Talk:Wikipedia Asian Month/Archive/Archives/2015-10

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Format

@AddisWang: There is suggestion from an idwiki user to use id:Wikipedia:Wikisprint/2014-15 as a format of this "competition". So this Indonesian "Wikisprint" is a event where on the stated period, you need to achieve a certain point to receive prize (which is a Barnstar). Earning points can be done by creating articles (of a certain criteria and minimum length), list the articles you made at that page, and after verification by the juries, one can claim the prize. What do you think? Kenrick95 15:21, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I think it's more like a game rather than competition. --Ricky Setiawan (talk) 12:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Btw @AddisWang:, Kenrick told me that you guys meet on the Wikimania. :) @Kenrick95: also has some experience regarding the game, Wikisprint/Wiki-marathon. It is easy to be held yet fun and can generate some quality articles as well as increase user engagement, right Kenrick? --119.18.159.10 12:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Though I only have ever participated as the jury, it does not require much work to make this event happen. Kenrick95 13:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Kenrick95:, I agree with @Ricky Setiawan: that this is more like a game and culture exchange event other than competition, especially we might not have any prize other than postcard.--AddisWang (talk) 22:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

@AddisWang: With this format, only those with at least certain amount of points can be rewarded hence encouraging people to create new articles. So what do you think of the format? Below are the translated Indonesian Wikisprint rules. Maybe we can use this as a basis for the Asian month rules. Kenrick95 13:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
@Kenrick95:, I'm think editors who contribute at least 5 new articles fit this criteria will receive postcard. And for each individual Wikis, the local organizer can decide to have a honor title to editor who create most amount of article or not. (Such as Wikipedia Culture Ambassador, may be easily accepted by small community.) I'm move those rule to the main page and improve it. Thanks for the translation. --AddisWang (talk) 23:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
@Ricky Setiawan:, we have the translations :)--AddisWang (talk) 23:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
I am interested in the competition idea. Do you have a tool on toolslab to help judging the submissions? or do you plan to make one? With a good tool, tracking and judging can be streamlined and scalable. We can double check by human for the winners only. --Taweethaも (talk) 15:05, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
A tool at Tool Labs is a good idea though it requires some time to develop and test. I may or may not have time (my semester haven't started) to make it ready for use in November though (but yeah if the tool isn't ready, we can easily fallback to manual tracking and judging like what's done in Indonesian Wikisprint). Kenrick95 (talk) 15:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Kenrick95:@Taweetham: My idea is making this time as a fun game, rather than with competition. Maybe we can do it next time with more experience and time. And I personally don't support the idea that using prize to motivate people editing Wikipedia.--AddisWang (talk) 05:48, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
@AddisWang: Yeah I agree that we should target this being a fun game rather than a competition, but yeah postcard may be an attractive prize. Maybe what @Taweetham: meant by winners are those eligible for postcards? Kenrick95 (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I understand that having a small number of big prizes is not desirable that's why we have postcards - hopefully unlimited number of postcards. What I mean by competition is that we perhaps still need to make report metrics and do some ranking. --Taweethaも (talk) 17:11, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Because I think people can "only" get a postcard (and fun) for doing any cheating. So we don't have to make it as a very strict system. I will expain with more detail about the byte and word in new title, ping you when I've done.--AddisWang (talk) 00:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Another concern is the differences of word counts between languages. I think each community should provide their own exact number for article criteria as it differs from one another. Kenrick95 (talk) 15:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

The rule shall be able to be adjusted by each community--AddisWang (talk) 05:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I really hope we have a tool to help us. We can count number of bytes rather than words for convenience. However, we need to count only the text. We have similar tool here.--Taweethaも (talk) 17:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Wow thank you Kenrick for the translation! Ok, while Kenrick is preparing for the tool lab, let us prepare the design materials for the event and give it a professional look to make everyone eager to join it. As usual, I ping @Farras: for this. Can you help us, Farras? --Ricky Setiawan (talk) 15:52, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Indeed I'm looking forward for this event, and I'll prepare articles about ASEAN member states and even step on and become a co-judge in zhwp (主持人), given that my days in the school is not too busy. Though I've some doubts: 1) whether a user's position in a chapter/user group matter for his/her eligibility in the WikiSprint and 2) postcards will be sent on the basis of community, participants or even chapter.

