Commons talk:Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom/Organizers' help desk

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to current candidates WLM-UK 2013 links:

For organizers & helpers

For competitors

Have questions about how you can help organize the 2013 competition? Ask here!

You can also check the Organizers' FAQ

How do I add an image from Commons to the new WML template on Wikipedia?[edit]

Have a look at en:Grade I listed buildings in Bristol for a list that has embedded images. Each row in the template looks something like this:

{{EH listed building row
| name = [[Avon Bridge]] 
| location = Whitby Rd, Brislington
| type = Bridge
| completed = {{sort|28|1839}}
| show_architect = yes
| architect = [[Isambard Kingdom Brunel]]
| show_listed = yes
| date_listed = 8 June 1990
| grid_ref = ST613724
| lat = 51.449707
| lon = -2.557578
| uid = 1219892
| show_img = yes
| image = Avonbridge.JPG
| show_ref = yes
| reference = <ref name="avonbridge">{{cite web | title=Avon Bridge | work=Images of England | url= /default.aspx?id=380854 | accessdate=2007-03-16}}</ref> 

--MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:06, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Errors in the Northern Ireland Lists[edit]

I was discussing progress by Skype with Romaine yesterday, and he pointed out that some errors have crept into the Northern Ireland lists. If you click on any of the NB numbers in those lists they do not take you to the correct page of the NEIA site.

See for example any of the links at en:List of Grade A listed buildings in County Fermanagh

Is anyone able to look into that, please? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I can't see what you mean here, Michael: it seems to work fine for me? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 13:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, you are right. The problem seems to have gone away now. Presumably it was a temporary issue with the NEIA website. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:58, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Grade I listed buildings in Berkshire[edit]

Some information seems to have gone missing, as pointed out here. The page needs to be reviewed and compared with content before the change. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done. I have added as much information as I can to the page from the original listing particulars, short of having local knowledge, and have made some corrections to the table entries. The sources in the previous version of the page were mainly dead, and are now in any event replaced with direct links to the original listings. The page may not be perfect, still, but it is certainly better than it was. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:41, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Suggested Commons template and category[edit]

Sorry if this is wrong place (not entirely sure where to put this).

Could we set up some index categories on Commons, of the form, Category:Listed buildings in England by list entry number? This should ease cross-linking between Commons cats, en articles and external resources.

Maybe make use of a standard template for Commons categories?--Nilfanion (talk) 00:01, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

This is as good a place as any to discuss. Not quite sure how your proposed category would work in practice. Could you give an example?
As I understand it, the upload wizard will do some categorization of its own, depending on what categories have been set up on Commons, but that is unlikely to be great at this point, as we don't have clear Commons cat links in the en.W lists. See:
There is also Category:Listed buildings in England with known IDs
These pages on en.W also get updated I believe:
  • If the unique identifier is not filled in, the file will go into one of the following Commons categories, ready for manual action:
  • Category:Cultural heritage monuments in England with unknown IDs
  • Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Scotland with unknown IDs
  • Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wales with unknown IDs
  • Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Northern Ireland with unknown IDs

The detailed operation of the wizard is still rather unclear to me, but I hope the above helps a bit at least. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:24, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Basically, suggesting a meta category. As an example, Category:Saltram House would have [[Category:Listed buildings in England by list entry number|1386230]]. Compare to the IMO number cats for ships. If this was done via templates, standard text could be supplied to each listed building cat (or image); containing similar stuff to what is being added to the list articles on WP.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
As for location cats, ideal would be down to civil parish (ie town/village) level; which is 1 or 2 below ISO3166-2, and is noted on the English list at least. Ideally every English parish has its own cat on Commons, but (due to disambiguation needs) may be hard to predict the cat's exact name.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Template fixes[edit]

There have been various suggestions in various places on en:Wikipedia for improvements to the templates, particularly to w:Template:EH listed building row. Is this the place to consolidate them, and hopefully get some action/response? Some of these are my opinion, some others from elsewhere (w:Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board#Lists of listed buildings: harmful edits, w:Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board#Hiding of coordinates, w:User talk:Nev1, w:Template talk:EH listed building row and probably others).

