Proposal talk:Camera equipment program/Archive 1

Following are some comments extracted from my mail as seconder.

I was initially concerned that the bar might be set a bit high but the existence of a number of potential recipients suggests it might be OK. We might need to clarify that "categories" on Commons are a lot looser than on WP and define "freely license".

If the grant is retrospective, do the "500 images using the new equipment" overlap with the images used to justify the grant? (IE, I buy a new camera, take 1000 photos with it and upload them with an appropriate free license, then apply for a grant. If I receive the grant, have I already fulfilled the "freely license 500 photographs that use the new equipment" requirement?)

--PeterJeremy 15:36, 6 August 2011 (EST)

I've revised "freely license" to indicate that they need to be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and they need to comply with the definition of "photograph" provided. I've also removed "use the new equipment" for the moment, as the new equipment may be a lens which may only be appropriate in limited photography opportunities.

My thinking was that the "500" images would retrospectively cover photographs already uploaded. I think the "500" number may be too high. John Vandenberg 16:04, 6 August 2011 (EST)

The numbers may be ok if additional weight is given to quality/valued/featured images. I suggest:

+1 point per MAX(total num images, total distinct commons categories)
+1 bonus points per image used in content space for any Wikimedia project other than Commons
+2 bonus points per image assessed as Quality Image
+4 bonus points per image assessed as Valued Image
+10 bonus points per image assessed as Featured Picture at either Commons or en-Wikipedia

I think this is about the right trade off between quantity, quality, and usefulness. Certainly it will incentivise photographers to both put in the hard yards and improve our work.--99of9 23:03, 22 August 2011 (EST)

I like "MAX(total num images, total distinct commons categories)"

I think the "used in content space" bonus needs to include some minimum period of use - at least one month in opinion, in order to avoid rewarding edit wars. John Vandenberg 23:22, 22 August 2011 (EST)

Oops, I meant MIN. MIN insists that prolific photographers keep up the diversity and the categorization. I agree that long-term usage is the important usage, but am not sure what's best to measure. --99of9 23:35, 22 August 2011 (EST)

recipient uploading overseas photos

An overseas community member has emailed me indicating they are interested in the program. They can upload images of Australian topics, however they would not be using the equipment for Australian topics, because they are not in Australia. In order to not exclude overseas recipients, or Australians who go overseas on holidays, I think we should change

"Recipients of grants in this program must agree to upload 500 photographs (as defined above) to Wikimedia Commons within 24 months."

to

"Recipients of grants in this program must agree to upload 500 photographs to Wikimedia Commons within 24 months. These photographs should include photographs using the new equipment when appropriate, be properly described (as above), however they do not need to be Australian topics."

John Vandenberg 12:25, 27 August 2011 (EST)