2011/12/12 Jan Ainali <[email protected]>: > 2011/12/12 Maarten Dammers <[email protected]> >> >> > 2011/12/12 Yaroslav M. Blanter<[email protected]>: >> >> 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? >> >> Let's put it a bit stronger. I would never support such a proposal. I >> support positive steering ("we encourage you to upload photo's of >> monuments that not yet have a (good) picture"), not negative steering >> ("WLM2011 we limit the eligible monuments to those without an image").
Then you're bound to encounter the same kind of criticism as this year. > Yes, I agree that positive steering is better. We could have one of the > judging criteria to be uniqueness or value adding, and explain that when > images are similar in other criterias, the ones that bring in new aspects to > Commons will be regarded higher. What you want (and what people are saying on these pages) is a Commons contest, not a photo contest. That is, with a Wiki(p|m)edia jury and all. You can't reasonably expect to have professional photographers in the jury and ask them to rate based on the utility for a certain site. This would be a big step backwards from this year's contest in my opinion and a huge failed opportunity for a lot of content to be freed. I'm fairly sure many photographers will be reluctant to participate with hi res images. Strainu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
