User talk:PanierAvide

Items Wikidata avec les items OSM correspondants

J’ai une approximation de ce dont tu parlais : la requête sur ma page perso affiche les items Wikidata géolocalisés autour d’un point avec l’éventuel entité OSM comportant le tag "wikidata" correspondant. Je n’ai pas réussi à retirer les items Wikidata ayant une entité OSM mais ceux-ci sont affichés à la fin du résultat grâce au tri. (ping @VIGNERON)

~ Seb35 [^_^] 18:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Cool merci :-) Ce serait pas ça du coup (en bidouillant avec la syntaxe ça a l'air de faire le travail) ?

SELECT ?place ?location ?distance ?osm ?placeLabel
WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:around { 
    ?place wdt:P625 ?location .
    bd:serviceParam wikibase:center "Point(-1.67982 48.11135)"^^geo:wktLiteral . # Change here the point
    bd:serviceParam wikibase:radius "0.2" . # Change here the radius around the point
    bd:serviceParam wikibase:distance ?distance .
  }
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  SERVICE <https://sophox.org/sparql> {
    OPTIONAL { ?osm <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikidata> ?place }
  }
  FILTER ( EXISTS { ?place ?osm [] } )
}
ORDER BY ?osm ?distance

--PanierAvide (talk) 19:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Effectivement, ça fonctionne, mais je ne suis pas sûr de comprendre, je reprendrai à tête plus reposée (j’ai un problème dans ma logique entre FILTER EXISTS et FILTER NOT EXISTS). Sinon ça marche aussi avec FILTER EXISTS { ?place ?p ?osm }.

En tous cas, on a la requête :) ~ Seb35 [^_^] 19:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Et requête bien utile car j'ai déjà rajouté deux identifiants Wikidata sur des objets perdus autour de chez moi :-) Par contre dans les résultats on a aussi les communes qui ressortent sous la forme de ce type d'objet wikidata https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q49464127 Quelque chose que je peux faire à mon niveau pour nettoyer ? --PanierAvide (talk) 19:27, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

J’ai fait plusieurs rues dans le centre-ville de Rennes mais n’ai pas osé ajouté de tag wikidata sur cette relation par exemple, ça se fait ou il faut faire autrement ? (il y en plusieurs telles relations où on pourrait ajouter un tag wikidata)

Pour ton item Melesse, c’est un doublon de celui-ci, les deux peuvent être fusionnés – il y a un gadget sur Wikidata pour ça, activé par défaut je crois (sinon voir dans les préférences), qui ajoute un lien dans l’onglet "Plus…". Ça fusionne dans l’élément le plus ancien.

~ Seb35 [^_^] 22:05, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Tu peux ajouter le tag wikidata sur les relations de type associatedStreet comme celle en exemple, c'est même plus logique car ces relations sont assez stables dans le temps, là où les segments de rues peuvent évoluer selon les modifications d'aménagement.

Merci pour les infos sur la fusion. J'ai ce message d'erreur qui apparaît

Erreur durant "Attendez ..." : Un conflit a été détecté sur cebwiki: [[Q634970]] avec cebwiki:Melesse, [[Q49464127]] avec cebwiki:Melesse (munisipyo)

Je ne suis pas sûr de ce que je peux faire à la place --PanierAvide (talk) 07:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah oui, les toponymes homonymes des communes peuvent sembler étranges sur Wikidata. Il y a deux éléments pour les communes : un sur la commune elle-même d:Q634970 et un pour le toponyme/lieu-dit/bourg d:Q49464127 (en gros la réalité administrative et la réalité physique/géographique). Dans ces cas-là, il ne faut pas les fusionner. PS: au passage, je signale qu'avec le préfixe d:, on peut facilement faire un lien vers Wikidata ;) PPS: merci @Seb35: pour le SPARQL ! Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 08:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

amenity=events_centre

Just a heads up, I just created amenity=events_centre per your proposal. I thought this image of The Dome Center, which you linked to in your proposal, could be a good one for the side bar. That said, I am unable to upload it since I am not yet autoconfirmed.
Joel Amos (talk) 00:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this page. You don't need to reupload the image on the OSM wiki, just use the name of the Wikimedia image in the side bar

File:DomeArenaInterior.JPG

--PanierAvide (talk) 07:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Tag attraction=*

Hello,

the tag attraction=* is not a subtag of tourism=attraction, checking the wiki page. Anyway thanks for your vote.

