User talk:Bdcousineau/Archives 6

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

Next moves[edit]

WiR, you are right and I agree; really the photographs are the most usefulness to Commons. I will work over the next week to see what I can do to speed up the ARC ID # assignment for the 100 photos I uploaded in the fall. We can then make all the templates and licensing match accross all Ford uploads to date. There are some groups of docs it would be nice to donate, tho.

However, the Ford Staff wants to replace {{NARA-image}} with {{GFPLM-image-ARC}}. Is this reasonable? If we do it here, we'll have to stay consistant and do it across all NARA Presidential Libraries photos as we grow the project, effectivley dismantling portions of NARA's project. I can't foresee if NARA'll restart the project, most likely they will not tell us. This is the reason i left {{NARA-image}} in place earlier when I had those files adjusted. I could go either way - maybe it's sufficient to put in a link to the Ford Digital Library site? Trying to think of the long term. Bdcousineau (talk) 21:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

There should be one sourcing template for each of the presidential libraries, because that is how NARA divides some of its content. See National Archives and Records Administration#Presidential libraries. That also would be consistent with Wikipedia's category w:Category:Presidential libraries. Lists, categories, and templates should justify each other. Templates for the remainder of NARAs items should follow the structure listed at w:Category:National Archives and Records Administration.

Ultimately, the issue of sourcing answers the question of where the Commons editor obtained the actual image uploaded into Commons. If the Commons editor obtained an image from flickr.com, which was obtained from the Ford Library, the source is flickr.com, not the Ford Library. If the Commons editor obtained the image from the Ford Library website, then the GFPLM-image-ARC template should be used as a source template. If the Commons editor obtained the image from NARA, then the NARA-omage template should be used as a source template, even if the Ford Library has ultimate NARA control over the image. When used to identify the source (such as here), {{NARA-image}} should be replaced with {{GFPLM-image-ARC}} only where it is clear that the Commons editor obtained the image from the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum. You can't make such a decision by a bot and it would have to be on an individual basis. However, the {{NARA-image}} sometimes is used as merely a secondary source of information rather than a source of the image. In that case, a bot probably could be used to replace {{NARA-image}} with {{GFPLM-image-ARC}}. You can get a more definitive answer by posting a request at Commons:Bots/Requests.

Commons images need only two things - a license and source information - to establish that an image is in fact free. Everything else is secondary to that and we seem to be spending a lot of time on secondary issues from Commons perspective. We all want to make this partnership work, so we are trying to be accomodating.

Neither NARA-image nor Template:GFPLM-image-ARC actually read as a sourcing template. They seem more of a third type of template, something like an additional information template. {{Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum-cooperation}} is another template, but seems to have sudo-licensing, sourcing, and information aspects, some of which overlaps information already provided in {{Information}} and licensing provided in the additional {{PD-USGov}} licensing template, for which we are looking to create User:Bdcousineau/PD-USGov-PresLib. Commons works towards seeking a common approach to all images in Commons. Commons is not NARA and if the NARA images are not treated as all other images in Commons, that upsets the common approach to all Commons images and makes it taxing on editors at Commons. It seems that there is frustration on both sides, as the Ford staff additionally has to deal with ARC issues now being raised by copying the images into Commons as well as other concerns. As long as we all continue to work at this together, things will work out. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 16:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
This was very helpful. I'm gonna repeat it back to make sure I got it.
"one sourcing template for each of the presidential libraries", and you mean each PresLib will get their own {{RR-image-ARC}} or {{FDR-image}} right, depending if that is where the upload is sourced from. I'm guessing in the long term, most uploads will be via ARC, since few PresLib websites hold as many docs as the Ford's.
Second paragraph ~digitized PresLib images and documents exist in three places at once: online at ARC, OPA (ARC's replacement 'database') and on individual PresLib websites. In 90% of cases, the physical holding (the actual contact sheets, artifacts, negatives, paper materials) live at the remote repositories (PresLibs, NARA Records Centers around the country) the remaining 10 % are the high value marerials - treaties, Nixon's Resignation letter are two examples - located in DC. If I understand this, the source templating refers to the upload source, not the physical source. For materials uploaded/source templated by NARA, I've had the Ford Lib location tag inserted. And that needs to be the end of the story, right? I will report this back to the Ford Staff who wanted {{GFPLM-image-ARC}} to replace {{NARA-image}} on images uploaded by NARA. I take the blame for that - I hadn't known that template=upload source. I plainly thought template=physical source.
Third para~ it's clear that we should stick with {{PD-USGov}} since as you figured out we don't actually make anything. However we should designate somehow that whoever photographs the 3-d objects gave up their copyright, if they are not a US gov employee. The copyright guys over on en were firm on that.
Finally~ we'll use {{Information}} or {{Artwork}} inserting {{GFPLM-image}} or {{GFPLM-image-ARC}} and the correct location tag, as well as {{Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum-cooperation}}. Have I gotten it right?
Thanks for keeping this on track! Bdcousineau (talk) 22:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Presidential libraries source template is only needed if a commons editor gets the image from that library and puts it into Commons. The source templating refers to the upload source because images can be copied and be in multiple physical sources. There's one upload source, the rest are merely identified locations from where copies of the image can be obtained. For 3d objects, there are at least two copyrights, the copyright to the photo and to the 3-D image in the photo. Both gotta be free license for commons. If you want to blow your mind, check out the licensing I did for File:Wikipedia Main Page screenshot 7 December 2012 0807 UTC.png - nine licenses. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 05:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

