I just tried to watch some presentation videos from Wikimania.
Some had very weak sound, some had no sound in the first minutes,
some only played the first minute and then stopped. I don't think
the Wikimania videos are unique in having such problems. Video is
new to Commons, and the expert contributors are more familiar with
still images.
How can we learn to make better videos? Are there some good
instructions? Perhaps a free instruction video (Wikibooks, but a
video instead of a book) on how to produce good videos is what we
need. In fact, the English Wikibooks has a title on "Video
Production", http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Video_Production but it
doesn't have a clear focus (pun not intended). It starts out with
discussing satellite TV and has long sections on file formats in
different operating systems.
There is a help page on Commons for converting video to the Ogg
Theora format, but that is only the last step in a long chain.
Given that video is new, how can we find and rate videos, nominate
"good/featured videos", and give advice on how to improve quality?
Is the Commons village pump enough for this? Commons has a
separate graphics village pump. Do we also need a separate video
village pump?
Current digital video cameras use hard disks or memory cards,
instead of tape cassettes. Many new models cost less than 300
euro (or dollars), some as little as 120 euro (memory card perhaps
not included). Some have a special "Youtube mode", and I guess
that kind of usage is what drives the price down. What models are
good, and what should one watch out for?
We can find free still photos on Flickr and copy them to Commons.
Is there somewhere we can find free videos and copy them? Yes, at
the Internet Archive. Somewhere else?
--
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
Voici un lien vers le graphique que j'ai téléchargé avant-hier :
[[File:Flux d'énergie automobile.svg|thumb|Flux d'énergie automobile]]
Merci d'avance à celui qui me donnera une solution.
Le 22/06/2016 à 14:10, Lionel Allorge a écrit :
> Bonjour,
>
>> bonjour,
>> quelqu'un peut-il m'expliquer pourquoi, lorsque je télécharge sur
>> Commons un graphique SVG, tous les libellés se trouvent déportés sur le
>> bord gauche du cadre ?
>> Pourtant, quand je clique sur le bouton "Fichier d'origine", le
>> graphique apparait bien conforme à celui que j'ai créé.
>> Précision : j'utilise le logiciel Open Draw de la suite Open Office.
> Peut-tu nous donner un lien vers un exemple ?
>
> Bonne continuation.
>
---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
bonjour,
quelqu'un peut-il m'expliquer pourquoi, lorsque je télécharge sur
Commons un graphique SVG, tous les libellés se trouvent déportés sur le
bord gauche du cadre ?
Pourtant, quand je clique sur le bouton "Fichier d'origine", le
graphique apparait bien conforme à celui que j'ai créé.
Précision : j'utilise le logiciel Open Draw de la suite Open Office.
Jpjanuel
---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Hi all,
Great news!
Freedom of panorama has been voted today in the Belgian parliament.
A mayority voted in favour of freedom of panorama, including commercial use.
Soon images of artworks and modern buildings in Belgium can be restored on
Commons.
But first the law needs to be published in the Staatsblad, and ten days
later it will be official, but that is just a formality. (Will keep you
updated on that.)
Article in the news in Dutch:
http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2685852
In the past weeks, as well as since the campaign in Europe last year, we
from Wikimedia Belgium have worked hard on this subject and communicated
with the members of the parliament informing what this subject means for
Wikipedia.
With the founding of Wikimedia Belgium in 2014, this subject was a priority
for us.
Thanks all for the support!
Let's get this implemented elsewhere too!
Greetings from Belgium,
Romaine
W dniu 2016-06-21 18:53:02 użytkownik Tuszynski, Jarek W. <JAROSLAW.W.TUSZYNSKI(a)leidos.com> napisał:
The categories in Category:Authority_control_maintenance are used to help with transition of Template:Authority_control identifiers from Commons to Wikidata, so that Authority control template does not have to keep and maintain all the identifiers but only a link to Wikidata where they are held and shared among all the projects. The categories there depend on comparison of Commons identifiers with wikidata ones. However I run into a curious problem where some pages are in some category, but that categore does not list them. For example Creator:Titus_Livius lists that it belong to Category:Pages_using_authority_control_with_all_identifiers_matching_Wikidata but that category does not lists it as one of the pages that is part of it. Other pages like that are: Creator:Alonzo_Rodriguez or Creator:Perrin_Remiet .
The only solution to the problem I found is to do an edit to the creator page, or run Pywikibot/touch.py if I had a list of files that need it. I guess some kind of event is needed to trigger page refresh and with activation of wikidata arbitrary access, we run into a problem that the event is happening on Wikidata and does not trigger the refresh on Commons. Page Purge does not seem to help. In the meantime I think I have about 100 pages in such a limbo state, but I have no way of finding them, other than running “touch” on large number of pages.
Any ideas what to do? Is that a bug that should be reported, or new norm. Does Wikipedia and other projects that used wikidata for a while run into it?
Jarek T.
