Talk:International writing contest

This idea sounds interesting but I don't understand how it is going to work on international level. Are we going to create mutlinational team of judges and to choose the best article of all Wikipedias, from those which win their internal contests? Or are we going to translate all winning articles to all languages? Polimerek 11:37, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I really don´t think we need "the best article in the world", that should be a decision of the languages. The part of the international concept is a smaller one, it ist to try a contest of different languages at the same time and to presentate it. It is a try and I think we have to set a lowlevel goal for it with this first try. I think, we´ll start a portal here showing all contests in the languanges, their nominees and the winners, also we can coordinate press releases and ideas concerning the contest (sponsors, external judges, translations, international cooperation in single articles, pictures etc.). It should be a funny time and I think we can do this worldwide, not more but not less too. Greetings from Berlin -- Necrophorus 11:58, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with Polimerek; I don't really understand how you can compare articles written in separate languages - will you have to find multilingual judges that understand, say, Hungarian, Interlingua and Vietnamese? Otherwise, the way Necrophorus presents it, it's not really an international contest: just a variety of insular contests occuring at the same time. echomikeromeo 01:49, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think, it is no problem if you see it as a variety of insular contests occuring at the same time because in it´s base idea it is a parallel contest in different Wikipedias linked together in meta, not more but not less too -- Necrophorus 07:56, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Judges vs. Community

It sounds good for me. I'll try to advertise this idea in Polish Wikipedia. I think the most painful problem is to choose "judges". I feel the better idea is to let all wikipedians vote for "best" article. Polish Wikipedia (and probably many others) is strongly "antiautoritarian" and people are usually against creating special "bodies" with some "special" power. Polimerek 12:36, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

As I told in the article: Every Wikiepdia should create their own rules. The first german contest brought about 60 articles to read and the judges read about 40 (partly very long or complicated) of them and discussed in many IRC-Hours about them (I was one of the judges). On the german site you can download a WikiReader with all nominated artisles. In a voting by the Community I see the problem that there should be topics that are most interesting and others don´t but it should not be the problem in a discussion. If you have a concept post it here as an alternative system beside my german one. -- Necrophorus 14:37, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

having been in the Jury of the german writing contest, I can strongly recommend other wikipedias to elect a jury to get an informed vote on the winners. First: there were more than 200 pages in print to read and facts to check - that's not something you can expect that a lot of people will really do if you hold the vote in the community. As a consequence, I fear such a vote would be more superficial than that of jury of few people who actually take the time to read _all_ articles carefully. --Elian 19:50, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Mmh, I thought about it and I think, it depends on the size of the single Wikipedia. If it is a small one with about 10.000 articles and a low number of permanent constibuters it will be better to let them all vote, bescause it could be impossible to create a judge and find authors for the contest. In lx: for example there are 5 to 6 peramnent Users so there should be at amximum 6 articles at the contest, so everyone may vote for his or her favourite. Greetings -- Necrophorus 20:59, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Best (winning) articles should deserve being the best articles

I think we should make sure that winning articles (esp. from small wikipedias, where every articles could be the "best articles", and every wikipedians could be the "best writers") really deserve being the best articles (i.e., they are really good), else the critical journalists (it is presumed that this event will attract the attention of the media, because we plan to release two press releases just for this event - and, the second press release will contain the winners with their articles - wasn't it?) could use the winning articles as an argument why people should not rely on Wikipedia as a source of information: even the "best articles" were bad. 61.94.149.115 17:58, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

First I think, it would be great, if small Wikipedias will join and it is no problem if in a small Wikipedia an article wins that is not the best of the whole Wikipedia. It should be the best made in the nomination time and if it is not of that high quality one of the bigger Wikipedias is, there is no problem even if the press will know it. Wikipedia is a project in an evolutionary process and we should not be ashamed of the current status the small Wikipedias have. That´s my opinion in this question, maybe it isn´t common sense. Greetings -- 217.184.47.52 20:36, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC) (sorry, was not locked in -- Necrophorus 20:42, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC))