Hi,
Currently on Commons, the access to the GWT is limited to a small group
of "happy fews" (who have the GWT permission).
Becoming a part of this group seems to be difficult, even for prominent
players of our community:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#GWToo…
To my opinion, we have nothing to loose (and maybe a lot to win) by
opening the GWT to all Commons users. This is the way we use to work and
what makes us successful. I don't see why we should proceed differently
here.
AFAIK, the only risk of this move would be to be flooded by inadequate
files. That's why we should maybe limit the number of parallel GWT
downloads to 1 or limit the overall number of uploads to 10 per XML file
for non-GWT permitted users. An other solution would be to adapt current
admin tools to allow them to efficiently deal with this new kind of
challenges.
Do you see any other risk?
Regards
Emmanuel
--
Volunteer
Technology, GLAM, Trainings
Zurich
+41 797 670 398
I'm happy to chime in and describe some of our experiences uploading
AV-material using the GWtoolset. We're expecting to make a donation
sometime the next few weeks. Let me know if that is needed!
Regards,
Jesse
2014-04-28 14:01 GMT+02:00 <glamtools-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>:
> Send Glamtools mailing list submissions to
> glamtools(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> glamtools-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> glamtools-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Glamtools digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Internship at Wikimedia CH around the GWToolset (Kippelboy)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:29:07 +0200
> From: Kippelboy <kippelboy(a)gmail.com>
> To: Conversations revolving around the development of GLAM Digital
> Tools <glamtools(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Cc: "rromir.imami(a)wikimedia.ch" <rromir.imami(a)wikimedia.ch>,
> "terburg(a)wikimedia.nl" <terburg(a)wikimedia.nl>
> Subject: Re: [Glamtools] Internship at Wikimedia CH around the
> GWToolset
> Message-ID: <18C24DF8-58B3-4493-BD31-C4913DE2BA87(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Great news! Looking fwd to see the uploaded content and your learnings
>
> :-)
> Kippelboy
>
> Sent from my Casiotone
>
> El 27/04/2014, a les 23.55, Jean-Frédéric <jeanfrederic.wiki(a)gmail.com>
> va escriure:
> Hi Charles & list,
>
>
> >> If everything is fine, the internship should lead to the creation of an
> handbook for GLAMs.
> > WMSE are looking into making documentation for batch uploads better.
> Working together on the GWT handbook sounds lika a brilliant idea!
>
> Yay indeed! Sounds very good. I'd be happy to be looped into this work.
>
> If I understood correctly, Sebastiaan ter Burg from WMNL (cc-ed, not sure
> if he is on that list) is working on a GWT manual.
>
> >> Is there any similar initiative somewhere?
>
> Some time ago I documented a bit how I work for batch uploads. This is not
> totally relevant now that we have the GWT but in case it might be of some
> interest
> <
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jean-Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric/Batch_uploa…
> >
> <https://github.com/Commonists/MassUploadLibrary/>
>
> Cheers,
> -- Jean-Frédéric
>
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I take the opportunity to introduce Rromir, he's doing an internship
> about the GWToolset for Wikimedia CH.
> >
> > Rromir is not an IT guy, neither am I, we will work together to test the
> GWToolset with three real batch of pictures coming from some of WMCH
> projects I'm leading.
> >
> > The idea behind this internship is to evaluate the usability of the
> GWToolset in the context of Wikimedia CH projects.
> >
> > Rromir is first getting familiar with the tool, then he will evaluate
> its accessibility to non-IT guy and if it's adapted to WMCH needs.
> >
> > If everything is fine, the internship should lead to the creation of an
> handbook for GLAMs.
> >
> > Is there any similar initiative somewhere?
> >
> > Charles
>
> _______________________________________________
> Glamtools mailing list
> Glamtools(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
>
Could a list admin check the subscribers and compare with
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=gwt…>?
I'm thinking it might be useful to post a standard welcome notice for
new users of the tool, including an invite to join this list to
discuss their experiences and initial reactions. Once you have used
the tool a couple of times, it is easy to forget which niggles took
the most time to get your head around.
Fae
--
faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Hello!
I submitted an account request on the wmflabs site through the provided link, but I haven't heard anything about it over the last couple of weeks. I was wondering if I could get access to the toolset set up - I'm working with the National Library of Scotland to upload content over the next few months and I think this would be really useful.
