Re: [GLAM] GLAM Digest, Vol 83, Issue 3

2018-06-12 Thread Arne Wossink 
Hi Olaf,

It turns out that only 10 images have already been transferred from Flickr,
and the rest isn't (yet) on Commons. So I figured that we'll proceed with
the upload as planned, omit the 10 that are already on Commons, and then
edit their metadata manually (and let the original uploader know why we're
doing that).

This seems like the easiest solution - although a Python script like that
would surely be a useful thing to have, not just for this case... :)

Best,


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

2018-06-12 15:35 GMT+02:00 Olaf Janssen :

> 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 
> To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]"
> 
> Subject: [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr
> Message-ID:
>  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:  20180611/8eeb1d9f/attachment-0001.html>
>
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:07:00 +
> From: Estermann Beat 
> To: "Wikimedia & GLAM

Re: [GLAM] GLAM Digest, Vol 83, Issue 3

2018-06-12 Thread Olaf Janssen 
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 
To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]"

Subject: [GLAM] GLAM collection transferred from Flickr
Message-ID:

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: 


--

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:07:00 +
From: Estermann Beat 
To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]"

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] 
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