Talk:Project grants/Wikimedia Commons advertisement business cards

Discussion

Using QRpedia or bitly to track how the links is being used should be straightforward. How would the number of people who go on to upload pictures to Commons be measured? Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 12:38, 22 April 2014 (BST)

Possibly using UploadWizard's campaigns... Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2014 (BST)

Maybe. It would be nicer to keep track of usernames rather than uploads if possible. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:00, 22 April 2014 (BST)

Surely if we know what files are uploaded we can works our usernames. CatScan v2 could do that, and since you can add categories with a campaign it would be straightforward to run a report. I think the bottom line is we should be able to measure it, so the cards could be a good investment. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 17:00, 25 April 2014 (BST)

• I've had similar thoughts to this in the past and I think this is a fantastic idea. Would it be better to have A5-sized cards as well as or instead of business-card sized? There's very little room on a business card, and we might want to explain (or at least touch on) things like licensing so that Commons' requirements don't come as a surprise when they get to the upload interface. Harry Mitchell (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2014 (BST)
  • Thanks Harry. :-) A6 might work, but I think A5 might be a bit too big. My rationale with suggesting business cards is that they'd be easy to slip into any sort of camera bag, which would make it less likely that they'd be left behind by photographers when they go on trips out, and they'd be easy for the recipient to tuck away in their own bag. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:32, 28 April 2014 (BST)

• A simple project that will cost peanuts but could deliver us a lot; sounds like a great idea to me. Looking at this useful guide for people, like myself, who are rusty on paper sizes, I would agree with Mike that A5 strikes me as too big. A6 could work, though I would say A7 is healthy size which could include enough concise text to be useful and readable. A8 would probably be too small. CT Cooper · talk 03:45, 30 April 2014 (BST)
• Regarding size, I agree that the business card size initially proposed could be most likely to be retained by others. There are various dimensions, with ID-1 apparently being the European standard. -- Trevj (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2014 (BST)

• Hi @Mike Peel:, pleased grants committee has been asked to look at this again. @CT Cooper: has emailed to reiterate his support, and I'm happy to do the same. Hopefully the office can work out some of the finer details with you. It would be good to have a clear idea what URL will be used (I'd suggest a short URL rather than QR code) for linking to Commons. I see the merit of phone/email on the card (easy to drop wmuk a message if out and about) but I did wonder if a wmuk link and possibly logo might be useful too (it flags us as an entity, and might be a recruitment opportunity (Goal 2a maybe) - at some point such a link could go to a 'photographer landing page'). Sjgknight (talk) 08:00, 28 May 2015 (BST)

Draft design

is at User:Mike Peel/Sandbox. Please feel free to play around with it. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:17, 29 April 2014 (BST)

I think that looks pretty good. I like having a photo on the back is a nice idea – especially the 2012 picture of the year. The only thing that's missing is a campaign link so we can measure usage. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 11:08, 30 April 2014 (BST)

Thanks Richard. I wonder if it would be best to set up a WMUK URL to do this - something like wikimedia.org.uk/commons that then links through to the welcome page while providing WMUK with tracking information via stats.wikimedia.org.uk? Or can redirect to a more complicated URL on commons? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:01, 1 May 2014 (BST)

I like the design and text but wonder how legible it would be at business card size. I've therefore suggested amended wording within the sandbox design, for consideration/further amendment. I assume the cards would be professionally typeset, including image bleed on reverse (maybe with attribution in white within a dark area of the photo, rather than within a footer, e.g. rotated within LH edge may be an improvement). -- Trevj (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2014 (BST)