User talk:Jane023

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Logo of Wikidata

Welcome to Wikidata, Jane023!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards, Stryn (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome! I can't wait to see this in use on the Hungarian Wikipedia. Jane023 (talk) 13:11, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

landscape with fighting bulls (Q17319694)[edit]

Hello, I am having a look at the Rijksmuseum stuff. As you seem to have quite a good knowledge of Dutch Golden age painting, can you tell if the painter of landscape with fighting bulls (Q17319694) (= [1]) is Dirk van den Berg (Q89329). --Zolo (talk) 18:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh actually he is the creator mentioned in File:Dirck van Bergen 002.jpg, so I suppose he is the same :). --Zolo (talk) 19:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When in doubt you can always check the RKD if they have it online (which they usually do for the Rijksmuseum). I added the RKD number. Jane023 (talk) 19:39, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Descriptions begin with a lowercase letter except …"[edit]

… as Help:Description#Capitalization points out. That is why I changed a description you added. Just to inform you. Cheers, --Marsupium (talk) 14:04, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'll try to remember Jane023 (talk) 15:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Biografisch portaal en Teylers[edit]

Hoi Jane, wat denk jij ervan om http://www.biografischportaal.nl/ hier toe te voegen? Is denk ik ook wel een aardige voor mix'n'match. Ben de schilderijen van het Teylers aan het toevoegen dus deze lijst zal nog wel langer worden. Multichill (talk) 22:43, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jaaaa! Leuk idee. Heerlijk dat wij de Teylers schilderijen al hebben op Commons. De BP database zit vol met fouten, maar Wikipedia en RKD ook, dus laat maar komen, wat mij betreft - the more the merrier! Jane023 (talk) 07:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Zat ik braaf pagina in te vullen, kom ik erachter dat Biografisch Portaal van Nederland ID (P651) al bestaat. Ik heb deze property maar een wat duidelijkere naam gegeven zodat deze wel terug te vinden is. Ik zal Magnus vragen of hij het aan Mix'n'Match kan toevoegen.
Er is al botmatig een slag gemaakt om de BP nummers in de Authority Control template te verwerken op de engelse Wikipedia. De artikelen met BPN nummers aldaar zijn hier te vinden. Jane023 (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wat betreft Teylers, fijn om te horen. Dat zal nog wel even handmatig puzzelen worden wat zo te zien missen de id's op Commons en dan kan mijn bot ze niet vinden. Multichill (talk) 10:12, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, het lijstje dat nog gedaan moet worden. Multichill (talk) 11:05, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ik zal ernaar kijken. Toen wij aan het Teylers project begonnen hadden zij niet eens de id's op hun website. Je moest ze opzoeken in de RKD. Heel omslachtig, en de schilderijen waren al destijds ge-upload door een fotograaf met de "eigen werk" template ook nog. Ik heb ze wel allemaal in de juiste commons categorieen gezet, maar de id's koppelen aan de schilderijen zal beter gaan als je de id's eerst sorteert per schilder. Kijk hier als voorbeeld: Schilderij van Abraham Teerlink met title + datum, sinds upload is de licentie + creator aangepast maar bevat nog geen id nummer. Jane023 (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dan zou ik die id's even lekker laten zitten en gewoon schilderijen hier erbij gaan zoeken. Het is me niet gelukt om bij elk schilderij een schilder te vinden. Ook omdat er voor sommige schilders nog geen item hier is.
Magnus is snel en heeft mix'n'match gevuld. Iets van 10% (8000) zijn automatisch gevonden, maar moeten nog nagelopen worden. Bedankt voor de hulp, we hoeven ons niet te vervelen! Multichill (talk) 21:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Magnus Manske (talk) 21:24, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Jane023 (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

part of "loops"[edit]

Hello. On some items, you use the property part of (P361) that creates a "loop". For example, Portrait of Sara Wolphaerts van Diemen (Q17323911) is part of Portrait of Nicolaes Hasselaer (1593-1635) (Q17323910) which (again) is part of Portrait of Sara Wolphaerts van Diemen (Q17323911). Do you mean to create a loop where two items are part of each other? What is the relation between these items that you want to express, and maybe there is a different property to use? Jefft0 (talk) 13:13, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up! I hope I didn't do too many of those. These are portraits that were commissioned as a pair of pendants, and the "part of" will only work if I create an item for the set of paired portraits, but since there are hundreds of these, I believe we need another property such as "pendant of", since there are only two paintings in any set. Jane023 (talk) 13:42, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jane023: Good point. We don't want to create an item just to represent the commission. Do you agree with proposing a new property "commissioned with" to handle this common situation? Jefft0 (talk) 13:44, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea of "commissioned with" in the sense that you could have a series rather than more than two, but I think we still need something for the concept of pendant portrait pairs - especially when pendants are not commissioned with the same artist (for example some women liked to have a different artist than their husband chose, for whatever reason). Also, some portraits have been identified as a "pendant" even though the other half is missing or has never been documented. Jane023 (talk) 13:49, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jane023: Thanks for the feedback. I suppose this issue arises for many collections, not just for collections of paintings. "To express that an item is part of a collection with other items, is it necessary to create a separate item for the collection?" I'm going to a Wikimedia meeting in Tarragona soon. I'll ask about it. Jefft0 (talk) 13:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we have part of (P361) for parts of other works, and collection (P195) for parts of established collections, but it would be nice to have some way of indicating that works are connected as pendants, or if there are more than two, connected as related objects. An example of pendant portraits that today are physically located far apart from each other, but which originally hung side-by-side:

Have fun in Tarragona, Jane023 (talk) 14:33, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Teylers creators[edit]