1[edit]

It'd be useful to create a central table of everything to transfer to the commons. I've started it at Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum/Transfer, feel free to fill it out. I'm unclear as to what's next without the dbs.Smallman12q (talk) 01:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The table is a good plan. Look for some input in the next few days, as I get it organized. At this point, uploads can only be from scraping ARC - and that's a lot of work! Until the db's get released, this part of the project might be on hold. The table can be a guide for when the db's are released.
The director is at the Museum tmw - perhaps there will be time to continue the discussions from last week, letting her know about the Commons position on source templating (from Uzma Gamal's recent explanation). However, actual decisions are by made in a team-setting, not by directive, so it's unlikely anything will change tomorrow. The next team meeting is scheduled for Feb. 1.
If the prize is bringing NARA/PresLibs back to Commons in a significant way, maybe the wisest course of action for now is .... no action. Let the Ford staff get to know the WiR. He has a task list (collecting Ford articles, linking, assessing, some basic things) to work on. These tasks are wins that he can report on; and the Ford staff can learn about Wikipedia, etc. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
No rush. I'll wait for dbs rather than scrape ARC. In the mean time, if you could get a really good quality, hi-res picture, with good lighting of the red and white WIN button, I could nominate for w:Wikipedia:Featured pictures and it could appear on the enwiki main page under "Today's featured picture". Featured pics need to meet this criteria: w:Wikipedia:Featured_picture_criteria. Other than that...I'll wait for dbs.Smallman12q (talk) 05:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
The raw WIN button is here. According to her supervisor, this file was one of our student photographer's first attempts at artifact photography, so it may/may not meet "Today's featured picture" criteria. The student is returning to continue artifact photography Feb. 4, and will re-take the button if needed to meet the criteria. Perhaps Fallschirmjäger at the Wikipedia graphics lab would be willing to correct minor technical issues. We/Ford Museum can provide additional "descriptive, informative and complete file description" if missing.
By late Spring, the Ford Museum Collections Department is hoping to have an additional 1500-2500 artifact images to donate to Commons. Currently, work is being done to clean up the digital files and standardize the descriptions. The images will be ready just in time to propose a second internship for the WiR. Bdcousineau (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
The artifact photos are (at this writing) exempt from needing an ARC ID; also the Collections Dept. will write/release a database to Wikimedia specifications for easy upload. That Dept. is interested in forging a strong active partnership with Commons. The Manager will be querying the other Collections Managers in PresLibs about their plans to photograph their collections, and will also recommend partnering with Wikimedia/Commons. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:25, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Well that's a plus. Is there a timeline as to when it'll be made available? For Feature pictures on the enwiki, the quality has to be really really good. You can see past images at w:Wikipedia:Featured pictures..michael can explain how it works. Also, don't know if you saw ityet, but uzma wrote w:Elaine Didier and it'll have a DYK at w:Template:Did you know nominations/Elaine Didier. Smallman12q (talk) 17:27, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there a different WIN button or badge that you would like to use? Otherwise, the photographer will re-do that one in a way that showcases her improved skills. For the next 10 days, we are busy with a new exhibit installation. After that, I'll sit with the Collections Dept. and develop a timeline. Also he wants to make a db that is useful to you, so we'll need to know what that looks like. Uzma had sent me the article w:Elaine Didier to forward to her for additional work. I still haven't heard back from her. Bdcousineau (talk) 22:15, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Featured pics are supposed to be iconic illustrations of a topic. Retake File:"WIN"_button.JPG (this may be the simplest featured pic) and File:"WIN"sign.JPG which is more illustrative. If a gradient background is used, it should be smooth. Regarding the database, it may be possible for you guys to upload the stuff yourselves, depending on the guy's technical competency. Other than that, it'd be best to sort out the requirements via email with the guy....or do you have multiple people for the collections dept?Smallman12q (talk) 00:09, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
We will def. look into doing an upload ourselves. Let's reconnect about this in a couple of weeks. It's just one guy BTW. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia main page article[edit]

