User talk:Bdcousineau/Archives 4

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Online Database[edit]

Apparently, you do have an online database for a lot of the media from the Gerald R. Ford Library at: http://research.archives.gov/search?desc-loc=5&pg_src=group&data-source=all .It says there are 2428 items. Should I upload from there? Happy thanksgiving btw=D Smallman12q talk) 21:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Hell yes. Can we avoid duplications - some of those have been uploaded by Dominic - 'specially the family photos. Can we still group into tables? That seemed to be useful - but maybe only to me. Lastly, can we pull all the descriptive data in? Even the data listed under the expanded link additional information -I'd like to avoid the whining of the scowly archivists if we leave something out. BTW not a single one of them has looked at ANYTHING we've done so far.
A slide of wiki-pumpkin pie to you as well. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Actually, we will need to add data to what this database has, i.e. a few links back to the Ford Library. We can also discard the NAIL/ARC variant control numbers (useless for anyone but a gov worker), we'll need to include the series, and collection info, and I'd put money on the Ford archivists wanting the box # listed. Is there a way to link to the Ford Library Finding aids? That would be a link specific to each of the 2000 odd items. The online items would have to be sorted into their series and matched with the correct website link....could that happen with a bot/script/function, or is that something I'd do by hand and then give to you?
Sure love to see all 282,000 photos uploaded. Nice dream. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:17, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
I can include all the data that's there. If it's not there (such as the links to the site), that would have to be added manually or so. I have to look more closely what has/hasn't been uploaded. Duplicates will be avoided in most (virtually all) cases. (You sure you weren't aware of the online db before?) Happy thanksgiving=D.Smallman12q (talk) 01:01, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Well, I knew that this existed in theory, but had no clue that it was operational - it has been a rumor for years. You have my permission (useless, really) to scrape it and upload anything you want - but you can anyway. Eisenhower returns almost 5000 digital items.
The one excellent thing about the database is there is NOT ONE effing link back to the Ford Library; when I point this out to Ford Librarians # 1 and #2, they will be pretty angry, and then see even further value in the Wikimedia project.
For the Ford stuff, can we upload the docs into tables according to SERIES? I think it follows our current scheme. Once the material is in a table on a category page, couldn't we do a batch insertion of a link? kinda like the batch insertion of the institution tag/partnership template that we are currently doing?
Can you let me know what you discover about what has/hasn't been uploaded? Curious.
On the photo collection front, I have gotten close to getting permission to upload what all that has been scanned. Also, I will be getting direct access to the drives where the photos live (no more 260 mile road trip) in the next 2 weeks, so when I get the YES, we can start on that.Bdcousineau (talk) 17:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Ye that can be done...I have to look at it and see what how to properly do it. I'm not sure if there's a point to adding a link back to the fordlibrary findingaid...it's a lot less useful (having less data and being less organized) than the database. Later, I can upload everything from the db...since it has a common format, one script would work for everything.Smallman12q (talk) 15:49, 24 November 2012 (UTC) I checked in the ARC catalog, and the stuff is there (not sure why I missed it before). At here, under "Digital Copies", for "Location of Archival Materials" select Gerald R. Ford Library and limit results to 2000. You'll get your 2k results. Its best to wait for Dominic's User:US National Archives bot to resume. The current data will probably have to be overwritten with the exact ARC data. It's unfortunate I didn't find it before (and you weren't aware of it). So, I'm not sure whats next?Smallman12q (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────┘
I'm pretty sure that Dominic's User:US National Archives bot is not going to resume - according to him, there's no one to run it. I've tried to check via his boss, and his cube-mate, but gotten no response. Can you tell somehow from inside Wikimedia? have there been recent uploads? I'll try his cube-mate again this week.
I'm not sure what you think needs to get overwritten. We've stayed close to Dominic's examples.
If you want to wait til I get the YES on the photos (these are not in ARC/OPA, so I need permission) we're at a break..
If you want to pillage the OPA datebase, let's! It's your call.
I'm guessing that all the empty category pages Domlinic made of Ford documents correlate to what's in the OPA database; once I suggest that these exist, there will be significant interest by Librarians #1 and #2 to fill these empty categories, and link back to the Library website. At minimum, I'd like to see the empties filled and categorized as Ford materials before we stop uploading documents. I don't think there's any big rush - now or later.
If you are bored/frustrated, is there a possibility of teaching Michael how to do batch uploads? He could take over as part of his internship. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:04, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

What does that mean...there's no one to run it? Commons:Bots/Requests/US National Archives bot says Dominic is supposed to run the bot. Is there something wrong with the program? (software doesn't get ill or age.) I could write a replacement if needed. Batch uploads require some programming knowledge. In my case, I usually parse the DOM, download, process, and upload. This portion of web-based programming uses only elementary-level math (unlike more graphic applications)...its mostly logic. Michael is always welcome to get a few books on programming and start learning. He can look at w:Wikipedia:Creating a bot and use a w:.NET or w:Python library for starting out. Programming its largely a self-taught skill... especially since the field is constantly updating (and its marketable=P). The degree just lets you get an interview sooner. Smallman12q (talk) 00:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Oh boy, Dominic got canned, remember? He no longer works at the National Archives. He was the ony one with knowledge about the bot. That was his sole function. Since he is no longer working for NARA, no one else is running the bot as far as I can tell. According to what he said in Seattle, no more uploads are taking place. Maybe I'm using the wrong verb - maybe a person doesn't "run" a bot, maybe a person "starts" a bot, or "sets" a bot...whatever. I think the NARA bot is in the off mode. With no plans to resume until they get a new Wikipedian.
Hence my interest in continuing with our big little project, hopefully easier now that you found a usable database.
I keep hoping there is a way for you to check the bot from the Wikimedia side to see if it is still uploading. The best I can find is a last upload date of October 17. Dominic left around then.
Maybe ask Dominic's friends Jarekt and Multichill they helped him develop the bot. They might know a) where Dominic is and b) if the bot is operational. According to the discussion page, it was going to run in spurts. I can ask if you'd like, but you know the languaging better.
I will call Dominic's cube neighbor as planned tomorrow, but based on what Dominic said in Seattle, she knows little.
Eventually we'll figure this out.
I made an internship plan for Michael, he has his interview at the Library next week. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
So dominic was let go...that would explain it. Well, the source mentions a "text file containing the mappings." I need a list of ARC ids with digital objects to plugin into: http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=<id> . Alternatively, I can go in order from 0 to whatever number and it'll just have a lot of misses (which is fine). I can write a replacement script, based on the current one. You (or an interested Wikipedian) can run it on a spare low-end computer w/ internet connection and XP+, or a virtual instance for a few weeks (non-stop). All you'll have to do is press "go". I'll try and write it next week or so. Good luck with Michael=D. Smallman12q (talk) 01:33, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Keys to the Kingdom[edit]

So you are making it possible for me to be the next NARA Wikipedian - omg, right? I'm up for it. Chances are slim that I'll be given a 'spare' computer for this; I may be doing this at home, where it can chug peaceably along. Will you need those ARC ID numbers or are you happy with the work around you mentioned above? Given your professed interest in large batch uploads, why are YOU not interested in doing the upload, and dumping the results on me? Bdcousineau (talk) 20:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

It's odd you guys don't have a spare computer(even low end Pentium 4)...I've seen pallets of gov computers sold for peanuts. I do batch uploads of 2-5k files. This will probably be larger at 75k+ files covering at least a terabyte+ of bandwidth down (download) and then up (upload). It'll be written in VBScript and you'll literally copy/paste the program source code into notepad, save, and run. For the arc numbers, I'll just go through them one by one, skipping those already uploaded...it won't be much slower. Smallman12q (talk) 22:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
This is really what I was privately wising for in the long term when I started this adventure - that I would manage the Presidential Libraries presence on Wikimedia. You are making that possible. I have to go away for a moment and be overwhelmed/gather strength. Then I'll be back with nag-gy tech questions. Sorry.
Was that from movie - the pallet of cheap computers? We have spares, what I meant was I wouldn't be given one to do this. At least not yet. Here's a story - when NARA first installed wifi, no government employees were allowed to use it. Researchers had to apply 30 days in advance to get access.
Did you see the awesome article by Uzma Gamal on Ford? Holy cow that helps my cause. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
It's quite good=D. Long-term editors can write good articles, the best ones are listed at w:Wikipedia:Featured articles. (You can see some of the articles I've written at w:User:Smallman12q#Wikipedia.) I literally meant pallets of computers, you can Google it. ..generally when companies move/close/or upgrade, that's where the machines go. Don't really know why some places are so allergic to getting "connected", (maybe the IT people are wikt:asshats). Anyhow, I'll write the program first, then we'll worry about how its going to be run. Since all it requires is plain XP, it could be run on a w:virtual machine. somewhere.Smallman12q (talk) 22:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, but before you get too far, I wrestled an archivist to the ground (surprisingly easy!) and got a file which I will zip and upload to you tomorrow. I can't open the file on my computer - don't even comment - but she said it contained all the ARC id #'s etc for the Ford materials in ARC. Hope that makes your job easier. Am looking into a terabyte of bandwidth, since my current home wifi package/ipad combo will prolly not support what I'll need. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Latest zip file - http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/download/WHSpecialfiles.zip It is awfully small, and may only contain ARC ID information about our previous /download/smallman12q4/0010.zip -- Bdcousineau (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
It's small, but its a database=D. Is there a chance you could get a similar database for the metadata of the ARC catalog?Smallman12q (talk) 23:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
It depends on the outcome of the meeting on Wednesday. I will make a strong case for it. They have such a db, but don't want to upload masses of docs (see above) and so won't hand it over. I will transform myself from this to this in an effort to be convincing. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:28, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
You should have an IT dept that could handle this, if a person can't be found. You could probably also run it in the cloud such as Windows Azure or AWS as its w:Classic ASP. I plan to have the script ready tmrw and will test it, it shouldn't be very complicated.Smallman12q (talk) 22:55, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

