User talk:Michael Barera/Archives/2013

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
My user page
My talk page
My userboxes
My awards
My photograph gallery
My photograph category
My library
My vinyl collection
My Wikipedia reading schedule
My sandbox
My menu settings
My slideshow settings
My custom license
My watchlist
My contributions
The Signpost
Michigan Wikipedians page
My Wikipedia user page
Michael Barera's Talk Archives
2011 2012 2013 2014

Contents

Talk-back[edit]

See User_talk:Smallman12q#Curious_about_creating_and_operating_a_bot_on_Commons.Smallman12q (talk) 04:01, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

The following text is copy-and-pasted from Smallman12q's user talk page for my convenience:

Programming revolves around practice and understanding. You'll need to read mw:Manual:Pywikipediabot(and relevant links) and Overview_of_the_process_of_developing_a_bot. All the bot frameworks are wrappers for the mediawiki api. You don't need a degree to program (though it'll help get your foot in the door). Having said that, you should should write down exactly how you think the program should work, and then find the proper function in the pywiki framework. (In your case, you want to get the page text, search/replace, and then save). You should also look at the source for the scripts in the framework and make some practice edits with the framework. I don't know how proficient you are in python, but I would recommend getting a book or two on python, watching some python videos, and practice. You should also get an w:IDE such as w:pycharm.
If you're willing to go outside python, you could try the DotNetWikiBot Framework which is written in C# and would be easier for a beginner to use.
I also suggest you get a w:wp:Toolserver account (they'll need some personal details).
According to Python LocalUserGroups, their is a pyhton group in Michigan which meets at w:Washtenaw Community College. You can post to this active google group for more info (they have a meeting tmrw). You should also see if you have any programming student clubs. It's always a plus to take initiative=D. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.Smallman12q (talk) 03:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

A challenge for you, if you choose to accept it...[edit]

This is in reply to

"Uzma, I've got a challenge for you. I'm looking for a photograph of the photographer David Hume Kennerly to add to his Wikipedia article and his creator template here on Commons. Considering your finding of a Sandra Eisert image, I thought that maybe you would know where to look to find one of Kennerly. If not, that is fine, I just thought I'd ask first! Michael Barera (talk) 03:35, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[1]."
See, for example, File:Ford A1812 NLGRF photo contact sheet (1974-11-07)(Gerald Ford Library).jpg. I posted a request on Smallman12q's page for a scrolling contact sheet table that could help in requests such as this. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:52, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh, wow, that's awesome Uzma! Thanks so much for finding that! (And I'm also really excited about the scrolling table idea: that will make things a lot easier!) I've been think about your previous question concerning categorizing photographs by photographer, and I think the answer is to use creator templates (like this one for Kennerly) to automatically add every photograph by each photographer into the proper category (in Kennerly's case, this category). It could be done by hand, but I think it would be much more efficient to place a bot request to replace every instance of "Kennerly" in the author field with {{Creator:David Hume Kennerly}}. As you can see from the Kennerly template, however, I'm going to need basic biographic information on every photographer (ie, birth year/date, birthplace, location of work, etc.), and a photograph of the photographer would really be nice (you can see what I've already done with Eisert: this will essentially be my model going forward). Thanks again for the tip and the update, as well as everything else you've been doing. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 16:52, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Bdcousineau/PD-USGov-PresLib[edit]

ok, so what changes do you recommend?

also, I've put this directly onto active users pages to get their comments.. These are users who weighed in on the copyright discussion. Do ya think I should post it to the copyright page? I want to get approval for this by Admins, copyright watchers, etc, so when we put it into the files, we get minimal protest. any ideas? Bdcousineau (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Just a couple minor things. The first is a capitalization issue: "the U.S. Federal government" (see {{PD-USGov}}, which uses "United States Government" and "Federal Government": I think that "government" on your template needs to be capitalized). The second is equally minor: your template uses "the person" when it refers to the previously-named "employee or contractor of the Presidential Libraries", while the PD-USGov template uses the more clear "that person" in what is essentially the same spot. So, I would just recommend the minor changes of capitalizing the "g" in "government" and changing "the person" to "that person" (I think both look better and they're more in line with the already-existing templates and wording).
In terms of getting comments, I would take it to the copyright page that you went to earlier on the artifacts and copyright "issue" we had (on the English Wikipedia, I think?). I think they'll speak up (at least I hope they will!). Michael Barera (talk) 16:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, all great ideas! I will make the changes and bring the results to those pages. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject[edit]

(Reply to thist post.) Hi Michael. Since the article is named w:Gerald Ford and the category is w:Category:Gerald Ford, the WikiProject probably should be Wikipedia:WikiProject Gerald Ford. The WikiProject can be set up following w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/WikiProject and using w:Template:WikiProject. Ford article contributors is a good list of people to contact to see if they want to join once the WikiProject is set up. Perhaps the project can be focused on using the Commons content provided by the institution in Wikipedia. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 05:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

That all sounds good, Uzma. I think the project will be quite involved with using Commons content in Wikipedia, but I don't want to limit it to just that. Thanks so much for all your help and advice, and now creating the WikiProject (at Gerald Ford, like you suggested) will be one of my top priorities! Michael Barera (talk) 15:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
so Uzma Gamal will you please join? We need you! <smile and giggle> Bdcousineau (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Alright everybody, I've been bold and created a Wikipedia:WikiProject Gerald Ford, so feel free to jump in and join! Michael Barera (talk) 21:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

WiR task # 1 for Jan. 11 meeting[edit]

Hello!

I'd like us to show the Ford Staffers what metadata fields are possible in {{GFPLM-image-full}}, could you make all possible fields visible? For example, when we are on the view page of {{Artwork}} all the fields are visible. In {{GFPLM-image-full}} there are a fields listed in the code on the edit page that are not visible on the view page. Can you make a sample so that all those are visible on the view page? Sorry I'm so imprecise.

I'll also send you the approved language that now goes in {{GFPLM-image}}.

Also, I think in the spring we'll have 2k artifact photos ready to upload. Just in time for a summer internship!

And check out user:Bdcousineau/PD-USGov-PresLib so far. This is an interesting process - on en-wiki many users were really in my face about copyright, so then I invited them to comment on this as I work on it - now they are all QUIET and have nothing to say. Huh.

Feel free to comment! Bdcousineau (talk) 00:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, the new PD template looks really good at this point (it needs maybe a couple more tweaks, but they'll be minor) and I like the {{GFPLM-image}} as well (I made a couple small format changes to make it more in line with the other cooperation templates: NARA, Bundesarchiv, Tropenmuseum, etc.). As for {{GFPLM-image-full}}, this needs a bit more work: first of all, there is no documentation page for it (which should look something like {{NARA-image-full/doc}} when finished), which is important to inform users what fields are supported by the template and what fields aren't. Just looking at the code that is there, I'm having a hard time determining which parameters can be used to enter data on individual images and which parameters just support other parameters. You'll have to ask Smallman12q about that distinction (seeing that he created it in the revision history), and if he can produce the "usage" code that goes into the documentation page (which will look something like this when finished: {{NARA-image-full |Title= |Scope and content= |General notes= |Description= |ARC= |Local identifier= |Creator= |Author= |Location= |Date= |Record group= |Record group ARC= |Series= |Series ARC= |File unit= |File unit ARC= |Variant control numbers= |TIFF= |Other versions= |medium= |dimensions= |institution= |references= |object history= |credit line= |inscriptions= |notes= }} ), then I will be able to create a mock-up for you that uses all the parameters. Hope that this helps. Michael Barera (talk) 04:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I was afraid of that. I'll ask him today, and get back to you. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I've already asked him, so you can just watch his user talk page for a response. Michael Barera (talk) 19:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Even better, thank you. I have a two other small tasks as well, we can chat on Friday. They'll be fun-ish; one is I'm volunteering us/you to help clean up one of NARA's messy bits on Commons - there's cat without the Holy ARC ID #'s - I'll round up the ARC ID #'s you'll insert... And NARA gets happy (btw we are growing this beyond the Ford Library, but no so fast that we scare anyone...). Bdcousineau (talk) 00:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Cool, the NARA project will appreciate that, as will the rest of the Wikiverse! Michael Barera (talk) 01:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, more good news: Smallman12q has now created {{GFPLM-image-full/doc}}, so it is now clear to me (and other users) what parameters are what in the {{GFPLM-image-full}} template. If you still want me to, I can now create a mock-up with all the fields in use. Michael Barera (talk) 05:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, please. Make the mock-up so we can give the Staffers something to look at. Yay! Haven't heard back yet about those stray NARA files. Bdcousineau (talk) 12:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

GFPLM-image language for ARC Records only[edit]

This is offical and approved new language for {{GFPLM-image}} for files that have ARC ID #'s only

'This media is housed at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum, available online at Ford Digital Library or through the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, under Archival Research Catalog (ARC) identifier xxxx.'

The contact sheets have the different {{GFPLM-image}} - since they have no ARC ID #. Can you please insert the new one into the {{GFPLM-image-full}} sample that you are concocting for Friday's meeting. This is what we will use for the next upload. Thank you!

I have a few docs from NARA about our Commons/Wikipedia presence that I'll email ya tomorrow. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Wait, there can't be two "different" {{GFPLM-image}} templates: we're going to have to create a new template specifically for ARC, aren't we? (Something like {{GFPLM-image-ARC}}, I think.) I can go ahead and create a second template, but please first confirm that we need two specific templates with two distinct messages (and I'm assuming the current {{GFPLM-image}} is suitable for non-ARC files, but I'm thinking I should change the language to more closely match the official/approved language that you've given me). Check out my sandbox to see what I'm working on regarding these templates and let me know what you think. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 01:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
OK, I've just finished my mock-up now, and I'm curious to know what you think, especially on the wording of the non-ARC version. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 01:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Good thinking!! The existing {{GFPLM-image}} is used in the contact sheets and if we upload any thing else from the website directly (or other material has no ARC ID's).
{{GFPLM-image-ARC}} (nice name!) will be used for the next upload, of materials with ARC ID's. Please DO NOT change the language on it, it's been approved by people in PresidentialLibs. That is the one that can go into the {{GFPLM-image-full}} sample that you are concocting for Friday. Sorry, you missed that conversation I had with Smallman about this a few weeks ago. I suggested: "This media is housed at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum, available online at Ford Digital Library." with links, obviously. We don't have to give NARA any advertising. in the future, we can use {{GFPLM-image-ARC}} for other Presidential Libraries, by replacing GFPLM with JFKPLM, or HHPLM, or FRDPLM. We'll mostly stay with the older Libraries for now - fewer copyright battles!! (can you see my evil plan for wiki-domination unfolding?)
Could you possibly list all of our templates/tags somewhere? I think I saw you made a spot for it on the WikiProject page... I saw NARA did the same thing here - that'll keep me from driving you crazy! Bdcousineau (talk) 15:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
We should put them all in a category together: right now, the institution and cooperation templates are in Category:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum, but we can create a different category if you want to. Michael Barera (talk) 15:56, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
OK, I've just updated the wording of the template mock-ups in my sandbox based on your suggestions. What do you think now? Michael Barera (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done I've now finished the {{GFPLM-image-ARC}} and new-look {{GFPLM-image}} templates, and I've also categorized them so they appear with the other Ford-related templates in Category:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum. I hope you like it! Michael Barera (talk) 05:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, thanks! makes it easier for me to keep track of what we need/are using. When the new PD-USGov-PresLib gets approved, we'll put it there too. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Stallman[edit]

If you get any face-time with Stallman, I'm curious as to what he thinks about this project.Smallman12q (talk) 05:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

We'll see: I guess I just feel I'd be above my station making any face-to-face interaction between the two of us about me. I don't know if I'll even get a chance to say "hello" and "thank you" to him personally: I sure hope so, though. Michael Barera (talk) 15:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Be bold! Bdcousineau (talk) 17:27, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
I didn't get any face-to-face time with him (it was a packed house and I had an interview with Open Michigan shortly thereafter that I couldn't miss), but I did get myself a couple GNU and GPL stickers from the free sticker table afterwards! Michael Barera (talk) 18:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Checking in[edit]

Hello! Just now I'm occupied with my primary job of exhibit installation. Hopefully we can check in towards the weekend to see how it's all going. Whatever you are working on, thank you! Bdcousineau (talk) 02:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Cool. I figure that I'll continue to work on WP:GRF on Friday and, if things are going slowly, try to see if I can create a new article. We aren't going to be uploading much (if anything) in the near future, are we? PS: Have you see what Uzma Gamal has created? I love it! Michael Barera (talk) 02:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
This weekend I will work on the table at Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum/Transfer. It seems like completing small tasks and presenting those might ease us forward to larger more dynamic ones. Look for an email to the Ford Wiki group about source templating this week. I'm impressed by the WP:GRF . It's now very clear how many articles there are on Ford/cabinet/issues on Wikipedia, and this will be easy to present at the next group meeting.
Yes, this very cool! I particularly liked the paragraph on David Ferriero/NARA and Wikipedia. I forwarded the article to her; she has not responsed yet.
As far as uploads, in mid-February there will be approx. 1000 artifact images to upload - they are exempt from needing ARC ID's and will have a db built to Smallman12q's specs. Bdcousineau (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
That looks great: I can't wait for the artifact images! Also, I've just completed importance assessments which will automatically be covered in the table and update log, however the bot that updates it only runs once every 24 hours, so it may not be live until tomorrow. Still, this brings the preliminary tagging/assessing project to an end (we can update/change my rankings as needed and also make sure to tag and assess all new articles that we create, but other than that were are done with this step). Going on with tasks for week 1 and 2, I mentioned that the images in foreign language articles issue is actually a Commons issue, and I've already swept through the pertinent Commons files and added the collaboration templates to them so we can track them. The only potential issue is images from the Ford website that were uploaded independently by Wikipedians uninvolved in this project, but they can't really be considered part of the collaboration and thus probably shouldn't be tagged. Finally, adding links to relevant articles is something that we've been doing incrementally, typically as new articles are created, and I think it is under control. It is challenging to do all at once: typically, you notice a link missing when you are editing, and you just add it in at that point. So, I think we're all set with the Week 1 and 2 tasks, but there is one other thing I wanted to mention: Geir talked with me about converting all the Ford collaboration's image templates to {{GFPLM-image-full}}. I think that this is the logical next step in the process, because standardization will be really helpful on both the NARA and Wikimedia sides of this project, and also because we can make changes to the template (if we need to) that will go live on all the Ford collaboration image pages at the same time. I just don't know what the best way to do execute this conversion would be (ie, by bot or by hand), so I'll ask Smallman12q what he thinks about it. Thanks and have a great weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 18:35, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
This is all great. I will have more time to digest it tomorrow. Let's put our heads together to figure out how many files need {{GFPLM-image-full}} it may not be as many as you think. Also see my page for the article on the WiR in the "Chronicle of Higher Education" - this is a big step. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:43, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I think we're okay on the template: I've spoken to Smallman12q about it, and it sounds like he can do it by bot. And yes, I've already seen the article in the "Chronicle of Higher Education" and your post about it on your talk page: that is really neat! Michael Barera (talk) 04:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I replied on Smallman's page about this topic, not on mine. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open[edit]

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee


Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 09:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Edit-a-thon[edit]

Hey Michael. Any news regarding the Ford/MWiki edit-a-thon? Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Yup, I posted to the WP:UMICH talk page yesterday, and it looks like it will be at the Ford Library on Thursday, February 7th from 5-8pm. In retrospect, I probably should have posted that message to your talk page. Anyway, have a great weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 15:41, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Ah! Yes I missed it on my watchlist - WT:UMICH is indeed a good place for it. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 19:08, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon also[edit]

Hello - Last week there was a Learning to Edit Wikipedia workshop on UofMCampus. Do you think there is any value in inviting those who attended to the Edit-a-thon? I can round up the attendee list. It would be a great opportunity to introduce the Michigan Wikipedians to depts. on Campus that might want their own future WiR's.

