Re: [Wikimedia-l] Media handling is difficult
On 31 July 2015 at 06:48, Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs on Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could it be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors = VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to contribute. That removes one of the technological barriers and it looks its a priority for WMF. While part of contributing to Wikipedia is still contributing by images. I am from Wikimedia Czech republic. We run many projects based on media harvest or organizing *low barrier media harvest activities* to bring new users to Wikipedia. As our newbies are not technologically skilled and not native English speakers, there is a big technology block to contribute to Wikipedia with ease: 1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload I don't think having a custom mobile app for uploading files is really the key problem. The quality of media capture on non-specialist mobile devices, and especially the general pattern of use for them, is not so good that encouraging people in general to upload them for use in Wikipedia articles is a good idea. Yes, you *can* take good, educational, useful photos with a mobile device, but in general people do not, and when we enabled uploads on the mobile desktop we got a lot of very low-value photos, almost all of which were deleted (and the users understandably didn't stay around). The old tickets at https://wikimedia.mingle.thoughtworks.com/projects/mobile/cards/920 and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T53559 for example have some off-handed comments about this being the Selfie Apocalypse. The hard thing is not grabbing the media file from the user's device, but helping users understand what media is appropriate, what is expected, what is good, and what won't get immediately deleted by the wiki's community. We don't just want to trap people into making a one-off upload contribution – we want to encourage people to join the community and stay, taking several photos, not just one. :-) I've got some ideas about how we can gently coax people into understanding this without scaring them away, but I'm sure others have better plans. 2) newbies are lost, when they click on Upload image and they are transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons 3) Wikimedia Commons is in English - foreign language for our participants 5) Wikimedia Commons environment is still pretty techy 6) Insert metadata, takes a long time: e.g.: you have an image of a cathedral in Des Moines, IW. 3 or 4 times you have to insert same information: a) to file name (*Des Moines, cathedral.jpg*), b) to file description (*en:** Cathedral in Des Moines, Iowa, USA*/*es:* *La catedral de XY en Des Moines, Iowa, EEUU*) and c) to the category (*category:Des Moines* or *Churches in Des Moines*, *category:Cathedrals in Iowa*). [Answering these three together.] Yup, that's why our main work in Multimedia right now is making it possible to upload a media file from whichever wiki you're on , and do so whilst you're editing. We're looking to make adding the information as simple and painless as possible, without letting people upload files without enough information for the community to triage and ensure are as high quality as possible. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91717 is the overall work, and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T40030 will be the integration into VisualEditor (we'll do it for users writing in wikitext as well, of course). 4) biggest language barrier are categories, which are in English only, we need to insert name of the category in our mother tongue That is true. The long-term hope in this area is using Wikibase (the software behind Wikidata) to add proper structured data to Commons. This would mean that we could replace categories named in a single language with 'tags' named in all languages, which would make it both easier to contribute to Commons and better to find existing media already on Commons for the majority of our readers and editors who do not speak English. You can see some thoughts on this at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Multichill/Commons_Wikidata_roadmap Could we do something for those, who contributes with their media to Wikipedia? Could we do it in one or two years? Absolutely. Or, at least, I hope so. :-) Yours, -- James D. Forrester Lead Product Manager, Editing Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. jforres...@wikimedia.org | @jdforrester On 31 July 2015 at 06:48, Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs on Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could it be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors = VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to contribute.