┌───────────────────┘
Yes, I looked into AWS and will look at the other recommendations. There is a strong bias AGAINST uploading large numbers of documents to Wikimedia. We will address this at the meeting next Wednesday. I hope I don't yell and call them names; they are uploading large numbers of docs to the Library website, not sure I see the difference between that and this. There is a strong bias TOWARDS choosing sexy topics and uploading materials around these topics, but Uzma Gamal's article shows that we can't predict which materials an editor wants to use - he found an image unused for 6 yrs. Even the Operation Fluid Drive piece proved that - few Library staffers had even heard of that ... Sure we have IT guy to handle this, yes, and he's sympathetic, but it's "not clear if we should allocate scarce resources to this project". Sounds like FEDSPEAK to me. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:20, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll wait to see if they give you the db for all the metadata, before I write the screen scraper. It shouldn't be a big deal. Since its PD, it really should be made available to researchers who want to run their own queries.Smallman12q (talk) 16:25, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Ok, got it, and agreed.Bdcousineau (talk) 02:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Riverside archives[edit]

Re: User_talk:Bdcousineau/Archives_2#California_wiki_people I responded on my user talk page -- I haven't heard anything from them. I'll try emailing again. Banaticus (talk) 22:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Ps[edit]

I think it would be great if you took over the National Archives bot, and finished up what they started. Let me know what I can do to help! Bdcousineau (talk) 03:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

NARA bot script, etc[edit]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:US_National_Archives_bot/script. I also have a document with links to all the NARA projects and tools across the wiki, if it's of any interest. Bdcousineau (talk) 13:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

High-Resolution Download[edit]

Hi Bdcousineau. The High-Resolution Download link at Image: A6311-09 results in downloading Image: A5724-09, which is the wrong photo. Can you get the High-Resolution Download link at Image: A6311-09 fixed so that the link results in downloading the correct photo? Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:16, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I'm on it. Thx. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Hi-res download issue resolved. Congratulations, you touched a page on our website that has languished since 2006! Makes my job selling Commons to my co-workers easier...Bdcousineau (talk) 17:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
This might help as well. To welcome the Ford Presidential Museum to Wikipedia, I just wrote and published Ford assassination attempt in Sacramento based on information (and photos) from the material donated by the Ford Museum and Library and just wrote and published Senator Hotel, the hotel Ford stayed at the day of the assassination attempt in Sacramento. Enjoy! -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 05:09, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
That is great news...I appreciate it. Thanks! In turn, I wrote a blog entry called "Lost webpage found by Wikipedia editor" for the National Archives employee communications network. Have a great day! Bdcousineau (talk) 12:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
If you have a link to that blog entry, I would appreciate receiving it. Also, thanks for the Butter pecan caramel ice cream treat.[1] I especially enjoyed learning that your archivist appreciated the article. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 07:12, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
I'd love to, but the blog is on an internal communication tool. It's short, so I've attached the text - of all the blogs about my wiki project, its gotten the most views - a shocking 57 so far.
"Lost webpage found by Wikimedia editor

OK, the page wasn’t really lost!

According to Ford Presidential Library Archivist and webmaster William McNitt, the page was created in 2006 – but never used until today. A Wikipedia editor searching for a particular image opened the page, and seeing a broken link, notified Ford staff.

Here is an interesting story: prior to uploading media to Wikimedia Commons, the Walter Arts Museum in Baltimore logged 1 million pageviews a year on their website. This is a good solid indicator of use. Then the staff uploaded their artifact images to Wikimedia Commons. When they tracked the pageviews, the number had increased – to 3 million a MONTH. Whoa!?!!

Perhaps for the Ford Library, this is how it starts.

(Attached is the image from the "lost" page - just blow the dust away!) end of blog entry"
Have a great day. All my previous blog posts are about our Wikimedia project successes. If this blog post gets picked up and bounced anywhere publically, I'll let you know. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:30, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Photo contact sheets[edit]

Hi Bd. I've been working on how the Commons pages for the Ford photo contact sheets might look and how to fully categorize each Ford photo contact sheets (not including the what each photo shows). I created one at File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg. My goal was to make the file name and page have a standard approach that could be used for all NARA presidential library contact sheets. The table has columns that match the Ford Library columns (see, e.g. this). We may be able to have one master table for all NARA presidential library contact sheets. For that, I added other columns that will allow sorting all NARA presidential library contact sheets by various parameters. Perhaps this format can be added to each NARA presidential library contact sheet page (with particular entries changed or left blank) as you bring in each contact sheet into Commons. Please look of the File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg page and edit as needed. I also posted a category scheme below for all NARA presidential library contact sheets. Perhaps someone who knows more about the Commons category scheme can improve on the below scheme so that each contact sheet can be properly categorized as it is brought into Commons.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Category scheme for File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg and other NARA presidential library contact sheet pages +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-- Uzma Gamal (talk) 16:05, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

omg! you are making me cry from happiness. I didn't imagine the contact sheets would be useful. I will pull in Michael Barera he's my category guy. As far as the table - is there a way to populate some of the columns (like names, and location). It's important to my battle that I am able to replicate as much as possible what we have on the Library website. More importantly, can the contact sheets be uploaded from pages like[[2]] ? I know smallman12q is working on a program to upload docs via the NARA db ARC; I don't think these contact sheets are in there... BTW, the centennial anniversary of Ford's birth is in 2013, sure would be great if I could provide 100k pages to Commons - that's about what we have scanned at the Library presently. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
We have a template {Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum-cooperation} to put into each page - I put one into File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
I can make a table based on the pdf table, and upload all the contact sheets...though I'm not sure how useful the contact sheets will be. This is on my todo list.Smallman12q (talk) 22:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
If there is any value to having the contact sheets on Commons, go for it. I think there are 12k pages. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Alright, the categorization structure looks good, I just removed one redundancy: "Category:Contact sheets by the Ford White House 19750905" is now a subcategory of "Category:Contact sheets by the Ford White House", and the image is only in the first one. Other than that, the categorization structure looks great. My gut feeling, though, is that the usage of these images will probably be limited: maybe one can be used on the Wikipedia article contact sheet, but other than that I don't know: they're really busy and the individual images are so small it probably won't be worth cropping them out in derivative images. Unless you're seeing something I'm not seeing, I don't think having 12,000 of these contact sheets on Commons will be terribly valuable. Michael Barera (talk) 02:54, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
How about limiting the contact sheets by date - pick a few important events (swearing in, Pardon speech, Draft Dodger amnesty speech for example) and do the contact sheets for those? The photographer David Kennerly (troll that he is -ugh) snapped lots of pictures. In many cases it looks like frame-by-frame still from a film. My two cents - I defer to you wise wiki-dudes. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:03, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
It'd be easier to do them all since they follow the same format.Smallman12q (talk) 16:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't have anything against uploading them all, I just wanted to stress not being disappointed if only one of the 12,000 is ever used in a Wikipedia article (which I think is a real possibility). Michael Barera (talk) 18:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I won't be disappointed if the files don't get used, I just don't want to known for uploading garbage. Again, I defer to you as the wiser entities. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

