# 10 Oct, 2017 20:12
it would be nice if the gear database would not contain that many dupes.
I don't know how many dupes of PixInsight or the ASI1600MM-C from ZWO are in the DB. The entries should be combined to improve searching.
It would also help to show and sort how many owners exist when entering the gear so people gravitate to the hopefully correct gear.
# 29 Nov, 2017 03:22
|I second this one!|
# 29 Nov, 2017 07:13
Yes, I would also love to see this happen!|
# 01 Dec, 2017 21:55
|Me too. It is not so easy to find pictures taken with similar equipment like your own. Probably this request is a challenging one, but a clean gear database would be a massive benefit, i think.|
# 02 Dec, 2017 12:50
|Maybe we can split the work, if Mabula creates a Google spreadsheet or so with different gear types and split them into let's say 50 sheets I am sure we can get this done|
# 02 Dec, 2017 17:13
You can’t do it that way, there are tens of thousands of items. I need to write a section of AstroBin for official equipment pages, that are curated by moderators, and then rewrite the way you add gear to images so that you need to choose from the curated database. I can do that but it will take quite some time.|
And by the way, I am starting a new day job sonI have limited time for new time-consuming AstroBin features 😭
# 22 Jan, 2018 22:24
Salvatore, why not go a Wiki-like way, i. e. a more "democratic" way? I mean users could create and manipulate gear description pages themselves and insert only links to them into the image detail section. The only thing we would need is an overview of pages already available. If we start from zero then there could be a chance to concentrate the mass of gear items to a few hundred ones. And that all at a low price for a wiki tool without any need for a special database and/or moderators. So, most of the work would be performed by the users then… |
# 23 Jan, 2018 05:32
I never was even entertaining the idea of doing the actual dedupication work myself. The idea would of course always be that the community does it, but that still requires a massive amount of work from my side to set up a system that would enable you all to improve the gear database.
# 26 Jan, 2018 19:27
|Salvatore, to ease your work, do you have something in mind that is already available? I mean some kind of database framework or wiki system?|
# 26 Jan, 2018 21:07
|Unfortunately not. Whatever it is, it needs to be tightly integrated with AstroBin, and the gear management code on AstroBin needs to be rewritten so we don't end up with the same mess again a year later.|
# 07 Feb, 2018 15:25
I have another idea. There could be a quite easy way to link your existing gear items to an official database without creating that database separately:|
First, we need the possibility to modify the hyperlink of your own gear copy to point to a different gear page than yours (which is empty in most cases… ).
Second, an approved AB team has the admin rights to create a gear item/page for our wanted list of products. Those items (and only those) may have some special kind of mark (e. g. an additional flag or a special naming) to be detected by the gear autofill parser. So, if you would like to link your gear item to a central product page, you can select one of these official items. How does that sound?
# 14 Apr, 2018 22:28
I propose Crowd Sourced Equipment duplication and database clean up|
First of the function would have to be added to Astrobin's user interface: some how all users must have to have the ability to flag one
piece of equipment linking it to another believed to be a duplicate.
This option/form would be passively placed in the equipment data entry
Then, I propose we form a group of volunteers that will moderate the requests and verify/approve and deny. These people would
have to have internet searching skills and be able to make the decision
to merge the equipment with the appropriate name. To make this easier,
we choose a consistent alpha-numeric rule structure (no special
characters, exactly as seen on the manufacturers website, all caps,
title case, etc… what ever rules everyone agrees on). This is also
easily scripted into the database to convert inputs of users to match
the input requirements for data matching.
This way we can have an open wiki like structure letting users add equipment, and give them the
ability to help clean up the database with a little more oversight by
people willing to do the research.
# 16 Apr, 2018 22:41
|As i wrote before, a clean gear database is one of my biggest wishes for AstroBin. I would volunteer for such a work mentioned by HomerPepsi.|
# 17 Apr, 2018 06:01
MichaelI could help here, too!
# 23 May, 2018 08:09
I'd love to see a consolidated gear data base, too!|
What comes to my mind is a system like the one used by the StackExchange Forums:
Different jobs in the consolidation process (proposing the merge of gear items, approving these merges) can be done by any user but require a different amount of "Karma Points", which could be (something like) the AstroBin index that is already in use.
That way, you don't have to manually choose a group of selected users to be moderators, but still only people with a proven investment into the site would have the power to make db changes.
# 23 May, 2018 12:08
Good idea! I like that democratic way, too. But a high AB index may not be correlated to a good technical knowledge of all the stuff.|
So, a team of select volunteers should be more efficient here! CS, Andreas
# 15 Oct, 2018 06:56
Hi, I'm a new-ish user of Astrobin who plans on participating in it seriously as my interest and skills in astrophotography develop over time.|
I too note and share the confusion and frustration born out of the largely free-form equipment database. For example, I just went to add my ZWO ASI1600MM Pro camera to my personal gear list, a fairly popular model, and I think was presented with at least 6 variations of that name to choose from - all obviously referencing the same product, but all written out in ways with tiny differences.
I also note that this want has been hanging around the community for some time now, so there's no shortage of people willing to help solve this consistency issue. Perhaps there needs to be a kick-start to help things along? While the process seems daunting, I think we can start small - say by first correcting the Make/Manufacturer listings first. These should be a more limited scope than equipment makes and models, and easily researchable and correctable. Lessons learned from that process can inform the much-more involved process of fixing and consolidating the equipment list.
I agree in the end, unknown equipment should be entered into a moderation queue of its own and deliberated on by one or two mods who are knowledgable about gear. I also think some ground rules should be established to inform their decisions - even standardizing down to how decimal places are recorded (is it 1.25" or 1,25", etcetera).
|You have no new notifications.|