philip Chang  on
September 10th, 2012

The Wiki Loves Monuments Android
App
is
a great way to take photos and upload them to Wikimedia Commons during the
world’s largest photo
contest
throughout
September. But what if you are shooting with a camera and don’t see
yourself taking too many photos with your mobile phone? You can now use the
app as a convenient travel log and make it much easier to organize your
photos when processing and uploading them at home.

Here’s how you use the app as a travel log. As you walk around finding
monuments nearby to shoot with your camera, use the app on your phone to
find the monuments and take a picture of them to upload, either on the road
or when you get home. Back on your computer, your uploaded mobile photos
will be a convenient record of all the monuments you visited, sitting on
Commons under “My uploads.”

As an added bonus, every mobile upload you add to Commons will include a
link to the Special Upload Wizard that automatically allows you to upload
and categorize more photos of that monument based on its campaign and
reference number. This is similar to clicking the “upload photo” button on
the monument lists in Wikipedia, but it is right there in your travel log.
 

A screenshot of the new travel log feature associated with WLM app photos
uploaded to Commons.

To see your travel log and use this feature, you must login at
commons.wikimedia.org  and
click on “My uploads” at the top. Click on the name of any uploaded photo
and the file page of that photo will open. Scroll down and below the
description you will see the link, “Upload more photos of this monument.”

The travel log can help you in two ways:

   1. you will see a sequential list of the monuments you visited, which
   helps in identifying the monuments taken on your camera
   2. you can submit the photos from your camera for each monument directly
   from the travel log

The latest app, version 1.2.3, has been published in the Google
Play
store
and that version has this new feature. Please update the app if you
downloaded it before and do not have auto-updates turned on. If you have
good ideas about photo uploads in general, or improvements next year, feel
free to post 
feedback
or
send email .

You may also download the app
here,
or on the F-Droid
market
.

We appreciate your support. Happy uploading!

*Phil Chang, Product Manager, Mobile*

   - Copyright notes: "Upload more
photos"
by Philinje ,
under CC-BY-SA
   3.0 Unported ,
   from Wikimedia Commons


-- 
Phil Inje Chang
Product Manager, Mobile
Wikimedia Foundation
415-812-0854 m
415-882-7982 x 6810




-- 
Phil Inje Chang
Product Manager, Mobile
Wikimedia Foundation
415-812-0854 m
415-882-7982 x 6810
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Upcoming Survey, Feedback requested, and Office Hour

[Delphine Ménard]

Hello Tilman,


On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Tilman Bayer  wrote:
> Hi Delphine,
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Delphine Ménard  wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Tilman Bayer  wrote:
> ...
>>>
>>> Still, I was aware that there had been some objections to that
>>> question by chapter representatives (which I don't assume have to do
>>> with the fact that respondents rated chapters' performance lower than
>>> that of other entities in the two previous surveys), and looked into
>>> these concerns while the present questionnaire was prepared; I also
>>> reached out to one of the critics in person at Wikimania. But I still
>>> haven't seen a compelling argument why the way the question is asked
>>> should be biased against chapters. The argument that the opinion of
>>> Wikimedians who live in countries without chapter should not count
>>> seems weak to me, e.g. because the projects that the work of chapters
>>> aims to support are international, and because the question asked
>>> about chapters in general, not one particular chapter.
>>
>> That is not the argument I was trying to make (ie. voices of
>> Wikimedians in a country without chapter don't count). Rather, there
>> is a long list of things the Foundation does, where people are asked
>> whether they knew about it, or not. And after that, right when people
>> have been made aware of everything the Foundation does, they are asked
>> to rate the work of the Foundation. The same question about the
>> chapters comes after absolutely nothing has been said about chapter
>> work, which, I believe, does introduce a bias. In short, people are
>> being asked to rate something they *at this point in the survey* have
>> an idea about (for the WMF) although they might have had no idea about
>> it before starting the survey.
>> All I'm asking is that we review the context in which this question is
>> being asked so results make more sense.
> OK, after some other people also remarked that preceding this question
> by other questions which conveyed quite some information about the
> Foundation's activities but not about the chapters' activities. we
> have now rearranged the questions so that this is no longer the case.
>
> This is a bit of a compromise regarding the structuring of the
> questionnaire into sections, but fortunately it could be done without
> invalidating existing translations or changing the variables of the
> resulting dataset.