Also for the case in zhwp, we'll held a writing campaign (動員令, Dòngyuánlìng) in Summer every year, as Addis introduced to you in the Wikimedia blog before. It usually lasted for about 2 months, and there will be some designated subjects for participants to work on (those out of scope are also accepted, but the marks given is lower). From my viewpoint, it may resemble a contest in numbers, as those with most articles submitted/marks given will receive a title. Other projects with a similar format of the Campaign there doesn't work (incl. a pilot I've involved before), with lack of promotion and editors as possible contributing factors of their failure. Thus I doubt if zhwp editors will just relax and have fun in this event. Furthermore, from my experience in last year's Campaign, I'm worried about if this project will results in creation of a bunch of articles which fulfilled the criteria but with factual errors/unsubstantial content. On that year's Campaign I and another user criticise a newer user for factual errors appeared in his Campaign submissions about Russia and other CIS states. Now the blamed user is concentrated on articles related to Armenia, as well as China's bilateral relationship with other states - even though my "partner" still scold and make fun of him, so do I (in a more polite manner, and no fun-making). --Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse | Contributions ) 15:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

(1) My view is that this "sprint" is open to everyone but those who chose to be the judges or organizers shouldn't be eligible for the event since they should not be judging the articles that they created themselves. (2) What I imagined now is that the users eligible for the prize will be sent postcards from the chapters on the topic that they're most active on (@AddisWang: What do you think of this?).
There is this point that the article criteria "The article have decent references; doubtful or controversial statements in the article should be verifiable by the citation(s) listed in that article." and that's why human judging is required to strike out these kinds of articles. Kenrick95 (talk) 15:29, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
@春卷柯南:, I understand these concerns, but our goal of this event is aiming to build a channel on culture exchange inside the Wikipedia. So people willing to have fun and learn some culture of neighbor are very welcome, but it's not necessary we want to attract those who wish to win big prize or something like that. I think the motivation is having fun, even the postcard is just help our communities to build friendship. And on each wiki, in Chinese Wikipedia as example, no one can represent all editors says people won't join. We are not looking for to have entire community join, especially in the first time. You don't need to worry about the output or any those metrics, which I personally don't care that much.AddisWang (talk) 00:27, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Personally I don't worry about how many will join, and understand the goal stated above. Postcards is already an attractive incentive, but I do worry titles will generate a sense of competition among (some of) participants in zhwp (of course one varies from the others, I may mention it again in the local discussion).--Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse | Contributions ) 16:08, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
@Kenrick95:, I actually the organizers can join the event as long as there is another organizer check his/her articles. The maximal you can get for potential "cheating" is just a postcard. And the postcard maybe randomly distributed, since not all participate communities require (or able) to send postcard.AddisWang (talk) 00:27, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
@AddisWang: Well, as long as they did not judge their own articles, I think it's fine. Okay then, random distribution seems okay to me. Kenrick95 (talk) 12:24, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Maybe small Wikipedia which only has one organizer are fine to check his/her own articles.--AddisWang (talk) 02:04, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


Translation of Indonesian Wikisprint rules

  • Articles that are taken into account are those created in the 3×24 hour period stated below
    <insert dates>
  • Those articles should be newly created by you (i.e. not expanding stubs)
  • If you have created articles during the sprint period but haven't registered, when you register, you can list down those articles here.
  • An article can only be listed down once
  • A new article should be at least a "long stub" (text content, without template, references, categories, etc) should be at least 300 words and fulfill the notability guidelines. Doubtful information of the article should be verifiable with trusted sources listed in that article.
  • Each participants list down their own new articles.
  • Articles not fulfilling the criteria will be struck out by the juries.
  • Participants may still list down articles created during the sprint period at most 1×24 hours after the sprint ended. After that, no more articles should be listed.
  • For each articles fulfilling the criteria, participants receive 1 (one) point. Participants complete the challenge if they have at least 3 (three) points.

