Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows: 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
- The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any
country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...).
We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
- The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any
country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Béria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs".
Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR?
Jane
2011/8/2 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...).
We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
- The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any
country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Béria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs".
Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR?
Jane
2011/8/2 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...).
We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
- The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any
country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Béria, The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your WLM website, am I right?
In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID number, won't you?
I noticed the following situation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's tagged with this same number, but for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG is not tagged. I would expect the category to be placed in a category called "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the category "Category:Imóveis de Interesse Público in Lisbon (district)" instead.
I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Imóveis de Interesse Público", so I get that you have broken your designations down by type, but I am curious how you will instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also in that category are not "Imóveis".
Jane
2011/8/3 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Béria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs".
Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR?
Jane
2011/8/2 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...).
We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
- The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in
any country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Hello all,
I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in this category http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_..., right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple category (easier for the jury).
Susana
2011/8/3 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com
Béria, The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your WLM website, am I right?
In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID number, won't you?
I noticed the following situation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's tagged with this same number, but for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG is not tagged. I would expect the category to be placed in a category called "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the category "Category:Imóveis de Interesse Público in Lisbon (district)" instead.
I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Imóveis de Interesse Público", so I get that you have broken your designations down by type, but I am curious how you will instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also in that category are not "Imóveis".
Jane
2011/8/3 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Béria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs".
Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR?
Jane
2011/8/2 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...).
We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.comwrote:
Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
- The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in
any country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
There should be country specific subcategories there indeed - you are correct :) I suggest putting this category /in/ your country specific contest template. Not sure if someone already designed one actually to be re-used. Besides that I believe there are some temporary categories involved, like "needs to be included in the lists" etc which involved more manual work but can be done by anyone who knows Wikipedia.
Best, Lodewijk
2011/8/3 Susana Morais susana.morais@wikimedia.pt
Hello all,
I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in this category http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_..., right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple category (easier for the jury).
Susana
2011/8/3 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com
Béria, The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your WLM website, am I right?
In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID number, won't you?
I noticed the following situation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's tagged with this same number, but for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG is not tagged. I would expect the category to be placed in a category called "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the category "Category:Imóveis de Interesse Público in Lisbon (district)" instead.
I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Imóveis de Interesse Público", so I get that you have broken your designations down by type, but I am curious how you will instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also in that category are not "Imóveis".
Jane
2011/8/3 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Béria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs".
Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR?
Jane
2011/8/2 Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...).
We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.comwrote:
> Hi all, > I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty > important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas > addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first. > > This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the > top level category (see the email from Bas): > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs > Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID > Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs > > I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, > because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. > The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those > countries. My reasons are as follows: > 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in > any country's wikipedia. > 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a > government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law > on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need > the formal name of the designation. > 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why > have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including > English-speakers)? > 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be > consistent across all countries. > > I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German > Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is > "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it > to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect > "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the > English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". > > Jane > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Hello all,
I didn't quite get the beginning of this thread, but I have some remarks from what I understand. First of all, there seem to be two issues here:
1. Organization issue: Having a category tree to allow browsing by "ID-enabled" images (in WLM-PT we have linked commons categories with object ids whenever possible);
2. Convenience issue: Having a specific category for images of country objects to pass on to the jury, as a pool of candidates.
Jane, the unfortunate part is that I've been removing the {{IGESPAR}} template from all images I've found whenever there is a category for the "objects" in question (or one that I have created for that purpose). That's what makes sense to me, anyway, but doesn't invalidate having whatever top-categories - in this case, "Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs" (it would aggregate {{IGESPAR}}+{{DRAC-RAM}}+{{DRAM-RAA}} then, although I'm (lazily) using Category:IGESPAR for that.
Lodewijk, complementing, the country-specific category could be fetched from the parameters passed to the form, right? I believe we already agreed on passing an ID and a Country.
Susana, I actually believe we should categorize a lot! See: - Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011, for those who want to dig into *all* images from *all* contries - like Europeana's Art Noveau Juri; - Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal, for Portuguese Juri; - Imóveis_de_Interesse_Público_in_Lisbon (replace "Imóveis de Interesse Público" and "Lisbon" accordingly) to keep up with the current category structure, which is IGESPAR related. - Campo_Pequeno - which is the building category; - IGESPAR - inherited from {{IGESPAR}} (and due to my laziness, DRAC-RAM and DRAC-RAA) which is used to tag an ID into the picture (or category). - Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed, either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
In short, Jane and Susana, I wouldn't mix {{IGESPAR}} and {{Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal}} purposes. The former is for keeping a link between the lists, and the second is for the Juri.
You can imagine how the bottom of the page will look, though :)
Béria, just a note regarding SIPA and IGESPAR: only IGESPAR's objects have some kind of protection; this means SIPA's shouldn't have designations like "Monumento Nacional". In the end, roughly, all SIPA are "unprotected".
This also means the everyone relying to IGESPAR id should be clarified by now: the monument ID is a specific WLM id. Its range will dictate to which it refers to: IGESPAR, Azores, Madeira or SIPA.
Hi, Nuno. I don't think removing the IGESPAR template from files makes sense even if there is a category for the object. Note that the template can be changed so that it shows a different text and categorize it differently if it is included in different domains. I already did a few changes to the template so that it only includes the [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs]] in file pages.
This makes sure that the same template can be used for your issue 1. and the issue 2. It also means that we can change the {{IGESPAR}}, {{SIPA}}, whatever, to have similar behaviour in file pages in order to categorize in the same top-level category. I don't think there is a problem to have a file both down the category tree and in a over-arching category with all photos.
Best, Gonçalo
2011/8/3 Nuno Tavares nuno.tavares@wikimedia.pt
Hello all,
I didn't quite get the beginning of this thread, but I have some remarks from what I understand. First of all, there seem to be two issues here:
- Organization issue: Having a category tree to allow browsing by
"ID-enabled" images (in WLM-PT we have linked commons categories with object ids whenever possible);
- Convenience issue: Having a specific category for images of country
objects to pass on to the jury, as a pool of candidates.
Jane, the unfortunate part is that I've been removing the {{IGESPAR}} template from all images I've found whenever there is a category for the "objects" in question (or one that I have created for that purpose). That's what makes sense to me, anyway, but doesn't invalidate having whatever top-categories - in this case, "Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs" (it would aggregate {{IGESPAR}}+{{DRAC-RAM}}+{{DRAM-RAA}} then, although I'm (lazily) using Category:IGESPAR for that.
Lodewijk, complementing, the country-specific category could be fetched from the parameters passed to the form, right? I believe we already agreed on passing an ID and a Country.
Susana, I actually believe we should categorize a lot! See:
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011, for those who want to dig into
*all* images from *all* contries - like Europeana's Art Noveau Juri;
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal, for Portuguese Juri;
- Imóveis_de_Interesse_Público_in_Lisbon (replace "Imóveis de Interesse
Público" and "Lisbon" accordingly) to keep up with the current category structure, which is IGESPAR related.
