Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Indic Wikisource Community/Requests for comment/Indic Wikisource Proofreadthon

< Indic Wikisource Community
Shortcut:
GRFC
Requests for comment (RFC for short) are processes by which broader input can be requested. This is typically required for policy changes that are broad in scope. It may also be useful to gain wider input regarding conflicts or unresolved issues on other Wikimedia projects with the hopes of obtaining resolution. Add a link to the proposal page or disputed page or create a new subpage requesting comments here (please use {{Rfc subpage}}). Anyone is welcome to give his or her opinion on the requests listed below. See also: all RfC pages and more Wiki-wide elections and votings.


Request for Comments is a discussion place where we are starting a few discussions and inviting you to share comments/views.

Guidelines
Here are the basic guidelines to follow.

  • Everyone is welcome: Everyone is welcome to comment, from all communities, and all Wikisource projects.
  • Duration: This RfC will be open for at 1 January 2021 - 31 March 2021
  • Detailed comment: Please write in details, and avoid brief comments without explanations.
  • Friendly discussion: Keep the discussion friendly, avoid personal remarks and personal attacks.

Why RfC?: These are a few questions, concerns raised during first and second Indic Wikisource Proofreadathon. So we believe that your comments/inputs/suggestions will help in planning in the future or any other Wikisource edit-thon or similar event.

Proposal 1 : Next proofreadthon edit

We plan to have a similar competition next year. I hope your opinion on this matter. Give your opinion on whether this competition should be done or not. This RfC is specific only to decide an all India level 12 Indic language Wikisource project edit-thon/contest only. Please write in details with adding #{{support}} - ~~~~ or #{{oppose}} - ~~~~ below, if you agreed OR not agreed to another edit-thon in coming years.

Voting edit

  Support   Oppose   Neutral   Comment

  1.   Support --Sushant savla (talk) 15:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support --Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support I welcome this initiative to organize the proofreadthon every year. --Vijay Barot (talk) 16:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support - Suvray (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Comment - Bengali Wikisource community usually organizes 1-2 contests every year. There are more plans this year. So, my personal opinion is to not over-burden the Bengali community this year.
  7.   Support Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Neutral -- अमिताभ साव (talk) 08:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support - #𝕾𝖆𝖋𝖚𝖆𝖓(𝖙𝖆𝖑𝖐) 09:50, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support --Proofreadathon is very much welcome. Nettime Sujata (talk) 15:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support --Proofreadathon is very much needful.[[Sudhahar Sambamoorthyrao (talk) 03:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)]][reply]
  12.   Support --Yaser Arafath (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support — Shabab Mustafa (talk) 08:26, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support--ঈশান জ্যোতি বৰা (talk) 16:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support - Pasaban (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support-- Komal Sambhudas (talk) 08:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support - Mohaguru (talk) 08:08, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support -- Manisha yadav12 (talk) 04:38, 24 January 2021 (UTC)(talk)[reply]
  19.   Support --अमृता कुमारी पाण्डेय (talk) 04:46, 24 January 2021 (UTC)(talk)[reply]
  20.   Support - Md.Fahamidul Islam Dipro (talk) 17:05, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support --Info-farmer (talk) 00:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support - JyotiPN (talk) 07:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)JyotiPN[reply]
  23.   Support - দিব্য দত্ত (talk) 18:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support Hpsatapathy (talk) 14:24, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support G Rameswaram (talk)--117.200.0.216 03:47, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support --Greatder (talk)
  27.   Support - Soorya Hebbar talk 07:50, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support - Shubha (talk) 11:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support - --Vmayil (talk) 05:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

  Comment If this proofreadthon held twice a year, it will be very good decision for the 12 Indic languages. But, every languages must be followed by same rules or criteria. Must be formed 3-members jury board to follow up the competition. - Suvray (talk) 18:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment This paves way for adding more books in the indic languages segment. But quality of proof reading should be ensured, this calls for responsibility on the part of those doing validation.G Rameswaram (talk) --117.200.0.216 03:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 2: Time span for contest edit

How may the days be sufficient for future edit-thon? The last two proofreadthon was held in 10 and 15 days respectively. We are giving you both options for support/opposition. If you think other options should be used for days, please add this.