┌───────────────────┘
Hold the phone! The main page to the Ford White House contact sheets notes that Ford White House photographers took approximately 290,000 photos.[3] That's a third of a million photos!!! All those photos reside on the contact sheets and only a limited few of those image have been turned into individual photos. Merely because the entire sheet itself won't be used in Wikipedia does not mean that the individual treasure trove of 290,000 photos on the sheet lack value as well. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, they probably are the most valuable jewel in the Ford Library's collection.
The Ford library has turned some of the images into individual photos (and these contacts sheets can be used to index those individual photos), but the vast majority of those photos have not yet been turned into individual photos. Not because they have no visual value, but because the Ford website receives a limited audience interested in limited issues on a particular topic (Ford) requesting a copy of an image as compared to the millions who visit Wikipedia every day and are interested in ... everything. Those 290,000 photos don't just show Ford and his family and staff, they show the people who they met all over the world (for Wikipedia's biography articles), locations and buildings all over the world (for Wikipedia's location and building structure articles), and everything the Ford Presidency came in contact with, which is just about everything. That is a huge difference between the success brought by images provided by Walter Arts Museum in Baltimore and success that will be brought by the image from the Ford Library. As for Wikipedia, it's not just those interest in Ford who will make use of these 290,000 photos. Those photos have value well beyond Ford topics and I don't think we can make sweeping generalization about 290,000 photos. The thousands who work the Wikipedia encyclopedia every day can make use of the individual images either by cropping or by contacting the Ford Library (or making a request to Bdcousineau) if there is a need for an individual photo that does not yet exist in a size larger than 200 dpi. Recall that this is a Ford-Wikimedia Commons partnership and there will be tremendous benefits on both sides, not just Wikipedia getting some images limited to Ford. Over time, the Ford library photos will end up in countless of Wikipedia articles viewed by millions of people all over the world, which will increase traffic in the Ford library, museums, and website in ways that would never happen otherwise. However, this Ford-Wikimedia Commons cooperation won't result in full benefits for either Wikpedia/Commons or Ford if the photos cannot be found. The contact sheets are vital to that. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:59, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Bringing in the contact sheets: The difficulty comes in finding the photos and finding things is where a Wiki is superior. By tying these contact sheets to the individual Ford photos and other Commons media and pages to topics well beyond the Ford topic in multiple ways (1) categories, (2) tables, (3) term dynamic linking, (4) Ford's Daily Diary (activities logs) dynamic linking, (5) word search text, (6) What Links Here, etc., Wikipedians will be able to find a contact sheet image they could use and act to get that photo image into a Wikipedia article. When the contact sheets are brought into Wikipedia enmass, it would help if we add a standardized text to each page with dynamic links, etc.
    To further our discussion on bringing in the contact sheets, I uploaded example No. 2 of a contact sheet at File:Ford A5397 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg. The table columns File:Ford A5397 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg includes text that is populated from the identical text at White House Photographs July 5, 1975. I didn't populate the tables at File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg because the Ford Library has not yet created White House Photographs September 5, 1975. The Ford Library calendar at here shows July 10, 1975 as the last date for which The Ford Library created a text summary page for contact sheets. Bdcousineau, imagine a Wikipedia/Commons volunteer tacitly filling in part or all the table at File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg without being asked, merely as a WikiGnome. (I have a few ideas on how you can entice Wikipedia volunteers to start working on the Commons Ford Library material, but we can go into that later). The WikiGnome's effort would cost the Ford Library zero in time or money. The Ford Library then can take that free work, bring the text into the Ford Library Website, revise it as needed, and then post it on the Ford website as part of White House Photographs September 5, 1975. Then Commons can take that verified correct information from the Ford Website and plunk it into the File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg page. Ford-Wikimedia Commons cooperation at its finest.
    The contact sheets can be uploaded from Ford White House Photographs Contact Sheets Container List. That page has the date of the photos (which is different from the contact sheet date) and the photo identifier. The Ford Library's name of the first contact sheet is A0001_NLGRF. I think "Ford" should be added to the front of A0001_NLGRF and perhaps" contact sheet" added to the back of it when brought into Commons to distinguish it from other NAWA presidential library contact sheets that eventually will be loaded into Commons. Since other NARA libraries probably use the same A0000 to A9999 coding system for their contact sheets, I named the uploaded file Ford A5397 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg by replacating the A5397_NLGRF part provided by the Ford library. Bring in all 12,886 contact sheets as we will make use of them.
    -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:59, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • THANK YOU. I like how you think, and am thrilled that you can tell me a concrete use for these that I can in turn sell to the reluctant Library staffers. I know so little about how all the wikis work that there is no way I could have envisioned such an outcome. Let's do it. Plus, I LOVE the phrase "hold the phone" so you had me there. I have an important meeting this week with high level DC people about my Wikimedia work (that y'all are doing for me, thanks)- I will spend the next few hours assimilating this so I can present it factually and not emotionally.. Did I say thank you? Ps I like "stop the presses" and "asshat" too! Bdcousineau (talk) 20:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

DB retrieval[edit]

(In reply to this post) Geez, Smallman12q you always assign me so much w:reading! =p If my survivial in the world of w:cyberculture and it's isms depends on my "ability to manipulate tools to a degree not present in other forms of culture" I'm w:toast. Darwinian FAIL.

So excited about this!! !!!!!!!

I will do my utmost to get that metadata database for you. Remember, I am not an archivist, and therefore suspect. I'll report back from the front lines soon. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

The wiki is an encyclopedia...there's a lot of reading (and writing)=P. Could you also check if you can get the contact sheet data in database form...the pdfs look like printouts, so there should be a db/spread sheet for the contact sheets. Smallman12q (talk) 23:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I will ask about those, too. I hope I don't have a spell of w:Coprolalia during the meeting. These Librarians are terrified to the death of mass uploads (loss of editorial control, paucity of expertise) and yet my task is to get them to not only agree to it but to give me the keys...while you guys get all the easy stuff, writin' a few li'l ole scripts and bitty bots. I'll call on my patron saint w:Barbarella_(film) for support. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:38, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
So...it's Wed....any luck? On a side note, you may be interested to see User:Vgrigas's Category:The Impact of Wikipedia videos seen on their userpage: User:Vgrigas (or the WMF's youtube page).Smallman12q (talk) 00:04, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Ok, some luck, and some stone-walling. From the local staffer in charge of ARC: we enter files directly into ARC, that is the database. From the DC staffer in charge of ARC: This project is being carefully followed by the Archivist; make sure every thing uploaded refers to ARC/NARA in boilerplate - adjust the language that Dominic used, we dont like it. BTW, good job being at the forefront and setting the pace for everyone else, being in front is a bitch. From the Ford Library director: give them (you) what they need to do a good job of uploading for us, as long as we don't have to allocate staff. From the Supervisory Archivist at the Ford: we're not doing anything til that boilerplate langauge is adjusted. (This will take months, because he is terrified/knows that his staff has not done their job vis-a-via ARC, and this project reveals that to DC. In fact few of the presidential libraries have done their ARC uploads like they are supposed to, and he is SCARED that the other libraries will blame him when this comes to light. Not my problem, actually.)
So we will get no access to databases (if they even exist), and adjusting the Record ID templates will get put off and put off. The GOOD NEWS in all of this is that the Director, bless her soul, understands that wiki-bandits may upload Ford materials anyway, and she is almost giving a secret thumbs up to this - she's not afraid of any consequences, unliker her second in command. I think (my opinion here) she wants to find a harmless project to push back against her boss, the Archivist in DC to see what he does, and this is the project.
And they all LOVED Michael. He hit a home-run with his interview, and inadvertently said all the right things, even the scowly side of the room loosened up. He has two reasonable requests of me: go to the Village Pump about the contact sheets (as to their usefulness, he's still not convinced) and two, if we do commence with batch uploads we (make it more challenging for you by) considering what we are uploading, and not just doing value-less material.
As for me (are you still reading?) I AM curious about the Village opinion on the contact sheets. Michael didn't really know what they were (I shoulda said go look it up, right?) so I will post about them tonight...
Let's say we do upload 12k contact sheets and then 70k pages of documents, and then do 2k tape recorded conversations from the LBJ library and then other documents from other Libraries (makes me giddy to even think about it) BUT we are changing the landscape of Commons and littering it with paper... Is that cool? Bdcousineau (talk) 00:57, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────┘
Yes I read it=P. It's not w:WP:TL;DR. (It's not a w:Wikipedia:Walls of text or w:MWOT. Anyhow, if I understand correctly...(I hate office politics...so consuming in rl).

  • they want the ARC template changed (I thought those were ironed out before...Dominic had an official role)
  • no db (well the db obviously exists for ARC at least)
  • Michael got the job (the internship)...congratz to Michael
  • you have some support from the director
  • the deputy archivist is playing office politics using this to gauge their position
  • some places are a little behind...waiting to retire=P
  • you get brownie points for being the initial Guinea pigs to interact with the web=P

you guys also had presnet which means you got a head start with arc (and there's probably a commercial interest involved) ...so what's next...should ARC be scraped and continue the upload?Smallman12q (talk) 01:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

YES. SCRAPE. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Dodged a Whacking with a wet trout thank you. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:44, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Does the no databases also apply to the contact sheets? The contact sheets were likely made at the Gerald Ford Library...so does anyone have the database/spread sheet used...or they don't want to share? (In terms of work, getting data out of a db is like walking to your mailbox, whereas parsing is driving for at least an hour).Smallman12q (talk) 01:25, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
If there is a db they will not release to me until the record id templates are re-languaged...this will take months, as it invloves input from DC staffers and from the local Supervisory Achivist who now will w:stonewall me to w:death I think asshat is appropriate here - maybe even bug-f*@kr (learned that one from some nasty wiktionarians). I'd like to see this move forward, but it depends on if you like to hike. I will ask the photo guy on Monday, he can be simpatico. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
So they don't give access to db for contact sheets...oh well...will parse. I'll probably do export from PDF to csv this way (if that doesn't work, I'll export the pdfs to html and parse). Access 2007 was used to make the pdfs for the contact sheets and it states "This database was created by Library staff and indexes all photographs taken by the Ford White House photographers on this date."...so a db exists. For pdf files uploaded, there is a "pdfscanid" paramter...which should match the arcid. If you want different text for the contact sheets, I'll make another template.Smallman12q (talk) 00:49, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

