https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T165653 has some related information, and
suggests using Flemish museums as a case study.


On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:13 AM Alex Stinson <[email protected]> wrote:

> " What would be great to have (but probably doesn't exist) is a case-study
> showing: here's what happens when you provide metadata, versus here's what
> happens if you don't, with clear differences in uptake or re-use of media.
> "
>
> I am not sure how I would start that research question, there are a number
> of tactics we could take:
>
>    - Do analysis of use of media files in Batch uploads, by percent/time:
>    as a success indicator, and then evaluate that against some type of
>    measurement of quality of metadata?
>    - Try to look at the success of "Challenge campaigns" based on
>    different kinds of metadata -- and do some qualitative studies of that work
>    --- asking editors, how it easy it was to use, etc.
>    - Do some type of "Google and Wikimedia Commons search comparison" --
>    where we do google searches around topics adjacent to upload, and see which
>    GLAM projects get represented in them.
>
> In part, I think we are a bit hampered by the extant metrics tools, to
> getting a good story here. I had a meeting recently with Giovanni Profeta
> who has been partnering with WMCH and WMIT to investigate how to visualize
> the data that we can access:
> http://www.gprofeta.it/visual-tools-for-glams/index.php?title=Visualizations_to_be_included_in_the_website
> . Hopefully, this will make its way into WMCH's GLAM metrics tool (once its
> deployed), but I think some of these visualizations might provide us easier
> methods of analysis here.
>
> I also think what is missing is a reasonable way to give guidance for and
> analyze the quality of the metadata to begin with in our context:
>
>    - Should we develop a metric based on the % of fields used in
>    Artwork/Photograph/Information templates?
>    - are there fields that we could prioritize as important? (Creator
>    template, institution template, long vs short descriptions?)
>    - Can we describe the use of categories in that metric?
>    - Do we generate this from their upload model or from a random
>    sampling of content?
>
> I, personally, don't have time to do something like this by myself, until
> we get closer to the need for GLAM user research for structured commons.
> However, I would be happy to sit in on/help organizing a working group in
> this (like we are doing on the documentation-front based in followup  to
> the conversations at the GLAM-Coordinators meeting).
>
> Alex
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Arne Wossink <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks all for your feedback; keep it coming if you are aware of any
>> other case-studies!
>>
>> @Alex, Whatamidoing: those are good and valid points. As a Wikimedian I
>> know that the system works this way, and I know the benefits of providing
>> categories and metadata that are ready for Wikidata. However, when I talk
>> to museums, most of that knowledge is lost. What would be great to have
>> (but probably doesn't exist) is a case-study showing: here's what happens
>> when you provide metadata, versus here's what happens if you don't, with
>> clear differences in uptake or re-use of media. We have anecdotal evidence
>> that this is the case (as shown in this discussion), but that's not always
>> enough to convince GLAMs to support us.
>>
>>
>> Arne Wossink
>>
>> Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland
>>
>> *(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday, Tuesday,
>> Thursday)*
>>
>> Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 <+31%206%2011000505>
>> E-mail: [email protected]
>>
>> *Postadres*:
>> * Bezoekadres:*
>> Postbus 167                                                Mariaplaats 3
>> 3500 AD  Utrecht                                         Utrecht
>>
>> 2017-05-17 20:34 GMT+02:00 Whatamidoing (WMF)/Sherry Snyder <
>> [email protected]>:
>>
>>> Let me expand on what Alex says with two examples of what's great about
>>> metadata specifically about how ti integrates with Wikidata:
>>>
>>> 1)  You can get information about art in general.  Have you read
>>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/08/23/wikidata-glam/ ?  There is a map
>>> in the middle of the blog post that shows where notable works of art are
>>> from, and it was generated from metadata that had been imported to
>>> Wikidata.
>>>
>>> 2)  Metadata puts your art into Wikipedia articles.  A number of the
>>> Wikipedias are using Wikidata-aware infobox templates, which means that
>>> when Wikidata has an entry about the artwork, then the artwork or details
>>> about it can instantly appear at any Wikipedia that pulls metadata from
>>> Wikidata.  Look at the infobox at
>>> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paysage_de_la_vall%C3%A9e_de_l%27Arno
>>> Everything in that box at the moment is pulled from Wikidata, from the
>>> image to the name of the art museum that holds it.  The article itself only
>>> contains {{Infobox Art}}.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 7:09 AM Alex Stinson <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Arne, et. al.
>>>>
>>>> I think the greatest benefit right now, in practical terms, is
>>>> increasing the discoverability through search and through the current
>>>> category and linking structured between Wikidata and Wikipedia (for
>>>> example, interwiki language links on the left-hand side of Wikipedia pages
>>>> are increasingly including Commons Categories from Wikidata). We don't have
>>>> a huge amount of evidence, that these things support access (and would
>>>> welcome any examples folks want to share, like Jos -- or if they have a
>>>> tactic for examining this data).
>>>>
>>>> In the long term, the greatest benefit will be ease of migration to
>>>> Structured Data on Commons -- which has lots of discovery and arbitrary
>>>> query potential. Recently, I wrote a couple recommendations for Martin
>>>> Poulter, which, if done with GLAM collections now, I am imagining will help
>>>> a migration to Structured Data on Commons:
>>>>
>>>>    - Including as many descriptive metadata templates as you can in
>>>>    existing Commons infoboxes (Institution templates, creator templates,
>>>>    technique templates (basically every type of sub-template type listable 
>>>> at
>>>>    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Artwork ). These are
>>>>    mapped almost 1-to-1 by a few folks on Commons, so should be fairly 
