@Arne and experts: We can overwrite a file with GWToolset provided no other user has edited the file. Perhaps experts are aware of further options with GWT for overwriting files.
Examples: 1. GWToolset overwriting with a different resolution succeeded for
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_-_RMNH...
checking the box "Reload media from URL" down the page. The new resolution is considered a new version. (Here a downgrade as a test.) The old version remains available.
2. GWToolset overwriting failed for
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_-
_RMNH.MOL.216649_-_Mitra_aurantia_aurantia_%28Gmelin,_1791%29_-_Mitrida e_-_Mollusc_shell.jpeg
with or without that box checked because
"A media file with the identical title "File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.MOL.216649 - Mitra aurantia aurantia (Gmelin, 1791) - Mitridae - Mollusc shell.jpeg" already exists in the wiki. It was edited or created by someone other than you"
- another user had edited the categories.
Best regards, hans muller https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hansmuller
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 12:39 pm schreef Arne Wossink:
@Hans,
Thanks for the input so far. Please keep me updated on that overwrite. If anything, it is once again a reminder that these things must be done right the first time around ;)
Best,
Arne Wossink
Projectleider / Project Lead Wikimedia Nederland
Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 (di, wo, do)
*Postadres*: * Bezoekadres:* Postbus 167 Mariaplaats 3 3500 AD Utrecht Utrecht
2015-12-17 12:34 GMT+01:00 Hans Muller j.m.muller@hccnet.nl:
We're talking about
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Media_contributed_by_Museum _Catharijneconvent
? Main uploader there was HuskyBot i think.
I made a mistake some months a go while uploading photographs of dead bird skins for Naturalis with GWToolset with various views for the same specimen uploaded under the same filename. So that is like uploading a higher resolution, an image with a different checksum under the same name. You see the result here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_- _RMNH.AVES.101712_-_Corvus_enca_compilator_Richmond,_1903_-_Corvidae_-_ bird_skin_specimen.jpeg
(scroll down) Later uploads under the same filename by GWToolset were accepted as new versions. Caveat: the uploader was the same user for these various "versions".
Best regards, hansmuller
PS At the end of my present batch (18/12 morning?) GWToolset is requested to overwrite medium resolution
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_- _RMNH.MOL.216649_-_Mitra_aurantia_aurantia_%28Gmelin,_1791%29_-_Mitrida e_-_Mollusc_shell.jpeg
with large, so we'll see. I can put up a test image to test if another GWToolset user can overwrite it (?). I don't think so, this might be Arnes problem.
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 11:30 am schreef Jesse de Vos:
Hi Arne, I actually don't think this can be done. It is an action in which an existing file on Commons must be updated, this is not supported by the toolset. We had a similar issue with higher res. Video files. We decided to stick with the current resolution. Alternatively, a volunteer could do this update using a script. Best, Jesse
verzonden vanaf mijn smartphone|sent from my smart phone Op 17 dec. 2015 11:03 schreef "Hans Muller" j.m.muller@hccnet.nl:
Dear Arne,
Yes, this is a modest batch that can be done with the GW toolset, most easily if the images each have a (temporary) individual URL and so are accessible on the internet.
Groeten, hans muller
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 10:57 am schreef Arne Wossink:
Hi all,
Museum Catharijneconvent has approached us that they would like to make higher-resolution versions available of images that are already available on Commons. Around 800-1500 images are involved.
Is this something that can be handled by the GW toolset, or are there better ways to do this?
Best,
Arne Wossink
Projectleider / Project Lead Wikimedia Nederland
Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505
*Postadres*: * Bezoekadres:* Postbus 167 Mariaplaats 3 3500 AD Utrecht Utrecht _______________________________________________ Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
This is a good option for how GWT should handle "upgrades". Where other volunteers have edited it makes sense to tidy these up manually or by on-project negotiation.
As an example, many of the 100,000 Wellcome images I uploaded were plate illustrations, and I did go through a process of uploading higher resolution images after initial batch testing. Some users prefer to crop off the borders before they are used on Wikipedia or elsewhere, and so there were instances where I had to make a judgement call on whether to upload under new file names after such crops were created. Similarly on a couple of my projects I have uploaded both jpeg files and TIFF equivalents, sometimes at higher resolution or without the compression degradation that jpeg causes; though there have been several discussions about whether we should delete the jpegs as duplicates we have always ended up keeping both formats.
With these sorts of questions, although Commons has some relevant guidelines for overwriting files and handling duplicates, it's a good idea for very large upload projects to maintain its own guidelines + casebook on an on-wiki project page where interested volunteers can contribute views and ideas for how to manage housekeeping issues or exceptional cases. None of this, I believe, can be simply resolved with one shared GLAM manual with one way of working.
