Per the monuments database statistics page it looks as though the se-ship
database is no longer being included. I took a brief look at recent code
commits but couldn't see the reason there.
As I'm currently travelling so I can't take a more in-depth look so if
anyone else has the opportunity that would be appreciated.
Cheers,
André
------
André Costa
GLAM-tekniker
Wikimedia Sverige
Bonjour,
Je viens d'ébaucher une traduction de
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org/officially-amazing-world-record/ sur
http://wikilovesmonuments.fr/?p=526&preview=true
Ceux qui ont les accès (et je vois qu'ils sont nombreux) pourrait-il
relire et publier cette traduction ? (histoire de repoussez les posts
de 2012 vers le bas). Il y a une « équipe blog /comm» d'ailleurs ?
(moi c'est le genre de trucs où je suis un peu nul et la vérification
des participations m'occupera déjà assez comme ça ;) )
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Dear all, I put in copy the WLM main list to help us to fix this situation.
The status today in Switrzerland is that we have a big set of lists in the German Wikipedia, and two sets of list in the Italian and French Wikipedia that do not follow the same editorial choice. The important point is that the content is really different, and we can not obviously use so different list for a national contest.
We may copy and paste the german list in commons or FR and IT wikipedia, then translate the list name and templates, but we would have to manually check the name of the more than 6000 object because the german list have only name in german.
We have excel sheets with most of the monuments with Original name.
My question is the following :
-can we copy paste the list in FR and IT wikipedia, and fixing the name in the same time or,
-or work directly in the WLM database, by duplicating the german list for the french and italian , and afterwards replace the object name by the ones in the excel sheet (need to check KGS number and canton for duplicate)
Thanks to all
Charles
Le 26 août 2013 à 23:14, Estermann Beat <beat.estermann(a)bfh.ch> a écrit :
> Hi Charles,
>
> The lists on German Wikipedia containing KGS A and B objects contain more objects than the Excel Sheet from FB KGS. This is due to the fact that the Wikipedia entries were first generated based on the PDF-files available on the KGS website and then complemented by entries from the Excel sheets. Entries that are present in the PDF files but missing in the Excel sheet haven’t been deleted from the Wikipedia lists. – This is because the Excel Sheet represents work in progress that needs to be double-checked by the cantons before the next version of the PDF is produced.
>
> Furthermore, for some cantons, German Wikipedia contains lists of objects that are protected at the cantonal level but are not recognized at KGS A or B objects. – So there are several thousands of objects in the list that are not included in the Excel Sheet.
>
> Cheers,
> Beat
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: WikiLovesMonuments [mailto:wikilovesmonuments-bounces@wikimedia.ch] On Behalf Of Charles Andrès
> Sent: Montag, 26. August 2013 22:50
> To: Wikimedia CH working group Wiki Loves Monuments
> Subject: Re: [WLM CH] Problems with tools
>
> I have one question about the list, I don't remember having seen the answer.
>
> what is the overlapping between the KGS list in the excel sheet and the german list, 100% exact same size, 100% but more in one of the two sets?
>
> charles
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> I use this email for mailing list only.
>
> « Je donne mon avis non comme bon mais comme mien. » (Michel de Montaigne)
>
> Charles ANDRES, Chairman
> "Wikimedia CH" – Association for the advancement of free knowledge –
> www.wikimedia.ch
> Skype: charles.andres.wmch
> IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch
>
> Le 26 août 2013 à 22:10, Estermann Beat <beat.estermann(a)bfh.ch> a écrit :
>
Hi all,
as some of you may know, I'm now also collaborating with Europeana in their
Wiki-related projects. I have a couple of good announcements to share with
you:
1) Again this year, Europeana will be an official partner of Wiki Loves
Monuments and will sponsor the main prize, as did last year.
2) Beside of sponsoring main prize, We’ll have a special category within
the contest entitled ‘World War I Monuments and Memorials'.
This category is understood in an inclusive way (all monuments/memorials
related to WWI in participating countries) This category proposal is
related to another ongoing Europeana project, Europeana 1914-1918 [1]
designed for collecting memorabilia in digital form from related to WW1.
Previous editions of the WLM contest also had an special Europeana category
(GLAM for 2012 [2] and Art Nouveau for 2011 [3]). The contest and jury
systems for this particular category will be the same one than used on
previous years, following our KISS principles :) Still not sure about it
but probably will manage an online exhibit like the one Europeana did for
Art Nouveau in 2011 [3]
We are still drafting all so will be glad to read your comments and
questions on this.
Best,
Àlex Hinojo
@kippelboy
[1] www.europeana1914-1918.eu
[2]
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:GLAM_images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monu…
[3] http://exhibitions.europeana.eu/exhibits/show/wiki-loves-art-nouveau
I'd be interested to hear from countries that have experience from previous years how you pre-filtered the submissions for the jury. As this is the first year for the UK, we have no idea how many entries we will get, but it may well be too many for out three-person jury to handle.
I know that some countries have used special panels for pre-filtering, and others have used the Wiki community. What were your experiences, and what technical means did you use to help with the filtering?
Any insights on how best to handle this would be much appreciated.
Michael
I have to say that I have a complete disconnect with this statement from
Lodewijk:
"professional
photographers ... can process actually thousands of images per hour - so if
they are
willing to spend a few hours and are helped by the right equipment (jury
tool!) they can process a /lot/." for screening entries for the jury.
Viewing 1 image every 3 seconds would be 1200 images per hour, but with the
inevitable break to keep your eyes from glazing over and your mind from
wondering, it's probably 1,000 per hour on a practical basis. Somebody
yesterday (Mexico?) gave some numbers that suggested more like 100 per
hour, a factor of 10 difference.
Given that there is some computer/connection dependent time involved in
displaying a photo and recording the result, I just don't see how viewing a
photo for 3 seconds gives any real basis for screening.
There are quite obviously some photos that can be screened out very
quickly. I'd say 10% or maybe even 20% of the photos I saw last year, I
wouldn't consider putting in Wikipedia, e.g. highly over-exposed, or very
dark, or my pet peeve - signs - "This way to the Statue of Liberty". These
can be screened out quickly, but others will take some time. I'd also say
that about 20% of the photos in the US last year were quite good, maybe
even "approaching professional quality." Running by these in 3 seconds or
less, it would be impossible to do a quality job of screening. Maybe you
could identify a certain type of lighting, or an obvious wow factor on
many, but I'd think that at least half of deserving photos would be left
behind.
For those countries with more than 10,000 photos to screen the difference
is huge. 10 hours of screening (should be pretty easy to handle) vs. 100
hours (a real organizing challenge and time commitment).
BTW, I don't think the jury tool has been designed to process over 10,000
photos.
Pete
User:Smallbones
I'm forwarding this for broader input - I'm really not sure what is required. Please advise:
From: care19161(a)gmail.com
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 14:04:33 -0400
To: wlm-us(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [WLM-US] Question Regarding Wikipedia Takes America
Hi! I am thinking about organizing a Wikipedia Takes America project in my city, and I have a question. I've looked through the National Register of Historic Places for the sites in my city/county that do not yet have photos, and I've come across a few that I know will be a problem. One is our Federal Building and the others are private homes. Do you have any advice as to how to go about getting permission to photograph these buildings? I would assume we could simply ask the permission of the homeowner and perhaps direct them to the Wikipedia site for more information on the project in the case of the private homes, but is it even possible to photograph a Federal Building these days without government or press credentials?
Thanks,
Pat Carey
Rochester, NY
_______________________________________________
WLM-US mailing list
WLM-US(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wlm-us