w:We Can Do It! is scheduled to appear on the enwiki front page on Feb 15th. You should have someone at NARA look it over. It will get a lot of traffic.Smallman12q (talk) 16:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

ok, I will find an appropriate NARA staffer. Bdcousineau (talk) 22:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
In the aftermath of the media wave, there are new hierarchical procedures in place. I really appreciate the heads-up, but the Ford project will be better served if I let this one go. Sorry. Perhaps if another comes up in the future. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

WiR at the Ford Library[edit]

Many Wikipedians made this happen http://www.ur.umich.edu/update/archives/130115/wir. Great work! Bdcousineau (talk) 21:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

And on mlive.com http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/01/president_gerald_r_ford_librar.html#incart_river_default - Great pr for the Wiki projects. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:42, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

A Ford FPC here on Commons![edit]

I've just nominated the photograph File:Gerald Ford hearing2.jpg for Featured Picture status here on Commons (it is already a Featured Picture on English Wikipedia). Feel free to check it out and see how it does! Michael Barera (talk) 19:02, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Here's hoping! I will check its progress. Bdcousineau (talk) 21:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Chronicle of Higher Education[edit]

http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/michigan-student-is-first-wikipedian-in-residence-at-a-presidential-library/41681

This is interesting as it highlights (both in the article and esp. in the comments below) the on-going tensions inside academia about Wikipedia and its contributions.

This article may help the project regain momentum. Bdcousineau (talk) 01:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

New York Times[edit]

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/18/gerald-ford-library-hires-wikipedian-in-residence/

This has exceeded expectations. Great exposure for all the Wiki projects. Also reached in London and Berlin. Be bold! Bdcousineau (talk) 15:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum/Transfer[edit]

I've updated Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum/Transfer. I'm still unclear as to how many actual photos have ARC ID#'s, but the new groups in the table have ARC ID #'s. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

2012 Picture of the Year contest now open[edit]

Bdcousineau, I know that this is your first opportunity to vote in the Picture of the Year contest (yes, I did check it first just to make sure!), so I thought that you might like to learn a little more and maybe vote for your favorite images. Below is the standard introductory message that everyone who voted last year got (so it should be able to answer your questions!). Michael Barera (talk) 21:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Michael. I will vote! I am working on an email to send the the Archives staff about standardizing the templates. I hope to get it out tomorrow, but also super busy installing new museum exhibit. I'll check in again by Friday. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

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

Wikimedia blog post and other stuff[edit]

  • The project is mentioned on the Wikimedia blog.
  • You should start a news page at Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum/Press.
  • w:Wikivoyage is up so Michael should add a page for the museum and library.
  • For a lot of the files, the arc # is the pdf number...but not always. Also the descriptions for the files are lousy...if arc has a better desc, I should it add in. Let me know when you get a hold of the collections guy.
  • Until then...I'll be doing other uploads (did Commons:Batch_uploading/AELG). Future file uploads should be much faster (10+/minute).