When I asked about contact sheet db , I got "That is the db" (referring to the website); when I asked for the db for ARC, they said they enter directly into ARC .Please do not change "pdscanid" parameter to "arcid" parameter for the contact sheets. Contact sheets have no ARC ID# yet. See your user page for new quasi-acceptable {{GFPLM-image}} language. I left two versions - one for uploads with ARC ID's-one for uploads without. This template can become {{JFK-image}} or {{LBJ-image}} and so on for future hi-jinks and wiki-piracy. Thanks for be willing to do the scut-work of parsing - can I send you an intern? I seem to have the touch.
We will be generating lots of publicity around Michael's WiR internship. And I have created a 2 yr temporary position at the Museum for an ex-intern to become paid employee to photograph entire artifact collection (for Commons, duh). Just doing my bit to avoid the w:fiscal cliff if we last past 12.21.12, that is! Bdcousineau (talk) 01:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I'll modify the template for those without arc ids. Congratz to michael. Photographing the collection is good. Please make sure you organize the images into some sort of db or w:Content management system. And no the stack of pdfs is not a db...its the output of a db...(which by parsing, will be put back into db form...going backwards).Smallman12q (talk) 02:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I'll organize the photos. That said, access to Ford photos not in ARC will (for now) be limited to those small groups arranged by theme on the website. I've uploaded many of those already. The bulk of the Ford photos will not be given to me until a variety of staffers sign off on {{GFPLM-image}}. I intiated that yesterday. But here comes the stone-walling.
If your task list goes 1. Contact sheets 2. Ford materials in ARC 3. Ford materials on website, when do you estimate you will be at #3? Can I have time between each upload for Michael to categorize the upload and for me to do a little freak-out dance?
So if you are making dbs, you could donate them to us, with a smile and the w:middle finger. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
These db discussions are akin to w:Dilbert comic strips, specifically this one. And yes, I'll give the db if one is made. Will do contact sheets this week.Smallman12q (talk) 23:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I've downloaded the pdfs from the calender views at http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/whphotos/whpo.asp. There are some broken links, there is an extra 1 before whpo:

http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/whphotos/
197412031whpo.pdf
197606191whpo.pdf
197607131whpo.pdf
197608061whpo.pdf
197608071whpo.pdf
197608141whpo.pdf
197608171whpo.pdf
197608181whpo.pdf
197610131whpo.pdf
197610221whpo.pdf

Smallman12q (talk) 00:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

The webmaster will fix these links tmw, and writes:"the user can access the pages through the alternate interface at http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/whphotos/whpodatelist.asp".
I've determined that when I say db to Library staffers they hear chocolate-covered dictionaries and polka dot cocker spaniels. The Collections Manager (from the Museum) is gung-ho to create a db for the 1200 odd artifact images we'll be uploading in January. Jarekt has offered to do that upload. See my user page below - Artifacts and templating.
As for the Ford photos - these are the non-ARC, non-website ones at this point; they are sleeping safely on a hidden drive - when I get the go ahead to upload them, they will have an ARC ID # and thus I will be able to satisfy your directive to "organize the images into some sort of db or w:Content management system" - does ARC qualify? By then it might be clear that everything BUT the photos has been uploaded, and nicely so, too - maybe they'd best scamper to get me good info to finish the job correctly. Here's hoping! Bdcousineau (talk) 20:17, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
ARC is a content management system...but it's missing an w:API. In simple terms, APIs make it easier for machines to read content...though a CMS can also be read...just a little more work. I've parsed the contact sheets metadata. The resulting xml database can be found here (36MB). I've put a sample atUser:Smallman12q/contact sheet. For each upload, I'll include a table.Smallman12q (talk) 18:17, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
That looks like A LOT of work. Thank you! Very instructive. I can even follow along. May I make some suggestions for changing a couple of table headings? Also I'd like Michael to take a look to make sure he can easily categorize the batch - it's a lot of pages. There's been movement on the language for {{GFPLM-image}} - surprise surprise. And I was named the point person for other Presidential Library wikipedia start-up projects in a 15 person tele-conference. Yippee! I'll check back in later tonight. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:41, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Suggestions are welcome. I've actually documented how this upload was done at The Code Project. You may find it interesting.Smallman12q (talk) 20:23, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
I read The Code Project and did find it interesting. I got it all but the programming language. Is 'pretty print' a technical term? I was pleased to note that when I opened it this afternoon, it had 445 views, and this evening it had 542, and they weren't all me, honest to god. I'm happy you are finding multiple uses for all the work I'm asking you to do.
I made the changes to the table heading at User:Smallman12q/contact sheet but only in the first table (A0001). I'm pretty sure you can wave your magic programming wand and finish the others quicker than I.
The new {{GFPLM-image}} language provided by the Presidential Libraries is at the bottom of my user page, if you'd like to weigh in. I've invited the gang over to take a look. I really created havoc by calling it the 'record id box' - so glad I know the proper wiki-name.
I continue to be overwhelmed by your willingness to do all this work - I will show the Ford Library Staff at the next get-together. Thank you! Bdcousineau (talk) 00:58, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I'm well aware of how loong, if at all, any such project would take at an agency. (I've seen an econ consultant serve as a lead technical adviser 0.o) So, I'm just doing my part to move it along. And yes, w:prettyprint is a technical term=P. You (or Michael now that he's official) need to finalize what you want the template information for the contact sheets to look like, and provide an example so I can do the upload.Smallman12q (talk) 12:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

1[edit]

See Sandbox6 for template info. We can't use {{GFPLM-image}} really, so I worked in the SUMMARY area and imported yr table, with new column headings. You do not see image A0001.jpg because I cannot upload images into Commons from my ipad - I can't figure out how to save an image from the web to my "camera roll" - the Commons uploader only pulls from my ipad camera roll, although now I know how to bookmark, and put a jpg onto the desktop space. YAY
This is one of the many 'under the wire' projects we are undertaking, and I don't want Michael to jeopardize his internship by getting too deep into these, unless he chooses to, so I'm okay with this as a file page layout if it works for you.
Ipad shut down in 3 2 1 Bdcousineau (talk) 01:26, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
For author, should we instead put w:White House Photographic Office? (An article for that office should also be made). Also, for tone, the abbreviation BW is used, should I spell out "Black & White"? I'll also add the categorized tag when uploading.Smallman12q (talk) 01:12, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
I like that solution for author w:White House Photographic Office - there would be no potential copyright questions (like I am currently dealing with elsewhere) and bonus, no mention of Kennerly (don't LIKE that guy). No, don't spell out black and white, "BW" is fine. Michael needs the media-needing-categorization-tag - is that what you mean? SEE BELOW. Some interesting movement from DC- uploading from websites (non-ARC materials) may now be, umm, not totally OK, but less prohibited? You should see the gobbledygook email I got today....all about being a good NARA citizen (what? We're a country now?!) and mentioning this project several times. I will forward a copy to my WiR for his scrapbook. Bdcousineau (talk) 04:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
this from Michael:"As long as we can make sure that all the contact sheet uploads go through the "uncategorized" category so I can make sure they are all properly categorized, I'll be happy." - see the bottom of my user page for context. Thanks. Bdcousineau (talk) 04:30, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the big thing I want to ensure is that all the contact sheets are properly categorized. It would be great if we could either 1) make sure they all get uploaded to the "uncategorized Ford images category" or 2) make sure they all are categorized with "Contact sheets from the Ford White House" when they are uploaded (which is probably even better). Either way, I want to make sure that all of them are properly categorized so they're not just floating around with a hidden category and nothing else. Thanks, Smallman12q! Michael Barera (talk) 13:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
So I can upload the 10k images to match the formatting at Sandbox6? I've also created Creator:David Hume Kennerly whose description should be filled out.Smallman12q (talk) 03:16, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
YAY! Please replace Creator:David Hume Kennerly with House Photographic Office - some contact sheets are by a guy named MOORE, and I can't find anything about him, so can we leave that parameter more general, with the link back to the Ford website. Also I deleleted Category:photographs by David Kennerly . In that group of 10k contact sheets there may be other creators besides Moore not listed on House Photographic Office so maybe best to keep it loose for now. Then YES upload. Best christmas present EVAR. Up there with my dream that the NARA lawyers come back with "Gifts to Presidents enter into the public domain period." So I can tell the copyright trolls who are pushing their w:Wikipedia:Walls of text on me to scram. But it's a good thing, getting the federal lawyers to wield their rule, brings weight to the project internally and externally. Had to throw my weight around with brickwall-like co-worker and invoke the dreaded "Because the Boss said to" - this may yield results making the ARC scrape easier. That scrape actually given a written ok by people way way above us. Really, having the time of my life here; time to msg the hubby in Afghanistan so he knows I haven't disappeared down this rabbit hole. Thanks for all your time and work. Bdcousineau (talk) 04:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
┌────────────────┘
You'll probably like this quote: "She came closer to killing me than the president."[4] Is that what he's like in real life? Great news on the contact sheet descriptions. Each contact sheet description table will be on the individual contact sheet page. However, I've been working on a way to also optionally have them all on a single page by including the large table in a scrolling list. (See the page I created at Help:Scrolling list). The large table could be column sorted and that single page key word searched to assist in seeing connections between topics and finding individual items. Before the frame column at User:Bdcousineau/Sandbox6, would it be possible to have the columns NARA Library and Roll film # similar to the table at File:Ford A9138 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg? The Roll film # column would help leave the option open to copy all the individual contact sheet description tables into one page. The NARA Library column would leave the option open to have all the NARA Library contact sheet description tables on one page. Also, the fordlibrarymuseum.gov contact sheet descriptor pages have a "View President Ford's Daily Diary (activities log) for xxx here" link (see, e.g., 19760405whpo.pdf. Would it be possible to add a "View President Ford's Daily Diary (activities log) for xxx here" link to User:Bdcousineau/Sandbox6 as an example for the pages Smallman12q creates? Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 11:00, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, he is a high maintenance self absorbed asshat-troll. I can't believe that headline, but really I can.
I'm loathe to return the NARA Library column because I think we are the only one presently scanning contact sheets for website use. I know other Libraries have contact sheets, just don't know their plans for them. (Digression- I've seen Nixon contact sheets with soft-core porn - the photogs were shooting a hippie march on DC and fired off a few rounds of film under a set of bleachers looking up at the girls - naughty guys!)
Does it make more sense to add a link to the contact sheets at the Daily Diary page (once that group gets uploaded?), instead? I don't know how complicated the programming is here, but I know Smallman is having to do a lot of shit work because my co-workers are holding out on db's. Maybe this is a simple addition, but I don't know from programming!! More importantly, I also don't know if he's started or not. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:59, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

break[edit]

