User talk:Jheald

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

Illustrations and engravings of Cambridge, to 1923[edit]

I am, actually, as you say, trying to dumb down the gallery. Commons Galleries are not WP articles, they are solely collections of images or other media files. Therefore by definition they are dumb.

Official policy is:

"When creating a new gallery, a few things should always be included...
3. A brief description of the subject (if necessary)
  • Commons is not an encyclopedia. Our main purpose is not to educate readers through text. If they want to read more about a subject, Wikipedia exists solely for that purpose."

As I said in my edit comment, and earlier to you, neither Authorities nor External Links are appropriate in a gallery. This is not WP:EN. You are not only not required to prove anything or reference anything, in general it is not allowed.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg ResolvedSee discussion on Jim's talk page -- Jheald (talk) 14:52, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Scotland Yard with Part of the Banqueting House, by Edward Rooker after Paul Sandby, 1766 - gac 03515.jpg[edit]

{{File:Scotland Yard with Part of the Banqueting House, by Edward Rooker after Paul Sandby, 1766 - gac 03515.jpg}} Denniss (talk) 09:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

This is just silly. It's a 200 year old oil painting and {{PD-Art}} obviously applies. There's no reason why Denniss could not have saved us all the trouble of looking at this by adding the tag himself. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I thought it was just something automatic sent by a bot.
I'd been changing the information with a big copy/paste from a similar image, and accidently clipped off the licensing info. All sorted now. Jheald (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Templating the message away, to remove the nasty big red box... Jheald (talk) 15:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrol given[edit]

Commons Autopatrolled.svg

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. INeverCry 06:02, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank... für den BARNSTAR[edit]

1) Ich fühle mich sehr geehrt, danke für alles, auch die neuen Hinweise. Mein English ist leider nicht besonders gut, daher antworte ich auf Deutsch. Es ist sehr schön, dass diese alten Bücher nun allgemein verfügbar sind. Ich habe im Katalog viele seltene Titel gefunden und auch schon spannende Entdeckungen gemacht, es macht mir so viel Freude. In Deutschland sagt man " Geteilte Freude ist doppelte Freude " - in diesem Sinn hab ich den Zugangslink zur Hauptliste auch gleich an verschiedene Bekannte weitergegeben, die sich beispielsweise mit dem Befreiungskampf vom Jahr 1813 in Deutschland, polnische oder römische Geschichte interessieren, alle waren sofort begeistert !! Manche dieser Bücher sind auch schon Google-Books verfügbar, aber dort stets ohne die Karten und Grafiken. Hier ist das Material hoch auflösend gescannt, man erkennt jedes Detail, super Qualität ! 2) Wie gewünscht, habe ich auch schon einen kleinen Hinweis für mögliche Verbesserungen. Es gibt sicher eine Anzahl von Bildern, die bereits seit einiger Zeit in Commons existieren und benutzt werden. Sie können (a) von anderen Autoren oder Büchern aus dem 19. Jahrhundert sein oder (b) wahrscheinlich aus einem dieser Bücher (der British Library Collection) sein.

Mein Vorschlag: Da sollte es einen Hinweis in der Bildbeschreibung des anderen Bildes geben, wenn man solche Paare findet. Hier gleich ein Beispiel dieser Bilder (BritLib-Resource: [1] = Kru mans from Liberia or Grain Coast) and ([2] = a Kru people, the Copy version without further information). Soweit für heute. Ich denke nach, was man noch verbessern könnte. Bis bald --Metilsteiner (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis zu dem Feld (Other Version=), ich habe dies gleich benutzen können 1812er-FirstDragoons-Uniform. Zu diesem Datensatz noch ein administrativer Hinweis: Die pdf der Buchvorlage History of the King's German Legion. by BEAMISH, North Ludlow (1832) enthält nur die Karten, aber nicht die farbigen Uniformtafeln! Vermutlich wurden diese hübschen Drucke vom damaligen Verleger in einer separaten Mappe als Beigabe verkauft. Die Blätter konnten so auch einzeln oder im Set, ohne das Buch gekauft werden. Daher fehlt aber momentan ein direkter Zugriff auf diese 18 Digitalisate der Uniform-Tafeln im Bestand der British Library. Gruß --Metilsteiner (talk) 09:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Feedback zum zweiten Template[edit]

Danke für die letzte Antwort... ich werde "die anderen" Bilddateien der Uniformen entsprechend (overcross) ergänzen. Inzwischen habe ich praktische Erfahrungen mit der zweiten Template Version gesammelt und diese Vorlage modifiziert. Mein erstes Versuchsergebnnis mit einer simplen Grafik Päsident-Brand ist mir nicht leicht gefallen.

