Jump to content

Talk:Coolest Tool Award

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 2 months ago by BDavis (WMF) in topic Is there a list of tools?


Is there some place we can see which tools have been nominated to avoid duplication? Do more nominations affect the likelihood of a tool winning? - PKM (talk) 21:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

All nominations will be kept private, so you won't be able to see the list of nominated tools. And, more nominations, the better it will be for a tool unless they are duplicate submissions :) SSethi (WMF) (talk) 22:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the clarifications! - PKM (talk) 03:20, 18 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

What will happen to the nominated tools? Masum Reza 13:53, 22 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Masumrezarock100: The nominated tools will be reviewed by this year's committee & the nominations will help the committee to find & select the top tools to be presented at Wikimania. Hope that answers your question? :-) - BMueller (WMF) (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Yes. Masum Reza 14:55, 23 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Wouw* that was very short time! Were this only technicians / WM people the target group? (I've not voted) -- User: Perhelion 09:14, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Hi, no, everyone was invited to nominate tools. I'm sorry if you missed it/or if it wasn't clear that everyone can recommend tools :( It was not a classic vote though, but a call for nominations to help the committee to find & select the coolest tools. It got announced via Tech News, some mailing lists, Facebook, Twitter, and afaik a few people also shared it on other places (for example I've seen it here: de:Vorlage:Beteiligen). The timeline was/is quite tight though, as we had to wait until the Wikimania submission got accepted before starting with the actual preparation & call for nominations. I would hope once it becomes an established tradition, calls for nominations can also start a bit earlier & stay open longer. It's the pilot year :-) Best, --BMueller (WMF) (talk) 13:56, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
I talked to TheDJ, and he said there wasn't much nominations. Only few people have subscribed to tech news and other mailing lists. So they didn't know about this. My point is that it should have been publicized more in English Wikipedia and other wikis. Masum Reza 17:52, 10 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Masumrezarock100: sorry, i only noticed this now. My comment back then was specifically on tools regarding English Wikipedia. Also we had quite a few last minute submissions, that I was not yet aware of at that time (because for privacy reasons i didnt have direct access to the submissions). We had a very successful event at Wikimania and we hope that this will return next year, with even more enthusiasm, more tools and hopefully even more nominations and more time to make those nominations. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 18:32, 17 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
I didn't know about this but that is probably on me, I'm trying to keep up but it's not easy, and I may well have skimmed over the announcement and missed it.
I think it's a great idea, and hope it continues. while I was familiar with many of these tools, some were new, and at least one (page views analysis) seems to have new features I had noticed before so I'm happy to see that.--Sphilbrick (talk) 19:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Thank you :-) this is great to hear! --BMueller (WMF) (talk) 05:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply


I don't have the technical skills to do this but I hope someone could coordinate with those editors with graphical skills to either create a specific barnstar for these awards or some other way to create something that could show up on an editor's use of page to acknowledge this award.--Sphilbrick (talk) 19:13, 18 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi Sphilbrick, we did that :-) we created a userbox template for the awarded tools and added them to the project pages of the tools, like here. Best, BMueller (WMF) (talk) 05:18, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Wonderful! Thanks.--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Very happy to see the creation of such award[edit]

I'd love to say such award is a great recognition for the technical contributions. It's really a great idea! Here is some of my suggestions:

1. Let's do it next year as well!

2. I think as more people start to take this award seriously, we can start to also recognize "nominees" and "honorable mentions" just like other academy awards.

3. Set up a public process for either the judgement process or the judgement committee selection will help advance award.

4. Consider invite the award recipient back to present next year award / be sitting on the next year's judgement committee, to create a sense of traditiony-ness

Again, great idea!

