Hi, dear colleagues!
We need some technical help.
I've created a Template *Шаблон:WLM-рядок*
<http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A8%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BD:WLM-%D1%8…>nearly
the same as polish
*Wikiprojekt:Wiki Lubi Zabytki/wykazy/wiersz *and now I have 2 actual
questions for continuing work.
1. How could I transform in automatic mode a list from a standard wiki form
to templated? For example
here<http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D1%96%D0%BA%D1%96%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D1%…>is
a table where I've templated only first 2 rows but the others have not
yet. Of course whole the list must be templated but doing it by hands is
too dull work.
2. How could I make in automatic mode some more complex transformations in
case if I have a list with more parameters? For example
here<http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%BC%27%D1%8F%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%B8_…>
we have 10 parametres, and only 4 of them are needed for WLM-lists and 3
are missing. So this list also need transformation, and also doing it by
hands is too dull work.
The problem is that hundreds of tables need such transformations. For
example only for Vinnica
district<http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%…>we
have 27 lists of historical monuments, 28 - architect, 30 -
archaeology,
1 great list - memorials, and additionaly 5 are monuments in cities. All of
them are to be transformed. So I need a script which could perform it.
--
Regards, Andrij
I think maybe someone was working on this for WLM? Don't remember for sure.
-Jeremy
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ed Summers <ehs(a)pobox.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:27 PM
Subject: [Commons-l] iphone upload app
To: commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
I was wondering if anyone knows of a iPhone app that makes uploading
images to the commons easy. I ran across mention of WikiSnaps but
couldn't really figure out what it's current state was. Is this a need
that other's have had, and found tools for?
//Ed
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WikiSnaps
I start a "did you know" section :-)
Did you know...
... that an old Roman and Romanesque site is both registered as French Monument Historique and Spanish-Catalan Bien Cultural?
I had to double check it. It is located right on the border. As a result, we have two identifiers here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Archaeological_site_of_Panissars
Vicenç
Hello all of You,
we would love to further the outreach of the WLM contest even beyond the
boundaries of the community. For that reason each participating chapter
will likely to be organizing its own press information center and maybe try
to get media partners for support. In case you like to get support in how
to raise a media partnership please do contact me. We are working on a
basic pattern for such purpose. In any case please do inform me about Your
press activity as soon as it comes to partnerships.
On international level we strive for media partnerships aswell. Please let
me know, if You do have specific media in mind, that could be interesting
to address. Right now we consider magazines on photography and heritage of
interest but also web related focus as open access would be fine. If You do
have further ideas, come on and share them.Both print and online would be
just nice.
Here some examples:
- National Geographic http://www.nationalgeographic.com/
- Metro Newspaper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_International
- Eikon http://www.eikon.at/content/en/termine_wettbewerbe.php
- world monuments fund http://www.wmf.org/watch
Please help me to complete the list! If You do know who to address to
obtain a quick decision please let me know. :))
best regards and have a nice weekend
Barbara
--
Barbara Fischer
Kuratorin für Kulturpartnerschaften
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | NEU: Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
This is not the first time this topic has come up - every time it is about
throwing up thresholds for photographers because we believe that it
increases quality. Actually, we learned that it doesn't. The lower the
thresholds, the less restrictions we put on people, the more submissions we
will get. Please note that we are not *just* caring about that one single
perfect shot, but we want people to upload multiple pictures! If they want
to upload 100 pictures of a church, who do they hurt other than the jury
members? I have been told that many slightly different pictures could in
the future even perhaps be used for 3D image generation. But even for now I
have more than once searched for a slightly different angle of a photo
because I wanted it for a specific purpose. And I can tell you from
experience that a jury is very good at ignoring a set of 100 very similar
photos. That is much easier than choosing between two good quality photos.
Everyone who didn't read it yet, I'd recommand
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Philosophy
. It gives a consise overview of what Wiki Loves Monuments is all about,
and why we have made certain choices. In that same philosophy, I believe
that imposing upload restrictions is bad - bad for moral, bad for quality
and bad for free content. Another popular restriction I strongly oppose is
requiring a minimum amount of pixels. The only thing it helps for, is to
make it easier to manage the work load. Throwing up a threshold is a very
effective way to scare off especially the newcomers - Wikipedians will
upload anyway. And that is one of my main goals this contest - get more
people to do their uploads to Wikimedia Commons instead of Facebook. Get
people to realize that it is quite doable to upload your pictures on
Commons, and that they even may get used on Wikipedia that way. That free
licenses are not evil.