  • Last year, we have conducted two times a year with a 6 month Gap. Some community members think that once in a year.
  • Last year, we have conducted a proofread in May and November.
  • Please write in details with adding #{{support}} - ~~~~ below.

Voting edit

For 10 Days edit

  1.   Oppose - Suvray (talk) 18:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 05:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support -- Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support--ঈশান জ্যোতি বৰা (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support-- JyotiPN (talk) 07:54, 28 January 2021 (UTC)JyotiPN[reply]
  6.   Support - দিব্য দত্ত (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support - G Rameswaram (talk)--117.200.0.216 04:03, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For 15 days edit

  1.   Support--Sushant savla (talk) 15:05, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support--Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support - Suvray (talk) 18:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support -- Nettime Sujata (talk) 15:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support --Yasercs89 (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support --Vijay Barot (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support - Pasaban (talk) 17:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support -- Komal Sambhudas (talk) 08:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support -- Manisha yadav12 (talk) 04:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)(talk)[reply]
  11.   Support --Info-farmer (talk) 00:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support --Greatder (talk)
  13.   Support - Soorya Hebbar talk 07:53, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support - Shubha (talk) 11:53, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support --Vmayil (talk) 05:35, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yearly one time edit

  1.   Oppose - Suvray (talk) 18:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support - at least for Bengali Wikisource -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 05:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support-- JyotiPN (talk) 07:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)JyotiPN[reply]
  4.   Support - দিব্য দত্ত (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yearly Two time edit

  1.   Support--Sushant savla (talk) 15:05, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support--Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support - Suvray (talk) 18:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Comment, community led events should be prioritized first and should not coincide with them. There should be a good amount of space between community led events and this proofreadathon. Bengali Wikisource community has more plans this year, please consult that separately before committing anything for the Bengali Wikisource community. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 05:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support Nettime Sujata (talk) 15:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support--Vijay Barot (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support--ঈশান জ্যোতি বৰা (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support - Pasaban (talk) 17:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support -- Komal Sambhudas (talk) 08:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support -- Manisha yadav12 (talk) 04:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC) (talk)[reply]
  11.   Support -- अमृता कुमारी पाण्डेय (talk) 04:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC) (talk)[reply]
  12.   Support --Info-farmer (talk) 00:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support --Greatder (talk)
  14.   Support - Soorya Hebbar talk 07:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support - Shubha (talk) 11:53, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support - --Vmayil (talk) 05:35, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

Proposal 3 : Quality control/rules edit

One serious objection raised by some community members during edithon, that most of the users proofreading/validate (status change) the pages without proper checking as standard proofreading format/template rule (for your information validation is also proofreading by another user). This bad practice was seen during two Indic Wikisource proofreadthon in all language community.

Voting edit

  Support   Oppose   Neutral   Comment

  1.   Support --Yasercs89 (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support--Nettime Sujata (talk) 13:20, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support - Pasaban (talk) 17:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support let us discuss.--Info-farmer (talk) 01:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support - JyotiPN (talk) 08:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)JyotiPN[reply]
  6.   Support - G Rameswaram (talk) --117.200.0.216 04:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

