Template talk:Artwork/Archiv/2020

Title bar omits bracket

There seems to be a bug where an end bracket in a title parameter is missing from the title that is displayed in the bar at the top. See File:Catalogue of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (1906-1907) - DPLA - b46138f1b8f429dc350963ff88e66528 (page 179).jpg, for example. Dominic (talk) 15:01, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Object type : item of collection or exhibition

Some Wikidata items are marked as instances of item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264), which is rather odd and useless in the "object type" field. Can it be hidden ? -Zolo (talk) 09:50, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

@Zolo: late reply on d:Talk:Q18593264#instance_of_=_item_of_collection_or_exhibition. Do you agree? Multichill (talk) 17:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

errors ?

File:Pieter_Jansz._Saenredam_005.jpg gives the creator double
File:The Interior of the Church of Saint Bavo, Haarlem by Pieter Jansz. Saenredam, Getty Center.JPG does not show institution and references --Oursana (talk) 01:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Oursana, I do not see 2 creators in File:Pieter_Jansz._Saenredam_005.jpg and I do see institution in File:The Interior of the Church of Saint Bavo, Haarlem by Pieter Jansz. Saenredam, Getty Center.JPG. --Jarekt (talk) 02:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer, I still have it with Safari and Firefox, in the first file I see the same creator twice. Later I will try with another computer, seems to be an error with me.--Oursana (talk) 02:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I am using Firefox and did not see the issues but I do see 2 creators in Chrome when logged in as User:JarektBot... I am very confused. --Jarekt (talk) 03:04, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Not a browser issue. As I see 2 creators when I log out and back to 1 when I log in. --Jarekt (talk) 03:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

My problems were the same even after restart. From my macbook - safari File:Pieter_Jansz._Saenredam_005.jpg had only one creator tl, while the other file also did not show. Thank you all and stay safe :)--Oursana (talk) 16:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

institution

Following the dicussion with Jarekt I'm proposing to change the label "collection (Q2668072)" to "institution (Q178706)" and creating new field for collection.

I understand that that in English [[:Mona Lisa, by Leonardo da Vinci, from C2RMF retouched.jpg|Mona Lisa painting] is in the Louvre collection. But ther are other cases also. At least in the National Library of Israel they have collections in thier so called "collection". For example see File:Dan Hadani collection (990044413420205171).jpg. We can not call Dan Hadani collection and the National Library of Israel both collection. One is institution and the other is collection. If we have both "|Institution=" an "|collection=" then users can add Louvre to "|collection=" if they find it suitable. But if we have a specific collection of Institution then the correct form should be Institution=Institution and collection=collection. So I'm proposing to changing back "|Institution=collection" to "|Institution=institution" and create new field "|collection=collection".

In general I would say that in my opinion when adding a field withe the name X the outcom should be also X. Otherwise it may be confusing and might be contain language issues. It is better to make it simple. |institution=collectioninstitution, |departmentCurrent location=Current location etc. It is only a general say.

Tags: Jarekt, Multichill, Oursana, Elya, Marsupium, Zolo. -- Geagea (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Again: Jarekt, Multichill, Oursana, Elya, Marsupium, Zolo, I'll appreciate your opinion her. Do you have objection to change to "|Institution=institution" and create new parameter for collection - "|collection=collection"? -- Geagea (talk) 07:01, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Geagea, I do not have strong opinions on collection vs. institution label, but I do have to understand how to code any possible changes and I need to be sure not to break current files. Right now collection (P195) and the template field "institution" is displayed in the field titled "Collection", with the preference given to template field in case both are present. I agree that "when adding a field withe the name X the outcome should be also X", but unfortunately the data Artwork template stores in "institution" field is stored on Wikidata in collection (P195) and location (P276) statements. The actual code is in Module:Wikidata_art, in function p.get_institution, I do have some special cases for Louvre and I can hardwire something for National Library of Israel for wikidata sourced fields. --Jarekt (talk) 14:58, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I used artwork template before the change but since the decision accepted then it was it's done. I believe the saying that a item is in the collection of the institution is just a way of speaking. You can say it also in Hebrew but if we the institution includes collection sound weird. Anyway tecnically changing from collection to institution should not cause much difference. You can say that "the item is in the collection of the Louvre" or "the item is in the institution Louvre". Sure I can find local solution just for Dan Hadani collection but I thing it is better to make things simple for people - "|X=X". -- Geagea (talk) 16:43, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I disagree. collection (P195) is mostly used for the holder of the collection and that's the institution. Multichill (talk) 17:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

And what about Dan Hadani collection which is a collection in National Library of Israel (Q188915)? Should it be collection of a collection? -- Geagea (talk) 11:02, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Library of Congress often groups their items in "collections" based on who donated them. So sometimes we have more specific collection based on the donor, or more general "Library of Congress". I wonder of the issue is that translations of a word "collection" have slightly different meanings in different languages. I see it a lot with Polish and English as sometimes the same word have very different meaning, like "collaboration" is a good thing in English and just the opposite in many other languages (see Wartime collaboration (Q156744)). Maybe word "collection" works in English but not in Hebrew. --Jarekt (talk) 14:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Management of creator (P170) in uncertain cases

Hello @Jarekt: ,

I have a request: in some cases, the author/artist is not exactly the specified artist: the artwork can be only "attributed to" (manually, we can use Template:Attributed to) the artist, or "after" (manually, we can use Template:After) an artist, etc.