Contact sheets are like one big photo film strip of lots of little photos in a film strip. The contact sheets were made by the Ford White House. For example, Karl Schumacher come back to the White House on July 5, 1975 with a roll of Kodacolor 35 mm safety film. That roll was immediately copied onto a contact sheet, this July 5, 1975 sheet, the purpose is so people in the White House could look at the contact sheet to decide which photos the Ford White House would release. So, the photos are no problem. However, now I realize that the Contact Sheet Photo Descriptions[5] might be a problem. The text of that database was created by the Ford Library staff, so I'm not sure that it is in the public domain. If not, we would need the Ford Library to release the text under a free license (CC?) before we can add it to commons. Without that contact sheet description text, there would be less of a point in bringing in the contact sheets into Commons. The text of the President Ford's Daily Diary (activities log) is free. However, I tried to use that Daily Diary text to fill in the table at File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg. I just don't have the expertise on the Ford administration to match up Ford's September 5, 1975 activities (the day Fromme tried to assassinate Ford) with the photos in the contact sheet. We still should bring in the free license contact sheets and worry about the other details later. Going to sad mode now. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 18:55, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Cheer up, the contact sheet descriptions were written by Federal employees as part of their duties - why wouln't it be public domain? Seriously confused - following that line of thinking, no photograph taken by Kennerly or Schumacher, etc would be public domain. Please clarify. When we work for the Fed, everything we do is considered pulbc domain/owned by the government. We have no expectation of privacy or ownership rights. NONE. NEVER.
The daily diaries will be uploaded sepearetly, no need to match them to the contact sheets. Save your energy. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm still kind of new to the workings of the Ford Library. If employees of the Ford Library are Federal government employees and they wrote the contact sheet descriptions, then there would be no copyright issue. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 02:08, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
That is indeed the case. Thanks for brining it up though!Bdcousineau (talk) 03:15, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Image 06/A6 at File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg[edit]

Hi Bd. Can you find out why Image 06/A6 in the File:Ford A6313 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg contact sheet is circled, twice!?! and who did it? Two different people seem to have got excited in 1975 when they found that photo and circled it with different pens. I got a feeling that it shows Squeaky Fromme an hour or so before she tried to kill Ford (when he was going to or from the Host Breakfast). I can't tell from the photo. Images 09/A9 and 10/A10 look like they are from Ford's meeting with Governor Brown just after the assassination attempt. However, the images 06/A6 don't appear to be from the assassination attempt because the people are not moving fast. However, it was early in the morning when the Host Breakfast occurred. Image 08/A8 doesn't seem to fit into the events of Ford's September 5, 1975 daily diary.[6] I'm not sure what the images show. Maybe the photographer took Host Breakfast photos with the camera and then didn't start shooting again with that film role until later?
The people doing the circling may have gotten excited in locating the image as proof of Fromme's whereabouts before she later pulled out that gun. In writing the Wikipedia article Ford assassination attempt in Sacramento, I didn't find any info about her whereabouts that day until she pointed the gun at Ford. If the photo shows Fromme an hour or so before the assassination attempt, that photo including the two circle markings would be a great addition to the Ford assassination attempt in Sacramento as conveys internal emotions (hopefully by someone at an upper level in the Ford administration) at finding something important a heighten time in Ford's presidency. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I will ask about this. Are you going to try to get FA for that article? I saw you put it on the DYK list, I wasn't sure if I could "approve" the nomination, given that I have an interest in it's success. Bdcousineau (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for asking others about the image. I'll continue to improve the article overtime. It first needs to reach GA (it's now at B ). There's enough scholarly writing on the topic to where it can be brought to FA status. As for DYK, it's better to have a regular at DYK approve the nomination. DYK is backlogged, so it may be a while before a DYK regular reviewers Template:Did you know nominations/Ford assassination attempt in Sacramento. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:48, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
I contacted the Photo Archivist via phone 2ce today (we are at different physical locations) to no avail. I will be at his location tomorrow and will ask him in person about this. I'll be in touch. Thanks for your thoughts about the contact sheets - I will be able to steal your ideas. Especially relevant as I was uplading a few of Betty's dresses to Commons and the descriptions included the date she wore the dress. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:17, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Got an answer for you - the circles were indeed made by Ford's White House photo editor (I have her name, can I add it? last time I put a name on a talk page I got slapped by several passers-by). The different colors could represent a coding system, but that is not verifiable. So your idea is possible. D'ya want me to take a loupe to the sheet? Bdcousineau (talk) 14:24, 5 December 2012 (UTC) and here she is - bottom of the page. http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/WHPhotos/whphotogs.asp Bdcousineau (talk) 14:31, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for finding the information. No need to take a loupe to the sheet just yet. The photo's not usable without published information describing the circles and why they are there. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Ford/Fromme article[edit]

Wikipedia Main Page screenshot 7 December 2012

Congratulations to Uzma Gamal and to this project. And you got both articles in....plus I love the hook more. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

It looks that it is going to run on the mainpage sometime tomorrow, according to the DYK Queue, and it looks like the photo of the weapon will run along with it! Michael Barera (talk) 18:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
WTH? But I saw it also on 2 December 2012 @ 7:37 pm. I saved it, not as screen shot tho (darn you ipad!).Great about the image!! I'll tell the photo-intern. Thx for the alert. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC) OK - just figured out the above one was for the Senator Hotel article... even tho the assassination attempt article was linked as well. You guys are sneaky! Can you do screen shot if after hours? My ipad won't. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
The Ford assassination attempt received a 1,000 hits on December 3rd,[7]. Was there any increase in the visits to the Ford website on December 3rd? With the photo, it may bring in more hits the second time around. For comparison, see Wikipedia:Did you know/Statistics. Military type images seem to draw the crowd, so maybe that nice gun photo will too. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 04:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Looks like the Ford assassination attempt article will be on the Main Page from 11:00AM to 7:00PM Michigan time. Perhaps you can send around an email to the NAWA workers once it's on the Main Page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 04:08, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, and all the Library staff are here for an event, so I made them ALL look at it - the Director was THRILLED - thank you - the only person who ignored me was the one upper echelon staffer who feels like his job is threatened by this - he totally ignored me (hard to do in my pink w:puffa coat). Bdcousineau (talk) 16:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Here's the screenshot. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 16:42, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
I sent out the link of the DYK to the social media centers at NARA for their use. Will let you know what happens. Also replied to your email. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:52, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Indentation[edit]

In text conversations on Commons, you may want to use indentation symbols to position your text in a way that identifies for whom the message is intended. I added the three characters ::: before your 00:52, 4 December 2012 post above to position it to the right of my 12:48, 3 December 2012 post above (which has two :: before it). Another indentation symbol commonly used is *. {{Outdent}} is used as well. Generally see Indentation. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

ok, thanks. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

TV station contact[edit]

Due to the article w:Ford assassination attempt in Sacramento the Museum was contacted by a British TV station wanting to do a story....thanks so much! Now, to work on getting the Watergate tools and the famous tape recorder onto Commons. We have'em on display, just don't OWN them. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Congrats to the Museum!!! I'm happy to learn that their hard work is paying off with a little publicity from Wikipedia. There's a lot more to the Ford assassination attempt. That British TV station will find a lot of good content for their show. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 04:33, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Fromme DYK tweets[edit]

The DYK from 7 Dec 2012 was tweeted by @OurPresidents (2k followers) and re-tweeted once from there, and also by @USNatArchives (they have 12k followers) retweeted 2 ce from there. It was also made one favorite by a follower. Now I have to learn twitter? CRAP! Bdcousineau (talk) 00:35, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Very nice! Michael Barera (talk) 01:03, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Congratz! Maybe you can get the social media dept on board.Smallman12q (talk) 17:03, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
One social media gal is % 100 - she did a blog re-post about Uzma finding a "lost" image (based on a blog post I did), and the other one is at a cautious 50% - she's the one I will work with on re-langiaging the record id templates. I wll start to pass the stats back and forth btwn my user page and them - I'm betting they'll be impressed with the DYK stats (15k views last time I checked). Plus these gals will be crucial when we offically announce User:Michael Barera's WiR position sometime in the next fews days. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Archival Research Catalog (ARC) Identifier (ID) number template[edit]

what is under discussion is this record id box (below is the one user:Dominic designed). This where new verbiage will be needed.


NARA Logo created 2010.svg This media is available in the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, cataloged under the ARC Identifier (National Archives Identifier) missing.

This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required. See Commons:Licensing for more information.


English | Español | Français | Italiano | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Slovenščina | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(繁體) | +/−

RECAP:

The artifact files don't have a record id box- wont need one.

The photo group I uploaded from Ford website, will need a record id box at at some point. Ignore this group, it's fewer than 100 files.

The first document batch upload - the numbers in the pdf title ARE the ARC ID #, even though the scans may not yet be in ARC. I will manually re-name the table columns as requested by Ford/DC staff. I don't intend to re-create record id box with the ARC # and new language for this group unless it can be inserted by bot. Ignore this group, too.

Next upload - the contact sheets: I think the number in the pdf title may BECOME the ARC ID #. In which case it would be optimum to create a record id box for these files prior to upload. Please give me a week to chat with the Ford staff about this.

then, the scrape of the ARC site - We will need to create a record id box with this number for each file, along with the new template language, using Dom's layout as a sample (template for the template).

finally, the scrape of the Ford website: the number in the pdf file title is the ARC id #. We will need to create a record id box with this number for each file, along with the new template language.