On going disccused imported from Talk:Indic Wikisource Proofreadthon 2020/Rules

  •   Comment Is there any other way to judge a person's contribution other than an existing tool? To judge, additional parameters should be taken into account along with yellow/proofread and green/validated. Kindly share your opinions. Usually, we do patrol on recent changes page; Timeline in between pages, byte diff, a new page, or existing page. If it is a new page, we have to double verify that whether it is already available on the internet or not. In our community, we get opinions for a book then only uploaded it to this Proofreadthon. Also, we need time to overview our contributions(16k proofread pages + <16k validated pages) at least a week. Then only, we can compare with other Indic WS community. Also, they will furnish their opinions here. I welcome suggestions from any other community--Info-farmer (talk) 14:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment அனைத்து நூல்களுக்கும் ஒரே மாதிரியான நெறி பொருந்துமா என்பதைக் கலந்தாலோசிக்க வேண்டும். சான்றாக, கவிதையின் வடிவமமைப்பு வேறு, ஆய்வு நூல்களின் வடிவமைப்பு வேறு, சிறுகதை, புதினம் ஆகிய நூல்களின் வடிவமைப்பு வேறு, அகராதி நூல்களின் வடிவமைப்பு வேறு இவற்றைக் கருத்தில் கொண்டு நெறிகள் உருவாக்கப் பெறுவது சிறப்புடைத்து எனக் கருதுகின்றேன். அப்படியிருக்கும் பொழுது போட்டிகளை நடத்தும் பொழுது தெளிவான நெறிகளை உருவாக்கிக் கொள்வது எதிர்காலத்தில் போட்டிகள் சிறப்புற நிகழ்வதற்கு வழிவகுக்கும். இதனால் ஒவ்வொரு மொழியின் தரவுகளும் மேம்படும். நடுவர்கள் நடுநிலைமையோடு செயல்பட்டால் அனைத்து மொழிக்குமான தரவுத்தளம் மேம்படும். இல்லையேல் தன்னார்வலர்கள் விலகிச் செல்ல நேரிடும்.--Neyakkoo (talk) 02:52, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment வணக்கம். போட்டியில் மஞ்சள் மற்றும் பச்சை நிற மாற்றத்தை வைத்து மதிப்பெண் கொடுப்பது என்பது தேவையற்றது. இந்தப் போட்டியில் பழைய பங்களிப்பாளர்களும் புதியவர்களும் அதிகமாக கலந்து கொள்ளும் சூழ்நிலை ஏற்படுவதால், புதியவர்களுக்கு மெய்ப்பு பார்ப்பதில் சில வழிமுறைகள் தெரியாமல் இருக்கலாம். பழைய பங்களிப்பாளர்களுக்கும் முழுவதும் தெரியும் என்பது கேள்விக்குறி? ?? பழைய பங்களிப்பாளர்கள் உடைய செயல்பாடு மெய்ப்பும் சரிபார்ப்பும் 95% தரமானதாக இருக்கும் எனலாம். புதிய பங்களிப்பாளர்களுக்கு குறியீடுகள் இடுவதில் சிக்கல் இருப்பதால் அவர்களுடைய மெய்ப்பும் சரிபார்ப்பும் தரமானதாக இருக்கும் என்பது கேள்விக்குறி??? போட்டி மதிப்பெண் அடிப்படையில் நடப்பதால் மதிப்பெண்ணை அதிகமாக திரட்ட வேண்டும் என நோக்கில் அனைவரும் ஓடுவது இயல்பு. இப்படி சில பல சிக்கல்கள் இருக்கையில் போட்டி எந்தவிதத்தில் நடைபெற வேண்டும் என்பதை ஆய்வுசெய்து முன்னெடுக்கவேண்டும்.இதுபோல் போட்டிகள் நடத்துவதின் நோக்கம் என்ன? -- ஒவ்வொரு மொழியிலும் உள்ள பழைய நூல்கள் மின்னூல் ஆக்கப்பட வேண்டும் விரைவாக பணிகள் செய்து முடிக்க வேண்டும் என்பது தானே. விரைவாக செய்து முடிக்கக் கூடிய மின்னூல்கள் தரமானதாகவும் அமைய வேண்டும் இதுபோல் கருத்துக்களை முன்னெடுத்து போட்டிகள் செயல்பட்டால் மெய்ப்பும் சரிபார்ப்பும்- பணிகள் தரமானதாக அமையும். இந்தத்தளம் தன்னார்வலர்கள் அதிகமாக பங்குபெறும் களம். இதுபோல் போட்டிகளில் மதிப்பெண் குறைப்பு தகுதி நீக்கம் என சொல்வதால் பங்களிப்பாளர்கள் குறைய வாய்ப்புள்ளது. அனைவரையும் அரவணைத்துச் செல்லும் வகையில் போட்டி விதிமுறைகள் அமைந்தால் சிறப்பு நன்றிகள் --வெற்றியரசன் (talk) 07:01, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment நெறிமுறைகள் சரியாக இருக்க வேண்டும். ஏனெனில் நம்மை சரியான வழியில் செல்லத்துண்டுவதே நெறிமுறைதான்.

