Talk:International logo contest/Results
Some votes are in the other languages ballot pages. Don't you put them in your calculations ? Are only english speaker allowed to vote ? That was not mentionned in the vote rules. Wikipedia is called multilingual project : does that mean that it is a english language project with less important contributors not english speeking ? ArnoLagrange 09:50, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)
- Thank for pointing out. You are absolutly right. I have updated the results so that they include votes from non-English ballot pages. -- Taku 14:39, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)
- All the votes listed on other languages ballot pages should be moved to the en page on the 25th. I never understood non english would actually vote on other pages, I just thought only the explanations would be there. ant (et merci Arnaud pour la traduction)
- Les "non english" (drôle de catégorie, à d'autres époques et en d'autres circonstances on a aussi parlé de métèques,...) se sont mis à voter dans leur langue ... enfin les germanophones ont ouvert la voie. J'ai assuré la traduction en espéranto, puis celle en français (j'aurais bien aimé que quelqu'un d'autre le fasse) et je regrette que les wikipédiens qui utilisent d'autres langues n'aient pas traduit aussi les explications dans leurs langues (seuls le chinois et l'espagnol apparaissent dans la première page). Que signifie une démocratie dans une communauté multilingue si les documents importants ne sont publiés que dans une seule langue que tout le monde ne maîtrise pas ? What does mean democracy in a multilingual community if important documents are published in an only one language all body cannot so well ? -- ArnoLagrange 08:45, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Yes, but métègue has a bad connotation nowadays :-)
I entirely agree with that feeling. One year ago, I wrote Future of international Wikipedias as part of the main community after I saw some global decisions be taken only by english people *again*. It was one of the first thing I wrote here not about the english wikipedia. I worked like hell to have us taken into account, and made more translations that you could imagine. But this is without counting the fact that people get tired of being attacked for constantly reminding others of their existence, just for bugging them. And this is without counting that doing dozens and dozens of translations (check the history of the majority of meta articles on fr) is not necessarily rewarding and is more often that it should the opportunity for others to attack you for not having been "perfect". You should also remember that any edit on Wikipedia is voluntarily. You cannot expect people to have fun just by translating things other created, and expect all texts to be translated by others just because it is necessarily to do so. I did that *a lot* for 18 months, for a benefit that is not necessarily obvious. Having been told I was doing it *too much* and preventing others to do it, I dropped my contributions on that matter, but pushed several of you to do so. What sense does it have to have a democracy if its citizens are just waiting for you to tell them what to do, pulling and pushing for them to act as citizens ? Perhaps we should lose democracy again, for citizens to realise what they lose by doing nothing. Thank you for *your* help and opinion. User:Anthere
As an independent viewer of Wikipedia and as webpage-developer I feel that the choice of the community is not optimal. Actually I don't really care since I use Wikipedia one or two times a month, but the new "puzzlelike" logotype may fit in to the current webpagedesign. On paper it really looks like crap, a logotype today should look good on both paper and screen. But the community has made it's choice. -- Iraeo
As both a check on the election results, and as a demonstration of pairwise voting, I decided to do the following:
- Download the ballots cast in this contest
- Run them through a program I wrote to parse them into a format I'm used to working with (with candidate translation list I manually created).
- Tally the votes using the Condorcet calculator
In using this technique, the winner of this election remains the same (1a). However, it's still interesting to see the nature of the pairwise matchups. In particular, the race for second place was really close (option 2c beat option 10 by five votes). It was even closer before I noticed I missed the international ballots (without those ballots, 10 beat 2c by a vote).
You can see the complete results here
-- RobLa 03:03, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Start a discussion about International logo contest/Results
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Meta the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve International logo contest/Results.