Also did you or CLeeder supply the GLAM Newsletter with a status update of this project as requested? If so, could you send me a copy? I have to supply the FordStaff with project updates now as well.

I will post to my user page about where we are on the template standardization. Check there later today.

Have a great day, and thanks for all your hard work. Bdcousineau (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and yes, I think that inviting the people (especially professors) who attended the Learning to Edit Wikipedia workshop would be useful. Also, another yes, I sent a status update for the GLAM Newsletter a couple of weeks ago. I will go ahead and e-mail that to you now. After that, I'll definitely check out the discussion about template standardization on your user talk page: I hope it is coming along well! Anyway, take care! Michael Barera (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

More media[edit]

Hello! Another google alert popped up with an interview with you (which was great, btw) you are keeping some kind of list, right? Should this pr be mentioned in the case study... Or is it too much "advertising"? You would have a better sense than I if that's the case. Talk to you tomorrow at the meeting. Have a nice night! PS Have you given any thought to applying for a travel scholarship to Wikimania 2013/Hong Kong? Apps due in Feb. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I have a rough list of the interviews I've done in my planner, but really I feel that it has been too much and I feel it would be advertising in the case study. I haven't really though seriously about going to Hong Kong for Wikimania: it is an attractive proposition, but honestly I don't think it is anything more than a pipe dream for me. Michael Barera (talk) 05:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
ok, good enough! When you arrive at the Ford today, can you please call me? I will phone in to the mtg. I'll need you to run the laptop for the other staff, so I have to get you a password, etc, and we'll pull up the screens ahead of time, like at the last mtg. Talk to you soon. Bdcousineau (talk) 12:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I think the meeting went well. The big issue I was concerned about was loosing those ARC links, so as long as the NLGRF/ARC template retains them, I think we're OK (although I can't speak for the community though, haha!). Let me know what you want me to do next, regarding templates or sources or whatever else, and we can go from there. Michael Barera (talk) 18:32, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

4 un-categorized artifacts from Ford Museum[edit]

hello - 4 recent uploaded artifacts to be categorized. Also, Zolo redid the template on this blue dress... {{Artwork}} seems like a good template for all the artifacts. He mentioned being willing to help. Would you like to contact him next week after the Edit a thon? It would be good to get the artifact template standardized as well, especially as more uploads seem to be imminent. Have a great day! Bdcousineau (talk) 19:57, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Where are the uncategorized images? I checked the uncategorized category but, as of right now at least, it is empty. Michael Barera (talk) 22:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
The hidden cats seem to be fine, but there is a red "Uncategorized Ford images" in their main categories:
File:Revolver belonging to Gerald Ford Sr.jpg
File:Tape recorder from President Nixon's Oval Office.jpg
File:Transistor radio used in the Watergate break-in.jpg
File:Walkie-talkie used in Watergate break-in, circa 1970's.jpg
It's gotta be uploader I'm using. Thanks for looking in to it for me. Tmrw I will begin to re-template the dresses, using the model set up by Zolo. I'll continue with the artifacts until all the ARC ID are assigned to that group of 100 photos - then I'll work on those. See you this week! Bdcousineau (talk) 01:11, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Finished swapping out the templates on the Betty Ford dresses. Will begin with the remaining artifacts tomorrow. Missing photo ARC ID's trickling in. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done with the categorization. For future use, can we have a standard "uncategorized" category so it can be easier for me to tell when I need to do some categorization work and, more importantly, where all the uncategorized images are? Maybe we'll have to look into what the uploader is doing to really understand it, but it would be far from ideal if every time we upload another batch of images I have to hunt for them or ask you to locate them. Thanks so much and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 00:05, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

File move[edit]

Per User_talk:Smallman12q#Question_about_editing_Images, could you assist User:Anmats in moving some files?Smallman12q (talk) 02:08, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up: I've already responded on your user talk page as well as Anmats's page. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 00:06, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Open Michigan[edit]

What do you know about Open Michigan. User:Anmats has uploaded a few files...it may be better to do a batch upload. Could you get in touch? (Also, best of luck with the upcoming edit-a-thon!)Smallman12q (talk) 21:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

They are active in open access / open source initiatives around the University of Michigan, and I've interacted with them twice since I first became aware of them last fall: first at a Wikipedia Education Program event, and then second at a Creative Commons workshop. I know a couple of them personally, but I can't figure out who User:Anmats is from the user page description, so I'll send an e-mail. If I can figure it out, I'll let you know. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 21:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I've just received a speedy response from Dave Malicke (User:Dmalicke) saying that the images had been uploaded by one of his co-workers at Open.Michigan. According to Dave, all the files in this set have already been uploaded, so there is no need for a batch upload (at least for this project). I hope that this helps! Michael Barera (talk) 21:39, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it seems the content uploaded from http://open.umich.edu/education/med/resources/second-look-series/materials is CC-BY-NC which isn't permitted on the commons. Could you get them to relicense as CC-BY-SA or CC-BY or an OTRS ticket. Sorry for the hassle, the illustrations are really good though.Smallman12q (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Nvm, it seems some of the slides have different licensing which means they're fine. 0.o Smallman12q (talk) 15:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Epidermal Layer of Skin Cell Junction

Hello, if possible I would like to rename the file "Epidermal Layer of Skin Cell Junction" to "Desmosome Cell Junction." The original name doesn't provide much information and would not be as helpful to other users as the new one. Thank you!!! User:Anmats (talk) 10:22, 6 February 2013

✓ Done: hopefully this helps. The new name is File:Desmosome Cell Junction.png. Michael Barera (talk) 22:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit a thon again[edit]

CLeeder and the Cultural Collections Committee (there's a good rock band name) are interested in attending; I heard from CLeeder. I'd like to invite Smallman12q, Uzma Gamal as well (this project is as much theirs as anyone's) - is that sort of thing "done"? Bdcousineau (talk) 23:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I haven't done it yet, as I don't know if they are in the area (and honestly I suspect not), but I have created a "Joining online" section under "sign-up" to allow for people like them to join us remotely if they can't be there in person. You may want to note this to them, so if they are able to between 5-7pm on Thursday, they can join us in cyberspace even if they can't be with us on location. Michael Barera (talk) 01:02, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Ok! I'm sure they are elsewhere too, but my internal girl-o-meter is saying the right thing to do is to invite them "personally". However my girl-o-meter is sometimes wrong... so I'll defer to your wiki-experience. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with inviting them personally, actually I think it would be the right thing to do considering what they have given to the project so far. Still, I want to make sure they know they have the option of joining us virtually: even if they can't make it in person, they deserve to be included. Michael Barera (talk) 03:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, my presence is solely virtual. Also, UMich is in w:wp:USEP at w:Education Program:University of Michigan. Have you made the folks there aware of a meetup?Smallman12q (talk) 02:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
It will be great to have you virtually, Smallman12q! I'll be looking forward to it! Also, I believe that Open.Michigan has contacted the WEP people that you've mentioned regarding our edit-a-thon. Michael Barera (talk) 23:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't mean to disappoint, but my wiki presence is solely mediated by text so I meant IRC or IM.Smallman12q (talk) 02:39, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
-GL at tmrws edit-a-thon! For future reference, Guided tours are being developed...you can see a sample one at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?tour=gettingstarted . Cheers.Smallman12q (talk) 02:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the thought, and also the sneak-peak at the guided tours: those will be really cool (and also effective, hopefully) when they're rolled out. I guess we'll just have to teach the newcomers the ropes the old way tomorrow, haha! Michael Barera (talk) 02:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Women with wristwatches wearing bikinis[edit]

What is really the point of this category? Are we soon going to have Category:Women between 182 and 185 centimetres in height with red hair and freckles wearing bikinis while talking on their cellphones? -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

It is a convergence of the wristwatch and swimwear categories: if you don't think it is useful, go ahead and delete it. I see your point about overcategorization (and I haven't gone beyond two clothing articles in this or any other category), but my thinking was trying to isolate the bikini-related materials for two reasons: 1) to make it easier to ensure all those images are properly tagged with the {{Personality rights}} warning (they are among the most obvious examples of "identifiable people" images on Commons) and 2) to segregate them from the other "people wearing wristwatches" images or what have you. My basic thinking was that creating bikini-specific subcategories would be both more precise and allow people who aren't interested in seeing more such images see categories of people wearing wristwatches and other clothes/fashion accessories without the bikini photos (because they've been moved to the subcategory), in essence achieving a sort of self-censorship similar to how the categorization of images containing nudity works. Admittedly this was a bigger point for images with sunglasses in them than any other kinds of images, but I think you'll see where I'm coming from on this one. Still, if you really don't think that this is useful or helpful, go ahead and delete it: as far as I'm concerned, you can use Cat-a-lot to quickly remove images from relevant categories and then apply for speedy deletion for those categories (I'll back you if you think this was a bad idea: just tell them the category creator [me] was overzealous and is fine with deletion). I'll trust your judgment on this one. Thanks for the chat and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 22:51, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Does "the principle of least surprise" really require separating all bikini images into separate categories? When I saw you create categories and/or categorize images for women wearing bikinis and sunglasses, or bikinis and high-heels, then I kind of wondered whether there was much point to it all, but didn't see any real harm (since those items can be considered part of the overall sartorial appearance or style); however bikinis and wristwatches seems ultra-pointless, since they don't have much to do with each other at all. The category is safe from me, since I don't know anything about bots (and don't have much interest in learning), and the whole "Categories for Discussion" process is pretty much broken. However, I wish that you would restrain yourself from creating further "Bikinis and X" categories, where "X" has no real relationship or connection or association with bikinis... AnonMoos (talk) 23:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough, if you don't think the "principle of least surprise" is worth following here than I'm certainly happy to lay off and stop creating new categories in this area. Also, if there are any categories that you really don't like, just let me know and I'll be happy to empty them and apply for deletion. The more I think about it, the more I think I was overzealous: thanks for stopping by and voicing your opinion. I really do appreciate it. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 02:50, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

template standardization update[edit]

hello - The Ford Bicentennial artifacts now have {{Artwork}} as well. ARC ID's for the 100 photo media kits almost all assigned, then I'll begin adding {{Photo}} to those or should they get {{GFPLM-image-ARC/en}} ?

Also, when convenient, please send the category name to use for any newly uploaded un-categorized images. Thanks, have a pleasant day, see you tomorrow. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

The photo kits should probably get {{GFPLM-image-ARC/en}} ({{photo}} is just an internationalization template that says "photograph" in multiple languages, depending on the user setting). The category that we set up for un-categorized images last fall is Media from the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum needing categories. It is a subcategory of both the "Media from the Ford Library/Museum" and "uncategorized media" categories, so it really should be the place that new images go before they are properly categorized. Thanks so much and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 22:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Got it, thx. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

File:British "White Ensign" 1707.png[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:British "White Ensign" 1707.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Fry1989 eh? 02:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Belated thanks for the nomination and promotion of File:Gerald Ford hearing2.jpg. As you can tell, I rarely log in these days. Added a comment to the talk page of the nomination. One of the reviewers had mistaken film grain for noise. Durova (talk) 00:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for all your hard work on it: I think it looks really good! We're lucky to have people as talented as you here on Commons/Wikipedia! Michael Barera (talk) 04:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit a thon photos[edit]

Hello and happy Monday! Dmalicke posted edit a thon images here here and here. Use for any GLAM page update about the event that you do!