அனைவரையும் அரவனைத்துச் செல்லவேண்டும் நன்றி--Rajendran Nallathambi (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  •   Comment After the completion of the competition, is this discussion needed? Any kind of suggestions or discussion should have been done during the competition itself. There was a dip in quality for sure due to competitive pressure and lack of experience but should have been addressed then and there. The only suggestion is - I see heavy contributions in Tamil compared to any other language. Some languages did not even have 5 contributors having 350 points. Just to encourage Tamil wiki which had stellar contributions, all folks who got more than 1000 points should be rewarded.Ssriram mt (talk) 11:32, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Greetings, The Competition went well and good. Applause for all those who were behind this Event. The main problem here in the Competition is all are doing proof reading just for the sake of points. As a result, they are doing it very faster. Instead of exhibiting proofreading and the talent of correcting mistakes you can make this event an open one from January to December and make clear that this competition is not just for earning points and securing prizes. You can distribute prizes at the end of the year for the Proof Reader. The motive of this competition is increasing the proofreading habits and as a result of that increasing the books Pdf of that respective language. The most number of edits/points wins. Kindly also increase the points for the persons rechecking the proofread pages. Kindly take these into the note.- Aarlin Raj A (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • போட்டியின் விதிமுறைகள் அனைத்து மொழிப் பங்கேற்பாளர்களுக்கும் புரியும் படி வெளிப்படையாக அறிவிக்கப்பட வேண்டும்.மதிப்பீடு என்பது அவர்கள் செலவளித்த காலம் மற்றும் ஏற்படுத்திய மாற்றங்களின் அடிப்படையில் அமைந்தால் சிறப்பு. போட்டியின் இடையில் ஏதேனும் மாற்றங்கள் அல்லது கருவிகளில் கோளாறு ஏற்படின் அதனை உடனுக்குடன் பங்கேற்பாளர்களுக்கு அறிவிக்கப்பட வேண்டும்.(The terms of the contest should be explicitly declared to all language participants according to their understanding. The evaluation is based on the changes they have made in terms of time and conditions. If any changes or tools are occurring in the course of the competition, they should be informed immediately.)--பிரபாகரன் ம வி (talk) 07:31, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment এই ব্যাপার একটু কঠিনই বটে। আমরা চাই নতুন সম্পাদক আসুক, আবার নতুনরা না বুঝে সব ঠিকঠাক না করে মুদ্রণ সংশোধন হয়েছে ক্লিক করে। বর্তমানে কারো সম্পাদনা পরীক্ষা করতে হলে, এক এক করে বইয়ের পৃষ্ঠাগুলিতে যাওয়া লাগে, যা বিরক্তিকর ও সময় সাপেক্ষ। আমার প্রস্তাব এমন কোন সরঞ্জাম তৈরি করা যাতে খুব সহজে সম্পাদনা পরীক্ষা করা যায়। বার বার পাতা লোড করা লাগবে না। --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 01:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment I want to bring more users/ proofreaders. But if I impose too many rules, that will not be welcoming. So I do not support adding more strict rules. We may host a separate event for the page validation only where we will check thoroughly and then mark a book as complete. For the proofread contest being too strict will not be helpful, there are other times for that. Ultimately it in event of 10-15 days and it does not endorse that the winner is the best proofreader in the community. Neyakkoo mentioned about books with different layouts. I would like to consider that as well. Formatting a poem page takes more time than a general novel or story books. Another problem I found that on the edit panel, all the necessary tags/templates are spread in multiple tabs. We should show those in same panel. Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Dear Indic Wikisource Librarians, Warm Greetings, The annual event of all India Indic Proofreadathon on Wikisource is a noble initiative. There is much discussion on the rules and scoring of the competition. This was a topic of discussion during the previous competition too. In this context, first we must ensure that What are our main objectives to organize this Proofreadathon ? To attract new members to the Wikisource platform ? Or to add maximum literature to Wikisource in a very short span of time ? And in parallel with all this, a challenge for us is to maintain a certain level of quality.
    I think if we want to attract new contributors to Wikisource, we have to relax the rules. Prizes are essential for encouragement. However, external attractions never go beyond the inner inspiration.
    I personally believe that, not obviously, but we have to see the competition divided into two parts. One group of participants should work as proofreader. While the second one, which cares about quality during the competition, should contribute through validation. The enthusiasm of new members (and the enthusiasm to win prizes) and the quality editing of experienced members can balance our noble goals behind this proofreadathon.
    (some notes: * Validation is the final outcome so score for the validation should be increased from 1 to 2. * the present structure for participation is OK. No need to give extra point to regular users. * It is not practically possible to completely solve quality related issues what we are facing. We must achieve our goals in the presence of present issues. After all, it is up to the contributor to assess himself by quality contributions or by quantitative contributions.--Vijay Barot (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment As the prize money gets higher the tendency to find the loopholes in the competition increases. I have seen two related (sometimes unrelated) users club together. They proofread and validate in union without proper checking. The judges are also not checking the proofread and validations (either intentional sometimes, sometimes due to lack of interest to check, sometimes tiring due to abundance of pages to check). Many of the users who indulge in such unfair practices often collude with the admins/organisers/Jury. When other community members object for such rampant change of page status, the person who indulges in unfair practice through admins/organisers/Jury throw allegations such as new users biting, harassment, etc. Due to such incidents the community health deteriorates. Also the users doing unfair practices found telling that in competition every thing is fair, winning is the only motive, other language users are also doing such unfair practice (why are you stopping only in our language), we are doing these things urgently to win prizes (we will come back and rectify them later), etc to justify their unfair practise. From two or three edidathons the observation is that some users (old and new) have become bounty hunters. Their contribution during non competition is practically zero but zooms very high during editathons. Some of them are becoming aggressive to do anything to win the prize. Later no one appeared to correct the mistakes (who promised to correct the mistakes after competition). The most disturbing this thing is the collusion of unfair users and admins/organisers/Jury. Until we dont have proper quality control measures, either we have to do away with the prize money entirely and give only barnstars as rewards or keep the prize money very low to a minimum. I agree that editathons have brought new participants. But almost all have become bounty hunters rather than regular contributors. Atleast in my language I have not seen any other entering in competition becoming regular contributor.--Balajijagadesh (talk) 02:39, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 4 : Edit count edit

