User talk:Multichill/Archives/2020/March

SDC modelling and {{Information}} template

I have been working a bit lately on Module:Information/sandbox and I think I can handle all the possible formats of "source", "author", and "date" fields I encountered in your uploads, so in the case the field is missing from the {{Information}} template the data can be accessed from SDC. I would like to make sure I captured all the currently used formats, so I can test the code. You can see output of Module:Information/sandbox if you replace {{Information}} template with {{Information/sandbox}} and remove most fields. I attempt to mark fields which come from SDC with , I would like to also link them to specific SDC properties, but still waiting on phabricator:T241338. If I missed any formats can you give example files?

Before any future rollout of the proposed changes I would also like to make sure that all of those modeling formats are documented in Commons:Structured_data/Modeling. I updated "source" and "date" sub-pages and will work on Commons:Structured_data/Modeling/Author, but it would be great if you check the documentation for completeness, accuracy and clarity. --Jarekt (talk) 17:49, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: oh great! {{Information/sandbox}} seems broken at the moment. Can you fix it?

I'll have another pass at the modeling pages. I was also planning to write some Wiki Loves Monuments and structured data documentation so might be some overlap here.

Maybe a good pilot is to start with the Geograph uploads. I would love to just throw something like {{Geograph from structured data}} (and categories) in the wikitext and everything is grabbed from structured data. File:Cottages at Garneddwen - geograph.org.uk - 750937.jpg is a nice example file for that. Multichill (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Fixed {{Information/sandbox}} (some issue with "demo" mode). I also added {{Information/sandbox}}{{Location}} to File:Cottages at Garneddwen - geograph.org.uk - 750937.jpg, to show the output. I do not think you would need {{Geograph from structured data}} in the future, you will just need "{{Information}}{{Location}}{{Object Location}}" plus license, which I guess we can put in {{Geograph from structured data}}, although I do not like hiding licenses in templates like that, so any license change would show up in file history. --Jarekt (talk) 19:19, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

{{Structured Data}} is probably half-way there, and I can probably simply it if things are already included via {{Information}}. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Mike, My plans are to add most frequently found SDC cases to {{Information}} but at the moment the look of the information template will not change much. It will still have the same few fields it always had (I am thinking about adding support for "location" = location (P276) used for years by {{Information2}} ). Maybe {{Structured Data}} should expand on {{Information}} template and support other SDC properties like depict, etc. --Jarekt (talk) 19:19, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: My hope with {{Structured Data}} is that it will pull together all of the relevant templates, so we can just include one template in the file page wikicode, and we can then evolve the template code without having to make more edits to all of the files after the initial transition. The complication there is data migration, which is why it provides various parameters to show extra information temporarily. It already adds the license template as well as the others, provided it's properly set up on Wikidata. I have two suggestions for {{Information}} right now. First, please add an option to pass descriptions to {{Information}} that are displayed alongside the current values, rather than replacing them. Second, just adding location (P276) support won't be enough, you'll need to follow the template tree. The "location" function in Module:WikidataIB mostly does this, so I'd suggest using that, but also see the additional tweaks in {{Wikidata Infobox}}. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments/Structured data is still work in progress, but should give a good overview. Multichill (talk) 20:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I created {{Geograph from structured data}} and applied it to one file: File:Cottages at Garneddwen - geograph.org.uk - 750937.jpg. Can you update the template? Multichill (talk) 21:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Sure, but I can not get to it immediately. It is beginning of the month and I need to do Commons:Photo_challenge stuff. --Jarekt (talk) 22:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: sure, doing some first tests, see File:Midsummer Sunset at Underhoull, Shetland Islands, Great Britain - geograph.org.uk - 6000005.jpg and other files. Not done yet. Multichill (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Er gaat iets mis met BotMultichill

Dag, Multichill. Zojuist zie ik dat je Bot om 11:30 uur bij acht afbeeldingen van de c:Category:Hervormde Kerk (Wapserveen) een Wikidata-entiteit heeft veranderd, gebaseerd op een Rijksmonument dat er niets mee te maken heeft, namelijk de kerk te Munnekeburen. Graag even kijken wat daar is misgegaan en dan herstellen uiteraard. Groet, Eissink (talk) 11:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC).

Ik heb de acht edits inmiddels ongedaan gemaakt. Eissink (talk) 12:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC).