Unless I'm mistaken, currently these values (that come from wikidata) are not considered by the Template. A few examples :

• Here, I remove the patch to automatically retrieve the "attributed to" wikidata information, after updating the wikidata item - with no success.
• Here, I remove the patch to automatically retrieve the "after" wikidata information, after updating the wikidata item - with no success.

I guess it would be the same with all the use cases of "use of creator (P170) in uncertain cases".

Is there already a way to retrieve this information into the Template:Artwork?

If there is not, is it possible to modify the template to include the information listed in the "use of creator (P170) in uncertain cases"?

Thank you very much, --Daehan (talk) 13:49, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Daehan, we do not usually use Template:Attributed to or Template:After templates, which are kind of leftovers from some earlier eras. So to do this in wikitext do {{Artwork|artist={{Creator:Henry Raeburn|after}}}} giving:

Artist

After Henry Raeburn  (1756–1823)     Description Scottish-British painter and portraitist Date of birth/death 4 March 1756  8 July 1823  Location of birth/death Stockbridge Edinburgh Work location Edinburgh, London Authority file : Q561916 VIAF: 24874387 ISNI: 000000006634371X ULAN: 500032325 LCCN: n83013586 NLA: 36306862 WGA: r/raeburn Open Library: OL1109102A Oxford Dict.: 23007 GND: 120340399 SUDOC: 035750294 BNF: 149723857 BIBSYS: 90531664 NKC: xx0190035 BNE: XX1598705 RKD: 65411 J9U: 987007274570805171 Koninklijke: 087629399 WorldCat artist QS:P170,Q4233718,P1877,Q561916

See Creator:Henry Raeburn documentation (or any other creator template documentation) to see what other cases are handled. I also fixed the syntax on wikidata so it follows our currently supported model. I agree that "unknown value" makes sense there I just never have seen anybody use it, as we usually just use anonymous (Q4233718). I should expand the template to be able to handle both. --Jarekt (talk) 16:21, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Jarekt: thank you for the hints!

However, these are manual corrections. My point is to see the right information into {{Artwork}} with only {{Artwork}} as a code (like in my examples, with no parameters). Currently, a lot of files use {{Artwork}} only but the data retrieved is not accurate, because the template doesn't manage these use cases.

Do you see my point? Do you think it's feasable?

Thank you, --Daehan (talk) 20:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Daehan, both items are fixed to the expected model. --Jarekt (talk) 01:21, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

new parameters

Hello,

I am wondering if it is possible to add two more parameters to the template: depicted object and depicted event.

Thank you,--Michel Bakni (talk) 13:32, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: if you can help --Alaa :)..! 12:18, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Michel Bakni and علاء: , Depicted object if it is notable than it has a wikidata entry and we would add it using "wikidata" parameter, if they are not notable than I would describe them in the "Description" field. "Depicted event" is an interesting one if it is just on Commons than I would use "Description" field, but I wonder how we model "depicted event" on Wikidata. Through depicts (P180), main subject (P921) or some other properties? I could try to parse those and add them to "depicted event". --Jarekt (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I think I did not explain my idea well. The picture shows a table, an elephant, or a weapon we can not mention that now. Although they might not be the major objective of the picture, these objects need to be referred to as well. For the Depicted events, I am currently using the depicted people field, and this is not very good, because events are not people.

Thank you very much for responding fast--93.3.144.33 07:05, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

"The picture showing a table, an elephant, or a weapon" would be handled by depicts (P180) statements on Wikidata on SDC, but {{Artwork}} does not display that info. Depicted events would be handled by "Description" field. However can you point me to some images where this change would help? --Jarekt (talk) 13:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: Yes sure, please check [1] and [2]. In [1], The icon showing mary and Agel gabrial, but it is to for them, it is is dedicated for The annunciation (Q154326). For [2], the icon showing the face of jesus, but is an object called Image of Edessa (Q223246). I want the event and the object to clear in all the languages regarding of the existing of description in a given language.--Michel Bakni (talk) 17:36, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Michel Bakni Sorry I forgot about this discussion. I fixed two example files and added depicted event to the description. That is where we usually place info that does not ideally fit other fields. --Jarekt (talk) 03:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry, I did not get your modificaions, can you please explain in more details?--Michel Bakni (talk) 08:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Should SDC and this template use and fetch depicted part (P5961)?

What about using depicted part (P5961) as qualifier to digital representation of (P6243) and default |depicted part= to its value? --Marsupium (talk) 11:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)