Thanks. I will not hide that I am still not sure whether we don't now
have two "out of context questions" instead of just one, but I guess
it's what we could do for this round, so thank you for doing this.

I sincerely hope that we can all together revisit this part of the
survey to give results that can be used by all of us to increase
satisfaction and performance in the future. Contrarily to Sue, I do
think that these surveys (should) have a real-world impact and
(should) keep us all on our toes, fine tuned to the critisicism, needs
and wishes of the editors of the WIkimedia projects. As such I expect
us to make sure that we do get as precise a picture as possible of
what those are.

Best,

Delphine
-- 
@notafish

NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org
Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Upcoming Survey, Feedback requested, and Office Hour

[Craig Franklin]

Great, THANKYOU for finally moving on this.

Cheers,
Craig Franklin

Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 10:24:39 -0700
> From: Tilman Bayer 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Upcoming Survey, Feedback requested, and
> Office Hour
> Message-ID:
>  kijpcvrr6pdeb0usz_+_6q2yiraxr3fqz9ql...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi Delphine,
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Delphine M?nard 
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Tilman Bayer 
> wrote:
> ...
> >>
> >> Still, I was aware that there had been some objections to that
> >> question by chapter representatives (which I don't assume have to do
> >> with the fact that respondents rated chapters' performance lower than
> >> that of other entities in the two previous surveys), and looked into
> >> these concerns while the present questionnaire was prepared; I also
> >> reached out to one of the critics in person at Wikimania. But I still
> >> haven't seen a compelling argument why the way the question is asked
> >> should be biased against chapters. The argument that the opinion of
> >> Wikimedians who live in countries without chapter should not count
> >> seems weak to me, e.g. because the projects that the work of chapters
> >> aims to support are international, and because the question asked
> >> about chapters in general, not one particular chapter.
> >
> > That is not the argument I was trying to make (ie. voices of
> > Wikimedians in a country without chapter don't count). Rather, there
> > is a long list of things the Foundation does, where people are asked
> > whether they knew about it, or not. And after that, right when people
> > have been made aware of everything the Foundation does, they are asked
> > to rate the work of the Foundation. The same question about the
> > chapters comes after absolutely nothing has been said about chapter
> > work, which, I believe, does introduce a bias. In short, people are
> > being asked to rate something they *at this point in the survey* have
> > an idea about (for the WMF) although they might have had no idea about
> > it before starting the survey.
> > All I'm asking is that we review the context in which this question is
> > being asked so results make more sense.
> OK, after some other people also remarked that preceding this question
> by other questions which conveyed quite some information about the
> Foundation's activities but not about the chapters' activities. we
> have now rearranged the questions so that this is no longer the case.
>
> This is a bit of a compromise regarding the structuring of the
> questionnaire into sections, but fortunately it could be done without
> invalidating existing translations or changing the variables of the
> resulting dataset.
>
> Also, the launch of the survey had been postponed into this month for
> various reasons, including allowing more time to respond to feedback
> like this.
> --
> Tilman Bayer
> Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
> Wikimedia Foundation
> IRC (Freenode): HaeB
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikitravel hits spammy oblivion

[Thomas Morton]

Gloating (and throwing insults) is childish, and will not help resolve the
situation.

Tom

On 10 September 2012 12:49, David Gerard  wrote:

> Noticed by Keegan Peterzell.
>
>
> http://wikitravel.org/wiki/en/index.php?title=Special%3ARecentChanges&limit=500
>
> Turns out you can't replace 48 volunteer admins with one incompetent
> employee. Who'da thunk.
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Wikitravel hits spammy oblivion

[David Gerard]

Noticed by Keegan Peterzell.

  
http://wikitravel.org/wiki/en/index.php?title=Special%3ARecentChanges&limit=500

Turns out you can't replace 48 volunteer admins with one incompetent
employee. Who'da thunk.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l