Francesco Francians (talk) 06:34, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for pointing this out. This is yet another weird OSM tagging but as it is established, I will change my comment. --PanierAvide (talk) 06:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, welcome... I don't see the point of using attraction (meant as theme park one) for big benches, that's why I proposed a new tag. Francians (talk) 06:46, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

As said, it would make more sense to have this as a subkey of another main osm tag, in order to be compatible with existing software. Even if it is tempting to create another value for tourism, path is very long before having support by editors and apps for a new main OSM tag. This was true for objects more common than big bench (see public_transport=*). Some people used viewpoint=* to set what type of viewpoint it is, why not viewpoint=giant_furniture then ? This makes detail available on OSM feature, while keeping compatibility with existing apps. It doesn't make query for getting only these features more difficult. I see only advantages to this approach ;-) --PanierAvide (talk) 06:54, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the author of image File:2018-02 Atelier 4c carto humanitaire rennes.jpg ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-".

In case that you are the author of the photo: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add <nowiki>{{CC0-self}}</nowiki> to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use <nowiki>{{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}}</nowiki> to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on [[Talk:Wiki]]: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step or when you are uploading files that are not your own work. --Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for pointing this out. I edited picture metadata accordingly, this photo was taken by myself. Best regards --PanierAvide (talk) 18:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the author of image File:2018-04 atelier 4c rivières.jpg ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ".

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified January 2022}} from the file page.

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for letting me know, I edited page accordingly. Best regards --PanierAvide (talk) 08:20, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for a quick reaction! User:Mateusz Konieczny/notify uploaders/PanierAvide have a few more. I admit that I am not yet sure how to deal with screenshots. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Screenshots may be helpful Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:25, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I added license to pictures, as they were taken by myself. For screenshots, I don't know either... Does it help if the screenshot is about an app I made myself ? Which is the case for ~2/3 of them. --PanierAvide (talk) 08:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

If you made all what is depicted in image then you can license however you want (just mention that in file description when you will edit). It gets trickier if there are substantial elements made by others. On which licenses is software of remaining screenshots? According to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Screenshots freely licensed ones should not be problematic Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:54, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

All other software depicted is open source and OSM-based (MapContrib, MapRoulette and so on) --PanierAvide (talk) 09:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

License

Do you have nay idea or way to discover/recover license of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Step_contrast_bad.jpg ? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:19, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

No, I don't know well enough Flickr platform to be sure on how to do this. --PanierAvide (talk) 16:23, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Welp, the we likely need a replacement for this file (for example used on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:step:contrast ) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:59, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Even more licensing annoyance

Sorry for bothering about it, but I progress through various copyright licensing issues and noticed https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:OLU_pictures.png - are you author also of photo embedded there? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 05:50, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I'm the author of OpenLevelUp and the person who made 99% of its screenshot there ;-) --PanierAvide (talk) 06:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:Step contrast.jpg ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|PanierAvide}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, June}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 23:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not the author of this one, and I'm not sure where it came from. Maybe Flickr but can't say for sure. --PanierAvide (talk) 06:16, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I think that I found a passable replacement! See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:step:contrast now with a new image that I have taken (though I was actually taking image of a bicycle ramp :) ) - is it now fine to remove that old image? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:31, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, more annoyance

Do you know source and license of image shown as the main part of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osc.png ? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, this was extracted from OpenStreetCam at the time, renamed into Kartaview, so I guess it was CC-By-SA 4.0 as it's the license used by Kartaview for pictures. --PanierAvide (talk) 15:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Than sadly also author of the picture is needed (BY part requires attribution) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:31, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

It appears on the picture, it's "skobbler" which is the author of the sequence this pictures belongs into. --PanierAvide (talk) 16:25, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:Ad ceiling.jpg ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you have taken then you can make it available under a specific free license (except some cases, like photos of modern sculptures in coutries without freedom of panorama or taking photo of copyrighted artwork).

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|PanierAvide}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, August}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:OSM Rennes atelier commerces oct2018.jpg ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you have taken then you can make it available under a specific free license (except some cases, like photos of modern sculptures in coutries without freedom of panorama or taking photo of copyrighted artwork).

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|PanierAvide}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, September}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:42, 23 September 2022 (UTC)