Brianna Laugher | 1 Jul 05:00
Picon
Gravatar

Re: We may have somewhere to send the exhibitionists

On 01/07/07, Angela <beesley@...> wrote:
> On 6/21/07, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain@...> wrote:
> > Users place the tags directly onto the image; the effect is similar to
> > a HTML image map. They click on a person in the picture, and enter the
> > name of the person as the tag, and the coordinates are stored. Then
> > users viewing the photo roll over the tag and see a frame appear over
> > the image at the coordinates specified.
>
> Wikia has an image tagging feature that sounds a lot like what you're
> describing. See
> <http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Leiadeathstar.jpg> for an
> example.
>
> Each image has a "tag this image" link which lets you click on a part
> of the image and add a tag, which is a link to an article. You can
> search by tags <http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Special:TaggedImages?q=Han%20Solo>
> and there's a log to show who added what
> <http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Log/tag>.
>
> It's very much in beta right now, but if anyone would find it a useful
> addition to Commons, we're happy to make that available under the GPL.

Hell YEAH :D
Of course, the likelihood of getting it accepted by devs and actually
*enabled* are two more barriers...

I look forward to seeing TaggedImages develop on Wikia.

cheers
Brianna
(Continue reading)

Catalin Mihaila | 1 Jul 22:27
Picon
Favicon

Centralizatorul Media

Buna ziua,
MC Regional pune acum in mod gratuit la dispozitia celor interesati Centralizatorul Media. Acesta, odata "lipit" pe desktop, aduce aproape de dumneavoastra zeci de programe TV, radio si ziare, nationale, doar pe internet, sau locale impartite pe judete.
Delectare placuta!
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Brianna Laugher | 2 Jul 06:04
Picon
Gravatar

Should Commons be renamed?

Hi all,

Erik (user:Eloquence) conducted a smallish survey on Meta about
Wikimedia brand identities. (See the relevant parts of his email
below.) Some people identified "Wikimedia Commons" as a confusing
name, in that it doesn't clearly identify what the project actually is
or does. Do Commoners think the project should be renamed, and if so,
to what?

IMO Commons had rather no choice but to choose a confusing name,
because the obvious name - Wikimedia! - already stands for some other
idea that doesn't actually have a lot to do with media but only wikis.
Perhaps Wikimedia (& Wikimedia Foundation) should become Wikimmunity
(wiki-community - but it kind of sounds like wiki-immunity :)) and
then Commons can take over the Wikimedia label. Otherwise we're
looking at "Wikimedia Media"... er... then should MediaWiki be
"Wikimedia Wiki"? :)

If I search in google for "Commons", Wikimedia Commons is 7th, behind
Jakarta Commons (something to do with Java), Creative Commons,
"Commons" (NIH grants?), two Wikipedia articles, and the UK govt
"House of Commons" website. Clearly using the word Commons is going to
be an uphill battle in terms of creating an identity. (Doesn't mean
it's impossible, though.)

Is there any other word like "media" in English that covers the
meaning of images/graphics + audio + video (+ documents) ?

Wikimedia Formats? (urgh)
Wikimedia Multimedia?
Mediagenic? (I just learnt of this word via Wiktionary. It's formed
from media + photogenic, I quite like it. but there's some companies
that have taken it already I think.)

Does Commons need a "Wikimedia" identifier in the name? (None of the
other projects have one.)
Does Commons need a "wiki" identifier in the name? (All of the other
projects have it, but I think it's not as essential to Commons as to
other projects.)

Ideas welcome,
Brianna
user:pfctdayelise

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Moeller <erik@...>
Date: 01-Jul-2007 22:16
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Brand Survey Analysis
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@...>

== Current names ==

Of all the names, "Wikimedia Commons" is widely identified (by 12
people, according to my count) as a confusing name which does not
really identify what the project stands for, is not easily
translatable, too long, and too close to "Creaitve Commons."

[...]

== Follow-up ==

I'd like to recommend several follow-up steps. Some of these can be
only taken by the Board/Staff, while others can be initiated by any
community member:

[...]
* There should be a dedicated brainstorming about the Wikimedia
Commons name and possible alternatives.
[...]

--

-- 
They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment:
http://modernthings.org/
White Cat | 2 Jul 08:52
Picon

Re: Should Commons be renamed?

