Yaroslav, I agree that is bot work. However, in our case, we just followed a somewhat different approach in face of the circumstances: we proposed ourselves to review image by image - please keep your flames out of the discussion :-))
We developed a tool to verify the photo data[1] so users can manually verify legitimacy/correctness of the data. This is obviously a lot of work, so we also did a tool to allow to verify/accept/reject the image with a single click, propose categories or add categories we had already mapped. [1] http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org.pt/tools/verify/?debug=0&wlm_id=70523 The verification tool transparently fetches this info and acts upon user decision: reject/accept, but the big thing is that we automatically get the images categorized with a bigger accuracy. Here's an example (with a single click): http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Castelo_de_S._Jorge_(20).jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=60403156&oldid=59783730 This is just another option put on the table countries may consider, so no one relies on a bot we never saw, and barely heard of. -- Nuno Tavares Wikimedia Portugal http://www.wikimedia.pt Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer. Participe também: http://www.wikimedia.pt Em 01-10-2011 18:27, Yaroslav M. Blanter escreveu: > Unrelated to my previous post (which is apparently so long that nobody > bothers to read it through) > > Now we have a lot of work to do on Commons to accomodate the images, and I > came across the following problem. Let me cite an example. > > There were 12 files uploaded of the St. Paul and the St. Peter Cathedral > in Peterhof, Russia. Most, if not all of them are uncategorized (meaning > only have the categories autoimatically inherited from the template). This > is one example (I have just categorized it): > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0_%D0%B8_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B0_%D0%B2_%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8F%D1%85.jpg > > The cathedral has an id which is 7801172001. All pictures uploaded under > WLM have the template with the ID. > > There are also pictures of the cathedral uploaded before September 2011. > There is a separate category for the cathedral: > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Saints_Peter_and_Paul_Cathedral_%28Peterhof%29 > > They have no id template. > > Can the following work done by a bot? > > 1) I (or somebody else) puts in the category the ID template for a certain > monument (this of course only works if a category corresponds to one and > only one monument); > > 2) A bot searches for all files with this monument ID and addes the > category (possibly removing the parent category if applicable); > > 3) A bot adds the ID template to all files in the category. > > Is it feasible? Is it reasonable? Could it be done on a regular basis? I > guess it would save a lot of time to those who work on Commons. Though > categorizing 12 files and adding templates to 20 more files is not a big > deal, doing this for every popular monument can be a bit annoying. > > Cheers > Yaroslav > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu > _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
