Wikipedia talk:Developing Countries WikiContest/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Wikipedia talk:2024 Developing Countries WikiContest) (bot |
m Task 4: Remove/replace substed TemplateStyles tag |
||
Line 7:
Also, should we give more weight to articles more directly about the country? For example, an article is created about a current Peruvian politician vs a book by a Peruvian-born American author? There should probably be some sort of criteria so editors aren't confused about it. — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 02:11, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:this is a great question - currently, my idea is that all articles related to a country are worth the same, with bonuses for more "high-level" country-related articles, such as "history of" or "religion in" articles, and an even higher bonus for the actual countries' articles. however, we need to iron out more tangential cases like you mention
:I think this would boil down to defining the scope of the contest as "Global South (broadly construed)" and leaving the edge cases up to judges' discretion. Might be worth an instruction on the submissions page to check beforehand with a judge if they're unsure? <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 02:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Line 17:
July is going to come a lot faster than one might think. It might be worth reaching out to editors and asking for RSVPs as soon as possible, as that will likely significantly impact how the contest is organized. [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] and [[User:Sawyer-mcdonell|Sawyer-mcdonell]], thoughts? <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 01:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:i think let's give this thread a few days to ruminate & develop some concrete ideas, and then definitely
::{{+1}}; [[WP:VPIL]] is probably a good first place. <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 02:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Line 202:
:thanks for linking your "core" articles list - that will be very helpful. and i agree we should do away with the interwiki bonuses in favor of the new ones we've come up with.
:i also see your point about the FAC length issue - i'm amenable to either having one single 3 month round, or extending the rounds, or some other solution. i also agree that we should display the "reviews needed" prominently.
:regarding the "no data" countries - most of them are, unsurprisingly, lacking coverage on wikipedia due to WP:BIAS so i would be cool with a case-by-case basis. we probably shouldn't count vatican city, but we should absolutely count the DPRK, for example.
:Some thoughts: I agree with dropping the "Winter" simply because shorter names are easier to remember. There isn't a need to differentiate between another contest with the same name this year.
:I also think a single 3-month round would work fine.
:We could also consider using the [[List of countries by Human Development Index|Human Development Index]] instead. We could only look at countries considered High development or worse (HDI ≤ .799), giving us about 123 countries. — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 04:18, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
::there was some discussion about how we're counting countries that are "no data" - HDI could be a great supplemental measure for this purpose i think
::I also think a single three-month round would work better. Less chance of unlucky DYK/GAN/FAC promotions. [[User:AirshipJungleman29|~~ AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 18:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
===rounds===
putting this in a new subsection so it's easier to find: currently we've got 3 month-long rounds, but above we've got some legit concerns about how long the FAC & other content review processes are. what are our thoughts on having rounds? should we switch to one 3-month round?
:Makes sense to me, especially since this is a brand-new event. I think it might be beneficial to incentivize as much contribution to the contest as possible by eliminating eliminations. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 18:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
::i agree - pinging @[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] 4 their thoughts
:::If the majority is in favor then sure. — ♠[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small>♠ 00:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
::{{+1}}, although maybe I'm just salty I got eliminated from WikiCup because of a DYK running one day late. <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 19:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Line 219:
== countries & territories not included on our map ==
on the main map we're using, there are a number of countries marked grey (not mentioned by the sources of the map) so i think we should outline which of those countries will count for our purposes. [https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/wesp/wesp_current/2014wesp_country_classification.pdf this UN report] includes a number of non-sovereign territories. i'm going to add these territories to the scoring (probably in a different section, for now) assuming there's no objection.
:i found a better source for the SIDS list so i've updated it accordingly
:i have added some more information about edge cases, territories, etc. anyone feel free to suggest changes here. pinging @[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] for their opinion here
::{{Like}}, {{u|sawyer-mcdonell}}. — ♠[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small>♠ 23:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Line 227:
{{atopg
| status = implemented
| result = i'll close it formally since qoh won't.... any additional comments can go in a new section
}}
Line 236:
:'''Support''' the idea, not decided on what the bonus would be. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 01:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''Support''' - Countries highlighted in darker colors should be given more bonus points in my opinion [[User:Arconning|Arconning]] ([[User talk:Arconning|talk]]) 02:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''support'''
:Sounds good, maybe a 1.5x multiplier? — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 02:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
::1.5x is fine for me. <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 02:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Line 245:
I made [[ Wikipedia:2024 Developing Countries WikiContest/Scoring]] based on what I've read on this talk page. Please provide suggestions as subthreads to this one so we can keep the talk page easy to navigate through and make proposals easier to discuss/enact. Differences to the WikiCup I've made: removed interwiki bonuses, added bonuses for country and second-level country articles with additional bonuses for least developed countries. Some editors have discussed removing DYK points and the like, but I personally am very much against doing so. They don't give all that many points so I don't think anyone will win based on them, they increase the visibility of the content, and in order to get a DYK a page has to be either (1) created, (2) expanded 5x, or (3) GA'd. Either of those 3 options are ''exactly'' what this WikiContest is trying to encourage. Points for review and stuff really are there so we don't add to the huge backlogs. We could add a clause were no editor may pass on to the next round or win if over 50% of their claimed points are from reviews. — ♠[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small>♠ 11:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:i've removed the mention of an interwiki bonus from the DYK section; it's not mentioned elsewhere in the scoring page & i don't think it serves our purposes here
:Thought about including points for new article creations? I'd be happy to participate if I could create new start-class articles about species in these countries and have them count for something. Maybe 1 point, for minimum 1500-character relevant article (with the 1.5 multiplier for least-develop countries)? [[User:Esculenta|Esculenta]] ([[User talk:Esculenta|talk]]) 19:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
::there was some discussion about this, but we were concerned that it might incentivize mass stub creation. for all intents & purposes, DYK credit can be considered a "new article creation" category. however, i'd be happy with giving points for non-DYK article creation with similar length/citation/etc criteria as DYK
:::Well, if we're all okay with incentivizing mass "start" creation, then add it to the scoring column! I think it's a good idea to have a way to contribute and not be compelled to add to the demands of the review systems. [[User:Esculenta|Esculenta]] ([[User talk:Esculenta|talk]]) 22:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
::::totally fair, as DYK is still in backlog mode & GAN still has a pretty big backlog. pinging @[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] @[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]] & @[[User:Generalissima|Generalissima]] to see if you guys have any input on this
:::::What if we just accepted approved DYK nominations, instead of waiting until they actually run? (Obviously, disqualifying them if someone tries to game the system around that) <small> [[User:Generalissima|Generalissima]] ([[User talk:Generalissima|talk]]) (it/she) </small> 22:28, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::i would definitely be cool with this, as someone who just had an approved DYK nomination sitting waiting for promotion for over a month haha
:::::Don't think start should qualify. I say B+ only. We want actual articles that take time and work, not something people can pump over and over to win. I also think any article not GA level should give at the very most 5 points. — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small> ♠ 22:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
:::::I'm game with Generalissima's idea to count DYK accepts for points rather than running on the Main Page. While I have a somewhat more relaxed view on article creation than Ixtal, I agree with the basic sentiment: pumping out a bunch of low-quality articles is not the goal of this contest, as it does not contribute to the encyclopedic coverage of underrepresented communities/places. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 22:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::definitely agree with this
:::::I disagree <s>with all of the above</s> that DYK nominations should be accepted instead of articles. If we want to incentivize article improvement of underrepresented areas, editors shouldn't be spending their time not contributing towards this goal. Editors will be finding interesting hooks, nominating them, doing QPQs, answering reviewer queries etc. instead of writing content. Obviously, an editor who goes through DYK should be rewarded, but why not also award points for, say, C class article creations? If I'm an editor and I find an underrepresented subject area and I have 10 articles I could write, it would take significantly more hours of work to send them all through DYK. — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 00:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::I'll add that I personally don't often go through DYK, especially because most things I write don't have "hook"-y facts. — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 00:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::to be fair i think you're actually agreeing with us here; at least me and Technosquirrel anyways
:::::::Am I? I thought you guys were advocating for only accepting DYK nominations, while I agree with Esculenta and want the option for editors to submit C+ class articles outside of DYK. — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 00:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::::there's a compromise proposal to accept approved DYK nominations that haven't hit the main page, but my understanding is that there's consensus that as long as the articles aren't low-quality, new creations should count for something; the main concern here is balancing both encouraging quality article creation & avoiding worsening backlogs, while also avoiding incentivizing mass creation of crappy articles. the details of criteria still need to be decided though; i'll write a proposal in a subsection.
