Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution: Media about living people

On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: > While I appreciate the lengthy discussion about the scope of the resolution > and about the ways it can be implemented in on-wiki processes, I would like > to raise a different question. > > I note with some interest that Jimmy's vote

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution: Media about living people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_151#Resolution:Media_about_living_people Hope this helps. Jee On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: > While I appreciate the lengthy discussion about the scope of the > resolution and about the ways it can be im

[Wikimedia-l] National Museum of Korea releases images of artifacts and old books.

Hello, folks. The National Museum of Korea announce high quality images of 7,300 artifacts would be released. And they will release the 100 thousands pages of old books. They said the material will be available for commercial uses. But the exact license term is not known. http://www.museum.go.kr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

On 15 December 2013 19:36, Andy Mabbett wrote: > The images contain metadata, which could be used for categorisation,at > the book level. > Not that useful. If you look at the images a lot are simply decorations and there are a fair number of duplications. > The whole point of the wiki mode

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution: Media about living people

While I appreciate the lengthy discussion about the scope of the resolution and about the ways it can be implemented in on-wiki processes, I would like to raise a different question. I note with some interest that Jimmy's vote is not recorded at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

On 15 December 2013 17:39, Katie Chan wrote: > The images release contained no image-level metadata == One million > uncategorised images == Commons community raise up in arms The images contain metadata, which could be used for categorisation,at the book level. The whole point of the wiki mode

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Commons-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

I was just about to respond with this :-) I discussed this with the BL team a few weeks before the release, and while we could sort out the technical issues of a million items fairly easily, it looked like the lack of metadata would make them very unsuited for Commons. There's nothing stopping us

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

On 15 December 2013 16:08, Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada quoted: > We have released over a million > imagesonto Flickr Commons Please note that we have a project page, for discussion of importing these images to Commons in a sensible manner: https:/

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

Just discovered the Commons project-site, too. Good to break down the massive amount of unsorted material in countries first. Could help to address interested editors quicker. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:British_Library/Mechanical_Curator_collection Jens 2013/12/15 Michael Peel

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

2013/12/15 Katie Chan : >> "We plan to launch a >> crowdsourcing application at the beginning of next year, to help describe >> what the images portray." > > > The images release contained no image-level metadata == One million > uncategorised images == Commons community raise up in arms It does

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

There’s been quite a lot of discussion of this on the cultural-partners mailing list (https://intern.wikimedia.ch/lists/listinfo/cultural-partners). As a result of that, Tom Morris has set up a working page on Commons at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:British_Library/Mechanical_Curat

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

On 15/12/2013 17:05, Jens Best wrote: Thanks for the news. A question comes to my mind when I read this article: Why did the British Library use Flickr instead of Wikimedia Commons? This: "We plan to launch a crowdsourcing application at the beginning of next year, to help describe what the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

Just discovered a short note of Andrew Gray, why Flickr was preferred instead of Commons. http://www.generalist.org.uk/blog/2013/mechanical-curator-on-commons/ 2013/12/15 Jens Best > Thanks for the news. > > A question comes to my mind when I read this article: Why did the British > Library use

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

Thanks for the news. A question comes to my mind when I read this article: Why did the British Library use Flickr instead of Wikimedia Commons? Maybe it has to do something with a better usability of Flickr? - The usability of Wikimedia Commons most be increased to make it more attractive to indi

[Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

Quote from full announcement http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk/digital-scholarship/2013/12/a-million-first-steps.html We have released over a million imagesonto Flickr Commons for anyone to use, remix and repurpose. These images > were taken from the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution: Media about living people

Well I was thinking of only tagging pictures that are controversial, but of course you could tag everything, I suppose. It would be simpler to tag categories, that way you have semi-automatic tagging of pictures of the top-tier (the Obama-tier and above) without having any problematic names in the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution: Media about living people

Hoi, I am really interested in how you think this will work out when Commons is going to use Wikidata. The planning is that in half a year the Wikidata team will start work on implementing something for Commons. It will include tagging. So for me a picture will be tagged and indicate who is in a pi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution: Media about living people

Craig, Phoebe, and Yaroslav, those are all very good points. Until Google improves its image-recognition software, most photos appearing in google images are triggered by text in the image description. It should be easy to tag problematic image desriptions, especially when more people than the subj