Browse Wikimedia Commons for photos to insert into new posts

[brainwane]

Title:
Browse Wikimedia Commons for photos to insert into new posts

Area:
entries

Summary:
On the New Post and Edit pages, give the user the ability to browse freely licensed photos from Wikimedia Commons to insert into their posts. Use the MediaWiki API https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:FAQ and the example of http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/PhotoCommons as a prototype (it's a WordPress extension).

Description:
It would be nice to give users the ability to dress up their more text-heavy posts with graphics. Wikimedia Commons is a useful source of freely licensed graphics.

I don't know how this should be implemented in the UI. I imagine there would be some kind of search functionality, to search Commons for photos matching a keyword and then to display thumbnails and then choose them for insertion. Inserting the photo should probably also automatically add a caption with attribution.

Poll #8850 Browse Wikimedia Commons for photos to insert into new posts

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 64

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
5 (7.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
4 (6.2%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
26 (40.6%)

(I have no opinion)
27 (42.2%)

(Other: please comment)
2 (3.1%)

Comments

[jazzfish]

I am cautiously in favor of this in general while not having any particular use for it myself.

[elf]

I don't want DW to be more image-heavy. I don't mind if some people put images in their posts, but I don't want to promote the idea that "every post should have a picture!" I'm here, instead of Wordpress or (twitch) Tumblr, precisely because I like text-heavy, discussion-intensive posts.

I like rich commenting features, not strong image features. While I'd love DW to host images, that's not the same as active encouragement for putting lots of images in posts that, currently, don't have them and don't need them.

If it's legal to hotlink to Wikimedia images, we have ways of doing that now. If not--DW would need to implement image hosting, which it currently doesn't have.

[denise]

At the same time, there are plenty of people who want to put images in their posts, to break up the visual flow of their text, and a lot of people with text processing issues that find heavy, dense text posts to be difficult to read if there isn't something breaking up the wall o'text...

[elf]

I don't mind images. I read scans_daily. I used to read it on dialup. But I don't want "PUSH HERE TO ADD WIKIMEDIA IMAGE TO YOUR POST!!!" --especially not when there are so many other nifty features to work on.

I'd be delighted for DW to set up some kind of image hosting. If this hosts the images at DW, I'd prefer that coding time were spent arranging more universally-useful image hosting. If it's just a bit of script that creates a hotlink to the Wikimedia image, I'm more than happy for hotlinking to need a bit of coding skill to discourage it from getting annoying. (To me. I'm aware other people have different annoyances. They get a vote and a voice, too.)

That said, I wouldn't be upset if this got implemented, beyond a moment or two of "hmpf, more visual internet gah."

[brainwane]

So it sounds like we disagree in what we want in our DW reading and writing experiences, which is totally fair, of course.

especially not when there are so many other nifty features to work on

Well, there are lots of cool things to work on, but not all effort is fungible. I am totally biased in that I work for the Wikimedia Foundation and I'm trying to encourage reuse of our materials and ensure that the MediaWiki API is useful to other people. So if people wanted this feature, I'd probably be able to wrangle MediaWiki-knowledgable volunteers to help work on it, and these would be volunteers who would not otherwise be interested in working on Dreamwidth at all. (And then there's the "every suggestion stands by itself" thing but I figure you know that already; you've been quite fair in your evaluations.)

But the polling right now is strongly going against my suggestion so my above point is probably moot anyway.

[matgb]

FWIW, I like the basic idea and it's inspired some thoughts I'll get back to later-I'd definitely like an easier way of putting appropriate pics in some of my posts if I ever get back to writing regularly again, and the idea of an image library searchable from within the 'insert image' bit of the post page is good, it just needs to be sorted out as to why (and possibly have a few DWy bells and whistles).

I'm also thinking of some way of making it easy to insert existing icons intot he body of posts, just need to figure out what it is I'm thinking of before I try and write it down.

(and FWIW I'm a former dial up user who regularly browses on mobile platforms, relevent images in posts can be scaled by good mobile browsers and a good interface would work with the image placeholders for dial up users so they're just implementation issues not objections really)

[azurelunatic]

Thinking about this bit, if the image already has thumbnail-sized versions of it available from the source, it could be really shiny to have a placeholder setting which is "use thumbnail versions for placeholder image when available" -- I am not suggesting that globally, since one very valid use of placeholders is to block images of unknown provenance for possible content issues, rather than size issues -- but for people whose use of placeholders is strictly for size, and the image is hosted from somewhere Known that does thumbnails in a way acceptable to DW, I think it could be very useful.

[matgb]

Ooh, I like this. I had to use placeholders when I was on dial up, but really hated it (and there's someone on my reading page now that's posting full screen size pics and force reducign them, thinking that it's a good thing, need to mention how bad it is at some point).

Auto thumbnail use could be really cool if it's workable, and it ought to be.

[musyc]

Now that I would like. I am one of those "placeholders for size not content" people, so auto-thumbnails would be awesome for me. (And save some swearing every time I forget and have to research how to use the thumbnail from PB as an anchor, which is every time. Which goes first a href or img src ahhhhhhhh;lkajsd;fkjasdf.)

[brainwane]

If I quoted anything I'd quote your whole comment. :-) Yes, this. I find it difficult to read walls of text, and unappealing to write walls of text. Most people prefer text with illustrations, although I am perfectly willing to believe that current DW users, and the market that DW wants to appeal to, are not in that bucket.

