Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[Sylvain Boissel]

There was also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiMoney before
that but it never really worked either.

Le dim. 27 janv. 2019 à 08:10, AntiCompositeNumber <
anticompositenum...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> The   does
> exist, but it doesn't seem to get much attention.
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 1:29 PM geni  wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 16:07, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> > >
> > > I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
> > > larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
> > > which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
> > > bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!
> > >
> > > But quite frankly, why should we not? ¢1 per fixed single word typo
> > > that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
> > > spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
> > > edits?
> > >
> >
> > You've just created a financial incentive to include spelling errors.
> >
> > --
> > geni
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
*Sylvain Boissel*
ADMINISTRATEUR SYSTÈME ET RÉSEAUX
*WIKIMÉDIA FRANCE*

*Tél: ** +33 9 67 45 12 67*
*Mobile : +33*
* 7 84 37 91 03*
*www.wikimedia.fr *
*40 rue de Cléry, **75002 Paris*


*Imaginez un monde où chaque personne sur la planète aurait librement accès
à la totalité du savoir humain. C'est notre engagement. Aidez Wikimedia
France à en faire une réalité .*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[Pine W]

Hi Yaroslav,

I'm not aware of such wide consensus against paid editing in general.
Wikimedians in Residence, for example, often seem to be paid contributors,
and I can't recall the last time that I heard criticism of the concept of
Wikimedians in Residence. However, you may know more about the consensus on
diverse projects than I do, and I would be interested in reading a
representative sample of links to policies and discussions about this topic
on various projects.

Personally I am against undisclosed paid editing, and I would like to see
WMF do much more to detect, penalize, and deter undisclosed paid editing.
But there are also people and organizations such as well-intentioned WiRs
and their sponsoring institutions who are willing to contribute usefully to
the projects with paid time. I think that paid benevolent contributions to
the projects should be encouraged, for example from organizations like the
American Psychological Association and Stanford University.

I think that the professionalization of Wikimedia is likely to continue
over time. The learning curve is steep for many on-wiki tasks, and we have
a limited supply of knowledgeable volunteers who cannot possibly fulfill
all of our readers' wishes and the needs for behind the scenes support
(such as responses to OTRS tickets, conflict of interest investigations,
translations, and personalized help for new contributors) with the limited
supply of time from knowledgeable volunteers. If results from increased
professionalization are good and there aren't problems with conflict of
interest or noteworthy conflicts between populations of volunteers and
well-intentioned professionals, then I'm okay with this trend and in some
ways I would encourage it because the projects benefit from having more
knowledgeable and well-intentioned participants.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )


On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:28 PM Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> Whatever the reasoning is, I think we should accept that at the moment paid
> editing is universally regarded very negatively in virtually all projects.
> Non-monetary prizes for competitions may or may not be ok, everything else
> is most likely not considered to be ok even if does not explicitly
> contradict to any policies.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 5:07 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
> > larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
> > which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
> > bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!
> >
> > But quite frankly, why should we not? ¢1 per fixed single word typo
> > that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
> > spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
> > edits?
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:17 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > In the Basque wikipedia we are doing monthly contests on different
> > topics, and some of them are focused on quality (i.e. adding references
> and
> > images). There are some prices every month, usually books or thing
> related
> > to technology. And people usually like to participate for the fun, and
> for
> > the prize.
> > > ________
> > > From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf
> > of Benjamin Lees 
> > > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 5:14 AM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…
> > >
> > > It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
> > > English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
> > > actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or
> perceived
> > > spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
> > > fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.
> > >
> > > In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism
> is
> > > most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because
> of
> > > spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making
> > it
> > > clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
> > > review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
> > > in—Cunningham's law[2] never fails.
> > >
> > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
> > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Both in Wikipedia 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[AntiCompositeNumber]

The   does
exist, but it doesn't seem to get much attention.

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 1:29 PM geni  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 16:07, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> >
> > I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
> > larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
> > which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
> > bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!
> >
> > But quite frankly, why should we not? ¢1 per fixed single word typo
> > that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
> > spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
> > edits?
> >
>
> You've just created a financial incentive to include spelling errors.
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[Jan Ainali]

In Swedish Wikipedia we have Monthly tasks (mostly called monthly because
in that interval barnstars are given for completed tasks), where editors
gives small tasks for other editors to complete. Very similar to your
bounties, but not often spell checking.