Feel free to add others. I offer w:User:Dave.Dunford/DerbyshireGradeI as a now-abandoned model for some of these suggestions. Dave.Dunford (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Request for a Notes column, to contain contextual information, and possibly information from other columns.
  • Too many columns? Date Listed, Grid Ref (etc.) and List Entry Number could be moved to the proposed Notes column (they feel to me like subordinate information, and there is no real reason to want to sort by any of them). Date Listed in particular seems altogether arbitrary and unnecessary; anyone wanting to know can find out from the NHLE listing.
  • Errors in/hiding of lat and long.
  • Why non-standard centered columns?
  • Why non-standard small font size? (If some columns are merged or deleted as proposed above this may no longer be necessary).
  • Why the unnecessary vertical space below the photos?
  • Type column seems prone to error – should it be omitted?
  • "Completed" seems somewhat meaningless for buildings that have been adapted and expanded over the centuries.
  • Should capitalisation of Type and column headings follow w:MOS:HEAD (i.e. sentence case)? [Update: also w:MOS:TABLE: "Only the first word in the caption or heading should be capitalized (except for proper nouns), in keeping with Wikipedia's conventions for capital letters."]
I noticed the latest edits by LivingBot, "reconverting grid reference to coordinate pair to avoid OSG38/WGS84 datum conflict" had put the Grid refs & lat & long with 8 didigts and 6 digits after the decimal point respectively. I have been shortening them to 6 for the Grid ref & 4 after the decimal point for lat and long to avoid excessive precision per WP:OPCOORD. What do others think is appropriate?Rodw (talk) 10:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I agree with you, Rod. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
6 digit grid references refer to 100m squares, don't they? It seems to me that 100m square is a lot in an urban environment. In general I'd be fine with shortening the coordinates themselves though, to (say) 10m precision. If I've got to go and photograph the thing, that's the kind of precision I'd like. Jarry1250 (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Also, given that all of the monuments covered are roughly the same size (10s of metres across), it makes more sense to change the display of the pages by editing the template than to change the underlying wikitext in each case. That way, if you decide you suddenly need the precision, it's easier to change your mind. Jarry1250 (talk) 20:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Seconded re fixing this in the template rather than the wikitext - and I'd vote to retain the 8-figure refs (accurate to 10 metres) anyway; if they are sourced from the NHLE data they seem to be generally accurate, and this level of precision is often useful in distinguishing adjacent properties (particularly when there are several listed properties close together, which often happens). Dave.Dunford (talk) 18:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Maybe the layout can be improved for the future, but for now most people are concentrating just on getting the data up to allow the WLM competition to get started. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I took a look but didn't notice any dividing rules missing. Is it still happening, and if so what browser are you using? Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 09:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
    Have a look Here - It happens with FF21 on windows and FF22 on Linux. It appears not to happen on Chromium on Chrome.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 20:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

en:Grade II* listed buildings in Bristol[edit]

I have converted this to the new template, removed redundancy and buildings not in the city of Bristol, a further 100 or so to add from the official list. Will work on this over the next few months. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! --MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:21, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Offensive banner[edit]

I have received an email (toady at 17.41) from a member of WMUK who lives in the south of England:
Robin, can you get the UK flag changed to a Wales flag at, which is the Wales page for the Wiki Loves Monuments image uploads. Wiki Loves Monuments; Union flag.PNG

The link to the above upload page is the word "Wales". Many people (including the above person) would view the use of the Union Jack in the context of Wales as being political and offensive. Either replace with the Welsh Dragon or with the WMUK banner, please.

Llywelyn2000 (talk) 17:20, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

I assure you no offence was meant, I'm looking into this now. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:03, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Many people would view the insistence that the Union Jack cannot be used in the context of Wales, despite Wales being part of the United Kingdom as being political and offensive. Either keep the Union Jack or secede.
I'd rather this didn't become a political debate. The competition is about documenting the UK's built heritage, which is quite impressive and should be the main focus. Using the Wikimedia UK logo might avoid hurt feelings. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
The upload wizard now uses the Wikimedia UK logo. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 11:22, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks Richard. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Coordinate name[edit]

There is a problem with w:Template:EH listed building row. It does not pass a name= to Template:Coord so when someone clicks on the little globe and goes to e.g. Bing Maps, the marker defaults to the page name, e.g. List Borsetshire. Surely it should use the name from column 1?--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 04:26, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

This has been attempted, so far without success. There were an initial problem with passing names that has square brackets in it. Even when that's solved, in my attempts I've not able to get the information to display unfortunately. -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 09:20, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Andy Gray reports it fixed, and it does look better. Hurrah! I'm not convinced that clicking on the grid reference doesn't need some work - in Google maps the marker is called 'United Kingdom', and in Bing '{titlee}'...--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 16:00, 4 September 2013 (UTC)


The more I look at this the odder it seems. Am I missing something? Why not start at the top with Scheduled ancient monuments? Those are in a very parlous state on WP. Go look at Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Lincolnshire to see what I mean. I cant find any List of scheduled... on the site. It means things like or are ignored..--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 03:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem is many scheduled monuments are earthworks. There are 19,717 of them in England, Scotland, and Wales (the Act of Parliament does not apply to Northern Ireland) and are considered nationally important. Structures can be both scheduled and listed. However, where a site is just scheduled it is often because there are no substantial above-ground remains, for example Burrough Hill and Castleshaw Roman fort. I would really like to see these photographed, but for the first year we decided to focus on listed buildings. There are also issues of making sure people don't accidentally trespass.
During the planning stage we did consider scheduled monuments. It's possible we may include them next year. Would you be interested in joining the planning for next year's WLM? A competition covering listed buildings and scheduled monuments could work. However, the lists for scheduled monuments are in poor condition. The Welsh lists are being created by User:RobinLeicester who is doing fantastic work, but in England such lists are a rarity (I think we have less than ten, although several are actually Featured Lists). Having a lot of new lists on Wikipedia for scheduled monuments would be a good outcome. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
I've been to Burrough Hill. It is amazing.
I'd not mind being part of a project, as for example when I helped straighten out en:wikipedia:List of monastic houses in Lincolnshire ; I like the researching. - but I could not commit time to creating such a thing.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 16:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Hopefully we'll have a script which can do most of the heavy listing of creating the lists. Scheduled monuments will be kept in mind when thinking about WLM 2014. There's potentially some really interesting stuff that could be done. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 13:44, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

commonscat broken?[edit]

The 'commonscat' template in the last column used to make a 'click here for more pictures' under the photo. That seems to have stopped working. There have been redirects.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 09:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

It was deleted on purpose but without obvious sign of consensus. I've asked about it on Wikipedia. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:25, 12 November 2013 (UTC)