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Big problem to solve: good WYSIWYG on WMF wikis
On 16 June 2015 at 02:53, Derk-Jan Hartman d.j.hartman+wmf...@gmail.com wrote: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-December/063225.html I just found back this post by David Gerard from 2010 and was struck by how dead-on the discussion and analysis was and how far we have actually come with VE 5 years later, even though we still did not pass the finish line just yet. Yes, I agree. I think there's a lot of interesting areas we can consider for VisualEditor as a technology, and more importantly editing as an area; thank you for raising this. :-) Also interesting is some of the follow up to it, which points out that the usability of Templates is also a real problem in itself, not easily solvable with WYSIWYG, but probably just as important. I think VE is really close now to being usable in production, but I think that we are FAR from done on this front. Like was stated, templates are a real problem. A UI problem, and one that VE doesn't really solve. Citoid sort of does, but just for one small subset of templates. Agreed. There are several layers of answer to this question, precisely as you say based on what levels of vision we're trying to achieve. Here is mine (TL;DR: lots to do): Mostly this comes down to what templates (and now of course, Lua) are used for. My mental categories are: 1. Standardised workflow notices – this needs a reference, this article is poorly written, this list needs expanding, this file should be expanded, please delete this page, this page is protected, this suggested edit needs reviewing, please don't edit this discussion because it's archived, I am warning you not to be disruptive in your editing or you will be in trouble, this user is blocked, etc. 2. Standardised visual formatting of content – citations (templated references), infoboxen, stub notices, succession boxes, media licensing data, Wiktionary's etymology templates, Wikisource' and so on. 3. Standardised conversion or expansion of content – unit conversion, date conversion, links to sister project pages on the same title, annotation markup (e.g. setting lang=fr around some content, or marking it up with hCard data; adding an HTML anchor to the page; etc.). 4. Standardised fetching of content – we frequently pull images from Commons (and people don't even think of it as fetching content); beyond that it's not yet hugely common, though some infoboxes for example pull data from Wikidata. 5. Unstandardised sharing of identical content blocks (the original intent for templates) – most often used as navboxes, and sadly sometimes also used to hide complex wikitext e.g. for infoboxes or graphs from the regular users who might break it, which speaks to how much VisualEditor is needed. Of course, to make things 'easier' a lot of templates do multiple versions of these, and/or are parameterised to do almost the same thing but slightly differently based on some of the inputs (e.g. a species infobox which adds a 'fix me' category, sets a different background colour if the status is 'endangered', pulls three of its values from Wikidata, and converts range from hectares to square kilometres). There's also meta-templates for other templates like notices, but I'll ignore those for now. :-) My broad attitude is that the need for the first four of these categories can be replaced by real software support; the need for the fifth is not something I foresee a better solution for than community-shared templates, though I'm willing to be proven wrong. I understand that everything I mentioned in group one (workflow stuff) is potentially in scope for the work that the excellent Collaboration team are considering as part of Flow (hence the name). No doubt it could also cover a number of areas of work of which I cannot yet conceive; this is how templates themselves have grown from their original intent into the sprawling, complicated and confusing morass that they are today. This workflow stuff is deeply hard to get right, however, and I've seen how badly doing workflows in systems can destroy the communities, so I imagine this will move slowly. For many of the use cases in groups two and three (visual and machine-readable formatting/re-formatting), I think that broad swathes of our content uses of templates would be better supported through use-specific systems at three levels: * structured – storing information in a proper, machine-readable manner, with a single way of both storing and representing the same information for all instances on that wiki, but differing between wikis; * standardised – the above, with the harmonisation of the structure and use of that content type across all Wikimedia wikis; and * centralised – the above, with all the content stored on one central 'wiki' (or whatever) rather than local versions of the content. For example, references are currently semi-structured on many wikis using citation templates; storing this in structured data is a clearly useful
[Wikimedia-l] Media handling is difficult
Hi, I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs on Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could it be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors = VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to contribute. That removes one of the technological barriers and it looks its a priority for WMF. While part of contributing to Wikipedia is still contributing by images. I am from Wikimedia Czech republic. We run many projects based on media harvest or organizing *low barrier media harvest activities* to bring new users to Wikipedia. As our newbies are not technologically skilled and not native English speakers, there is a big technology block to contribute to Wikipedia with ease: 1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload 2) newbies are lost, when they click on Upload image and they are transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons 3) Wikimedia Commons is in English - foreign language for our participants 4) biggest language barrier are categories, which are in English only, we need to insert name of the category in our mother tongue 5) Wikimedia Commons environment is still pretty techy 6) Insert metadata, takes a long time: e.g.: you have an image of a cathedral in Des Moines, IW. 3 or 4 times you have to insert same information: a) to file name (*Des Moines, cathedral.jpg*), b) to file description (*en:** Cathedral in Des Moines, Iowa, USA*/*es:* *La catedral de XY en Des Moines, Iowa, EEUU*) and c) to the category (*category:Des Moines* or *Churches in Des Moines*, *category:Cathedrals in Iowa*). Its 2015, there are many social projects around us. You can handle images much easier on these projects than on mother of all social projects - Wikipedia. Big step was done with using images allready present in Commons. Could we do something for those, who contributes with their media to Wikipedia? Could we do it in one or two years? Thank you very much for your concern! Regards, Juandev ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Media handling is difficult
On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:37:19 -0400, Jan Ainali jan.ain...@wikimedia.se wrote: Some thoughts inline. 2015-07-31 15:48 GMT+02:00 Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com: Hi, 1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload Well, there is one [1] (but not supported by WMF and only for iOS so far). There is one for android too [1]. [1] https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdid=org.wikimedia.commons ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Media handling is difficult