Also, what were the languages your brother translated the Inauguration page into: Italian, Spanish and ? I thought there might have been a third. I want to make sure that tidbit gets into my blog and into the Ford Foundation newsletter.... Bdcousineau (talk) 16:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The Midfielder created the Italian language article (Insediamento presidenziale di Gerald Ford) and made a couple of changes to the Spanish language article (Investidura presidencial de Gerald Ford en 1974), which had existed before. Also, thanks for the links to the photos: I'll take care of categorizing them right away! Michael Barera (talk) 00:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done with the category! Michael Barera (talk) 00:33, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Vladivostock[edit]

File:State Gifts Sculpture - USSR.JPG. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll see if I can work it in (but as I develop the article, I'm finding that historical images are more appropriate: I guess we'll see!). Michael Barera (talk) 00:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

GLAM newsletter[edit]

You should mention your work in the GLAM newsletter outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/January 2013/Contents/USA report.Smallman12q (talk) 23:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

yes, please do! Bdcousineau (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion, but is it really appropriate to mention what I've been doing on behalf of myself? It just doesn't seem right to me... Michael Barera (talk) 01:45, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
It was done by Dominic and Sarah Stierch, see outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/September_2012/Contents/USA_report and outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/January_2013/Contents/USA_report. The newsletter is in essence a status update as opposed to a 3rd party review. As such, those involved, including yourself, are the most qualified to write on the topic.Smallman12q (talk) 03:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done Michael Barera (talk) 00:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Friday at the Ford[edit]

hello WiR -

if you have time could you please start work on the Ford Museum/Library case study? thanks! my to-do list includes writing an application for funding to go to the OpenGLAM conference. Happy that this project is included in their launch efforts. It's not clear yet if I'll be allowed to go, but I might as well be ready. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

That is a good idea, but how important is it compared to my work-in-progress article on the Vladivostok Summit or our recently-developed Wikisource efforts? I just want to get a sense for the priorities I have tomorrow. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 01:47, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough. For now it's third. If the conference happens, it would be great to have along (end of March) so I can give a presentation. Still think the Wikisource direction is very cool! Bdcousineau (talk) 02:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Okay, my plan for today is to 1) finish writing the Vladivostok Summit article and then get it to our new peer review space for other editors to take a look at and polish up before it goes live in the mainspace, and then 2) do as much transcribing of documents as I can on Wikisource (my plan is to go in the order presented on the "Works" page). Please let me know if you object to this plan: thanks and have a great weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 15:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Alright, I went to town on the Vladivostok Summit article, which I have a full first draft of done and waiting for others to help review. I'm going to go back to it and revise it, too, but I've just put four hours into it and I think that at this point it really needs some fresh eyes on it! Have a nice weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 19:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Here's a thought - can you email the draft to Ford Staff for their input? They'll be happy to be invloved even if you have to make the edits for them. A good excuse to get them 'owning' the project. Otherwise sounds like a productive day for you!
Next week I'll see where we are on the photos with newly assigned ARC ID's and/or keep working on updating artifact templates.
Trying to set next working group meeting also. Bdcousineau (talk) 21:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

google alert[edit]

strangely I got a google alert about the peer review page set up for the Vladivostok article...and the article had my all-time favorite Ford photo. Great job! The Ford Staff might like to see the article and weigh in as well - this could serve as an "ice-breaker" and get them involved in ways that planning uploads doesn't. I'll check in tomorrow, have a nice night. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Very cool: this is the same article I've been working on the last couple weeks. How do you think the best way is to get it to your colleagues at the Ford? E-mail the URL to them directly? Also, to whom exactly should I send the e-mail? (Let me know that by e-mail: I've now figured out how to access e-mail at the Ford, I just can't use Thunderbird because POP/IMAP seem to be blocked.) Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 02:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
sent you an email via gmail account. Bdcousineau (talk) 13:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

hello[edit]

hello - Do you want to do a backstage pass? There was talk about some of the MI Wikipedians coming to the Museum for a tour behind the scenes into the vaults... it could become a more serious occasion. Maybe even get a press release written. The Collections Dept has time mid-to end of April. It might have to be during the day, tho. The Ford Wiki Working Group had fun at the Edit a thon, so I think this might be okay as well. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

That sounds like a great idea! Yes, I would love to do it! I think the Michigan Wikipedians would really enjoy it, but scheduling will probably be an issue: the rest of the club consists of undergraduates, and their schedules simply aren't as flexible as mine is. I know from coordinating the edit-a-thon that as a whole the Michigan Wikipedians really prefers evening events to daytime ones. It would be preferable to do it in the evening, I think, but if this isn't possible, the later the better. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 00:43, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
would a few hours on a Saturday be possible? Also, did you get any feedback from the email you sent to the Ford staffers today? Bdcousineau (talk) 02:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Regarding Saturday, possibly. I'll have to float that idea to the Michigan Wikipedians and see what they think. Regarding feedback, definitely: Geir and Helmi spoke to me about it at the Library, and they seemed fairly impressed. The only major suggestion they had was to include Kissinger's own account from his memoir (which I began doing today and intend to complete next week). I think I'll delay pushing it out to the main article space until after I'm finished adding Kissinger's perspective, which means the DYK nomination will be delayed another week. But, article quality is more important that speed (it is 2013 on Wikipedia, not 2005 anymore!), so I'm not exactly disappointed about it. Have a great weekend! Also, if you're feeling bored and/or adventurous, I'd highly recommend taking a look at the Wikisource project and trying to transcribe a page or two of a document (this one is the one we're currently working on): there is a lot to do, and once you get the hang of using the underline template {{u|like this}} and a few other technicalities, it is really quite simple. I've already spent hours working on it, both at the Library and at home, and if you're looking to get your feet wet at Wikisource (like I am) it is a great place to start. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Ok, let me know what works for the backstage pass event. Yes, I will try my hand at the transcribing - it is very impressive that the Wikisource project is happening to the extent that it is. Great that you got some feedback about the article!
For the summer internship, I will present the idea that you can do more articles and improve the ones that exist - this may be very attractive to the Ford Working group. At the up-coming meeting, I'm bringing a cake, gotta turn those frowns into smiles! Bdcousineau (talk) 12:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Very cool! I'll let you know what the Michigan Wikipedians think after I consult with them at our next meeting on Thursday. (I've already posted a message to the club's talk page, but I'm not expecting a response.) Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 16:59, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

transcribe-a-thon[edit]

let's put together a transcribe-a-thon - this event will

  • teach new skills to participants/editors
  • build a bridge between wikipedia and wikisource
  • invite Ford staff to feel included
  • illustrate the usefulness of uploaded documents
  • be the first one?

I've written a note to User:AdamBMorgan on his page if you want to check it out. Sometime in March/April? Perhaps this is better than a backstage pass since that has logistical issues.... Bdcousineau (talk) 13:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

This is a great idea, the only thing is that I'm not a Wikisource expert, so I feel comfortable with "proofreading" documents but not "validating" them (ie, I always want an experienced user like AdamBMorgan to check my work after I'm done to green-light it). Also, one thing I really want to stress is the huge amount of documents the Ford has already donated and, considering we only have three people working on it as far as I know, this is going to take a really, really long time. So please, for the foreseeable future, no more document uploads: just look at the proportion of red X's to green check marks on the "Works" page! I really think we should get this under control before adding to what is already a massive backlog. Thanks and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 17:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
ok. Well, let's think on this some more. The idea of investigating many different types of collaboration projects is exciting! Let's see what AdamBMorgan has to say. have a great day! Bdcousineau (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
You too! I really like how you're thinking on this one! Michael Barera (talk) 17:32, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

GLAM Newsletter[edit]

Per outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/Suggestions#Gerald_R._Ford_Presidential_Library_and_Museum_collaboration, you can add what you want to outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/February 2013/Contents/USA report in a new section with 3 "===" .Smallman12q (talk) 14:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done: how does this look? Feel free to play with it and improve it if you like. Thanks for the heads-up! Michael Barera (talk) 17:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to jazz it up with image samples but I won't get to it til tonight later. To avoid blatant COI, can someone else read it then? thanks. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:10, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done: I inserted images and made some text edits. Please review for COI - also I messed up the spacing somehow for the ===News in Brief=== area  :( can you fix please! Feel free to make other improvements, too. Thanks. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
It looks good! The problem with ===News in Brief=== was caused because you tried to close the gallery section with an opening tag (<gallery>) instead of a closing tag (</gallery>) (see here). It was easy to fix. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Barera - faster than Ferrari![edit]

Muybridge race horse animated.gif The (saddle-)fastest categorization award!
We have to thank you for your incredible categorization. With your support the finish is more fun! AtelierMonpli (talk) 00:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC) --Funfood 00:56, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I really appreciate it! Happy editing! Michael Barera (talk) 00:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Cabinet members articles[edit]

hey. I worked on this today... am I on the right track? It needs more on his political life; I just did layout edits. Feedback is welcome. I'll keep going if this is a good direction. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:08, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Whoops! just found the correct template - am replacing it now. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
That looks good so far: I think you're definitely on the right track, but you're right, it does need more on his political life. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 19:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

summer 2013[edit]

any chance you could do 8 hours a week during the summer as WiR? 4 hours article improvement, 4 hours wikisource and other miscellany (case study, image cat-ing, etc., etc.). I'll email the PEP peeps next week, to give them a heads up - very excited to have gotten the go ahead on this - the continuation of the position is a good measure of the project's acceptance.

also, this might be interesting and we talked about this too . Bdcousineau (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I should be able to do 8 hours a week over the summer (perhaps even more, if there is a more "traditional" archival component as well). I'm looking forward to it! Michael Barera (talk) 02:33, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

yipiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii juhuuuuuuuuuuuu[edit]

  • finished* :-)

!Beer !Coffee

-)

--AtelierMonpli (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Und jetzt 2011 is Geschichte! Michael Barera (talk) 15:55, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
I think I'll take some holydays now :) --Funfood 15:58, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Well done![edit]

Love the hook on the DYK!

Can you write blog post for the NARA external blog(s)? Topic: how you wrote this article, especially a description of the Wikipedia peer review process. This would be interesting to NARA/external readers. Earlier in the winter, there was an offer on the table by the NARA Social Media group to have you guest-blog. I'll see if that offer stands. Bdcousineau (talk) 13:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'd definitely like to write a blog post about the creation process! Michael Barera (talk) 16:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

You're invited[edit]

... to help give a short talk at the 2013 Association of Midwest Museums Conference on July 16 in Madison WI. Yup, the proposal was accepted. I'd love you to be there, since it's in part about the WiR position. The session is called: Unintended Consequences, or it takes a Village to create a Wikimedia project. We may be able to get funds via the WMF. I've invited the other villagers as well. We can talk about details soon. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Very cool! I hope that it works in my schedule, or at least that I'll be able to make room for it! Michael Barera (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Friday[edit]

great work! really moved the project forward.Thanks. Will look at the blog sample sunday. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:58, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. Michael Barera (talk) 01:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: February 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 14:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:President and Mrs. Ford at the RNC.jpg[edit]

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:President and Mrs. Ford at the RNC.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

High Contrast (talk) 19:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. This is part of a mass upload that is currently being worked on by those of us involved in the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum cooperation project. I'm currently working on uploading higher-res versions of each file and, as you rightly pointed out, the description is in need of some clean-up too. If you have any advice about how best to clean it up, I'm happy to listen and see what I can do. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 20:02, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
OK, considering that the other images I've re-uploaded haven't been a problem, I've applied a temporary fix to the file in question by adding "Image: B1192-07" to the description, just like the way the other images are marked. This (hopefully) won't be the ultimate solution, but I think it resolves the sourcing problem and will work for the short term. For the long term, the Ford collaboration (of which I am a part) needs to take a look at this and find a more elegant and simple solution, like an external link to the image on the Ford site. Thanks again and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hopefully, the work by Smallbot this week will take care of this issue. See my talkpage for details. The spreadsheet has ford source url, zip file name, better description, new ARC ID #. Does that notice need answrering? I didn't see a place to go to a discussion. Bdcousineau (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
I don't think so: I removed the warning once I added the image number to the file (I noticed that none of the other files I re-uploaded drew the attention of High Contrast, and the only difference between this and the others was the lack of the image number: I simply added the image number, removed the sourcing warning, and haven't heard anything more about it since, so I think that we're OK on this one). Still, it will be nice to add the Ford source URLs and ARC IDs to these images. Happy editing, and I'll see you on Wednesday! Michael Barera (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

blog post[edit]

sorry, never got to review the blog post in detail. There's no rush on it, some of the Ford staff review team are on vacation this week, and won't be around to approve it. I'll get to it Mon/Tues. Hope you had a wonderful weekend! See you at the Edit-a-thon this week. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'm not in a hurry on it either, although I did enjoy writing it last Friday! Michael Barera (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiVoyage[edit]

Now that wikivoyage is up, you should probably create pages for the Gerald Ford Museum and Library.Smallman12q (talk) 20:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

That is a good idea: I'll add that to my to-do list for tomorrow! Michael Barera (talk) 21:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Done, with your help! Bdcousineau (talk) 00:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Michael Barera/Archives. You have new messages at Bdcousineau's talk page.
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 | +/−

09:35, 18 March 2013‎

Answered, on your page. Michael Barera (talk) 17:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Lake Van, Turkey - October 1984.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Lake Van, Turkey - October 1984.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Stefan4 (talk) 14:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I've responded at the deletion entry. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Ford Working Group mtg March 29[edit]

This is what we'll have the group look at during today's meeting: http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Whistle_stop_train_tour
http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Marine_One
http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Sino-American_relations
http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/John_Albert_Knebel
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:President_and_Mrs._Ford_after_her_surgery.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Letter_to_Gerald_R._Ford_%281934-02-17%29%28Gerald_Ford_Library%29%28039400011%29.pdf
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Photograph_of_%22Jerry_Ford,_Jr.,_For_Congress%22_Quonset_Hut_-_NARA_-_187020.tif

thanks! Bdcousineau (talk) 14:11, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I thought the meeting went well. I'm looking forward to seeing those photos from Berkeley! Michael Barera (talk) 16:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Contact sheet work-around[edit]

hi Do you remember my frustration that we couldn't supply editors with hi-res images from the contact sheets without being charged $17? I think I solved it: Twitter. I will start a Twitter feed featuring whatever image an editor needs - I get the hi-res scan for free for Twitter, and can upload the image to Commons also, the image gets an ARC iD satisfying NARA and no one but a few thousand Wikipedia editors know! hehe!

I will write it into your summer plan, too to make it official. You can see on my page #Margaret Trudeau how this started. have a good night. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

You are literally a genius.
The two images that have already been requested of me are of Gough Whitlam (from here) and regarding United States Bicentennial coinage (a higher-resolution version of this image). If we could get higher resolution versions of those, it would be fantastic. You may have to do some real thinking to come up with a rationale for why Gough Whitlam is relevant to your Twitter feed though, haha! Take care (and PS, I've sent you an e-mail this evening regarding less fun technicalities about my internship). Michael Barera (talk) 02:54, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
yea, thanks, but I'm not. Just bored at work! Twitter plans in place, will unfold slowly. I think this might work. Canoe1967 wants to focus on notables in en:wp with no/few images, what a great opportunity to insert Ford images. I pitched the Twitter project as "forgotten celebrities" - and since there was a recent great response on a recent FB post with a forgotten celeb, I got some early buy-in. Enjoy this fantastic weather! Bdcousineau (talk) 13:52, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
can you start a list of requests? thanks Bdcousineau (talk) 13:53, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Sure, where would you like me to create the list? Does it make a difference? Michael Barera (talk) 14:07, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
nope however you want to do it, thanks Bdcousineau (talk) 18:59, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
OK, for the time being I've created the list in my sandbox, but we can move it if you like. Michael Barera (talk) 04:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

help! can't find[edit]

I saw an updated version of this today where Dominic added a note that participation had now closed. It came up on a watchlist of mine. Can't find that either.

I can't find that page any more. It's an expanded version of the one above - with details on the conference sessions, more participants, etc. And travel funding!! Any ideas? Thanks! Bdcousineau (talk) 23:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe this on English Wikipedia? Michael Barera (talk) 04:50, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I also realized that I could do a history search on my computer too... see just proving I'm not a genius, don't want ya'll to be intimidated! =) Bdcousineau (talk) 10:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
My iPad kept looping back to a cached version I think. Bdcousineau (talk) 10:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Ah, alright: so you're all set now? Michael Barera (talk) 16:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
yes thanks. Sending you an email tonight, please look out for it. Bdcousineau (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
OK, I'm at my WP:UMICH meeting now, but I'll take a look when I get back to my personal laptop at my apartment. Michael Barera (talk) 23:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Update: I saw the e-mail and sent my reply last night. If there is anything else you need from me on this front, please let me know. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 15:29, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Penyulap (please talk to me on my talkpage, I don't bite! :) and this is a big deal, (<grumble>@big companies) Penyulap 19:06, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks for the message. I don't feel qualified to join the deletion discussion for this one, though. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 04:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

ARC Id[edit]

Bdcousineau asked me to update the files listed in this excel file, but I can't do it automatically. As you're the intern, could you do it manually? The details are at User_talk:Smallman12q#Arc_Id.27s. If not, I'll get to it eventually.Smallman12q (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good, I'll do it this Friday or if I have time over the weekend. Should I keep it as an .xls file, or can I convert it to .ods? I'm a Linux user. Michael Barera (talk) 04:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't really matter as the sheet won't be needed after the files are updated. Linux and OpenOffice/LibreOffice is also fine for me=P. Thanks.Smallman12q (talk) 02:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done: I've finished it and e-mailed it to Bdcousineau. I can't seem to add attachments to Wikimedia e-mails, and I don't have your direct address, so I guess you have to ask her for it. Hope it helps! Michael Barera (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Wait...what? The information on the spreadsheet is supposed to be put into the relevant files along with {{GFPLM-image-full}}. What's another spreadsheet being made for? Am I missing something?Smallman12q (talk) 19:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
I updated the file names the way that Bdcousineau asked me to do so, but I did it in the spreadsheet. It seemed to be what she wanted, though, based on our e-mail conversation, but looking back on what you said specifically I think we weren't all on the same page on this one. To be clear, you want me to 1) rename the files and then 2) insert the {{GFPLM-image-full}}? Sorry for the apparent miscommunication. Michael Barera (talk) 22:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
My understanding of what Bdcousineau requested:

  • Move file to current name + (arcid) ...this can be done automatically...the rest not...I can't easily parse out the param values
  • insert the {{GFPLM-image-full}}
  • insert arcid into the {{GFPLM-image-full}} template with |arcid=
  • update file desc from sheet
  • update date from sheet
  • update source from sheet so it looks like Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library: H0010-2 with [Ford-Library-URL SourceID]

If I'm mistaken, double-check with her. Cheers. Smallman12q (talk) 12:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, that sounds good. I'll plan to work on that at the Library next week, or perhaps sooner if I find some free time. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 15:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
UPDATE: I've finished a first image as a sort of prototype: File:Soviet General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev greets President Ford – NARA – 7157128.jpg. What do you think? By the way, I've had to make a few changes to {{GFPLM-image-full}} to get it all to work, and I have three questions for you that you may be able to help me with regarding the template: 1) how do you make the "creator" field optional? (I just commented it out for the time being, but this isn't an ideal solution), 2) how can we make the template potentially support the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum institution template in addition to the Library one? (I agree with you that the Library one should be the default, but there should be as easy way to switch it to the Museum), and 3) is there any way to rename the "Source/Photographer" field just "Source"? (it looks like this was inherited from {{Artwork}}, but it isn't terribly appropriate for the Ford images and I would prefer to go back to the basic "Source" field used in {{Information}}. I'll be waiting for you to green-light me (and hopefully help me figure out answers to my three questions about the template) before continuing on with more conversions to GFPLM-image-full. Thanks again for all your help and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 17:30, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I think it looks fine...but this was Bdcousineau's request...so check with her. I've put the creator field in an if block, so it should be optional now. You can change the institution by institution={{Institution:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum}} or whatever institution you want. It's inheriting from artwork...so can't really change source here. Anything else, let me know. Cheers.Smallman12q (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. First of all, I really appreciate you putting the creator field in an if block (I'm going to have to remember that code, that could be quite useful in the future!). Secondly, my problem with the institution field was simply my own: I was mistakenly trying to code for it using the "location" parameter, which obviously doesn't work. Thanks for the heads-up, it looks great now. Finally, I see what you mean about the "source/photographer" field, but I think it is confusing because the "photographer" is the author, in the case of most of the Ford images. I guess it isn't a huge deal, but I'd like to change it to simply "source" if we are ever able to do it reasonably and easily. Again, thanks for everything you've done for me, the Ford collaboration, and Wikimedia more generally. We're very fortunate to have an editor like you! Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 04:52, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
UPDATE: Good news! I've figured out how to change the "Source/Uploader" field to just "Source", using the code used on {{NARA-image-full}}. Right now, it does not support a default value, but because every one of the source field entries should be different for each of the images I'm not sure it has to or even should. Also, I've created new language-switching templates for both the Library and the Museum to use in the "source" field instead of having just a wikilink to English Wikipedia. I've also inserted these new templates into the "change language" fields of their two respective institution templates (again, for the Library and the Museum). This way, we're building in internationalization, and now we'll only have to keep updating the links to foreign language Wikipedia articles in one place (the language-switching templates) instead of in two places (both the language-switching and the institution templates). The only thing that would make it even better is if we could get Wikidata to update the links automatically: perhaps wishful thinking, but I'm crossing my fingers and hoping for it! Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Good work! nice to make things easier. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

GLAM activities in the USA in March 2013[edit]

Hello Michael Barera, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see the USA is missing regarding the edition about March 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in the USA in March? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the March edition is Monday 8 April.) You can start writing via the page outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/Newsroom. If you wish to be informed by e-mail next time, please write me at this page. You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 02:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I answered him in several places, including my talk page. You can read what I wrote there. Have a good day! Bdcousineau (talk) 14:43, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate it. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 16:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: March 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 12:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

DPLA project[edit]

We now have some major DPLA people involved with this project. And it will be happening rather sooner than I thought.

I need you to do a few things: can you make sure we have a place that the images can flow to once we get started with the upload? Last time, the images went into the "Media donated by the Ford" category. Let's make sure there is something like that in the NARA area...where did NARAbot uploads go to? Also, Sarah said it would be useful to have a page on Commons to document the upload as it happens (and we need a case study page eventually, too). I think she meant this. I didn't see our records in this group, luckily.

Also the discussion page might be revealing as well. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:14, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I think you're on to the right things. My only concern is uploading too quickly and creating large uncategorized media backlogs, like the original NARA project did (or worse, what the Geograph project did). To answer your question, the main NARA source category is here. Have a nice weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 04:01, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Backlogs are created with batch uploads and then worked through. There's be little benefit in slowing down batch uploads to prevent such backlogs, because the files would appear the same initially, and its more of a hassle for the bot op. Whether the backlog is workthrough, or the upload is worked through in more or less real-time, should have no impact once its categorized.Smallman12q (talk) 12:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Should we consider limiting the first upload to the 26K Dept of Defense images? They will all be in the same hidden cats, right? Does that help the backlog issue? The other files I picked out were for fun/usefulness/to bring the number up to 30k but could be done later. I made clear to SJ that we're gonna keep going with this (provided ya'll are amenable, that is).
I also thought it would be politic to invite NARA to suggest which records they might like to see grabbed first - when I email Pam tmw I'll see if she wants to weigh in, and thus become more partner-y. That is the right thing to do. Today I brief my boss. Bdcousineau (talk) 13:56, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
The only thing is that batch uploaded images typically have no practical use until they are categorized. I've spent (and continue to spend) a huge amount of time working on clearing out the NARA uncategorized backlog (which is a year and a half old, by the way, and it is holding up the backlog clearing process because all of the user-uploaded images from 2011 have now been categorized). In my experience, it is very, very rare that any uncategorized image is used anywhere on any Wikimedia project. If we create a huge backlog on this upload, we're going to have a ton of files floating around in uncategorized limbo for a number of years, during which period they're not going to be terribly useful (they'll be searchable, but that is it). Please remember that Commons' ability to deal with backlogs is not anywhere near the English Wikipedia's because the editing base just isn't as large. I've been really pleased that for the Ford collaboration we've been able to keep on top of categorization, but I really worry about backlogs going forward because the editing base is shrinking. Remember the older Bundesarchiv and Deutsche Fotothek batch uploads were cleared out quicker than either the newer NARA or Geograph ones, and I'm especially worried about this trend of slower categorization going forward. Perhaps this concern is only because I focus on categorization and not batch uploading, but from my experience there are only a handful of us working consistently on categorization. We already have too much to do, and we certainly wouldn't be looking forward to another huge uncategorized backlog. Michael Barera (talk) 15:50, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Aside from categories, a lot of images are found via relevant text on the description page. Provided the metadata is decent, some categories could be suggested for the images. Also, categories are often added once an image is used if it is found by search. For example, in my batch upload Category:Images from Oregon Historical County Records Guide where a lot of the images are uncategorized, a number of them are used and have had categories added after their usage. But beyond that...do you suggest we not do further uploads until the uncategorized backlog is cleared? A bigger backlog is the result of more media for the same number of editors...not much can be done there.Smallman12q (talk) 18:16, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
We need more people working on backlogs, period. From my experience (and I have categorized thousands, if not tens of thousands, of images on Commons) it is exceptionally rare to find an uncategorized image that has been used anywhere. It is possible in theory to search for it and use it, but in practice this doesn't happen much. If the uploads happen in smaller chunks, they can be categorized right away, then they get found, then they get used. I've noticed this with my personal uploads, which I am very careful to categorize properly as I upload. From a philosophical point of view, I believe that proper categorization is one of a dutiful uploader's responsibilities, just like proper sourcing and licensing.

Going back to my earlier point about needing more people, we really do need to recruit a much larger group of Wikimedians if the new DPLA project is really going to batch upload 30,000 images. There is no way that I can do all this categorization myself the way I've been able to do for the earlier Ford uploads. Sven Manguard wrote a great opinion essay about backlogs a year and a half ago, and I really believe they are more of a concern on Commons than on English Wikipedia because of the smaller editor base. While I'm not completely opposed to a large batch upload in principle, I'm really, really worried that this will turn into another NARA batch upload where we still have thousands of uncategorized, unused images a couple years in the future, essentially just sitting around doing nothing.

Perhaps I'm biased because I work so much with categorization, but I really do worry about this issue, especially now that there are so many GLAM institutions involved but a still-shrinking editor base. This is a problem I have seen get worse since I started editing in 2006, and I fear it will become even more of an issue in the future. Don't let me stop the DPLA collaboration from happening, but I would really, really appreciate it if we could somehow assemble a team of categorizers for this project. I really don't want to let it get out of control like the NARA uncategorized backlog did. Just my two cents. Michael Barera (talk) 04:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