>>>> easy to
>>>>    migrate long term.
>>>>    - Ensuring that Commons categories are mapped one-to-one with how
>>>>    Wikidata concepts are being used (depicts, vs topics related to an 
>>>> object),
>>>>    and doing it on Wikidata with Property:P373 property.
>>>>    - If items are described in Wikidata, adding as many fields as
>>>>    possible.
>>>>
>>>> The Structured data on Commons team is still being assembled, and will
>>>> be doing research that builds on some initial research from the Wikidata
>>>> team before doing community consultations around design next-steps:
>>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HeavyCommonsUserQualitativeResearch.pdf
>>>>  . I am not sure what the final shape of the project's impacts will be/look
>>>> like, but the more metadata that is consistently displayed now, the easier
>>>> it will be for the community or institution to take advantage of the
>>>> benefits of structured Commons later (such as easing attribution and
>>>> embedding of the mediafile in other sources, surfacing media files in
>>>> multilingual search, etc).
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Alex Stinson
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Arne Wossink <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Jos,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, those would be the kind of interaction that would be interesting
>>>>> to see happening as a result of providing metadata to images.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Arne Wossink
>>>>>
>>>>> Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland
>>>>>
>>>>> *(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday,
>>>>> Tuesday, Thursday)*
>>>>>
>>>>> Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 <+31%206%2011000505>
>>>>> E-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> *Postadres*:
>>>>> * Bezoekadres:*
>>>>> Postbus 167                                                Mariaplaats
>>>>> 3
>>>>> 3500 AD  Utrecht                                         Utrecht
>>>>>
>>>>> 2017-05-16 15:31 GMT+02:00 Arne Wossink <[email protected]>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Reem,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Metadata, in this case, refers to the data from the information or
>>>>>> artwork (or other) template that's used when an image is uploaded to
>>>>>> Commons. So it's not the exif-data, but information about, for example,
>>>>>> who's the maker of a painting, when did he make it, what techniques did 
>>>>>> he
>>>>>> use. Take, for example, the data from this upload:
>>>>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NL-HlmNHA_53004672_Kaaiman.tif
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Arne Wossink
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday,
>>>>>> Tuesday, Thursday)*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 <+31%206%2011000505>
>>>>>> E-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Postadres*:
>>>>>> * Bezoekadres:*
>>>>>> Postbus 167
>>>>>>  Mariaplaats 3
>>>>>> 3500 AD  Utrecht                                         Utrecht
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017-05-14 21:31 GMT+02:00 Jos Damen <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After adding Category:People_being_vaccinated to this file
>>>>>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ASC_Leiden_-_Coutinho_Collection_-_G_07_-_Ziguinchor,_Senegal_-_Vaccination_-_1973.tiff
>>>>>>> by User Hans Muller, it was picked up by User:Kopiersperre, who added:
>>>>>>> Category:Jet_injectors and added the image to
>>>>>>> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impfpistole
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other example:
>>>>>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ASC_Leiden_-_Coutinho_Collection_-_A_37_-_Surgery_in_Sara,_Guinea-Bissau_-_Suturing_the_wound_-_1974.tif
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jos Damen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2017-05-13 15:44 GMT+02:00 Arne Wossink <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As best practice we usually encourage GLAMs to provide as many
>>>>>>>> metadata as possible for media donations. However, providing these 
>>>>>>>> metadata
>>>>>>>> and "wikifying" them (for examply as part of an upload using Pattypan) 
>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>> be quite a bit of work, either for a Wikimedian or a GLAM 
>>>>>>>> volunteer/staff
>>>>>>>> member.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do we have any case studies outlining immediate benefits of
>>>>>>>> providing more metadata? For example, does providing more metadata 
>>>>>>>> lead to
>>>>>>>> better uptake of images in articles on WP?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Arne Wossink
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday,
>>>>>>>> Tuesday, Thursday)*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505 <+31%206%2011000505>
>>>>>>>> E-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Postadres*:
>>>>>>>> * Bezoekadres:*
>>>>>>>> Postbus 167
>>>>>>>>  Mariaplaats 3
>>>>>>>> 3500 AD  Utrecht                                         Utrecht
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> GLAM mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> GLAM mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> GLAM mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Alex Stinson
>>>> GLAM-Wiki Strategist
>>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>>> Twitter:@glamwiki/@sadads
>>>>
>>>> Learn more about how the communities behind Wikipedia, Wikidata and
>>>> other Wikimedia projects partner with cultural heritage organizations:
>>>> http://glamwiki.org
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GLAM mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Sherry Snyder (WhatamIdoing)
>>> Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GLAM mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GLAM mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Alex Stinson
> GLAM-Wiki Strategist
> Wikimedia Foundation
> Twitter:@glamwiki/@sadads
>
> Learn more about how the communities behind Wikipedia, Wikidata and other
> Wikimedia projects partner with cultural heritage organizations:
> http://glamwiki.org
> _______________________________________________
> GLAM mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>
-- 
Sherry Snyder (WhatamIdoing)
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
GLAM mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam

Reply via email to