Commons is the "common" place for wikimedia projects for media (images, video files, audio files, pdf files). It may be further expanded to include interwiki templates and other goodies when there is Mediawiki support for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediagenic is taken and we (commons) shouldn't be restricted to multimedia.

I personally have no problem identifying what commons is. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Commons

I want to be associated with a project which has a litteral meaning "belonging equally to, or shared alike by, two or more or all in question" (1st meaning on the cited source) which is what commons is, a common wiki.

     - White Cat

On 7/2/07, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
Hi all,

Erik (user:Eloquence) conducted a smallish survey on Meta about
Wikimedia brand identities. (See the relevant parts of his email
below.) Some people identified "Wikimedia Commons" as a confusing
name, in that it doesn't clearly identify what the project actually is
or does. Do Commoners think the project should be renamed, and if so,
to what?

IMO Commons had rather no choice but to choose a confusing name,
because the obvious name - Wikimedia! - already stands for some other
idea that doesn't actually have a lot to do with media but only wikis.
Perhaps Wikimedia (& Wikimedia Foundation) should become Wikimmunity
(wiki-community - but it kind of sounds like wiki-immunity :)) and
then Commons can take over the Wikimedia label. Otherwise we're
looking at "Wikimedia Media"... er... then should MediaWiki be
"Wikimedia Wiki"? :)

If I search in google for "Commons", Wikimedia Commons is 7th, behind
Jakarta Commons (something to do with Java), Creative Commons,
"Commons" (NIH grants?), two Wikipedia articles, and the UK govt
"House of Commons" website. Clearly using the word Commons is going to
be an uphill battle in terms of creating an identity. (Doesn't mean
it's impossible, though.)

Is there any other word like "media" in English that covers the
meaning of images/graphics + audio + video (+ documents) ?

Wikimedia Formats? (urgh)
Wikimedia Multimedia?
Mediagenic? (I just learnt of this word via Wiktionary. It's formed
from media + photogenic, I quite like it. but there's some companies
that have taken it already I think.)

Does Commons need a "Wikimedia" identifier in the name? (None of the
other projects have one.)
Does Commons need a "wiki" identifier in the name? (All of the other
projects have it, but I think it's not as essential to Commons as to
other projects.)

Ideas welcome,
Brianna
user:pfctdayelise


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Moeller < erik-AeOJrEpdGNeGglJvpFV4uA@public.gmane.org>
Date: 01-Jul-2007 22:16
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Brand Survey Analysis
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List < foundation-l-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>

== Current names ==

Of all the names, "Wikimedia Commons" is widely identified (by 12
people, according to my count) as a confusing name which does not
really identify what the project stands for, is not easily
translatable, too long, and too close to "Creaitve Commons."

[...]

== Follow-up ==

I'd like to recommend several follow-up steps. Some of these can be
only taken by the Board/Staff, while others can be initiated by any
community member:

[...]
* There should be a dedicated brainstorming about the Wikimedia
Commons name and possible alternatives.
[...]


--
They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment:
http://modernthings.org/

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Florian Straub | 2 Jul 09:12
Picon

Re: Should Commons be renamed?

Brianna wrote:

> Is there any other word like "media" in English that covers the
> meaning of images/graphics + audio + video (+ documents) ?

What about wikifiles?

Regards,

Flo
--

-- 
Ist Ihr Browser Vista-kompatibel? Jetzt die neuesten 
Browser-Versionen downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/browser
Pedro Sanchez | 2 Jul 09:32
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Should Commons be renamed?

On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko@...> wrote:
> Commons is the "common" place for wikimedia projects for media (images,
> video files, audio files, pdf files). It may be further expanded to include
> interwiki templates and other goodies when there is Mediawiki support for
> it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediagenic is taken and we
> (commons) shouldn't be restricted to multimedia.
>

And Meta is the "common" place for discusions and coordinations...
White Cat | 2 Jul 10:26
Picon

Re: Should Commons be renamed?

Perhaps meta can be merged to commons? A daring idea perhaps but we could more than handle it. There are so few galleries and articles on Meta. A "new" commons namespace can be dedicated to that import.

    - White Cat

On 7/2/07, Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Commons is the "common" place for wikimedia projects for media (images,
> video files, audio files, pdf files). It may be further expanded to include
> interwiki templates and other goodies when there is Mediawiki support for
> it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediagenic is taken and we
> (commons) shouldn't be restricted to multimedia.
>

And Meta is the "common" place for discusions and coordinations...

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
White Cat | 2 Jul 10:29
Picon

Re: Should Commons be renamed?

As of Monday, 2 July, 2007, 08:27 (UTC/GMT), there are currently 10,471 articles and 2,680 files on Meta.

As of Monday, 2 July 2007, (UTC/GMT), there are currently 63,232 galleries and 1,603,598 files on Wikimedia Commons.

  - White Cat

On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
Perhaps meta can be merged to commons? A daring idea perhaps but we could more than handle it. There are so few galleries and articles on Meta. A "new" commons namespace can be dedicated to that import.

    - White Cat


On 7/2/07, Pedro Sanchez < pdsanchez-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Commons is the "common" place for wikimedia projects for media (images,
> video files, audio files, pdf files). It may be further expanded to include
> interwiki templates and other goodies when there is Mediawiki support for
> it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediagenic is taken and we
> (commons) shouldn't be restricted to multimedia.
>

And Meta is the "common" place for discusions and coordinations...

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Bryan Tong Minh | 2 Jul 10:35
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Should Commons be renamed?

The fact that we have the confusing Wikimedia in our name, is actually
an advantage. If you want to request author's permission for freely
licensing an image, they will immediately associate the name with
Wikipedia, a name that everybody knows. The chance of success is so
much greater when saying "Wikimedia Commons" than "Commons".

Bryan

On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko@...> wrote:
> As of Monday, 2 July, 2007, 08:27 (UTC/GMT), there are currently 10,471
> articles and 2,680 files on Meta.
>
> As of Monday, 2 July 2007, (UTC/GMT), there are currently 63,232 galleries
> and 1,603,598 files on Wikimedia Commons.
>
>   - White Cat
>
>
> On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko@...> wrote:
> > Perhaps meta can be merged to commons? A daring idea perhaps but we could
> more than handle it. There are so few galleries and articles on Meta. A
> "new" commons namespace can be dedicated to that import.
> >
> >     - White Cat
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/2/07, Pedro Sanchez < pdsanchez@...> wrote:
> > > On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko@...> wrote:
> > > > Commons is the "common" place for wikimedia projects for media
> (images,
> > > > video files, audio files, pdf files). It may be further expanded to
> include
> > > > interwiki templates and other goodies when there is Mediawiki support
> for
> > > > it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediagenic is taken
> and we
> > > > (commons) shouldn't be restricted to multimedia.
> > > >
> > >
> > > And Meta is the "common" place for discusions and coordinations...
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Commons-l mailing list
> > > Commons-l@...
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l@...
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>
White Cat | 2 Jul 10:37
Picon

Re: Should Commons be renamed?

Agreed.

   - White Cat

On 7/2/07, Bryan Tong Minh <bryan.tongminh-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
The fact that we have the confusing Wikimedia in our name, is actually
an advantage. If you want to request author's permission for freely
licensing an image, they will immediately associate the name with
Wikipedia, a name that everybody knows. The chance of success is so
much greater when saying "Wikimedia Commons" than "Commons".

Bryan

On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> As of Monday, 2 July, 2007, 08:27 (UTC/GMT), there are currently 10,471
> articles and 2,680 files on Meta.
>
> As of Monday, 2 July 2007, (UTC/GMT), there are currently 63,232 galleries
> and 1,603,598 files on Wikimedia Commons.
>
>   - White Cat
>
>
> On 7/2/07, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > Perhaps meta can be merged to commons? A daring idea perhaps but we could
> more than handle it. There are so few galleries and articles on Meta. A
> "new" commons namespace can be dedicated to that import.
> >
> >     - White Cat
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/2/07, Pedro Sanchez < pdsanchez-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > On 7/2/07, White Cat < wikipedia.kawaii.neko-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > > Commons is the "common" place for wikimedia projects for media
> (images,
> > > > video files, audio files, pdf files). It may be further expanded to
> include
> > > > interwiki templates and other goodies when there is Mediawiki support
> for
> > > > it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediagenic is taken
> and we
> > > > (commons) shouldn't be restricted to multimedia.
> > > >
> > >
> > > And Meta is the "common" place for discusions and coordinations...
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Commons-l mailing list
> > > Commons-l-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Gmane