@Eissink: Heb je een voorbeeld? Heb je gekeken of het juiste ID in {{Rijksmonument}} staat? Die zal wel naar de verkeerde kerk wijzen. Ik zet niet voor niets het ID ook in de bewerkingssamenvatting. Multichill (talk) 21:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Ik had nog niet gekeken, omdat ik niet veel begrijp van de Wikidata-entiteiten en dergelijke, maar het gaat om File:Wapserveen, Hervormde Kerk (2009) -017.jpg en zeven andere met soortgelijke bestandsnaam. Ik zie dat ik ze in mijn volglijst heb staan omdat ik ze heb hernoemd, waarbij nog het adres van de oude toewijzing (kerk in Boijl) in de beschrijving staat (zal ik wijzigen; geo-locatie had ik al wel gewijzigd), maar het Rijksmonument d:Q2159535 is weer een andere kerk, en ik weet niet waar je bot dat heeft afgelezen. Eissink (talk) 21:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC).

Ik zie nu dat BotMultichill op 16 juni 2019 zelf om onbegrijpelijke reden heeft toegevoegd dat dit om een monument in Munnekeburen zou gaan, terwijl de beschrijving aangaf dat het een pand in Boijl zou betreffen, wat dus een kerk in Wapserveen is gebleken... Zo houden we elkaar lekker bezig :) Eissink (talk) 21:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC).

Inmiddels heb ik achtmaal het juiste Rijksmonumentnummer ingevoerd. Eissink (talk) 22:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC).

Je had dus gelijk wat betreft "vast verkeerd ID", maar dat ID had je dus zelf toegewezen. Enig idee wat daar mis is gegaan? Eissink (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2020 (UTC).

@Eissink: Dat sjabloon met verkeerd id zat er al op bij upload dus daar is het mis gegaan. Dat pikt de bot op. Zie bijvoorbeeld Hervormde Kerk (Q2763535). Daarop staat Rijksmonument ID (P359) -> 21045. Omdat je nu het juiste nummertje hebt toegevoegd zal de bot nu de foto's aan Hervormde Kerk (Q2763535) koppelen (als je de verkeerde eraf hebt gehaald). Multichill (talk) 22:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Integration with Commons app?

Hi Multichill,

We (the Commons app) have been thinking about integrating Campaigns (e.g. WLM) further into our app, and someone pointed me to you as the person to talk to about this. :) Would you be interested in collaborating on this?

Misaochan (talk) 17:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

@Misaochan: long ago we even build a Commons app for Wiki Loves Monuments, see mw:Wiki Loves Monuments mobile application.

That app didn't really work out. Would be nice to something more up to date and maybe learn from the experience of the previous app?

Also looking forward to have IOS support for the app. Uploading photos is hard now.

I'm not really into mobile development myself, but I can give feedback. Will you be at the upcoming hackathon in Tirana? Multichill (talk) 18:37, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for linking the old mobile app to me, that will help us figure out what direction to go in, indeed.

We have just submitted a Project Grant proposal for developing an iOS port for the Commons app, actually. Would greatly appreciate your thoughts on it. :)

I won't be at the hackathon in Tirana, but at least one of our core developers will be attending. Will you be there? If you are, I can let her know to meet up with you. I think basic WLM integration into the Commons app might be a nice hackathon project, too. We wouldn't need you to do actual development, but would love to have your input on potential features.

Cheers! Misaochan (talk) 11:30, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Sikuopelgt.jpg

And also:

• File:Sikuunimoggroot.jpg

Yours sincerely, Arosio Stefano (talk) 07:49, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

copyright status of CC0-Files

Why do CC0-Files get copyright status copyrighted and not public domain (see [1])? --WaldiWuff (talk) 21:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Because CC0 is a license. A file is in copyright and with {{Cc0}} you release all copyright, but it isn't actually in the public domain. Multichill (talk) 21:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

But its mildly disturbing and not in the spirit of the CC0-Licence. And also: @Schlurcher: and his SchlurcherBot has the same approach as me: [2]. --WaldiWuff (talk) 20:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I do agree with @WaldiWuff: 100% and partly with you, Multichill. As your answer implied, there is a difference between a public domain tag and the CC0-License. Whereas the public domain tag simply states that the file is in the public domain (i.e. was in the public domain before uploading), a file can be properly licensed with CC0. After licensed with CC0, the file is in the public domain. A file licensed elsewhere with a CC0 can be uploaded here with a public domain tag. So then your copyright status (P6216) would change? This does not seem correct. For CC0, it do treat copyright status (P6216) as for PD, but give them a copyright license (P275) as for all other files with a license. On the other hand, I do not add copyright license (P275) to files with PD, as PD is not a license. I think you should change your copyright status (P6216) handling of files with CC0. I would keep copyright license (P275) as is. --Schlurcher (talk) 20:34, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