So please, lets try to keep the thresholds low - lets give people freedom
in uploading as many photos from monuments as possible.
Best,
Lodewijk
2012/6/22 Jan Ainali <jan.ainali(a)wikimedia.se>
> While making it as easy as possible for the jury, let's not forget the
> purpose of the contest, to get educational pictures of as many monuments as
> possible. There need to be an incentive for photographers to not
> be satisfied with just uploading their best image. Uploading with metadata
> is a pain, and if they are not entering the contest the risk is that we
> will miss out of some educational pictures that may not be the prettiest.
> The contest is our carrot to make people upload, and if the carrot is
> smaller not all will chase for it.
>
> I think Racso is on to something though, by limiting it to a certain
> number per monument. The limit must be higher than one, eg. for a church
> the interior is at least as interesting as the exterior for one thing and
> while the photographer thinks one of them has better chance to win, maybe
> the other is of most value to the projects. Perhaps ten is enough, that
> could make those photographers that upload hundreds of picture of each
> monument less overwhelming. Can we do such a limitation technically, or do
> we make it as a strong recommendation to the contestants or solve it
> in another way?
>
> --
> Best
> Jan Ainali
> Chairman, Wikimedia Sverige <http://se.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huvudsida>
>
> 2012/6/22 Nicu Buculei <nicubunu(a)gmail.com>
>
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Peter Ekman wrote:
>> > It seems to me that you can't possibly give a jury a 1,000 photos and
>> expect
>> > them to come up with anything reasonable. That type of system would
>> also
>> > drive away quality jurors - the best jurors simply wouldn't have time
>> for
>> > all that. And if we're talking about 10,000 photos, it just gets worse.
>> > There has to be some sort of pre-screening, whether we like it or not.
>>
>> A jury put in front of 1000 or more photos would have a difficult job,
>> but with a pre-screening you can get to a few hundreds of images and a
>> reasonable amount of work.
>>
>> > A couple of suggestions for pre-screening:
>> > 1. Let the photographer decide which of his photos is best - say 1 for
>> the
>> > entire contest or 1 for each day he/she uploads.
>> > 2. Have a contest each day, with a each photographer who uploaded that
>> day
>> > nominating a single photo, and letting the community vote (I'd say +1
>> for
>> > each photo you like) then after a few days a selected screener from the
>> > community selects 2 or 3 photos from the group that has the highest
>> score.
>> > After 30 days, you'd have 60-90 photos that the jury can deal with,
>> each
>> > photog would have had the chance to nominate his best photos (multiple
>> > times), the community would have their say, and the screeners would not
>> have
>> > to deal with 1,000s of photos.
>>
>> Something like that would require a large organizational effort and a
>> large community, which is not the case for most of the participating
>> countries. Small teams and small communities will have to "Keep It
>> Simple and Stupid". [1]
>>
>>
>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
>>
>> --
>> nicu :: http://photoblog.nicubunu.ro/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
>> WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
>> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
>
It seems to me that you can't possibly give a jury a 1,000 photos and
expect them to come up with anything reasonable. That type of system would
also drive away quality jurors - the best jurors simply wouldn't have time
for all that. And if we're talking about 10,000 photos, it just gets
worse. There has to be some sort of pre-screening, whether we like it or
not.
A couple of suggestions for pre-screening:
1. Let the photographer decide which of his photos is best - say 1 for the
entire contest or 1 for each day he/she uploads.
2. Have a contest each day, with a each photographer who uploaded that day
nominating a single photo, and letting the community vote (I'd say +1 for
each photo you like) then after a few days a selected screener from the
community selects 2 or 3 photos from the group that has the highest score.
After 30 days, you'd have 60-90 photos that the jury can deal with, each
photog would have had the chance to nominate his best photos (multiple
times), the community would have their say, and the screeners would not
have to deal with 1,000s of photos.
Pete Ekman
User:Smallbones
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 00:16:01 +0200
> From: Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org <javascript:;>>
> To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition
> <wikilovesmonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>>
> Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] jury process - easy and neat?
> Message-ID:
> <CACf6BesGfNFEVuXoQapbahbTmCiyMh0FdAOgZpGBungyENpZzA(a)mail.gmail.com<javascript:;>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Of course if you only use this tool as a means to get the best 1% of the
> pictures... it doesn't have to be as precise. Just have the final selection
> in a second round, with zero scores - then vote again for those or have a
> discussion on the mailing list.