::::::While I do recognize your concerns, I don't think they're enough to take DYK out of the equation. Also, here's another point I haven't seen people discussing: it'd be an enormous burden on the coordinators to have to check that the new creations are at the rating that the editors think they are. In essence, they would have to conduct a DYK review — checking for copyright infringement, assessing sources, and scanning the prose for errors. You also seem to be implying that editors' time would be wasted at DYK when they could be writing something else, and I disagree on that point. Our goal is to improve encyclopedic coverage of underrepresented topics, and that goal does not end the moment you tab away from that page. DYK brings large amounts of attention to otherwise forgotten articles, and the review process undoubtedly improves (or, at the very least, reaffirms) their quality. I think this part would go a long way in incentivizing collaboration on underrepresented topics, which is a much more beneficial goal than making sure the participants receive points faster, in my opinion. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 00:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:::::::excellent points! you're right that there would be a lot of extra maintenance on our part doing checks of articles, which i think could be pretty impractical, especially if we get more participants
:::::::Valid points, but in my opinion, the coordinators have less to check compared to a DYK review. Most competent editors could quickly assess an article on its citation density, reliable sourcing, NPOV, and class in about a couple minutes, no? — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 02:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
== awards ==
what kinds of barnstars, awards, etc should we be giving out!!!
:idea: other than the main big award the overall winner gets, i think having some specialized awards would be fun too, like "most countries covered" or "most top-level articles" "most article reviews" (PR, GAN, FAC) or other things like that - it would add a little whimsy & extra fun
::There are the generic reviewing and quality content barnstars, which would be appropriate for special recognition of this kind. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 17:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:::works 4 me
:i'm in a car and to lazy to look, is there a systemic bias barnstar!!! we could like give a {{tl|The Left Half of the Half Barnstar}} to ppl who make the 2nd round and this systemic bias barnstar to the finalists and cups to the top three, no!!! <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 17:46, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
::i also support most countries/DYKs/GAs/FAs/reviews!!! <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 17:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:::Okay, I'm sorry for typing like that. But I also support somehow incorporating {{tl|cbarn}}. <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 17:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
::::"im sorry for typing like that" you're just typing like me lmfao :sob:
:::::rekt!!! <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 17:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
:I was considering this as well. If we can bring on an artist or two, it might be cool to design some event-specific awards for podium winners. Other award ideas include the {{tl|Systemic Bias Barnstar}} and, of course, {{tl|The Completionist Barnstar}}. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 17:46, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
::definitely agree w the systemic bias & completionist barnstars !!
::Perhaps we can ask for a Grand Systemic Bias Barnstar? To give to the winner. Since we aren't doing rounds, perhaps the top 25 editors can win the regular bias barnstar. As much as I love the completionist philosophy, I don't see the reasoning for granting its barnstar as part of this WikiContest. — ♠[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small>♠ 15:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
:ok so here are my specialty award ideas:
Line 283:
:* most article reviews
:* most top-level articles
:to be awarded with some special barnstars. please give suggestions for which specific barnstars (or suggest new barnstars for this purpose) should be given for specific awards, as well as what special barnstars/awards should be given out to the top 3 overall winners. i like Ixtal's idea of a "grand systemic bias barnstar"
::Agree with those so far. Perhaps we could add one for most women articles? — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small> ♠ 23:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
:::ooh that would be fun! i'll start laying these down on the contest page - then we can see where we might want to ask someone to make new barnstars etc
::also, should we have special awards for the top 3 scorers? i'm thinking of something like a triple crown or the aforementioned grand systemic bias barnstar
::i've layed out my initial ideas for the award scheme. anyone feel free to BOLDly change it, especially if you can find more specific/appropriate awards (or add new ones!) :)
:::I don't understand the distinction between "Most high-level articles" and "Most good/featured articles". <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 01:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:::Could you clarify what "high-level articles" are? It's additionally confusing considering there's another award for good and featured articles. {{small|(QoH and I just can't stop jinxing today)}} <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 01:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::sorry, i'm talking about the articles referred to [[Wikipedia:2024_Developing_Countries_WikiContest/Scoring#From_relation_to_developing_countries|on the scoring page]], as in main & second-level country articles - i'll clarify the wording
:::::To be honest, is it realistic to expect someone to improve multiple "high-level" articles to GA/FA within a three-month period? These articles are a lot of work due to their enormous scope. Also, the achievement of promoting those articles is already being awarded with massive multipliers. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 01:56, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::that's a good point; i'll remove it for now
:::::Ah, I understand, but I agree with the squirrel. <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 02:00, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:::It's lazy, but maybe do {{t|tcb}} for most countries covered? <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 02:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::perhaps lazy, but certainly works!
