Kategoridiskusjon:Norske kulturminner

message: Hi everyone, I have been spending some time on making the lists ready for WLM2012. Things that I think good be improved:
* Template:Kulturminner header and Template:Kulturminner row have too any fields. Part of them should be hidden. Some suggestions:
** Merge navn and artikkel into one column. This probably needs some bot help
** What's RA-mal?
** Hide kommunenr
** What are the fields "vernetype", "kat", "tilrettel" and "verdensarv"? Do they really need to be in the lists
** The columns should probably be shuffled to make it easier for the user
** We should probably add a empty "bilde" field to every row so it's easier for the user to add an image (bot job)
* Every list article should get an intro linking to the location article. The location article should link back to the list article
* Almost every list article should link to the corresponding Commons category after we decided on the naming, see :Commons:Category talk:Cultural heritage monuments in Norway
* The lists are too large and should be split up. You should aim at not having lists larger than 150 items. Looks like splitting out communes works for most locations except Farsund, Bergen, Froland & Oslo. Per neighborhood or splitting out important streets seems to work in other countries.  
* Merge needds to happen for Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Monuments 2011/kulturminner/Drammen and Liste over kulturminner i Drammen, see Diskusjon:Liste over kulturminner i Drammen#Merge
* Are all the lists complete?
* Now the only way to find all lists is Spesial:Lenker_hit/Mal:Kulturminner_row. Probably good to add a tracker category to all the lists. Something like :Category:Liste over kulturminner i Norge?
* The images at Bruker:Multichill/Unused monument photos should be added to the lists
* I would like to rename Bruker:Multichill/Unused monument photos to a title in Norwegian probably somewhere in your project namespace. Any suggestions?
* There should be a central list from which people can start browsing (Liste over kulturminner i Norge?). List should linke to the counties, the counties should link to the municipalities and the path back should also be linked. So municipality to the county and the county to the central list.
Finally some list for to inspiration. Multichill (diskusjon) 26. jun 2012 kl. 18:28 (CEST)
replies: text: Thanks for good suggestions. Haros (diskusjon) 26. jun 2012 kl. 21:09 (CEST)
replies: text: :The lists are an excerpt from a larger database at Riksantikvaren, or really its maintained by Miljøvernavdelingen at Fylkesmannen in each county. The excerpt is made by H@r@ld, perhaps he has some comments. Name is the object name in the database, article is the proposed article in Wikipedia. They are not always the same, but the object name could be set to point to the article if it exists.

text: :RA-mal can be probably be removed. Kommunenr (numeric id for municipalities) can probably be removed or appended to the name of the municipality. Vernetype says what kind of legal status the protection has, for example if it is protected by law due to age or it is by administrative declaration. For example AUT is automatic by law, IKKE is not protected, UAV is not known status, and so forth. Kat is type of object, for example gårdstun is gehöft and kirkested is the area where it is or has been a church. Tilrettel is if there is made preparations for visitors, usually it is ukjent or unknown or museum or some information tablet. Verdensarv is if the site is on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

text: :Place for an image would probably be a good addition, and an excerpt from the article (if there is one) should also be a nice addition.

text: :Linking to the Commons list should be pretty stright forward, there is some support for this in the footer of some of the infoboxes. There could also be special marks of some  kind in the articles, but things like that has a bad habit of accumulating over time so it must be removed or toned down after a while.

text: :Splitting on municipalities seems like the obvious thing to do, even if some of the lists will be rather large. Further subdivision could be done on bydeler or city ward/ort. Some of the small municipalities have a large number of entries on the list, and there is an on-going work to make the lists more complete. That may make the number of items increase by nearly a factor ten but most of the additional items are not something we need to bother about for this competition.

text: :These lists are from a database of official objects, other lists in Wikipedia might not be official, but can have been left out of the official list due to sloppy work. I've told Fylkesmannen i Oppland about several cases. The lists was previously defined as the only accepted list for photos part of the competition, and that makes it a little difficult to change it. I think it is easier to keep on using it "as is", or perhaps mark those that are part of the official list somehow. That is official entries will have an id and a link to the database.

text: :No they are not complete, and it is said unofficially that somewhere near 50% are missing of important objects and probably a very large number of not so important things. Especially there are huge gaps on industrial heritage, old roads, hunting and trapping, and so forth. Present institutions, profan buildings and churches are best covered even if not complete.

text: :Name of the category for the lists should be "Lister over kulturminner i Norge" in Norwegian. Category for the photos could be "Ubrukte bilder av norske kulturminner".

text: :And basically sounds like a good idea! =) — Jeblad 26. jun 2012 kl. 22:20 (CEST)
replies: text: ::Thanks for suggestions and all the excellent work on standardizing WLM datasets across countries. I was going to comment on the purpose of the fields  "vernetype", "kat", "tilrettel", "verdensarv" as well as why the name field has been duplicated, but Jeblad has written good explanation already (thanks!).

text: ::The Directorate for Cultural Heritage (Riksantikvaren) are adding a few thousand new cultural heritage sites each year. The number is changing slowly, so assume the lists from 2011 are 95-98% complete. These heritage sites are reported from each county. The quality and completeness of the reporting vary between counties. We are cooperating with the Directorate with the aim of getting database dumps of the sites for purposes like WLM and other wiki-projects in the future. In order to use the title field as a link to corresponding wikipedia article(s) the The Directorate for Cultural Heritage will have to remove capitalization errors and do a cleanup of the title field. Some of these errors are corrected in the WLM lists. Unfortunately, the Directorate have not (yet) had time to import our TSV file of corrections. A reconversion of a fresh dump of the Directorate's database would lead to a lot of (semi-)manual work in order to apply the manual changes to the title field in the current WLM lists. The datatype of the geolocation field in the original database is (mostly) polygons, not points, which was recalculated to a point at the polygons centre. This is a minor problem since it is possible to automate these steps completely. When these two problems are solved, the WLM lists may be updated by a bot job. Since I'm pessimistic about getting both solved in the near future, the best option is to continue to use the items on the 2011 lists in 2012, since these are  nearly complete. H@r@ld (diskusjon) 27. jun 2012 kl. 08:13 (CEST)
replies: text: :::We probably should do some filtering of the lists too. Take a look at "Anne Maries vei 22" as an example. It should not be in our list, as it apparently is there due to the next door neighbour. Another problem is with objects like "Løvenskiolds gate 6". There I'm not able to find why it is on the list.

text: :::I have split the lists further, each kommune should have a list. We have hidden some fields, and added images. Haros (diskusjon) 27. jun 2012 kl. 08:57 (CEST)
thread_title:  Improvements