montage
montage copied to clipboard
hatnote
Flagging images while voting
I'd like to be able to flag images when voting, so that I can come pull out or look at a selection later. The option of several having different flags (eg of different colours) would be good.
One example would be to note copyright infringements, or images otherwise outside Commons' scope, as I go along. I'd then be able to use the flagged list to go to Commons later and nominate those images for deletion.
Or, flags could be used for a variety of special needs within the contest, for example noting possible candidate images that might be eligible for some special prize.
One option would be to offer tag options to coordinators, and even jurors. I will prioritize this as normal given the other higher priority tasks.
We have two related features ready to be implemented in the client:
- Faves: jurors can mark an entry as a fave (/v1/juror/round/<round_id:int>/<entry_id:int>/fave), and then get a list of their faves (/v1/juror/faves).
- Flags: jurors can mark an entry with a flag and submit a reason (/v1/juror/round/<round_id:int>/<entry_id:int>/flag), and then coordinators can view flagged entries (/v1/admin/round/<round_id:int>/flags) to determine if they should be manually disqualified (/v1/admin/round/<round_id:int>/<entry_id:int>/disqualify). The idea is to catch images that are obviously not eligible for WLM, copyright violations, etc. (I keep thinking of those weird photos of trampoline people that were submitted to Wiki Loves Monuments Iran!)
Any chance of this being made available by early next week? We'd like if possible to use it in our round 2
@yarl do you have all the specifications you need for this feature? Let us know if we should discuss it more. Otherwise, I agree that it would be great to get to it soon. It's a very useful one for jurors and coordinators.
Here are some flag reasons for a radio button list, with an Other + write-in box.
- Low image quality (blurry or corrupted)
- Inappropriate or offensive content
- Suspected copyright violation
- Non-photographic work (e.g., illustration)
- Excessive manipulation or post-processing
- Other (please specify) [_____]
Sound good?
All of those (and many more) could be useful to some campaigns, but probably user needs will differ quite a lot. Some will want one-off flags for special prizes, and so on.
If you have a hard-coded list you risk repeated requests to make the list longer and longer. What about allowing several generic flags, with the flag wording and meanings chosen by the coordinator when the round is being set up?
When voting, the juror should be able to select one or several flags.
@slaporte has mentioned above a slightly different concept: that a juror can tag a photo in some way and type in a reason for later review by the coordinator. That would also be a useful feature, but might be implemented separately from the coordinator-defined flags discussed above. For Stephen's feedback idea, just a single data entry field per photo with free text entry would be enough I'd have thought.
Would really like to have had this for WLM 2017. What about WLM 2018 - please?