:if anyone here enjoys making templates, barnstars, and the like, i think a "global barnstar" would be lovely, along with our other suggestions of a "grand systemic bias barnstar" & some kind of cup or trophy perhaps :)
::{{Doing|Doing the Global Barnstar}} <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 02:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:::{{t|Gbarn}} <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 03:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::wahoo! thanks :D
:I could create some userboxen perhaps...? — [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span style="letter-spacing:0.1em;">PerfectSoundWhatever</span>]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|t]]; [[Special:Contributions/PerfectSoundWhatever|c]]) 02:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::feel free! sounds fun :)
== North Korea ==
Line 307:
I believe that North Korea should be considered "least developed" and given a multiplier on {{slink|Wikipedia:2024 Developing Countries WikiContest/Scoring|Other states}}. Thoughts? <sup>[[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Queen</span>]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contribs/Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">of</span>]]</small><sub>[[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color: darkred">Hearts</span>]]</sub> 20:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
:Thought we'd decided on this already. '''Support''', obviously. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 21:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
:DPRK is certainly on par with the rest of the "least developed" world, in both information and living conditions. works 4 me
::{{+1}} — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small> ♠ 04:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Line 313:
Is it the same (as in, same points) if an article is accepted for Recent Deaths, or for a proper blurb? [[User:Cambalachero|Cambalachero]] ([[User talk:Cambalachero|talk]]) 02:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
:i'm personally fine with keeping the [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring#In_the_news|WikiCup standards]] where both recent deaths and blurbs count for the same amount, since that's really impossible to control on the nominator's end. ITN has [[WP:ITNCRIT|quality requirements]] for displaying on the main page, which is ultimately what we're looking at for scoring.
== More feedback/questions ==
Line 332:
:::{{u|sawyer777|fix failed ping}} [[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#483D8B;">Queen of Hearts</span>]] ([[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#483D8B;">talk</span>]]) 18:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
:::The bonus points system at [[Wikipedia:2024 Developing Countries WikiContest/Scoring#From relation to developing countries]] assumes that several people will be working on these types of articles, but I don't believe there are going to be any meaningful contributions there. I think that the scope of those bonuses should be expanded in some way if it's going to be kept, though I don't have a proposal for what exactly it would look like. [[User:Thebiguglyalien|<span style="color:#324717">The</span><span style="color:#45631f">big</span><span style="color:#547826">ugly</span><span style="color:#68942f">alien</span>]] ([[User talk:Thebiguglyalien|<span style="color:sienna">talk</span>]]) 21:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
:::i actually was thinking the former, as that is more practical & matches with the award for the person who covers the most countries
::::i welcome a rewording although i'm not sure exactly what to change the wording to
*FWIW, re. point 3 I think it should be the former. [[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#00008B;">Queen of Hearts</span>]] ([[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#00008B;">talk</span>]]) 22:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
*:(i assume you mean #4?)
*::<small>Yes. Don't edit Wikipedia while eating pasta... [[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#2F4F4F;">Queen of Hearts</span>]] ([[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#2F4F4F;">talk</span>]]) 23:45, 12 May 2024 (UTC)</small>
:Should we make a subpage for the submissions of everyone? — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[WP:2024DCWC|Sign up for the 2024 DCWC!]] — [[Non nobis solum]] </small> ♠ 20:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
::yes - i think we can have it all on one subpage, much like a backlog drive
:::{{+1}} [[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#000080;">Queen of Hearts</span>]] ([[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#000080;">talk</span>]]) 20:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
::::Created [[Wikipedia:2024 Developing Countries WikiContest/Submissions]], though we may want to rename it. — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[WP:2024DCWC|Sign up for the 2024 DCWC!]] — [[Non nobis solum]] </small> ♠ 22:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
:::::I think it's a good idea to have a leaderboard-style table, but we also need a page with sections for each user where they can list their submissions. I'm thinking something like the [[Wikipedia:Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/March 2024#Participants and reviews tracker|GAN backlog drive]]. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 22:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
::::::as of how it's designed right now, this page does both - i would be amiable to splitting it into two pages though
:"Three months is a relatively short period of time for some of the review processes, especially GAN". There are points for GA, but also for GA reviews, which should speed up the process. [[User:Cambalachero|Cambalachero]] ([[User talk:Cambalachero|talk]]) 02:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Line 349:
== Translations ==
How will translations of articles from developing countries be evaluated? [[User:HarveyPrototype|HarveyPrototype]] ([[User talk:HarveyPrototype|talk]]) 16:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
:this is a good question! @[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] thoughts?