Presently as per the international system, all Wikisource relates edit-thon best practise for edit count of each contributor is proofread/validation per page. Some of the community members proposed adding byte, instead of edit per page by the user. Please give us your opinion. If you want the present system, Please write in details with adding #{{support}} - ~~~~ or #{{oppose}} - ~~~~ below.If you have a different opinion, please raised your voice in the Discussion section below.


Voting edit

  Support   Oppose   Neutral   Comment


  1.   Oppose Byte count cannot be taken as a judgement. Nettime Sujata (talk) 15:21, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Oppose --Yasercs89 (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Oppose --Vijay Barot (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Support Byte count to be taken. "Proofread means correction". Byte diff will show that involvement of a contributor. And also, kindly consider my suggestions as above.--Info-farmer (talk) 01:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Oppose - দিব্য দত্ত (talk) 18:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

Totally disagree with adding extra points. Long time contributors are already familiar with all the tools and the overall environment. New users take time to know more about the overall process, learn from their mistakes and overall resistance form the other users. So if you have to give extra points new contributors should get that.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nasirkhan (talk)
  •   Comment If every participant mandatory attend 3-phases demo contest / demo test, then maximum problems may be solve and all languages must be go ahead with same rules or criteria. - Suvray (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment except the edit count, we may check if a page have any major formatting issues or so. Byte should not be considered at all, because if you create a new page vs edit a page which previously populated with OCR text have huge byte differences. Even if we consider all pages will have OCR texts some might not need much changes, on which ground one will get less point on that page? Proofreader have to check all the lines and word and there might be nothing to change. Can you differentiate that if a proofreader have not made any change or there is nothing to change? Only edit count is ok for the contest. Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    •   Comment// Proofreader have to check all the lines and word and there might be nothing to change.// Yes. but in a book, that kind of pages are few in every book. OCR are good in few languages. Kindly consider others are working hard. Kindly consider my suggestions as above.--Info-farmer (talk) 01:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 5 : eGift/prize/certificate edit

There are some thoughts around some community members, the E-gift and prize are hampering the volunteer enthusiasm and it is affecting the philosophy of our Wikimedia movements. There is an arraignment that most of the participants are participating in the events, just for own the prize or prize e-gift card. Please give your opinion about this.If you agree to prize/E-gift, Please write in details with adding #{{support}} - ~~~~ or #{{oppose}} - ~~~~ below.

