Having experience of various similar contests, I have to say the rules, though admirably short, seem not to cover clearly various points that will occur to many people. Questions I wondered about include:
- Are sites with "tentative" status ok?
- Are the various types of points cumulative - ie if you do a Good Article, do you also get points for added pictures, text etc?
- "If you improve 3,600 bytes of content of an existing article, you get 3 points" and "If you add a 3,600 bytes of wikitext (templates, refs, citations) to an existing article, you get 3 points." - is there any point keeping these two separate? What if you add 2,000 bytes of text and 2,000 bytes of wikitext?
- On en:wp it typically takes 1-2 months for an FA nomination to pass through the process to a decision; GA noms are backlogged and often take even longer. I realize on some Wikipedias it can take a few days. Is there a deadline for the judging?
- Can articles on component parts of sites (specified in the UNESCO listing) be included? Many sites are actually covered by a number of articles, often somewhat arbitarily bunched together by UNESCO.
- Presumably new articles on the WHO sites, as listed, are ok, even where the main component parts already have their own articles?
- Hi Johnbod,
- Thank you very much for the excellent questions! I have tried to clarify accordingly, either here or in the text.
- Tentative sites are not included. They are not (yet) World Heritage sites. I added a clarification.
- Yes, they are cumulative. I updated the example with the Feature article to clarify that.
- You get points for all the bytes added to an article. That is what the examples are trying to highlight. In your example you would get 4 points.
- No, not a specific date. If a nomination process is underway we will wait with announcement of winners until the nomination is over. I added a clarification.
- You mean e.g. the articles "Old and New Towns of Edinburgh"? If so, yes, they would both be included. I have clarified that.
- Do you mean that e.g. the article about the New town of Edinburgh is missing but we have one about the Old town? Then yes, creating the article about the New town would give you points (if it is in the lists).
- Best regards, John Andersson (WMSE) (talk) 03:50, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Where we submitted the article names? Is it in beneath the participants name? — Ferdous • 05:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Hi! I added an example user to make it more clear here. Looking forward to your contributions! Best, John Andersson (WMSE) (talk) 14:52, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Yiyi for your question, yes it is eligible I've added a clarification to the rules to include this kind of article. --John Cummings (talk) 13:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello, what about "side articles" ? By example, a site has three temples. There is an article dealing with the site and three other side articles dealing with each temple in details. Are side articles taken into account ? --ContributorQ (talk) 00:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, that is what "their constituent parts" is aiming to cover. Ainali (talk) 06:26, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for your answer. And what about recursivity ? If, in the example above, a temple has some assets, like some paintings. I could create an article about a painting and about the artist who created it. And so on... --ContributorQ (talk) 10:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have a question on the score. On a page (lesson) I wrote on it.wikiversity I also added a gallery with a good number of photos to give the reader the idea of being in that place and being able to see it with my own eyes but those images I have to Add to score calculations or not? Thanks in advance --Samuele2002 (Talk!) 21:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- John Andersson (WMSE) ? --Samuele2002 (Talk!) 20:27, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Need some help
Hi, I am trying to check on Wikipedia Portuguese if the UNESCO monuments have articles. Since I´ve started this search, I´ve faced the following situation: e.g, the UNESCO list says to me that Tiya archaeological site has no article in Portuguese. But, when I search for "Tiya archaeological site" on the Wikipedia PT, I have the Tiya article as my first response. It happens because everyone looking for the site is redirected to this article. So, on the Wikipedia PT, Tiya and Tiya archaeological site are the same thing (or have been treated as they were).
When I go to Wikidata, I can see that are 2 entries: one for the place and the other one for the site. When I check the links to Wikipedia articles from the place entry (Q224673), I can see they have almost the same problem of the Wikipedia PT: the place and the site are seen as the same thing, apart from Wikipedia ES and Wikipedia CA that have specific articles for the site as well (as we can see on the site entry on Wikidata).
So, as I don´t know to solve the "redirection" situation of the Wikipedia PT and believe this must be more complex to solve, how could I indicate to the coordinators of the UNESCO Challenge that there is a Wikipedia PT article about Tiya archaeological site, but that it does not have this specific name on its headline? Museu33389 (talk) 23:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
- Good question. I do not know Portugese Wikipedia, but in Swedish Wikipedia I would have written a summary under a specific headline in the main article Tiya (with a "pt:Predefinição:Artigo principal" link to the UNESCO article). Then I would cut-paste the relevant sections from the main article into the new UNESCO article, Tiya archeological site. This would improve clarity IMO.
- If this is not possible, of course you will still get points for your work of improving the amount of information about the archeological site! Please add the articles you have worked on here and add a short comment about the fact that the articles are not separated in ptwp. Best, John Andersson (WMSE) (talk) 04:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
CET and UTC+01:00 stand next to each other without relation, better write CET=UTC+01:00 or CET/UTC+01:00. Further, since end of may, we do not have CET, but CEST (Central European Summer Time) which is UTC+02:00. Indicating start and end time in CET therefore is a bit strange. --Bjs (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Contribution ethics and use of images
I don't know how ethical it's for some users to add 30 to 40 photos in an articles, just to get points quickly and easily. The purpose of adding UNESCO images should be to place where there is no image (or few in a long article), or to replace those that are of low quality. It's like, for competition's sake, let's make encyclopedia articles into photo galleries. --Liridon (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I was going to raise similar concerns after seeing this edit on one of the articles I've translated for the contest. Another contestant has added an image in the wrong place, with a caption that is gibberish, obviously in the sole intent to gain 1 point. To me, this looks like a perversion of the original intent of the contest. Ælfgar (talk) 11:17, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Unesco CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0
Can someone help me with UNESCO license? Those depictions are available under CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0. Does it mean that I can translate them from English or French without any problems, but should put a simple reference after the end of a sentence? I'm confused by the request of "indication if changes were made". What is the best way to do that? Thank you. --Andrew J.Kurbiko (talk) 18:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Andrew J.Kurbiko, thanks for your question, please add a reference like any other source. The website is a little confusing, there are descriptions available in 7 languages in total, to see them just go to one of the World Heritage sites to see a description and then you can chose the language there e.g Ennedi Massif. Is it possible to also put some kind of note at the end of the article or the talk page to say where the text originally came from? Whatever is acceptable for your language Wikipedia. We would like to understand where translations have been made from the UNESCO text. We would like to set a system for this but it hasn't been created yet.
Thanks to the organizers
Many thank to the organizers of this contest. Even if I was not able to contribute a lot this time, I found it a very good idea. If there will be another contest on UNESCO heritage, please let us know at de:Wikipedia Diskussion:WikiProjekt UNESCO-Kultur- und Naturerbe. --Bjs (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you Bjs! We will be sure to do that, if we decide to organize one in 2018. Best, John Andersson (WMSE) (talk) 06:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Invitation to Met Open Access Artworks Challenge (15 May - 30 June)
We'd like to invite UNESCO participants to join a new challenge on the same model, the Met Open Access Artworks Challenge. You can contribute by illustrating with images using some of the 375k photos now under CC0, starting or improving articles (try our new Mbabel tool!), or creating translations. You can sign up here: Met Open Access Artworks Challenge/Participants.--Pharos (talk) 18:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)