PS: Nothing personal, no hard feelings. This is something I feel strongly about, but I don't want to make you feel threatened or uncomfortable in any way. I really, really appreciate everything you've been doing for the Ford collaboration, as well as other things around the project. We're coming at this from two different perspectives, and perhaps I've developed a case of tunnel vision when it comes to categorization. But I would like you to read over my thoughts and think about it. If you really think I'm wrong on this, we may have to just agree to disagree. Still, no hard feelings. Enjoy the rest of your weekend, and thanks again for everything you do: take care! Michael Barera (talk) 04:44, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I understand your concerns regarding categorization, but aside from not doing uploads or getting more editors, not much can be done. Perhaps there could be a more efficient way to categorize? Would better tools help? What could make categorization more efficient and more newbie-friendly?Smallman12q (talk) 14:31, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps wider use of such tools as HotCat and Cat-a-lot, which save a lot of time. Maybe even making them default preferences, especially HotCat. What I'm curious about going forward (although I'm not sure how practical it is) is developing some sort of algorithm for converting standardized descriptions, keywords, and/or finding aids from GLAM batch uploads to place those images in "mainspace" categories. It may be a pipe dream, though. Until there is a paradigm shift like that, what we really need is more editors working on categorization. Michael Barera (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
I continue to be impressed at how many of NARA's files you've worked on, and although I cannot speak for the entire agency, I still say thanks for all your hard work!
Would it be possible to use HotCat as the default preference in a test batch upload (like the DPLA?) And/or would it possible to develop "some sort of algorithm for converting standardized descriptions etc" again using the DPLA as a test run? The most important element of the DPLA collaboration is not the size of the upload, but that it happens, and we get the word out via twitter, blog, etc. so other Wikimedians learn about this amazing resource. THE DPLA is a game-changer for Wikimedians and free media access.
Also, there is talk about this - see Jarekt's comment's particularly and newbie that I am, it's even obvious to me the batch upload process is headed for a change - there's an intuitive connection between your concerns (batch uploads) and that discussion (better searchability).
On my page we're discussing searching/linking pipe dreams if you want to take a look - #LOD - Ford contact sheets, daily diary, artifacts, meeting minutes (sorry, forgot how to make that a link, even tho you told me once long ago!). Bdcousineau (talk) 14:10, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
PS. The most wonderful thing about this is that Wikipedia (and the sister projects) is where pipe dreams come to get realized. =) Bdcousineau (talk) 14:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
That all sounds promising, especially the refining of the batch upload process. Regarding HotCat, individual editors have to turn it on to use it (it is in Preferences under "Gadgets"): I doubt Commons will deploy it as a default anytime soon because I haven't heard anything about doing that, but I could be wrong. Still, HotCat is all about individual editors adding and modifying categories, so it can't really be deployed on a project level the same way that batch uploading can be. Regarding batch uploading, some uploads are able to add categories as the images are uploaded, such as this recent French example. The drawback is that the categories are high level ("men", "women", "shawls", etc.) but I would argue that this is still more effective than just dumping all the images into the uncategorized backlog. Ideally, the categories could be refined even more (especially considering how good the NARA descriptions/dates/location details are): with the NARA/DPLA upload, I'm curious if there is a way to harness all this. Maybe just wishful thinking (at this point), but I do believe the technology will eventually catch up. Take care and happy editing! Michael Barera (talk) 14:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

ok, so does that mean smallbot can have the HotCat preference in place? or is it only for hand/one-by-one uploads? Also we can certainly deploy whatever the French example did and maybe even refine it. That is a wonderful example - thanks for pointing it out. I can do a quick look a the records prior to upload to see if we can make lower level categories - YAY! working towards a better fix that just an uncategorized mess. Bdcousineau (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Regarding HotCat, no: bots cannot use it, it is only for humans, and it can only be used once turned on (in Preferences under "Gadgets"). I'd recommend you try turning it on yourself and then try using it, and let me know how easy it is: it has become second nature to me, so when I call it "intuitive" I may be biased, haha! Michael Barera (talk) 15:09, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

DPLA - possible categories[edit]

hi ~

What follows are categories developed by NARA for Record Group 330, the record group I'd like to upload ... is this useful?

also:

Have a great day. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

This is very useful. What we'll need to do before implementing it, however, is find the equivalent Commons categories. For example:
It should be easy to do this with the people categories, but the US-named "operation" categories may need to be rolled into the broader war/conflict category that they were part of (for example, Operation Allied Force redirects to "Category:Kosovo War"). Overall, though, this looks really good and will be very useful in a batch upload. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 15:12, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Oh good! I will work on finding the Commons cats as I can ... changing out exhibits for the next few weeks. Bdcousineau (talk) 22:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
OK, I've just found all the categories and posted the results: all but one of them currently exist, and that one would be easy to create once we have images for it. Also, some of the "perhaps" options may be the right call: for instance, dumping images of American ships into the super-generic "ships" category may not be as useful as using the "ships of the United States" category. The same goes for "art" and "military aircraft". Note the "Bob Hope and the USO" category, too: that may be more appropriate than either the "Bob Hope" or "United Service Organizations" categories, depending on exactly what is in those "also" images. I hope this helps: take care! Michael Barera (talk) 05:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for taking this on. I noticed that Slick-o-bot has uploaded a number of files named "File:Defense.gov News Photo" and then a numbering system like "011007-F-6833L-076.jpg". It's safe to assume when these image were subsumed into NARA, they were re-numbered/renamed ... will there be a way to sort and discard the duplicates if they are dupes? Also, Slick-o-bot's cats don't include NARA cats, so we can assume that these are not the NARA?ARC versions of these images. And there's text on the NARA/ARC page that explains the images were given to NARA - is that includable in the description info?
The loss of the WiR position and by extension the Ford Commons project is really terrible, but we were living on borrowed time. And, worse, it's a personal turf-war. Last week I met with Elaine and she is still very angry at me that I cannot take down her entry on en-wiki. Also last week, NARA's Dept. of Innovation sent an email around to v high level NARA suits about me, not the project. Ford Managment got scared by that, and won't cross the Office of Innovation. In the end, the project is too successful and gets too much positive attention outside of NARA. Tough week!
See you Friday, for the presentation and exit interview. Please persue the PEP internship with Geir - they really want you to stay on. Bdcousineau (talk) 11:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Regarding duplicates, the MediaWiki software automatically detects duplicates (but only exact duplicates, including the same image size and everything) and then tags both images with a link that says something to the effect of "this image is a duplicate of this image [with link]". This has actually come up with the Ford uploads because some of the images had been uploaded before the collaboration by independent Wikipedians and, in many cases, one of the two was deleted (I know at least a few of your uploads from last summer have been deleted, but in other cases it was the earlier upload that was deleted). You shouldn't worry about this, unless perhaps there will be a huge number of duplicates, which may ruffle some feathers among administrators on Commons (although I'm only speculating about that).

Regarding images that were given to NARA, that information would be includable.

Also, regarding Director Didier's article, there are a few things that we can do: 1) rewrite the article to correct factual inaccuracies and "remove fluff" or, more drastically, 2) apply for deletion on grounds of the subject not being notable enough (I'm not sure this would work, though: I don't know what the notability standards are for library/museum directors). Either of these options could be very off-putting to Uzma Gamal, however, so I hesitate to pursue either of them. I want to improve that situation, but I'm really not sure how. Would it be possible to get Director Didier's objections and, more importantly, suggestions for improvement in writing so that we can figure out how to go forward on this one? Thanks. Michael Barera (talk) 15:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

File matching is done with a hash. So if any byte (including metadata) changes, it's viewed as a different file. Regarding the deletion, it would pass notability. Also, you could get some negative press for a deletion. DPLA was scheduled to launch in Boston...but it seems they'll still launch the digital portion w/o the rl event. Given the political morass, not really sure where this initiative is heading.Smallman12q (talk) 18:48, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the laugh, I still have my head, for now. Will respond in more detail in a few hours. Must do exhibit stuff. B at 207.245.177.6 18:54, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I am still v interested in the DPLA project. More on that below.
  • Didier article: This was brought to my attention in January, and I emailed an administrator User:Jameslwoodward. He wrote back a v measured response about deletion rules. etc., which I forwarded to Ford management. Last week I reported that the article could not get deleted, but could get improved (not by me, plainly COI); and could she provide us with objections/corrections etc. She said she did not have time to provide us with corrections. I think we wait a little, and try again to get her objections/changes at a later date. I could get written up for "insubordination" - she did not choose that road in Jan., let's hope not now too. In Jan., I was also ordered to remove a paragraph while my supervisor stood over me to make sure I did it. Delete all these stoopid details as off-topic, just being irritated.
  • Can you please read this page. I signed up in March; although I am by no means an experienced Wikipedian, the topics would be v relevant and helpful. I was told today that it was invite-only and I was not invited, because it was not about Wikipedia editing. Is this how these events are handled? You sign up and then get picked? I truly want to believe that I misunderstood about how these events are staged, and not take it personally (see location and organizer). Please advise.
  • I would like to go forward with the DPLA project and even begin with NARA materials. However, you no longer need me - this is the sea-change that the DPLA will bring - bot operators can get what they see as important and skip the step of creating community with the cultural heritage institutions. The politics around this are inconsequential (except there are bruises) - the materials are now at a third party site, free for all to use in any way. It was a considerate good-will gesture to try to collaborate with NARA, but essentially unnecessary. I'm still in.
    That said, Record Group 330 is significantly larger than first thought. Significantly. Jamie from Museum Collections says: Smile and Take. Every. Single. Image. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:04, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Regarding deletion/'forced' removal, there's been a case that didn't end favorably. Anyhow, you you've been here long enough to know how things work. Regarding boot camps, conferences, they are generally invite only as opposed to general public meetups which are more informal. According to Wikimedia DC "ADMISSION TO THIS EVENT IS RESTRICTED TO REGISTERED WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS." It seems Dominic is organizing...so you'd have to check with him. You could also check with w:User:LoriLee and w:User:SarahStierch. It's organized by Wikimedia DC and NARA. Regarding DPLA, I'll see what comes out of the launch and what can be uploaded. Best of luck. Smallman12q (talk) 00:58, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, if Director Didier won't give us any corrections regarding her article at this point, there is not much we can do besides sitting and waiting. Smallman12q, I know what you mean about "forced" removal: I read last week's Signpost article about the French intelligence case. The Ford probably doesn't want us making an even bigger deal by subjecting Director Didier to the Streisand effect. I don't have any familiarity with "GLAM/Boot Camp", so I don't feel qualified to comment on that. I'm excited about the possibilities presented by the DPLA project too, although I really do hope we can use the categories we assembled on this page as "starter" categories and not just dump everything into the uncategorized backlog. Once again, just my two cents. Michael Barera (talk) 03:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
If you think the categories will be useful in preventing a backlog, that is a win! This is a very big series of PD images. Looking forward to what Smallman discovers in the next few days. Bdcousineau (talk) 11:32, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

There is a project page for the DPLA project. The creation of this page was requested by other interested users, but brings up a few questions:

  • Files from the DPLA are not DPLA-created files, in the traditional way of Commons source files. Is it useful to call this the DPLA project? Or is it more useful to directly add the files to their source Commons project (if there is one)? I understand we will do that with hidden cats, but what about on the more visible level?
  • An uploaded source file will point back to ….? It’s hard to tell from the DPLA website, sometimes files are just links back to a service hub. This may only be answerable once Smallman can get a sense of the terrain/exposed metadata.
  • This formula - pls see editable page, showing up here as 0 - is from the Walters case study page, and it reset to 0 once I changed the name – if someone could please check to make sure it’s a formula that will track any uploads.
  • If this is named DPLA, will need an institution tag. And other tabs on the project page as well. Anything else? Bdcousineau (talk) 17:03, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
This looks pretty good so far. Regarding the first point about the name, I think DPLA is fine, as long as it is explicit where the material is coming from (I think the collaboration page does a good job on this front). From a Wikimedia perspective, it doesn't make a big difference where the "source" field of the information/custom template points back to, as long as it is the (or a) genuine source and can be used to prove the origin (and proper licensing status) of the image/file in question. The formula looks like it is good to go, the only issue is that (obviously) there are no images in the "media contributed by the DPLA" category yet. The institution tags (if used) should be the locations where the materials are actually held (like the Ford/NARA examples): the bigger priority right now, I think, is creating the collaboration banner (the one that goes over the license and says "this image was contributed as part of a collaboration with the DPLA", etc.). You may also want to think about creating a custom "information" template (maybe "DPLA-image-full"?) if you want to use one before the uploading starts: it would be a real pain to have to clean that up after a mass upload. Let's get it right the first time. (Also, will there be anything like ARC numbers for the DPLA? Again, if so, this would be much better to do now before the uploads than have to clean up later.) In general, most of the thoughts/issues that applied to the Ford collaboration will apply here as well, I believe. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 23:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
PS: I think a great way to approach it is thinking about (and reviewing) all the template standardization I've been doing the last couple weeks. Essentially, if you could have done those Ford uploads you did last year all over again, what would you have done differently? What do we have now with the Ford images that would have saved lots of time and effort if we had implemented from the start? From my perspective, this includes: 1) custom "information" template (like a DPLA version of {{GFPLM-image-full}}, 2) institution templates, 3) creator templates (possibly), 4) ARC-style ID number templates (if necessary), 5) internationalized institution "name" templates (for the "source" field of {{GFPLM-image-full}}), 6) a collaboration template, and 7) the proper license (or licenses). Not all of these may apply, but you get the idea. As I said before, I'm a big fan of getting it right now so we don't have to clean it up later. Thanks again for all your hard work! Michael Barera (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. Perhaps tomorrow is a good day to visit about this in more detail. See you then. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:58, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

DPLA launch[edit]

So DPLA has launched today and seems very promising. Online, they have (http://dp.la/search?partner[]=National+Archives+and+Records+Administration) 500k NARA records. For the NARA bulk download, it lists some 2 million rows (with an offset of ~1.1 million which is odd). I've included the first 3 listed below. A description and file-url is provided.

Smallman12q (talk) 19:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

SO exciting! This is a lot of video, tho. It seems like it would be sortable by Record Group? or, what is the next step? Tomorrow Michael and I can talk thru templating, and the other Commons side details. Bdcousineau (talk) 21:51, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'll see you tomorrow! Michael Barera (talk) 23:49, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
There is a mixture of video in .wmv format (which will have to be converted to .webm), pictures (and probably pdfs...haven't checked). Exactly how they should be sorted out on here has to be decided beforehand. It's a massive set, and using the API, uploading the NARA set alone of 500k items will take 24/7 for at least a month at 10 items/minute and a few terabytes of storage. There are also several other sets available, but NARAs should be the least likely to have copyright issues. There should probably be an RFC (request for comment) before the upload. SJ has suggested on the mailing-list that wikidata may be used to centralize changes to the metadata, but I don't how that'll work out. The data available to work with is mirrored by the dpla site, so that's what we can sort by. For Commons:Digital Public Library of America, you should create a subpage for each of the DPLA collection partners, as they'll have their own issues.Smallman12q (talk) 01:29, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
ok, yes. I have time this weekend to look around the site, and begin to work on sorting issues. Plus we'll spend time tomorrow too, Michael can explain the nuances. So figure out what items would be useful/figure out sorting with in that group/ do the RFC. Or are you suggesting the entire 500K? It makes sense to have each partner on their own subpage. While NARA files can use all the established templates, naming, etc., etc., the others will need new. As far as PD, I read that the ARTStor items (10k) were PD. At what point is moving files from the DPLA to Commons just re-creating the DPLA in a new place? or is that the wrong question? Thank you, I'm speechless. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:55, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Figured out a sorting path from the front end website that returns the 500K NARA records, and through a multi-step process leads to useful categories. Will confer with Micheal that these steps really work. Not all the DPLA processes work so well on iPad, so might be slow. Will write down the steps if needed for the RFC. These steps may not be scalable to the other collection partners.

