Lars Aronsson wrote: >Why is it still, now in 2014, so hard to find images? >We have categories and descriptions, but we also know >they don't describe all that we want to find in an >image. If I need an image with a bicycle and some red >flowers, I can only go to the category:bicycles and >hope that I'm lucky when browsing through the first >700 images there. Most likely, the category will be >subdivided by country or in some other useless way >that will make my search harder. > >Where is science? Google was created in 1998, based >on its Pagerank algorithm for web pages filled with >words and links. That was 14 years ago. But what >algorithms are there for finding images?
Hi. Have you tried Special:Search? :-) There's a very nice category of red flowers: <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Red_flowers>. If you search for 'incategory:"Red flowers"', you can find pictures in only that category. If you search for 'incategory:"Red flowers" incategory:"Bicycles"', you can see the intersection of these two categories. (No results currently, alas.) Try a search such as 'incategory:"Red flowers" incategory:"Cosmos atrosanguineus"' to see the search actually work (it should return one result currently, 'File:Cosmos atrosanguineus "Choco Mocha".jpg'). Hope that helps. MZMcBride _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