FYI, for those interested in uploading to Commons, there was an interesting presentation at Wikimania about usability testing this. https://archive.org/details/videoeditserver-96 The short answer to your very valid question -- licenses and copyright are complicated legal issues when it comes to media. That creeps over into usability in ways that are probably going to be very hard to solve. -Andrew On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs on Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could it be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors = VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to contribute. That removes one of the technological barriers and it looks its a priority for WMF. While part of contributing to Wikipedia is still contributing by images. I am from Wikimedia Czech republic. We run many projects based on media harvest or organizing *low barrier media harvest activities* to bring new users to Wikipedia. As our newbies are not technologically skilled and not native English speakers, there is a big technology block to contribute to Wikipedia with ease: 1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload 2) newbies are lost, when they click on Upload image and they are transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons 3) Wikimedia Commons is in English - foreign language for our participants 4) biggest language barrier are categories, which are in English only, we need to insert name of the category in our mother tongue 5) Wikimedia Commons environment is still pretty techy 6) Insert metadata, takes a long time: e.g.: you have an image of a cathedral in Des Moines, IW. 3 or 4 times you have to insert same information: a) to file name (*Des Moines, cathedral.jpg*), b) to file description (*en:** Cathedral in Des Moines, Iowa, USA*/*es:* *La catedral de XY en Des Moines, Iowa, EEUU*) and c) to the category (*category:Des Moines* or *Churches in Des Moines*, *category:Cathedrals in Iowa*). Its 2015, there are many social projects around us. You can handle images much easier on these projects than on mother of all social projects - Wikipedia. Big step was done with using images allready present in Commons. Could we do something for those, who contributes with their media to Wikipedia? Could we do it in one or two years? Thank you very much for your concern! Regards, Juandev ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 11, Issue 30 -- 29 July 2015
News and notes: BARC de-adminship proposal; Wikimania recordings debate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-07-29/News_and_notes Op-ed: My life as an autistic Wikipedian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-07-29/Op-ed Recent research: Wikipedia and collective intelligence; how Wikipedia is tweeted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-07-29/Recent_research In the media: Is Wikipedia a battleground in the culture wars? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-07-29/In_the_media Featured content: Even mammoths get the Blues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-07-29/Featured_content Traffic report: Namaste again, Reddit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-07-29/Traffic_report Single page view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Single/2015-07-29 PDF version http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-07-29 https://www.facebook.com/wikisignpost / https://twitter.com/wikisignpost -- Wikipedia Signpost Staff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does Foundation have 3rd party standing against Harald Bischoff?
On Jul 27, 2015 5:33 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: snip This still leaves me wondering if WMF Legal could be involved in the legal defense of the reusers if they acted in good faith in attempting to comply with the license terms as they understood them on Commons. snip Acting in good faith will, at best, mitigate against damages. It isn't actually a defense against liability. If people are getting sued after doing absolutely everything right, then I could maybe imagine getting involved. However, in many licensing disputes there is a legitimate case that the reuser violated the terms of the license (e.g. by neglecting details regarding authorship / attribution / etc.), often due to ignorance of what the license requires. In many such cases, the reuser may well face a likelihood of losing if the case ever made it to court. In a world of good faith we might expect that reusers who made mistakes out of ignorance to be treated kindly, but the legal system isn't exactly geared towards kindness. I think that we (the community + the WMF) should do more to help ensure license compliance and educate reusers about appropriate attribution, etc. However, I don't think that WMF Legal should get involved in cases where someone wanted to do the right thing but failed. There is no need to waste our resources on third-party cases where there is a significant risk of losing. Robert, and Jan Bart, what the lawyer did in harald Bischof s Name is something common. There might be hundreds or thousands of cases, and there are maybe the same number of images concerned. Google reveals that lawyers did this on behalf of at least 4 authors in the last 10 years or so. There is no sign that this will stop in future. Therefor allow me come back to my original question which I d love to have an answer from the wmf legal department, and cc-by expert readers: independent of this case, is there a technical possibility to put amateur reusers in future on a safe ground. Without the need of education. By automatically adding author and license info into the metadata of the image. If this is not enough attribution we should strive to have this kind of attribution accepted in a future version cc license. Best Rupert ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Media handling is difficult
2015-07-31 19:54 GMT+02:00 Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com: FYI, for those interested in uploading to Commons, there was an interesting presentation at Wikimania about usability testing this. https://archive.org/details/videoeditserver-96 The short answer to your very valid question -- licenses and copyright are complicated legal issues when it comes to media. That creeps over into usability in ways that are probably going to be very hard to solve. I guess it adds complexity for sure, however it doesn't explains why we still can't do a proper image rotation or crop without hacking around JS or bots (which makes things complicated when the volunteer maintainer has enough of fixing is code due to change mediawiki). -Andrew On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs on Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could it be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors = VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to contribute. That removes one of the technological barriers and it looks its a priority for WMF. While part of contributing to Wikipedia is still contributing by images. I am from Wikimedia Czech republic. We run many projects based on media harvest or organizing *low barrier media harvest activities* to bring new users to Wikipedia. As our newbies are not technologically skilled and not native English speakers, there is a big technology block to contribute to Wikipedia with ease: 1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload 2) newbies are lost, when they click on Upload image and they are transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons 3) Wikimedia Commons is in English - foreign language for our participants 4) biggest language barrier are categories, which are in English only, we need to insert name of the category in our mother tongue 5) Wikimedia Commons environment is still pretty techy 6) Insert metadata, takes a long time: e.g.: you have an image of a cathedral in Des Moines, IW. 3 or 4 times you have to insert same information: a) to file name (*Des Moines, cathedral.jpg*), b) to file description (*en:** Cathedral in Des Moines, Iowa, USA*/*es:* *La catedral de XY en Des Moines, Iowa, EEUU*) and c) to the category (*category:Des Moines* or *Churches in Des Moines*, *category:Cathedrals in Iowa*). Its 2015, there are many social projects around us. You can handle images much easier on these projects than on mother of all social projects - Wikipedia. Big step was done with using images allready present in Commons. Could we do something for those, who contributes with their media to Wikipedia? Could we do it in one or two years? Thank you very much for your concern! Regards, Juandev ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Pierre-Selim ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does Foundation have 3rd party standing against Harald Bischoff?