Hopefully you have not started any scrapes. Will you be able to give me one sample file to check? I will create the new and improved language for this asap. My verbiage may not be officially sanctioned, but since its in a template, can't we make a global change to the text easily? Bdcousineau (talk) 14:52, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

NARA, Ford library, and Google do not show what "a record id box" is. Please post links to the Ford Library/Museum website that shows a record id box, the ARC ID # (also, please explain what a record id box is and how that differs from the ARC ID #). Also, regarding re-name the table columns, what table columns are you refrering to? Looks like the {{NARA-image}} template has had the ARC Identifier number in there since 17 March 2007.[8]. Also, take a look at File:Ford A5397 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg. You will see a lot of redundancy between the information I added to Template:Information and {{Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum-cooperation}} and {{NARA-image}}. I think we all agree that the more source information, the better. Three templates, four if you count the licensing template, is a bit much for one page. However, what about just using Template:NARA-image-full instead of using Template:NARA-image. That would leave one source template and one licensing template to cover the page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 18:41, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • The NARA-image should be changed at Template:NARA-image/en. The second appearance of "National Archives" in the template is redundant, "ARC" is an abbreviation for "Archival Research Catalog," not "National Archives Identifier", see www.archives.gov/research/arc/. I'm not sure who outside of Commons has final say on the template, but a Wikipedia approach would be to limit the language to phrases from the ARC website itself. This uses the term "online." This calls the parameter the "description identifier" (lower case "d", lower case "i"). I'm not sure what you mean by record id box. However, I would revise the template to read something like:

NARA Logo created 2010.svg This media is available in the online holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, under Archival Research Catalog (ARC) description identifier xxxx, and in the online holdings of the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum, under record id box xxxx.

This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required. See Commons:Licensing for more information.


English | Español | Français | Italiano | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Slovenščina | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(繁體) | +/−

-- Uzma Gamal (talk) 19:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC

the Record ID box is the rectangular shape that the record ID infromation is in (it has boundaries hence I called it a box, sorry to have driven you crazy.) The ARC ID # resides in this rectangular shape.
We need one institution tag and one cooperation agreement template and one of these per file. The institution tag is set. The copperation agreement template is set. This last template is the one to be worked on. It's a matter of including that verbiage you wrote (i'll need to make a minor adjustment,) and then where possible, we need to include the ARC ID #, which in most cases for the Ford Library, is the same as the number in the title before the original file extension..For example in File:- Ford, Kissinger, Romanian President Nicolae Ceausescu(Gerald Ford Library)(1553195).pdf the numerals are the ARC ID #. As I just learned last week.
Forget the columns. I've got that one. Simple word change. Nothing to do with the rectangular box.
I was asked by staff in Dc to make changes to {{NARA-image}}. This is the box shaped thing I am referring to. In a snarky power play, the people I spoke with decided that that {{NARA-image}} wasn't good enough.
Please look at Cabin image to see exactly how this rectangular shape was used by NARA. My goal is to replicate this. Yes, lets use Template:NARA-image-full . The yellow rectangular shaped thing shows up in the area record id.
I'm confident that eventually I will stop confusing everything. Thanks for not biting the w:newbie.
I will work on

NARA Logo created 2010.svg This media is available in the online holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, under Archival Research Catalog (ARC) description identifier xxxx, and in the online holdings of the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum, under record id box xxxx

This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required. See Commons:Licensing for more information.


English | Español | Français | Italiano | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Slovenščina | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(繁體) | +/−

tomorrow.

PS I am asserting that Commons has the final say on the templates, thus avoiding endless discussion by Ford/DC staff. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:29, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
If you look at the page Template:NARA-image, you will see "Template:NARA-image" at the top. It may be easier to refer to the rectangular shape Record ID box as the "NARA-image template that include the ARC description identifier." I'm not sure what "The yellow rectangular shaped thing shows up in the area record id" is. Written text is a difficult way to communicate. To help communicate, everyone uses links. You may want to look over the thing that helps you do that. A better way of putting that: "You may want to look over the thing that helps you do that." See the difference linking makes? You don't have to know how to describe something when you can just link to it. As for what we are trying to accomplish, I think what you really are talking about is amending the one tag Template:NARA-image-full, particularly the institution information template/table in the Current location parameter of Template:NARA-image-full and the cooperation agreement template located at the bottom of Template:NARA-image-full, both of which can be transcluded into Template:NARA-image-full when Template:NARA-image-full is posted on a page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:17, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Artifacts and templating[edit]

Welcome to Commons ! I come here following Uzma Gamal's invitation on my talk page but I have not yet taken the time to read all the relevant discussion, so forgive me if I am off-topic. From what I have seen so far, it seems that:

  • unlike previous NARA uploads, uploads from the Ford Library will not be about textual documents.
  • Ford libary upload use a standard accession number rather than NARA identifiers like "ARC".

If all that is true, our standard {{Artwork}} would probably be more suited than template:NARA-image-full. The name artwork may not be suited, but it does not have much visible impact, see File:First Lady Betty Ford's pale blue and green gown.jpg. Otherwise, I the best solution would probably be a custom template, please let me know how I can help. --Zolo (talk) 17:50, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for joining us! I love your idea of using {{Artwork}} for our artifacts....so far there's approx. 200 uploaded. Is there a way to insert {{Artwork}} into those uploads automatically, or will I need to do it by hand? If there is a batch solution, and you want to take that on, GREAT! For the future, I will definitely use {{Artwork}}. We are on track to do our entire artifact collection photography (about 20k objects) in the next 30 months, and as they photograph, I upload.
As for the rest, we will be uploading more textual documents than artifacts/photographs (even though our next upload is contact sheets). Also, we have to put in the ARC number where possible, in a nod to my DC overlords. I am working on the correct PC verbiage on the {{GFPLM-image}}. Thanks for stopping by! Love having your input. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:34, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
{{Artwork}} is not great for photos like File:President Ford monitors the evacuation of American citizens from Beirut, 1976.jpg but other templates like {{Photograph}} can do. Is there a way to presort files so that we can add the right template during upload. I guess it should be:
  1. photos of artifacts
  2. photos of documents
  3. photos of people / events
Otherwise, we can have a custom template for the Library. It will look pretty much the same, but it may be a bit unwieldy to maintain.
{{Artwork}} cannot be added directly using the standard upload wizard but it can be added during batch uploads. I do not know exactly how it ~works, but I have left a message to user:Jarekt who has done many of them.
Cheers. --Zolo (talk) 20:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
We will be uploading in several batches. Artifacts will be uploaded by hand not batch, so I can use {{Artwork}}. Documents uploaded in batch. We are working on adjusting {{GFPLM-image}} for those. Photos of people / events will be dealt with separately, and not soon. What I'm trying to say is that yes, we'll upload like groups, rather than one big giant mess. Make sense? Bdcousineau (talk) 20:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes it makes sense, thanks :)--Zolo (talk) 07:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I can help with either uploads with correct {{Artwork}} or replacing descriptions of existing files. For example if you upload bunch of images with minimal metadata (like "metadata coming soon") and send me a spreadsheet with filenames and content of {{Artwork}} I can run a bot to insert the templates. I imagine that it would take a lot of time to add those templates by hand after initial upload, and that is not necessary. --Jarekt (talk) 04:45, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Zolo and Jarekt - it's great to have offers of help, espcially since I have little knowledge of Wikimedia and programming... just ask my uploader Smallman12q- I'm pretty sure he will sigh and roll his eyes. I will soon be getting about 1000 artifact images to upload and pending copyright issues I'd love some help.I think I'll get those jpgs late January (we have an exhibit change in mid January), and will be in touch then. Feel free to stick around and comment on what I'm doing. And in early Janaury, I will have a WiR Michael Barera to keep me in line. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Copyright[edit]

I had not though about it, be we may have a copyright problem for some objects. Gifts to Betty Ford and -possibly also dresses designed for her- are not works of the US administration. So unless there is an exception I am not aware of, Commons policy usually requires a special authorization from the designer :(. --Zolo (talk) 08:35, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