Die Eingabemaske ist nicht präzise: (a) Bei Artist müsste der Illustrator stehen, ich kenne aber nur den Buchautor. (b) Titel müsste ebenso der Bildtitel sein und nicht der Buchtitel. (c) accession number - Bei dieser Frage habe ich sogar zwei Angaben gefunden und instinktiv den ersten Wert verwendet - Shelfmark: "British Library HMNTS 010096.h.24.", "British Library HMNTS 010097.g.1.") Hier ist auch die Hemmschwelle für mich, dieses Template zu mögen: Beim Bildbeschreiben muss ich auf meinem (kleinen) PC-Monitor noch ein zusätzliches Windows-Fenster (mit Flickr) synchron mitlaufen lassen, um immer diese von Bild zu Bild unterschiedlichen Daten (copy & paste) zu finden und zu ergänzen. Das wird ein enorm (zeit-) aufwändiger Weg. Und weil man ständig in dem Flickr Datensatz hin und her blättern muss vermutlich auch noch ein sehr fehlerträchtiger Weg, wenn mehrere ähnliche Motive vorkommen, wie gerade bei den Uniformen (oder bei Pflanzen, Insekten, Textilmustern, ...). Man muß wirklich hoch konzentriert bei der Arbeit sein oder einen zweiten PC oder Monitor als Referenz haben.
In meiner alten Bearbeitungsmethode war nur die variable Seitenzahl zu merken, diese habe ich ganz einfach beim Abspeichern des Download-Bildes am Anfang vom Dateinamen des jeweiligen Bildes eingesetzt und so war auch sofort die inhaltliche Reihenfolge der ganzen Bilderserie sortiert. Dieses zweite Template braucht wegen des Mehraufwandes bei dem Übertragen der Shelfmark vermutlich die 3 bis 5 fache Menge an Zeit beim Abarbeiten. Der Effekt ist aber unmittelbar von der jeweils vorhandenen Position und Anzahl der Bilder im Flickr Pool abhängig, (ab 50 Bilder wird es vermutlich belastend). Gruss --Metilsteiner (talk) 12:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry - ich hab da gar nicht mitbekommen was eigentlich passiert ist! ...oder Kokosnüsse vor den Augen gehabt??? Dieses neue automatische Template ist SUUUUUUPER !!! - ich bin wirklich begeistert. Das Handling ist ganz einfach und sicher, vielen Dank - ab morgen arbeite ich nur noch mit dem neuen SCRIPT Template. Gruß --Metilsteiner (talk) 21:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC) Mein Exempel war wieder diese Datei: Päsident-Brand.. --Metilsteiner (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Johannesburg Photos[edit]

Hallo, ich hab noch zwei wichtige Entdeckungen gemacht, leider kann ich das nicht selbst berichtigen: (1) nach dieser Quelle sind die Davis Brothers ein Pseudonyme !!! und stehen für JOSEPH AND DAVID BARNETT. Beim Durchlesen hab ich alle in der Category "Davis Brothers, Johannesburg" befindlichen Bildmotive in der Tabelle wiedergefunden - z.B. im unteren Teil der Liste, Rubrik "Gold Mining".

(2) die heutige Bebauung in Johannesburg ist deutlich abweichend von der Situation von 1890. Ich habe diesen Stadtplan(1897) gefunden, der auch vom Autor Longland benutzt wurde in seinem Adressbuch von Johannesburg. Dort sind auch die Bergbau-Firmen Robinson Gold Mining Co. ect. gut dargestellt, gibt es diesen Stadtplan im Pool der British Library zu finden, könnte man die einzelnen Bergbau-Bezirke als Ausschnitt dieser Karte präsentieren. Viele Grüße --Metilsteiner (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Separate Category für Advertisements ?[edit]

Hallo, ich bin noch ein paar Tage im südlichen Afrika unterwegs und bearbeite jetzt Pietermaritzburg. Bei den Grafiken im Flickr-Pool sind Filler / Symbole, die Teil von Werbeanzeigen sind: Collection. Ich habe schon viele Beispiele von Werbeanzeigen gesehen, manche sind wertvoll, weil sie den Lebensstandard der damaligen Zeit belegen, andere sind für Economy interessant. Können wir ein separates Verzeichnis beginnen für Advertisements - (analog zu Maps)? Viele Grüße--Metilsteiner (talk) 17:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Problem separated pictures by cutting[edit]

Hallo, ich habe noch eine Frage zu Bildern, die im Buch auf Doppelseiten erscheinen, bei Flickr dann aber als zwei Einzelbilder existieren. Hier ein typischer Fall bei Buenos Aires Oft trifft das bei Panorama Ansichten oder bei Landkarten auf. Natürlich kann ich beide Hälften mit Hilfe einer Stitch-Software relativ gut ausrichten und in eine Datei zusammenfügen. Aber meist fehlt ein bestimmter Anteil an Bildinformationen. Manche "Kollegen" arbeiten präzise und setzen in solchen Bildern einen weißen oder schwarzen Streifen als Ersatz für den fehlenden Teil von dem Bild. Gibt es dafür schon eine Empfehlung? Viele Grüße --Metilsteiner (talk) 18:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Category:Pages using Artwork template with incorrect parameter[edit]

Hi Jheald. Several of your uploads are in the maintenance category mentioned above. Please fix them. --Leyo 00:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