Fae
On 18 December 2015 at 10:06, Hans Muller j.m.muller@hccnet.nl wrote:
@Arne and experts: We can overwrite a file with GWToolset provided no other user has edited the file. Perhaps experts are aware of further options with GWT for overwriting files.
Examples:
GWToolset overwriting with a different resolution succeeded for
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_-_RMNH...
checking the box "Reload media from URL" down the page. The new resolution is considered a new version. (Here a downgrade as a test.) The old version remains available.
GWToolset overwriting failed for
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_-
_RMNH.MOL.216649_-_Mitra_aurantia_aurantia_%28Gmelin,_1791%29_-_Mitrida e_-_Mollusc_shell.jpeg
with or without that box checked because
"A media file with the identical title "File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.MOL.216649 - Mitra aurantia aurantia (Gmelin, 1791) - Mitridae - Mollusc shell.jpeg" already exists in the wiki. It was edited or created by someone other than you"
- another user had edited the categories.
Best regards, hans muller https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hansmuller
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 12:39 pm schreef Arne Wossink:
@Hans,
Thanks for the input so far. Please keep me updated on that overwrite. If anything, it is once again a reminder that these things must be done right the first time around ;)
Best,
Arne Wossink
Projectleider / Project Lead Wikimedia Nederland
Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 (di, wo, do)
*Postadres*: * Bezoekadres:* Postbus 167 Mariaplaats 3 3500 AD Utrecht Utrecht
2015-12-17 12:34 GMT+01:00 Hans Muller j.m.muller@hccnet.nl:
We're talking about
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Media_contributed_by_Museum _Catharijneconvent
? Main uploader there was HuskyBot i think.
I made a mistake some months a go while uploading photographs of dead bird skins for Naturalis with GWToolset with various views for the same specimen uploaded under the same filename. So that is like uploading a higher resolution, an image with a different checksum under the same name. You see the result here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_- _RMNH.AVES.101712_-_Corvus_enca_compilator_Richmond,_1903_-_Corvidae_-_ bird_skin_specimen.jpeg
(scroll down) Later uploads under the same filename by GWToolset were accepted as new versions. Caveat: the uploader was the same user for these various "versions".
Best regards, hansmuller
PS At the end of my present batch (18/12 morning?) GWToolset is requested to overwrite medium resolution
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_- _RMNH.MOL.216649_-_Mitra_aurantia_aurantia_%28Gmelin,_1791%29_-_Mitrida e_-_Mollusc_shell.jpeg
with large, so we'll see. I can put up a test image to test if another GWToolset user can overwrite it (?). I don't think so, this might be Arnes problem.
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 11:30 am schreef Jesse de Vos:
Hi Arne, I actually don't think this can be done. It is an action in which an existing file on Commons must be updated, this is not supported by the toolset. We had a similar issue with higher res. Video files. We decided to stick with the current resolution. Alternatively, a volunteer could do this update using a script. Best, Jesse
verzonden vanaf mijn smartphone|sent from my smart phone Op 17 dec. 2015 11:03 schreef "Hans Muller" j.m.muller@hccnet.nl:
Dear Arne,
Yes, this is a modest batch that can be done with the GW toolset, most easily if the images each have a (temporary) individual URL and so are accessible on the internet.
Groeten, hans muller
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 10:57 am schreef Arne Wossink:
Hi all,
Museum Catharijneconvent has approached us that they would like to make higher-resolution versions available of images that are already available on Commons. Around 800-1500 images are involved.
Is this something that can be handled by the GW toolset, or are there better ways to do this?
Best,
Arne Wossink
Projectleider / Project Lead Wikimedia Nederland
Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505
*Postadres*: * Bezoekadres:* Postbus 167 Mariaplaats 3 3500 AD Utrecht Utrecht _______________________________________________ Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Ideally it should differentiate between editing the file and editing the categories of the file.
If the upload is simply a better version of the same thing then very few categories will change.
On 18 Dec 2015, at 11:35, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
This is a good option for how GWT should handle "upgrades". Where other volunteers have edited it makes sense to tidy these up manually or by on-project negotiation.
As an example, many of the 100,000 Wellcome images I uploaded were plate illustrations, and I did go through a process of uploading higher resolution images after initial batch testing. Some users prefer to crop off the borders before they are used on Wikipedia or elsewhere, and so there were instances where I had to make a judgement call on whether to upload under new file names after such crops were created. Similarly on a couple of my projects I have uploaded both jpeg files and TIFF equivalents, sometimes at higher resolution or without the compression degradation that jpeg causes; though there have been several discussions about whether we should delete the jpegs as duplicates we have always ended up keeping both formats.