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:M%C3%A5nadens_uppdrag


Jan Ainali
http://ainali.com


Den fre 25 jan. 2019 kl 16:17 skrev Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
galder...@hotmail.com>:

> In the Basque wikipedia we are doing monthly contests on different topics,
> and some of them are focused on quality (i.e. adding references and
> images). There are some prices every month, usually books or thing related
> to technology. And people usually like to participate for the fun, and for
> the prize.
> 
> From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf of
> Benjamin Lees 
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 5:14 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…
>
> It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
> English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
> actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
> spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
> fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.
>
> In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism is
> most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because of
> spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making it
> clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
> review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
> in—Cunningham's law[2] never fails.
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
> > a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
> > they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
> > are doing.
> >
> > I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
> > fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
> > written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
> > something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
> > Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
> > so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
> > crowdsourcing.
> >
> > Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
> > except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
> > and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
> > missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
> >
> > The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
> > About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
> > nothing unusual about this.
> >
> > Could we use bounties to get some momentum?
> >
> > John Erling Blad
> > /jeblad
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[geni]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 16:07, John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
> larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
> which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
> bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!
>
> But quite frankly, why should we not? ¢1 per fixed single word typo
> that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
> spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
> edits?
>

You've just created a financial incentive to include spelling errors.

-- 
geni

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[John Erling Blad]

I believe this kind of statement ("at the moment paid editing is
universally regarded very negatively in virtually all projects") hurt
the movement more than anything else for the moment, as it blocks
progress on a lot of important fields without any real arguments to
back it up. It is the fundamental flaw behind "Terms of use/Paid
contributions amendment"[1] It is just a bunch of feelings and
hearsay. We have shot ourselves in the collective foot by blocking the
most useful tool we have.

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use/Paid_contributions_amendment

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 5:28 PM Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>
> Whatever the reasoning is, I think we should accept that at the moment paid
> editing is universally regarded very negatively in virtually all projects.
> Non-monetary prizes for competitions may or may not be ok, everything else
> is most likely not considered to be ok even if does not explicitly
> contradict to any policies.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 5:07 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
> > larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
> > which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
> > bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!
> >
> > But quite frankly, why should we not? ¢1 per fixed single word typo
> > that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
> > spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
> > edits?
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:17 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > In the Basque wikipedia we are doing monthly contests on different
> > topics, and some of them are focused on quality (i.e. adding references and
> > images). There are some prices every month, usually books or thing related
> > to technology. And people usually like to participate for the fun, and for
> > the prize.
> > > ____
> > > From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf
> > of Benjamin Lees 
> > > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 5:14 AM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…
> > >
> > > It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
> > > English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
> > > actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
> > > spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
> > > fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.
> > >
> > > In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism is
> > > most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because of
> > > spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making
> > it
> > > clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
> > > review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
> > > in—Cunningham's law[2] never fails.
> > >
> > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
> > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
> > > > a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
> > > > they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
> > > > are doing.
> > > >
> > > > I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
> > > > fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
> > > > written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
> > > > something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
> > > > Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
> > > > so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
> > > > crowdsourcing.
> > > >
> > > > Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
> > > > except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
> > > > and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
> > > > missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
> > > >
> > > > The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
> > > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[Yaroslav Blanter]

Whatever the reasoning is, I think we should accept that at the moment paid
editing is universally regarded very negatively in virtually all projects.
Non-monetary prizes for competitions may or may not be ok, everything else
is most likely not considered to be ok even if does not explicitly
contradict to any policies.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 5:07 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:

> I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
> larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
> which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
> bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!
>
> But quite frankly, why should we not? ¢1 per fixed single word typo
> that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
> spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
> edits?
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:17 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
>  wrote:
> >
> > In the Basque wikipedia we are doing monthly contests on different
> topics, and some of them are focused on quality (i.e. adding references and
> images). There are some prices every month, usually books or thing related
> to technology. And people usually like to participate for the fun, and for
> the prize.
> > 
> > From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf
> of Benjamin Lees 
> > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 5:14 AM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…
> >
> > It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
> > English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
> > actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
> > spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
> > fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.
> >
> > In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism is
> > most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because of
> > spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making
> it
> > clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
> > review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
> > in—Cunningham's law[2] never fails.
> >
> > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
> > > a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
> > > they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
> > > are doing.
> > >
> > > I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
> > > fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
> > > written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
> > > something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
> > > Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
> > > so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
> > > crowdsourcing.
> > >
> > > Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
> > > except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
> > > and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
> > > missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
> > >
> > > The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
> > > About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
> > > nothing unusual about this.
> > >
> > > Could we use bounties to get some momentum?
> > >
> > > John Erling Blad
> > > /jeblad
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@list

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[John Erling Blad]

I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!