It was a systematic problem caused by the current beta version of the new GWtoolset batch uploader. See also Commons:Village_pump#Renaming_multiple_files.3F for another couple of problems. I'm hoping that the developers will make some patches to the tool, and then I intend to re-do the entire batch upload from scratch, which should wipe out all of these problems. So if you can wait a few days, this should all get fixed. Jheald (talk) 06:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
If there is a constant modification to all file pages, this may be done using COM:VFC. --Leyo 22:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
You're right. Thanks for persisting. The wikitext of the description pages looked such a mess that I thought the only option was to scrap it & start again. But you've made me look at it again, and I think it may well be fixable after all -- with about 5 relatively simple substitutions that AWB should be able to do, and a couple of cunning templates for the trickier bits. I'm quite heavily committed, time-wise, over the next couple of days, but let me see what I can do. Jheald (talk) 01:56, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
✓OK. Done. Jheald (talk) 10:30, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. --Leyo 19:34, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Datierungsproblem[edit]

Hallo Jheald, (1) ich habe gerade ein "Datierungsproblem": in dem Diary einer Schiffsreise von London nach Kapstadt sind etwa 15 Motive vom Bordleben und der Hardware des Schiffs. Die Fotos sind natürlich auf der Reise entstanden, also 1895. Mit dem Buch wurden die Bilder erst 1896 publiziert. Daraus folgt ein realer Fehler von einem Jahr. Sollte ein damals (1895) fotografierter Passagier nicht auch unter dem Jahr 1895 und nicht erst 1896 in der Bilddatenbank "verwaltet" werden. Möglicherweise gibt es ja Leute, die wissen, das Ihre Vorfahren genau mit diesem Schiff im April 1895 auf der Reise nach Südafrika waren. Dann hätten sie eine Chance, die damalige Besatzung und Passagiere zu sehen. (2) Wir haben jetzt bereits 2500 Bilder im Pool !!! Gruß --Metilsteiner (talk) 10:50, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Eine Frage zur Globalen Sortierung der Dateien[edit]

Hallo Jheald, ich habe die letzten 24 Stunden mit der Berichtigung von Einträgen zugebracht, um die jeweils zu einem Buch gehörenden Dateien zusammen zu halten. Weil ich anfangs mit dem PIPE(|)-Zeichen einige meiner Datensets zusammen gehalten habe, muss ich diese frühen Dateien leider alle überarbeiten. .... Nun gibt es ja dieses wunderbare Scribt, da geht alles viel einfacher.? Aber ich verstehe nicht, warum die Sortierung nicht funktioniert. Ich würde erwarten, das alle Bücher eines Jahres (z.B. von 1888) hintereinander weg und davor 1887 und danach die von 1889, ... 1899 erscheinen. Im Moment funktioniert das nicht. Auf den ersten 6 Bildschirmseiten (=1200 Dateien a 200 Dateien/view) habe ich alle Dateien überprüft. Nun stehen dort die Dateien zwar korrekt pro Buch, also entsprechend ihrer Seitennummer aufsteigend. Aber die Bücher sind nach wie vor zu einander unsortiert. Ich kenne ältere Datenbankprogramme, die mit der Sortierung großer Datensets überfordert sind, aber hier ist das doch noch überschaubar - mit 2500 Dateien. By the way - besitzt die an zweiter Position bei Defaultsort verwendete Zahl (= die 9stellige Nummer der British Library) eine logische Aussage z.B. (000xxxxxx=UK; 001xxxxxx =France; ..) oder ist die Zahl nur eine Inventarnummer? Könnte es möglicherweise sein, dass die beiden Leerzeichen in dem Sortierschlüssel das korrekte Sortieren verhindern? Viele Grüße --Metilsteiner (talk) 16:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

(Maschinelle Übersetzung:) Thank you, I have now understood the structure of the range. I also had only to understand the problem why the chronological sorting does not work correctly, because I suspected a software problem. Now I can consider the problem as solved. Thanks for the quick reply.--Metilsteiner (talk) 07:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

BL images[edit]

Hi, thanks a lot for your kind words. I'm trying to analyze what can be done after a GWToolset upload and that's why I spended some time yesterday with your collection. Not only changing some categories but actually reusing content on many Wikipedia articles. I'm completely OK with your categorisation proposal, feel free to revert my edits where needed. I initially thought they where upload mistakes, that's why I erased them :P.

Hereby I explain some of the oportunities/challenges that I think we could be facing:\

  • A) Better resolution of an existing image. That's the case of your upload of Beowulfs. I just replaced a previous existing version in many languages. That's something that needs to be tracked/updated when uploading content (by you or by community, of course :)
  • B) Lower resolution of an existing image. That's the case of your magna carta upload, which is lower that the one at Magna Carta. In these cases pic can't be changed but I would recommend to improve the metadata of the better quality file, to proper source the content.
  • C) Categorisation party: Pics are more used when better categorised. This is obvious, and I've seen you are doing a great work with it :)
  • D) Multilingual effect. Check where your pictures are being used and see if they could be used the same in other language versions.
  • E) And many more things....