With these sorts of questions, although Commons has some relevant guidelines for overwriting files and handling duplicates, it's a good idea for very large upload projects to maintain its own guidelines + casebook on an on-wiki project page where interested volunteers can contribute views and ideas for how to manage housekeeping issues or exceptional cases. None of this, I believe, can be simply resolved with one shared GLAM manual with one way of working.
Fae
On 18 December 2015 at 10:06, Hans Muller j.m.muller@hccnet.nl wrote: @Arne and experts: We can overwrite a file with GWToolset provided no other user has edited the file. Perhaps experts are aware of further options with GWT for overwriting files.
Examples:
- GWToolset overwriting with a different resolution succeeded for
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_-_RMNH...
checking the box "Reload media from URL" down the page. The new resolution is considered a new version. (Here a downgrade as a test.) The old version remains available.
- GWToolset overwriting failed for
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_-
_RMNH.MOL.216649_-_Mitra_aurantia_aurantia_%28Gmelin,_1791%29_-_Mitrida e_-_Mollusc_shell.jpeg
with or without that box checked because
"A media file with the identical title "File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.MOL.216649 - Mitra aurantia aurantia (Gmelin, 1791) - Mitridae - Mollusc shell.jpeg" already exists in the wiki. It was edited or created by someone other than you"
- another user had edited the categories.
Best regards, hans muller https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hansmuller
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 12:39 pm schreef Arne Wossink:
@Hans,
Thanks for the input so far. Please keep me updated on that overwrite. If anything, it is once again a reminder that these things must be done right the first time around ;)
Best,
Arne Wossink
Projectleider / Project Lead Wikimedia Nederland
Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 (di, wo, do)
*Postadres*: * Bezoekadres:* Postbus 167 Mariaplaats 3 3500 AD Utrecht Utrecht
2015-12-17 12:34 GMT+01:00 Hans Muller j.m.muller@hccnet.nl:
We're talking about
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Media_contributed_by_Museum _Catharijneconvent
? Main uploader there was HuskyBot i think.
I made a mistake some months a go while uploading photographs of dead bird skins for Naturalis with GWToolset with various views for the same specimen uploaded under the same filename. So that is like uploading a higher resolution, an image with a different checksum under the same name. You see the result here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_- _RMNH.AVES.101712_-_Corvus_enca_compilator_Richmond,_1903_-_Corvidae_-_ bird_skin_specimen.jpeg
(scroll down) Later uploads under the same filename by GWToolset were accepted as new versions. Caveat: the uploader was the same user for these various "versions".
Best regards, hansmuller
PS At the end of my present batch (18/12 morning?) GWToolset is requested to overwrite medium resolution
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center_- _RMNH.MOL.216649_-_Mitra_aurantia_aurantia_%28Gmelin,_1791%29_-_Mitrida e_-_Mollusc_shell.jpeg
with large, so we'll see. I can put up a test image to test if another GWToolset user can overwrite it (?). I don't think so, this might be Arnes problem.
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 11:30 am schreef Jesse de Vos:
Hi Arne, I actually don't think this can be done. It is an action in which an existing file on Commons must be updated, this is not supported by the toolset. We had a similar issue with higher res. Video files. We decided to stick with the current resolution. Alternatively, a volunteer could do this update using a script. Best, Jesse
verzonden vanaf mijn smartphone|sent from my smart phone Op 17 dec. 2015 11:03 schreef "Hans Muller" j.m.muller@hccnet.nl:
Dear Arne,
Yes, this is a modest batch that can be done with the GW toolset, most easily if the images each have a (temporary) individual URL and so are accessible on the internet.
Groeten, hans muller
Op Do, 17 december, 2015 10:57 am schreef Arne Wossink:
> Hi all, > > > > > Museum Catharijneconvent has approached us that they would like > to make higher-resolution versions available of images that are > already available on Commons. Around 800-1500 images are involved. > > > Is this something that can be handled by the GW toolset, or are > there better ways to do this? > > Best, > > > > > Arne Wossink > > > > > Projectleider / Project Lead Wikimedia Nederland > > > > > Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 > > > > > *Postadres*: * > Bezoekadres:* > Postbus 167 > Mariaplaats > 3 > 3500 AD Utrecht Utrecht > _______________________________________________ > Glamtools mailing list > Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
Glamtools mailing list Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools