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 <[email protected]> > 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 <[email protected]> > >> 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 <[email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > >> > 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 <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] >> >> >> > >> > 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 <[email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > >> > 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 <[email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 <[email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > >> > 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 >> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> 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 >> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > 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 >> > [email protected] >> > <mailto: >> [email protected]> >> > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments >> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu >
_______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