Voting edit

  Support   Oppose   Neutral   Comment

  1.   Support right from the school levels, prizes are given. The tradition started not to attract the students to learn, but to invoke a sense of competition, to give rise to do better and better. Prizes motivates, and nothing wrong in it. It is a "money well spent" rather than "wasted".--Sushant savla (talk) 15:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support - Suvray (talk) 18:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. tend to   Oppose, prizes need to be of very small amount. E-certificates can be an option. I am against large prizes for proofreading. After the competition ends, people just dont return to editing because then the there are no prizes. Consult local community first. There should not be same medicine for all communities.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bodhisattwa (talk)
  4.   Support Current prize is ok, you may also add ecertificates. If the amount of prize money looks big, we may reduce that a little and increase the total number of prizes. Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support-- Prizes should be there, other than certificates. Editors toil a lot and the prize motivates. Nettime Sujata (talk) 15:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support - Prizes should be given to remind everyone that to be skilled enough in proofreading is a great thing that motivates the participants a lot. -- Md.Fahamidul Islam Dipro (talk) 18:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support Agree with Sushant's Opinion. E-certificates along with prizes are welcomed.--Vijay Barot (talk) 17:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Oppose E-gifts are somewhere not reached to the winner. This maybe the concerning cause. Gifts are always good to motivate. If it seems gifts are hampering, first I will ask is it the type of gift. 10 dollar, 10 dallar book, 10 dollar T-Shirt, 10 dollar electric gadget-- all have the same value of money but surely doesn't carry same motivation or attracts "prize seeker". Instead of these, I wish you choose the prizes among the wiki products, or like Wiki souvenir, photobook etcetra. Shahriar Kabir Pavel (talk) 20:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support-- I believe in the fact that, prizes can truly be a huge motivating factor when it comes to any sort of competition. In case of Wikisource, they speed up and intensify the atmosphere as well as inspire the users to do more. It helps to create a significant amount of awareness in the offline world regarding Wikisource and its functions, thereby attracting new volunteers into the community; which, in my view, is a big gain for us. Therefore, I unequivocally support the current practice of giving prizes in the proofreading competition.Thank you.--ঈশান জ্যোতি বৰা (talk) 17:29, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support-- Agree with Sushant's Opinion. E-certificates along with prizes are welcomed. -- Komal Sambhudas (talk) 09:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support - দিব্য দত্ত (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

  1. As suggested by @Sushant savla: in above question, if head-start points are given for contributions made during non-competition period, then it solves the problem of editors participating just for sake of prizes. It also gives round the year contributions, rather than just the 15 days period. Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 15:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Also for the jury, who judges or apply for their high quality performances! - Suvray (talk) 18:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 6 <User proposed> edit

Voting edit

  Support   Oppose   Neutral   Comment

Discussion edit

What does it mean like as <User proposed>. Pls give an exmaple. - Suvray (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Suvray: Da, This section is open for any new topic proposed by any user.Jayanta (CIS-A2K) (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarity. - Suvray (talk) 17:53, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I read all the comments, most of them are very concerned about the point given to wrong user/ not doing much! For me it is a 10-15days long event only. If someone gets a prize s/he may have contributed on that time span only. And it does not indicate anything more that that. The edit count shows only for that time span, long time users total edit count is much higher, there voice is well accepted that a newly registered contributor.

We may host separate event for page validation and then the objective will be make a book complete. The way the other editors appropriate and decide who have contributed most when an article achieve the Featured Article we may use the same approach on that event. It may be a month long event and we may use eCertificates and may not have gift cards as prize. Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestions : I am giving these suggestions with a overlook of non-Indic language practices / progress.

  1. //We may host separate event for page validation// So no mark to green (it is precaution).
  2. We are already checking books prior to Proofreadthon. so, we can use violate color for all the spelling corrected pages.
  3. then yellow for wiki format
  4. No marks for the pages with out the "byte diff". so, nobody will create new pages from internet sources/by bot.
  5. OCR are good only for few Indic languages. We should respect continuous and laborious contributons of others.--Info-farmer (talk) 01:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

