I remind you all the https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/NonFreeWiki proposal of a Non-Free Wiki. I supported that.
If we finally create it, maybe we can organize it since the beginning in a way closer to how users active on Wikiprojects nowadays might like such repository to work. With better language integration, cross-wiki metrics, efficient structured metadata, automated categorization, transparent OTRS, a flag system that allow users to start deletion procedure only when they have a standardized and balanced degree of activity, and so on.
Once we show it works there, it would be much easier to import innovations on Commons... I am already stressed at the idea of discussing these things on Commons, but I would find interesting to set them up in a new system.
A.
Il martedì 19 maggio 2020, 03:20:37 CEST, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com ha scritto:
We have two or three competing reasons to have commons like repositories:
1. Truly fully open content repository for Wikimedia projects and the world as a whole. (Commons now)
2. Truly fully open content repository in general of things which are worthy but not used in projects/articles now. (Some of Commons)
3. Commonly available repository for sufficiently free (fair use, other existing allowed cases like irreplaceable or so forth) use in at least one project so that other projects could also share the media efficiently if local content rules allow it. (Nowhere now, I’ve described as “uncommons” somewhat for its humor value as a name)
I have previously pointed out that ideally we’d have a way to unify those for easy other projects reference, but there were wailing and gnashing of teeth from developers and I list energy.
I also have pointed out that the “helpful” process of copying a non-fully-free image to Commons, local deletion due to overlap, then commons deletion removing *all* copies is pathological inter-project process behavior and we really needed to end that somehow. Also ran into much wailing and gnashing of teeth from commons people not entirely wanting to be blamed and others out of patience trying to deal with commons people, and everyone loses interest.
Perhaps we would do better off to create an uncommons and change all the for-wider-use upload tools to deposit it there, point the internal image auto linking there, and have commons out on the side as not the direct Wiki project source but a specific curated open content source. Everything in commons would be in uncommons and linked for articles etc, new fair use or irreplaceable content goes to uncommons only, and curators with open license intellectual property expertise could curate upselection of the approved bits to commons.
That should make everyone happy and be practical and implementable without horrible massive architecture changes.
-george
Sent from my iPhone
On May 18, 2020, at 5:04 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
it all comes back to "Who is our audience" and "How do we need/want to engage with them"
If you start on the mainpage, follow the about link, then follow to scope there is no clear just a vague anyone...
I think we need to be honest in the assessment of our true audience, thats basically the WMF projects therefore our purpose is "to make freely licensed media accessible across all movement projects"
Like the movement strategy process we need to dissect what we are trying to achieve and how we can get there, and then come up with a solution to address what we already have so its all consistent. At the moment we are developing differing concepts, tools, policies in isolation .
On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 23:34, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Yes, structured data are far from perfect. I am sorry about it because I know their potential but they need to grow on a difficult soil and this slows down. We expected that, unfortunately. You can't just use them top-down, they need a bottom-up approach but we lack the right mentality of engaged users to make it grow.
If you want to change and improve something right now with metadata, try galleries before categories. They are quite useless at the moment, I see some users are updating them but they are really poor. It was very frequent to finf low resolution files still there, they are not standardized as well. Since they have limited structural role, working on that should be easier.
Il lunedì 18 maggio 2020, 17:20:31 CEST, Phil Nash via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> ha scritto:
The search has to be done before the category structure is addressed, even if that needs to be done. How else would you compartmentalise, what 32 million images? And structured data has to be fixed before either. The reason is that structured data does not have unique names, and I don't think people relate to the Q numbers as well as names of things they know already. It's actually very much worse than that because these automated "Depicts" suggestions do not appear to know about Commons categories such that they suggest an obvious statement.
We all know it's maybe broken, but I don't see this as a fix, even if we run two systems in parallel until the structured data is (a) mature (b) sensible and (c) throughly reliable.
New Outlook Express and Windows Live Mail replacement - get it here: https://www.oeclassic.com/
----- Original Message ----- From: Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: 18/05/2020 15:53:35 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons
I think we could start to make the category structure obsolete and focus on structured data, there's already bots running basic structured data that could be ramped up. and Having Wikidata game( https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-game/) thats instead focused on whats in a file & its description, that would capture more structured data including licensing. It'd help teach people more about including structured data 62million files is a lot to process so it'll take time but we can run competitions like 1lib1ref, encourage affiliates to focus on doing Commons structured data game as outreach events, this will teach people about licensing, and about what makes a good photograph because everyone knows a 30px by 30px photo is crap we can have structured data items less than 100,200,500px on the long edge.
Next step would be to look at the search function, add in an advance option with a few optional fields to fill in that searches the structured data. The advance search option could then sort by pixel size giving the biggest images first.
On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 22:28, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Commons needs iterative workflows that tag problems and modify what
reuses
/ transfusions are supported, rather than making everything a crude delete/keep decision. Else it will always struggle w scaling to these uses.