Thanks,
Ally
Ally Crockford
Wikimedian-In-Residence
National Library of Scotland
George IV Bridge
Edinburgh EH1 1EW
Scotland, UK
e: a.crockford(a)nls.uk<mailto:a.crockford@nls.uk>
t: (0) 131 623 3797
w: http://www.nls.uk<http://www.nls.uk/>
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
National Library of Scotland, Scottish Charity, No: SCO11086
This communication is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the addressee please inform the sender and delete the email from your system. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of National Library of Scotland. This message is subject to the Data Protection Act 1998 and Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. No liability is accepted for any harm that may be caused to your systems or data by this message.
www.nls.uk
Dear all,
First off, congratulations to everybody on creating this tool, which is
going to revolutionise uploading to WikiCommons.
Inevitably what follows is going to be largely a list of nit-picks (and
I'm sorry if I haven't tried to find your project plans or bug-tracker
first, in case some of the answers are already in the pipeline); but
don't let any of the below take away from what is a great achievement.
So, what are some issues that struck me, when uploading the set now at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_released_by_British_Libr…
(cat name may move, but this is where it's at for the moment).
* Filenames -- already under discussion in a different thread, at least
as regards character replacements.
I was a bit surprised to find the Artwork::title field automatically
being built into the file name -- I hadn't expected this.
On the one hand, I can see that it's an important piece of WikiCommons
culture to enforce: the name of the work comes first, because that is
what people will first see. But in my case, I sometimes had some very
long titles, so I wanted to be able to sometimes have a shortened
version in the filename. As a result, to avoid this I found that I was
having to move put the picture title into the first line of the
description field -- not ideal. So you might want to consider adding an
option to de-select this.
It would be nice for users to have a bit more information about how
filenames will be created, but this will come.
* Staging area. -- I had had the impression that the initial 3 test
uploads would be uploaded to a staging area, rather than the main live
wiki. So I was a bit surprised when I found it was indeed the main live
wiki they had been uploaded to.
Of course, this makes a lot of sense -- for example, seeing the effect
of specialist templates etc. It's just about managing expectations --
and, perhaps, reassuring people that mistakes can be easily removed eg
by tagging the wrongly named image with {{duplicate}}. (I ended up with
the unexpected title duplication causing unwanted filenames, and then a
".jpg.jpg" set of uploads). I initially wasn't very comfortable with my
mistakes happening on the live wiki for all to see, which made me feel
quite stressed to start with; but then I relaxed, and started the full
upload.
* Output. -- If outputting {{artwork}}, please include the standard
fields in the standard order, even if some of them are empty. eg:
{{Artwork
|artist =
|title =
|description =
|date =
|medium =
|dimensions =
|institution =
|location =
|references =
|object history =
|credit line =
|inscriptions =
|notes =
|accession number =
|source =
|permission =
|other_versions =
}}
& further fields have their standard places in the order; which pretty
much corresponds to the sequence they are output in, *not* alphabetical
order.
This is important, because WikiCommons is not a "write once" medium --
pages are there to be easily edited and updated, by humans.
It is useful to have all the basic fields in place, even if they are not
populated, because it makes it so much easier to fill something in later
-- for example, in my case, to move some of the 'description' back into
the 'title'; or to add references; or transcriptions of inscriptions; or
other versions, already on the Wiki.
The empty fields also help to give the edit page order and structure
when you look at it; otherwise it can get messy and harder to process,
if the 'description' and 'source' fields are allowed to dominate, which
can get quite long and free-form.
And please keep the fields in the standard order above, so that
experienced editors know exactly where to expect to look for particular
information, and where to edit it.
* GWtoolset fields.
The unexpected fields 'gwtoolset-title-identifier' and
'gwtoolset-url-to-the-media-file' are currently causing the template to
throw warnings, which look unsightly.
If these are going to be placed in the artwork template, please edit
that template, so that it doesn't throw warnings.
But is the artwork template actually the best place for these fields?
They don't relate to a description of the artwork, rather a description
of the upload process.
The standard place to describe the history of the upload process is in
its own template, separate from the image description template --
compare for example the template left by the Flickr2Commons bot in the
'licensing' section of the page
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Furnival%27s_Inn,_Holborn_-_Shepher…
The advantage of this is that the 'artwork' template can be kept to a
very specific function, without having its code cluttered up by other
stuff. Think what the effect would be if every upload process wanted to
add its fields to the artwork template -- maintenance, or even reading
the code, would become a nightmare. Instead, much better to put this
content in your own template, to mark the GWtoolset upload process,
perhaps with an additional master parameter to turn visible output from
the template off or on.
* Category section
This is one of the most important sections for hand-editing. Yes there
are nice methods to add/remove categories now built right into the
interface; but these still also get edited by hand, too. Readability is
therefore important.
Therefore, can you add linefeed characters, so that each
[[Category:...]] directive starts on a new line.
It's a small thing. But without it the output from last night's version
is almost unreadable.
* Whitespace
I can see it's useful at the moment, in the present beta stage of the
code, to add a debugging dump of the tool's run-state to the end of the
page.