Criteria used in judging:

  • Article fulfills the article notability criteria
  • Article contains at least 300 words, not including tables, infoboxes, references, external links, categories, etc.
  • Decent references; Doubtful or controversial statements contains citation(s).
  • Not purely machine translated; and having a decent language style
  • There is no issue (no tags) with the article
  • Not a list
  • Informative

Wikisprint result will be judged by the juries. Decision of the juries are absolute.

And most importantly, have fun!

Redundant criteria

The criteria that users need to have an account on the local project is redundant. All accounts are global, so it shouldn't matter. ----Rsrikanth05 (talk) 16:51, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

It's for ip users.--AddisWang (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
@AddisWang: Even for an IP user, if they have one account, they automatically get a global account. ----Rsrikanth05 (talk) 22:25, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Strict rules?

@Kenrick95:@Taweetham:. Since we are thinking about a game that aiming to let attendee having fun and learn some neighbor's culture, and a ultimate "prize" is a postcard, it's not necessary to pay a lot of time to check every article very strictly. I think an experienced editor may able to take a look and know if the article fulfill the criteria such as reference and category, and another click to see if the article are 3500 byte. 300 words rule are more likely to ask people don't have plenty of reference and only a few sentences, which can be detected roughly by taking a look.

On Chinese Wikipedia, the bytes of text in an good quality article usually are usually half of the entire article's bytes.

So how about make it easy for everyone.--AddisWang (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

By only counting the bytes, one can only make a one-liner article with lots of images, infoboxes, templates, categories, etc. This is not what we want. Hence, the word count rule exists. And yeah one Wikipedia differs from other Wikipedia on the quality of an article versus the byte count. If the word counting judging system is made easier (i.e. automated), would you like to have it? Kenrick95 (talk) 00:54, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
So the idea I want to say is, that it's vey easy to detect if the article is the kind you've mentioned. If it's a one-liner article, then it obviously not fulfill the 300 words rules. If not, we don't really count the words and say "There are only 294 (or 249) words so it can not count". It's more likely to be, a line of ZHWP on my screen is roughly 50 words, so there are 5 lines text in the article which shall be fine. I just want to save you and others' time :). It's definitely welcome to have a tool to use.--AddisWang (talk) 01:03, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I think that if we make it a rule, then we should strictly follow it. If there is a tool to count the number of words, then I think it should be easy and consume little time to conform with the rules. Kenrick95 (talk) 12:26, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
I apologize for entering this discussion late, but if you ask me, I agree that the rules shouldn't be overly strict. On the Tagalog Wikipedia, we try to place primacy on quality despite the fact that lots of people just want to write one-line stubs and be done with it. If someone writes over 300 words, then that's fine. If someone writes less but the quality is good, that should be fine too.
That said, we have a quality metric for this, right? I'd love to read long articles, but only if they make sense. :P --Sky Harbor (talk) 10:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what the judging process is supposed to do: filter out those articles with poor quality because the criteria is not only about word/byte count. Kenrick95 (talk) 04:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Rules and Guideline finalization

@Taweetham: @Sky Harbor: @AddisWang: @Ricky Setiawan: @Rsrikanth05: @春卷柯南: I think that there is no more issue with the Rules and Organizer's Guideline, except whether it should be followed strictly or not. I'm proposing to finalize this discussion so we can start setting up the local event page. I'm suggesting this: word count should not be followed too strict, while other measurable and obvious rules should be followed strictly (e.g. byte count, no issue tag, have reference, etc); in the end, human judge will have a final say whether to accept or reject one's article. What do you all think? Kenrick95 (talk) 07:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Kenrick. --Ricky Setiawan (talk) 04:13, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Agree. The tool will us save time. However, Wikipedia is for human to read and we will definitely have a look at those articles. --Taweethaも (talk) 08:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Agree with Kenrick on his suggestions. But wait a moment - Here's my concerns (Sorry for delay a as I was back lately yesterday). --Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse | Contributions ) 07:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
  1. Contradictory statements found in the introduction and the rules. The introduction stated that a participant is not allowed to write articles about a participant's own country (I agree on the rule that articles about one's own country/region shouldn't be allowed to submit as contributions in this event), but the rules forbids also articles about his/her mother tongue's speaking regions. Take Malay as example - its speaking region at least encompasses Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei (though ethnic Chinese is the dominant ethnic group in Singapore; though Malay is intelligible with Indonesian, but I'll rather put aside on this issue). If the second definition is adopted, then a Malaysia editor will not be able to submit a Bruneian article in this event.
  2. And also how to deal with dependencies (e.g. Hong Kong). Will a participant live in a dependency barred from writing an article about his/her country (e.g. PR China, in the case of Hong Kong) and submit it as a work for this event?
  3. Regarding diplomatic articles, if one side is the participant's own country, and the other is not an Asian country, will it count? If the another side is an Asian country, will it count?
  4. In a discussion with Rover (WMHK) in last month's monthly meeting of HK Wikimedians, I mentioned about my doubt that which side will be responsible for postcard sending, the chapter or the participants? (he replies that he will have a study on this event, but WMHK is lacked in terms of funds - maybe unable to give material support)
  5. If a submission is rejected, I think that re-submission should make as an option.
  6. Is it possible for one to participate in the event in more than one language versions (with an intent to boost his/her chance to get an honour title)?
  1. Hmm I agree that the statements are inconsistent. I feel that it has more sense to count articles about Asian countries, except own's country --> That means we need to collect data about the country of residence.
  2. I think both are fine, we only need to make a consistent definition so there will be no dispute later on. I think that it is okay to treat HK, China, and Taiwan as three separate "countries"?
  3. What do you mean by "diplomatic articles"? I think we only count those articles on Asian countries topic.
  4. I'm not sure about that, but I think @AddisWang: started a grant proposal to WMF.
  5. What I'm thinking is just judging after the period is over. So this may not be applicable.
  6. I think it is possible, given that a person is entitled to a maximum of one postcard (or two, if one joined as judge too?). Nevertheless, this event objective is to encourage writing about Asian countries.
Kenrick95 (talk) 04:45, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Apology for a typo error in the 4th point. At this moment I can't agree more on the 4-5th points.--Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse | Contributions ) 10:23, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
  1. Agree. The process to collect participants' addresses is already listed in the guidelines, and it can served for two purposes - sending postcards (but if the postcard is rejected, it may means that the participant provide a fake address to us) and check for their country/region of residence.
  2. Agree. But a Mainland Chinese will rather think that China is a country, Hong Kong/Taiwan are dependencies under China. In Taiwan some endorse the idea that Taiwan is independent from China, some shared a similar view with Mainland Chinese. But from a US perspective, Taiwan is a country. Though Hong Kong is not even a state, but they have a different jurisdiction, fiscal system, etc from Mainland China/Taiwan; when we have to fill in forms, in the country field, Hong Kong can be found sometimes (just neglecting "political correctness.") We also don't need to care much about political correctness, just follow Wikipedia is already okay.
  3. In this case I mean articles about bilateral relationship between two states. eg. China-Indonesia relations/Dutch-Indonesia relations.
  1. Yeah sure. But then why one would provide a fake address if one wants to have the prize?
  2. Well, it's complicated (and sensitive), maybe we should state this special case clearly before any dispute happens later.
  3. I think they will still be counted if one of the parties are Asian countries.
Kenrick95 (talk) 17:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I see the confusion.