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Mon., May 18, 2020, 9:48 a.m. Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l, < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
in the past "99% unproblematic" was true, because most of the things
were
obvious and standard (panorama of towns, ancient portraits), it's not nowadays. You can upload tons of unproblematic pictures because they are easy to find, but you don't need them really. So they mostly clutter the
workflow.
There are a lot of images of kittens that we can upload, good luck categorizing them. Of course, you can switch to very specific projects
like
"documenting all small rivers" but the core issue are also high-quality upload. And everything is potentially problematic there: the right of
an
important person to privacy, the right of the manufacturer of an instruments, how creative is the lighting of an object? if I upload an image of a town it's probably a very nice one, taken by a competent photographer who clearly show them on line as well. You are in a
dimension
where you need to study, learn, ask around, find a balance. Instead we
have
people acting randomly and superficially, because they do not care
about
the long-term effect of their actions.
This impacts the maintenance of course, because very specific issues requires sophisticated categories, processes and metadata. The effort
there
is quite high, you are always the first one to arrive. the first one to clean up,the first one to explain to a third party. If you add on that
more
unnecessary stress than required, people reduce this job as much as
they
can as a necessary balance. But that job has an important effect in the overall maintenance, so at a certain point you start to see the effect
when
it is not there.
It's not a big surprise, we tried to explain this fact for years, but
the
community is designed to ignore these aspects and encourage other work attitudes. It's just like that.
Il lunedì 18 maggio 2020, 15:28:51 CEST, Yaroslav Blanter < ymbalt@gmail.com> ha scritto:
To be fair, in most cases to use Commons for uploading files is
totally
unproblematic as soon as one has basic understanding of copyright. I am pretty sure 99% of my uploads can not be deleted (I had my files mass-nominated for deletion, once with the claim they are not mine, and once with the claim they are holiday photos and out of scope, but both cases admins were reasonably enough to speedy close the nominations).
Of
course there are always potentially problematic cases, for example I
can
imagine for one could start requiring "publication" dates for painting, which is copyright paranoia but some people take it seriously etc. But
if
one uploads something sufficiently far from the grey area it normally should be ok.
(I am still a Commons admin, but I reduced my admin activity to a
minimum
and I am not planning to increase the activity level).
Best Yaroslav
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 3:12 PM Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello Alessandro, Thank you for your post and its insight. I recognized the same with
me: I
only make use of Wikimedia Commons in lessons if I have enough time.
Also I
would introduce it only to students with a solid knowledge of English.
Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org schrieb am Mo. 18. Mai 2020 um 13:08:
In the end, it's more like inducing order from other projects than
caring
about the order on Commons because there clearly can't be with people acting the way they do.
This is a great observation! And this phenomenon contributes to the on-going chaos, to the work-around-culture you need to adapt to if you
want
to make use of Wikimedia Commons. :-(
Kind regards Ziko
They are also not caring for it: if you spend your time starting
unnecessary deletion procedures instead of cleaning up categories or description, you obviously have your priority, so we also have ours.
About the main page, we need to focus more on media files IMHO, and
of
course search is complicated but I am sure metadata can improve it.
A. Il lunedì 18 maggio 2020, 11:33:46 CEST, Robert Myers < robert.myers@wikimedia.org.au> ha scritto:
Well some people do, but it is when they get trolled by other
contributors
and/or overzealous Admin comes along and deletes the file. They
quickly
lose interest, in turn telling other people not to bother.
I just had another lot of photographs tagged by a troll, in which an
Admin
deletes (
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File:Ra...
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File:Ab...
). These have been on Commons for two + years, using the same camera
gear
I
have used over the years. If it is enough for me to give up on the
project,
it would be the same for any other user but for a newbie it is
something
that would make me run for the hills (depart quickly as possible)!
On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
benjaminikuta@gmail.com>
wrote:
Anecdotally, it seems people sometimes don't upload their photos to Commons because they don't realize that the scope of Commons is
much
broader than that of Wikipedia.
Has there been, or should there be, any research into this, or why
people
don't contribute more broadly?
~Benjamin
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Robert Myers Secretary - Wikimedia Australia M: +61 400 670 288 robert.myers@wikimedia.org.au http://www.wikimedia.org.au
Wikimedia Australia Inc. is an independent charitable organisation
which
supports the efforts of the Wikimedia Foundation in Australia. We
welcome
your support by membership or donations to keep the Wikimedia mission alive. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- GN.
*Power of Diverse Collaboration* *Sharing knowledge brings people together* Wikimania Bangkok 2021 August hosted by ESEAP
Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- GN.
*Power of Diverse Collaboration* *Sharing knowledge brings people together* Wikimania Bangkok 2021 August hosted by ESEAP
Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe