free login casino free slots_Welfare offer betvictor free spins_online slot machines real money no deposit

Fri, 25 Jan 2019 08:29:13 -0800

Whatever the reasoning is, I think we should accept that at the moment paid
editing is universally regarded very negatively in virtually all projects.
Non-monetary prizes for competitions may or may not be ok, everything else
is most likely not considered to be ok even if does not explicitly
contradict to any policies.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 5:07 PM John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was thinking about actually bounties, like in bug bounties from
> larger software vendors. We have some "bugs", like spellchecking,
> which is pretty easy to quantify, and that can be done as part of
> bounties with cash. Yes, the ugly word, paid editing! OMG!
>
> But quite frankly, why should we not? ¡é1 per fixed single word typo
> that leads to one-less spelling error? Perhaps even $1 per
> spellchecked page? Delayed one week to see if anyone reverts the
> edits?
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:17 PM Galder Gonzalez Larra?aga
> <galder...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > In the Basque wikipedia we are doing monthly contests on different
> topics, and some of them are focused on quality (i.e. adding references and
> images). There are some prices every month, usually books or thing related
> to technology. And people usually like to participate for the fun, and for
> the prize.
> > ________________________________
> > From: Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf
> of Benjamin Lees <emufarm...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 5:14 AM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bounties¡­
> >
> > It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example.  On the
> > English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
> > actually do find fun (or relaxing).  Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
> > spelling errors[1]) are something that unregistered users really like
> > fixing.  But maybe that varies significantly across language editions.
> >
> > In any event, spelling errors are probably the case where eventualism is
> > most appropriate.  It is rare that someone will be misinformed because of
> > spelling mistakes, and they serve a useful signaling function in making
> it
> > clear that a given piece of content has probably not undergone peer
> > review.  And rather than driving people away, they tend to draw them
> > in¡ªCunningham's law[2] never fails.
> >
> > [1] free online bettinghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGVAR
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
> > > a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
> > > they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
> > > are doing.
> > >
> > > I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
> > > fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
> > > written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
> > > something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
> > > Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
> > > so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
> > > crowdsourcing.
> > >
> > > Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
> > > except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
> > > and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
> > > missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
> > >
> > > The Norwegian Bokm?l Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
> > > About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
> > > nothing unusual about this.
> > >
> > > Could we use bounties to get some momentum?
> > >
> > > John Erling Blad
> > > /jeblad
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to