Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Media Viewer: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 141: Line 141:
::I believe it displays whatever description is on the description page at Commons. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 17:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
::I believe it displays whatever description is on the description page at Commons. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 17:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Based on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Media_Viewer#Intuitive_trial Tgr(WMF)'s response], there is a layer of filtering between the Commons description page and the Media Viewer description page. --[[User:Ancheta Wis|Ancheta Wis]] [[User talk:Ancheta Wis|   (talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Ancheta Wis| | contribs)]] 18:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Based on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Media_Viewer#Intuitive_trial Tgr(WMF)'s response], there is a layer of filtering between the Commons description page and the Media Viewer description page. --[[User:Ancheta Wis|Ancheta Wis]] [[User talk:Ancheta Wis|   (talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Ancheta Wis| | contribs)]] 18:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

:+1 Agree, get rid of this please. If you want to make this the default for mobile platforms perhaps that's something worth investigating, but for the desktop please get rid of it. Let's make this a petition (or if there already is one, please link to it). [[User:Crazycasta|Crazycasta]] ([[User talk:Crazycasta|talk]]) 19:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


== Copyright information ==
== Copyright information ==

Revision as of 19:02, 5 June 2014

Welcome to the Media Viewer discussion on English Wikipedia!

Media Viewer is a new tool under development that aims to improve the multimedia viewing experience on Wikipedia and its sister sites. This multimedia browser displays images in larger size and with less clutter, providing a more immersive user experience, as described here. It was developed in collaboration with many community members around the world -- including over 12,000 beta users here on English Wikipedia, who have been testing it since November 2013. The current plan is to release this tool gradually in coming weeks: it is already enabled by default on a dozen pilot sites, and will be deployed more widely throughout May, as described in this release plan.

Can you share your feedback about this tool, to help address any critical issues before its release on the English Wikipedia? To try it out, please log in and click on the small 'Beta' link next to 'Preferences' in your personal menu. Then check the box next to 'Media Viewer' in the Beta Features section of your user preferences — and click 'Save'. You can now click on any thumbnail image on this site to see it in larger size in the Media Viewer. For more info, check out these testing tips or this Help page.

Once you've tried the tool, please share your feedback here, to help improve this feature. You're also welcome to take this quick survey -- or join this wider discussion on MediaWiki.org, if you prefer. Thanks for sharing your insights!

Test images

Here are some sample images for you to test Media Viewer with. To use this tool, check out these testing tips. Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 01:28, 25 April 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Extended content

Pictures of the year 2013

Note that it takes about two weeks for new improvements to be deployed on English Wikipedia. To test the latest features, you can also use this test page on MediaWiki.org -- or if you are feeling adventurous, try this beta site, which is the most current, but slower and less stable.

Comments

Zoom feature, Use this File issues

There is no way to zoom in. This is a major, huge problem, which makes the Media Viewer less useful than simply using the article page the image is transcluded onto.

Using the image in a different website is also much, much harder than before.

Old workflow:

  1. Click on image (move to image's page on en.wiki)
  2. Click on image (move to upload.wikimedia.org's page)
  3. Copy URL
  4. Paste into other usage

New workflow:

  1. Click on image (open's MediaViewer)
  2. Find the "use this file" icon, hidden in the corner
  3. Click on it
  4. Click "Embed"
  5. Click "HTML"
  6. Copy the highlighted text (no way to copy only part of it)
  7. Paste into other usage
  8. Remove most of the copied text, which includes way more info than needed for copyright reasons.

Aside from these two major issues, and that there's no way to go the file page on en.wiki (the page that used to be reached by click on an image), it's very nice (although I'm still not sure what the point of it is). -- Ypnypn (talk) 02:30, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ypnypn, thanks so much for your clear and detailed feedback, which is very helpful to us.
You make a very good point about the need to zoom in: we're now working on a basic zoom feature to address this request in coming weeks.
Your workflow analysis for 'Use this file' is also very useful. We are considering adding a direct file link in the Share panel, which would reduce the number of steps required to match the old workflow. We could also remove an extra step in the Embed workflow (e.g. select HTML by default), to save time. However, the HTML links were carefully discussed with our legal team, as well as other community members, who made a strong case for the need to provide credits and HTML links for the file page, author, license and file repository , to comply with the terms of Creative Commons and other licenses. In the past, people have very lax about giving proper credits and required links, which this HTML code addresses effectively.
In consultation with other community members, we chose to link directly to the file page on Commons or the actual file repository where people need to go to make file edits (instead of the duplicate enwiki page which cannot be edited anyway). The local file page on enwiki remains accessible, but it is not clear to us what purpose it serves at this time.
Thanks again for your good insights, and we look forward to improving this product based on your feedback. :) Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 19:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We measured the time it takes to load a file description page, and it takes over 3 seconds on average. The image itself might take a while to load, either. So while the old workflow might have less clicks, that does not make it faster, as it involves waiting for the browser to load.

You can get a direct URL to the file in the Share this file/Download menu, via the preview link (admittedly this is hard to find).

Also worth noting that using the code from the Share panel will protect you from mistakes such as using a raw SVG file (which might work in your browser but fail completely for your visitors).

Fabrice: the HTML option is selected by default if you are not logged in. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 23:41, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Intuitive trial

TheDJ suggested we try media viewer.