- Campo_Pequeno - which is the building category;
- IGESPAR - inherited from {{IGESPAR}} (and due to my laziness, DRAC-RAM
and DRAC-RAA) which is used to tag an ID into the picture (or category).
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
In short, Jane and Susana, I wouldn't mix {{IGESPAR}} and {{Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal}} purposes. The former is for keeping a link between the lists, and the second is for the Juri.
You can imagine how the bottom of the page will look, though :)
Béria, just a note regarding SIPA and IGESPAR: only IGESPAR's objects have some kind of protection; this means SIPA's shouldn't have designations like "Monumento Nacional". In the end, roughly, all SIPA are "unprotected".
This also means the everyone relying to IGESPAR id should be clarified by now: the monument ID is a specific WLM id. Its range will dictate to which it refers to: IGESPAR, Azores, Madeira or SIPA.
-- Nuno Tavares Wikimedia Portugal http://www.wikimedia.pt
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.
Participe também: http://www.wikimedia.pt
Em 03-08-2011 09:53, Lodewijk escreveu:
There should be country specific subcategories there indeed - you are correct :) I suggest putting this category /in/ your country specific contest template. Not sure if someone already designed one actually to be re-used. Besides that I believe there are some temporary categories involved, like "needs to be included in the lists" etc which involved more manual work but can be done by anyone who knows Wikipedia.
Best, Lodewijk
2011/8/3 Susana Morais <susana.morais@wikimedia.pt mailto:susana.morais@wikimedia.pt>
Hello all, I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in this categoryhttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_... ,
right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple category (easier for the jury). Susana 2011/8/3 Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> Béria, The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your WLM website, am I right? In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID number, won't you? I noticed the following situation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's tagged with this same number, but for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG is not tagged. I would expect the category to be placed in a category called "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the category "Category:Imóveis de Interesse Público in Lisbon (district)" instead. I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Imóveis de Interesse Público", so I get that you have broken your designations down by type, but I am curious how you will instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also in that category are not "Imóveis". Jane 2011/8/3 Béria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>> We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ /Béria Lima/ Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> (351) 963 953 042 /Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer./ On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> wrote: Béria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs". Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR? Jane 2011/8/2 Béria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>> Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...
). We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ /Béria Lima/ Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> (351) 963 953 042 /Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer./ On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge <kilian@k-kluge.de <mailto:kilian@k-kluge.de>>wrote:
Hi Jane, in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons. Kilian On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first. This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows: 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries. I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:DenkmalgeschütztesObjekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
The idea is that there is one category for use also after the competition, these are the ID categories. Besides that there will be a Wiki loves monuments 2011 in Country X category tree for the jury. Mvg, Bas
From: goethe.wiki@gmail.com Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 12:40:31 +0200 To: wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Top level Commons categories per country
Hi, Nuno. I don't think removing the IGESPAR template from files makes sense even if there is a category for the object. Note that the template can be changed so that it shows a different text and categorize it differently if it is included in different domains.
I already did a few changes to the template so that it only includes the [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs]] in file pages.
This makes sure that the same template can be used for your issue 1. and the issue 2. It also means that we can change the {{IGESPAR}},á {{SIPA}}, whatever, to have similar behaviour in file pages in order to categorize in the same top-level category. I don't think there is a problem to have a file both down the category tree and in a over-arching category with all photos.
Best, Gonþalo
2011/8/3 Nuno Tavares nuno.tavares@wikimedia.pt
Hello all,
I didn't quite get the beginning of this thread, but I have some remarks
from what I understand. First of all, there seem to be two issues here:
1. Organization issue: Having a category tree to allow browsing by
"ID-enabled" images (in WLM-PT we have linked commons categories with
object ids whenever possible);
2. Convenience issue: Having a specific category for images of country
objects to pass on to the jury, as a pool of candidates.
Jane, the unfortunate part is that I've been removing the {{IGESPAR}}
template from all images I've found whenever there is a category for the
"objects" in question (or one that I have created for that purpose).
That's what makes sense to me, anyway, but doesn't invalidate having
whatever top-categories - in this case, "Cultural heritage monuments in
Portugal with known IDs" (it would aggregate
{{IGESPAR}}+{{DRAC-RAM}}+{{DRAM-RAA}} then, although I'm (lazily) using
Category:IGESPAR for that.
Lodewijk, complementing, the country-specific category could be fetched
from the parameters passed to the form, right? I believe we already
agreed on passing an ID and a Country.
Susana, I actually believe we should categorize a lot! See:
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011, for those who want to dig into
*all* images from *all* contries - like Europeana's Art Noveau Juri;
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal, for Portuguese Juri;
- Im¾veis_de_Interesse_P·blico_in_Lisbon (replace "Im¾veis de Interesse
P·blico" and "Lisbon" accordingly) to keep up with the current category
structure, which is IGESPAR related.
- Campo_Pequeno - which is the building category;
- IGESPAR - inherited from {{IGESPAR}} (and due to my laziness, DRAC-RAM
and DRAC-RAA) which is used to tag an ID into the picture (or category).
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others:
manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to
geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
In short, Jane and Susana, I wouldn't mix {{IGESPAR}} and
{{Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal}} purposes. The former
is for keeping a link between the lists, and the second is for the Juri.
You can imagine how the bottom of the page will look, though :)
BÚria, just a note regarding SIPA and IGESPAR: only IGESPAR's objects
have some kind of protection; this means SIPA's shouldn't have
designations like "Monumento Nacional". In the end, roughly, all SIPA
are "unprotected".
This also means the everyone relying to IGESPAR id should be clarified
by now: the monument ID is a specific WLM id. Its range will dictate to
which it refers to: IGESPAR, Azores, Madeira or SIPA.
--
Nuno Tavares
Wikimedia Portugal
Imagine um mundo onde Ú dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
livre acesso ao somat¾rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ╔ isso o que
estamos a fazer.
Participe tambÚm: http://www.wikimedia.pt
Em 03-08-2011 09:53, Lodewijk escreveu:
There should be country specific subcategories there indeed - you are
correct :) I suggest putting this category /in/ your country specific
contest template. Not sure if someone already designed one actually to
be re-used. Besides that I believe there are some temporary categories
involved, like "needs to be included in the lists" etc which involved
more manual work but can be done by anyone who knows Wikipedia.
Best,
Lodewijk
2011/8/3 Susana Morais <susana.morais@wikimedia.pt
á á Hello all,
á á I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the
á á participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has
á á previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the
á á photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in
á á this
á á category http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_...,
á á right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the
á á competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to
á á organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier
á á during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple
á á category (easier for the jury).
á á Susana
á á 2011/8/3 Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com mailto:jane023@gmail.com>
á á á á BÚria,
á á á á The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM
á á á á participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he
á á á á needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number
á á á á from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your
á á á á WLM website, am I right?
á á á á In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the
á á á á number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What
á á á á do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural
á á á á heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the
á á á á IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID
á á á á number, won't you?