>
> Personally, I think every country can decide its own process - so lets make
> the tool somewhat dynamic, but not shoot down major options. Last year
> Russia had a public voting, and it seems they were happy with it. I'm no
> big fan of it, but who am I to stop it? :)
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2012/6/22 Platonides <platonides(a)gmail.com <javascript:;>>
>
> > On 21/06/12 18:29, aude wrote:
> > > We have a technical volunteer "intern" helping us in DC and this is
> > > something he wants to work on.
> > >
> > > I'm not exactly sure how the process worked last year, but we're
> > > thinking either integrating something into the WordPress site so that
> > > people can browse photos (pulled from Commons, like InstantCommons) and
> > > rate them. A public voting phase could help narrow the selection for
> > > the jury, which could also make use of the tool.
> > >
> > > Thoughts? suggestions? brilliant ideas?
> >
> > Each instance used its own system. Nuno made a web application for
> > voting, from which you could start. There is also a toolserver tool
> > which facilitates downloading all the files from a category.
> > Last year we provided zips with all the images which our jury
> > downloaded. Then they chose those they deemed the best, which went to a
> > second round.
> > If you're joining the jury in one room (with multiple computers), it may
> > be simpler if they are provided directly a copy of the images in an
> > external drive. Remember that not all your jury members will be
> tech-savvy.
> >
> > If I were designing such system, I'd make it an interface where the jury
> > would go giving a mark from 1 to 10 to each photo. But not actually
> > restricted to that. So after 200 photos, it could give a 12 if needed
> > (instead of recalculating all previous votes), or even provide marks
> > with decimal points.
> > The interface itself would be just a (zoomable) gallery of the photos
> > that he didn't review yet (plus auxiliar pages, to view the best ranked
> > by you, change a vote, etc.).
> >
> > What would be interesting is that they could be using it from the first
> > day, so instead of reviewing all files after the competition closes,
> > they could keep up with the upload rate.
> > As far as a 10 given on Sep 1st is the same as one given on 30th Sep
> > (which is easy by things like moving the bar higher up to a 14), it'd be
> > equivalent.
> > You then fetch the N most ranked from each member to next round, so
> > different scales aren't a problem.
> >
> >
> > As for a public voting, I don't think it would work. You would need each
> > person to review a significant number of files, otherwise the noise
> > given by each different reviewer (a 10 by me could be an 8 by you). And
> > you won't be getting volunteers to review thousands of photos. Only the
> > jury will do that, because they agreed to. (Obviously, anyone is able to
> > volunteer to be jury. We were discussing on wlm-iberconf ml giving a
> > jury for another country and getting one).
> >
> > What I had thought as a possibility for involving the public was to
> > allow it to choose a number of photos that pass to the next round (just
> > as each jury does), thus ensuring they get attention. But that won't the
> > jury task of having to view all of them.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> > WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
> >
>
Dear all,
as the the contest is preceding we would like to ask all of You for
recommendations for the nomination of members of the international jury.
These is the criteria as announced on
wikiolovesmonuments<http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org/jury/>
Each national contest will result in images for the international contest.
The international jury, made up of seven members with different skills and
backgrounds, will determine the winners of this final round out of the
nominated images and award the prizes.
Criteria
The jury will determine the winners of the international contest by the
following criteria (in no particular order):
Technical quality (Sharpness, use of light, perspective etc.)
Originality / setting
Usefulness of the image on Wikipedia
Last year when the contest was an European contest these were the members
of the jury<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_loves_monuments_2011/Jury>,
just to give You an idea where to look:
- Michael Bieodowicz, manging director images ZEIT
Magazine<http://www.zeit.de/zeit-magazin/index>
- Sebastian ter Burg <http://www.sebastiaanterburg.nl/>, C- BY-SA
Photographer,
- Tomasz GAnicz, president of Wikimedia Polska
- José Gustavo Góngora, Wikipedian
- Sneska Quaedvlieg-Mihailovic, General Secretary of Europa
Nostra<http://www.europanostra.org/>
Please help us with ideas and contacts, if You have, to the persons you
recommend.
best regards
Barbara
--
Barbara Fischer
Kuratorin für Kulturpartnerschaften
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | NEU: Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.