Hi Jane, ik heb de lijst van schilderijen van Teylers zonder creator onder de 100 weten te krijgen. Zin om te helpen om het naar nul te krijgen? Multichill (talk) 21:05, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ik heb wel effe snel het tot 50 gebracht, maar vele van de rest zijn nog niet op Wikidata (vreemd, want ik dacht dat wij bijna de gehele collectie op Wikipedia had gezet). Jane023 (talk) 22:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hee Jane, bedankt voor het helpen. Ik heb wel je samenvoeging van View from Dekkersduin (Q17348906) en Dekkersduin (Q2052566) ongedaan gemaakt. Hoezo had je die samengevoegd? Het ene item gaat over een schilderij en het andere over een duintje. Dat is toch niet hetzelfde?
Welke schilderijen mis je bijvoorbeeld? Kan je die bij Europeana vinden? Multichill (talk) 19:11, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ik mis de schilderijen hier niet, maar op Wikipedia juist. Ik geloof wel dat je nu de complete collectie heb - zo veel schilderijen hebben zij niet. Ik klikte vanaf de 1ste en 2de schilderijen zalen naar de creators toe om te zien wie je allemaal al had. Sorry, die merge was inderdaad fout. Ik bedoelde View from Dekkersduin (Q17348906) te mergen met View from Dekkersduin (Q474096). Ik haalde weer de concepten "schilderij"-"schilderij onderwerp" door elkaar. Jane023 (talk) 19:59, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, die had ik niet gezien. Heb het nu samengevoegd.
We zijn er bijna, nog maar een aantal.
Iets anders, ik heb deze twee lijstjes gemaakt
Vooral op die tweede lijst kom je boeiende tegen, zo heb ik net Piet Mondrian (Q151803) aangepast. Multichill (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dank - dit zijn zeer interessante lijsten om allerlei redenen, niet alleen door de probleem die jij vond, maar ook doordat de spellingen van vooral oude namen hier een rol spelen. Mondriaan wordt internationaal vaak Mondrian gespeld, en er is veel werk aan de winkel mbt tot alternate names. Jane023 (talk) 11:10, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Teylers is nu klaar. Als ik die lijstjes zo zie dan is er nog voldoende te doen. Multichill (talk) 15:53, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Er is trouwens nog voldoende te doen. Ik hoop dat ik een leuk lijstje van het Rijksmuseum kan krijgen. Dat scheelt al een heleboel schilders. Multichill (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Die is een goeie! Er is inderdaad nog werk aan de winkel. Ik ben nog steeds de rkd lijst aan het vullen met de Wikidata items die er al zijn. Daarna ga ik mijn resterende 4000 namen toevoegen, wie weet helpt dat. Jane023 (talk) 14:34, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Op User:Multichill/Rijksmuseum creators staan de namen die ik vandaag van het Rijksmuseum heb gekregen. Output van de bot: Current score after 1777 creators: 965 hits - 812 missed. Multichill (talk) 22:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dit werkt helaas niet. Bij de volgende botrun is dat weer verdwenen. Je moet checken of de bestaande items exact hetzelfde label of alias hebben en occupation (P106) + country of citizenship (P27) erop hebben zitten. Dan pikt de bot het op. Multichill (talk) 09:10, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, maar om alle alternatieve namen van de Rijksmuseum in te voegen is ook overdreven denk ik. Abraham van (I) Strij is geen echte pseudoniem (wel Abraham van Strij (I), wegens de RKD en Commons). Idem dito "Girolamo da Treviso (il Vecchio)". Enne, de oudere namen missen vaak country of citizenship (P27) wegens purisme op het gebied van nationaliteits grenzen door de eeuwen heen. Jane023 (talk) 09:30, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CLARA-ID (P1615)[edit]

CLARA-ID (P1615) is ready. --Tobias1984 (talk) 21:49, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! Jane023 (talk) 22:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Jacob de Gheyn III[edit]

The merge/split was done by a third user. At that time the feature of redirect ids was unavailable, so what looked as the right option to me was just delete the remaining ID, adding a note on deletion summary. Nothing on policy was changed and you are right about the lowest IDs, but is possible that the third user or was unaware about it or choose to create two new entries to prevent nem misunderstandings. The second option is reasonable also to me, and was in fact one of the reasons I've choose to simply delete instead of making further changes. Anyway, now Jacob de Gheyn III (Q576295) redirects to Jacob de Gheyn III (Q17343011) and Jacob de Gheyn III (Q17343011) now includes some metadada that was lost on the manual split. Lugusto (talk) 19:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the explanation! Sometimes I feel like I understand what's going on, and sometimes I get a bit lost here. Jane023 (talk) 19:43, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Toon Disney[edit]

Hier ging wat fout. Multichill (talk) 20:17, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bedankt! Gebruiker PKM had die match gemaakt in Mix-n-Match en ik heb het gewoon meegenomen met een sync actie. Ik heb de match gecorrigeerd zodat het niet nog een keer gebeurt. Jane023 (talk) 20:56, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ik kwam erachter dat infobxen op de nlwp ook RKD id erin hebben staan. Die ben ik nu aan het importeren. Best wel een hoop hits :-) Multichill (talk) 21:02, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wat goed! Het begint echt een leuke dataset te worden. Jane023 (talk) 22:10, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Master of the Codex of Saint George (Q1918541)[edit]

Je blijft het dubbele nummer maar toevoegen zie ik. Multichill (talk) 23:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, ik weet niet precies hoe het werkt met dubbelen. Ik match alles dat gematchd kan worden, en soms weet ik dat ik dubbelen toevoeg, maar ik kan niet zien aan de naam welke de "echte link is" en wlke de dubbel. De Mix-n-Match tool van Magnus zet vele dubbelen weer onder de "Y" knop als dubbelen. Bijvoorbeeld het item Adriana Spilberg (Q512339) heeft al 6 dubbelen staan onder "Double Qs in this catalog", maar ik zie maar eentje in haar Wikidata item. Ik neem aan dat dit niet handmatig, maar door een bot is gebeurd. Ik zal het vragen aan Magnus. Jane023 (talk) 08:59, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

pendant of (P1639) created[edit]

pendant of (P1639) is ready. Emw (talk) 01:54, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Jane023 (talk) 12:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

curator (P1640) created[edit]

curator (P1640) is ready. Emw (talk) 02:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Really useful for exhibitions, thanks! Jane023 (talk) 12:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PrepBio[edit]

Thanks for mentioning PrepBio. I didn't know about that! Now I have no excuse not to start an EN wiki article on Ernst Gombrich, which I've been meaning to do. - PKM (talk) 03:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I love PrepBio and I am waiting for a similar "PrepPlace". Happy editing in 2015! Jane023 (talk) 09:42, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'm off the hook for Gombrich, though. It does exist. Happy New Year! - PKM (talk) 20:13, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

David Davidsz. de Heem (Q5232844)[edit]

Hoi Jane, ik snap niet hoe je deze edits hebt kunnen maken. Is een heel ander persoon. Ik zie dit soort fouten heel regelmatig voorbij komen van verschillende gebruikers. Kan jij me vertellen hoe het bij jou fout is gegaan? Multichill (talk) 19:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deze edits komen uit Mix-n-Match. Af en toe zijn er foutieve matches, maar volgens mij zijn ze in de minderheid. In dit geval is dit persoon een combinatie van een daadwerkelijk persoon met een fictieve persoon en evt. kunstwerken zijn wel op naam van deze combi-persoon - zie voor meer info de WP artikel hier: en:David Davidsz de Heem. Jane023 (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obscure schilders[edit]

Hoi Jane, zin om te helpen met puzzelen? Ik heb nog wat "obscure" schilders in de aanbieding bij Frans Hals en het Rijksmuseum. Multichill (talk) 19:14, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ik heb de FHM gehalveerd. Er zitten idd erg obscure schilders bij, maar dat is juist leuk (ook een paar dames!) Jane023 (talk) 08:10, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Qualifiers vs references[edit]

Hoi Jane, bedankt voor je hulp met het Guggenheim, maar er is iets niet helemaal goed gegaan. Je hebt referenties opgenomen als qualifiers. Wat het zou moeten zijn is een inventory number (P217) met als qualifier collection (P195) -> Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum (Q201469) en dan als referentie reference URL (P854) -> url en ook retrieved (P813) -> vandaag. Zie bijvoorbeeld deze edit waar ik het herstel. Ik zal deze schilderijen langslopen. Zou je hier in de toekomst op willen letten? Dubbel werk is natuurlijk zonde. Wellicht dat dit ook op andere plekken fout is gegaan? Multichill (talk) 10:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I follow this logic (the inventory number is only meaningful when the collection is noted with it). I just hope I can remember to do it this way. Sorry for the mistake, Jane023 (talk) 10:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, mistakes happen. Thanks for helping out with this. Guggenheim is currently importing, maybe you can help out with the MOMA puzzle? These are all missing an inventory number. Multichill (talk) 11:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Names[edit]

Hi,

Instead of adding names in one language, like this, I like to use the "VIP's labels" tools, and add them to all languages using the Western alphabet, in one go, like this. Perhaps that's of interest to you, too? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I feel a bit bad about only adding the Dutch names, but I noticed lots of them have Dutch in the name too. I am just copying them from the Mix-n-Match download for RKDartists. I figure afterwards I can check for all cases where the English name is equal to the Dutch name. For those cases I do want to propagate these names into all euro languages, but I don't know how to do that with the VIP's labels - can I set it up as a batch process? Jane023 (talk) 15:55, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so; but see instructions at User:Jitrixis/nameGuzzler.js. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More YP numbers[edit]

I did a bit more: we might see the PCF again, but that is in any case several months away.

User:Charles Matthews/YourPaintings report#Linkage is a new venture, while the added column on the same page about cross-matching shows some checking of the work, plus the effects of a drive to push up the ULAN identifications. The linkage obviously relates to translation possibilities for enWP. An important practical step is to have concrete lists of those, language by language (of those chosen, French is the only one where I can hold my own). So ... it is quite a big deal that Magnus's efforts last week (PagePile tool) offer a route to such lists.

Charles Matthews (talk) 19:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting numbers! I wonder if the numbers going down from July to August are doubles that were merged or incorrect matches? In any case it looks like a lot more VIAF got matched and a few others. You have been busy! I honestly haven't even looked at PagePile yet. Will try to do that soon. Thanks for your efforts on this! Jane023 (talk) 19:45, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Q20003677[edit]

Hoi Jane, ik heb Q20003677 verwijderd. Daar iets mis gegaan want de enige inhoud was "schilderij door Pieter de Hooch" in verschillende talen, voor de rest was het helemaal leeg. Multichill (talk) 12:27, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks - no idea how it got created, but I recall some problems with connectivity back in June when I was working on these Hooches. Jane023 (talk) 12:31, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny Zillhardt[edit]

Hi Jane,

It's not a nickname. In fact her real name is Marguerite-Valentine-Jenny Zillhardt. Thx for your article in English, it encouraged me to write a French version ;) Pyb (talk) 08:00, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! But then that's the name that should be in the alias, no? Now there is no trace of the other name at all. Jane023 (talk) 08:03, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be afraid, I have just correct your mistake. If you want to add something to the item, it's a wiki! Pyb (talk) 13:50, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but I am still afraid that your corrections are not correct. To me, you left this item less correct that you found it. Though I appreciate that you have found another name spelling for this person, correct behavior is to add the new alias, not delete the "wrong" alias. If someone was searching for Marguerite Valentine they will not find her. I am still confused by your behavior. I am also mystified why you wouldn't add this alias to the French label. I will try to repair the item as I would have made the edit and hope you can see what I mean. I hope you haven't been making a habit of this. Jane023 (talk) 16:08, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please assume good faith? I added a lot of informations on this item, I added pictures of Jenny on Commons and wrote an article in French!
I probably made a mistake by adding "Marguerite-Valentine-Jenny Zillhardt" to the property birth name (P1477) and removing the alias. I was not sure of me. But why you don't stop complaining about that tiny problem and just add the correct alias?
I was happy to talk to you beacause I like your work. But now, I'm just disappointed by your overreaction. I hope that we will have other opportunities to talk together. As the first time was not very pleasant ;) Pyb (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for coming across as an unpleasant person - who knows I might even be an unpleasant person - it's hard for me to tell. I certainly am not accusing you of bad-faith. I am worried that you don't understand what the alias field is for. As I have tried to show, the alias field should be stuffed with anything that will improve searches for the item. These searches can be from anywhere, not just Wikidata. Possibly direct searches will pick up text locked in any properties, but input line searches are only returning text from the label, description, and aliases. Please note that I did not remove any of the other iformation that you added - I only restored information that you removed. Thanks for the compliment! I hope I haven't put you off Wikidata editing. And again, sorry for the annoyance. Jane023 (talk) 17:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Project Gutenberg ebook identificatiecode[edit]

I created Project Gutenberg ebook ID (P2034) for this. Mbch331 (talk) 09:13, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I will use it. Jane023 (talk) 09:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Auto-translations[edit]