á á á á I noticed the following situation:
á á á á http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa
á á á á is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}}
á á á á I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's
á á á á tagged with this same number, but for example,
á á á á http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG
á á á á is not tagged.
á á á á I would expect the category to be placed in a category called
á á á á "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the
á á á á category "Category:Im¾veis de Interesse P·blico in Lisbon
á á á á (district)" instead.
á á á á I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Im¾veis de
á á á á Interesse P·blico", so I get that you have broken your
á á á á designations down by type, but I am curious how you will
á á á á instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are
á á á á not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the
á á á á (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also
á á á á in that category are not "Im¾veis".
á á á á Jane
á á á á 2011/8/3 BÚria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
á á á á mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>
á á á á á á We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K
á á á á á á monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both.
á á á á á á _____
á á á á á á /BÚria Lima/
á á á á á á Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt
á á á á á á (351) 963 953 042
á á á á á á /Imagine um mundo onde Ú dada a qualquer pessoa a
á á á á á á possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat¾rio de todo o
á á á á á á conhecimento humano. ╔ isso o que estamos a fazer./
á á á á á á On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com
á á á á á á mailto:jane023@gmail.com> wrote:
á á á á á á á á BÚria,
á á á á á á á á Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities,
á á á á á á á á but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into
á á á á á á á á "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this
á á á á á á á á toplevel, there should be for example, a category called
á á á á á á á á "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs".
á á á á á á á á Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't
á á á á á á á á have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you
á á á á á á á á mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR?
á á á á á á á á Jane
á á á á á á á á 2011/8/2 BÚria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
á á á á á á á á mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>
á á á á á á á á á á Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of
á á á á á á á á á á monuments ( see here:
á á á á á á á á á á http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...
á á á á á á á á á á ).
á á á á á á á á á á We can create 4 "main categories", but they would
á á á á á á á á á á still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in
á á á á á á á á á á Portugal" category.
á á á á á á á á á á _____
á á á á á á á á á á /BÚria Lima/
á á á á á á á á á á Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt
á á á á á á á á á á (351) 963 953 042
á á á á á á á á á á /Imagine um mundo onde Ú dada a qualquer pessoa a
á á á á á á á á á á possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat¾rio de
á á á á á á á á á á todo o conhecimento humano. ╔ isso o que estamos a
á á á á á á á á á á fazer./
á á á á á á á á á á On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge
á á á á á á á á á á <kilian@k-kluge.de mailto:kilian@k-kluge.de> wrote:
á á á á á á á á á á á á Hi Jane,
á á á á á á á á á á á á in Germany the trouble is that in every state
á á á á á á á á á á á á there are different names for essentially the
á á á á á á á á á á á á same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale"
á á á á á á á á á á á á (cultural heritage monuments), some have
á á á á á á á á á á á á "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"),
á á á á á á á á á á á á some have both, some differentiate between three
á á á á á á á á á á á á or four categories... It's already a bit
á á á á á á á á á á á á confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists
á á á á á á á á á á á á for each state have different naming schemes,
á á á á á á á á á á á á and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this
á á á á á á á á á á á á to Commons.
á á á á á á á á á á á á Kilian
á á á á á á á á á á á á On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell
á á á á á á á á á á á á <jane023@gmail.com mailto:jane023@gmail.com>
á á á á á á á á á á á á wrote:
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Hi all,
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á I am sending out a new message, since I feel
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á this issue is pretty important and impacts a
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á that Bas addressed also need follow up, but
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á let's tackle these categories first.
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á This is the list of categories as they stand
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á today on Commons in the top level category
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á (see the email from Bas):
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Andorra with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Austria with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Brussels with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Estonia (with known IDs)
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Hesse with known ID
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Portugal with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Romania with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Spain with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Category:Cultural heritage monuments in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Wallonia with known IDs
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á chosen their names well, because they are
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á using the terms that are covered by law in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á their country. The other categories should
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á be renamed to reflect the legal term in
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á those countries. My reasons are as follows:
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á not defined anywhere, in any country's
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á wikipedia.
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á 2) We are using a formal designation that
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á has been assigned by a government agency and
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á is covered by the European Council's
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á international law on cultural property. In
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á order to refer to the proper designation, we
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á need the formal name of the designation.
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á 3) The sub categories are going to have
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á native names anyway, so why have a strangely
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á named top-level category that no one
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á understands (including English-speakers)?
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á 4) When we make interwiki links to these
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á things we should be consistent across all
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á countries.
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á I noticed a confusing situation has already
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á top level category for the Austrian
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á monuments is "Kategorie:Liste
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á (Kulturdenkmale in Ísterreich)", when I
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á fully expected it to be
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á "Kategorie:Denkmalgesch³tztes Objekte". On
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Commons I would expect
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á "Category:Denkmalgesch³tztes Objekte with
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á named it "Category:Denkmalgesch³tztes Objekte".
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Jane
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á _______________________________________________
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
á á á á á á á á á á á á á á http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
á á á á á á á á á á á á _______________________________________________
á á á á á á á á á á á á Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
á á á á á á á á á á á á WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á á á á á mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á á á á á https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
á á á á á á á á á á á á http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
á á á á á á á á á á _______________________________________________
á á á á á á á á á á Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
á á á á á á á á á á WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á á á mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á á á https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
á á á á á á á á á á http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
á á á á á á á á _______________________________________________
á á á á á á á á Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
á á á á á á á á WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á á á https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
á á á á á á á á http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
á á á á á á _______________________________________________
á á á á á á Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
á á á á á á WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á á á https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
á á á á á á http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
á á á á _______________________________________________
á á á á Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
á á á á WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á á á https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
á á á á http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
á á _______________________________________________
á á Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
á á WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
á á https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
_______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
I agree about keeping the ID's on the pictures - for the Netherlands, whenever I sort a WLM picture into a category I copy the template to the category for browsing convenience, but I certainly never remove it from the picture. We *want* those tags on the picture so people can easily look for pictures by ID number. And there are still a lot of pictures from last year to put in categories by the way, in case anyone is interested!
2011/8/3 GoEthe.wiki goethe.wiki@gmail.com
Hi, Nuno. I don't think removing the IGESPAR template from files makes sense even if there is a category for the object. Note that the template can be changed so that it shows a different text and categorize it differently if it is included in different domains. I already did a few changes to the template so that it only includes the [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs]] in file pages.
This makes sure that the same template can be used for your issue 1. and the issue 2. It also means that we can change the {{IGESPAR}}, {{SIPA}}, whatever, to have similar behaviour in file pages in order to categorize in the same top-level category. I don't think there is a problem to have a file both down the category tree and in a over-arching category with all photos.
Best, Gonçalo
2011/8/3 Nuno Tavares nuno.tavares@wikimedia.pt
Hello all,
I didn't quite get the beginning of this thread, but I have some remarks from what I understand. First of all, there seem to be two issues here:
- Organization issue: Having a category tree to allow browsing by
"ID-enabled" images (in WLM-PT we have linked commons categories with object ids whenever possible);
- Convenience issue: Having a specific category for images of country
objects to pass on to the jury, as a pool of candidates.
