What is the current en:wp feeling on moving free-content images that could be on Commons to Commons? Anyone know more or less?
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
What is the current en:wp feeling on moving free-content images that could be on Commons to Commons? Anyone know more or less?
It's uncontroversial to move images individually, people do it all the time. Mass moves seem like less of a good idea, unless you had a group that had already all been vetted for source and license. Commons doesn't have the resources to clean up after a move of, say, 100K images of which 5% are copyvios.
Stan
On 4/11/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
It's uncontroversial to move images individually, people do it all the time. Mass moves seem like less of a good idea, unless you had a group that had already all been vetted for source and license. Commons doesn't have the resources to clean up after a move of, say, 100K images of which 5% are copyvios.
It is such a painful, slow process to manually transwiki an image that I pray to god that someone will start doing mass moves.
I understand that we would not want to blindly move tens of thousands of images at a time, but surely there is a middle ground. Someone could make a tool whereby you could quickly just tick off a list of acceptable images, and the move would "happen"?
Steve
Steve Bennett wrote:
On 4/11/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
It's uncontroversial to move images individually, people do it all the time. Mass moves seem like less of a good idea, unless you had a group that had already all been vetted for source and license. Commons doesn't have the resources to clean up after a move of, say, 100K images of which 5% are copyvios.
It is such a painful, slow process to manually transwiki an image that I pray to god that someone will start doing mass moves.
I understand that we would not want to blindly move tens of thousands of images at a time, but surely there is a middle ground. Someone could make a tool whereby you could quickly just tick off a list of acceptable images, and the move would "happen"?
I think Magnus did something semi-automatic, can't find a ref to it now. Image history will be more meaningful once we have single-login, so I've hanging out waiting for that. It will go faster if en:'s free-license categories are scrubbed of copyvios, so there's plenty of work available now. :-)
Stan
On 4/11/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
I think Magnus did something semi-automatic, can't find a ref to it now.
Commons Helper: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/commonshelper.php
Image history will be more meaningful once we have single-login, so I've hanging out waiting for that. It will go faster if en:'s free-license categories are scrubbed of copyvios, so there's plenty of work available now. :-)
Real transwiki ([[Special:Export]] and [[Special:Import]]) for images would be a dream.
On 4/11/07, Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/11/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
I think Magnus did something semi-automatic, can't find a ref to it now.
Commons Helper: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/commonshelper.php
Ok, well I'll try that next time, but really this is something that should be fixed at the server level. Look at the example of one image I tagged: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kitesurfing_on_st_kilda_beaches.jpg
It's licensed as public domain. By an apparently respectable user. Perhaps we could have a list of users whose images we trust to accurately state their licences. Then transwiki all free images uploaded by those users at the server level.
Steve
Stephen Bain wrote:
On 4/11/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
I think Magnus did something semi-automatic, can't find a ref to it now.
Commons Helper: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/commonshelper.php
Image history will be more meaningful once we have single-login, so I've hanging out waiting for that. It will go faster if en:'s free-license categories are scrubbed of copyvios, so there's plenty of work available now. :-)
Real transwiki ([[Special:Export]] and [[Special:Import]]) for images would be a dream.
This should include access to what the changes were. A simple list of users with the date and time of the edits is useless.
Ec
It is such a painful, slow process to manually transwiki an image
that
I pray to god that someone will start doing mass moves.
You may be in luck: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/SieB ot --Mets501
Steve Bennett wrote:
On 4/11/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
It's uncontroversial to move images individually, people do it all the time. Mass moves seem like less of a good idea, unless you had a group that had already all been vetted for source and license. Commons doesn't have the resources to clean up after a move of, say, 100K images of which 5% are copyvios.
It is such a painful, slow process to manually transwiki an image that I pray to god that someone will start doing mass moves.
I understand that we would not want to blindly move tens of thousands of images at a time, but surely there is a middle ground. Someone could make a tool whereby you could quickly just tick off a list of acceptable images, and the move would "happen"?