  1. The purpose of not writing their own country is ask Wikipedians to write something not easily access in their native language. Thus, for Chinese Speaker from Taiwan writes an article about India is much more meaningful than an article about mainland China or Hong Kong. To make it easy, here is something I think can be used to decide the content about which country should exclude from local event.
  1. The source regions of page view per Wikipedia take more than 70% page view will be exclude. (EX. Chinese Wikipedia: China+Taiwan+Hong Kong=79.9; Indonesian Wikipedia: Indonesia=87%; Tamil Wikipedia: India+Sri Lanka=69.3%) link of page view data
  2. The country or region that obviously use one language as it's official language but not on the list due to it's population shall be exclude. (Ex: Macau)
  3. Other special exclusion can be decided by local event team.
  1. I think the article about more than two countries shall be count since it fit our purpose for get know each other more. Also, other such criteria shall be decided by local team and shall be flexible.
  2. I would like to put WMHK into our grant proposal, as long as I know who is really the person in charge of the chapter. And the grant will be decided by WMF not me.
  3. The rule and judge policy shall be flexible and final decided by local team.
  4. The honor title shall given by each Wikipedia community and local team, depends on each Wikipedia's policy, so it shall be decided by local team.
  5. While we may can develop a honor title for international level, for whoever contribute most amount of articles.
  6. If a Wikipedian can accomplish the requirement on more than one Wikipedia, there shall be no limit on postcard. While if one also serve to more than two Wikipedia's local team and judge, only one postcard will be given for his/her organizing.

--AddisWang (talk) 02:16, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm quite agree with AddisWang though I don't want to complicate things especially the first point. Kenrick95 (talk) 01:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Good, me neither, let's discard it.--AddisWang (talk) 19:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Agree with AddisWang, The Wikipedians from a single language community but from different countries are familiar with each other and know more or less about the culture as they are working together for considerable time in Wikipedia. On addition, it is possible to have articles on both countries in that language Wikipedia. So, it would not be meaningful to write articles on each other, as they might be doing this before. It is better to exclude the native language speaking countries. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 12:10, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Let's give the local team the right to make decision. --AddisWang (talk) 19:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, agree. Kenrick95 (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Query regarding Postcards

Hi. The Hebrew Wikipedia would like to participate in the Asia Month. However, we are not familiar with the Postcard gesture that was suggested here. Is it a virtual postcard or a true and physical one? We would be grateful if someone could direct us to any link to a detailed information regarding Postcards and possibly some examples, too. Best Regards. YoavR (talk) 19:12, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

@YoavR: Hi, so far, we're talking about a physical post-card. I believe @AddisWang: can explain more since he has experience in printing and sending the postcards to participants of his local competitions in China. Kenrick95 (talk) 15:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
@YoavR:，physical postcards. Just like those Wikimedia Israel made for WikiAir project.--AddisWang (talk) 19:29, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you both. YoavR (talk) 08:12, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Following your replies, we decided not to use physical postcards in the Hebrew Wikipedia. Instead, we will give "medals" on talk pages to writers of 5 articles. In other words, we will be happy to participate, but a little differently compared to other Wikipedias. My question is: should we subscribe on this page like everyone else? Or subscribe with a comment about the differences regarding postcards? Best Regards, Ravit (talk) 20:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
I'll leave this to Addis to decide, although on the Tagalog Wikipedia we thought of giving bigger prizes for a while. As far as I'm concerned, I'm okay with not giving physical postcards if you guys can't, though you might want to specify that they will still receive postcards from other participating countries. My question though is how you guys will give out medals to other Wikipedians who contribute to Israel topics on their local Wikipedias. --Sky Harbor (talk) 03:59, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ravit, it's great to hear Hebrew Wikipedia is going to be part of Asian Month. So there are only six communities will send postcards (China, India, Philippines, Indonesia, Japan and Taiwan), the rest of the communities will only receive postcards from these six communities. So if you willing to not even receive a postcard from these communities for some reason, that's totally fine. We may also giving participate virtual medal on their Wikipedia page since it has no cost. Hebrew Wikipedia can just participate like anyone, maybe put a note that Hebrew community will not receive postcard to make it clear. As Josh said, you don't need to sent postcards, just like many other communities, but still receive postcards.--AddisWang (talk) 06:22, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarifications. So we will subscribe like most countries that don't send postcards. Of course it would be nice to receive postcards from the few countries that will send them (though I guess it would be a little complicated regarding Indonesia, which unfortunately has no diplomatic relationships with Israel; but that's Ok). Best regards, Ravit (talk) 19:29, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Ravit, Ok thank you, I will keep that in mind and avoid such uncertainty.--AddisWang (talk) 21:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wikipedia_Asian_Month/Archive/Archives/2015-10&oldid=26450294"