(user:Jarekt)
I think this is the same bug as reported here:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117332
It seems to appear on all wikis (at least observed on multiple wikisources & enwiki) randomly; likely only or mainly on new pages.
AFAIK, null-edit for affected pages is the only solution for now. But there is no simple way to locate pages hit by this bug (or at least I know none).
On small wikis you can noll-edit all pages created/edited in some period of time. But on Commons... :(
Ankry
The categories in Category:Authority_control_maintenance<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Authority_control_maintenance> are used to help with transition of Template:Authority_control<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Authority_control> identifiers from Commons to Wikidata, so that Authority control template does not have to keep and maintain all the identifiers but only a link to Wikidata where they are held and shared among all the projects. The categories there depend on comparison of Commons identifiers with wikidata ones. However I run into a curious problem where some pages are in some category, but that categore does not list them. For example Creator:Titus_Livius<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Creator:Titus_Livius> lists that it belong to Category:Pages_using_authority_control_with_all_identifiers_matching_Wikidata<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Pages_using_authority_control_w…> but that category does not lists it as one of the pages that is part of it. Other pages like that are: Creator:Alonzo_Rodriguez<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Creator:Alonzo_Rodriguez> or Creator:Perrin_Remiet<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Creator:Perrin_Remiet> .
The only solution to the problem I found is to do an edit to the creator page, or run Pywikibot/touch.py<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Pywikibot/touch.py> if I had a list of files that need it. I guess some kind of event is needed to trigger page refresh and with activation of wikidata arbitrary access, we run into a problem that the event is happening on Wikidata and does not trigger the refresh on Commons. Page Purge does not seem to help. In the meantime I think I have about 100 pages in such a limbo state, but I have no way of finding them, other than running "touch" on large number of pages.
Any ideas what to do? Is that a bug that should be reported, or new norm. Does Wikipedia and other projects that used wikidata for a while run into it?
Jarek T.
(user:Jarekt)
Hi all,
A quick update re: the Upload to Commons Android app:
- We are now considered an 'official' app and have been granted permission
by WMF to use the Wikimedia Commons logo and name. As such, the app is now
named "Wikimedia Commons" <
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=fr.free.nrw.commons> instead
of "Upload to Commons", and its icon has been changed to the Commons logo.
Ownership of the app should also soon be transferred to the WMF Google Play
account. On a practical basis, there should be no change in the use of the
app and it will still be maintained by volunteers.
- I am happy to announce that my IEG proposal for further work on the app <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Improve_%27Upload_to_Commons%27_…>
has been selected. :) I will be starting work on it shortly, so there will
be regular releases planned for the next 6 months. Bug/crash reports and
feedback are welcome on our Google Groups forums <
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/commons-app-android> and GitHub
page <https://github.com/nicolas-raoul/apps-android-commons/issues> as
always.
Have a great day!
Cheers,
Josephine
Hello,
About a month ago I had sent a mail[0] about my GSoC project on porting
catimages to pywikibot-core with my mentors DrTrigon[1] and jayvdb[2]. As a
step towards that, we've made a library to analyze files on commons using
exif data and computer vision techniques which will be used in the bot. We
recently released a v0.1.0.
Currently, the library is able to identify mimetypes, detect barcodes,
detect faces, read exif data, and measure the average color. You can read
more about the library at User:AbdealiJK/file-metadata[3]. It contains
installation instructions and also a simple script using pywikibot which
can be used to analyze files on commons.
We've been running the library on a number of files (35,000+) on commons to
test for corner cases and to check it's validity. You can find the logs of
that analysis on
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:AbdealiJKTravis/logs . There are
some discrepancies which have been seen, and it would be great to hear your
comments on it.
It would also be immensely helpful if users can install the library and
test it out. If any problems arise, please make an issue at the bug
tracker[4] on github or on the Talk page so that we can help you out and
also make the library more robust.
Regards,
Abdeali JK
References:
[0] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2016-May/007740.html
[1] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:DrTrigon
[2] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jayvdb
[3] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:AbdealiJK/file-metadata
[4] - https://github.com/AbdealiJK/file-metadata/issues
Dear Wikimedians,
The tenth Picture of the Year competition (2015) has ended and we are pleased to announce the results:
In both rounds, people voted for their favorite media files.
In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images.In the second round, people voted for the 56 finalists (the R1 top 30 overall and top 2 in each category).
We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for
creating these beautiful media files and sharing them as freely licensed
content:
658 people voted for the winner, File:Pluto-01 Stern 03 Pluto Color TXT.jpg (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pluto-01_Stern_03_Pluto_Color_TXT.j…)
In second place, 617 people voted for File:Nasir-al molk -1.jpg (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nasir-al_molk_-1.jpg)
In third place, 582 people voted for File:Heavens Above Her.jpg (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Heavens_Above_Her.jpg)
See https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2015/Results to view the top images »
We also sincerely thank to all voters for participating. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.
Thanks,
Steinsplitter on behalf of
the Picture of the Year committee