Did you really use Google Translate for edits like this? German Wikipedia is not amused. Less than helpful. --Magnus Manske (talk) 17:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A few of them - I tried to catch these but apparently not all of them. I am almost at 100 paintings, so of course I didn't hand translate all of them but only the most recent one. I think most titles are OK though, so this should not be a big problem (I wish I could just use Landschaft switched out with Wasserfall). Unlike what has been claimed in the discussion, Ruisdael titles have changed with each person or institution cataloging them, so claiming the list is worthless because the titles are incorrect is just silly. Actually Christoph suggested I use the title property and if I left the titles blank, then the Q numbers might be overwritten by Listeria with the contents of title (P1476) if it exists. In that case I could fill in the original titles (if available). Such an approach could be attempted for a Danish or Swedish list. That would give readers more information than the list of Q numbers that otherwise would be shown. Thanks for the efforts on my behalf btw - I do think it's an interesting discussion. I detect quite a bit of fear about loss of control. Did this happen when Commons was introduced? --Jane023 (talk) 17:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Jane. None of the German titles are okay unless it is the official title used in German art history and temporary literature. The title of a painting is not guess work, there is always an official title that has been used in referenced literature. Especially a title like Zwei Unterschlächtiges Mühlen mit Men Öffnen einer Schleuse ([2]) is not even German. Now adding fake labels in a language that you don't seem to speak when I look at Q20804345 is ... well ... I'm shocked. That is not what Wikidata is about. Please remove all German labels that you added. Thank you. With best regards, --Gereon K. (talk) 18:39, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry you feel shocked. Please be aware that these titles have nothing to do with Wikipedia titles, which is what is selected when writing a Wikipedia article in for example, the German Wikipedia. These titles you are viewing are only meant to be more meaningful than q numbers, which are completely useless from a reader perspective. If you object to these titles appearing in the list, you can either change them or use the property for genre instead of title. I disagree by the way that there is one unique official title in each language for Ruisdael paintings. That is simply not true. --Jane023 (talk) 19:03, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are no official titles for lots of the paintings, you are right. I understood that a Label should represent the title of a Wikipedia article. Now for a painting this title should either come from literature or just using the original title. Now the attitude "I don't speak the language but I edit in the language anyway, I know that it's wrong, but no problem, you can change it" is not what minium quality is about. Especially not in Wikidata since many projects use data from Wikidata without looking at it. --Gereon K. (talk) 19:29, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No the title in Wikidata reflects the item in Wikidata, just as the Wikipedia title reflects the article in Wikipedia, and the file title on Commons reflects the image. These are not and never will be the same concepts though they may on occasion be the same text. For example, I would have chosen to label all paintings of waterfalls (I think there are about 50 of them) "Wasserfall", but this is impossible due to other restrictions with label and description being the same. On Wikipedia, you could have "Wasserfall (Berlin)" or something like that. Again, I could remove the title column and you could browse the list by image, but this would lose all links to Wikidata (which might be a good thing, considering the emotional impact this has caused). --Jane023 (talk) 19:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just fyi, it is completely unacceptable to add automated translation to Wikidata as labels. EOD. Adding nonsense in another language doesn't help anyone and you are well adviced to not use google translate for adding labels to wikidata items in future. If anyone looks for automated translation, they can use the translate system they want on the client side. Best regards -- Bene* talk 21:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, I have to agree with Jane023 that an item's label isn't necessarily the official name of that subject. That's what we have official name (P1448) for. For translations of official names we still have to wait for the multilingual datatype afaik. -- Bene* talk 21:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After discussion I am looking into using title (P1476) with a reference, which may be a fallback for empty labels in the case of artworks. There is no official name for paintings except those in one collection for more than a century or for which the artist has documented the title in a way that has stuck with the art trade. Since the German WIkipedia got so emotional about it, perhaps the label could just be removed from the list. They can always get to the WIkidata item through the image file, which they may be more comfortable with anyway. Jane023 (talk) 21:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the way to deal with this is to learn from the experience. The German list article is about to be nuked, to some degree because of the bogus translations that showed there. Someone gave me this as an example for a good list of paintings. By editing Wikidata and fiddling with the bot, we should be able to replicate that table, for that or another artist, say, in a user subpage here. Maybe throw some references in, to show that Wikidata can actually be better. That would go a huge way with the people worried about quality, though it won't impress the Luddites. Then again, nothing will. --Magnus Manske (talk) 22:01, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. Don't worry I have big plans to forge ahead with Rembrandt. The only problem with this list is that so far no German Wikipedians have seen this who actually care about Ruisdael. I expect that will change over time too. I do think we need to force these conversations because we won't have them otherwise. Thinking it over, it would be nice to separate a column for actual links to articles (right now just one in dewiki) and for the wd links. Next I think it may be interesting to work with the title property with a language code. If the language has no title, then the next best title is used and so on. Jane023 (talk) 22:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Another weird thing they have is to combine the material and dimensions in one field. I don't think this is wise or pretty, and it seems a dewiki thing. Everywhere else dimensions and material are not combined. Oh and combining height & width in one field will be a challenge anyway I suppose. Jane023 (talk) 22:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reusing item numbers[edit]

Hi Jane!

I'm curious about your recent edits to Portrait of Jan Harmensz. Krul (Q18602834).

This item started out as a biography, which then got merged into Jan Harmenszoon Krul (Q2119242).

I see you have now re-used the item number, for a portrait of Jan Harmenszoon Krul (Q2119242), but I'm not quite sure why. Wouldn't it have been more usual to create a new item for the painting? Normally merged items are left that way, in case anyone ever wants to review the history. Jheald (talk) 22:21, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I figured since it is in a way a visual biography that it would be OK to reuse it. I don't think it does any harm. I would normally just create a new one, but this one was just left hanging there, so I picked it up. --Jane023 (talk) 22:23, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

short film (Q24862)[edit]

Hi Jane023,

I noticed you added a series of films. If they are short films, please use the above items with P31.
--- Jura 15:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is the limit for a short film? --Jane023 (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good question. If your films are above 90 minutes, they are definitely not short films. WP mentions short shorts with < 3min. How long are yours?
--- Jura 19:33, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
between 15 minutes and 45 minutes. --Jane023 (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The articles in es/fr at WP mention 30 minutes as limit. What do you think of that?
--- Jura 19:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I really don't want to split the collection into short and long films. Why is there a separate item anyway? We have duration that should give an indication of length. --Jane023 (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's currently split in two by the WikiProject. I suppose you could probably put them all in short films. The running time property hasn't quite been sorted out yet.
--- Jura 20:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK I will take a look tomorrow. Jane023 (talk) 20:19, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took so long, Andy and I needed to discuss our vision how to move forward. We have decided on a sort of "taxonomy of TED" and the first edit shows how the P31 will change to a TED talk that is a short film as well as a lecture: see here --Jane023 (talk) 13:10, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bot permsision request[edit]

