Video tutorial "Referencing with VisualEditor" – newsletter issue 1
Good news: the (lengthy!) script draft 1 is complete!
Hello, I am happy to share that script draft 1 is complete and ready for public comment.
The script (link to the Google doc) is much longer than I anticipated, at almost 21 pages!
Although I think that the 21 page script would be a very good introduction to referencing policies and workflows, I am considering dividing it into two or more smaller scripts that would be produced as separate videos. For example, one script could focus on policies and a different script could focus on how to use the citation tool. I am considering this for three reasons:
- People may be more willing to watch shorter videos that have more specific focus.
- Shorter videos may be easier to search for an answer for a single specific question.
- There is a possibility that if I attempt to produce a single video from almost 21 pages of script that I might exceed the budget for this mini-project. I would like for both WMF and the community to be satisfied with the results from this mini-project, and I think that dividing the script into smaller scripts which could be produced separately would be a good way to ensure that the budget for the current grant is not exceeded. While there is a reasonable possibility that I could finish production of the entire 21 pages of script within the current grant, I think that dividing the script would be prudent. After one of the smaller scripts is fully produced within the currently available funding, remaining script could be considered for production within the current grant if there seems to be adequate remaining funds, or could be saved for possible production with a future grant.
Request for constructive criticism and comments
I would very much appreciate constructive criticism and comments regarding the script, preferably by March 10 at 11:59 PM UTC. This is a shorter time window than I would like to provide, but the planned end date for this project is March 14 and I would like to finish video production by the end of March 13 so that I have 24 hours for communications before the grant period ends. If you would like to review the script or make other comments but the end of March 10 is too soon for you, please let me know that you need more time, and I will take that into consideration as I plan for final production and consider whether to request a date extension from WMF. (Extending the finish date for the project would not involve requesting additional funding for the current grant.) I would prefer that the video be done perfectly a few days late than that the video be done on March 14 but have an important error that was not caught during a rush to the finish.
I have three specific requests for feedback:
1. Please find errors in the script. This is a great time to find problems with my work, before the script goes into production and problems become more expensive to fix. Please go to this link in Google Docs and use the Comment feature in the Google Doc.
2. Do you have comments regarding whether the script should be divided, and if so, how it should be divided? Please let me know on the project talk page.
3. How do you feel about the name for the video? Do you prefer "Referencing with VisualEditor" or "Citing sources with VisualEditor", or a third option? Again, please comment on the project talk page. However, if I divide the script then I will create new names for the smaller videos.
Thank you for your interest in this mini-project. I am grateful to be working on a project which I hope will help Wikipedia contributors to be more efficient and effective, and indirectly help to improve Wikipedia's quality by teaching contributors how to identify and to cite reliable sources. I believe that the finished video will be good, and I hope that the community and novice contributors will find the video to be very useful.
Yours in service,
--Pine✉ 07:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Video tutorial "Referencing with VisualEditor" – newsletter issue 2
Hi! The full version of this newsletter issue has a lot of information. I am sending a short version to talk pages.
The most important information to know is that draft 2 is finished, that the single long script has been divided into many smaller scripts, and that portions of the script have been prioritized for production.
Due to budget constraints, not all scripts can be produced within the scope of the current pilot grant, but the other scripts will remain available for potential future production. (This project feels somewhat like doing a vehicle repair when the mechanic starts to work on the engine, and once the mechanic gets under the engine and starts to work, they discover that accomplishing their objective requires twice as much time as they first had estimated.) However, nothing is lost, so do not fear. Overall, my assessment (me being User:Pine) is that this project is producing a lot of good output and is generally a valuable pilot project.
For more information, including my requests for your feedback, please see the full version of the newsletter.
Thanks very much. --Pine(✉) 22:38, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I really appreciate all the time and effort you put into this. I was reading the newsroom current draft of the next issue (because I like them that much and I'm always curious to see how articles develop at the Signpost). Anyways, I'm not sure I could be an official writer or anything, but if I do see other bits and pieces of good news around on Wikipedia, I'll be sure to let you know! Clovermoss (talk) 00:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, Clovermoss. ↠Pine (✉) 20:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I'm more than just a fan now :) Once again, I wish you well on your break. Clovermoss (talk) 18:56, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I believe User:Strainu is a native speaker; I'm not. His "Ce vă face fericiți săptămâna aceasta?" is certainly also correct, but it's more formal ("vă") and it is in the plural ("fericiți"). I'm not sure of any meaningful difference between his "aceasta" and my "asta"; I would be inclined to favor his choice, given that I'm not native. If there is any meaningful difference, I'd be interested in knowing it. - Jmabel (talk) 22:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Question: Is the intention that the cafe be regularly scheduled on Saturdays, as the default time? (I can't do Saturdays, but I get it if that's the most convenient time for most people.) --Yair rand (talk) 06:29, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hi User:Yair rand, the intention is to find times for the Wikimedia Café that maximize participation from around the world, and on Saturdays at its current time the Café has been receiving enough attendance that I'm happy with it. However, we could have an additional Café meeting that is either 12 hours earlier or 12 hours later than its current time on Saturdays. Would one or both of those be better for you? I'm happy to discuss this with User:Bluerasberry, who is the other main organizer for the Café. ↠Pine (✉) 06:40, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- No, don't worry about it. I'm glad that the Cafe is working well. --Yair rand (talk) 04:01, 11 March 2020 (UTC)