  • how many records should get moved? The original group I was interested in is incomplete/partial.
  • does ALL sorting need to happen before Smallbot starts, or can we continue sort/categorize while Smallbot works? Sleep now. Bdcousineau (talk) 08:53, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
What is Commons relation to DPLA will have to be figured out. Initially, commons will be a mirror, though as editors contribute/correct descriptions/data it may be a two-way street. All the records that are of encyclopedic use that are free should be copied over(why not). You can categorize as files are uploaded, but its best(easiest) if you get the upload format right the first time so don't have to go back and fix 100k files.Smallman12q (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
We were thinking about this in person today, but don't you think the DPLA is at least a bit like Flickr? It hosts all sorts of content (not all of which is appropriate for Commons due to licensing issues), but it isn't a records creator, rather just a place for different authors and sources to share their content. I'm thinking that the DPLA's relationship to Commons will be much more like Flickr's relationship to Commons than a traditional GLAM project like NARA, the Bundesarchiv, or the Walters Museum. Michael Barera (talk) 20:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Meeting notes[edit]

A fun rare in-person meeting about the close of the WiR position and the opening of the DPLA project.

  • The point that the DPLA mimics Flickr (as opposed to a traditional Commons partner) is borne out by the fact that Wikimedians do not need to "ask" for access to the data, rather the data is already exposed and ready to be used. No "collaboration banner" needs to be developed.
  • To that end, Michael made changes to the Com:DPLA page, aligning it as a Commons resource rather than as a Commons collaboration.
  • We checked the structures of the Flickr pages and this point made sense.
  • A sub-page for the files from each of the DPLA content partners is necessary, especially in cases where there are many categories/sub-categories.
  • For the NARA download from DPLA, all existing NARA templating, naming, licensing and other in-place structures will be followed.
  • As other files from other DPLA content partners come onto Commons, new templates/institution tags etc will need to be developed. Beginning with the NARA records gives us time to identify the next group, and develop those formats.
  • Category determinations will be in place before the download (to avoid a gigantic pile of un-categorized files).
  • The expansion of the French example was vetted and the group concensus is that it will work. The plan is to pull the categories determined by the parent agency and used for their internal sorting (see top of this page for our first attempt) and match those to existing Commons categories. This will work for the NARA records, as useful categorization is on the ARC pages (but not in the ARC/OPA link provided by the DPLA site). Coincidentally, this method should also work with the existing NARA files, correcting the current back-log of uncategorized files (and could scale up to other large groups of uncategorized files, should that happen in the future). We'll get to that at some point.
  • As NARA record groups are matched to their categories (and cross checked) the can be uploaded to Commons. It makes sense to do "rolling" uploads, right? Or is the preference to wait until we can match all NARA groupings with their categories?
  • I'll start matching the ARC categories to the NARA files on the DPLA this weekend.
  • This list will also allow us to cross-check against what NARAbot has already added to Commons, so those files can get sorted out.
  • RFC needs to be done.

Everyone is on board with beginning with the NARA records - all of 'em! Please comment or add. Congratz to Michael on his new internship at the Ford Library (rumor has it in the AV dept); also Director Didier concurs that Ford Museum artifact uploads to Commons can continue over the summer. Counting snow flakes, again and still! Bdcousineau (talk) 00:33, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

That all sounds good (to me at least). I really like what we are trying to do with the categories: I really hope it works out. Now I'm hoping to see a trial run so I can take a look at what to expect on the categorization side. Obviously something is better than nothing (as long as it is relevant, of course), but I'm really curious how effectively we can apply categories at the moment of upload using this approach ("how good can we make it?", essentially). Have a nice weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 00:54, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

DPLA metadata policy - fyi[edit]

here Bdcousineau (talk) 11:12, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Good stuff, especially: "any metadata imported into the DPLA, which is protected by copyright, is provided under a CC0 Public Domain Dedication." This means that all the metadata on the DPLA site, once it is there, is in the public domain and thus free for us to use here on Commons or anywhere else. The more I read that, the more I thought (and continue to think) that the DPLA is really quite like Flickr and our relationship to it as Wikimedians should be quite similar. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
careful.... they are not making the same claims about the content. So while smallbot deposits metadata, it then presto-chango becomes content on Commons right? The actual content/picture may not be free, as I understand it. I'm fairly unclear about when the metadata "turns into" content, or maybe I'm overthinking. Good think we're starting with known PD works, as this concern will become clearer. If you understand this, please explain! The first image posted by the DPLA was an old-fashioned "all rights reserved", which I thought was a odd way to start, actually.
Also, I'll set up a table for the NARA records with the following columns (by late tonight) to help keep track of where we are:
  • NARA Series name
  • duplication checked
  • ARC cats located
  • Commons cats matched
The cells will be "done" or "not done".
I'll locate the ARC cats and list in my sandbox, and then you can match to Commons cats. I'll post link.
For the NARA records, it will be important to include the NARA hidden cats onto the files as they come in, so that they flow into the NARA cats, as well as the Commons Rource cat. Does that make sense?
There will need to be a page where the media gets dumped, right?
Despite real world chores, we could be ready to start reasonably soon, if we are locating/matching cats as smallbot works away.
Smallman, could you do something similar to the French example in the RFC? - It will get attched to the project page via a tab, and be useful for when the case study gets put together. Thanks!
Tomorrow is wide open for me, I should get a reasonable start on this. Please comment/add. Anything else needed? Bdcousineau (talk) 16:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
I've started a NARA page at Commons:Digital Public Library of America/NARA. It's empty/scratchpad for now. I've put up there how the metadata is structured for the first 580k files, and how many files have what metadata available where. The metadata is what will be become the text content on commons. The CC0 dedication of the metadata is good. I believe this NARA dump is content in PD, not sure about the other partner dumps. RFCs (w:Wikipedia:Requests for comment) are a way to get comments/feedback/support for a project. I will file a bot upload request sometime this week.Smallman12q (talk) 00:48, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

NARA index list[edit]

a sample to try matching to Commons categories (from the o's):

Ordnance Section

   *(1st Army) 
   *(4th Army) 
   *(5th Army) 
   *(Allied Force HQ) 
   *(Army Ground Forces) 
   *(China-Burma-India Theaters)
   *(European Theater) 
   *(German Air Force) 
   *(Pacific Theaters) 
   *(SHAEF) 
   *(War Department Claims Board) 
  • Ordnance Statistics Section (Army Ground Forces)
  • Ordnance Supply Companies
  • Ordnance Technical Committee
  • Ordnance Training Center
  • Oregon
  • Oregon civilian defense
  • Oregon electric power utilities
  • Oregon employment planning
  • Oregon federal courts
  • Oregon appeals cases
  • Oregon attorneys, U.S.
  • Oregon district courts
  • Oregon federal prisoners

Bdcousineau (talk) 18:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

table[edit]

User:Bdcousineau/Sandbox9

Looks good. Michael Barera (talk) 15:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
... and is essentially useless. Record groups do not return the categories/index terms as hoped. These are sometimes returned at the series level, however a record group can have over 2k series. The Records of the Environment Protection Agency has over 2k; none of the few I looked at had categories/index terms. No idea why Records of the Secretary of Defense had that list. The categories/index terms are often at the item level....and that's currently at 580k.
There is this list of index terms - no idea as to the size of it. Can it be used to match to Commons categories instead?
How did the Flickr project handle this?
Also found the first typo on the DPLA (funny cuz the iPad is a horrible speller) Records of the U.S. Marine Corps, 1775 - 9999. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Most of the records list the a series in the "isPartOf" key. Also, 61k list "subject" such as "{"name":"Industries"},{"name":"Timber management"}". The original NARA upload was broken into chunks at Commons:National Archives and Records Administration/Categorize for categorizing. Not sure what you mean by "Flickr project"? Most of the items have a "series" and "title" tag. 386940 out of 580k have a description. So there's enough to do at least a bare upload of title and description for 1/2 of them. Not really sure what to do with the list of index terms? I will do some sample uploads this week. Unrelated, but I'm also working on improving the Open Access Media Importer Bot. Smallman12q (talk) 02:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
It seems like splitting composite images is a common problem (we had similar issues with the contact sheets).
The list of NARA index terms is an attempt to provide categories similar to those in use on Commons for the DPLA media to be put into - Michael has ongoing concerns about a large dump of un-categorized media. I'm game for whatever outcome. My experience in this is limited to the Ford contact sheet and document uploads. The documents were sorted. Most likely, having a few samples will answer some questions - looking forward to them. Did NARAbot create the "chunks" while uploading or did the human do it later? I understand that Wikimedians did further categorizing, but not what happened prior to that. Bdcousineau (talk) 21:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I know Michael is interested in "subject" ({"name":"Industries"},{"name":"Timber management"}) as a way to create categories; also "location" - I've found both in basic searches. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:09, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Ye, a lot have subjects and location. I have to finish the samples first before we do anything further.Smallman12q (talk) 12:05, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
I'll be very interested to see what the samples look like. Here's hoping for the best! Michael Barera (talk) 14:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

DPLA - more rights discussions[edit]

not always public domain. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

That is good to know: it's just funny the author referred to us (speaking of my school) as "Michigan University", haha! Michael Barera (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
He's not from Michigan, eh? There's a lot of chatter about the DPLA on Twitter and the OK Foundation mail list - I'll keep posting interesting tidbits. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The library divide[edit]

There is a new debate quickly shaping up around the DPLA that I'm identifying as "the library divide" (gender divide, digital divide): Public librarians are v suspicious that the DPLA will replace/impact them, and their services at the local/community level, and all the more so because there is a distinct feeling of high brow/low brow - the DPLA was originated at Harvard (high brow) and the local public librarians (low brow) are feeling that the DPLA is snobbish.

I was able to "sit in" a live class at Harvard last night via Twitter (that alone is incredible) with some high level librarians and students from Harvard about this very topic, also read lead pipe article.

Interestingly, and germane to our project, is the firm belief (by both sides) that people will go to the DPLA to use the materials, make apps, etc . We are doing the exact opposite - bringing the materials out to the people. "Nah they can’t tell me nothing~We give it to the people~Spread it across the country" thank you Macklemore. Bdcousineau (talk) 11:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

That is a very interesting and insightful point that I didn't see before you brought it up. I think it will be good to keep in mind as we go forward. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 14:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM in April in the USA[edit]

Hello Michael Barera, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see the USA report is only a very short story in the edition about April 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in the USA in April? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the April edition is 8 May.) You can start writing at the page outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/Newsroom. If you wish to be informed by e-mail next time, please write me at this page. You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 08:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Romaine. I appreciate the message, but I'm no longer the Wikipedian in Residence at the Ford Presidential Library. Because I'm not really active in a GLAM project anymore, I don't think I'd be of much use to the This Month in GLAM newsletter. I really enjoyed it while it lasted, but it is all done now. I'm sorry to not be of use on this anymore, but that is what happened when my WiR gig ended. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 18:19, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

checking in[edit]

Hello, I trust exams went well and are behind you! I've not heard at all from Smallman, hope all is okay. I've been a cut-n-paste monkey, creating this and that mostly as notes, and for a future case study. Sandbox10 are the categories returned by basic front end searches in the DPLA for each record group. Sandbox9 is how many files per record group. I'm curious to learn how many series are in each record group, however, what's in the DPLA is only a portion of many record groups so no way to tell.

Ostensibly Smallbot will show these same results - I just needed to keep busy/learn patience, plus I like to get familiar with the material somewhat. Note to project: the DPLA search engine is sloppy - many times I got results that were not NARA's despite the very specific NARA search terms. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, exams are thankfully now over! Now I just have to wait for all my grades to come in (so far, so good, haha!). Thanks for the links to the sandboxes: they look good, except for a redlinked category that is something like "Category:Military Art of the United States", which doesn't look quite right (and I know it wasn't on that list that we put together). Other than that, it looks good so far. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 02:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
hee hee I made that red-link category up. It can be replaced/corrected. Looking at the images it made sense at the time - this is art done by soldiers when deployed, in the tradition of trench art (which I had thought was limited to WWl, but then Wikipedia corrected me). Bdcousineau (talk) 11:21, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, there is Category:Military in art, as well as Category:United States Marine Corps in art. Maybe we could create an intermediate "Category:Military of the United States in art" for these purposes, but I think they are all art about the military. For art by the military, I think we'll probably need to create your category, but capitalization rules would put it at "Category:Military art of the United States". Michael Barera (talk) 23:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
That sounds fine. Smallman reports that we might have something to look at this week, and that he hopes to have the upload completed by mid-summer. Will this be one of the larger donations to Commons? I'm curious to read what the RFC brings. Also, are you interested still in learning how to do a batch upload? There will be about 2k artifact images and a db in a couple of weeks you can mess around with if so.
Have you been following the controversy that has developed around the NewYork Times article and the Wikipedia entry on women novelists? On the surface it's about sexism in Wikipedia, but it's also about categorization and sorting. Among other places, it's on Jimbo's page, and is worth a look. Also, if you need a great time suck this summer get yourself on twitter and set up a tweetdeck. You'll never need to tweet, but the stuff you can read/learn about is incredible. Any topic, there's a lot to read on it. It's better than an RSS feed. Have a nice night. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:46, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Regarding size, I think so, but you can check here. From a purely personal standpoint, I don't have a huge interest in running a batch upload, but I am very intrigued by your categorization system and would love to learn how to apply it (both to the DPLA images to be uploaded and the NARA images still needing categories from 2011). And yes, I have followed at least part of the Wikipedia novelists categorization controversy. I think we're eventually going to male and female categories for just about everything on both Wikipedia and Commons, although smaller groups will likely go before larger ones (for sake of simplicity), which means that in many cases (but certainly not all) the female categories will be created before their male counterparts. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 12:28, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

ok, my misunderstanding - I thought I remembered you asking Small about how-to batch upload. No worries, I'll figure it out. "My" cat system is just what was revealed by a simple search on the DPLA website. On my page is a DPLA sample to look at/comment on. I will comment tonight, busy day ahead. Enjoy the day! Bdcousineau (talk) 12:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I thought we going to have Smallman12q run the batch upload. If this is not the case, I'd be willing to learn the batch upload process. I don't have a huge interest in running a batch upload, but if it would be helpful to the cause I'd be willing to learn. I just took Smallman12q's experience and perspective for granted on this one. Also, I just got back from the Michigan softball game today: photos will be uploaded shortly! Have a great day! Michael Barera (talk) 19:49, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
UPDATE: my softball photos have now been uploaded! Michael Barera (talk) 21:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Nice photos! Great day for a game, too. Smallman said he might get busy after the DPLA upload. Those artifact images can go up anytime after I get them onto our website - perhaps we can just ask at the batch upload request page. Again, sorry if I misunderstood. If you have time, your input on the DPLA sample on my page would be very useful. Thanks in advance. Oh BTW, are you interning with Geir or Ken? I truly hope that worked out. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:14, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Don't worry about it, my position is a bit complicated: if we have other people capable and willing to do it (ie, Smallman12q), I'll just stand to the side and let them run the batch upload. If we don't, then I'd be willing to learn, even though it is not the most interesting thing (in my opinion) on Commons. Regarding my internship (which begins tomorrow!), Geir will be my mentor, but it sounds like I'll be working closely with Ken in the A/V department. I'm super excited! Michael Barera (talk) 18:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I've informed Bdcousineau that I will indeed be retiring come June/July and heading for greener pastures. I should get this NARA batch up and running by then. It's been fun, and I wish you the best of luck IRL. Smallman12q (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

