Hi all,

Lodewijk:

as I understand it, they should be bumped down at least one level to a region? Or could people help in a more structured way, by connecting the identifiers with the right category, somehow? What is the most intelligent approach in the current setup?

It depends why the bot fails to categorize the picture:

* if the file does not have a Monument template (for it, {{Monumento italiano}}), then it needs manual attention − indeed being bumped down ;

* it the file does have a monument template, then the bot should have been able to do something about it, but could not because of a mistake at some point in the process. More about answering Nemo below

Nemo wrote:

I know the Italian team is a bit confused, I don't know what we know. Thanks for the patience. For sure I don't understand the instructions, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Monuments_database/Categorization

Thanks for your questions! I answered on the talk page and tried clarifying the pages. Let me know if that helps.

AFAICS, User:Yiyi has specified a category for most monuments in the latest Wikipedia lists, e.g. https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2015/Monumenti/Basilicata .

That’s good. We’ll have to check whether they are being slurped correctly in the database.

Why do we even have
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WLM2013-riga ?

Why is it strange? AFAICS all the others have a template to generate rows of monument lists tables. The current one is https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WLM2015-riga . We use new templates and new lists every year because the authorised monuments vary every year.

Ok, here is the problem. The current design implies that one configuration (country, project) has one row template and only one. As a result, all monuments using WLM2014-riga and WLM2015-riga are *not* parsed. This also explains the problems with categorisation: the bot does find the monument in the database and thus cannot infer categories.

Looking at the WLM201X-riga templates, they appear to be perfect supersets of one another − all the fields of 2013 are in 2014, which are themselves in 2015. In this case, could we just unify the template?

(One may ask, « can’t the bot handle more than one row template per country/project ». Maybe so, but someone would have to code it ; and frankly I do not see a strong use case for it :)

Jean-Fred