On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 12:40:31PM +0200, GoEthe.wiki wrote:
> 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.
We shouldn't mix the 2 issues in one template. On one end pictures are
monuments, on the other end they are entered into a competition. Those
are different things, even during the competition, people could upload
monument pictures without wanting to enter the competition. Those are
really two separate things.
Regards,
Andre
>
> Best,
> Gon?alo
>
>
>
>
> 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;
> > - Im?veis_de_Interesse_P?blico_in_Lisbon (replace "Im?veis de Interesse
> > P?blico" 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 :)
> >
> >
> > B?ria, 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 ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
> > livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que
> > estamos a fazer.
> >
> > Participe tamb?m: 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]>>
> > >
> > > B?ria,
> > > 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:Im?veis de Interesse P?blico in Lisbon
> > > (district)" instead.
> > >
> > > I suppose the template sub-tag "IIP" stands for "Im?veis de
> > > Interesse P?blico", 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 "Im?veis".
> > >
> > > Jane
> > >
> > > 2011/8/3 B?ria 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.
> > > _____
> > > /B?ria Lima/
> > > Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt>
> > > (351) 963 953 042
> > >
> > > /Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a
> > > possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o
> > > conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer./
> > >
> > >
> > > On 3 August 2011 08:39, Jane Darnell <[email protected]
> > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > >
> > > B?ria,
> > > 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 B?ria 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.
> > > _____
> > > /B?ria Lima/
> > > Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt>
> > > (351) 963 953 042
> > >
> > > /Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a
> > > possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de
> > > todo o conhecimento humano. ? 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 ?sterreich)", when I
> > > fully expected it to be
> > > "Kategorie:Denkmalgesch?tztes Objekte". On
> > > Commons I would expect
> > > "Category:Denkmalgesch?tztes Objekte with
> > > known IDs", and in the English Wikipedia, I
> > > named it "Category:Denkmalgesch?tztes
> > 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