But quite frankly, why should we not? ¢1 per fixed single word typo
that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
edits?

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:17 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
 wrote:
>
> In the Basque wikipedia we are doing monthly contests on different topics, 
> and some of them are focused on quality (i.e. adding references and images). 
> There are some prices every month, usually books or thing related to 
> technology. And people usually like to participate for the fun, and for the 
> prize.
> 
> From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf of 
> Benjamin Lees 
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 5:14 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…
>
> It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
> English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
> actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
> spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
> fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.
>
> In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism is
> most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because of
> spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making it
> clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
> review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
> in—Cunningham's law[2] never fails.
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
> > a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
> > they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
> > are doing.
> >
> > I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
> > fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
> > written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
> > something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
> > Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
> > so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
> > crowdsourcing.
> >
> > Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
> > except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
> > and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
> > missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
> >
> > The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
> > About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
> > nothing unusual about this.
> >
> > Could we use bounties to get some momentum?
> >
> > John Erling Blad
> > /jeblad
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga]

In the Basque wikipedia we are doing monthly contests on different topics, and 
some of them are focused on quality (i.e. adding references and images). There 
are some prices every month, usually books or thing related to technology. And 
people usually like to participate for the fun, and for the prize.

From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf of 
Benjamin Lees 
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 5:14 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.

In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism is
most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because of
spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making it
clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
in—Cunningham's law[2] never fails.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law


On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:

> Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
> a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
> they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
> are doing.
>
> I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
> fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
> written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
> something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
> Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
> so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
> crowdsourcing.
>
> Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
> except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
> and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
> missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
>
> The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
> About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
> nothing unusual about this.
>
> Could we use bounties to get some momentum?
>
> John Erling Blad
> /jeblad
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[Benjamin Lees]

It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.

In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism is
most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because of
spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making it
clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
in—Cunningham's law[2] never fails.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law


On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:

> Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
> a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
> they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
> are doing.
>
> I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
> fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
> written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
> something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
> Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
> so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
> crowdsourcing.
>
> Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
> except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
> and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
> missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
>
> The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
> About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
> nothing unusual about this.
>
> Could we use bounties to get some momentum?
>
> John Erling Blad
> /jeblad
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[Rehman Abubakr]

Hello John,

I thought about it too, in a slightly different angle, and maybe it is really 
not a bad idea.

What I thought was more for people who are here for a while (maybe those who 
have been around for 2+ years, 5000 edits, whatever). More of a motivation for 
the older worn out contributors.[1]

I don't know what the 'bounty' could be, maybe something tangible or valuable 
in RL (tshirt, products, cake, draw to win stuff), or maybe something that is 
more than a barnstar but still digital. I prefer the latter for efficiency 
reasons, hence let me elaborate a tiny bit on that:

It could be something like an automated point system that is attached to a user 
account. Something like a scorecard that is not editable by users, but is 
visible as part of the account, automatically updated in the backend by the 
system or a special authorised bot. Something of that sort.

Just my thoughts...

[1] I've been around since 2008, and worked in many parts of Wikipedia and 
Commons. As real life gets more hectic for me, my motivation to edit is 
starting to vary widely, as while there are sooo many things to do in the 
wikiverse during my free time, there aren't any solid milestones you could 
focus on each day. You open a random backlog, and there's an endless ocean of 
work which if you attend 1 or 1 requests, it doesn't really matter to the 
contributor itself. More like starting to mop a vast room-less floor.



Yours truly,


Rehman Abubakr (Roy)<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rehman>

OTRS agent, Admin (English Wikipedia, Commons), Contributor (Wikidata, Meta)
User:Rehman<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rehman> | 
Talkpage<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rehman> | 
rehman.wikime...@live.com<mailto:rehman.wikime...@live.com> | 
UG-LK<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Sri_Lanka/English>


From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf of John 
Erling Blad 
Sent: 25 January 2019 05:25
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
are doing.

I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
crowdsourcing.

Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.

The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
nothing unusual about this.

Could we use bounties to get some momentum?

John Erling Blad
/jeblad

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

[Wikimedia-l] Bounties…

[John Erling Blad]

Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
are doing.

I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
crowdsourcing.

Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.

The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
nothing unusual about this.

Could we use bounties to get some momentum?

John Erling Blad
/jeblad

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,