விக்கிமூலம் - தொடர் வகுப்பிற்கான கருத்தும் பின்னூட்டமும் edit

  • ஜெயந்தா நாத் அவர்கள் இது குறித்த வேண்டுகோளை முன்வைத்தார்கள். அதன்படி இங்கு என் கருத்தையும் பின்னூட்டத்தையும் முன்வைக்கின்றேன். முதலில் பின்னூட்டம். இதுபோன்ற வகுப்புகள் ஏற்படுத்துவது பாராட்டுக்குரியது. அதனை ஏற்படுத்திய தன்னார்வலர்களுக்குப் பாராட்டு. அடுத்து, கருத்து. விக்கிமூலம் என்பது பல்வேறு தரவுகளுக்கான ஒரு மூலம் அனைவரும் அறிவோம். அம்மூலத்தின் தெளிவே, தரவுகளின் தெளிவு. எனவே, அதில் இந்திய விக்கிமூல தன்னார்வலர்கள் கலந்துகொண்டு மேம்படுத்தி வருவது சிறப்புக்கரியதாக உள்ளது. இருப்பினும் அதில் இன்னும் கவனத்தைச் செலுத்துவது நோக்கத்தக்கது. போட்டிகள் நடக்கும்போது கவனித்தேன். அதில் நிறத்துக்குத்தான் முன்னுரிமை அளிக்கின்றனர் தன்னார்வலர்கள். இது நிறத்தை மட்டுமே மாற்றும். விக்கிமூலம் மேம்படாது. அதில் இன்னும் மாற்றங்கள் செய்யவேண்டும்.
  • மாற்றம் ஒன்று - கூடுதல் நிறம் உருவாக்குதல்.
  • காரணம் - மஞ்சள் நிறத்தை எடுத்துக் கொள்வோம். இதில் எழுத்து, சொற்பிழைகளும் நுட்பங்களும் சரிபார்க்கப்படவேண்டும் என எதிர்நோக்கப்படுகின்றது. அது பொருந்தாது. எழுத்து, சொற்பிழைகள் பார்ப்பவருக்கு நுட்பங்களைப் பயன்படுத்தும்போது சிக்கல் வரும். இது ஒரு நூலைப் பதிப்பித்து வெளியிடுவதற்கு இணையானது. எனவே, கூடுதலாக ஒரு நிறம் வேண்டப்படுகின்றது. அது எழுத்து, சொற்பிழைகள் களைய ஒரு நிறம், நுட்பங்களைப் பயன்படுத்துவதற்கு ஒரு நிறம். இரண்டுமே கடுமையான பணி என்பதால் ஒரே புள்ளிகள் வழங்குதல் வேண்டும். அதுபோல பச்சை நிறப் பங்களிப்பாளர்களுக்கு சமமான புள்ளிகள் வழங்குதல் வேண்டும். இதனைக் கருத்தில் கொண்டு போட்டிகள் நடத்துவது விக்கிமூலத்தின் பணி இன்னும் சீருறும்.
  • இனி, தொடர் வகுப்புகள் குறித்துப் பார்ப்போம். தொடர் வகுப்பில் சான்றிதழ் பெறுவதற்காகவே சிலர் பங்களிப்புச் செய்கின்றனர். இதுபோன்ற பங்களிப்பாளர்களைச் சரியாகப் பயன்படுத்திக் கொள்ளவேண்டும். ஒருவார பயிற்சி என்றால், இரண்டு நாட்கள் அறிமுகத்திற்கும் நுட்பங்களின் அறிமுகத்திற்கும் பயன்படுத்திக் கொண்டு, மீதமுள்ள நாட்களில் நூல் மெய்ப்பிற்கு ஒதுக்கிக்கொள்ள வேண்டும். ஒவ்வொரு வடிவம்சார் (கவிதை, கட்டுரை, அகராதி, ஆய்வு, சிறுகதை, புதினம்) நூல்களுள் ஏதாவது ஒன்றை முடிக்கச் சொல்லலாம். இதனைக் கவனத்தில் கொள்ளவேண்டும். இதுபோன்ற முயற்சிகள் விக்கிமூலத்தை மேம்படுத்தும் என்று கருதுகின்றேன். இதனை விக்கிமூலப் பங்களிப்பாளர்கள், அணுக்கர்கள், ஒருங்கிணைப்பாளர்கள் கவனத்தில் கொண்டு செயல்பட்டால் சீர்மையுறும். நன்றி! --Neyakkoo (talk) 09:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indic_Wikisource_Community/Requests_for_comment/Indic_Wikisource_Proofreadthon&oldid=24893209"