In recent weeks I've been spending a fair chunk of time wandering around [[Category:Free use images]] and marking individual images with {{Move to Commons}}. Based on some other images I'd seen transwikied that seemed to have been done in a semi-automated manner I had assumed that there was a bot somewhere that followed up on such taggings, I hope I haven't been making a lot of manual effort instead.
I've mostly been tagging images that will be relatively easy to convert to SVG and that otherwise have no likely or obvious licencing problems, in case anyone was worried. I've been doing a little sanity-checking of licence tags in the process and moving some stuff to other licences where the current one seemed obviously wrong. It makes for a nice cleanup project that only a human editor can really do well. I can't really say what percentage of the free images are actually incorrectly tagged though since I've been picking a non-random sample.
On 4/10/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
I understand that we would not want to blindly move tens of thousands of images at a time, but surely there is a middle ground. Someone could make a tool whereby you could quickly just tick off a list of acceptable images, and the move would "happen"?
I would trust people if there was a tag {{move to commons}} or something (I know that is actually a tag) that needed to be added by a human. Once that was added a bot could do the transwiki. If you wanted one more level of assurance, perhaps an admin could validate these images and add them to some transwiki interface.
I haven't heard anyone oppose moving good images to the commons, it's just that actually doing it is *so slow*. Plus the tools we used to have don't work since the toolserver is now only for non-english wikipedias.
Judson [[:en:User:Cohesion]]
On 4/11/07, cohesion cohesion@sleepyhead.org wrote:
I would trust people if there was a tag {{move to commons}} or something (I know that is actually a tag) that needed to be added by a human. Once that was added a bot could do the transwiki. If you wanted one more level of assurance, perhaps an admin could validate these images and add them to some transwiki interface.
Frequently there are definable *groups* of images that should be transwikied. Like "all images uploaded by X in category Y". Even just adding the tags can be a lot of work. Eg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=20...
I haven't heard anyone oppose moving good images to the commons, it's just that actually doing it is *so slow*. Plus the tools we used to have don't work since the toolserver is now only for non-english wikipedias.
Yeah. Similar deal with renaming wrongly named images. I put a tag on an image once for it to be renamed and 6 months later it was still there. Just because the tools are bad.
Steve
On 10/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
What is the current en:wp feeling on moving free-content images that could be on Commons to Commons? Anyone know more or less?
- d.
Only hurdle is correct attribution to the creator (often the uploader) by linking to their en.wiki account. As long as attribution is correct (preferably the en.wiki image history would be copied across too), it is beneficial.
On 10/04/07, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
What is the current en:wp feeling on moving free-content images that could be on Commons to Commons? Anyone know more or less?
Only hurdle is correct attribution to the creator (often the uploader) by linking to their en.wiki account. As long as attribution is correct (preferably the en.wiki image history would be copied across too), it is beneficial.
What does one need to do a proper history-preserving transwiki? Is it possible from en:wp to commons?
- d.
On 11/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/04/07, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
What is the current en:wp feeling on moving free-content images that could be on Commons to Commons? Anyone know more or less?
Only hurdle is correct attribution to the creator (often the uploader) by linking to their en.wiki account. As long as attribution is correct (preferably the en.wiki image history would be copied across too), it is beneficial.
What does one need to do a proper history-preserving transwiki? Is it possible from en:wp to commons?
When I do it, I copy it manually into editable text field associated with image wiht header like ==English Wikipedia image history==.
On 4/10/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
What is the current en:wp feeling on moving free-content images that could be on Commons to Commons? Anyone know more or less?
- d.
Little actual opposition but there are more important things to worry about. largely a don't care attitude as far as I have been able to tell.
If we move away from the general community feelings and look at the issues involved the level of copyvios on en is a problem that prevents mass moves. Screw ups like this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Gas_syringe.jpg&dif...
are the problem with individual moves.
Until we have a way within the software (ok I can think of a work around method using bots) to really move images rather than copy and paste any mass moving project would be a mistake.
On 11/04/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
Until we have a way within the software (ok I can think of a work around method using bots) to really move images rather than copy and paste any mass moving project would be a mistake.
Transwikiing in software is theoretically possible - it's switching it on.
- d.