I will keep on taking a look today to you collection. Best,--Kippelboy (talk) 08:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I asked to an experienced user. I'll ping you again when I get the answer :)--Kippelboy (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2014 (UTC).
Update: [3]
Question: Are you planing to do a bigger upload in short term? We are preparing Europeana press release and wanted to know about it :)--Kippelboy (talk) 13:30, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Inhalt prüfen[edit]

Hallo Jheald, bei der Visite der Bilderserien ist mir heute dieses Buch unangenehm aufgefallen, bitte mal prüfen, ob man das nicht besser entfernt, in Deutschland könnten manche Motive gesetzlich untersagt sein, auch wenn die schon vor 120 Jahren entstanden sind... Gruß--Metilsteiner (talk) 19:03, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Rename request[edit]

Hello, Jheald! I am sorry because I cannot leave a message on Wikipedia. I want to thank you for editing and renaming image of Henry the Young's coronation and banquet that I have uploaded. I uploaded today this image. Can you rename it in „Joan of England, queen of Sicily“? I have no power to do it. It's the image of Henry's sister, but I named it after their brother Geoffrey of Brittany by mistake.--Lycoris (talk) 13:56, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

✓OK Done. Jheald (talk) 14:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, Jheald, on all you have done for me. Nothing else I can say, but if I can do for you, just say.--Lycoris (talk) 16:20, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Dear Jheald, I am really stupid! I just uploaded this, but again - by mistake - I didn’t gave it its proper name. Please change it to "Philippe le Bel tree".--Lycoris (talk) 17:15, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
✓OK Done. Jheald (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Mechanical Curator[edit]

Hello - I arrived today at the Mechanical Curator page for the second time, and paying more attention on this occasion. The DNB brings me, as you might have guessed: the first time round was in relation to w:Henry Harrod and Gleanings among the Castles and Convents of Norfolk.

Today it is w:Charles Frederick Partington, who wrote the text for National History and Views of London and its Environs. I just thought "it would be nice if" there were an image uploaded here already. Not a very helpful thought in itself, though.

I did add a ref in the WP article to a limited edition book by Bernard Adams, London Illustrated 1604–1851. It set me back quite a lot when I found it in a charity shop a couple of years ago. It has 500 pages that give a plate-by-plate description of 238 illustrated topographical books of London in the stated period. So, roughly speaking, it has the sort of content that might make certain mass uploads here worthwhile.

I hesitate to volunteer to do such stuff on a grand scale. It would fit quite well with one of my interests, engravings of old buildings that are not still around, and London is of course covered with sites of such buildings. I made a joke a while back about "Wiki Loves Engravings", but perhaps something could be done, starting from here, to do uploads that were not the sort of piecemeal efforts I manage in connection with specific WP articles. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

brown stains[edit]

In all honesty, the best way I've found of dealing with brown stains is to carefully circle all of them with the select tool (in additive mode, so ou can select multiple patches), adjusting colours, saturation slightly, unselecting everything, then repeating. That's not quite the quick process you're hoping for, I fear. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


GLAMwiki toolset[edit]

Hi Jheald,

Congratulations on becoming a user of the GLAMwiki Toolset. You can find some frequently asked questions and helpful links for using the tool at GLAMwiki Toolset. As your first step, please add yourself to the list of users at GWToolset users and follow the good practice of creating pages explaining your new projects, as these can help create a focus for our wider community of volunteers. A standard place to set up a project page is at Batch uploading, though long term GLAM programmes may fall under GLAM. To discuss the tool with fellow users, please join the email list GLAMtools or try chatting at #wikimedia-commons webchat. SteinsplitterBot (talk) 11:24, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations (2)[edit]

Hallo Jheald ... vielen Dank für das erneute Lob. Obwohl ich bereits drei Monate diese eigentlich monotone Arbeit erledige, ist es noch immer sehr spannend und abwechslungsreich, es macht mir einfach große Freude. In meinem letzten Job habe ich in etwa das gleiche gemacht, wie diese Buchillustrationen zu optimieren. Nur musste ich die Alben und Fotos noch selber einscannen und inventarisieren. Daher habe ich mit dieser Thematik bereits viel Erfahrung und auch im Internet sind schon einige GB an Bild-Dateien aus meiner damaligen Arbeit im Archiv (DEMO-Bild, vollständig mit Metadaten ect. - als Teil der semiprofessionellen Datenbank zur Geschichte der Auto-Industrie in meiner Heimatstadt) und aus meinen privaten Fotosammlungen zu finden.
Es gibt eine breite Palette an (kostenlosen) Tools und Software für die Bildbearbeitung und das Thema Datei-Verwaltung. Hinzu kommen praktische Erfahrungen mit Standard-Programmen, wie WORD, EXCEL, und eine von Fall zu Fall variierende Arbeitsmethode. Man kann viele Arbeitsschritte automatisieren.. Gruß --Metilsteiner (talk) 21:02, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Colesworthey Grant, 50 sketches of Indian People[edit]

Hallo Jheald, ich stecke in Schwierigkeiten: mein aktuelles Buch (A series of miscellaneous rough sketches of Oriental heads, Part 1. (1844)) ist von Colesworthey Grant und enthält 50 schöne Illustrationen, auch der indischen Aristrokraten um 1840. Einige Personen konnte ich bereits mühelos identifizieren, aber die meisten Namen sind ungeläufig. Ich habe eine Webseite gefunden, mit 340 Grafiken von Grant, doch dort finde ich leider keine Bilder gezeigt, nur diese Liste! Wie bekomme ich die Bilder zu sehen, da die handschriftlichen Einträge in der Buch.pdf und auf den Scanns oft schlecht oder nicht lesbar sind?

