On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:

Hi Paul,

An edited version wouldn't be your own work fully, so wouldn't fit the contest rules.

What then? Should the photo be rejected at all?

Oh, by the way, what if the uploader fixes the photo by themselves? Will it yet fit the rules?

Best, Lodewijk

2012/9/3 Paul Selitskas p.selitskas@gmail.com

...

One of Belarusian contestants addressed me a mail with a question: may they reupload the same photo with a better quality and what consequences will it have concerning WLM.

So, may the participant replace the file uploaded for WLM with the same file of better quality? Will the new file be treated the same as if it was uploaded at the first place?

Besides this, I have a question of my own. Let's say, someone submitted a photo for the contest. Then a random Wikimedian uses it in an article. Then he wants to fix it (colors, perspective, whatever) and actually he does it by replacing the original file with a new fixed version of it. What next? Should the jury examine the original version, or the fixed one? If the photo wins, who takes the prize? And so on.

-- З павагай, Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects p.selitskas@gmail.com, +375257408304 Skype: p.selitskas

---

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

---

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

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.orgwrote:

Like I said: that is very situation specific, and up to the jury to decide.

Sometimes, unknowingly, watermarks like time stamps are default in Camera, and the uploader may choose to upload the cropped version. This issue is situational and all should not be ignored.

Lodewijk

2012/9/3 Paul Selitskas p.selitskas@gmail.com

...

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:

...

Hi Paul,

An edited version wouldn't be your own work fully, so wouldn't fit the contest rules.

What then? Should the photo be rejected at all?

Oh, by the way, what if the uploader fixes the photo by themselves? Will it yet fit the rules?

...

Best, Lodewijk

2012/9/3 Paul Selitskas p.selitskas@gmail.com

...

One of Belarusian contestants addressed me a mail with a question: may they reupload the same photo with a better quality and what consequences will it have concerning WLM.

So, may the participant replace the file uploaded for WLM with the same file of better quality? Will the new file be treated the same as if it was uploaded at the first place?

Besides this, I have a question of my own. Let's say, someone submitted a photo for the contest. Then a random Wikimedian uses it in an article. Then he wants to fix it (colors, perspective, whatever) and actually he does it by replacing the original file with a new fixed version of it. What next? Should the jury examine the original version, or the fixed one? If the photo wins, who takes the prize? And so on.

-- З павагай, Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects p.selitskas@gmail.com, +375257408304 Skype: p.selitskas

---

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

---

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

-- З павагай, Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects p.selitskas@gmail.com, +375257408304 Skype: p.selitskas

---

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

---

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

Thank you guys for your comments!

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:

exactly, it depends on the situation :)

2012/9/3 Karthik Nadar karthikndr@gmail.com

...

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:

...

Like I said: that is very situation specific, and up to the jury to decide.

Sometimes, unknowingly, watermarks like time stamps are default in Camera, and the uploader may choose to upload the cropped version. This issue is situational and all should not be ignored.

...

Lodewijk

2012/9/3 Paul Selitskas p.selitskas@gmail.com

...

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:

...

Hi Paul,

An edited version wouldn't be your own work fully, so wouldn't fit the contest rules.

What then? Should the photo be rejected at all?

Oh, by the way, what if the uploader fixes the photo by themselves? Will it yet fit the rules?

...

Best, Lodewijk

2012/9/3 Paul Selitskas p.selitskas@gmail.com

...

One of Belarusian contestants addressed me a mail with a question: may they reupload the same photo with a better quality and what consequences will it have concerning WLM.

So, may the participant replace the file uploaded for WLM with the same file of better quality? Will the new file be treated the same as if it was uploaded at the first place?

Besides this, I have a question of my own. Let's say, someone submitted a photo for the contest. Then a random Wikimedian uses it in an article. Then he wants to fix it (colors, perspective, whatever) and actually he does it by replacing the original file with a new fixed version of it. What next? Should the jury examine the original version, or the fixed one? If the photo wins, who takes the prize? And so on.

-- З павагай, Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects p.selitskas@gmail.com, +375257408304 Skype: p.selitskas

---

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

---

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

-- З павагай, Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects p.selitskas@gmail.com, +375257408304 Skype: p.selitskas

---

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

---

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

-- Thanks and regards, (User:Karthikndr) Karthik Nadar.