Smallman12q (talk) 01:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes! The project got a lot of play recently, including the Wikipedia FB page. I watched it all weekend. The NYTimes piece went viral. Early Sunday morning, the Associated Press wrote a story - I tracked that as it emerged on almost every TV news market website in the country. I still need to figure out how to harvest the twitter feeds.
I will start that news page this weekend - still installing exhibit.
I'll ask WiR to do the w:Wikivoyage entry.
When we are ready to do more uploads/standardize the template, robust metadata and complete descriptions will be available for you, or it's just not worth doing.
I see Collections Guy daily, but we are busy with exhibit installation. Thanks for checking in. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

project development[edit]

I've been tasked by NARA (really I volunteered) to develop a plan to get NARA as an whole back on track with Wikimedia/Commons. This is a big step forward. I will need help from the Wikipedia side as I develop this. I'll post to this page. Bdcousineau (talk) 15:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

That's a plus...does that mean we get dbs?Smallman12q (talk) 00:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm working towards it. The level of publicity caused several big issues to come up; we are still de-tangling. As of this time/date the project has not been taken down. Initial hesitations expressed by staff still stand, perhaps more so, given much of the publicity was misleading.
No db's in the near future; are we anywhere with the template standardization? I've lost track, apologies, given the tense situation. Once we show standardized templating across current project materials, the likelihood of new db release increases.
On the plus side, another PresLibs contacted us wanting info about a WiR of their own. The current internship arrangement may become a template for other PresLibs. - I provided materials to DC. One branch in DC is determining if beginning a Wikimedia project must be through an application/approval process via the Social Media area (sorry, Uzma). Another branch of NARA is meeting soon to determine the course of this project and setting policy - let's hope they talk. Whether or not the "plan for NARA" referenced above will be considered/taken seriously, is anyone's guess. Bdcousineau (talk) 22:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Elaine Didier on the mainpage right now![edit]

Pssst, your boss is on the Wikipedia mainpage right now, complete with a photo! How cool is that? Be sure to thank Uzma Gamal again! Michael Barera (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I've archived a copy at http://www.webcitation.org/6DtklUCZ7 .Smallman12q (talk) 00:49, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I've received some edit suggestions, but hesitate to do them because of COI - she is my boss. I will contact Uzma Gamal for assistance. Bdcousineau (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Write up for our edit-a-thon[edit]

I've now completed a rough draft of a write up for our edit-a-thon. Instead of doing a traditional document, I've elected to create a Wikipedia page complete with relevant images and links to other pages of interest, including examples from past edit-a-thons. It is currently in my sandbox on Wikipedia. It is largely based off of Wikipedia's "how to" page for edit-a-thons, which can be found here, but it has been adapted and molded to fit our situation. Let me know what you think: thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 16:44, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

