Hi,

For 2024, it's a bit too late already but I'm eager to hear ideas for 2025 (we actually talked a bit about it already in France)

In France, we are stuck around 80 % (like many countries according to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Monuments_database/Statistics ) and the last 20 % are :

- "recent" buildings still covered by copyright

- inaccessible buildings (private properties, destroyed, etc.)

I fear these 20 % are not really doable (and clearly it's neither easy nor fun) and it wouldn't make sense to focus on them.

For re-photography, it's a great idea. Could we have something to have a list of monuments that need to be re-photographed? (old and small size for instance).

Cheers,

Nicolas

Sans virus.www.avast.com

Le dim. 2 juin 2024 à 17:58, Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt@gmail.com> a écrit :

Hi Maarten,

I actually agree with Seddon. Our problem is not so much that we have almost all documents photographed, the problem is that the photographs often are of substandard quality, and every new edition of WLM would bring a large bunch of substandard photographs. Ideally, we would require (i) better quality or (ii) good quality, bigger size or (iii) different conditions (other location of the camera; winter vs summer; clear vs cloudy etc). However, I do not know how to formalize this and whether it can be formalized without repelling a lot of potential participants.

Best

Yaroslav

On Sun, Jun 2, 2024 at 5:11 PM Seddon <jseddon@wikimedia.org> wrote:

It would still be good to reach 100% coverage so I wonder if it's worth having a category for "best previously unphotographed" and then the one for "best refresh" where the new photo must either tell a new story about an monument with an existing photo, or must be a better overall composition than the existing monument.

On Sun, Jun 2, 2024, 14:25 Maarten Dammers <maarten@mdammers.nl> wrote:

Hi everyone,

As you probably know, Wiki Loves Monuments started in 2010 in the
Netherlands, 2011 in Europe and 2012 worldwide (I was one of the main
organizers for those years). We managed to get a lot of monuments
photographed that didn't have a photo before. In the Netherlands we also
got a large collection from the local heritage organization (see
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_the_Rijksdienst_voor_het_Cultureel_Erfgoed
). After that, we had some sequels in the Netherlands, but attention and
numbers dropped as you can see at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_in_the_Netherlands
.

In my opinion this is because Wiki Loves Monuments is suffering from the
sequel problem: We keep repeating the same concept that worked really
well in the past, but is a bit of a stale copy of what it used to be.
Bit like movies where successful movies keep getting sequels. Of course
this only applies to countries where WLM was done multiple times.

Just like movie franchises that have become a bit stale, we can go back
to our basis and reinvent ourselves. Our basis is at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Philosophy :
* Make it easy
* Make it fun
* Make it local
* Help Wikipedia
* Give quick and visible results

The coverage in the Netherlands is currently 90%. So if you compare it
to the first years: It's not easy to find something to photograph, not
much fun finding it, probably not local (already done), it's hard to
help Wikipedia because it already has a photo and no quick and visible
results.

I made a query at https://w.wiki/AGP5 to give a random sample of
rijksmonumenten (monuments in the Netherlands) that have an image.
Clicking through it I noticed that the majority of images (80%? 90%?) is
of 10 years old. A lot has changed in 10 years: The monuments might have
changed and camera quality improved a lot. So my idea for 2024: Let's
focus on getting new images for monuments that currently have an old
image. This would be like a reset where suddenly you'll have tons of
monuments to photograph nearby. We would need to update some of our
tooling to find monuments to photograph and to get them used, but let's
worry about that later.

What do you think?

Maarten



_______________________________________________
WikiLovesMonuments mailing list -- wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
%(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org/message/2MPEXZ67BG3CXFH657LNYX7TTMZXFMVY/

http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org

_______________________________________________
WikiLovesMonuments mailing list -- wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
%(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XD72CTHTJOGIJYPB47HXKYEDWJTPRAP6/

http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org

_______________________________________________
WikiLovesMonuments mailing list -- wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
%(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LQLRYUOLXBHB63Z7FDL5EEIGJI76OZMB/

http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org

_______________________________________________
WikiLovesMonuments mailing list -- wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
%(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W7GBDZ5MGEDSCD63EI7OAW72KJG4RZTR/

http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org