Grants talk:PEG/Jackson Peebles/Video and Interactive Tutorials

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Flow Funding origin[edit]

I'd like to thank Jackson Peebles for originally sharing his idea in the context of the Flow Funding Pilot. Unfortunately it was not possible to fund his project there, but I see great merit in his initiative and I am looking forward to seeing this project funded by the Wikimedia Foundation here. TSB (talk) 18:49, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some questions:[edit]

Proprietary software
As the main cost of the project is Adobe Captivate (AC) licence - have you considered a cheaper software or maybe free alternative? Why do you need AC?
First and foremost, I want to say that (at the risk of sounding like I'm brown-nosing), I really appreciate all of the concern about using free, less-expensive, and open-source software. I'd like to first say that I, personally, do prefer to use open source software and have historically licensed my own (joint) developments with open source licenses, as can be uncovered by a quick search of "Jeebles Directory." You'll also note that the licenses of my personal website and academic website are all Creative Commons. With this in mind, it should be apparent that it was only with great hesitation and research that I determined that I genuinely feel that I can only go through with this project with Adobe Captivate. In the end, though, there were three determining factors (listed in order of precedence) that led to choosing Adobe Captivate over the alternatives, namely CamStudio (the other mainstream one, which is free for the limited version):
  1. Adobe Captivate features a well-developed, simple, and streamlined way to localize projects. It is my view that this is imperative, as I am seeking Wikimedia support as well as to help the greatest possible user base. This is not meant to be purely an English Wikipedia project. If all goes well, I can foresee (or at least hope to see) this having an impact on much of Wikimedia and MediaWiki, as a lot of the components that I hope to cover cross the boundaries of single-nationality wikis. Even AutoWikiBrowser, for instance, can be used on multiple projects, with expansion expected in the future. None of the other software available offers this functionality at this time.
  2. Adobe Captivate allows interactivity. While I realize that this was not put forth in the original proposal, that is because I do not want to commit to something that I am unsure that I can do. I can guarantee tutorials; however, my ideal involves tutorials with interactivity, thus permitting a substantial additional level of understanding. As posited previously in my proposals, I would love to see a tutorial-based, interactive version of the Adoption and CVUA programs, and I feel that I can make this happen given my previous experience and dedication to Wikipedia (with hopes of expanding this dedication to a greater amount of projects). Again, none of the other software that I am aware of (and I have done a fair amount of looking) comes close to offering this level of functionality.
  3. I have a decent level of experience using Adobe Captivate. While I realize that it is worth my time to learn how to use other software if there are substantial benefits involved and I recognize the importance of conserving donor money to the largest extent possible, given the above two points, it seems unwise and, in fact, inadvisable to use other products when I have a level of knowledge built up on using Adobe Captivate through my work with other organizations, such as the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the American Red Cross through their online learning platforms and my associated volunteer work. These are built using Adobe Captivate. Furthermore, I do have an academic license for (a version of the) Adobe Creative Suite, and any external work that needed to be done (basic image editing, scripting, etc.) can be easily integrated using the Bridge functionality that would interconnect the suite and Captivate.
Video recording
Are you about to record the movies/tutorials only by yourself, or you consider to organise a small team of recorders? In grant application you sometimes write "we", sometimes "I."
An interesting point. Upon review, it appears as though I may suffer from multiple personalities, as this will be an individual project. The "we" at times indicated Andrew West, the flow funder with whom I originally worked to develop this grant proposal and who has provided support throughout this project, and it is also important to note that it is among my highest priorities to keep this project entirely transparent and seek community input as often as possible, thus constituting another "we." However, the tutorials would be developed by myself without others' contributions (unless they were given in some free capacity through community input) in accordance with the recommendations of the community and the directives of the WMF.

Questions by Polimerek (talk) 14:03, 25 March 2013 (UTC) Answers by Jackson Peebles (talk) 17:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


I saw and discussed things a bit at the original flow funding application on English Wikipedia, I like Jackson's responses, and I trust that Jackson will provide value to the community (as long as there is a place on en wiki for people to provide feedback on rough draft videos, which Jackson said there would be, in his user space). He's putting his real-life credibility on the line. So let's fund this please. =) Biosthmors (talk) 18:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Central Project Location[edit]

Though this is a Wikimedia project, the central location that I monitor most closely regarding this project is located at English Wikipedia. I am happy to accept any suggestions, comments, and concerns at that location's talk page! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 20:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]