FYI! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits

Oh that's funny! I didn't know you were doing that too. I am still uploading using this account for creations, because it occurred to me changes to those items will thus show up in my watchlist. I can use the other account for additions and changes to existing data and I have already started using it for that. It would be nice if I could make autolist run faster, but I understand that is a bug and not related to being a bot or not. --Jane023 (talk) 15:53, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weird edits[edit]

Your bot is doing weird stuff like this. Could you please explain what this is for? Sealle (talk) 17:45, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this does seem a bit weird. I meant to add labels to items without labels, but for Russian I accidently overwrote some existing labels. I will take a look. Jane023 (talk) 21:07, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK so there were two issues here; (1) updates to items that didn't need them (all fixed now) and (2) "weird" labels. I checked all the updates and noticed a few other weird ones, but there may be a few more. Hopefully the benefits outweigh the drawbacks of adding these labels. Jane023 (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Listeria bot on trwiki[edit]

Hello,

I can help create the mentioned template on trwiki , I've bot flag and familiar with the process. can you provide example for translation? thanks. -- Hakan·IST 18:56, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, thanks! Here is the enwiki version: en:Template:Wikidata list and here it is on Wikidata: Template:Wikidata list. --Jane023 (talk) 19:03, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Gijsbrechts[edit]

Hi Jane!

A couple of years ago, you added 1683 as year of death. From your previous edits to the item, I assume that your source was RKD. Is that correct? --Palnatoke (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. no way of knowing now. My usual source is RKD for Dutch/Flemish artists, but I will take whatever I can if they are not specific. I see the BPN also doesn't have a date. The English article says "after 1683" so I may have just copied it from there. Sorry, I know it's not much help. Jane023 (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the RKD says around or in 1675, so you can both say it is uncertain as say it is definitely 1675. We don't have definite dates for half the painters in the 17th-century, so this is perfectly accurate. I changed the enwiki article to reflect 1675 as well. Jane023 (talk) 06:16, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rembrandt puzzle[edit]

Hi Jane, can you have a look at Bust of a Young Bearded Man (Q22116506) & A Bearded Man Wearing a Hat (Q21508783)? Both have the same catalog code show they show up at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Duplicate paintings, but these look like different paintings. Multichill (talk) 11:12, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fine now. Both paintings are illustrated on the same page of the 1908 catalog, one on the left and one on the right. The Cleveland one had both catalog codes (left and right) listed, so I deleted the wrong one. Thanks for the heads up and am so happy I added the links to these! That made it very easy to debug. Jane023 (talk) 11:24, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Duplicate paintings#Items with same catalog code of the same catalog you'll find quite a few other Rembrandt paintings. Can you check these paintings too? Multichill (talk) 11:57, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Not sure how those happened. Jane023 (talk) 13:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

The Europeana Barnstar
A small token of recognition for all your help with, and involvement in, the Europeana Art History Challenge right from the start. SoAPies gotta' stick together! Wittylama (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Maarten and Sandra both mentioned the challenge and SoAP last night at our GLAM dinner. Hopefully we will have recruited at least one editor: a guy interested in all thing Luxembourgian. :) We also talked about reviving the GLAM-nl mailinglist (which I am not even sure I am subscribed to) which would be a good place to send NL-related messages (bv the Gildemeester thing). Jane023 (talk) 08:13, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help![edit]

Hi Jane, thank for your help yesterday and your welcoming attitude to us newbies --Nattes à chat (talk) 07:31, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help with matching Rijksmuseum paintings[edit]

Hi Jane, I hacked up User:Multichill/Zandbak to match Rijksmuseum paintings here with RKDimages. I could really use some help here. The way I do it:

  1. Open for the 10 images new tabs for Rijksmuseum, RKD and the quickstatements (21 tabs)
  2. Go through the tabs one by one
  3. If it's the same, just close them
  4. If it's a different painting, remove the line from quick statements
  5. When at the last tab (quick statements), submit it
  6. Go to the start, every once in a while remove the entries done on User:Multichill/Zandbak

Some things you might encounter:

  • Completely different paintings -> Just remove from quick statements and skip them, we'll catch them later
  • Multiple entries in RKDimages about the same painting that are exactly the same -> Just add them all, RKD plans to merge duplicates so this will help
  • Multiple entries in RKDimages for different parts of one triptych (or similar) -> Just add them all to the triptych, we'll figure out later if we want to split up too

I hope you're willing to spend some time on this! Multichill (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ps. I wonder if @Spinster: wants to help too, maybe if I promise to make for Boijmans too after this one is done? ;-)

Lakenhal[edit]

Hoi Jane, via deze link kan je gemakkelijk de 7 missende drieluiken zien. Denk dat deze het beste met de hand kunnen worden aangemaakt hier. Overzicht van alle schilderijen staat op User:Multichill/Paintings in Museum De Lakenhal. Bijna alle schilderijen zijn al gekoppeld, maar ik kan nog wel wat hulp gebruiken met de laatste loodjes. Ik denk niet dat er veel nog aangemaakt moeten worden. Multichill (talk) 17:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Multichill:, Dank voor de link, ga ik doen. Ik heb al een heleboel schilders via de missing painters link net gekoppeld. Ik merkte dat je de engelstalige titles mis - dat zat volgens mij wel in de oude website en is blijkbaar eruit gesloopt. Jammer! Jane023 (talk) 17:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bedankt voor de hulp! Sommige schilderijen hadden zowel een Nederlandse als een Engelstalige titel. Omdat het op twee regels was pikte de bot dat niet op, die heb ik handmatig toegevoegd. Ik denk niet dat er meer dan dat is. Als de beschrijving leeg is dat komt dat ook omdat de maker dan op twee regels staat. Zie Interior with a Woman Spinning and a Man Smoking (Q27307750) en [3] als voorbeeld. Dat moet handmatig gedaan worden. Multichill (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK dank voor de uitleg Jane023 (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Multichill:, Ik kan deze niet vinden bij Mauritshuis nog Lakenhal - volgens RKD eigendom Lakenhal en volgens Mauritshuis langdurige leen vanaf 2009. Jane023 (talk) 12:40, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Prado zero[edit]

