Wikidata:Property proposal/Wikimedia Commons campaign
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Wikimedia Commons campaign
[edit]Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Commons
Not done
| Description | name of a Wikimedia Commons campaign |
|---|---|
| Represents | no label (Q122150405) |
| Data type | String |
| Domain | item, Q122150397. This is a newly created item and not used yet. |
| Allowed values | text |
| Example 1 | Wiki Loves Monuments in India (Q73852346)→wlm-in |
| Example 2 | subject→value |
| Example 3 | subject→value |
| Planned use | Proposing to make contests data available as structured data to allow creating dynamic upload links for all heritage items globally. |
| Expected completeness | always incomplete (Q21873886) |
| Formatter URL | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard?campaign=$1 |
Motivation
[edit]Proposing to create this missing property to allow dynamic media upload links to be added to any Wikidata item that is part of a campaign. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 15:54, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]- Why not have this as a sitelink at the bottom of the item? I added to Wiki Loves Monuments in India (Q73852346) what it could look like. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 21:12, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion! However, I'd say it would be too fuzzy. It could mean a Commons page which is something different, and more reasoning would be needed to know what kind of page it is. Conversely, these campaign pages would appear on lists of Commons pages, where an extra step would be needed to filter them out. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 06:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- I am not convinced if this has been thought through sufficiently, and this may become problematic if this property gets created. So let us talk about it first how you would see it and how it can be useful. There are multiple heritage projects, but let's start with Wiki Loves Monuments. For most countries it is easy: if you take the ISO country code, you know what the upload campaign for WLM will be. For example: Spain, ISO code: ES, upload campaign: wlm-es. When there is 1 campaign for a country, it's easy. I am more concerned about the exceptions. Germany for example, each German state has its own monument system and campaign, like Bayern, campaign: wlm-de-by. In the Netherlands there are three types of monuments: national, provincial and municipal, each with their own upload campaigns. In Sweden there are campaigns for Building monuments, Antiquities, and Ships. In Italy there is national campaign, but also one for South Tyrol. And then India, they have a campaign for each state. So my question is: where and how do you want to connect these campaigns? The second question is, that you want to have the campaigns as structured data, which I understand. However, the example provided makes it unclear how this will get "structured", because items with
Wiki Loves Monuments in <country>are not structurally connected with heritage items/etc. Also, the URL provided is not the upload link, but the gallery link. Romaine (talk) 09:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)- Thank you @Romaine, I also think that we can mature the proposal together.
- Some additional information is needed about the campaigns to know which of the campaigns is valid for any item on Wikidata.
- It is important to know which heritage designation property the campaign uses, so that it can be used to detect when an upload link is displayed. This could be added as a qualifier to the campaign statement.
- The contests (such as Wiki Loves Monuments 2023 in India) must also be added as structured data and they must include the start and end date of the contest. This means that all annual contests must be added, with links to their parent contest.
- There are different ways to detect the subcontests
- The heritage ID used on the Wikidata item also triggers the related campaign, for example in the case of the Belgian (geographic) or Swedish (thematic) contests.
- Germany and India, for example, use regional divisions that need to be inferred from the location.
- It is a good question if a string value with qualifiers is enough or whether the campaigns should have an item that would be more flexible to describe.
- ps. I will change the link to the campaign. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 12:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
- (Formatted for legibility) – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 05:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas), Sorry for the delay. Having thought about it, I think it only can be connected to Wiki Loves Monuments items if those items with multiple areas/types get a qualifier that specifies the area or type, with the use of applies to part, aspect, or form (P518) and excluding (P1011).
- But if you want to connect Wiki Loves Monuments editions with heritage designation properties, the same problem is present as with upload campaigns. Upload campaigns can be 1 to 1 connected to heritage designation properties. With each upload campaign (and each heritage designation property) various meta data can be added. With each Wiki Loves Monuments in a country edition then multiple duplicate data can be added. I think it would be better if we indicate with each Wiki Loves Monuments in a country edition which monuments (by area/type) are eligible (this can differ per edition), while to each item of a monument type the upload campaign is added.
- Item of Wiki Loves monuments in a country in a year: adding which type(s) of monuments are eligible
- Item of a monument type in an area: adding which upload campaign matches + adding which property
- Property for a heritage designation: adding which monument type
- I think this prevents duplicate data being added and that in this way it is added in a stable structured way. Romaine (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Not done, no consensus of proposed property at this time based on the above discussion. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 11:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)