And in other news...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

And in other news...

Brianna Laugher
Brief comments on happenings around the wiki:

* A process to recognise "featured galleries" has been started. (A
"gallery" is a Commons main namespace page that is used to
display/organise/annotate/present media files.)  If you are interested
in helping develop the criteria, or suggest some of your favourite
galleries as possible models, please comment at
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Featured_galleries .
Innovative and unusual presentations are especially welcome.

* Commons is rapidly approaching one million files. How can we
celebrate and mark the occasion? See
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Commons:One_million_files

* A new process has been started [for admins] to review images from
Flickr, as license changes or license mismatches are a common problem.
No decision has been made about how to handle the images with
differing licenses. See
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Para/Flickr
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Flickr_review_needed
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Attention#Flickr_review

* There is a fledging project developing to organise and encourage
Commons maintenance and cleanup work to be done. Mop and bucket
optional. Your help needed at
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:CommonTasks .

* A new process for photography feedback has been started. It doesn't
offer any shiny awards, but could give you more expansive feedback
than COM:QI (Quality images, ala 'Good articles', but only for
Wikimedian-created works) or COM:FP (Featured pictures). See
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photography_critiques .

regards,
Brianna
user:pfctdayelise
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

David Monniaux-2
And a few stats:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons_stats_October_2006.svg

We are probably the world's largest site for free wallpapers: the median
of the distribution looks like it's 800 kpixels, which is 1024x768.

We like NASA very much we have 7829 photos from them.
-- DM
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

Alphax (Wikipedia email)
David Monniaux wrote:
> And a few stats:
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons_stats_October_2006.svg
>

Don't suppose we've got anything on admin stats yet?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

signature.asc (581 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

Gregory Maxwell
In reply to this post by David Monniaux-2
On 10/17/06, David Monniaux <[hidden email]> wrote:
> And a few stats:
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons_stats_October_2006.svg
>
> We are probably the world's largest site for free wallpapers: the median
> of the distribution looks like it's 800 kpixels, which is 1024x768.

