User talk:Jane023/Archive 7

File:Commons vs Wikidata for PD-Art-100-1923 images.png

love the slide, but just to quibble with you: there is a "credit line" field, and "object history", which is separate from "notes"; although people have been pasting lots in the notes field. - and creator template on commons, and institution coming from wikidata. cheers. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 20:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

True. Neither of which have properties on Wikidata btw. Jane023 (talk) 20:37, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Structured Commons focus group update, Nov 21, 2017

Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for the the community focus group for Structured Commons :-)

IRC office hour today, 21 November, 18.00 UTC

• The IRC office hour about Structured Commons takes place at 18:00 UTC in wikimedia-office ^webchat. Amanda, Ramsey and I will give updates about the project, and you can ask us questions. The log will be published afterwards.

Tools update

Many important community tools for Commons and Wikidata will benefit from an update to structured data in the future. You can help indicate which tools will need attention:

• Check this Google spreadsheet and leave your comments (ping me if you'd like full editing access to the spreadsheet)
• More and more tools will also be tracked on Phabricator and on the tools inventory page. Feel free to add and edit.

Warmly, your community liaison SandraF (WMF) (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Works after Pieter Claesz. Soutman --> Category:Works after Pieter Soutman

Hi. Please could you explain this move? (diff is the edit creating the soft redirect to the new name). This leaves the category Category:Works after Pieter Soutman with a name inconsistent with its parent and other related categories and you appear to have moved on to other things. Thanks. --Mirokado (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes most engravings are signed with a note "Pieter Soutman del." and therefore this move increases findability for engravings. Jane023 (talk) 20:14, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. It would be worth adding that explanation to the category page since it wasn't obvious to me and it may stop someone "correcting" the category name some time later. --Mirokado (talk) 20:46, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. Jane023 (talk) 11:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! --Mirokado (talk) 13:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Structured Commons focus group update, December 11, 2017

Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for the community focus group for Structured Commons :-)

Later this week, a full newsletter will be distributed, but you are the first to receive an update on new requests for feedback.

Three requests for feedback

1. We received many additions to the spreadsheet that collects important Commons and Wikidata tools. Thank you! Now, you can participate in a survey that helps us understand and prioritize which tools and functionalities are most important for the Wikimedia Commons and Wikidata communities. The survey runs until December 22. Here's some background.
2. Help the team decide on better names for 'captions' and 'descriptions'. You can provide input until January 3, 2018.
3. Help collect interesting Commons files, to prepare for the data modelling challenges ahead! Continuous input is welcome there.

Warmly, your community liaison SandraF (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) - 16:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Paintings_in_Monastère_royal_de_Brou

Paintings in Monastère royal de Brou has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pierre Tribhou (talk) 20:04, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Bartholomeus van der Helst - Man leaning out of the window 1639 (cropped).jpg

Dit is het bewijs dat de staande man in het midden Roelof Bicker is

Hallo Jane023 zou dit Roelof Bicker (1611-1656) kunnen zijn? Lotje (talk) 14:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Hij is zeker iemand van de kring van burgemeesters, want hij houdt een van de Amsterdamse bekerschroeven vast. Roelof Bicker is hij niet, zie de bijgevoegd gravure. Jane023 (talk) 20:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Philip van Dijk - Portrait of an Officer in Armour in Front of His Tent NTIV QUEG 1514019.jpg

Copyright status: File:Philip van Dijk - Portrait of an Officer in Armour in Front of His Tent NTIV QUEG 1514019.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Philip van Dijk - Portrait of an Officer in Armour in Front of His Tent NTIV QUEG 1514019.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:57, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Peter Lely - William III (1650–1702), as Prince of Orange LNE RATOL I 40.jpg

Copyright status: File:Peter Lely - William III (1650–1702), as Prince of Orange LNE RATOL I 40.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Peter Lely - William III (1650–1702), as Prince of Orange LNE RATOL I 40.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 10:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Structured Commons - Design feedback request: Multilingual Captions

Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for the the community focus group for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons.

The Structured Data on Commons team has a new design feedback request up for Multilingual Captions support in the Upload Wizard. Visit the page for more information about the potential designs. Discussion and feedback is welcome there.

On a personal note, you'll see me posting many of these communications going forward for the Structured Data project, as SandraF transitions into working on the GLAM side of things for Structured Data on Commons full time. For the past six months she's been splitting time between the two roles (GLAM and Community Liaison). I'm looking forward to working with you all again. Thank you, happy editing. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Madeleine Carpentier - Les Chandelles - 1896.jpg

File:Madeleine Carpentier - Les Chandelles - 1896.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 11:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data feedback - What gets stored where (Ontology)

Greetings,

There is a new feedback request for Structured Data on Commons (link for messages posted to Commons: , regarding what metadata from a file gets stored where. Your participation is appreciated.