When I saw you add the header to your page a few weeks ago, I suspected that you were planning on retiring (and more or less confirmed it when I discovered that the numbers were Unix time equivalents for June 1/July 1). I have really enjoyed working with you this past half year or so: Commons is really going to miss an editor as talented, helpful, and kind as you. Take care, and all the best, wherever your life takes you. If you ever get bored or lonely, you're always welcome back here! Thanks for everything. Michael Barera (talk) 00:47, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
must find new bot operator, AAACK!! And just when I have an idea for an app, too. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:07, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: April 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 22:20, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Boomerang logo UK.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Boomerang logo UK.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Stefan4 (talk) 18:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I've added to the discussion at the deletion page. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Stadium?[edit]

Please check your edit http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Disc-comparison-desaturation.png&diff=70467721&oldid=54758288 . If it is not a mistake, I suggest improving the description or giving a short explanation in its talk page.--Pere prlpz (talk) 18:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think it was a mistake: its usage here confused me, I believe, when I made the edit last year (I can't remember what exactly I was thinking at the time). I think I have given it better categories now (see here). I hope this helps. Sorry for the hassle. Michael Barera (talk) 20:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

DPLA[edit]

The batch upload is set to begin early next week. Not too many questions/comments on the bot request. The counter will be activated. Let the fun begin! Excited beyond words, and sad - no one I know "gets" how utterly cool this is. Have a nice day! Bdcousineau (talk) 23:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Wait, I thought I "got" how utterly cool this was, haha! I'm super excited to see what the categories look like when the images are uploaded (as well as how and when that approach can be applied to the backloged NARA images from 2011). Thanks again for everything and Happy Mother's Day! 12:32, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm so glad we can think this is cool together! Bought a laptop with Ubuntu loaded already... may need advice/technical assistance soon. Sent in DPLA case study proposal to Museum Computer Network conference today, fingers crossed. Have a wonderful Monday. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
That all sounds good, especially the Ubuntu bit (yay!). Just out of curiosity, where did you buy a laptop with it already pre-loaded? That would save me a few hours the next time I buy a laptop, haha! Michael Barera (talk) 22:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
ASUS X201E-DH01 11.6-Inch Laptop from Amazon, (so not cool, right? but I figured they had a good customer service policy). I went to the Ubuntu site and they list all the laptops pre-loaded/approved with Ubuntu and then I seached for one under $500 and came up with this. I don't need one as big as yours (I'va smaller brain, ya know, eh?), and this one seemed to fit the bill - I need to sneak it into my office and work off the wifi while also doing my regular job. Fingers crossed. It has wifi connectivity issues out of the box, but it's also an easy fix...so hopefully so! Have a fun day digitizing. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Very cool. I'll have to remember that for the future. And yes, I'm really looking forward to more digitization tomorrow! Michael Barera (talk) 01:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

AACCKKK! Smallman AWOL. Questions about the upload are building on the bot request page. Laptop a failure- will not pick up wifi at my house - need to test at a Starbucks -already had a linux tech look at it. Spirits droopy, except I applied for a research/dev project at the British Library ... see how brave you and Small have made me?! have a nice weekend. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, the bot upload comments look good, but I understand your worries about not having Smallman12q around beyond his retirement. Regarding your laptop, you may need a proprietary driver for your wi-fi to work. I had to do that once on my older laptop, which I had to tether to the Internet through Ethernet to find and download the right driver. To get to the proper settings on Ubuntu 13.04 (the current release), click on the "power/tools" symbol in the extreme top right of your screen, select the first option "About This Computer", click on the "All Settings" button in the top left-ish of the window, click on "Software & Updates" under the "System" header, and then (in the new window that pops up) click on the "Additional Drivers" tab on the far right to see what drivers may be available for your computer and might be able to fix the problem. On my computer, I have the option of selecting a "BCM4313 802.11b/g/n Wireless LAN Controller" from Broadcom Corporation, but I don't have to because there is an open-source alternative that works for my laptop (an HP Pavilion dv6 from Q4 2011). Just remember that you'll need to go old school with an Ethernet cable in order to allow you to download the proper driver from the Internet while your wi-fi isn't working. I hope this helps. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 22:12, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
PS: Good luck with your application at the British Library! Michael Barera (talk) 22:12, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, -mattbuck (Talk) 19:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, Matt. I've responded at the deletion request page. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 22:51, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Team Barnstar Hires.png The Teamwork Barnstar
It's been a pleasure working with you and Bdcousineau on the Gerald R Ford project and subsequently DPLA. I wish you success in your continued wiki endeavors, grad school, and inevitably the real world. Cheers. Smallman12q (talk) 00:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks so much, Smallman12q! This really means a great deal to me. All the best to you as well! Michael Barera (talk) 12:51, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Um...[edit]

I seem to be under investigation right now by NARA in a big way .... maintain distance!! Sigh Bdcousineau (talk) 16:48, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, that isn't good. Here's hoping for the best! Michael Barera (talk) 12:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
This actually may be a VERY good thing - I've had to pull my Weingarten card and its moving up the chain FAST, and around the officer that has her claws out. The outcome could be that the Ford WiR may get to come back in Fall....have you seen the movie The Grifters? Anjelica Houston gets beaten up with a bag of grapefruit because it doesn't leave bruising...... Again, this will have a long term positive effect I'm sure! Bdcousineau (talk) 12:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, I hope you're right about the "long term positive effect"... Michael Barera (talk) 13:36, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
(*:*) optimism, grasshopper! Bdcousineau (talk) 14:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright Camp 2013[edit]

Hiya! I registered for Copyright Camp ~ join me? Or I'll buy you a meal afterwards if you can't....we can toast Small's retirement and cry together. =o Bdcousineau (talk)

That looks pretty cool, but it is on a Thursday while I'm scheduled to work at the Ford. I could certainly meet up with you that evening, though. Michael Barera (talk) 00:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok, that sounds fun! If you pick a place and time, I'll meet ya there... looking forward to it. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Wow, there are so many good places in Ann Arbor. What kind of food do you like? Michael Barera (talk) 20:36, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I like Middle Eastern. Can you pick a place that's ok for a group? I'm gonna invite the Copyright Camp attendees to join us for further informal shop talk (we both need to get chummy with these people - me for a peer group, you for a job later on). Also will invite Smallman to join via Google Hangout - that'll never happen (eye-roll and smile). Sound good? Bdcousineau (talk) 12:10, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I would recommend Jerusalem Garden, but it is a little bit small for a group: they do have outdoor seating that might work out, however (and the food is great!). There's also Star's Cafe, but it is out at the Westgate Mall and isn't exactly in downtown Ann Arbor. Michael Barera (talk) 13:34, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Jerusalem Garden looks great! 6:15 ish? The Camp is at Hatcher. I'll start spreading the word. oh - d'ya think any Michigan Wikipedians might be interested in the Copyright event? I can post a link on the group's page.... Bdcousineau (talk) 14:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Asking the Michigan Wikipedians isn't a bad idea, the only thing is we're currently "out of session" (maybe more "out of season", haha) and you likely won't get through to anyone other than Arbitrarily0 or myself. Go ahead and post a link, it won't do any harm. I'm looking forward to seeing you at Jerusalem Garden! Michael Barera (talk) 23:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: May in the USA[edit]

Hello Michael Barera, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see the USA is missing regarding the edition about May 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in the USA in May? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the May edition is Friday 7 June 18:00 UTC, so in about 6 hours. If you need more time I can postpone it.) You can start writing at the page outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/May 2013/Contents/USA report. If you wish to be informed by e-mail next time, please write me at this page. You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 12:43, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer, Romaine, but once again I'm no longer a Wikipedian in Residence and I'm out of the loop regarding GLAM. Sorry. Michael Barera (talk) 13:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello Michael, Thanks for the information. I just wrote to the editors of the past 6 months in the USA in the hope they have still any knowledge about GLAM in the past month or do maybe now about who does have. I will put you on my list not to write you again, mostly I look at that first, but no guarantee. If it happens again, please just ignore it, then I have missed my not to write list. Thanks and greetings - Romaine (talk) 13:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: May 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 22:45, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Fair enough. I'm not an expert in French copyright law, however, so I don't feel qualified to join the deletion discussion. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 00:51, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Still, thanks for the reply :-) At least November 2017 isn't that far in the future... Gestumblindi (talk) 18:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
That is a good point. It is amazing to think that something as old as the Internationale can still be protected by copyright, though. It just doesn't seem right... Michael Barera (talk) 20:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Robin Christopher.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Robin Christopher.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:55, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, Crisco, and sorry for missing what is probably a copyvio during the Move to Commons process. Thanks for letting me know, and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 23:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Happy 4th[edit]

Left a msg at about what to do now. Stay tuned! Have a great weekend. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and happy Independence Day to you as well! I'm curious to see what happens with Fæ. Good luck! Michael Barera (talk) 03:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Very nice of you to throw a barnstar my way... my first! Noah Salzman (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

You are most welcome, Noah: you deserve it! Thanks again for the great photos! Michael Barera (talk) 18:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: June 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 15:15, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar[edit]

Thanks! Spyder_Monkey (talk) 23:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

You are most welcome: you certainly deserve it! Thanks again for all your hard work! Michael Barera (talk) 20:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Happily, the case study proposal for the project-that-cannot-be-named was accepted at the MCN Conference. Sadly, there is no project-that-cannot-be-named due to the gag order. Rats. Cheers, Bdcousineau (talk) 02:58, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, keep at it: the gag order can't last forever, can it? Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 03:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

project update[edit]

Project status report at Commons_talk:Digital_Public_Library_of_America#Project_Update_7/26. Hope you are doing fine! Bdcousineau (talk) 00:31, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, but I'm a bit unsure about how to do an institution template for something like the DPLA (major fields on {{Institution}} include location [city], latitude, and longitude). Should they just be omitted for the DPLA institution template? And what kind of image can we use? Most other templates have a building pictured, like the Ford ones do. Michael Barera (talk) 01:24, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, missed your note! I think we can skip the picture til they issue one on the website, and use Boston as the location (use the staff office steet address) .. Or maybe not have an image of the building, it is a "cloud" institution, after all! Since this is about the DPLA itself and not the partner institutions let's stick to that. If we ever get a new bot operator, perhaps we can figure out a way to designate the files as from the DPLA but actually held somewhere else... Makes it interesting, no?
You oughhta see the copyright mess! Just within one service hub/partner, there's so many nuances!! PD, "should be" PD (state gov records), most likely PD, call for permission to re-use, full copyright, and some records are so tighlty held, it's amazing you can even look at the file image! There's even images that are "ok" for Commons from the DPLA partner site, but not from the file's "home" institution. WTHeck? I had NO idea the range of rights, and how few records are actually usable on Commons. It's quite fun, but not what I expected. I'm having to go collection by collection, and look at item level files and work backwards to get the original TOS. The NARA material was a cake-walk.
I will re-approach User:Fae now that I have a selection of not-NARA DPLA files, hopefully he might re-consider the project. User:Multichill is on a break. I'd like to get User:Canoe1967 on board, he's really active on Commons right now, but not a bot operator.
Have you seen this page? Need to close the loop (to the Commons project), will do it tomorrow. Hope you are having fun. Thanks for helping out (if you have the time). Bdcousineau (talk) 01:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Alright, I've gone ahead and created a mock-up for a DPLA institution template in my sandbox, but because it isn't physical and doesn't really have a location (or an image) the template is pretty plain and boring, as I feared. On the plus side, I have already created a multilingual name template for the DPLA. Hope this helps. Michael Barera (talk) 22:39, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
This is great, thanks! I wonder if as these materials get uploaded a line can get added to that institution template designating the DPLA Service Hub partner... We'll cross that bridge.
Tonight I'll add some un-covered pd DPLA files to Commons:DPLA#DPLA Service Hubs - surprisingly few usable records for Commons. Thanks! Bdcousineau (talk) 21:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
The beauty of the template system is that it allows us to modify or add anything as we need it down the line, so we don't have to worry about it now. We could definitely add it later, if that is what is deemed in the best interest of the project and Commons more broadly. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 21:12, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:A-18A Hornet from VFA-132.jpg[edit]

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:A-18A Hornet from VFA-132.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:19, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that one, Hedwig: it evidently slipped through the cracks on me a couple months ago, but I've gone back and fixed it. Sorry for causing you the trouble. Michael Barera (talk) 12:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: July 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 01:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

newbie-type question[edit]

Hi Michael -

Can you please explain ... when we worked together last spring you taught me that when uploading photos, it's essential to include a link to the photo's source file. Makes complete sense!