---

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

---

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

Thanks for bringing this out. This is very informative, I've just encountered the same inquiry.

Roel Wiki Loves Monuments Philippines

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ruwrote:

Sometimes, unknowingly, watermarks like time stamps are default in

...

Camera, and the uploader may choose to upload the cropped version. This issue is situational and all should not be ignored.

I personally always post-process all of my photos before uploading, including cropping, perspective correction, and brightness/contrast correction. No jury ever had problems with this post-processing, and I hope no reasonable jury will ever have.

Cheers Yaroslav

______________________________**_________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.**wikimedia.orgWikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/**wikilovesmonumentshttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.**org http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Andre Koopal andre@molens.org wrote:

On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 05:14:23PM +0200, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:

...

...

Sometimes, unknowingly, watermarks like time stamps are default in Camera, and the uploader may choose to upload the cropped version. This issue is situational and all should not be ignored.

I personally always post-process all of my photos before uploading, including cropping, perspective correction, and brightness/contrast correction. No jury ever had problems with this post-processing, and I hope no reasonable jury will ever have.

Cheers Yaroslav

Hi Yaroslav, if you do it, it of course isn't (well, they judge based on the corrections which sometimes aren't an improvement), but if others do the modifications then it can become a bit strange. But just to stress in principle postprocessing is allowed.

I'm not sure will alteration of brightness/contrast should be encouraged when we talk about naturality as one of the agenda.

Regards,

Andre

---

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

It's worth pointing out that one potential way of using the WLM mobile app [1] is that a user could upload a placeholder photo with their camera of a monument to keep track of monuments visited and then replace it with a high quality camera image when they return home to their desktop computer.

The benefit here being they can remember which monuments their photos relate to and the app will take care of the template for them.

Would these users be eligible for the competition?

[1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.wikipedia.wlm . On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Platonides platonides@gmail.com wrote:

On 03/09/12 16:45, Paul Selitskas wrote:

...

One of Belarusian contestants addressed me a mail with a question: may they reupload the same photo with a better quality and what consequences will it have concerning WLM.

So, may the participant replace the file uploaded for WLM with the same file of better quality? Will the new file be treated the same as if it was uploaded at the first place?

Besides this, I have a question of my own. Let's say, someone submitted a photo for the contest. Then a random Wikimedian uses it in an article. Then he wants to fix it (colors, perspective, whatever) and actually he does it by replacing the original file with a new fixed version of it. What next? Should the jury examine the original version, or the fixed one? If the photo wins, who takes the prize? And so on.

This was also raised last year. It was mentioned that freeing a bigger version of an existing file should not qualify. Your may decide to do otherwise, of course, but I think it is bet not to, as it would also make harder to create the lists of participating monuments if countries had different rules on what is a new upload.

If the uploader sends a better version of another picture uploaded in WLM, I consider this a valid submission by the author. Quite likely, also, consider for instance someone that uploads the image with a watermark, then he gets notified that there should be no watermarks and he reuploads the unwatermarked file.

Another sample, Indafotó (used last year for most of WLM-HU) lowscales the images to 1600 pixels. Samat contacted the users, which sent him the originals and he reuploaded them. IMHO the submission of the bigger image is perfectly valid.

When someone else fixes the image, that's a different matter. I wouldn't plainly disqualify them if someone eg. fixes the watermark from an image, just like we may add the monument id of some submissions (which would otherwise be uneligible). However, if such image was in the last round, I would do note it to the jury, which should probably take it into account negatively (but even then the photo might still astounishing and win anyway).

Regards

---

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

Hi Jon en Phil,

We can make up a thousand edge cases, but I rather stick to common sense: Is it in the spirit of Wiki Loves Monuments? If someone trying to toy the system it's definitely not, in this case I don't see any reason why this wouldn't fit the competition. Of course both images need to be own work, freely licensed and uploaded in September ;-)

Maarten

Op 4-9-2012 21:13, Philip Chang schreef:

To add to Jon's comment, we are considering a simple UI change to make it obvious that users can upload from mobile and then replace the images later on the desktop.

This assumes that replacing files is allowed, based on the copyright considerations discussed earlier in this thread.

If there is any preference for this feature, please let us know.

Phil

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Jon Robson <jdlrobson@gmail.com mailto:jdlrobson@gmail.com> wrote:

It's worth pointing out that one potential way of using the WLM mobile
app [1] is that a user could upload a placeholder photo with their
camera of a monument to keep track of monuments visited and then
replace it with a high quality camera image when they return home to
their desktop computer.

The benefit here being they can remember which monuments their photos
relate to and the app will take care of the template for them.

Would these users be eligible for the competition?

[1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.wikipedia.wlm
.
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Platonides <platonides@gmail.com
<mailto:platonides@gmail.com>> wrote:
> On 03/09/12 16:45, Paul Selitskas wrote:
>> One of Belarusian contestants addressed me a mail with a
question: may
>> they reupload the same photo with a better quality and what
>> consequences will it have concerning WLM.
>>
>> So, may the participant replace the file uploaded for WLM with the
>> same file of better quality? Will the new file be treated the
same as
>> if it was uploaded at the first place?
>>
>> Besides this, I have a question of my own. Let's say, someone
>> submitted a photo for the contest. Then a random Wikimedian
uses it in
>> an article. Then he wants to fix it (colors, perspective, whatever)
>> and actually he does it by replacing the original file with a new
>> fixed version of it. What next? Should the jury examine the
original
>> version, or the fixed one? If the photo wins, who takes the
prize? And
>> so on.
>
> This was also raised last year. It was mentioned that freeing a
bigger
> version of an existing file should not qualify. Your may decide
to do
> otherwise, of course, but I think it is bet not to, as it would also
> make harder to create the lists of participating monuments if
countries
> had different rules on what is a new upload.
>
> If the uploader sends a better version of another picture
uploaded in
> WLM, I consider this a valid submission by the author. Quite likely,
> also, consider for instance someone that uploads the image with a
> watermark, then he gets notified that there should be no
watermarks and
> he reuploads the unwatermarked file.
>
> Another sample, Indafotó (used last year for most of WLM-HU)
lowscales
> the images to 1600 pixels. Samat contacted the users, which sent
him the
> originals and he reuploaded them. IMHO the submission of the bigger
> image is perfectly valid.
>
> When someone else fixes the image, that's a different matter. I
wouldn't
> plainly disqualify them if someone eg. fixes the watermark from an
> image, just like we may add the monument id of some submissions
(which
> would otherwise be uneligible). However, if such image was in
the last
> round, I would do note it to the jury, which should probably take it
> into account negatively (but even then the photo might still
> astounishing and win anyway).
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org



--
Jon Robson
http://jonrobson.me.uk
@rakugojon

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

-- Phil Inje Chang Product Manager, Mobile Wikimedia Foundation 415-812-0854 m 415-882-7982 x 6810

---

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

Thanks for this feedback.

A user subpage sounds good but the issue is how to create that from the app.

What I am imagining is adding a category to those specific uploads, something like, "To be replaced on desktop."

This will help users find them later and would provide some indicator to admins.

Phil

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Platonides platonides@gmail.com wrote:

El 04/09/12 21:13, Philip Chang escribió:

...

To add to Jon's comment, we are considering a simple UI change to make it obvious that users can upload from mobile and then replace the images later on the desktop.

This assumes that replacing files is allowed, based on the copyright considerations discussed earlier in this thread.

If there is any preference for this feature, please let us know.

Phil

Yes, of course. I guess the risk is that some admin gets annoyed with such placeholders and speedies them before the user gets to it. Something like preparing a list in a user subpage of "files I need to upload from the desktop" looks to be more in "the wiki way".

---

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

Yes, you are right, we can create a subpage automatically and presumably update it easily.

Regarding the time issue, wouldn't that be limited automatically by the contest duration? If the user does not replace the photo within the month of Sep., then the mobile upload would simply participate on its own merits.

This feature would simply add an option to the normal mobile upload, so a photo of the monument would still be uploaded. It just adds some record-keeping ability.

Thanks for your feedback.

Phil

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Platonides platonides@gmail.com wrote:

On 04/09/12 23:15, Philip Chang wrote:

...

Thanks for this feedback.

A user subpage sounds good but the issue is how to create that from the

app.

Hmm, it should be easy: action=edit&title=User:Pchang/Files%20

to_upload_later&appendtext=*%20DSC0001.JPG%20From+the+top+of+Eiffel+Tower.%0A&summary=Adding+note+using+the+Mobile+App+to+upload+from+the+Desktop+the+file+ DSC0001.JPG&token=...

...

What I am imagining is adding a category to those specific uploads, something like, "To be replaced on desktop."

This will help users find them later and would provide some indicator to admins.

The main problem is when to consider an upload-to-be abandoned. How long will it take the user to upload it from home? A couple of days? A week? A month? It doesn't seem unlikely that a user waits up to a month to upload his vacation photos (to begin with he may need to go back home from the country he is visiting, and then he will have more priority issues than uploading to Commons). But leaving a placeholder file for a month seems too much IMHO.

Regards

---

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

Hi Phil

On the page:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:UploadWizard#URL_arguments it lists these parameters:

• campaign: Specifies which [[/Campaigns|upload campaign]] to use.
• skiptutorial: Sets if the licensing tutorial should be skipped or not.

The value should be "1" or "true" to skip.

• id: Sets the initial value for the id field.
• description: Sets the initial value for the description field.
• lat: Sets the initial value for the latitude field.
• lon: Sets the initial value for the longitude field.
• alt: Sets the initial value for the altitude field.
• categories: Sets the initial value for the categories field, multiple

categories seperated by |.

But is all of this required, and where are the templates? Could someone send a sample URL with the necessary parameters present?

I am not sure this is what you are looking for, but in case : you have a couple of examples at < https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Upload_Wizard/Fields_prefilling%3...

Hope that helps,

Platonides,

Is ID FIeld 2 definitely needed for Upload Wizard? Elke said it was not needed for mobile uploads, but please confirm that too.

Thanks.

Phil

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Platonides platonides@gmail.com wrote:

...

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Philip Chang wrote:

Yes, you are right, we can create a subpage automatically and
presumably update it easily.

Regarding the time issue, wouldn't that be limited automatically
by the contest duration? If the user does not replace the photo
within the month of Sep., then the mobile upload would simply
participate on its own merits.

I was thinking in the more general case of an upload application. A delay of one month for a photo done in september would obviously be too long for WLM :) (unless he waits for next year...)

On 05/09/12 03:16, Philip Chang wrote:

...

I walked through this idea with Matthew and we came up with a refinement:

On the user page, would it make sense to show the file as a link to its file page and also show a link to the Upload Wizard with all of the parameters for that monument?

If so, I have a question: What exactly is the format of the parameters in the link?

On the page: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:UploadWizard#URL_arguments it lists these parameters:

• campaign: Specifies which [[/Campaigns|upload campaign]] to use.
• skiptutorial: Sets if the licensing tutorial should be skipped or not.

The value should be "1" or "true" to skip.

I don't think this is needed since the campaigns already have it to true.

...

• id: Sets the initial value for the id field.

Note that some countries are also using id2

...

• description: Sets the initial value for the description field.
• lat: Sets the initial value for the latitude field.
• lon: Sets the initial value for the longitude field.
• alt: Sets the initial value for the altitude field.
• categories: Sets the initial value for the categories field, multiple

categories seperated by |.

But is all of this required, and where are the templates? Could someone send a sample URL with the necessary parameters present?

Thanks.

Phil

You can view an overview of the WLM campaigns at http://toolserver.org/~platonides/wlm2012/campaigns-overview.php

---

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

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Philip Chang wrote:

Platonides,

Is ID FIeld 2 definitely needed for Upload Wizard? Elke said it was
not needed for mobile uploads, but please confirm that too.

Thanks.

Phil

On 05/09/12 19:21, Philip Chang wrote:

Also, is the contest template what goes into ID Field 1?

Most countries use only one field. It is indeed the monument identifier template what goes into ID field 1 (the term contest template could be confused with "{{Wiki Loves Monuments 2012|xy}}", which we place at autoWikiText).

Two id fields are used by the various wlm-de campaigns, wlm-pa (they encode if it's a student or adult) and wlm-pl (idField1 is actually half template, the second code is the region code).

I suggest you consult with the local organisers if it's ok for mobile app uploads to only provide one.