Möglicherweise sind die Bilder in dieser separaten Sammlung zu finden, ich bekomme aber 0 (!) Treffer für Colesworthey

These catalogues cover the holdings of India Office Prints & Drawings, and Photographs within the Library's Asia, Pacific and Africa Collections. ???

Vielen Dank für einen Hinweis..--Metilsteiner (talk) 16:15, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

CANADA[edit]

Hallo Jheald, ich hab schon wieder eine Frage: es gibt ein separates Projekt British Library/Picturing Canada. Dieses besitzt auch einen eigenen Baustein (Template) {{Picturing Canada image}} für die Metadatenbeschreibung. Wenn ich die Beschreibung richtig verstanden habe, betrifft das Fotos und Fotoalben (aber nicht Bücher). Aber was ist mit Zeichnungen, Karten und Lithographien aus Kanada? Daher meine Frage: muss ich bei den kanadischen Motiven auch zusätzlich einen solchen Eintrag bei den Bildern einsetzen? Gruß --Metilsteiner (talk) 11:37, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Brainstorming (1)[edit]

Hallo Jheald, das aktuelle King's Handbook of the USA wird mich mit Sicherheit noch einige Wochen beschäftigen, aber ab und zu braucht man da mal ein Intermezzo, z.B. aus den Rubriken Verse / Plays / Works / ect. Dazu heute meine Anfrage: in den meisten Fällen sind dort kaum Bilder enthalten, es gibt sogar Titel, die nur ein Logo vom Verlag enthalten, sonst nichts. Es lohnt sich wohl in solchen Fällen nicht, neben den Standard Datensatz (Metadaten) auch noch eine Bookcat zu erstellen, die dann nur ein oder zwei Bildmotive enthält. Der Aufwand wäre, gemessen an der geringen Zahl der Bilder unangemessen. How to do ??? In diesem Fall wäre das Template - NO BOOKCAT - vermutlich die beste Lösung ? Wie kann/soll ich in solchen Fällen handeln? Ein weiterer Fall sind die Bücher mit den Decorative Filler - auch dort sollten wir den Aufwand scheuen, es reicht zumindestens das Bookcover - falls ein Motiv zu finden ist, manchmal findet sich auch nur ein Ex Libris. Viele Grüße ... (now) from the banks of the Ohio-River ... - --Metilsteiner (talk) 14:16, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Political Correctness[edit]

Hallo Jheald, einige Benutzer stören sich gerade an einem Bildtitel - der für sie an die unerträgliche Apartheid-Zeit in Südafrika erinnert, konkret geht es um den Begriff Kaffer in der Datei JOBURG (1893) Group of mining Kaffirs and overseer.jpg - Könntest Du bitte mal prüfen, ob der Einspruch berechtigt ist? Viele Grüße --Metilsteiner (talk) 19:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

My understanding of the Commons:Internet Archive/Book Images collection[edit]

Please forgive my ignorance, I was never involved in projects of this type. I have a series of basic questions to improve on my lack of knowledge and a simple yes/no without any qualifications will suffice, I will research the issues so that I don't waste your time.

  • Do I need a Flickr account?
    • @Ineuw: No. But a Flickr account may help if you wish to tag or comment on Flickr about the images; also sometimes Flickr gives account holders slightly more information
  • Do I need to be authorized separately to use the OAuth transfer bot? (I already have 2 connected aplications, WP -> commons and IA -> commons)?
    • If I remember correctly, you have to sign in to Flickr2Commons bot, to approve it to use your Commons account. It's pretty much just hitting OK on a form, I think
  • Can the commons transfer/upload tools differentiate and reject previously uploaded images?
    • Yes. Flickr2Commons will refuse to upload a duplicate. However if the previously uploaded images have been changed (eg cropped, rotated, or otherwise adjusted) then the tool won't recognise them as the same.
  • Do I use existing commons categories?
    • Yes -- if they exist. But you'll probably need to create a category for the book (or a separate category for this set of scans for the book, if a book cat exists already. And you may want to create new categories for some of the things shown in the images. I find the latter is the slowest part of the process.
  • Having sufficient familiarity and experience NOT to create superfluous categories, but create those that don't exist?
    • Exactly
  • Have the project templates mentioned, to identify the source of the images, exist already?
    • Nothing yet exists for the Internet Archive project. But they could probably be created quite quickly, if you would like to start. The Mechanical Curator books have the advantage of a reasonable index to choose a book, and the various templates already in place, if you wanted to try one of those first. I'd suggest not choosing a book with too many images to start with, because it can be quite laborious. But there are some very useful images there.
    • One other thing you may find useful is Commons:File renaming permissions (see Commons:Requests for rights#Filemover), because the default filenames are pretty uninformative, and it's sometimes easier to fix them to something more human-intelligible after they have been uploaded

Looking through some of the offering, I am familiar with numerous images (less that 2.4 million) in historical and cultural context. So, I can contribute to transfer and categorize those. — Ineuw talk 16:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Sounds great. If there are images there that you would like to see on Commons, welcome to the team! Jheald (talk) 17:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you — Ineuw talk 18:09, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
P.S: I have file moving privieges.— Ineuw talk 18:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Jheald. You have new messages at Commons talk:Internet_Archive/Book_Images_collection#Category.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

The Structured Data Bee, vol. 1, issue 1[edit]

Greetings, thank you for signing up for the Structured Data newsletter and its first edition. With this newsletter, the Structured data team plans on keeping you informed of technical progress, events, and communications to talk about the project, and continued information on how you can participate. This newsletter will be sent approximately every two weeks, and future editions will be translatable prior to publication. If you're new to Wikidata and want more information about how it works in relation to Wikimedia Commons, you can read an introduction to Wikidata for Commons being drafted.

Tech and design[edit]

  • The software development for this process is still in the planning phases. The idea is to have some functional prototyping done for experimentation and feedback by the end of the year.
  • The initial roadmap for development has been posted on Commons. The roadmap is a rough outline and is open to iterations as the team learns where and when to focus its energies.
  • There is a page set up for design ideas about what structured data could potentially look like.
  • There are forthcoming requests for comment about the particulars of technical architecture on mediawiki.org. Keep an eye on the c:Commons:Structured data/Get involved page for notification of when the RfCs are posted.

Events and chats[edit]

  • There was a week-long meeting between the Wikimedia Foundation's Multimedia team, the Wikidata team, and community members, held in Berlin, Germany, at the office of Wikimedia Deutchland on October 6-10. You can read an overview of the event in on this page on Commons. There are also plenty of pictures available on Wikimedia Commons.
  • If you would like to read more detail about what was discussed, there are etherpads of notes taken for each day of the event.
  • The second IRC office hour (logs) was held on October 16, and the first (logs) on September 3.

Getting involved[edit]

  • You've signed up for the newsletter. That's a great first step!
  • While working prototypes are being developed, there is a drive to make all files contain machine-readable data on Wikimedia projects.
  • A hub has been launched to facilitate communication and documentation for this work.
  • There is a frequently-asked questions page that is finishing drafting and will need translated. Keep an eye out for when it is ready if you are interested in translating.
  • There will be active organization of the Get involved page as community participation is further organized. There will be work groups, similar to specific Wikiprojects, dedicated to particular aspects of structured data like licensing presentation, design, API performance, and even helping out with this newsletter and other community communications.

There will be much more information and activities around the proposal to develop structured data on Wikimedia Commons. This project is a major undertaking and an important step as the chief provider, repository, and curator of media for Wikimedia projects.

Thank you for your participation in such an extensive project, let me know if you're interested in participating in this newsletter. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:43, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

Floor plans and other kinds of maps[edit]

Hi, I'm not sure what to do with such images, so I temporarily tagged some of them with "map" here. Suggestions? -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen: We haven't said to people to tag floor plans as well as ground plans, but I don't see why not. See also Commons:British Library/Mechanical Curator collection/map tag campaign/tagging gallery for some cases that might at first seem questionable, but we reckon are okay (ie us and the BL, when we were setting this up).
The bottom line really is that anything that can be georeferenced using the BL's map georeferencer should get a 'map' tag. Very generic floorplans -- eg "plan of an igloo" that somebody had on Friday -- should be excluded, because we'd never be able to georeference them. But otherwise, other ground plans and floor plans should be in, if there is any chance that they could be locatable on a world map. It may seem strange to use the 'map' tag for them, but (i) it makes all the filtering a lot easier, (ii) it avoids any question about how big does something need to be before we consider it a map, and (iii) we should be able to identify ground plans and floor plans quite easily at a later date, once they're georeferenced, simply because we'll be able to see that the feature they identify is geographically quite small.
As for maps that can't be georeferenced, it's okay to include those too, because there's a button for "I can't georeference this" on the georeferencer program, which will put them in a special set that can then be more closely evaluated.
Hope this helps. But in answer to your specific query: Yes, I think it's fine to put the "map" tag on most floor plans, so long as we think that they are floor plans of real places that there is some chance of identifying on a map.
Thanks a lot, Jheald (talk) 03:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
The other thing is you can always add additional tags, like "floor plan". (Use " marks to include a space in a tag). But I can't promise that anyone will ever systematically search for those, or know that they are there to look for them. Jheald (talk) 03:35, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Map tagging campaign[edit]

Two questions:

  • I've made edits to books on "/Synoptic index, Africa". How do these books differ from those listed at "/Synoptic index/to do/Africa history"?
  • For books without maps I've used "No maps" rather than "no maps". Does this matter?

