FamilySearch Wiki talk:Reviewer: Difference between revisions

Please indicate below your support of this proposal or ideas to improve it. Thanks! [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 16:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)  

Sounds reasonable to me [[User:Laralee|Laralee]] 17:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)  

::I guess I do not think that way. I personally do not like poster either as it sounds like something hanging on the wall. Bright yellow and beeps sounds like a very fun thing. For me, the action text is "Upload File" in the Toolbox. It would make sense to me to use the same words or some derivation of the words. Upload is the standard name. However, even one without the rights can still upload, they just do not have the immediate approval. So, maybe it needs o keep the Reviewer. [[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]] 20:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I support this. Never had anyone unfriendly, but had issues with timeliness and naming. [[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]] 19:28, 20 October 2009 (UTC)  

Some alternate names were suggested: Media Uploader, Media Loader, Media Poster, Media Contributor, Multimedia Reviewer, Multimedia Approver, Image Approver, Media Approver, and Reviever [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 20:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)  

:::The thing about "Media Coordinator" that worries me a little is that it may sound like a member of FamilySearch's marketing team who feeds information about the wiki to the media -- newspapers and genealogy magazine writers and such. If misunderstood that way, the title Media Coordinator might be construed as an authority figure in the wiki, which is something we wanted to avoid. (It's the same trouble we had with calling this role Moderator.) So I wonder if inserting Multi into the word would help clarify things. Then it would be a Multimedia Coordinator. (Makes for a long name, though. I prefer the short role names Wikipedia uses, like SysOps and Bots and such.) [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

My vote is to have a Reviewer that has a job (e.g. the missionaries) to review and upload, and to have an Uploader role for the people we trust and who get a free ticket to by-pass the image review process. Uploader and Reviewer, both roles both names. [[User:Jimgreene|Jimgreene]] 18:39, 2 November 2009 (UTC)  

Vote recorded below, but wanted to add my opinion in agreement with Jim that we should keep the reviewer as a separate role from Uploader, even if the rights are the same. In the future they may diverge. Even now, the Uploader doesn't approve others' images, only their own, right? [[User:Alan|Alan]] 16:42, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

| [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheym]]  

| [[User:Laralee|Laralee]]  

| [[User:CottrellS|Steve]]  

| [[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]]  

| [[User:CK Whipple|Kara]]  

| [[User:Franjensen|Fran]]  

| [[User:Molliewog|Mollie]]  

| [[User:Bakerbh|Bakerbh]]  

| [[User:Alan|Alan]]