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 10:34 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote: Therefor allow me come back to my original question which I d love to have an answer from the wmf legal department, and cc-by expert readers: independent of this case, is there a technical possibility to put amateur reusers in future on a safe ground. Without the need of education. By automatically adding author and license info into the metadata of the image. If this is not enough attribution we should strive to have this kind of attribution accepted in a future version cc license. It's not impossible but a hairy problem. It's being tracked under T5361 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T5361. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Media handling is difficult
*Jan Ainali:* thx for the link, we will have a look on that. *Bahodir Mansurov:* that sounds great. Most of the people here use Android. We will deffinitely test it. *Andrew Lih:* I havent catched the point. The presentation was about usability and how to run it. For image uploads we can run it just once or maybe 3 times (different target groups). I hope we dont have to run it in all countries and all languages to get some needs and be able to request developers to make changes into software?! If I understood well this team does not performed enough tests yet, so thats why they talk in general about Usability Testing? Or maybe I miss something, you are talking about licenses. I dont understand how licenses are related to this issue? *I am just guessing:* Foundation is afraid to use easy mobile app for upload, because people will massively break license? Is that a point? Did Commons colapsed with Instant Commons? Did we got some images, when Instant Commons was enabled in MW distribution? Juandev 2015-07-31 22:35 GMT+02:00 Pierre-Selim pierre-se...@huard.info: 2015-07-31 19:54 GMT+02:00 Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com: FYI, for those interested in uploading to Commons, there was an interesting presentation at Wikimania about usability testing this. https://archive.org/details/videoeditserver-96 The short answer to your very valid question -- licenses and copyright are complicated legal issues when it comes to media. That creeps over into usability in ways that are probably going to be very hard to solve. I guess it adds complexity for sure, however it doesn't explains why we still can't do a proper image rotation or crop without hacking around JS or bots (which makes things complicated when the volunteer maintainer has enough of fixing is code due to change mediawiki). -Andrew On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs on Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could it be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors = VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to contribute. That removes one of the technological barriers and it looks its a priority for WMF. While part of contributing to Wikipedia is still contributing by images. I am from Wikimedia Czech republic. We run many projects based on media harvest or organizing *low barrier media harvest activities* to bring new users to Wikipedia. As our newbies are not technologically skilled and not native English speakers, there is a big technology block to contribute to Wikipedia with ease: 1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload 2) newbies are lost, when they click on Upload image and they are transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons 3) Wikimedia Commons is in English - foreign language for our participants 4) biggest language barrier are categories, which are in English only, we need to insert name of the category in our mother tongue 5) Wikimedia Commons environment is still pretty techy 6) Insert metadata, takes a long time: e.g.: you have an image of a cathedral in Des Moines, IW. 3 or 4 times you have to insert same information: a) to file name (*Des Moines, cathedral.jpg*), b) to file description (*en:** Cathedral in Des Moines, Iowa, USA*/*es:* *La catedral de XY en Des Moines, Iowa, EEUU*) and c) to the category (*category:Des Moines* or *Churches in Des Moines*, *category:Cathedrals in Iowa*). Its 2015, there are many social projects around us. You can handle images much easier on these projects than on mother of all social projects - Wikipedia. Big step was done with using images allready present in Commons. Could we do something for those, who contributes with their media to Wikipedia? Could we do it in one or two years? Thank you very much for your concern! Regards, Juandev ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Pierre-Selim ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