Xinbenlv (talk) 20:38, 28 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi Xinbenlv thank you very much for all the great ideas :-) - 1. yes! 2. we had that idea in mind for this year too, but had to drop it out of logistic reasons - but for next year it would be nice to have 3./4. - sounds good, we'll definitely consider that! Thanks again, and sorry for the late reply - I was out on vacation & had no internet access for a while! Best, --BMueller (WMF) (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply


Tried my best to spread the word about first CTA in Ukrainian https://wikimediaukraine.wordpress.com/2019/09/26/coolest_tool_award/ --Anntinomy (talk) 11:12, 26 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Anntinomy: Wow, this is so cool! I added a link to your blog post to the materials section :) best, BMueller (WMF) (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Maybe a multilingual page.?[edit]

Thrilled to see inventive people get recognized and mentioned. Then, are we happy to turn the page translatable? Kindly push for translation, both yr2019 and yr2020 (: --Omotecho (talk) 08:33, 29 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hey User:Omotecho, I've talked to a variety of people about the possibility, but the situation is kind of complex since we want to keep the current edition in the top level page Coolest_Tool_Award, and that section is going to be edited and change while the award is ongoing, to finally be extracted to its own page next year when the new edition is planned. The rest of the page (the intro you marked, and from Coolest_Tool_Award#How_does_it_work downwards are going to be fairly stable and would be great to have translated.
The advice I've heard is that having most of a page translated, but keeping a section without translating is confusing when reading the page in other languages, and requires having justification in the source wiki text and maybe a visible notice about why a section isn't translated, and that isn't great.
Another option I've heard is moving certain sections to sub-pages, like Coolest_Tool_Award#How_does_it_work, and make them translateable there, and then transclude them into the main page. Kind of cumbersome but could be done.
Other options I've heard aren't great either, lots of tradeoffs really if a page isn't very stable and not going to change much.
The 2019 edition page 100% for sure should be marked for translation, as it is not going to change at all.
For now we left the main page as single language because there is no clear solution and the page is going to be changing, which is a valid reason for keeping a page out of translate.
Do you have thoughts about a good way to approach this? --JHernandez (WMF) (talk) 11:25, 29 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Interesting challenge. There is not so many text...What exactly is getting changed? Can it be reduced to tool list and few lines? Zblace (talk) 12:54, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Basically the Coolest_Tool_Award#Coolest_Tool_Award_2020 section is what is going to be changing a bit for the next month. During the duration of the award (~2 months), that section goes through 6 stages more or less:
  1. Last year results
  2. New edition announced
  3. Nomination process open
  4. Nomination process closed
  5. Award ceremony announced
  6. Awards published
The changes are not tremendously big, but I was advised to not mark the page for translation if it was going to be frequently edited like this. It would be great to hear from experienced translators or translate admins about what would be a good way to proceed about this. --JHernandez (WMF) (talk) 15:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Who is the Coolest Tool Academy?[edit]

Who is the Coolest Tool Academy? Who did it get started? ChristianKl19:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi User:ChristianKl, the Coolest Tool Academy 2020 are زكريا, Neslihan, Masssly, Magnus Manske, Krishna, me and Birgit. It got started last year in the first edition in 2019. They original members are listed in Coolest_Tool_Award/2019: Birgit, Bodhisattwa, Brooke, Ladsgroup, Srishti, TheDJ, زكريا. You can read here how the Academy is formed. Let me know if I can clarify anything else. --JHernandez (WMF) (talk) 15:24, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I also would like the academy better identified. I wish that the Academy can be Wikimedia Community members rather than Wikimedia staff people, just because Wikimedia staff are better resourced and tend to direct conversations. Community decisions and community processes work best in community control. To date so far as I know, there is no public evidence of the Wikimedia Foundation supporting community discussion and deliberation in this process. To ensure diversity and inclusion, I wish that the Wikimedia Foundation could support community conversation in geographically diverse places. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:30, 17 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Bluerasberry: Hi, Coolest Tool Award/2021 says: "Members of the 2021 edition are: Neslihan, Emmanuel, Jay, Masssly, Sage, Rummana and Andre." Could you elaborate what exactly you're missing and would like to see in this specific case (Coolest Tool Award and its committee in 2021)? Thanks, --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 06:39, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
@AKlapper (WMF): I apologize, the information I wanted was there. I did not find it. This project is cool itself and it finds tools. I was too pointed and aggressive in my asking. Everything is fine here except I got anxious. Thanks for your reply, nothing is missing, thanks to the committee, and I look forward to the award announcement next week. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:25, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Google form[edit]