We have a pretty iron-clad "Deed of Gift" that covers presidential materials donations to NARA for use in research, education, etc. However, we are looking into what releases the designers may have signed in order to do Mrs. Ford's dresses and jewelry.
What you are suggesting extends to ANY gift to any president - we have a lot of Bicentennial gifts, campaign buttons, etc - essentially every artifact in our Collections is a gift from somewhere. We would have no basis to donate anything to Commons. If we go even further down this road, any photograph in which Mrs. First Lady wears anything by designer XYZ is subject to being copied/pirated/knocked off.
I will get back to you once I get an answer from the Librarians. Thanks for bringing this to my attention; I certainly want to do this project in a way that everyone is satisfied with the results. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:13, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Commons copyright policy is very strict - sometimes absurdly so in my (rather uninformed) opinion. I remember that a NARA photo was deleted because its main subject was guy clad in Mickey Mouse or something like that. But I should have read the Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter, as it provides some clues:
  • "images illustrating clothing styles or articles of clothing are normally acceptable; in the United States, fashion is not copyrightable.[9] However, care must be taken not to infringe the copyright of any printed or woven design that may appear on the clothing's surface. So, for example you cannot upload images of t-shirts or caps displaying a copyright cartoon character: see Comic and action figures."
  • "Jewelry designs are generally protected by copyright so long as they exhibit originality and creativity. See, for example, R.F.M.A.S., Inc. v. Mimi So (2009), Donald Bruce & Co. v. B. H. Multi Com Corp. (1997), and Eyal R.D. Corp. v. Jewelex New York, Ltd. (2008). However, since items of jewelry don't normally carry a copyright notice, any jewelry sold in the United States before 1989 is probably in the public domain.".
So the situation sounds better than I feared, but in case of doubt it may be a good idea to ask for advice at Commons:Village Pump/Copyright. --Zolo (talk) 18:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I really appreciate you looking into this for me! Where do you think the misc. gifts that ordinary citizens create and send or just buy and send to the Presidents fall? I’ve been careful to NOT upload things with visible copyright or TM symbols, but often wonder about a painting Jane Doe made and sent to the White House as a gift. We have a ROOMFUL of these lovely creations. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:08, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Always nice to see interesting institutions coming to Commons.
If they just send a manufactured object, there should not be any problem, unless it "#Isn't every product copyrighted by someone? What about cars? Or kitchen chairs? My computer case?|incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independ­ently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article". If they created an artistic object, I do not think it will be accepted here. We normally we do not accept artworks by living or recently dead people unless we have a written authorization from the creator. It applies regardless of who the owner is, and even if it sounds reasonable to assume that the creator would not object in us publishing it. However I am not quite sure on this particular case, and you may want to ask for other opinions. --Zolo (talk) 20:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I think most gifts pass directly to the U.S. Federal Government,[10] so that copyright in the photographed gift no longer is an issue.-- Uzma Gamal (talk) 02:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Pleas etake a look at Category:United States Bicentennial materials in the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum this is the area I'm thinking of. I tried to avoid uploading artwork/handmade gifts, but I think at that moment in time, that's what everyone sent. How should these be licensed...you can see on the file pages how I handled it. I'm happy to change it if you think it warrants it. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

I think it is okay, but I am not sure. I am still hoping for an answer at COM:VPC#Category:United States Bicentennial materials in the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum--Zolo (talk) 05:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking that on! Bdcousineau (talk) 14:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I started a thread at Wikipedia here regarding the copyright issue. What ever the answer is, (e.g., "Deed of Gift" that covers presidential materials donations to NARA) the templates used on the images should indicate it. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 02:29, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I will wait to see if we get a response to COM:VPC#Category:United States Bicentennial materials in the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum, and then I'll work on that lingo as well. Geez, by the time we get done with all the variety of Ford uploads (they all have differing templates - ie. the artifacts do not have ARC id #'s), I'm gonna be w:cross-eyed!
So user:Elvey suggested to move some files to Wikipedia, which may make sense given that their copyright policy is not nearly as stringent as Commons. It can be done fairly quickly with [11]. --Zolo (talk) 09:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia has the same stringent copyright policy as Commons. Wikipedia additionally has a Wikipedia fair use exception, but that takes a lot of hoop jumping (the image has to be being used in a Wikipedia article, a reliable source has to have used the image next to text referencing the image, etc., that reliable source has to be cited in the Wikipedia article, etc. Wikipedia fair use is not your ordinary fair use.) Commons is the feeder to not only English Wikipedia, but all the other language Wikipedias and other Wikimedia sites. It's best to get all the items in Commons. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 16:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
I am working towards that. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

It's official!! WiR at the Ford Presidential Library[edit]

The rumors are true! Michael Barera has been named the FIRST EVER Wikipedian in Residence at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum. We are THRILLED to welcome him and have him guide us as we move our project forward. He begins on or around January 1, 2013. His internship represents a new partnership between the University of Michigan's School of Information and the Ford Library/NARA. I'll send you links to the PR that gets generated. Thanks to the w:Michigan Wikipedians for suggesting this to me. PLEASE help me spread the news. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:38, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Congrats! Once the PR is generated, you may want to post a message at Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 03:06, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
That is a super idea. I will do that. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:58, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

New template language - approved by the Presidential Libraries/NARA[edit]

Here is the suggested language for {{GFPLM-image}}. This is suggested for use with the materials to be uploaded from ARC/OPA (NARA databases):

"This media is from the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum [hyperlink to Ford Website], a part of the National Archives and Records Administration [hyperlink to Archives.gov]. It can be accessed online through the Archival Research Catalog (ARC) at identifier xyz."

I don't like that this suggestion removes the links to the Wikipedia articles (which my first iteration had included) on the Ford Library and NARA. On the plus side there is no link to the ARC source file. Feel free to insist that links back to Wikipedia articles are in the template. There are also no links included to the Ford Digital Library (online) but that is SOP for the agency that wrote this. Again, the first iteration included those. Any thoughts? Bdcousineau (talk) 01:10, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

The suggested language is fine. It doesn't matter if any information is not in the {{GFPLM-image}} general source template. {{GFPLM-image-full}} and other Image description templates allow any text to be added. The links to the Wikipedia articles on the Ford Library and NARA can be added elsewhere in the Image description templates. Links to the Wikipedia articles that use the common's image automatically appear on the page under "The following page links to this file:", so there's no need to list them as well. As for the source link, the actual source is from where ever the image was taken. If a copy can be obtained through the Archival Research Catalog (ARC) at identifier xyz, that is a copy, not the source, unless the image was copied from there into Commons. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 02:53, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
OK. Good to know about the source link, etc. We will always want the source link to point back to the Ford Library; any mention of ARC is uselss from a research point of view, but must be included to make the DC overlords happy. Thanks for your input. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:56, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Soungs good to me. A link to the Wikipedia Ford Library article is provided on the "institution" line. Anyway, links are often sort of random on Wikimedia sites, when you click on one, you never know where you gonna land. --Zolo (talk) 09:06, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
  • That's good new about now being allowed to post/upload any of the materials on all the NARA field sites and Presidential Libraries.[12] As for a need to develop different {{GFPLM-image}}'s for each group due to uploading materials with differing archival descriptors, it's hard to say given that the current {{GFPLM-image}} does not reflect the final language. Also, I'm not sure what the differing archival descriptors are. An "if" parameter can be used in the GFPLM-image template for the materials with ARC ID #'s. That is, "if" the ARC ID is put in the parameter, then the ARC ID text will show. "If" there is no ARC ID entered into the parameter, then the ARC ID text will not show. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 03:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
well, I may have jumped the gun on that..one department says uploads can be from ARC or website, another says ARC uploads only. WAHH! Thanks for explaining about the "if" parameter, that makes sense to me. I'll deal with that when it gets closer. Bdcousineau (talk) 04:27, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
RESOLUTION. The language in {{GFPLM-image}} has been approved by all stakeholders. That's prolly the fastest decision-chain ever experienced by gov workers. Everyone has joined in - whoot-whoot! Bdcousineau (talk) 14:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Official logo of the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.svg This media is from the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum[13], a part of the National Archives and Records Administration[14].It can be accessed online through the Archival Research Catalog (ARC)[15] at identifier 1234567.

This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required. See Commons:Licensing for more information.


English |+/−


-- Uzma Gamal (talk) 02:23, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

  • lovely - I will show to Ford Staffers who will continue the griping and stone-walling. And I understood the parameter language -bonus for me . Lots of discussion at #Licensing of photos of gifts to U.S. Presidents, I'm not sure if I should thank you or not! More as that unfolds, I had to contact the NARA lawyer, which scared the shit out of me. All for a good cause. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:25, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I learned about template parameters, if condition statements, etc. from reading Wikipedia templates and trying to write my own. I still don't know how it works. Alls I know is if I put this squiggly line here and a bracket there, eventually the template works. Usually, I just copy what someone else did on a different template. One of the major concepts to grasp is w:transclusion, which basically is taking the contents of a first page and making them appear on a second page by enclosing the name of the page in brackets {{}}. Once you understand transclusion, you'll know about 1/2 of what you need to know about Wiki programming. Putting the page User:Uzma Gamal/Demo in double brackets as in {{User:Uzma Gamal/Demo}} copies all the contents of User:Uzma Gamal/Demo to the below:

Hi

As for the copyright issues being raised at here, I'm sure that the Ford White House was aware of the issue at the time and got releases from the gift doners. The actual copyright release does not have to be posted in Commons. Basically, a person at NARA, the Ford library, etc. who would know of the licensing status of copyright questionable Ford item or group of items would send an email per the info at Commons:OTRS and OTRS would give the thumbs up. Then we're good to go copyrightwise. However, we can bring in the material into Commons and work out any licensing issue should someone challenge a listed license. Any challenge would be under a slow delete, giving at least seven days to discuss the issue. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:59, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I think that is a good idea. I will do the email to Commons:OTRS. I haven't been notified directly of an particular images, just the group of hand-made gifts. I'm fairly certain that a. no one sent those donors a copyright release, and b. they fall under the un-published/prior to 1977 rule (see [16]). So far we only have about 200 artifacts in Commons, but more are planned.
As for the {{GFPLM-image-full}} I've located it and am loathe to mess it up. D'you mind adding two more parameters:
|Collection
|Index Descriptors
I've sent a sample of {{NARA-image-full}} to the Ford Staffers. Thanks for the explanation of templating - I've done some un-complex ones; I loved your "the squiggly line here" - that's my kind of inexact language! Like I've said, head full of french pastry and Skrillex. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Template:GFPLM-image/en is transcluded into Template:GFPLM-image and Template:GFPLM-image is transcluded into Template:NARA-image-full. Threre already is a collectionurl prameter in Template:GFPLM-image/en, so I'm not sure which template a new Collection parameter would go. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:49, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
As soon as I sent that I realized I could've checked for those parameters, sorry. Now I need to have WiR set up a Commons file with Template:GFPLM-image/en with all the possible parameters turned on/visible (even if the parameter says "XZY") so that the Ford Staffers can see the possibilities. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