This is excellent work. Lots of great details and easy to understand steps. For the Ford Staff, however, we have to keep in mind that none/few of them them have user accounts, so you will also have to create a "traditional document", which we can present at the next Working Group meeting, which I believe is next Friday...
...at this meeting I also hope to report that we have standardized the templates on the test batch of docs uploaded in the fall. I will look into this over the weekend, and see where we are. I'll create a meeting agenda and send to you on Tuesday - on Wednesday I'll send out to the Ford Working Group.
I think it's time for you turn in your first "bi-weekly report to the UMSI Career Devl. Office". If you need clarification, let me know, I'll contact the PEP Office for a sample.
Hope you got my email from this am. Have a great weekend! Bdcousineau (talk) 17:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I just spoke with Dr. Didier, and it looks like the edit-a-thon will be on Thursday, February 7th from 5-8pm (I'm also working on getting into contact with the Michigan Wikipedians so that it works for all of us, or at least as many of us as possible). I'll go ahead and create a word document version of the edit-a-thon page and e-mail it to you as soon as I have access to e-mail again (Gmail seems to be blocked on NARA's wi-fi network, which also means I haven't seen your e-mail this morning). OK, regarding the "bi-weekly report to the UMSI Career Devl. Office", is this different from the regular reflections and other submissions I'm doing for my PEP internship via Symplicity? If it is, it would be great if you can fill me in with a sample. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 17:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
That seems RATHER SOON!!! let me see what she's thinking....do you need me to re-send via your umich account? I will do so now Bdcousineau (talk) 17:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Actually, the Michigan Wikipedians want it sooner, because we would like to use it in lieu of a mass meeting. Do you think there is a problem with that? Michael Barera (talk) 18:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Nope - if it's ok with you and her, I'm ok too! thanks for clearing that up. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Cool: actually, the umich accounts just migrated to Google this past year, so I can't log onto that either: sorry. Good news, though: I've just created a document version of the page on our edit-a-thon, and as soon as I get back to my apartment I'll e-mail it too you. I've also started working on an article with an eye on DYK (it is currently at the bottom of my sandbox), but I'm going to run out of time on it here at the Library today. If I have time, I'll work on it over the weekend, but if not I'll get back to it next week. Take care and have a good weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 18:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
PS: where can I get an updated copy of the "schedule and tasks" document you made for me? I noticed that Dr. Didier had a revised version with her as she was speaking to me today, and I'm still working off an old one. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 18:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum/Standardize[edit]

I've created Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum/Standardize. I'll handle getting the ARC ID's where missing. Smallman12q do you have time to tackle the first group on the list? I believe that the pdf # is the Arc ID #. The new wording to be used for {{GFPLM-image-ARC}} is in place. If you could let me know your availability and then send me a sample page, that would be helpful. Maha gratitude!

There is no longer any guarantee completing this task will move us closer to db release. There are several possible outcomes from last weeks's media event:

  • NARA says "thanks, we'll take it from here"
  • NARA decides that PresLibs may do Wikimedia projects, but no uploads
  • FordStaff decides to wait til NARA decides/writes a policy

Artifact image uploads/db's will remain possible, I think. What a mess! Bdcousineau (talk) 14:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll do it sometime this week. I'm going to work on Commons:Batch uploading/ECGPedia first. Smallman12q (talk) 00:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I appreicate whatever you can do! Bdcousineau (talk) 02:02, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm gonna get to this, this weekend. So is the collections dude available?Smallman12q (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks - these changes will help open the doors to further uploads....I hope. Collections dude always available and loves email! =P the photo-tech starts next week, I'll have her re-do the WIN button as requested. Working on plans to put the artifacts images onto our website prior to donating to Commons. I have blocks of time now thru April. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
I've changed {{GFPLM-image-full}} so it will support the "pdfscanid" and "arcid" paramaters as arcid...until I replace arcid in the files (someday). No scan/arcid and it makes no mention of the identifier in the template. You can see what it looks like at File:Gerald Ford Papers- Final Issues for Decision, Army Corps of Engineers- 11-21-75 - Defense, Intelligence (4)(Gerald Ford Library)(6596188).pdf. Could you e-mail the guy's email at Special:EmailUser/Smallman12q. For the images, I'm looking for a good shot of the WIN button and WIN sign.Smallman12q (talk) 22:43, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Great!. The only correction the Ford Staff will have is to replace "Record Group" with "Collection", or delete "Record Group" altogether. In your sample:"Record group: White House Special Files Unit Presidential Files, 1974-1977. I know we attempted to take of this months ago. I apologize for the endless fiddling - in today's mtg there was noticeable staff involvement/ownership. With the above change/new sample I'll email around on Monday, and perhaps this week the rest of the docs can be completed.
We are planning the WIN re-shoots first thing on Monday.
Done. He is looking forward to working with you. Of the first 1000 images about 300 are done, interns busy prepping the rest. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:39, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Changed text to Collection.Smallman12q (talk) 02:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

New[edit]

When and how do we want to do the work regarding the source field and the ARC template? Just wondering... Michael Barera (talk) 18:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