Hi I wanted to nominate a tool but I dont like using a GAFAM google form in a free software environment. Why not use meta for this ? The form obliges me to have a google account.... Nattes à chat (talk) 17:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Nattes à chat: Hi and thanks for your comment! Note that you do not need a Google account to fill in the form. I'm unfortunately not aware of available tools on Wikimedia wikis which would easily allow to add nominations in a structured way and processing them. If you have any ideas please feel free to share them, so we could hopefully look into them in the future. (Maybe mw:Extension:Page Forms could come close but that extension is not available on Wikimedia wikis.) --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 18:02, 11 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Hi @AKlapper (WMF): it is written "obligatoire" in red, which in french means "compulsory"..... ? This is what I use when I am looking for an free software alternative https://www.chatons.org/search/by-service?service_type_target_id=126&field_alternatives_aux_services_target_id=469&field_software_target_id=All&field_is_shared_value=1&title= Nattes à chat (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the clarification! The red word refers to fields that need to be filled out. I agree it was a bit confusing. We have now added a sentence to make it clearer that you do not need an account. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 20:18, 11 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thanks ǃ Nattes à chat (talk) 20:44, 11 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Once it's more established, I wonder if the nomination process is something that could be integrated into Toolhub, since it would (hopefully) already have listings of each tool. Legoktm (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Legoktm: In my understanding, "tool" in Coolest Tool Award is intentionally vague; it could also mean gadgets, external applications, mobile applications. If Toolhub also allowed listing those, that could work. (Reminded me a bit of unrelated phab:T287497.) --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 08:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

I clicked nomination, saw the google form, and closed the tab again. That was my nomination process. Really easy and fast. Maybe the coolest tool would be a tool that allows to chose the coolest tool without use of such external platforms, who knows. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 06:56, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Herzi Pinki: If anyone knows an alternative nomination system, which allows to nominate anonymously and does not expose previous nominations by others, then please share more info! --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 07:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
don't see any need to introduce intransparency in who nominated which tool. We collaboratively have a vision, don't we. Free knowledge. Advocating any tool to others by e.g. nominations gives us a much wider horizon. If somebody wants to nominate anonymously, he or she can do as an IP. In the end it is not the nominator but the tool that gets awarded. Best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 07:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Herzi Pinki: I do see a need. :) Thinking of the Oscars, Nobel prizes, etc.: Do you know awards that publish the results of public votes weeks before the actual award ceremony, to destroy the surprise? (PS: IPs are not "anonymous".) --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 07:45, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thinking of QI, Schreibwettbewerb, Wartungsbausteinwettbewerb, POTY, WLM, .. all nominations are public. In the end you might loose or gain contributors with your choice of tools. I'm one of those having been lost (also by your TINA arguing). Comparing with Oscars, Nobel prizes (or which country to invade next on the list of rogue states) is a bit inadequate in importance. WMF knows. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 08:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
What does "TINA" stand for? --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 08:08, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

I too clicked the "Nominate a tool" button and instantly regretted it. At the very least add a very prominent warning that the button itself leads to form hosted by an external organisation — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 21:09, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

