Hi Arne,

Good question! 

It might help if you share the exact Commons-cat the image are in, that helps 
us better assess the situation. I imagine a number of potential helpouts:

1) I guess asking a Commons admin to delete the already uploaded files and 
reupload using Pattypan would be the easiest way forward.

2) Assuming all images are in 1 Commons-cat : Use custom replace in 
VisualFileChange.js? (perhaps with reg exps?) 

3) In the GLAMwiki toolset I read " Re-upload media from URL - This checkbox 
allows you to re-upload media for an item that has already been uploaded to the 
wiki. If the item already exists because of one of your previous uploads, an 
additional media file will be added to the wiki. If someone else has already 
uploaded a new version of the media file, then your new upload will be ignored. 
If the media file does not yet exist in the wiki, it will be uploaded whether 
this checkbox is checked or not."

Perhaps this would allow for an upload with better metadata? 

4) Assuming all images are in 1 Commons-cat: with some effort you could write a 
Python script that replaces all the existing 'poor/too short' metadata field 
values with the better (template  based) values   

Best,
Olaf

-----Original Message-----
From: GLAM [mailto:glam-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
glam-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: maandag 11 juni 2018 11:11
To: glam@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: GLAM Digest, Vol 83, Issue 3

Send GLAM mailing list submissions to
        glam@lists.wikimedia.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        glam-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        glam-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GLAM digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. GLAM collection transferred from Flickr (Arne Wossink)
   2. Re: GLAM collection transferred from Flickr (Estermann Beat)
   3. Re: GLAM collection transferred from Flickr (Arne Wossink)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 11:01:43 +0200
From: Arne Wossink <woss...@wikimedia.nl>
To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]"
        <glam@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr
Message-ID:
        <cakre8muspsw25_fvdcspb94swg+pydynbpgg4ep2na9m4eo...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hi all,

One of our GLAMs was working on a small upload of PD photos from their
collection. They were planning to do the upload with Pattypan and use
creator, language templates etc. to enrich the metadata as much as possible.

However, these photos were already available on their Flickr account under
a PD license with basically the same information about the photos
(description was limited anyway). Another user has recently transferred
these with Flickr2Commons. So these images are now already on Commons, but
their description and other information is not as good as could have been
if all available templates etc. had been used.

This is a first for me. I'm aware that nothing could have been done about
the Flickr to Commons transfer except not putting them there in the first
place, but clearly the current situation is not in our best interest or
that of the GLAM and is certainly not a best practice.

Any comments on this? What would be a good way to handle this situation?

Arne Wossink

Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland

*(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday, Tuesday,
Thursday)*

Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505
E-mail: woss...@wikimedia.nl

*Post/bezoekadres:*
Mariaplaats 3
3511 LH Utrecht
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/glam/attachments/20180611/8eeb1d9f/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:07:00 +0000
From: Estermann Beat <beat.esterm...@bfh.ch>
To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]"
        <glam@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr
Message-ID: <1bac267756dd4b52ac8dc5336d6fe...@bfh.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hi,

Do the already uploaded pictures have a unique id (or some metadata that could 
be used as such) that would allow for an easy matching between the images on 
Commons and the entries in the database?

Cheers,
Beat



From: GLAM [mailto:glam-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Arne Wossink
Sent: Montag, 11. Juni 2018 11:02
To: Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public] <glam@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr

Hi all,

One of our GLAMs was working on a small upload of PD photos from their 
collection. They were planning to do the upload with Pattypan and use creator, 
language templates etc. to enrich the metadata as much as possible.

However, these photos were already available on their Flickr account under a PD 
license with basically the same information about the photos (description was 
limited anyway). Another user has recently transferred these with 
Flickr2Commons. So these images are now already on Commons, but their 
description and other information is not as good as could have been if all 
available templates etc. had been used.

This is a first for me. I'm aware that nothing could have been done about the 
Flickr to Commons transfer except not putting them there in the first place, 
but clearly the current situation is not in our best interest or that of the 
GLAM and is certainly not a best practice.

Any comments on this? What would be a good way to handle this situation?

Arne Wossink

Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland

(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday, Tuesday, 
Thursday)

Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505
E-mail: woss...@wikimedia.nl<mailto:woss...@wikimedia.nl>

Post/bezoekadres:
Mariaplaats 3
3511 LH Utrecht
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/glam/attachments/20180611/29771c27/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 11:10:32 +0200
From: Arne Wossink <woss...@wikimedia.nl>
To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]"
        <glam@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr
Message-ID:
        <cakre8mu-ypdt5_e7mxxgvgfd3tbwmghp21jhzzjmmscy-s_...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Yes. The catalogue ID is provided as part of the general description field.


Arne Wossink

Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland

*(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday, Tuesday,
Thursday)*

Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505
E-mail: woss...@wikimedia.nl

*Post/bezoekadres:*
Mariaplaats 3
3511 LH Utrecht

2018-06-11 11:07 GMT+02:00 Estermann Beat <beat.esterm...@bfh.ch>:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Do the already uploaded pictures have a unique id (or some metadata that
> could be used as such) that would allow for an easy matching between the
> images on Commons and the entries in the database?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Beat
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* GLAM [mailto:glam-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Arne
> Wossink
> *Sent:* Montag, 11. Juni 2018 11:02
> *To:* Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public] <glam@lists.wikimedia.org>
> *Subject:* [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> One of our GLAMs was working on a small upload of PD photos from their
> collection. They were planning to do the upload with Pattypan and use
> creator, language templates etc. to enrich the metadata as much as possible.
>
>
>
> However, these photos were already available on their Flickr account under
> a PD license with basically the same information about the photos
> (description was limited anyway). Another user has recently transferred
> these with Flickr2Commons. So these images are now already on Commons, but
> their description and other information is not as good as could have been
> if all available templates etc. had been used.
>
>
>
> This is a first for me. I'm aware that nothing could have been done about
> the Flickr to Commons transfer except not putting them there in the first
> place, but clearly the current situation is not in our best interest or
> that of the GLAM and is certainly not a best practice.
>
>
>
> Any comments on this? What would be a good way to handle this situation?
>
>
>
> Arne Wossink
>
>
>
> Projectleider / Project Manager Wikimedia Nederland
>
>
>
> *(Werkdagen: maandag, dinsdag, donderdag / Office hours: Monday, Tuesday,
> Thursday)*
>
>
>
> Tel. +31 (0)6 11000505
>
> E-mail: woss...@wikimedia.nl
>
>
>
> *Post/bezoekadres:*
>
> Mariaplaats 3
>
> 3511 LH Utrecht
>
> _______________________________________________
> GLAM mailing list
> GLAM@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/glam/attachments/20180611/a244d9a1/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
GLAM mailing list
GLAM@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam


------------------------------

End of GLAM Digest, Vol 83, Issue 3
***********************************
_______________________________________________
GLAM mailing list
GLAM@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam

Reply via email to