[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 1:27 AM Gergő Tisza wrote: > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:57 PM Ori Livneh wrote: > >> If we're collecting exemplars, I'd like to add Bartosz >> Ciechanowski's superlative articles , >> like the ones on bicycles

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

Hi Just chiming into this discussion on *Graphs*. During the pandemic, I devoted much time on Wikidata building large datasets such as poverty incidence data and financial data. It is live now with at least being queried in 1700 Wikipedia articles multiplied by 8 languages and one chart contain

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more video: doing it right

Thanks Brion for the detailed breakdown re: video issues. Replying under the changed subject line :) Re: transcoding video, Brion wrote: > Allowing *ingestion* of MP4 h.264/AAC would allow uploading camera > originals from most consumer gear -- a major democratizing feature. > Ingestion of MP4

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:57 PM Ori Livneh wrote: > If we're collecting exemplars, I'd like to add Bartosz > Ciechanowski's superlative articles , > like the ones on bicycles and sound > . His

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:03 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga < galder...@hotmail.com> wrote: > We have plenty of roadmaps, but no vehicle to reach our destination. > Seven years ago, we were discussing our Strategy for 2030. We used > thousands of volunteer hours, thousands of staff hours and

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 2:52 PM Samuel Klein wrote: > Galder: fair enough, let's keep this thread for interactive content. > Brion's excellent suggestions deserve their own thread. > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:14 PM James Heilman wrote: > >> With respect to OWID, one can see the interactive

[Wikimedia-l] We need more video: doing it right

[New thread for the discussions started by brion, Ivan, James and others on becoming video-friendly and building a community of video editors and curators. Was "*Re: We need more interactive content.*"] James Heilman wrote: > With VideoWiki we have been able to create some higher quality content

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

Galder: fair enough, let's keep this thread for interactive content. Brion's excellent suggestions deserve their own thread. On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:14 PM James Heilman wrote: > With respect to OWID, one can see the interactive graphs working within a > mediawiki environment here

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

With respect to OWID, one can see the interactive graphs working within a mediawiki environment here . Our hope for next steps to get around the current blockers is to show a static version of the graph from Commons with a play button overlay. When the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

Dear all, I think we are mixing two different topics here, which are two different problems we should solve: We have series of problems regarding video upload, some of them technical (codecs, uploading process...) and other social (how to know if the video is freely licensed, etc). Both are

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

Den tis 30 jan. 2024 kl 02:37 skrev effe iets anders < effeietsand...@gmail.com>: > I can see one solution to that (albeit farfetched): an analogue to a super > rigorous referencing approach. I am imagining it's possible to verify in an > automated way that an edited video is exclusively