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:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: maandag 11 juni 2018 11:11 To: [email protected] Subject: GLAM Digest, Vol 83, Issue 3 Send GLAM mailing list submissions to [email protected] 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 [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] 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 <[email protected]> To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]" <[email protected]> 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: [email protected] *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 <[email protected]> To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr Message-ID: <[email protected]> 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:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arne Wossink Sent: Montag, 11. Juni 2018 11:02 To: Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public] <[email protected]> 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: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]" <[email protected]> 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: [email protected] *Post/bezoekadres:* Mariaplaats 3 3511 LH Utrecht 2018-06-11 11:07 GMT+02:00 Estermann Beat <[email protected]>: > 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:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Arne > Wossink > *Sent:* Montag, 11. Juni 2018 11:02 > *To:* Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public] <[email protected]> > *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: [email protected] > > > > *Post/bezoekadres:* > > Mariaplaats 3 > > 3511 LH Utrecht > > _______________________________________________ > GLAM mailing list > [email protected] > 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 [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam ------------------------------ End of GLAM Digest, Vol 83, Issue 3 *********************************** _______________________________________________ GLAM mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