Happy editing to you. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 22:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

First structured licensing conversation on Commons

Greetings,

The first conversation about structured copyright and licensing for Structured Data on Commons has been posted, please come by and participate. The discussion will be open through the end of the month (March). Thank you. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Emily Carr - Klee Wyck titlepage.jpg

Copyright status: File:Emily Carr - Klee Wyck titlepage.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Emily Carr - Klee Wyck titlepage.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 15:46, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Aert Schouman P Tanje - Johannes van Ravestein and Adriaen Hanneman.png

Hallo Jane023, zou op dit een portret ook Jan van Ravesteyn afgebeeld kunnen zijn? :) Lotje (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Ja, bij twijfel kan je altijd de tekst zelf nalezen. Nu wij inmiddels de meeste zelfportretten inmiddels op Commons hebben, is het wellicht een idee om deze gravures te voorzien van de oorspronkelijke portretten. Ik heb deze net gedaan. Best, Jane023 (talk) 06:20, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Multilingual captions testing is available

Greetings,

The early prototype for multilingual caption support is available for testing. More information on how to sign up to test is on Commons. Thanks, happy editing to you. - Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons IRC Office Hour, Tuesday 26 June

Greetings,

There will be an IRC office hour for Structured Data on Tuesday, 26 June from 18:00-19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. You can find more details, as well as date and time conversion, at the IRC Office Hours page on Meta.

Thanks, I look forward to seeing you there if you can make it. -- Keegan (talk) 20:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

What properties does Commons need?

Greetings,

Structured Commons will need properties to make statements about files. The development team is working on making the software ready to support properties; the question is, what properties does Commons need?

You can find more information and examples to help find properties in a workshop on Commons. Please participate and help fill in the list, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

File:David Teniers - Boors drinking and smoking in an inn.jpg

hi, nice upload. i have been trying to include the Christies dimensions and provenance info, and an internet archive link. do we have a bot to farm the auction sites? we could do with a systematic sweep of the auction block, since they may not be seen in public for a while. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Ugh! I have tried and failed to get properties made just to deal with what we already have (which is a lot, and most of it pretty important stuff). Before starting a project like that I think we need to have items for each old masters auction (and also items for significant auctions like the Elizabeth Taylor auction etc) and then properties for auction sale number, lot number, price, sale price, hammer date, in such a way that you can build a url to link out to the actual info of the lot number. Since the urls seem to be built of auction number and lot number, I don't think we can make an artwork property in such a way that it properly builds the url. Short answer is no, there is no bot (yet) but yes, for the old master's paintings it would probably be useful to just upload everything systematically as it comes in (preferably before the auction to get the good images before buyers opt to show low-res images). Sotheby's and a few other large European auction houses like Drouot, Hampel, Koller etc would be nice too. If you can think of a way to do it, go ahead. I have been trying to see if there is any system to their webpages for years and can't find any. I can say for sure however that I am not the only one making such uploads. Also Jan Arkestein, Trizcek, and Wmpearl seem to get the hi-res images. Jane023 (talk) 05:15, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

i was afraid of that. as usual, we are picking things ad hoc, not systematically. and the auctions do not appear to have flat metadata, but have to be scraped. by each artwork. maybe a summer of code, or grant for some tools would make it easier to corral this work-flow. christies appears to keep older auctions, but some others are rotting with no archive, so there is some time pressure. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes and believe me when I say I feel your pain. By all means try to find a Google-Summer-of-Coder, but I think this is more a thing for art history fans, who tend not to be very interested in technical stuff. That said, you would need to figure out a way to deal with deletionists for all the sub-sub-top artists for whom the paintings are PD-Art but not considered notable enough for Commons. Basically you want to make sure we have creator templates and categories for anything you want to upload, or else... Jane023 (talk) 16:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

it's all good, i don't mind my manual methods, i just appreciate a better way. maybe a word with user:multichill. i haven't noticed the "non-notable art" deletionists on commons, but rather on english. they are pinging contemporary sculpture, i.e. w:Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Untitled_(Kelly). Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 00:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Wow that is a weird deletion discussion. That sculpture is definitely notable enough for an article and because we have so many issues with contemporary art and copyright you would be surprised that they wouldn't welcome the contribution. Bizarre on many levels. No, my point about the deletion discussions on Commons doesn't have to do with individual upoads but with mass-uploads. This can be an issue for GLAMs as well. Generally we tell them to hook up all the artists to Wikidata first now. Jane023 (talk) 06:23, 15 July 2018 (UTC)