When - ASAP. Getting these files updated according to the new standard must be done before we can suggest moving forward on anything else. How - Smallman has written (see above) he'll take care of the documents. I'll ask if he has the time/willingness to make these other changes, even though he made the first round of changes and may not be interested in further adjustments (totally understandable). We'll have to find another Wikipedian if he is not interested. Plan C, if you can get me into the template, I can do it by hand. Whew, so glad you were there today. I will do a project status report to this page too, over the weekend. Bdcousineau (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
OK, that sounds good: perhaps I can do a mock-up of how I envision the source field will look? Would that be helpful for you? Michael Barera (talk) 18:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Perfect! D'ya think this is possible to do by hand? Bdcousineau (talk) 19:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
It will take a while, but I think it can be done, at least for the photographs. Also, my time at the Library today is quickly coming to an end, so you can just keep in touch with me over the weekend. I should have some free time this weekend (unlike last weekend, haha!), and if I'm not responding just drop me a line on my talk page. Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 19:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
ok! chat with you soon, have a great weekend! Bdcousineau (talk) 19:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
OK, I can't get it to work as a mock-up right now because of the way the source parameter is currently written in the template, but here is my idea:
|source= [http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/images/avproj/pop-ups/A1813-05.html A1813-05]
Which will look like this in the source field: A1813-05. Let me know what you think: thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 19:06, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I can get that. That will work! We may want to consider adding: Gerald R. Ford Library Digital Library A1813-05. But is there way to get into the parameters of the template for me to update them all by hand? I've never been able to before...Bdcousineau (talk) 19:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

We're going to have to make a change to the template itself. I'm curious if we might be able to code it so that, if the source field is left blank, it would still say "Gerald R. Ford Library/Museum" as it currently does (essentially, the way "permission/see below" used to work on Commons and still does work on English Wikipedia when the field is left blank). I've never tried doing that before, though, so we may need to ask Smallman12q. If we can get it to work, however, the upside is we don't have to worry about getting it done overnight because the source field won't just "break" when we edit the template. I hope that this makes sense. Michael Barera (talk) 21:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure I fully understand. Could you elaborate/provide an example?Smallman12q (talk) 22:44, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, you lost me too! Bdcousineau (talk) 00:43, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Maybe I don't understand either, but is their a way to make a "fall back" option for the source field in {{GFPLM-image-full}}, so that if it is blank or missing it says "Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum" but if it has content (ie, a link to the Ford Digital Library source of the image) it will show that (much more useful) content instead? I was thinking about the "permission" field on English Wikipedia images, which can display whatever you put into it if you do put something into it, but then it also falls back to "See below" if there is nothing in it. I think this would make the process of adding links to the Ford Digital Library sources much easier and less stressful. Michael Barera (talk) 01:23, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Let's keep in mind that any template change other than what they are expecting has to get approved by the Staff working group, ...since we only meet once a month, this brings us to March for the group to even discuss this improvement. I'm aiming to get the docs and these 300 photos standardized by then (or close enough to being done that the group might be comfortable considering their next undertaking). Just my 2 cents, cuz I still can't visualize this. Also, for any of these and future photo files the source parameter will always have a link to a Ford website url. Bdcousineau (talk) 03:11, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
-I've fixed it per Mike's request. The pseudo-code would be:

Putt's Law

Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand.

if sourceparam has a value then
    use sourceparam
else
    use "Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum"

I've also sent an e-mail to Jamie...hopefully he'll be of help. We're still trying to work through w:Putt's law which is like this Dilbert strip and then of course the team management aspect. So what's next.Smallman12q (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that looks like Python! Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 20:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
It's your regular w:conditional (computer programming). The template markup is an in-lined version of everything making it more difficult for beginners.Smallman12q (talk) 02:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Drilling down from w:conditional (computer programming), it's a pleasure to find roles defined - a newbie doesNotUnderstand: and many kind editors intercede. hehe. Bdcousineau (talk) 15:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Fun gun[edit]

New on our website - will donate to Commons on Monday Revolver Sent to Uzma, might be of interest. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)