This approach is also backed up by Commons:Licensing section Material in the public domain: "Material released under a license like CC-0 is considered the equivalent of public domain material; " --Schlurcher (talk) 20:45, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

In some jurisdictions you can not release your work to public domain, and the only way your work can become public domain is when your copyrights expire. However you can release your work under any license, including CC0, which is like public domain, but not exactly. For example, you are still the copyright holder, and you request that people using the work do "not imply endorsement by the author". --Jarekt (talk) 04:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@WaldiWuff, Schlurcher, and Jarekt: I so happen to live in a country where you can't put it in the public domain so here it's a license, but I'm pragmatic. I like to have clean data and not the structured data on Commons equivalent of {{PD}}. When you use copyright status (P6216) -> public domain (Q19652) it should always have a qualifier to explain why the file is in the public domain. So you should figure out the right qualifier(s) to add to indicate that it's considered public domain because someone used {{Cc-zero}}. That might also solve the modeling problem of {{PD-self}}. Based on the qualifiers I see on copyright status (P6216), I would probably do something like determination method or standard (P459) -> "put in the public domain by copyright holder". I don't mind having this conversation here, but maybe better to copy it to Commons talk:Structured data/Modeling/Copyright? Multichill (talk) 17:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I have opened a discussion there. I do not like a text string for the qualifier, so I made another proposal. --Schlurcher (talk) 19:40, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

@Schlurcher: my intention was never a text string, but an item. I couldn't find one so that's why I used "put in the public domain by copyright holder". Of course that should be an item. I'll continue over there. 19:42, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:M. Dumas - After having lost - AB25596 - Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands Art Collection.jpg

Yours sincerely, BrightRaven (talk) 11:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:M. Dumas - Emily - K85596 - Museum Arnhem.jpg

And also:

• File:M. Dumas - Exotic lingerie - K85293-A-B - Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands Art Collection.jpg

Yours sincerely, BrightRaven (talk) 11:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Flickr - NewsPhoto! - Demonstratie 100 jaar Internationale Vrouwendag.jpg

File:Flickr - NewsPhoto! - Demonstratie 100 jaar Internationale Vrouwendag.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 13:25, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Watermelon House.JPG

File:Watermelon House.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 16:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Interieur, aanzicht gebrandschilderd glas-in-loodraam - Schiedam - 20366236 - RCE.jpg

And also:

• File:Interieur, aanzicht gebrandschilderd glas-in-loodraam - Schiedam - 20368335 - RCE.jpg

Yours sincerely, Vera ^(talk) 10:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

How to find all monuments

Hi! This File:Domprovstgården 02.jpg uses {{Fredet bygning|265-13708-1}}. I forgot how to find all photos of the same monument. As far as I remember you can find them with one or a few clicks? --MGA73 (talk) 17:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?sort=relevance&search="265-13708-1" works. Monuments database has an index for images too, but not sure if that still works. Multichill (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Great! Ty. --MGA73 (talk) 18:39, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

File:US Navy 100324-N-0000G-001 Nigerian navy Seaman H.O. Dairo watches as the German navy Type 702 Berlin-class combat support ship Frankfurt AM MAIN (A 1412) conducts a refueling at sea with Gunston Hall.jpg

File:US Navy 100324-N-0000G-001 Nigerian navy Seaman H.O. Dairo watches as the German navy Type 702 Berlin-class combat support ship Frankfurt AM MAIN (A 1412) conducts a refueling at sea with Gunston Hall.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: This still image is not "PD-USN": according to its description, it was taken by a Nigerian sailor ("Nigerian navy photo by Petty Officer 1st Class P.O. Gbarufu/Released"). Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Nigeria does not list an exemption oder PD clause for governmental works, hence, it would be a copyvio. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Grand-Duc (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

File:US Navy 100324-N-0000G-001 Nigerian navy Seaman H.O. Dairo watches as the German navy Type 702 Berlin-class combat support ship Frankfurt AM MAIN (A 1412) conducts a refueling at sea with Gunston Hall.jpg

File:US Navy 100324-N-0000G-001 Nigerian navy Seaman H.O. Dairo watches as the German navy Type 702 Berlin-class combat support ship Frankfurt AM MAIN (A 1412) conducts a refueling at sea with Gunston Hall.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

MGA73 (talk) 19:53, 31 March 2020 (UTC)