Jane, the unfortunate part is that I've been removing the {{IGESPAR}} template from all images I've found whenever there is a category for the "objects" in question (or one that I have created for that purpose). That's what makes sense to me, anyway, but doesn't invalidate having whatever top-categories - in this case, "Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs" (it would aggregate {{IGESPAR}}+{{DRAC-RAM}}+{{DRAM-RAA}} then, although I'm (lazily) using Category:IGESPAR for that.
Lodewijk, complementing, the country-specific category could be fetched from the parameters passed to the form, right? I believe we already agreed on passing an ID and a Country.
Susana, I actually believe we should categorize a lot! See:
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011, for those who want to dig into
*all* images from *all* contries - like Europeana's Art Noveau Juri;
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal, for Portuguese Juri;
- Imóveis_de_Interesse_Público_in_Lisbon (replace "Imóveis de Interesse
Público" and "Lisbon" accordingly) to keep up with the current category structure, which is IGESPAR related.
- Campo_Pequeno - which is the building category;
- IGESPAR - inherited from {{IGESPAR}} (and due to my laziness, DRAC-RAM
and DRAC-RAA) which is used to tag an ID into the picture (or category).
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
In short, Jane and Susana, I wouldn't mix {{IGESPAR}} and {{Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal}} purposes. The former is for keeping a link between the lists, and the second is for the Juri.
You can imagine how the bottom of the page will look, though :)
Béria, just a note regarding SIPA and IGESPAR: only IGESPAR's objects have some kind of protection; this means SIPA's shouldn't have designations like "Monumento Nacional". In the end, roughly, all SIPA are "unprotected".
This also means the everyone relying to IGESPAR id should be clarified by now: the monument ID is a specific WLM id. Its range will dictate to which it refers to: IGESPAR, Azores, Madeira or SIPA.
-- Nuno Tavares Wikimedia Portugal http://www.wikimedia.pt
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.
Participe também: http://www.wikimedia.pt
Em 03-08-2011 09:53, Lodewijk escreveu:
There should be country specific subcategories there indeed - you are correct :) I suggest putting this category /in/ your country specific contest template. Not sure if someone already designed one actually to be re-used. Besides that I believe there are some temporary categories involved, like "needs to be included in the lists" etc which involved more manual work but can be done by anyone who knows Wikipedia.
Best, Lodewijk
2011/8/3 Susana Morais <susana.morais@wikimedia.pt mailto:susana.morais@wikimedia.pt>
Hello all, I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in this categoryhttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_... ,
right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple category (easier for the jury). Susana 2011/8/3 Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.comBéria, The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your WLM website, am I right? In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID number, won't you? I noticed the following situation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's tagged with this same number, but for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG is not tagged. I would expect the category to be placed in a category called "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the category "Category:Imóveis de Interesse Público in Lisbon (district)" instead. I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Imóveis de Interesse Público", so I get that you have broken your designations down by type, but I am curious how you will instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also in that category are not "Imóveis". Jane 2011/8/3 Béria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>> We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ /Béria Lima/ Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> (351) 963 953 042 /Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer./ On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> wrote: Béria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs". Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR? Jane 2011/8/2 Béria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>> Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...
). We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ /Béria Lima/ Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> (351) 963 953 042 /Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer./ On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge <kilian@k-kluge.de <mailto:kilian@k-kluge.de>>wrote:
Hi Jane, in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons. Kilian On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first. This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows: 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries. I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:DenkmalgeschütztesObjekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
OK, I don't want to insist on this, but let me state my opinion.
The way I see it, having a category full of unsorted images is of no use for anyone, except for the jury, which will use it *once*. I can't imagine why a "Commons user" would go to [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs]] to find any image - although I understand its usage-principle for "Commons operators", though.
Every other usage (like getting the images for a particular ID) can always be a join of: * All File: that has the ID * Plus: all File: in the categories that have the ID.
Jane, about that categorization, I have always expected to be automatic, but got a bit surprised about the "no database access" news. In any case, they can always be categorized with a bot that does something like this:
* Get all images by ID; For each image: create/get a category based on the object name, put all images in there, remove the ID and whatever is commons. And no, I'm not forgetting about disambiguations :-)
Eventually, I'll make a bot for that, so I might help you with yours later if you want to follow this approach.
Hmm, the structure with the ID-category for Rijksmonumenten is pretty usefull, I've used it some times to find something. For the rest it's usefull for the bot to have the templates on the pictures, this way the bot can add informations such as object coördinates to the picture and tell on the local wiki that there is a new picture which isn't used in the lists yet. So I would say: tag the images AND the categories, not OR, I can find no reason why not to add the information in doublure. The more information the better. And if that structure is there, the ID-category, also if only used once, is a nice free extra step (no extra efforts). Mvg, Bas
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 12:02:27 +0100 From: nuno.tavares@wikimedia.pt To: wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Top level Commons categories per country
OK, I don't want to insist on this, but let me state my opinion.
The way I see it, having a category full of unsorted images is of no use for anyone, except for the jury, which will use it *once*. I can't imagine why a "Commons user" would go to [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs]] to find any image - although I understand its usage-principle for "Commons operators", though.
Every other usage (like getting the images for a particular ID) can always be a join of:
- All File: that has the ID
- Plus: all File: in the categories that have the ID.
Jane, about that categorization, I have always expected to be automatic, but got a bit surprised about the "no database access" news. In any case, they can always be categorized with a bot that does something like this:
- Get all images by ID; For each image: create/get a category based on
the object name, put all images in there, remove the ID and whatever is commons. And no, I'm not forgetting about disambiguations :-)
Eventually, I'll make a bot for that, so I might help you with yours later if you want to follow this approach.
-- Nuno Tavares Wikimedia Portugal http://www.wikimedia.pt
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.
Participe também: http://www.wikimedia.pt
Em 03-08-2011 11:47, Jane Darnell escreveu:
I agree about keeping the ID's on the pictures - for the Netherlands, whenever I sort a WLM picture into a category I copy the template to the category for browsing convenience, but I certainly never remove it from the picture. We *want* those tags on the picture so people can easily look for pictures by ID number. And there are still a lot of pictures from last year to put in categories by the way, in case anyone is interested!