How does that work for uploading images for Wiki Loves Monuments and similar projects (Wikimedia Commons app)? There is no source file location (on another website) for these images. I've been trying to think this through and am stuck. Is it a matter of the licensing? That makes little sense too, as Commons accepts images from museum exhibits taken by museum visitors.

hmmm.... Thanks so much. Bdcousineau (talk) 12:44, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

If you created the image yourself, you need to use {{own}} instead of an external link. Check out how I source this sample image (which I created myself). Also note the metadata at the bottom of the file added by my digital camera: most cameras will add metadata like this upon creation of the image, and when it is uploaded this combination of metadata and {{own}} more or less proves that the uploader created the image and thus is able to freely license it. I hope this makes sense. Michael Barera (talk) 12:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
This is perfect thank you. In the classes I've been teaching uploading images is very popular. I always put a speedy delete on the image, mainly to show the students how to do that (we also time it to see how long before we get an admin's response - this is useful to show how active/responsive admins are), but also I wasn't sure about how to handle source link. Now I am.
Plus I want to do "Wikipedia takes America" - there's two editors in my town now! Whoot whoot! We can hopefully photograph together.
Have a nice day! Bdcousineau (talk) 13:12, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Great! Good luck with Wikipedia Takes America, and have a nice day yourself! Michael Barera (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: August 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 08:10, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Jamaican Canadian.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Jamaican Canadian.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Denniss (talk) 21:07, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: September 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
  • Belgium report: Europeana Fashion Fashion edit-a-thon; Wiki Loves Monuments
  • France report: Aerial pictures of Versailles; In Brief
  • Germany report: Reaching out for new partners
  • India report: Wiki Loves Monuments in India
  • Italy report: Italian Wikipedia takes libraries
  • Mexico report: Wiki Loves Monuments 2013; edit-a-thon in La Merced historical neighborhood
  • Netherlands report: Wiki Loves Monuments; ECNC photo competition; Europeana Fashion Edit-a-thon Antwerp; Fourth Dutch Wikipedian in Residence; Wiki loves libraries workshop; 10 years of CC licenses
  • Spain report: Amical projects: Catalan Culture; Wiki Loves Monuments
  • Sweden report: Sign language and case studies
  • Switzerland report: New cooperation with Botanical Garden; History of Alps update; OpenGLAM workshop at OKCon
  • UK report: The Morning After the Month Before
  • USA report: Wikipedia at the Metropolitan New York Library Council in New York
  • Wiki Loves Monuments report: The world's largest photography contest has struck again, but missed many countries
  • Open Access report: Thanks, OKCon, featured content, stats and a final
  • Calendar: October's GLAM events
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 07:30, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Ramona Park article[edit]

hi!! Hope all is well by you.

We are having our Edit-a-thon this weekend, and we are working to add citations to the article. I imagine some of the sources might be posters or handbills - can you point me to how to cite these? I know how to cite web sites and books...would the article you wrote using primary source materials be a good model? Handbills and posters would be primary sources I think!

Hope to see you briefly next week, too! Bdcousineau (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

That's a good question, and I'm not sure how to cite posters or handbills (I've never done it before). I think you might be able to adapt the generic citation template for your purposes, but it might take a bit of work. Also, as I was reminded when I tried for GA status on the Vladivostok Summit article, Wikipedia articles should be based primarily on secondary sources, not primary sources. Primary sources are fine in moderation, but the bulk of the citations should come from secondary sources (this is the biggest reason why the Vladivostok Summit GA nomination failed). I hope that this helps. Michael Barera (talk) 15:57, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
That helps, thanks! I read about the GA nomination, and we discussed it in my class, actually ... sad lesson learned apparently. I will look at that template and see how it goes...I'm pretty sure it'll get fixed it we do it wrong, and then we'll know! Have a wonderful day. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
You too! Either way, we'll all learn from it. Michael Barera (talk) 23:45, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Prang's Valentine Cards2.jpg[edit]

Not sure about adding "1880s dresses" to that image, because that's some kind of allegorical or quasi-classicized image which doesn't show the woman wearing clothing very similar to the clothes that Western women wore in real life in the 1880s... AnonMoos (talk) 16:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Good point: I've gone back and removed Category:1880s dresses from those images (there are four of them total, if I count correctly). There are probably a few other similar cases that I've categorized by decade that have the same issue, so if you see any of them please don't hesitate to remove the category if you don't think it is actually relevant to the image (as is the case here). Don't feel obligated to ask me for permission. Thanks for the heads up, and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 21:19, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Godward Idleness 1900.jpg[edit]

I'm really not going to monitor your edits to images and pages which are not on my watchlist, but the above applies even more strongly to this image... AnonMoos (talk) 12:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

OK. I'm working on populating Category:Dresses by decade and its subcategories systematically, so you could sift through those categories decade by decade and then remove anything you think is non-contemporary and thus not properly categorized by my edits. That way you won't have to worry about monitoring my edits or any watchlists. This mistaken overcategorization probably applies only to a handful of images, but if you are as worried about it as you seem to be, feel free to sift through the dresses by decade category and its subcategories and remove whatever you thinks needs removing. I appreciate your feedback and your continued efforts to improve Commons. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 18:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Red linked categories[edit]

Hi, many thanks for all your current efforts in cleaning out the Category:Aircraft. I notice that you put non-existent Category:Wight Quadraplane against an image, and I have now moved that image into a new Category:Wight Quadruplane that sits in its correct location in the hierarchy. On Commons, non-existent (ie red) categories do not show up in the trees visible to users, and I believe that they should be discouraged in all but very short-lived occurrences, and that we should always attempt to create valid categories that fit into the category trees. I welcome your agreement or comments.PeterWD (talk) 20:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, PeterWD. You make a good point about red-linked categories: I've only created a couple in my categorization of aircraft images, and they are typically either obscure makes/models of aircraft or obscure airlines (I do make sure that I've added at least one already-extant category before adding a red-linked one, though). I was looking for "quadraplanes" with Hot-Cat, but I was thrown off by the spelling (I didn't find "quadruplane"). Whenever I create red-linked categories, I tend to assume that they'll be filled in later, but you've got me thinking and I believe you are right about this. Thanks for your help, and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

hello[edit]

Hi! I'm sitting over on the left - I have a question for you for about Commons images.. can I upload images that are public domain (due to publication in US and before 1923) that someone else has put a copyright onto? for example an old postcard that has a visible date but that an organization has decided is "theirs" Bdcousineau (talk) 20:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

You should be able to: somebody else shouldn't be able to put copyright on it. You'll have to give me more details later: I've got to run to a 5pm class! Michael Barera (talk) 21:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
What are the specifics? There are some Uruguay Round agreements that have reimposed copyright in the US on foreign works that were still protected in their source countries and some other similar peculiarities, but in this country if something was published before 1923 it is PD. I'm very curious to know more about this specific example! Michael Barera (talk) 03:00, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh my gosh - examples ABOUND!!!! I mapped the collections of all the DPLA service hubs, remember? That'll be a longer conversation. Here's another complex question: the Works Project Administration project provided all sorts of funds for projects in the 1030's, we know that... what happens if the funds were channeled to the States and distributed by a State Administrator (presumably on the State payroll, not the Federal one) and s/he took LOTS Of pictures of his/her projects ..... pd or not? These images not published (just snapshots) but are these workers considered contractors, or? Again LOTS Of examples of this ...so complex and interesting, I could talk about this for days! Sorry we had no time to chat yesterday... soon, hopefully! Bdcousineau (talk) 13:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Those state-funded WPA projects could well still be copyright protected, as they are post-1923. But, the pre-1923 postcards are still bothering me: they really should be in the public domain, unless they weren't published before 1923. Michael Barera (talk) 14:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
What I found when I looked at the DPLA service hubs WAS shocking - it seems that many of the state level repositories and also University repositories slapped copyrights (whether on the original or on the reproduction) onto entire collections with a broad brush. The most interesting was a group of pre-9123 images from Uni Virginia here- I take their rights language to mean: "use the image, but the price is to disseminate it with a copyright symbol for us!" Is that how you interprete that? Bdcousineau (talk) 12:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Hmm, I see what you mean: the exact wording is a bit confusing, though ("This image may be reproduced without additional permission but must be credited © Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia"). It almost looks more like a request for attribution (like a CC-BY license) than an assertion of copyright, save for the copyright symbol. I did a little more digging on the University of Virginia's own website, and came across this in their terms of use: "content posted publicly by the Library is believed to have no known U.S. copyright or other restrictions". So, it would seem that it is all PD, including the image in question that you pointed out to me. That specific image really must be PD: it was created in 1856 and its author died circa 1878. So, I think this is more a case of confusing wording than anything else. Michael Barera (talk) 20:47, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome-re: Green Diamond[edit]

It's always fun to find old train photos, especially those which are long gone and can't be seen in museums, etc. My Dad was a big rail fan, so our family vacations were by rail most of the time. We hope (talk) 13:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

That is fantastic, We hope! I really, really do appreciate it: Wikipedia is much richer for your contributions! Michael Barera (talk) 15:23, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: October 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 06:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Contact[edit]

Hi Michael
I'm not sure this is the right way to contact you but I couldn't find any contact link or similar. I have just started to contribute here on Commons and other WMF places so I don't know how everything works so please correct me if wrong.
What I actually would like to ask you for is some help. I would like to start a gallery on my user page and I can see you have a lot. I have tried to read the information but I haven't found any hands on.
I understand I should create a subpage to my user page, but how?
Then I should create a gallery, but how?
I tried to look at the code of your page but it didn't give me any idea of how to create it. So if you know were I can find hands on directions or you can tell me in short I would be very thankful. Göran (talk) 19:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, Göran: I'd be happy to help! I'll put more detailed information on your user talk page, so it will be easier for you to find it. Michael Barera (talk) 19:29, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that I got it started now. I can see that you have two hidden categories, *userspace and User galleries by*.

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
When I was reading I got the impression that it should create one automatically but it doesn't seems so. Do I have to create and add them by my self? Göran (talk) 20:07, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, there is always the JavaScript Gallery tool, but it is not the same as a standard gallery page. The Gallery tool is completely automatic, but creating your own gallery page allows you to shape and control how you display your images (such as splitting them between photos and illustrations, as you are currently doing). In short, I think the Gallery tool is a nice feature, but I prefer to use the gallery pages because it allows me to control the order and design of my galleries. I hope this makes sense. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 20:37, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, LGA talkedits 04:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I've responded on the deletion requests page. Michael Barera (talk) 00:13, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Just to respond as to why I did not nom any others in the cat :
File:BigChillRecord.JPG, File:CadenceGUISetting.JPG, File:The Big Chill 15.jpg, File:The Big Chill 16.jpg, File:UConn vs. Michigan 2010 02 (Michigan Stadium scoreboard).JPG and File:UConn vs. Michigan 2010 14 (attendance record).JPG : It could be argued that the copyrightable elements are COM:DM to the reason for these images (ie to show either the score or text based attendance).
File:Notre Dame vs. Michigan 2011 05 (scoreboard).jpg anything that is copyright (the logos are not) would be COM:DM.
File:Western Michigan vs. Michigan 2011 15 (game suspended).jpg : COM:TOO for the US issues. LGA talkedits 07:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
That makes sense. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 18:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Editor @ ar.wiki[edit]

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 07:20, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Avocato. I don't speak any Arabic, but every once in a while I'll add an image from Wikimedia Commons to an Arabic Wikipedia article. I'll be very careful to use my editor privilege on ar.wiki wisely. Thanks again! Michael Barera (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, LGA talkedits 05:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I responded on the deletion page: I really don't know enough about German law to voice an opinion on this issue, though. Michael Barera (talk) 19:20, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 19:38, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up: I think you might be right on this one, but I don't know enough about German law to feel confident voicing my opinion on this deletion request. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 02:08, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: November 2013[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png




Headlines
  • Australia and New Zealand report: From East to West
  • Belgium report: Wiki Loves Monuments in Belgium and Luxembourg
  • France report: Mass uploads; Wiki Loves Monuments; Edit-a-thon; GLAM conference
  • Germany report: MS Wissenschaft; Science Gallery; Zugang gestalten; Science 2.0; OKFest 2014
  • Italy report: Libraries and librarians (but there are still shoes)
  • Mexico report: Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 award ceremony; Day of the Dead photo contest winners
  • Netherlands report: Edit-a-thon Amersfoort; Wikipedia seminar Oslo; Wikimedia Nederland Conference; Europeana Fashion
  • Spain report: Wiki Loves Monuments; Fundación Joaquín Díaz González; Wiki Party in Salamanca
  • Sweden report: Motorcycles, Norway and shoes
  • Switzerland report: Wiki Loves Monuments Awards Ceremony; Wikipedians in Residence; Image Donations
  • UK report: Open content at the BBC; edit-a-thons; photography
  • USA report: GLAM-Wiki Activities in Philadelphia and Vancouver, Washington
  • Open Access report: Open Access Button and Berlin 11 conference
  • Calendar: December's GLAM events


Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 22:55, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, -mattbuck (Talk) 13:22, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, Matt. This is a file I transfered from English Wikipedia a while back. I don't feel well qualified enough to discuss the copyright issues at hand with the labels, though. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 19:29, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[edit]

Dear Michael, I wish and you and your family a Merry Christmas and lots of health and, of course, nice pictures for the coming year! Your Poco2 13:57, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the Christmas greetings, Poco a poco! I really do appreciate it. Thanks to you as well for all your wonderful photographs: I always enjoy seeing your work when I vote at FPC every weekend. Have a wonderful New Year! Michael Barera (talk) 05:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

File:BBVA Banco Francés logo.gif[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:BBVA Banco Francés logo.gif has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Cube00 (talk) 11:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, Cube00. I have no knowledge of Argentine law, so I don't feel qualified to comment on the deletion process itself. Take care! Michael Barera (talk) 16:32, 30 December 2013 (UTC)