Craig, Phoebe, and Yaroslav, those are all very good points. Until
Google improves its image-recognition software, most photos appearing
in google images are triggered by text in the image description. It
should be easy to tag problematic image desriptions, especially when
more people than the
Hoi,
I am really interested in how you think this will work out when Commons is
going to use Wikidata. The planning is that in half a year the Wikidata
team will start work on implementing something for Commons. It will include
tagging. So for me a picture will be tagged and indicate who is in a
Well I was thinking of only tagging pictures that are controversial,
but of course you could tag everything, I suppose. It would be simpler
to tag categories, that way you have semi-automatic tagging of
pictures of the top-tier (the Obama-tier and above) without having any
problematic names in the
Quote from full announcement
http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk/digital-scholarship/2013/12/a-million-first-steps.html
We have released over a million
imageshttp://www.flickr.com/photos/britishlibraryonto Flickr Commons
for anyone to use, remix and repurpose. These images
were taken from the
Thanks for the news.
A question comes to my mind when I read this article: Why did the British
Library use Flickr instead of Wikimedia Commons? Maybe it has to do
something with a better usability of Flickr? -
The usability of Wikimedia Commons most be increased to make it more
attractive to
Just discovered a short note of Andrew Gray, why Flickr was preferred
instead of Commons.
http://www.generalist.org.uk/blog/2013/mechanical-curator-on-commons/
2013/12/15 Jens Best jens.b...@wikimedia.de
Thanks for the news.
A question comes to my mind when I read this article: Why did the
On 15/12/2013 17:05, Jens Best wrote:
Thanks for the news.
A question comes to my mind when I read this article: Why did the British
Library use Flickr instead of Wikimedia Commons?
This:
We plan to launch a
crowdsourcing application at the beginning of next year, to help describe
what the
There’s been quite a lot of discussion of this on the cultural-partners mailing
list (https://intern.wikimedia.ch/lists/listinfo/cultural-partners). As a
result of that, Tom Morris has set up a working page on Commons at:
2013/12/15 Katie Chan k...@ktchan.info:
We plan to launch a
crowdsourcing application at the beginning of next year, to help describe
what the images portray.
The images release contained no image-level metadata == One million
uncategorised images == Commons community raise up in arms
It
Just discovered the Commons project-site, too. Good to break down the
massive amount of unsorted material in countries first. Could help to
address interested editors quicker.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:British_Library/Mechanical_Curator_collection
Jens
2013/12/15 Michael Peel
On 15 December 2013 16:08, Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada emi...@gmail.com quoted:
We have released over a million
imageshttp://www.flickr.com/photos/britishlibraryonto Flickr Commons
Please note that we have a project page, for discussion of importing
these images to Commons in a sensible manner:
I was just about to respond with this :-)
I discussed this with the BL team a few weeks before the release, and
while we could sort out the technical issues of a million items fairly
easily, it looked like the lack of metadata would make them very
unsuited for Commons.
There's nothing stopping
On 15 December 2013 17:39, Katie Chan k...@ktchan.info wrote:
The images release contained no image-level metadata == One million
uncategorised images == Commons community raise up in arms
The images contain metadata, which could be used for categorisation,at
the book level.
The whole point
While I appreciate the lengthy discussion about the scope of the
resolution and about the ways it can be implemented in on-wiki
processes, I would like to raise a different question.
I note with some interest that Jimmy's vote is not recorded at
On 15 December 2013 19:36, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
The images contain metadata, which could be used for categorisation,at
the book level.
Not that useful.
If you look at the images a lot are simply decorations and there are a fair
number of duplications.
The whole
Hello, folks.
The National Museum of Korea announce high quality images of 7,300
artifacts would be released. And they will release the 100 thousands pages
of old books. They said the material will be available for commercial uses.
But the exact license term is not known.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_151#Resolution:Media_about_living_people
Hope this helps.
Jee
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.net
wrote:
While I appreciate the lengthy discussion about the scope of the
resolution and about
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
tom...@twkozlowski.net wrote:
While I appreciate the lengthy discussion about the scope of the resolution
and about the ways it can be implemented in on-wiki processes, I would like
to raise a different question.
I note with some interest
18 matches
Mail list logo