Yesterday I wanted an image from a 19th century book and was disappointed to find that it wasn't included in the BL images. Fortunately, the Library of the University Heidelberg have high quality scans here. All very well organised. If only the BL would do the same. Aa77zz (talk) 11:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

@Aa77zz:. Hi! Those Heidelberg scans are very nice, aren't they.
I think what you have to remember about the BL images was that the whole thing has grown out of what was essentially one person's off-the-radar skunkworks project done in a couple of months.
The BL is committing heavy resources into digitisation, but priority that has been identified for these resources is digitising and re-cataloguing the BL medieval manuscript collection. There is also work supported by external funding -- notably the Qatar digital library project, funded by the Qatar Foundation; and the Endangered archives program -- emergency digitisation and conservation of archives at serious risk of being lost.
Plus there is some purely private digitisation being carried out, eg BrightSolid is digitising the newspaper archive; and Google is digitising some more 19th century books.
Both of the latter two have exclusivity conditions -- essentially only BrightSolid and only Google will be able to use the results, and BL is finding it hard to get raw access to the product even for research purposes.
On the other hand, the Mechanical Curator collection grew out of some earlier digitisation by Microsoft, which MS handed back to the BL when it decided not to make a competitor to Google Books. The BL Labs team did have access to this, and the Mechanical Curator collection grew out of this, when Ben decided to investigate what the OCR system was rejecting. It's on Flickr essentially because Flickr is free, and gave a ready made platform for public access to this many images with essentially no metadata.
The up-side is that it really caught people's imagination, worldwide, with its launch; and has encouraged many other library-like institutions with large quantities of scanned material to think how they could also release them and make them available. It has been a wonderful reminder to the world, again, of the re-use value of out-of-copyright material.
But to the specifics of your question. Flickr is being used because it was there, and it was cheap -- essentially free. And it's got real limitations (eg not seeing the images in page order, as just one of the things). The good news is that the Mellon Foundation, which has been sponsoring BL Labs, has agreed the purchase of a large number of large hard-drives, which the BL is currently awaiting delivery of them. The Labs drive rack has been reconfigured to have an empty slot, and so now as soon as the drives arrive, Ben will start swapping them in and swapping them out, loading large quantities of data onto them. High in the queue (I hope -- I press Ben about this every time I see him), as soon as the drives arrive, should be 4 x 4 TB drives for the Internet Archive, with the full pages scans of all the books. I talked to the IA back in the spring, and they say if they have the drives, they can get the images and accessible as books on the IA server very quickly. Ben would add links from the Flickr pages directly to the corresponding book page at the IA, just as he's done for the Georeferencer for the 3000 images that were done in the earlier stage of georeferencing.
So there is hope to get the books in a more accessible format; and IA might also create an "images only" view, which would essentially be a visual index to all the images in a book, but this time all in the right order. So we'd start to be getting a little closer to the Heidelberg offering, and organisation. Ben doesn't have the resources to create a portal or platform like Heidelberg's -- for the BL this has been just a one man part-time thing. But the Internet Archive could have a real incentive to make as nice a platform as possible for them. So here's hoping.
As for "No maps" and "no maps" don't worry -- this is really just for people to be able to read. Once the tagging project is complete, I will probably run a script to look for any anomalies, check against the central records, and tidy anything up that's not quite standard.
Finally "/Synoptic index - Africa", "/Synoptic index/to do/Africa" and "/Synoptic index/to do/Africa history":
The first index is an index I (with a few others helping -- the pages for Germany, in particular, were all done by others) created back in January and February, principally by using a grep-like program to search for particular key words (eg particular places, countries, "history", "gazetteer", etc) in books that had more than 15 images. The results were then arranged by hand into an order that was roughly geographic, then by publication date, with multiple copies of the same book arranged on the same line.
I then started looking at the classmarks, and found that for books published after 1800 I could identify clear subject-matter patterns in the classmarks. So I then automatically generated the "to do" pages, based on the classmark information, and gave them names based on what appeared to be the common subject matter. I called them "to do" pages, because I always meant to fold them back into the main (more geographically detailed) index. But I never did, because at least you could now more-or-less find the books on a particular topic. One thing I've been wondering, once all the maps are tagged, is whether we should quickly set up a similar process to move all of the "to do" page entries into the main index. (And also, perhaps, whether we should re-structure the main index into a larger number of smaller pages, perhaps something close to the present "to do" page organisation). I'd be very interested to know what people would think about that, and there's no reason why we can't make small changes straight away -- such as the sub-page transclusions created last weekend -- so long as the list of pages for the script to poll is kept in sync.
So I hope that answers why there are the different index series; and how the images might be made a bit more navigable. From the point of view of the BL, it's very much an experiment, and they're interested to see what people will do with it (and ways that can be found to make what they've done better and more usable). And wikis too are living, evolving things. So how we help people to use these images should be up for experiment and evolution too.
All best, Jheald (talk) 12:42, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Feedback: See: User talk:ClemRutter --ClemRutter (talk) 18:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
Congratulations on having shepherded this project to 10,000 maps - here's hoping we get as many again in the next half! Andrew Gray (talk) 01:09, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Wikidata; error[edit]

1. could you please add d:p1472 and institution template to the page
2. Did you ever notice this mistake? First mistake was wrong Wikidata Q.nr but you also went ahead. Regards--Oursana (talk) 14:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