The page says "This survey will be conducted via a third-party service", two lines below the botton. Would it help if the button was below that sentence? --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 21:12, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
That would help a little, but it would still not clear that the button itself takes you to an external website. It is quite possible, and perfectly reasonable to assume, that the WMF hosts a survey system which displays a web page form, validates any inputs, obfuscates the user account and then sends the inputs to the third party which is only responsible for collating the nominations — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 22:46, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
@GhostInTheMachine: Do you have a piece of software in mind that you could share? Thanks, --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 07:43, 26 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
No software as such, but WM must have hosted data input forms before. A quick check finds Special:SecurePoll and MW:Extension:InputBox – there must be other systems already available. — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 20:03, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Also mw:Extension:QuickSurveysGhostInTheMachine talk to me 23:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
mw:Extension:QuickSurveys can "ask one multiple-choice question". How is that helpful for this case? Have you checked what these pieces of software do? --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 00:35, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
Sorry – too brief. Let me expand ...
mw:Extension:InputBox is just a component, not a full survey. mw:Extension:Survey offers more, but is currently not being maintained. mw:Extension:SecurePoll has no clear statement about being maintained.
However, since mw:Extension:QuickSurveys is currently advertised as being maintained, there may be some value in contacting the team working on it to see if they can offer any guidance towards a locally hosted survey for next year — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 14:04, 7 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
BTW some WMF surveys were converted to LimeSurvey recently. For example, after requested, user Elfego Solares (WMF) helped in the conversion of all Wikimania Google Forms (sic) to LimeSurvey, halfway through! That's not to say that now we should contact Elfego Solares (WMF) for whatever conversion but, as it is complicated for volunteers to understand how WMF decides things, if a volunteer sees a Google Form, I think it could be useful to discuss it on the LimeSurvey talk page. --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 09:12, 12 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
GhostInTheMachine, AKlapper, Herzi Pinki, I don't see the need for anonymity either for the nomination process. The nomination doesn't select the winner: After the nomination process finishes, the Academy gets together to discuss the entries and selection process so there is no surprise to be spoiled by a public nomination process. It's not a vote.
And if the nominations are done publicly, well, InputBox was mentioned above which isn't sufficient by itself, but.. maybe next year.Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 13:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
That's a different topic though and unrelated to Google Forms? --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 13:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
AKlapper, the section starter asked "Why not use meta for this?", I offered a form that could technically be used to do the nomination process on-wiki.
Actually you yourself said I'm unfortunately not aware of available tools on Wikimedia wikis which would easily allow to add nominations in a structured way and processing them. If you have any ideas please feel free to share them, so we could hopefully look into them in the future.
My form allows the "add nominations in a structured way" part (for the processing part we'd need more information), so I "felt free to share my idea".Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:25, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ah, thanks! (Sorry, it's a long and older thread.) There is a surprise to be spoiled by a public nomination process - how many nominations a tool has received, for example. Or which tools got nominated. The current form also has a Comments field about the tool with a boolean whether we can use that feedback anonymously or not. That's all no technical blockers or such. But less fun and surprise. :) --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 09:58, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply


Is it OK to nominate projects you yourself have worked on? Or is it preferred that nominations come from elsewhere? Legoktm (talk) 19:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't see why it wouldn't be ok, if you don't start to spam it. MarMi wiki (talk) 12:58, 19 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Speaking of self-nominations, does "advertising" the Coolest Tool Award on the (web) tool page and/or the tool help page is ok? Like putting link to the Award page (or only mentioning about it) on the tool page (web tools probably would have an advantage). MarMi wiki (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Yes, it is fine to self-nominate. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 08:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Google forms 2022?[edit]

Please confirm that the nomination process this year will not use Google Forms — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 17:02, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@GhostInTheMachine: We are looking into LimeSurvey, however it's not totally clear yet if all followup processes related to the received tool nominations can also be adjusted. Fingers crossed. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 19:07, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
What's the problem with Google Forms? Sophivorus (talk) 17:42, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
You know, some people from Wikimedia's free environment (ex.) prefer avoiding Google's services for ideological reasons. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
And for the records, we went for LimeSurvey this year. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 19:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

List of nominated tools[edit]

Do you think it would be possible to publish the list of all nominated tools in each category? I think it would be a useful list to discover new tools. Don't you ? PAC2 (talk) 06:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'd personally recommend Toolhub for a curated list of great tools. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 07:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Still says "Watch out for more information"[edit]

Despite the wikimedia-l announcement days ago. Nardog (talk) 18:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@OOnifade-WMF: Please mark Coolest Tool Award/2024 for translation, your changes are not showing up. Nardog (talk) 10:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@NardogThanks for flagging this! I have reached out to a translation admin to help mark the page for translation. OOnifade-WMF (talk) 10:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Done! @Nardog OOnifade-WMF (talk) 11:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Is there a list of tools?[edit]

I can't recall every tool I use from the top of my head. Greatder (talk) 09:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

The Toolhub project is an attempt at compiling a comprehensive list of tools. It certainly is not complete at this point, but it is a start. https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/ -- BDavis (WMF) (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply