I think the description field is quite sparingly used - because people already add the identifier. Theoretically it should be possible to add the information that one would normally put in the description in the page from the information we have in the database. I don't see this as a major problem, although I do also see people who add more description. If they upload directly from the lists on Wikipedia, the description from the list is automatically transferred to the form too.

Lodewijk

2012/9/21 Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod@mccme.ru>

Dear all,

I noticed while categorizing images which were submitted for WLM 2012 Russia that almost all users (with the exception of the experienced Commons uploaders) do not use the description field nor the name field appropriately.

There are three common patterns:

1) (Minimalistic) The description field is not used, the name field is the official name of the monument (copied from some list, in Russian). If there are several photos of the same monument, an extra dot between .jpg (so that the name is xxx..jpg) or numbers at the end are used.

2) The description is still not used, and the name becomes the description: for instance (in Russian) Trinity Church, village of xxx, yyy district, zzz oblast, well preserved, a very nice view from the bank of the qqq River..jpg

3) The name is used, typically as in 1), but they copy extended texts to the description (typically taken from some other internet resource).

Nobody categorizes images of course.

All of these patterns in my estimate are above 95% of the uploads.

Is it just Russia, or do other countries show similar patterns?

Cheers
Yaroslav

_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org