https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53570
--- Comment #55 from Romaine <romaine_w...@yahoo.com> --- (In reply to comment #52) > Ok, I've read the comment history in more detail, and chatted a bit with > bawolff in IRC re: the history of the discussion. > > > It sounds to me like the actual problem is: > > * there's not an admin-friendly editing tool to list campaigns, show their > settings, compare and edit them. I have created an overview page of all WLM campaigns for myself and that works pretty well. I have learned to read the table format and I can deal with the JSON code, so personally speaking the current interface is not the most optimal but works for me at the moment. As said, to be able to maintain the campaigns I need the table format as overview, while that seems to be hidden next week with the implementation. That is the first problem. The second problem is perhaps the way how we as organizers have dealt with the campaigns. Participants and national teams expect us (the international team) to supply smoothly working campaigns in a contest that runs without big problems. In 2012 it appeared to work well in theory, but in practice we encountered problems. Problems with the potential of disturbing the contest largely. Looking back I think we should have had a evaluation with (more) technical people to discuss the problems of the campaigns of 2012. With the knowledge we had in January we have requested changes in the campaigns and have thought about how to minimize the risk of problems. Reading the comments in this bug it seems we should have requested more changes we had not thought of as we seem to use it know in a way it is not really meant to be. > combined with the fact that: > > * existing campaign administrators have been using the JSON pretty-printer > display and opening lots of Campaign: pages in separate tabs to facilitate > viewing and comparing campaign configurations. Yes. > thus: > > * the particular workflow of opening lots of Campaign: pages in tabs and > comparing the data in the table layout would be broken by showing different > content on Campaign: pages without adding a configuration-view-edit tool. > > Romaine, can you describe your workflow and requirements in a bit more > detail? I am not having completely clear what you would like to know, but I'll try. My workflow starts with: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Romaine/Wiki_Loves_Monuments/2013/table This table gives me a complete overview of all relevant pages and campaigns. Originally the table was smaller but was extended each week with new columns to get everything ready in the end of this month. Each row is a country, each column is a group of pages that perform a specific task. The /xx are language versions of pages used in that country. Almost all columns are used directly or indirect in the campaigns. Most rows represent in fact all pages for one campaign. I mostly search to fix the red links and red crosses. Many times when something is changed it is checked in the campaign, mostly the technical page, sometimes also the visual campaign how uploaders see it. Also requests from national teams I implement. I try to match the campaign itself with all specific aspects of the spoken languages, the local situation of the monuments, etc, in the campaign page everything comes together. What my requirement is, is to be able to click in my table on a link that leads me directly to an overview page of all things put in the campaign, just as the table structure on the campaign pages gives me know. > Remember that we're not trying to remove features or encourage random people > to > edit campaign data -- we're trying to encourage end-users to actively use and > submit to campaigns, which are *NOT* limited to Wiki Loves Monuments > specifically but are meant to become much more generally usable. I saw the new campaign pages and the overview of the campaign I use often was gone there. For a large competition like Wiki Loves Monuments at first sight the campaigns do not seem to be vulnerable for much wrong edits, but there are many admins on Commons which can edit without having enough knowledge. I think, considering all the comments, it has been made too easy to edit the campaigns for too much people, but on the other hand I question myself if it is a good idea to limit access to campaigns in general as it will then be for other projects more difficult to edit campaigns due the smaller number of campaign editors. I understand that the purpose of the new tool is to encourage end-users to use all campaigns more often, I really like it that that is to be improved, and I really want to support and help that to become better. As I wrote before, I think we can improve that much more by some kind of special portal page. > If anything, switching the display from a big data structure to a prominent > upload call to action should discourage people from editing the campaign > pages, > and encourage them to upload instead. I haven't seen any campaign, not in WLM, nor other projects using upload campaigns, using the pages in the campaign namespace for anything else than technical maintenance and the flow of the users doesn't reach to the campaign namespace. In general people which use a campaign to upload never visit these technical pages. They are directed to a upload campaign by a project page or website, only see an uploadform, and afterwards they see only the images they have uploaded. That is the same for Wiki Loves Monuments, we have three ways to go uploading through the campaigns. Participants find the website of the national team through the central notice, visit the website about the contest and click there on the campaign. Another way is to click directly on one of the links in the lists of monuments in Wikipedia, which pre-fill the campaign to easy the upload. Example on this page, the placeholder in the last column: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monuments_of_Aruba The third way to use a campaign is to click on here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_upload I still do not understand why the gallery has to be on the technical page while none of the visitor streams is going to that page, while it would be nice to have such tool for participants. I think there are better places to encourage people to upload. As said before, I like the idea of the gallery of the last 50 images uploaded, but only not there. Within my task of the organisation of Wiki Loves Monuments I also look to the flow of the users through pages. There are certainly improvements that can be made and the participation can be enlarged. I am happy to talk about it how we have done it and to help with general improving this for end users. To summarize: * For the maintenance we still need the overview pages that are currently shown on the pages in the campaign namespace. In the gallery page on labs it is gone. * The current JSON pages aren't a problem for the organizers. However they are vulnerable to wrong edits and gives us concerns. This can be discussed, but I think it is at the moment short term. * I am happy to talk about the flow of the user and enlarging the participation of users. The first campaign gets active at 12:00 UTC due time zones, that is already in 10 hours and 20 minutes. As long as we have easy and direct access to the overview of the settings of a particular campaign (like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaign:wlm-nl ), there is no problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