A couple of things[edit]

First of all, I've responded to your post about copyright issues (please see here). Secondly, I have a couple questions about categories. The first on is the "Media from the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum needing categories" category, which I love in theory, but I've noticed it has always been empty whenever I check it: can we make sure that any new uploads that aren't properly categorized when uploaded are dumped here so I can add appropriate categories? I just don't want any images to sneak by with just a hidden category or two and not be given any proper mainspace categories. Also, the other thing: since the "Collections of the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library" category is redundant with the "Documents" category, may I be bold and delete it? I think it is a bit confusing because it is only for the Library, and based on what I know about the Library and Museum being a single institution, I think it is much better to sort by type of material (photograph, document, physical object, etc.) instead of by physical location. Would you be OK with me deleting the category? Thanks for your time and, as always, your effort on this project. I really appreciate it! Michael Barera (talk) 18:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

yes, delete that. Don't even ask in the future, just do, and show me why later. I agree about dividing up by type of material (artifact, document, photo etc) rather than location. And its me who is guilty of not doing the Media from the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum needing categories cuz I didn't know to do it. I uploaded a bunch of dresses recently (about 22 I think) and Smallman is working on the contact sheets. That will be a huge bunch of files. I asked him to give us time between batches for categorizing (you) and freaking out (me). Lots of brouhaha from DC today. More on that later. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:02, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Cool (except the brouhaha bit, of course). As long as we can make sure that all the contact sheet uploads go through the "uncategorized" category so I can make sure they are all properly categorized, I'll be happy. And I'm going to go ahead and delete the "Collections of the Library" category right now. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 19:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Can you please let Smallman know that you need all the contact sheet uploads to go through the "uncategorized" category. Thanks. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:52, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Big success for the Ford/Sacramento assassination attempt article DYK[edit]

I've just found out that the Ford/Sacramento assassination attempt article generated the second-most number of hits of any DYK all December. 19,971 total views while it was on the main page! How cool is that? Michael Barera (talk) 14:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

That is awesome. Thanks for checking. I wonder if having NARA tweet it out helped at all. Let's make sure Uzma Gamal knows. PS will be investigating the Deed of Gift/copyright issues today. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
It also brought in 2,000 new viewers to the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum page in December 2012,[17] which is free advertising for the museum to people specifically interested in the topic. In other words, instead of an good advertising campaign reaching 3-5% of people interested in the topic, that DYK hook reached 2,000 people specifically interested in the Ford Presidential Museum. With the Christmas break coming up, I suspect at least some of those 2,000 people are going to be paid visitors at the Ford Presidential Museum based on the thought now being in their mind due to clicking through to the Ford Presidential Museum article. They are going to want to see that gun first hand and be willing to pay to enter the Museum to see it. You can't buy that kind of publicity on Wikipedia's Main Page, but can still get it for free if you know the ropes.

As for the Ford article, I knew the gun image plus "Squeaky" and "assassination" would bring in the page views based on past images and hooks that brought in more than 25,000 views. (The seem to like weapons and military images.) I was hoping to get more then 25K views so the article would make it onto the All-time DYK (Did You Know) page view leaders.

With a new Nixon Watergate article timed to appear on the Main Page as the general news is about Nixon (e.g., his birthday, x anniversary of Watergate, etc), plus a carefully chosen image based on the All-time DYK page view leaders, and a enticing DYK hook, the Nixon Watergate items will definitely bring in more than 25,000 views. We just need to include a link to the Ford Presidential Museum Wikipedia article in the new Nixon article DYK hook on the main page to help the Ford Presidential Museum reap some of the benefits of donating material to Wikipedia. And with 250,000 new images from which use in Wikipedia articles, links to the Ford Presidential Museum will be appearing on Wikipedia's Main Page for quite some time. Ultimately, the benefit to the Ford Presidential Museum in donating its images to Commons is exposing new people to Ford items/matters maintained by the Museum and generate interest in people visiting the Museum. Bdcousineau, perhaps you can recovery the above to the Ford Museum/Library staff and NARA to give them a better idea as to a good reason to support donating the NARA material to Commons. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 17:02, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Shut the front door!! are you doing this article? I can run upstairs and TAKE PHOTOS OF THE BREAK-IN TOOLS AND THE TAPE RECoRDER. And yes about all the rest. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:15, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Ford's centennial is this year too, in July. I know NARA will be doing a small exhibit on shared issues touching their presidencies (NASA i think, not Watergate). Shall I talk an image of the break in tools? They are on display, so image may not be the best. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:54, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Watergate scandal has already been written. However, there probably is new topics that can be written about or existing ones that can be expanded into a full article. It really depends on what photos the library uploads into Commons and which ones would be of most interest to people. High quality photos of whatever people visit the most at the museum probably will draw the most hit on Wikipedia's Main Page or photos that tell an interesting story. The Ford museum floor workers would know which items draw the most people. As for the tools, the Second burglary attempt, night of May 27-28 subtopic probably could be expanded into it's own spinout article that then can be linked on the main page, assuming that is where the tools were used. I'm not writing anything about Nixon at this moment, so I would not be able to use photos of the tools. Once all the Ford material is brought into Commons, then it will be easier to recruit others to start writing articles using the materal. As for Ford's centennial, DYK (Did You Know) section on the Main Page has a Special occasion holding area. If enough new/expanded articles are written related to Ford's centennial, hooks to those articles can be posted as a group on the Main Page at a time a target audience is most likely to see them. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Good to know, thx. I took some shots of the tools/tape recorder, and offered them to the article's main author (his wall o' barnstars made me a little nervous); he's gonna take a look. I was assigned a NARA lawyer about the copyright issue; we'll get comments on that soon. And today I will get in touch with the OTRS people about the same issue.
I sent those stats you provided to the NARA social media gals - they were all over them, they will do a blog post soon. I will comment above about the template. I've applied for a better web analytics tool (as opposed to the sh!tty one we have currently). And now we are all caught up! Bdcousineau (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Photos from the contact sheets[edit]

Once the contact sheets are in Commons, we can go after all the individual photos that have been cropped and enlarged from the contact sheets. You might already be on this, but I found some at fordlibrarymuseum.gov/images/avproj/new-images and the parent at www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/images/avproj and it's parent at www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/images. There might be a better way of location all such single images cropped from the contact sheets within the fordlibrarymuseum.gov site. Also, I've also been working on how mages cropped from the contact sheets might be listed in Commons (which might have already been address). For example, I cropped File:Ford A9138-12 NLGRF Sandra Eisert 1976-04-05.png from File:Ford A9138 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg and identified and categorized both. Note the dashed A9138-12 name of the image, 12 being the frame number. Also, when you look in the description table at File:Ford A9138 NLGRF photo contact sheet.jpg, you will see frame 12 dynamically linked. When people are looking at the contact sheet, they need only look down at the table to see whether a particular frame has another version. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 10:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

And all I've been doing is baking christmas cookies...what a lazy. That is a great plan. From what I understand, these may be the images requested by researchers for books, etc, so there is likely NO coherent reason why these images are on this page. Thank you Snr. Photo AV Guy. That's also why they are not located on our website proper as you suggest. Edruga is slowly feeding images (I think from this location) to the ARC people, so some of these may now have aARC ID #'s. BEFORE smallman12q does the ARC upload we need to make sure we capture everything/avoid duplicates. I'll get with her about harvesting those #'s.
I have not set up how images cropped from the contact sheets might be listed in Commons - if you have ideas, great. I've only uploaded a few (fewer than 50) so we can re-write any categories. I was going to have the WiR tackle that pretty soon - if we don't have copyright issues to fix.
I love having those dynamic links, that is the best possible solution for users of the images, they may want a different shot which they'll see on the contact sheet file.
Thank you! Bdcousineau (talk) 16:30, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
The images can be cropped out automatically. Finding a colored square of a constant size on a black background is possible with w:edge detection. We're looking for non-black frames of a certain size. I'm going to upload the stuff tmrw for sure (busy in rl). Will also check to see if I can auto-crop out the images...if not, someone else should be able to. If we upload 200k images, it'll be roughly 1% of all commons images=P. Cheers.Smallman12q (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Holy sh!t! are you kidding me?! That's possible? That would be, I cant even think of the words I'm so excited. Every time I think this can't get any better, you guys blow my mind. Well, lets get the upload done and categorized (deep deep bow and full prostration in the direction of Smallman12q and Michael Barera for those tasks) and then we can fancy it up. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Copyright Outcome A[edit]

I contacted Jim about the copyright mess (I saw him on several discussion pages about copyright and presidential portraits, plus he has some background into the NARA project via Dominic plus he helped me out early on plus he's an admin, etc) and here is his excerpted answer:

"During Ford's time in office, the copyright rules required that there had to be notice -- usually words like "(c) 1975 James L. Woodward" or "Copyright 1975 James L. Woodward" -- on the work. Many sculptures and paintings do not have notice and therefore are PD. We use the tag {{PD-US-no notice}} on those. That rule changed in 1978 to allow registration or notice and then again 1989 to require neither. See File:PD-US table.svg for a summary."

I can definitely live with this for now. We may have a few things to have taken down for the moment.

I also discovered this: Template:PD-USGov-NARA. I plan on re-opening this discussion, maybe trying to create a {{PD-USGov-PresLib}}. When I get buy-in on this tag from the Presidential Libraries side, we know the project is ON. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Using the terribly complicated intracacies of US copyright law to our advantage: I like that! Michael Barera (talk) 17:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)