[instantramen]

I initially voted no opinion because I couldn't figure out what about this suggestion I don't like, but this really helped. If it was just a matter of me not seeing a wide enough potential audience to justify the effort, I'd leave it be, but technologically speaking, I think this feature would discourage users who are constrained to dial-up, limited bandwidth, older computers, and/or mobile browsing from using DW. With that in mind, I have to vote no.

[brainwane]

There are mobile or low-bandwidth preferences, styles or skins available that minimize the bandwidth and processor loads of images by not displaying them (for example, the user preferences for Image Placeholders and Video Placeholders, and the Lynx site skin). So that filtering could take place on the reader's side, and I don't think we need to discourage more images in posts in order to serve the users you are (very rightly!) interested in encouraging.

[brainwane]

Yes, it's legal to hotlink to Wikimedia images.

[melannen]

+1

I have no strong objection if this is widely wanted and it's hidden away under the "insert image" pop-up, but for me personally, I would rather have "wall o' text" than "wall o' text interspersed with vaguely connected clip art with no captions" - which is a blog style I see around that I find incredibly unattractive, and don't particularly want to encourage on DW.

[alexbayleaf]

If implemented, I would prefer this were a more general CC image search, covering Flickr, etc, as well as Wikimedia Commons.

Also, I presume this would be part of "insert image" popup in the update page? It might just be the options I have selected, but I don't see that popup in the new (beta) create entry page. Whatever happens, it will have to tie in to the new design. brainwane, it might help your case if you were to suggest some of the UI/workflow and/or how it might fit into the new create entry page.

But more generally, I agree with elf that DW is strongest for mostly-textual posts, and that it would annoy me to see people putting images in their posts based on keywords, because that has a whiff of "INCREASE YOUR BLOG TRAFFIC!!!!1" to me (possibly because it's the style of many link-baity commercial blogs), and that's not what I want DW to be about. OTOH, if other people want it, and it's just part of the "insert image" popup in the editor, then it's no skin off my nose.

[brainwane]

If implemented, I would prefer this were a more general CC image search, covering Flickr, etc, as well as Wikimedia Commons.

Sounds awesome to me. I only mentioned Wikimedia since that's the source I'm most involved with right now. But a more general search would be very neat. Flickr in particular probably has heaps of suitable material.

it might help your case if you were to suggest some of the UI/workflow and/or how it might fit into the new create entry page.

It would, wouldn't it. It's tough to know because it depends on how the WYSIWYG/rich text editor is going to work, and AFAICT that's not available to look at yet -- maybe I'm wrong? Looking at the beta create entry page, I find myself thinking that this could somehow be related to the user icon picker. azurelunatic's related suggestion: "You know what might be interesting, freely licensed and topical images for people who need to snag a little 100x100 something for an entry that doesn't quite match any of their existing icons."

DW is strongest for mostly-textual posts

Yeah. The current users definitely tend that way. I used to just write paragraphs after paragraphs of text when I blogged (with lists and blockquotes and subheads sometimes), and now I try to break it up with thematically related photos and I much prefer it and find it easier on the eyes. So I'd like it if DW made it easier for me to write/present entries the way I want.

[msilverstar]

Seems too specific and limited a feature.

[sorchasilver]

+1

Some sort of general browsable image library link to make finding images easier from a variety of sources, for those that like them (personally, I'm with the above commenters who don't like or want them), would be a "no opinion" for me. But this seems far too limited and focused a suggestion.

[kyrielle]

My "other" is one part "I have no opinion" as this is not a feature I would use much, and one part "and also allow search of other sources such as Flickr" (Flickr has licensing information on its photos, such as creative commons, etc.).

I suspect the WYSIWYG editor will have an "insert image" option when it is done. If so, that could then offer a place to provide image links, or a search section to search various providers. (It could start with just one provider, but with an option to expand to others.)

I also agree that if the provider can give thumbnails, adding an ability to 'use thumbnail as placeholder' would be nice for people with bandwidth concerns.

If that's done, though, the "insert image" option where you can provide a direct image link maybe ought to provide the user an optional field for a thumbnail link. That way if they're on a service DW doesn't integrate with (or posting an image of theirs that is NOT cc licensed/searchable, such as if I posted one of my family photos from Flickr where I have those all-rights-reserved), they could add the thumbnail info.... Though, hmm, in the latter case you have to wonder what would be done about people being jerks providing "thumbnails" that are not, in fact smaller. Maybe that last is not a good idea for that reason. Hmmm.

[montuos]

This.

I too would be unlikely to use such a service, but, that being said, my opinion is that if you set up a framework to pull freely licensed images from one site, you might as well plan to pull from other such sites as well, as long as you can reasonably discern that the licensing is appropriate.

Edit: I still don't have an opinion for whether or not this idea should be implemented, though.

[azurelunatic]

It would be really interesting to be able to see all the public entries that have used the same image.

[pauamma]

Like others, I think design should have a "search/browse pics on external sites by some criteria for inclusion in entry" part and a "how to search inside a specific site" part, barring a generic API for the latter.

[green_knight]

I think that overall, an 'insert image' page will be a useful thing to have. Eventually, IIRC, DW is looking into a scrapbook-type feature where users can store albums of images with their accounts. (Obviously, a paid or premium paid feature.) Having other image-inclusion features on that page - even _starting_ with those other features - makes tremendous sense to me.
Flickr's API allows for search by keyword (we already have tags, combining the two in some form should be doable) and limit by creative commons licenses.

I think this would be _awesome_ functionality for many users - the ability to find legal images and have the right code delivered to their DW draft post - and from where I'm sitting it's definitely an attracive feature, even without the scrapbook link - I can imagine browsing my own flickr stream in that way, for instance.