2011/8/3 GoEthe.wiki <goethe.wiki@gmail.com mailto:goethe.wiki@gmail.com>
Hi, Nuno. I don't think removing the IGESPAR template from files makes sense even if there is a category for the object. Note that the template can be changed so that it shows a different text and categorize it differently if it is included in different domains. I already did a few changes to the template so that it only includes the [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs]] in file pages. This makes sure that the same template can be used for your issue 1. and the issue 2. It also means that we can change the {{IGESPAR}}, {{SIPA}}, whatever, to have similar behaviour in file pages in order to categorize in the same top-level category. I don't think there is a problem to have a file both down the category tree and in a over-arching category with all photos. Best, Gonçalo 2011/8/3 Nuno Tavares <nuno.tavares@wikimedia.pt <mailto:nuno.tavares@wikimedia.pt>> Hello all, I didn't quite get the beginning of this thread, but I have some remarks from what I understand. First of all, there seem to be two issues here: 1. Organization issue: Having a category tree to allow browsing by "ID-enabled" images (in WLM-PT we have linked commons categories with object ids whenever possible); 2. Convenience issue: Having a specific category for images of country objects to pass on to the jury, as a pool of candidates. Jane, the unfortunate part is that I've been removing the {{IGESPAR}} template from all images I've found whenever there is a category for the "objects" in question (or one that I have created for that purpose). That's what makes sense to me, anyway, but doesn't invalidate having whatever top-categories - in this case, "Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs" (it would aggregate {{IGESPAR}}+{{DRAC-RAM}}+{{DRAM-RAA}} then, although I'm (lazily) using Category:IGESPAR for that. Lodewijk, complementing, the country-specific category could be fetched from the parameters passed to the form, right? I believe we already agreed on passing an ID and a Country. Susana, I actually believe we should categorize a lot! See: - Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011, for those who want to dig into *all* images from *all* contries - like Europeana's Art Noveau Juri; - Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal, for Portuguese Juri; - Imóveis_de_Interesse_Público_in_Lisbon (replace "Imóveis de Interesse Público" and "Lisbon" accordingly) to keep up with the current category structure, which is IGESPAR related. - Campo_Pequeno - which is the building category; - IGESPAR - inherited from {{IGESPAR}} (and due to my laziness, DRAC-RAM and DRAC-RAA) which is used to tag an ID into the picture (or category). - Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed, either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe. In short, Jane and Susana, I wouldn't mix {{IGESPAR}} and {{Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal}} purposes. The former is for keeping a link between the lists, and the second is for the Juri. You can imagine how the bottom of the page will look, though :) Béria, just a note regarding SIPA and IGESPAR: only IGESPAR's objects have some kind of protection; this means SIPA's shouldn't have designations like "Monumento Nacional". In the end, roughly, all SIPA are "unprotected". This also means the everyone relying to IGESPAR id should be clarified by now: the monument ID is a specific WLM id. Its range will dictate to which it refers to: IGESPAR, Azores, Madeira or SIPA. -- Nuno Tavares Wikimedia Portugal http://www.wikimedia.pt Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer. Participe também: http://www.wikimedia.pt Em 03-08-2011 09:53, Lodewijk escreveu: > There should be country specific subcategories there indeed - you are > correct :) I suggest putting this category /in/ your country specific > contest template. Not sure if someone already designed one actually to > be re-used. Besides that I believe there are some temporary categories > involved, like "needs to be included in the lists" etc which involved > more manual work but can be done by anyone who knows Wikipedia. > > Best, > Lodewijk > > 2011/8/3 Susana Morais <susana.morais@wikimedia.pt <mailto:susana.morais@wikimedia.pt> > <mailto:susana.morais@wikimedia.pt <mailto:susana.morais@wikimedia.pt>>> > > Hello all, > > I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the > participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has > previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the > photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in > this > category http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011, > right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the > competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to > organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier > during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple > category (easier for the jury). > > Susana > > > 2011/8/3 Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com> <mailto:jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>>> > > Béria, > The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM > participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he > needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number > from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your > WLM website, am I right? > > In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the > number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What > do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural > heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the > IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID > number, won't you? > > I noticed the following situation: > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa > is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} > I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's > tagged with this same number, but for example, > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG > is not tagged. > I would expect the category to be placed in a category called > "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the > category "Category:Imóveis de Interesse Público in Lisbon > (district)" instead. > > I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Imóveis de > Interesse Público", so I get that you have broken your > designations down by type, but I am curious how you will > instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are > not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the > (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also > in that category are not "Imóveis". > > Jane > > 2011/8/3 Béria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt> > <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>>> > > We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K > monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. > _____ > /Béria Lima/ > Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> > (351) 963 953 042 > > /Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a > possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o > conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer./ > > > On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com> > <mailto:jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > Béria, > Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, > but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into > "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this > toplevel, there should be for example, a category called > "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs". > > Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't > have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you > mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR? > > Jane > > > 2011/8/2 Béria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt> > <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>>> > > Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of > monuments ( see here: > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portugal > ). > > We can create 4 "main categories", but they would > still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in > Portugal" category. > _____ > /Béria Lima/ > Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> > (351) 963 953 042 > > /Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a > possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de > todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a > fazer./ > > > > On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge > <kilian@k-kluge.de <mailto:kilian@k-kluge.de> <mailto:kilian@k-kluge.de <mailto:kilian@k-kluge.de>>> wrote: > > Hi Jane, > > in Germany the trouble is that in every state > there are different names for essentially the > same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" > (cultural heritage monuments), some have > "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), > some have both, some differentiate between three > or four categories... It's already a bit > confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists > for each state have different naming schemes, > and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this > to Commons. > > Kilian > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell > <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com> <mailto:jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>>> > wrote: > > Hi all, > I am sending out a new message, since I feel > this issue is pretty important and impacts a > lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues > that Bas addressed also need follow up, but > let's tackle these categories first. > > This is the list of categories as they stand > today on Commons in the top level category > (see the email from Bas): > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Andorra with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Austria with known IDs > Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Brussels with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Estonia (with known IDs) > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Hesse with known ID > Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Portugal with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Romania with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Spain with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in > Wallonia with known IDs > > I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have > chosen their names well, because they are > using the terms that are covered by law in > their country. The other categories should > be renamed to reflect the legal term in > those countries. My reasons are as follows: > 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is > not defined anywhere, in any country's > wikipedia. > 2) We are using a formal designation that > has been assigned by a government agency and > is covered by the European Council's > international law on cultural property. In > order to refer to the proper designation, we > need the formal name of the designation. > 3) The sub categories are going to have > native names anyway, so why have a strangely > named top-level category that no one > understands (including English-speakers)? > 4) When we make interwiki links to these > things we should be consistent across all > countries. > > I noticed a confusing situation has already > occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the > top level category for the Austrian > monuments is "Kategorie:Liste > (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I > fully expected it to be > "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On > Commons I would expect > "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with > known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I > named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". > > Jane > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 12:40:31PM +0200, GoEthe.wiki wrote:
Hi, Nuno. I don't think removing the IGESPAR template from files makes sense even if there is a category for the object. Note that the template can be changed so that it shows a different text and categorize it differently if it is included in different domains. I already did a few changes to the template so that it only includes the [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs]] in file pages.
This makes sure that the same template can be used for your issue 1. and the issue 2. It also means that we can change the {{IGESPAR}}, {{SIPA}}, whatever, to have similar behaviour in file pages in order to categorize in the same top-level category. I don't think there is a problem to have a file both down the category tree and in a over-arching category with all photos.
We shouldn't mix the 2 issues in one template. On one end pictures are monuments, on the other end they are entered into a competition. Those are different things, even during the competition, people could upload monument pictures without wanting to enter the competition. Those are really two separate things.
Regards,
Andre
Best, Gon?alo
2011/8/3 Nuno Tavares nuno.tavares@wikimedia.pt
Hello all,
I didn't quite get the beginning of this thread, but I have some remarks from what I understand. First of all, there seem to be two issues here:
- Organization issue: Having a category tree to allow browsing by
"ID-enabled" images (in WLM-PT we have linked commons categories with object ids whenever possible);
- Convenience issue: Having a specific category for images of country
objects to pass on to the jury, as a pool of candidates.
Jane, the unfortunate part is that I've been removing the {{IGESPAR}} template from all images I've found whenever there is a category for the "objects" in question (or one that I have created for that purpose). That's what makes sense to me, anyway, but doesn't invalidate having whatever top-categories - in this case, "Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs" (it would aggregate {{IGESPAR}}+{{DRAC-RAM}}+{{DRAM-RAA}} then, although I'm (lazily) using Category:IGESPAR for that.
Lodewijk, complementing, the country-specific category could be fetched from the parameters passed to the form, right? I believe we already agreed on passing an ID and a Country.
Susana, I actually believe we should categorize a lot! See:
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011, for those who want to dig into
*all* images from *all* contries - like Europeana's Art Noveau Juri;
- Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal, for Portuguese Juri;
- Im?veis_de_Interesse_P?blico_in_Lisbon (replace "Im?veis de Interesse
P?blico" and "Lisbon" accordingly) to keep up with the current category structure, which is IGESPAR related.
- Campo_Pequeno - which is the building category;
- IGESPAR - inherited from {{IGESPAR}} (and due to my laziness, DRAC-RAM
and DRAC-RAA) which is used to tag an ID into the picture (or category).
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
In short, Jane and Susana, I wouldn't mix {{IGESPAR}} and {{Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_Portugal}} purposes. The former is for keeping a link between the lists, and the second is for the Juri.
You can imagine how the bottom of the page will look, though :)
B?ria, just a note regarding SIPA and IGESPAR: only IGESPAR's objects have some kind of protection; this means SIPA's shouldn't have designations like "Monumento Nacional". In the end, roughly, all SIPA are "unprotected".
This also means the everyone relying to IGESPAR id should be clarified by now: the monument ID is a specific WLM id. Its range will dictate to which it refers to: IGESPAR, Azores, Madeira or SIPA.
-- Nuno Tavares Wikimedia Portugal http://www.wikimedia.pt
Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer.
Participe tamb?m: http://www.wikimedia.pt
Em 03-08-2011 09:53, Lodewijk escreveu:
There should be country specific subcategories there indeed - you are correct :) I suggest putting this category /in/ your country specific contest template. Not sure if someone already designed one actually to be re-used. Besides that I believe there are some temporary categories involved, like "needs to be included in the lists" etc which involved more manual work but can be done by anyone who knows Wikipedia.
Best, Lodewijk
2011/8/3 Susana Morais <susana.morais@wikimedia.pt mailto:susana.morais@wikimedia.pt>
Hello all, I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in this categoryhttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_... ,
right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple category (easier for the jury). Susana 2011/8/3 Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> B?ria, The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your WLM website, am I right? In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID number, won't you? I noticed the following situation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's tagged with this same number, but for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG is not tagged. I would expect the category to be placed in a category called "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the category "Category:Im?veis de Interesse P?blico in Lisbon (district)" instead. I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Im?veis de Interesse P?blico", so I get that you have broken your designations down by type, but I am curious how you will instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also in that category are not "Im?veis". Jane 2011/8/3 B?ria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>> We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ /B?ria Lima/ Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> (351) 963 953 042 /Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer./ On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> wrote: B?ria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs". Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR? Jane 2011/8/2 B?ria Lima <beria.lima@wikimedia.pt <mailto:beria.lima@wikimedia.pt>> Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...
). We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ /B?ria Lima/ Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> (351) 963 953 042 /Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer./ On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge <kilian@k-kluge.de <mailto:kilian@k-kluge.de>>wrote:
Hi Jane, in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons. Kilian On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first. This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows: 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries. I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in ?sterreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgesch?tztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgesch?tztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgesch?tztesObjekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:27:12AM +0100, Nuno Tavares wrote:
Hello all,
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
Just picking out this one. Yes, in NL a lot of categorisation was automated, either directly (I believe rijksmonument and the wlm category), or by bot.
As you know in which town a monument-id is, you can even do the location-based categories via the bot. For NL we also had a 'type' field, due to which we could categorize into categories like 'churches in the netherlands'.
And yes, categories are important, it makes the objects findable. That is why having the id with the upload is important, via the id and databases with information, you can automate a lot.
Regards,
Andre
I am starting to realize there are a bunch of great minds on this mailinglist and I feel confident that this WLM project is going to result in some very clever Bots.
Nuno, I definitely would appreciate any and all help on auto-categorizing!
Andre, are you referring to this template: {{Information field|name=Rijksmonument|value={{Rijksmonument|2542}}}} Because I noticed it dumped this picture into the category "Monuments and Memorials in Amsterdam" when it should have placed it into "Rijksmonumenten in Amsterdam": http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Groote_Keijser_6.jpg
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:27:12AM +0100, Nuno Tavares wrote:
Hello all,
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
Just picking out this one. Yes, in NL a lot of categorisation was automated, either directly (I believe rijksmonument and the wlm category), or by bot.
As you know in which town a monument-id is, you can even do the location-based categories via the bot. For NL we also had a 'type' field, due to which we could categorize into categories like 'churches in the netherlands'.
And yes, categories are important, it makes the objects findable. That is why having the id with the upload is important, via the id and databases with information, you can automate a lot.
Regards,
Andre
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:25:27PM +0200, Jane Darnell wrote:
I am starting to realize there are a bunch of great minds on this mailinglist and I feel confident that this WLM project is going to result in some very clever Bots.
Nuno, I definitely would appreciate any and all help on auto-categorizing!
Andre, are you referring to this template: {{Information field|name=Rijksmonument|value={{Rijksmonument|2542}}}} Because I noticed it dumped this picture into the category "Monuments and Memorials in Amsterdam" when it should have placed it into "Rijksmonumenten in Amsterdam": http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Groote_Keijser_6.jpg
Well, this template: {{Rijksmonument|2542}} triggers most, but that was not the reason for the mentioned category, that was placed by the uploader it seems, and is indeed wrong. But that is the well known confusion between monuments and heritage, where sometimes monument is used for heritage.
Not sure if Multichill has all bots still running that do the auto-categorisation. I do see the location is added.
Regards,
Andre
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:27:12AM +0100, Nuno Tavares wrote:
Hello all,
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
Just picking out this one. Yes, in NL a lot of categorisation was automated, either directly (I believe rijksmonument and the wlm category), or by bot.
As you know in which town a monument-id is, you can even do the location-based categories via the bot. For NL we also had a 'type' field, due to which we could categorize into categories like 'churches in the netherlands'.
And yes, categories are important, it makes the objects findable. That is why having the id with the upload is important, via the id and databases with information, you can automate a lot.
Regards,
Andre
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
This particular example is a good indicator of the density of Rijksmonuments in Amsterdam by the way. I can imagine that Multichill hasn't found a way to handle this type of categorization.
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:25:27PM +0200, Jane Darnell wrote:
I am starting to realize there are a bunch of great minds on this mailinglist and I feel confident that this WLM project is going to result
in
some very clever Bots.
Nuno, I definitely would appreciate any and all help on
auto-categorizing!
Andre, are you referring to this template: {{Information field|name=Rijksmonument|value={{Rijksmonument|2542}}}} Because I noticed it dumped this picture into the category "Monuments and Memorials in Amsterdam" when it should have placed it into
"Rijksmonumenten
in Amsterdam": http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Groote_Keijser_6.jpg
Well, this template: {{Rijksmonument|2542}} triggers most, but that was not the reason for the mentioned category, that was placed by the uploader it seems, and is indeed wrong. But that is the well known confusion between monuments and heritage, where sometimes monument is used for heritage.
Not sure if Multichill has all bots still running that do the auto-categorisation. I do see the location is added.
Regards,
Andre
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:27:12AM +0100, Nuno Tavares wrote:
Hello all,
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically
placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
Just picking out this one. Yes, in NL a lot of categorisation was automated, either directly (I believe rijksmonument and the wlm category), or by
bot.
As you know in which town a monument-id is, you can even do the location-based categories via the bot. For NL we also had a 'type'
field,
due to which we could categorize into categories like 'churches in the netherlands'.
And yes, categories are important, it makes the objects findable. That
is
why having the id with the upload is important, via the id and
databases
with information, you can automate a lot.
Regards,
Andre
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:40:58PM +0200, Jane Darnell wrote:
This particular example is a good indicator of the density of Rijksmonuments in Amsterdam by the way. I can imagine that Multichill hasn't found a way to handle this type of categorization.
I fix this one (and others in the mentioned category) btw, and will notify the uploader.
Regards,
Andre
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:25:27PM +0200, Jane Darnell wrote:
I am starting to realize there are a bunch of great minds on this mailinglist and I feel confident that this WLM project is going to result
in
some very clever Bots.
Nuno, I definitely would appreciate any and all help on
auto-categorizing!
Andre, are you referring to this template: {{Information field|name=Rijksmonument|value={{Rijksmonument|2542}}}} Because I noticed it dumped this picture into the category "Monuments and Memorials in Amsterdam" when it should have placed it into
"Rijksmonumenten
in Amsterdam": http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Groote_Keijser_6.jpg
Well, this template: {{Rijksmonument|2542}} triggers most, but that was not the reason for the mentioned category, that was placed by the uploader it seems, and is indeed wrong. But that is the well known confusion between monuments and heritage, where sometimes monument is used for heritage.
Not sure if Multichill has all bots still running that do the auto-categorisation. I do see the location is added.
Regards,
Andre
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:27:12AM +0100, Nuno Tavares wrote:
Hello all,
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically
placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are others: manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
Just picking out this one. Yes, in NL a lot of categorisation was automated, either directly (I believe rijksmonument and the wlm category), or by
bot.
As you know in which town a monument-id is, you can even do the location-based categories via the bot. For NL we also had a 'type'
field,
due to which we could categorize into categories like 'churches in the netherlands'.
And yes, categories are important, it makes the objects findable. That
is
why having the id with the upload is important, via the id and
databases
with information, you can automate a lot.
Regards,
Andre
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
This might be too specific for this list - if so, I apologize.
Categorization of the old centre of A'dam - de grachtengordel - I'd suggest categorizing by gracht also. As it is now, the main categori is huge and hard to navigate, partially caused by filenames like "Amsterdam - Prinsengracht x.jpg" and "Amsterdam-Herengracht y.jpg". The added spaces causes P to come before H. Suggestion is at least to categorize additionally by e.g. Singel, Herengracht, Keijzersgracht, and Prinsengracht etc etc. This can make searching easier. And if these categories also grow too big, it should be possible to go "Prinsengracht (odd numbers)" and "Prinsengracht (even numbers)" if I remember correctly.
BR noorse
On 3 August 2011 13:40, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
This particular example is a good indicator of the density of Rijksmonuments in Amsterdam by the way. I can imagine that Multichill hasn't found a way to handle this type of categorization.
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:25:27PM +0200, Jane Darnell wrote:
I am starting to realize there are a bunch of great minds on this mailinglist and I feel confident that this WLM project is going to
result in
some very clever Bots.
Nuno, I definitely would appreciate any and all help on
auto-categorizing!
Andre, are you referring to this template: {{Information field|name=Rijksmonument|value={{Rijksmonument|2542}}}} Because I noticed it dumped this picture into the category "Monuments
and
Memorials in Amsterdam" when it should have placed it into
"Rijksmonumenten
in Amsterdam": http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Groote_Keijser_6.jpg
Well, this template: {{Rijksmonument|2542}} triggers most, but that was not the reason for the mentioned category, that was placed by the uploader it seems, and is indeed wrong. But that is the well known confusion between monuments and heritage, where sometimes monument is used for heritage.
Not sure if Multichill has all bots still running that do the auto-categorisation. I do see the location is added.
Regards,
Andre
2011/8/3 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:27:12AM +0100, Nuno Tavares wrote:
Hello all,
- Up to now, I'm expected that the categories get automatically
placed,
either from the form, or a post-bot-run. Eventually there are
others:
manually inserted, like "Palaces in Portugal", and those related to geolocalization that don't interfere with anything, I believe.
Just picking out this one. Yes, in NL a lot of categorisation was automated, either directly (I believe rijksmonument and the wlm category), or by
bot.
As you know in which town a monument-id is, you can even do the location-based categories via the bot. For NL we also had a 'type'
field,
due to which we could categorize into categories like 'churches in the netherlands'.
And yes, categories are important, it makes the objects findable. That
is
why having the id with the upload is important, via the id and
databases
with information, you can automate a lot.
Regards,
Andre
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 09:49:55AM +0100, Susana Morais wrote:
Hello all,
I have some questions. For the WLM competition we will ask the participant to upload the photo with the ID number (he has previously seen in that great list we have in our site :)). Then the photo will be automatically (?) tagged under a specific sub-cat in this category http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Wiki_Loves_Monuments_..., right? Do the categories need to be more specific for the competition (this doenst mean we shouldnt be thinking how to organize them better after the wlm)? I think that it is easier during the WLM to have all photos in the competition in one simple category (easier for the jury).
In principle the functional categories now setup are not only for this competition. People can always upload pictures of monuments, we should always motivate them to upload with an ID, and put them in the correct categories based on that.
Secondly the special uploadform put the pictures in a wlm-specific category to be able to see which pictures were uploaded for the competition. The special upload form for WLM last year put pictures in that one via a template. The form is still active for people who want to easily upload monument pictures, only it doesn't include the wlm template anymore.
Regards,
Andre
Susana
2011/8/3 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com
B?ria, The key here is the word "monument". In order for a WLM participant to upload a photo based on local instructions, he needs an ID number. Presumeably he/she has found this number from your wonderful Portuguese map with ID coordinates on your WLM website, am I right?
In the Netherlands, some (not ALL) Rijksmonuments have the number physically on a brown plaque on the building itself. What do you call this number? I assume you do not call it "Cultural heritage monument number". In order to match it to either the IGESPAR or SIPA numbers you will need to have a key in the ID number, won't you?
I noticed the following situation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Campo_Pequeno_Lisboa is tagged with the template {{IGESPAR|74571|type=IIP}} I would therefore expect to see this category have photo's tagged with this same number, but for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campo_Pequeno_lisbon.JPG is not tagged. I would expect the category to be placed in a category called "Category:IGESPAR objects in Lisbon (district)", but I see the category "Category:Im?veis de Interesse P?blico in Lisbon (district)" instead.
I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Im?veis de Interesse P?blico", so I get that you have broken your designations down by type, but I am curious how you will instruct the jury to choose foto's if the photo's themselves are not tagged. Though my Portuguese is pretty bad, I think the (spectacular) pictures of the bulls themselves, which are also in that category are not "Im?veis".
Jane
2011/8/3 B?ria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
We have lists outside IGESPAR. The IGESPAR one has 4K monuments, the SIPA one almost 40K. We are using both. _____ *B?ria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
B?ria, Maybe I am just too unfamiliar with the technicalities, but my feeling would be yes, stuff all 4 categories into "IGESPAR objects in Portugal with known IDs". Under this toplevel, there should be for example, a category called "Monumentos Nacionais with known IDs".
Is there a problem with the WLM database that you can't have subcategories for the top-level ones? Or do you mean that you have lists outside of IGESPAR?
Jane
2011/8/2 B?ria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
Portugal can't use a single name. We have 4 types of monuments ( see here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011_in_Portu...).
We can create 4 "main categories", but they would still need to be under a "Cultural Heritage in Portugal" category. _____ *B?ria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 2 August 2011 11:11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.comwrote:
> Hi all, > I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty > important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas > addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first. > > This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the > top level category (see the email from Bas): > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs > Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID > Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs > Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs > > I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, > because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. > The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those > countries. My reasons are as follows: > 1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in > any country's wikipedia. > 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a > government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law > on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need > the formal name of the designation. > 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why > have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including > English-speakers)? > 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be > consistent across all countries. > > I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German > Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is > "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in ?sterreich)", when I fully expected it > to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgesch?tztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect > "Category:Denkmalgesch?tztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the > English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgesch?tztes Objekte". > > Jane > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Hello, I would suggest to create one common category for Germany, and specific categories for the states each with in those categorynames at least the state (like Hessen, etc) mentioned.
Greetings - Romaine
--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de wrote:
From: Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Top level Commons categories per country To: "Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition" wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Tuesday, August 2, 2011, 10:11 AM
Hi Jane, in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas):Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs
Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDsCategory:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDsCategory:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDsCategory:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs)
Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known IDCategory:Rijksmonumenten with known IDsCategory:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDsCategory:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs
Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDsCategory:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
1) The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any country's wikipedia.2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation.
3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)?4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Kilian, Of course each state may have its own naming convention, and I know the Deutsche Stiftung Denkmalschutz probably struggles with the same problem, but we can't wait for them to come up with a guideline on this, so I would just make a "Kulturdenkmale with known IDs" category and put each list in there at a top-Germany-level "Cultural heritage objects of Germany with known IDs" (note this wording intentionally also allows for similar categories in future such as moveable objects such as boats or artworks).
Even if it means you end up with 4 or more lists for just Hesse, who cares? Here in the Netherlands we have been looking at adding the Archis (archeological information) and though many are rijksmonuments, some are not, so this would probably mean a new category (somewhat like your difference between kulturdenkmale and baudenkmale).
My point is not that everything has to go into one category per country. My point is that the name of the category should have the native name of the protected object in it.
I can recall a discussion on the English wikipedia a few years ago where it was decided to merge the article for "Dike (construction)" to "Levee" (this was after hurricane Katrina). You always have people who feel the need to "clean up articles and organize things better" on Wikipedia. Calling the dikes in Holland "levees" just seemed silly to me then, and I notice now that there still isn't much support to that idea, considering the category name is "Dikes", and how much the word "dike" is still used on the English wikipedia in new articles. The nice thing about Wikipedia is that in the end, it's the usage (or not) of categories that proves the validity of this type of decision in the long run.
To sum up, I personally feel we need BOTH categories: Kulturdenkmale in Hesse and Baudenkmale in Hesse.
Jane
2011/8/2 Kilian Kluge kilian@k-kluge.de
Hi Jane,
in Germany the trouble is that in every state there are different names for essentially the same thing. Some just have "Kulturdenkmale" (cultural heritage monuments), some have "Baudenkmale" ("building heritage monuments"), some have both, some differentiate between three or four categories... It's already a bit confusing on de-wp, where as a result the lists for each state have different naming schemes, and I doubt that it'd be helpful to carry this to Commons.
Kilian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I am sending out a new message, since I feel this issue is pretty important and impacts a lot of Wikipedia projects. The other issues that Bas addressed also need follow up, but let's tackle these categories first.
This is the list of categories as they stand today on Commons in the top level category (see the email from Bas): Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Andorra with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria with known IDs Category:Onroerend erfgoed with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Brussels with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Estonia (with known IDs) Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hesse with known ID Category:Rijksmonumenten with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Romania with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain with known IDs Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Wallonia with known IDs
I think only the Belgians and the Dutch have chosen their names well, because they are using the terms that are covered by law in their country. The other categories should be renamed to reflect the legal term in those countries. My reasons are as follows:
- The term "Cultural heritage monument" is not defined anywhere, in any
country's wikipedia. 2) We are using a formal designation that has been assigned by a government agency and is covered by the European Council's international law on cultural property. In order to refer to the proper designation, we need the formal name of the designation. 3) The sub categories are going to have native names anyway, so why have a strangely named top-level category that no one understands (including English-speakers)? 4) When we make interwiki links to these things we should be consistent across all countries.
I noticed a confusing situation has already occurred in the German Wikipedia, where the top level category for the Austrian monuments is "Kategorie:Liste (Kulturdenkmale in Österreich)", when I fully expected it to be "Kategorie:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte". On Commons I would expect "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte with known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I named it "Category:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekte".
Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org