But please can you add several lines of whitespace before it.
Normally, the category section is very easy to find, being the last
thing on the page. But without whitespace, it gets buried in a big heap
of text. So, fine to keep the debugging information there, but please
add a few lines of whitespace before it, to make it easier to find the
categories section.
* Markup
I wasn't sure how to get markup onto the page. For example, the <br />
tag can be useful if one only wants a newline, not a new paragraph. (It
is only double newlines that the Wiki software treats as breaks, single
newlines get rendered as spaces; so a <br /> tag is needed if you want
to specify a linebreak).
However it appeared that <br /> tags were being eaten by the XML parser.
I also tried double single-quotes '' to indicate italicised text, but
the software carefully turned these into Unicode escapes to preserve
them. (I didn't try <i> or <em>, so maybe that would have been the way
round this).
It can also be very useful to be able to add [[wikilinks]] at the
offline, pre-upload stage. I presume the software will escape these as
well. (Though there are workaround templates, which I presume may give
a way to work round this, albeit at the expense of less readable
wiki-pages).
* Enhancements
** {{DEFAULTSORT:}}
It would be nice to be able to specify a field in the XML to be put into
a Defaultsort for the page.
For example, for anything over 100 years old, I tend to find that it's
useful to specify a default sort-key of the form "DATE ITEM SEQ" --
where DATE is a 4-digit numerical date (perhaps with a suffix to
indicate imprecision), ITEM is some identifier for the series or item,
eg a book, that the images are drawn from; and SEQ is a padded number to
indicate a sequence within that item.
Last night I got round this by smuggling my Defaultsort into one of the
fields in the Artwork template; but really it ought to be placed
immediately above the Category information, so it would be able to load
it there directly.
** Free text
It might be good to also be able to have the general ability to load
text (eg arbitrary templates) from the XML file into the various other
parts of the page outside the Artwork template. For example, particular
credit templates or notes, or bespoke 'permissions' templates.
Of course it would be nice if the tool already knew about such
templates; but for when it doesn't, it would be a useful option to be
able to place free text in different parts of the standard page.
** Compound fields
As well as Defaultsort above, there were a number of other entries in my
upload last night that were compound fields.
For example,
Description = Title + '
' + Description
Filename = Short_Name - Short_Item_Name (Date), Page - Shelfmark
while 'Source' was built from two fields plus two further templates,
each of which had various input fields.
Some of this is always going to be best pre-processed offline. But for
simple cases, it would be nice to be able to specify multiple fields
with separators, that could then be baked into the JSON file.
** Non-XML forms of input.
JSON seems increasingly popular; and might not have so many issues with
escaped characters (and escapes for the escape mechanisms) as XML. Or
perhaps it's just that I write simple XML by hand, but for JSON I tend
to leave it to a library call to worry about...
So there are some issues. The (non-)allowed filename characters, and
the presentation/layout of the final wikitext page were the ones that
gave me actual unhappiness. The rest is there as a raw user's initial
impressions.
But really I want to thank you for this tool, which makes batch
uploading accessible really for anyone who can write an XML file, rather
than having to write bespoke bots and get specific bot approval for each
little thing.
Hope this is useful,
All best,
James.
Hi all,
I’ve been talking with Catherine Draycott of the Wellcome Library about the possibility of uploading about 100k CC-BY images [1]. I was wondering what the status of the GLAMToolset project was, since it seems like it would be useful to them.
Also, if you would prefer to work with them directly I can put you in touch. I’m just a volunteer trying to connect the dots. In a pinch I was going to offer to help them write a program to do it.
//Ed
[1] http://blog.wellcomelibrary.org/2014/01/thousands-of-years-of-visual-cultur…
Hi all.
I received an account "aubrey" some days ago.
I logged in and I did not have problem.
But now that account seems to be deleted or something.
What happened?
We are really interested in this proejct, as we need some way to importa
data from XML to MediaWiki/Wikibase
(*lots* of data).
Aubrey
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Jeremy Baron <jeremy(a)tuxmachine.com> wrote:
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Andrea Zanni" <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com>
> Date: Sep 5, 2013 10:38 AM
> Subject: [GLAM] GlamWikiToolset account request
> To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]" <glam(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Cc:
>
> > Dear all,
> > I'm interested in testing the
> > http://gwtoolset.wmflabs.org/wiki/GWToolset
> > for some of the GLAM projects in which Wikimedia Italy is involved.
> > Is it possible to have an account?
> >
> > We are also interested in similar tools for Wikibase/Wikidata (if they
> already exists).
> >
> > Thanks for the help!
> >
> > Aubrey
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GLAM mailing list
> > GLAM(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GLAM mailing list
> GLAM(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
>
>