::I see the value as adding them to the wiki, {{u|Sawyer777|Sawyer}}. I'd personally score them equally as creating articles. Articles in, say, [[Burmese language]] that are not yet in the english wiki probably are equally important to Myanmar than an article that doesn't exist in either, if not more so. However, if others feel that they should be scored less I am open to that possibility. — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[WP:2024DCWC|Sign up for the 2024 DCWC!]] — [[Non nobis solum]] </small> ♠ 17:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
:::i agree that translations are very valuable, and something we should encourage - so we have something to work off of, how would 5 points be for a score?
:::"I'd personally score them equally as creating articles." Check again, we don't score the mere creation of articles. We score created articles that pass the DYK process, which guarantees some basic quality. The problem with translations is that anyone with google and a basic fluency to check the results can translate articles from other wikis and quickly farm points. Just a mere 40 semi-bot translations, 2 or 3 hours at most, and you get as many points as someone who promotes a featured article. It would be too easy to derail the contest's purpose that way. It may be better to treat translation like any other new article, only scores if it passes DYK (or if it is promoted to higher levels in record time). [[User:Cambalachero|Cambalachero]] ([[User talk:Cambalachero|talk]]) 02:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
::::this is a great point... i don't do translation work at all so i forgot about the existence of machine translation for a moment. i agree with your idea of requiring it pass DYK criteria.
::::{{u|Cambalachero}}, my statement works regardless of if they are currently scored or not. — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[WP:2024DCWC|Sign up for the 2024 DCWC!]] — [[Non nobis solum]] </small> ♠ 08:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Line 367:
Should Greenland be classified as "developed" (ineligible), "developing" (eligible), or "least developed" (1.5x multiplier)? [[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#0645AD;">Queen of Hearts</span>]] ([[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#0645AD;">talk</span>]]) 00:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
* '''Developing''' as proposer. On the map, it's "no data", but the first sentence of [[Economy of Greenland]] calls it {{tq|small, mixed and vulnerable}}, it is heavily dependant on Denmark ({{tq|the economy is critically dependent upon substantial support from the Danish government, which supplies about half the revenues of the Self-rule Government [the government of Greenland], which in turn employs 10,307 Greenlanders out of 25,620 currently in employment (2015)}}), and {{tq|Unemployment nonetheless remains high, with the rest of the economy dependent upon demand for exports of shrimp and fish.}} [[User:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#0645AD;">Queen of Hearts</span>]] ([[User talk:Queen of Hearts|<span style="color:#0645AD;">talk</span>]]) 00:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
*:i concur with this
*::+1. Apart from basic numbers, the Greenlandic Inuit are under heavy environmental stress which threatens their old ways of life that depend on the sea ice, now disappearing fast. They have to transform their economy entirely, towards something more urbanised and economically viable. This too, I would say, is a sign of a developing economy.
*::Also consider the HDI of 0.786, which although classified as "high", lags significantly behind the rest of the Danish Realm - Denmark is at 0.952 and the Faroes are at 0.950. And all the other IMF-designated developed countries are well above 0.800. [[User:Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI|Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI]] (<small><sup>[[User talk:Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI|talk to me!]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:contributions/Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI|my edits]]</sub></small>) 06:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
*:::definitely! not to mention the colonial dynamics, which while not directly correlated with development, are relevant contextually.
*::::Soooo... are they counted? Shall I notify them? [[User:Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI|Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI]] (<small><sup>[[User talk:Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI|talk to me!]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:contributions/Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI|my edits]]</sub></small>) 16:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
*:::::pinging @[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] if they have any last-minute objections but i'd say just go for it - i'll update the contest pages as well
*::::::No objections here, ping appreciated, {{u|Sawyer777|Sawyer}}. — ♠ [[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[WP:2024DCWC|Sign up for the 2024 DCWC!]] — [[Non nobis solum]] </small> ♠ 20:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
{{abot}}
| |||