Well I think this links in with wiki loves monuments so i'll send a copy to
Fae as I know he took an interest during the recent meeting although we are
still looking around for a UK flag carrier for the WLM project.

Oh and here is an idea - the Wikipedian of the
Yea<http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/UK_Wikimedian_of_the_Year_2012>r
has a special award - we could give it to Geograph - there must thousands
of UK articles that are much more informative due to this project.

On 9 April 2012 15:35, WereSpielChequers <werespielchequ...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks Roger. Would it be appropriae for the Board to get our CEO to make
> contact?
>
>
> Currently the Geograph images are geotagged in Commons, but Commons
> doesn't have ideal lookup tables to link them to appropriate towns and
> villages, I believe a bot was doing much of it based on proximity to the
> centre of somewhere, but boundaries are tricky things especially in the UK
> and the end result was that some geograph images got miscategorised. In
> some cases to the wrong side of the Solent.
>
> There are tables that exist which include boundaries of towns and
> villages, and with those tables one can use geocodes to correctly
> categorise images, at least to a geographic location. However I doubt if
> those tables would be available open source, and though I'm sure they are
> commercially available I'm not so sure whether it would be appropriate for
> us to license them - it probably isn't viable as any such license is likely
> to prohibit reverse engineering which would make it incompatible with
> Commons anyway. But it might be worth asking the office to at least make
> enquiries.
>
> WSC
>
>
> On 9 April 2012 15:17, Roger Bamkin <victuall...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh I so agree, this would make "Wiki Loves Monuments" really work for us.
>> Geograph is a brilliant project and WMUK should support them as easily as
>> we would wikimedia commons.
>>
>> (I have a suspicion that photos from Geograph will be less tricky to
>> categorise if they arrive with geotagging built into the picture.)
>>
>> so yes +1
>>
>>
>> On 9 April 2012 14:55, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9 April 2012 14:52, WereSpielChequers <werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > It turns out that they aren't aware that the migration has stalled, as
>>> their
>>> > site still claims that all their images get migrated to Commons
>>> > http://www.geograph.org.uk/faq3.php?q=wikipedia
>>> > I think there is a big opportunity for the chapter here, perhaps we
>>> could
>>> > approach them and suggest changing their upload software to dual use?
>>> So
>>> > Geograph users have the option of posting their images directly on
>>> Commons
>>> > provided they add categories.
>>> > I suspect there would be some software implications, but if so it
>>> might be a
>>> > useful use of a UK grant.
>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Would it be worth approaching the Geograph community and asking them
>>> to work on the categorisation backlog themselves directly?
>>>
>>>
>>> - d.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia UK mailing list
>>> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Roger Bamkin
>> 01332 702993
>> 0758 2020815
>> Google+:Victuallers
>> Skype:Victuallers1
>> Flickr:Victuallers2
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia UK mailing list
>> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>
>


-- 
Roger Bamkin
01332 702993
0758 2020815
Google+:Victuallers
Skype:Victuallers1
Flickr:Victuallers2
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to