Hoi Jane, bedankt voor het helpen, maar let wel op dat je het inventarisnummer exact overneemt hier ben je een 0 vergeten en op deze heb je een O gebruikt ipv een 0. Multichill (talk) 23:05, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dat is heel vreemd want ik dacht dat ik copy-paste gebruikte omdat ik het niet kon zien. Zij hebben het trouwens niet makkelijk gemaakt om de nummers te vinden, vind ik. Jane023 (talk) 08:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Vind je? Eerst plaatje, daarna beschrijving en dan eerste regel van "Technical data" (voorbeeld). Ik heb het meestal zo gevonden, het zijn er vooral ontzettend veel. Multichill (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ja, je hebt gelijk. Later dacht ik dat ik copy-paste misschien ook vanaf Commons of RKD had gedaan, wat ook foutgevoelig kan zijn. Jane023 (talk) 19:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait of Paulus Verschuur[edit]

Hoi Jane, we hadden Portrait of Paulus Verschuur, Served seven terms as Burgomaster of Rotterdam and also Director of the Rotterdam Chamber of the East India Company, elected 1651 (Q17339991), Portrait of Paulus Verschuur, Served seven terms as Burgomaster of Rotterdam and also Director of the Rotterdam Chamber of the East India Company, elected 1651 (Q17426503) en Portrait of Paulus Verschuur, Served seven terms as Burgomaster of Rotterdam and also Director of the Rotterdam Chamber of the East India Company, elected 1651 (Q27013027)! ;-) Multichill (talk) 16:42, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heb je trouwens een bron voor die owned by (P127)? Volgens mij is het sinds 1883 eigendom van het Rijksmuseum en daarna in langdurig bruikleen in Rotterdam. Schielandhuis is gewoon de voorloper van het Rotterdam Museum. Multichill (talk) 16:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ik ga het nazoeken... 3 is erg veel, maar ik denk dat er wel twee zijn. Jane023 (talk) 18:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ik heb het opgezocht en de Metropolitan schilderij is identificeerd op basis van de Pieter van de Werff schilderij door Sturla J. Gudlaugson in 1959. Dus maar één kopie van P.vd.Werff :) Jane023 (talk) 11:14, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SMK / KID[edit]

Hi Jane, we were talking about the Statens Museum for Kunst (Q671384) last night. The list of paintings that still need to be linked with a creator is at User:Multichill/SMK missing painter. Magnus fixed the KID collection in mix'n'match so this list shows a lot of potential hits. Would be great if you can help finish this list. I wrote a bot that will import KID data, so you just have to create them and the bot will do the rest. Multichill (talk) 15:55, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK I fixed some Dutchmen on that list (there are lots of women! Probably local painters). There seems to be a problem with that create-painter list, because the ones I tried were all created already? Jane023 (talk) 16:40, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paintings by decade[edit]

Now with the right sorting. Multichill (talk) 20:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My version - same query[edit]

Using query with one of the graphs[edit]

Here's an easier way with many more options. See {{Graph:Lines}}. CC: Multichill. 

{{Graph:Lines
|tabletype=query
|table=SELECT ?decade (COUNT(?decade) AS ?count) WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q3305213 .
  ?item wdt:P571 ?inception .
  BIND( year(?inception) as ?year ). 
  BIND( ROUND(?year/10)*10 as ?decade ) .
  FILTER( ?year > 1400)
  } GROUP BY ?decade
ORDER BY ?decade
|series="count"
|type=year
|xField=decade
}}

See source Wikidata query and sources.

--Yurik (talk) 01:41, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice! Thanks Jane023 (talk) 08:54, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See source Wikidata query and sources.


The graph looks quite different when filtered for paintings by women. Jane023 (talk) 09:07, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jane023, you can also add two more parameters to enable grid lines - yGrid=y | xGrid=y --Yurik (talk) 17:25, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nice! I like the grid lines! Jane023 (talk) 18:08, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Graph of # paintings per decade since 1400 in Wikidata whereby the painter was born in what is today Netherlands or Belgium[edit]

See source Wikidata query and sources.


Fashion and clothing[edit]

Thanks for your excellent work illustrating and expanding obscure clothing terms on EN wiki!

I started foundational work for Wikidata:WikiProject Fashion, mostly focusing right now on making sure subclasses of clothing have labels in English and digging up appropriate properties for talking about clothes, fashion, and textiles (all the while detouring down endless rabbit holes, as one does in Wikidata). Do come join us. - PKM (talk) 19:53, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and since we have Guimpe I must really get off my butt and write Partlet! I have too many references; that's why I haven't done it. - PKM (talk)
I signed up - good idea! Jane023 (talk) 07:23, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Strategy Process 2017[edit]

Hi, I'm one of the 3 Meta Coordinators. Our task is to help various communities (track B) during the strategy process. You've expressed your interest in coordinating the discussions on Wikidata, that's why I have a question for you. Are going to create here Q28937817, a page dedicated for the discussions so that anyone interested with Wikidata could participate? Maybe you could ping someone else from Wikidata community who could help you? Also, anyone of us, the Meta Coordinators, can do it. Thanks in advance for any reply! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 22:41, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done: Wikidata:Strategy 2017. Jane023 (talk) 07:21, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Jane023! I've added a top-header on the talkpage, and will now add a few more details to the main page.
I've created the basic pages for the process at meta: Outreach planning and Discussion Summaries (See the Spanish summary page for a good example). I've also listed those links at the m:...Outreach/List. Please watchlist and take over those!
Questions: Is there anything else we can do to help you, with the 3 main tasks of: Doing outreach to the Wikidata community to bring them into the discussion, helping to facilitate discussions on the talkpage itself over the weeks ahead, and summarizing those discussions at meta on an ongoing basis? Are you comfortable being the lead for this, and/or can you find other wikidatans to help? Do let us know if we can help. :-)
Best wishes, Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bianca Ponzoni Anguissola[edit]

Ho creato la voce, su Wp in italiano, Bianca Ponzoni Anguissola (ritratto). --FloraFlavia (talk) 17:33, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ho creato anche la voce, su wp in italiano Elisabetta di Valois (ritratto) --FloraFlavia (talk) 17:39, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ho creato anche la voce, su Wp in italiano Autoritratto al cavalletto dipinto di Sofonisba Anguissola. --FloraFlavia (talk) 17:41, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions, FloraFlavia! Jane023 (talk) 12:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Top creators[edit]

Hoi Jane, Top creators, Top creators by number of Wikipedia painting articles & Top creators by number of Wikipedia articles hebben nu allemaal links naar de lijstjes in Category:WikiProject sum of all paintings creators. Zullen we nog wat missende gaan aanmaken? Wellicht wil je helpen met dit lijstje blauw krijgen? Deze personen komen op alle drie de lijsten voor dus hebben minimaal 50 items over schilderijen, minimaal 15 Wikipedia artikelen over schilderijen en zijn vertaald in minstens 30 talen.

Als de authority control properties ook in de database staan dan zal ik daar ook eens rapportages voor gaan maken om te zien wat er uit de pas loopt. Multichill (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ik heb er nog een hoop extra aangemaakt en [[Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top creators by number of Wikipedia articles] uitgebreid. Ik denk dat elke schilder in die lijst wel een eigen pagina mag hebben, denk je ook niet? Multichill (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ja, helemaal mee eens. Ik heb al een paar aangemaakt en zal ze ook verder uitbreiden zo nu en dan. Ik zou het liefst zulke lijsten ook willen zien voor de top musea, al zullen deze timeouts veroorzaken als wij de volledige collectie hebben. Jane023 (talk) 20:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Daar hebben we er toch al een hoop van zoals Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Museum of Fine Arts, Boston? Op Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings/Top_collections zijn in ieder geval genoeg blauwe links. Voor de grote collecties heb ik het al in stukken gehakt, zie Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Metropolitan Museum of Art en Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Rijksmuseum. Multichill (talk) 20:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ja maar dat is alleen Massachusetts! In iedere State heb je minstens één belangrijk museum, zoals de Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art (Q403080) in Connecticut. Als je zo'n pagina bouwt maak ik de lijsten wel. Ik zou alle belangrijke musea willen hebben per regio (alle 50 staten van de VS, alle 15 staten van Duitsland, alle grote steden in Italië, enz) Jane023 (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Painting wiki monitor[edit]

You mentioned Latin so I created Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Wiki monitor/lawiki and Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Wiki monitor/enwiki can also use a bit of attention. For the English list it's mostly missing inception (P571). Multichill (talk) 15:25, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriel Metsu[edit]

Thanks for the many paintings of Gabriel Metsu. Great edits for great paintings :-) --Shonagon (talk) 23:25, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I hope to publish a list of his works on Wikipedia sometime soon. Meanwhile I am working on Gerard Dou. The list I am working on is here: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Hofstede de Groot. I hope to finish Volume 1 soon. Jane023 (talk) 08:01, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wouter Verschuur[edit]

Kan je eens naar Figaro - pet Pyrenean mountain dog (Q28797773) welke van de twee het gemaakt heeft? Ik heb de Wouter toegevoegd waarvan de RKD denk dat hij de schilder is. Multichill (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tja. Het gaat erom, welke is het meest waarschijnlijk op bezoek geweest~bij fam. Holthuysen in Frankrijk? Ik neem aan dat het Amsterdam Museum correcter is in deze, want zij zijn het onderzoeksproject gestart over de Holthuysens. Ik gok op de jongere, maar voor nu zou ik beide laten staan. Het kan best dat vader & zoon een schildersweek hebben doorgebracht aldaar. Jane023 (talk) 20:08, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

topics in wikisource[edit]

"If you had a "topic" namespace on Wikisource that was similar to the "author" namespace, then you could interlink such articles within the same ws instance, as well as link out to other language ws projects and the proper wikidata items. I guess I am in disagreement with the current vision for the future of ws and wikidata in this sense."

that sound like categories to me. (i.e. s:Category:Art) there are far fewer editors at WS adding categories. could you have a wikidata property (like genre, or subject) that would allow a query across wikisources? since topic metadata is hard, could we add it, with a mix and match game? Slowking4 (talk) 11:04, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well I didn't mean categories, though I suppose the initial item that triggered me (obscure but important Dutch official) might at some point have a category somewhere, so that is a possibility. I meant expanding the idea of the "Author" namespace to more than just biography or writer pages. So e.g. you could have a namespace for places that would enable the topic "New York City" for example that might include a link to some entry about "New Amsterdam". So my idea of a topic namespace was a way to think about how various wikisource instances could share their data in a more meaningful way than creating item numbers for pages. Maybe this discussion is better allocated to the wikisource mailing list as I think there are very few wikisourcerors here. I am really not seeing the benefit of having items for all articles in all old encyclopedias added to Wikidata, but maybe we do want that and I am just having trouble seeing the value added. Jane023 (talk) 11:23, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
i kinda agree. i just think it is easier to manage metadata at wikidata. easier to query. and what is the process to input the data. i kinda agree about WS articles as item, except for DNB where you have authors, so you could query by author and subject. it is a ontology philosophy thing - where to hold the data and how to manage it. if you had a schema with a rationale, we could brainstorm it and build a workflow & process. Slowking4 (talk) 17:22, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well something that has been bugging me for years is that we can't build a wiki-version of "Sandrart.net" on any wiki instance. That website is German and is based on Joachim von Sandrart's dictionary of the arts, but he was only responding in his way to Karel van Mander who was responding to Vasari. So we should begin with Vasari. The entire text is on Italian wikisource, and it has been translated through the centuries into multiple languages (into Dutch by Karel van Mander and into German by Sandrart). Theoretically, each original topic in Italian (note: not page) should interwikisourcelink to the other translation topics, and only the topic items should be linked (via a property) to the actual Wikidata item for the topic. I think. Jane023 (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
hmm - and i see we have a conflict between work Q1645493 and 1st edition Q19135206. hmm - and not started in english (disappointed)
ok - italian wikisource has done an editathon, could you get with aubrey [4] to create topics with wikidata links; and then we can transcribe the translations and interlink - does that work as a work flow - can you create a project page with a bullet checklist ?
Exactly. But once you start digging you realize you really need to keep track of the editions separately. Looking at how they setup sandrart.net also underlines this for the Teutsche Akademie, though it's really hard to "read" any edition of that thing on that website in my opinion. So in conclusion, if we continue along the current path, eventually we will have separate items for each Italian edition, and for each foreign language edition (which may or may not reference the Vasari origins). In order to implement topic pages that can be interwikisourcelinked, we still need consensus from the wikisource community, and in order to get that we first need to model out how this would work. I still think you would need to set up properties per edition of any dictionary in any language. Then the question is how to "interlink" the properties that match up to Wikidata items. That I don't know. Jane023 (talk) 11:56, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Following your WikidataCon recomendations[edit]