I'm not so sure, looking at our top aspect ratios:
 Images Ratio
 201436 1.33
  61803 0.75
  40633 1.00
  37839 1.50
  20991 0.66
  14287 0.62
  12942 1.60
  10734 1.25
  10552 1.49
  10352 0.80
  ~~~~~~~~

I'd be shocked if flickr didn't completely dwarf us in terms of images
with 4:3 and 5:4 aspect.

Since most cameras produce either 4:3 or 3:2, it would be interesting
to answer the question: Are Wikimedians cropping all these images, or
are we just pulling lots of images from outside websites where they
are cropped to fit the layout?
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

David Monniaux-2
Gregory Maxwell wrote:

>I'd be shocked if flickr didn't completely dwarf us in terms of images
>with 4:3 and 5:4 aspect.
>
"Free" ? As in "free speech" or in "free beer" ?
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

Brianna Laugher
In reply to this post by Gregory Maxwell
Where are all these random stats coming from?? Anything the rest of us
can play with?

Brianna

On 18/10/06, Gregory Maxwell <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/17/06, David Monniaux <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > And a few stats:
> >
> > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons_stats_October_2006.svg
> >
> > We are probably the world's largest site for free wallpapers: the median
> > of the distribution looks like it's 800 kpixels, which is 1024x768.
>
> I'm not so sure, looking at our top aspect ratios:
>  Images Ratio
>  201436 1.33
>   61803 0.75
>   40633 1.00
>   37839 1.50
>   20991 0.66
>   14287 0.62
>   12942 1.60
>   10734 1.25
>   10552 1.49
>   10352 0.80
>   ~~~~~~~~
>
> I'd be shocked if flickr didn't completely dwarf us in terms of images
> with 4:3 and 5:4 aspect.
>
> Since most cameras produce either 4:3 or 3:2, it would be interesting
> to answer the question: Are Wikimedians cropping all these images, or
> are we just pulling lots of images from outside websites where they
> are cropped to fit the layout?
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

David Monniaux-2
Brianna Laugher wrote:

>Where are all these random stats coming from?? Anything the rest of us
>can play with?
>
Download the SQL dumps from dumps.wikimedia.org, load them into mysql,
run your own requests!
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

Gregory Maxwell
In reply to this post by David Monniaux-2
On 10/17/06, David Monniaux <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> >I'd be shocked if flickr didn't completely dwarf us in terms of images
> >with 4:3 and 5:4 aspect.
> >
> "Free" ? As in "free speech" or in "free beer" ?

Touché

However,
Judging by the popularity of Flickr, Youtube, and the non free
creative commons licenses (which account for 2/3rds of the CC usage)
I'd say that the general public cares not a lick about free content,
so long as it is available to them at no cost and no one is suing them
(i.e. free as in stolen beer is sufficient, since there is no RIAA
going after folks for image copyright violations).

That we have not yet made Freedom a primary concern (even among many
of our own users!) is a substantial failure on our part ...  other
services which play really fast and loose with copyright (thank you
DMCA safe harbor) will always have a broader collection of content as
a result.

Today, commons is a weakly organized pile of images (and some other
media)... We're no better off than youtube, actually.. they offer
ratings, recommendations, and a better search engine.

I think we need to think carefully about our future.   If we are to
continue to provide value beyond a simple image dump for Wikimedia we
must focus on the virtues of our model (demanding free content,
welcoming enhancement and derrivation) compared to sites like Flickr
and Youtube.
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

geni
On 10/17/06, Gregory Maxwell <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Touché
>
> However,
> Judging by the popularity of Flickr, Youtube, and the non free
> creative commons licenses (which account for 2/3rds of the CC usage)
> I'd say that the general public cares not a lick about free content,
> so long as it is available to them at no cost and no one is suing them
> (i.e. free as in stolen beer is sufficient, since there is no RIAA
> going after folks for image copyright violations).

Getty have been going after websites.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

David Monniaux-2
In reply to this post by Gregory Maxwell
Gregory Maxwell wrote:

>Judging by the popularity of Flickr, Youtube, and the non free
>creative commons licenses (which account for 2/3rds of the CC usage)
>I'd say that the general public cares not a lick about free content,
>so long as it is available to them at no cost and no one is suing them
>(i.e. free as in stolen beer is sufficient, since there is no RIAA
>going after folks for image copyright violations).
>  
>
In France, a society of authors and composers called SACEM demanded
payment after a class of elementary school pupils sang a song for the
retirement of their teacher (the song's title translates as "goodbye, Mr
Teacher"), in public.

Technically, they were right: this was a public performance of a song
written by a still living artist, as managers of the rights of that
songwriter they can demand payment. Of course, this created an outrage;
the songwriter offered to pay the money owed to SACEM (once the artist
hands management to SACEM, as far as I know, he cannot directly choose
how SACEM manages his songs).

This should remind teachers and parents that things such as using
copyrighted photographs for a publicly displayed work (say, the kind of
"students' works" shown during "open doors" days or at end of the year)
may result in legal issues. After all, what SACEM does, the societies
collecting rights for photographs may do. (Though I suspect they would
have the common sense not to create themselves a public relation disaster.)

In any case, running things with the knowledge that things are ok
because people will break the law and no one will bother does not sound
like a sound approach.

Wikimédia France is trying to push many buttons to get public sources of
photographs to release them under free licenses. It is not easy, believe me.

Regards

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

geni
On 10/17/06, David Monniaux <[hidden email]> wrote:
> This should remind teachers and parents that things such as using
> copyrighted photographs for a publicly displayed work (say, the kind of
> "students' works" shown during "open doors" days or at end of the year)
> may result in legal issues. After all, what SACEM does, the societies
> collecting rights for photographs may do. (Though I suspect they would
> have the common sense not to create themselves a public relation disaster.)

I think the amusing one would be when one of the kids takes their
school to court for violating their copyright.


> In any case, running things with the knowledge that things are ok
> because people will break the law and no one will bother does not sound
> like a sound approach.
>
> Wikimédia France is trying to push many buttons to get public sources of
> photographs to release them under free licenses. It is not easy, believe me.
>
> Regards

Even if they do release them under a free lisence how were you
planning to get hold of them?

--
geni
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

David Monniaux-2
geni wrote:

>Even if they do release them under a free lisence how were you
>planning to get hold of them?
>  
>
We're not there yet. We're trying to get them to discuss the issues with
us and trying to show them that, for instance, they would have an
advantage in getting free advertisement on our sites (a public museum
who puts up a photo on Commons that says "This photo was provided by
museum Foobar which has the original painting, can be visited at blah
blah" gets advertisement). :-)
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

geni
On 10/17/06, David Monniaux <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We're not there yet. We're trying to get them to discuss the issues with
> us and trying to show them that, for instance, they would have an
> advantage in getting free advertisement on our sites (a public museum
> who puts up a photo on Commons that says "This photo was provided by
> museum Foobar which has the original painting, can be visited at blah
> blah" gets advertisement). :-)

Except that most stuff produced will not be digitalised. So while your
at it you might want to take a look at the restiction the goverement
puts on getting hold of PD material in it's various archives.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

David Monniaux-2
geni wrote:

>Except that most stuff produced will not be digitalised. So while your
>at it you might want to take a look at the restiction the goverement
>puts on getting hold of PD material in it's various archives.
>
We're also working on that.

On Thursday I'm going to attend a meeting on electronic libraries.
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

bawolff
> And a few stats:
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons_stats_October_2006.svg

Out of curiosity, Does anyone know what they highest resolution image
on commons is?

-bawolff
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

David Monniaux-2
bawolff wrote:

>>And a few stats:
>>
>>http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons_stats_October_2006.svg
>>    
>>
>
>Out of curiosity, Does anyone know what they highest resolution image
>on commons is?
>
Except for fake sizes such as SVG pictures, the largest is:
Orion_Nebula_-_Hubble_2006_mosaic_18000.jpg

a 18000x18000 picture stored in a 19 megabyte file.



_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And in other news...

bawolff
Thanks, Thats a nice picture. I changed [[n:portal:space]] to use it

On 10/18/06, David Monniaux <[hidden email]> wrote:

> bawolff wrote:
>
> >>And a few stats:
> >>
> >>http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons_stats_October_2006.svg
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Out of curiosity, Does anyone know what they highest resolution image
> >on commons is?
> >
> Except for fake sizes such as SVG pictures, the largest is:
> Orion_Nebula_-_Hubble_2006_mosaic_18000.jpg
>
> a 18000x18000 picture stored in a 19 megabyte file.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>


--
bawolff
Caution: The mass of this product contains the energy equivalent of 85
million tons of TNT per net ounce of weight.
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l