  • Knowing little about it,
  1. used beta >
  2. pref >
  3. went to an article, e.g. Inferior temporal gyrus >
  4. clicked [image size widget] under a thumbnail in that article >
  5. entered image viewer >
  6. clicked the viewer's [> widget] to successively browse the images of that article.
  7. my navigation keys, (the < and > keys) work like the widgets. nice.
  • I immediately missed being able to read the text of the article while browsing. It's a whole new way to step thru the article. Is there a way to see the captions, at least?
  1. my up / down navigation keys open/close up the provenance for the image.
  2. is there a way to read the captions of my article this way?
side by side browsers to read and view simultaneously
  • Figured out a way
  1. open up a 2nd browser
  2. size them so that they can both fit side by side on the screen
  3. article on the left, viewer on the right, use the navigation keys to step thru the images, as I read the article
  4. when I use the expand widget on a small image, full screen takes over, instead of expanding to the size of the viewer's browser (not my full screen) and I have to rebuild the setup I described above.

Thank you for your work so far. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 13:01, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ancheta Wis, thanks so much for your helpful feedback :). To respond to some points you raised, we have a few tickets under consideration in our development pipeline, which I think could address a few of your issues:
Which of these two solutions do you prefer? Either of these proposed changes could take a few weeks to develop and release on English Wikipedia, if they are selected. In the meantime, I am glad that you found a creative solution to address your immediate needs :). Thanks again for your good insights! Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 19:24, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fabrice, I am replying about #589, as it looked the most promising for my problem. I am trying to follow content which I know about from my reading. But I have a problem: when I read Insular cortex using the method described above, I follow File:Human_brain_frontal_(coronal)_section_description_2.JPG ‎which has a nice description page from Wikimedia Commons: with numbered items 1. Medulla spinalis 2. Decussatio pyramidum etc. These are not part of the caption on the Media viewer as I try to read Insular cortex. Currently I disable Media viewer on the text browser, so that I can read the Commons description page on File:Human_brain_frontal_(coronal)_section_description_2.JPG . Then I can re-enable it after reading the article.
#501 does not help my problem. Regards, --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 19:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like we should make sanitizing the description more permissive. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 21:45, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

esc to exit full screen probably shouldn't collapse the media viewer

In full-screen mode, Firefox advises me to use Esc to get back to non-fullscreen (windowed). However, after a stutter, this also causes the media viewer itself. Thus effectively you jump back two "levels" in one go (page->media viewer->fullscreen---->page), which took me by surprise. - Jarry1250 [Vacation needed] 22:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is Template:Bug. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 22:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Completely unnecessary

Considering the present ability to choose resolution on the image page, including native resolution, image zoom in/out and the full-screen function in most browsers. 76.113.29.108 (talk) 14:01, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No big deal

Minor nuisance. Almost always my aim is to see the metadata. Captions, geocoords, etc. So, it needs an extra click. Probably the majority of readers, not editors, will differ. Jim.henderson (talk) 23:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

<nod> Thanks, Jim.henderson. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 23:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How is this not a big deal if the loading time of this "Media Viewer" is horribly long and the file page link is not obvious? 192.12.184.7 (talk) 05:18, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The loading time of the Media Viewer is actually substantially shorter than loading a File page. Here's the data. There is a perception difference because the File page remains a blank, white space while the entire page loads, whilst Media Viewer loads immediately and calls for the image. The more images are viewed, the more are cached, and even faster it gets. There will be tweaks to make links more prominent/accessible as we get feedback like yours. I appreciate it! Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:07, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Get rid of it!

The Media Viewer is utterly needless and makes a mess of big images containing lots of detail. It makes all the detail small and hard to discern. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the way things worked before. Abandon this project as a waste of time, an annoyance and anything but an improvement. Kelisi (talk) 04:16, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I know the need for Wikipedia to evolve, but why mess with a fundamental feature that worked perfectly beforehand? Peter Greenwell (talk) 05:11, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But in the articles, media viewer activates only on a click. As I understand it, you can still read articles in the way we have been used to. I was coming to this talk page to provide feedback, to state that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_sulcus#mediaviewer/File:Cingulate_sulcus_of_Vervet_Monkey.png has a very nice caption, as distinguished from some other images. For me, what the editor of this image set up was helpful to my search (I was searching for 'ascending ramus'). To the media viewer team, this might serve as a guide to use the media viewer. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 19:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it displays whatever description is on the description page at Commons. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Based on Tgr(WMF)'s response, there is a layer of filtering between the Commons description page and the Media Viewer description page. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 18:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Agree, get rid of this please. If you want to make this the default for mobile platforms perhaps that's something worth investigating, but for the desktop please get rid of it. Let's make this a petition (or if there already is one, please link to it). Crazycasta (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Media viewer seems to take the licence details from the information template. This frequently has only "see below" entered, expecting the user to be on the file page and see the licence templates immediately below. But this is meaningless and unhelpful in the media viewer. I noticed this after responding to an editor on the help desk. The "old hands" will soon learn the ropes here, but user's who are not editors and who just wnat to reuse the image are going to have a hard time figuring it out. SpinningSpark 23:47, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Spinning Spark: the licensing is taken from the HTML markup in templates, so even if {{Information}} template is missing or says something like "See below" the licensing has to be somewhere on the page and it picks that up and displays it. Media Viewer will display licensing and link to information about that license as long as there is some sort of license template anywhere on the File page. HTH. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 03:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
More (technical) information: Commons:Machine-readable_data. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 03:28, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is not correct, the licence template is not displayed by Media Viewer, it just displays "see below" with nothing underneath it. See for instance this example. One has to click through to the file page before the licence templates are displayed. How can you not think that is confusing, especially when the link the reader needs to click is above, not below that statement? SpinningSpark 10:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]