@Oursana:.
(1) Which page?
(2) Thanks for pointing this out to me. I extracted the Q-number from the page automatically using a script, and added d:p1472 automatically without ever checking the names. I now realise this may have been a mistake, as Multichill (talk · contribs) last night pointed out a number of errors caused by incorrect Q-numbers, revealed in d:Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P1472. I've fixed some of these now (report should update tomorrow), and am continuing to work through them. (Though I also want to be doing some map tagging). So thanks for pointing out one more for the pile. Having done that I'll finally run a check of links vs names, to try to get final remaining anomalies. Thanks for flagging this up. Jheald (talk) 14:40, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
(1) Commons:Wikidata see headline, sorry I do not know how to handle this--Oursana (talk) 14:46, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
@Oursana: I understand now. I'll update that page. Jheald (talk) 14:50, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Unexpected countdown[edit]

Hi, I just saw this edit by your bot. Is that due to someone having added "no_map" tags or some such to so many images, is it a bug or is there another explanation? -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:01, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, thanks for the ping.
I believe it's a problem with Flickr. Flickr runs a distributed network of servers. When you add a tag, the indices on your nearest server get updated pretty quickly -- so that if you reload the "untagged maps" page for a book, a map that you have tagged should disappear from that page pretty fast -- or rather, it should disappear from your view of that page pretty fast. But (at least this is what I have learnt from Ben O'Steen at the British Library), it may take a while for the tagging to be synchronised to other replications of the index.
However it appears that in a few cases that the synchronisation may actually fail -- for some reason the replication job may have died for particular tags before it completed.
This actually seems to be more of a problem when tags are removed rather than when tags are added -- so for instance if you look to see the index of images still marked rotatec, here, you can see a number of images that actually have been rotated, and where the rotatec has actually been removed from the image, and replaced with a tag rotated, but which still are being returned in the search for "rotatec". Some of the images there were actually rotated months ago. And sometimes you get a different list back, depending on which server is handling your request (with which copy of the replicated index).
So the only way to be 100% sure is not ultimately to trust Flickr's index, but instead go through and poll every single image for the tags on it. Which is what Ben's tag-harvesting and rotation bot actually does, rather than trusting the index (or Flickr's "recently added tags" API call, which simply dies on collections of this size).
With the "map" tag, there seems to be one Flickr index replication that only includes about 200 fewer map tags than the others -- so if my bot's request gets handled by this server, the number that comes back is about 200 lower than usual. This has been the case right throughout the current tagging drive; and it's why I wrote the template not to display any number of maps tagged at all until it was over 200, because I certainly didn't want it reporting negative numbers of tags added.
The good news is that it seems to be only one of Flickr's servers that has this anomaly, so usually the apparent drop gets corrected after 10 minutes when the bot next runs, and replaced with a higher (true?) number, which seems to otherwise be stable.
So thanks for the ping; and that's what I think is behind this anomaly. Jheald (talk) 11:02, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons update[edit]

Greetings,

After a delay in updates to the Structured data on Commons project, I wanted to catch you up with what has been going on over the past three months. In short: The project is on hold, but that doesn't mean nothing is happening.

The meeting in Berlin in October provided the engineering teams with a lot to start on. Unfortunately the Structured Data on Commons project was put on hold not too long after this meeting. Development of the actual Structured data system for Commons will not begin until more resources can be allocated to it.

The Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia Germany have been working to improve the Wikidata query process on the back-end. This is designed to be a production-grade replacement of WikidataQuery integrated with search. The full project is described at Mediawiki.org.This will benefit the structured data project greatly since developing a high-level search for Commons is a desired goal of this project.

The Wikidata development team is working on the arbitrary access feature. Currently it's only possible to access items that are connected to the current page. So for example on Vincent van Gogh you can access the statements on Q5582, but you can't access these statements on Category:Vincent van Gogh or Creator:Vincent van Gogh. With arbitrary access enabled on Commons we no longer have this limitation. This opens up the possibility to use Wikidata data on Creator, Institution, Authority control and other templates instead of duplicating the data (what we do now). This will greatly enhance the usefulness of Wikidata for Commons.

To use the full potential of arbitrary access the Commons community needs to reimplement several templates in LUA. In LUA it's possible to use the local fields and fallback to Wikidata if it's not locally available. Help with this conversion is greatly appreciated. The different tasks are tracked in phabricator, see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T89594 .

Volunteers are continuing to add data about artworks to Wikidata. Sometimes an institution website is used and sometimes data is being transfered from Commons to Wikidata. Wikidata now has almost 35.000 items about paintings. This is done as part of the WikiProject sum of all paintings. This helps us to learn how to d:Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structuremodel and refine metadata about artworks. Experience that will of course be very useful for Commons too.

Additionally, the metadata cleanup drive continues to produce results. The drive, which is intended to identify files missing {{information}} or the like structured data fields and to add such fields when absent, has reduced the number of files missing information by almost 100,000 on Commons. You can help by looking for files with similarly-formatted description pages, and listing them at Commons:Bots/Work requests so that a bot can add the {{information}} template on them.

At the Amsterdam Hackathon in November 2014, a couple of different models were developed about how artwork can be viewed on the web using structured data from Wikidata. You can browse two examples here and here. These examples can give you an idea of the kind of data that file pages have the potential to display on-wiki in the future.

The Structured Data project is a long-term one, and the volunteers and staff will continue working together to provide the structure and support in the back-end toward front-end development. There are still many things to do to help advance the project, and I hope to have more news for you in the near future. Contact me any time with questions, comments, concerns.

-- User:Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)