Hi, Jane. This is amadalvarez, the catalan infoboxes builder. If I understood correctly, you ask for "catalogues" as a guide to increase the "Sum of all paintings". A few years ago I wrote ca:Llista de quadres de Hans Memling following the Giorgio T. Faggin's catalogue, and my pourpouse (as a background job) is to update WD from this information. Is it correct ?. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 06:25, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that would be wonderful to have! I created Giorgio T. Faggin (Q42895894) for the author, and next step is to create the catalogue and the listeria list in the sum of all paintings project. I use listeria as an online tracking device, but maybe you just want to track your progress with the catalogue itself. If this is the catalogue edition Das Gesamtwerk von Memling then I will set it up for you. Jane023 (talk) 07:20, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK I found L’opera completa di Memling (Q42896922) and set up the list and the catalog here Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/L’opera completa di Memling. Jane023 (talk) 10:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderfull!. Thanks. I have a listeria based on creator=Memling to find what is missing. I start to fill the catalogue+code to activate your listeria, then and I'll upload the rest of data (size, part of,..) later. Thanks, again. BTW, do you like the article with the full inventory ?. Amadalvarez (talk) 18:48, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes very impressive - I like how you include all of the variations whenever possible. There is a lot of wiki-love in that list! Jane023 (talk) 18:49, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm. Listeria shows nothing. It says "no item". False, I filled The Last Judgment (Q701035), Triptych of Jan Crabbe. Center table (Q42589069), Jan Crabbe triptych. Left wing (Q42590948), Annunciation (Q42591861), for instance. I can't see the reason. Amadalvarez (talk) 22:41, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I can't see why this list won't work - maybe the apostrophe in the title? I will ask @Magnus Manske:. Jane023 (talk) 07:30, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Amadalvarez: Sorry it is taking a while for an answer. Meanwhile I created a general list that contains the catalog numbers here: ca:Usuària:Jane023/Hans Memling. I will try to get the other one working soon. Jane023 (talk) 11:53, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry. Technical stuff take some time. I appreciate your listeria. I already had one (I told you two messages ago, oops !). I go ahead. Hugs, Amadalvarez (talk) 13:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Amadalvarez: It's working! And it looks great - thanks for your work on this. Jane023 (talk) 13:26, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeahh. Thanks !. What happened ?. I added a part of (P361) colum. I apologize because the new items I created has no english description. Thanks, again. Amadalvarez (talk) 21:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the manual updates have been disabled, but the disabling also meant the catalog queries stopped working (ps and pq in the query). Now you need to wait a day to see the changes :( but I added the column genre (P136) for you if you meant to add the genre property. Jane023 (talk) 23:11, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Q18117920[edit]

You created this page, but there is an error. Can you please check what wrong? Besides that, putting such lists on talk pages is not standard, talk pages are for discussions, not for lists. Maybe there are other possibilities? Steak (talk) 10:41, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! That one predates listeria. I wonder if there are any others hanging out there? I blanked it and made Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/Frans Hals catalog raisonné, 1941, which makes it easier to compare with the others. Jane023 (talk) 11:06, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
According to this you created a few more of these lists in 2014 and 2015. If you don't need them I will request their deletion. Steak (talk) 12:53, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes please do - I certainly forgot all about them until you reminded me! Jane023 (talk) 12:58, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oops I only meant the catalogs with potential Lua errors - the others aren't my responsibility, so those shouldn't be deleted (especially the recent ones). Jane023 (talk) 13:41, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Only talk pages created in 2014 and 2015 have been deleted. Steak (talk) 21:46, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! Jane023 (talk) 07:27, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My first catalog :-)[edit]

Hello Jane, I had a long text on your page yesterday describing my problems and asking for help, but in the end I could manage it: Georges Kars 1882–1945. Peintures et Dessins has materialized. Of course, it will have to be filled with more images. I struggled with catalog code (P528) being a qualifier of catalog (P972) or vice versa in the beginning, but think it's OK now. Would you suggest any improvements in the structure? I'm just starting to to have fun with OpenRefine and quick statements ;-) Regards from Cologne, --Elya (talk) 07:32, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How beautiful! I sometimes add columns according to things that might help (like the external ids in national databases for some Dutch & Flemish painters). I generally will also include the described at URL (P973) if I know the specific painter has lots of material in the collections uploaded by Maarten. Thanks so much for this catalog - it looks great! One thing to check while making your lists is that they also match up to each other, so e.g. Q43399931 from your catalog was not in Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Georges Kars, so I added creator (P170). I love lists because they make such checks so much easier than using klunky things like Commons categories. Jane023 (talk) 08:24, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, while working on another catalog/book, I realized that there were a lot of items without creator (P170). It's really fun to fix them quickly with the quick statements. And a different approach to learn sth. about an artist, starting with the works and not with the biography in Wikipedia. --Elya (talk) 22:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I can't agree more! The more work I do on art catalogs the more I learn about the painters. And if you are feeling inspired, I can highly recommend snooping around Commons for old list work done by Wikipedians in various languages. Unfortunately they don't include the catalog numbers, but if you do find a catalog for the artist, then at a lot of the Commons uploading, categorizing and attribution work has been done for you. So e.g. I just found this list so I will start working on this Adriaen van Ostade catalog raisonné, 1910 (Q43750405). Jane023 (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So, there we are with my new friend Georges and his second catalog: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/George Kars (Jiří Siblík, 1999). One item is a 3D item I cannot upload due to reasons, and one item stays lonely on my scan server at work over the christmas holidays ;-) Wish you a merry Christmas (if applicable) and a healthy start into 2018! --Elya (talk) 16:18, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful! What a great xmas present! Happy Holidays and thanks! Jane023 (talk) 18:09, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Van der Weyden[edit]

Hi, You have a new painter on the collection. Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/Rogier van der Weyden catalog by Chatelet, 1999. It has 3 void entries: #10 & #51, I couldn't find; #38 is a painting attributed to Memling after the catalog was made. I don't know ho to handle this situation: a) we assign the number even it has changed of creator; b) not record the number because of change. What's the common treatement ?. regards, Amadalvarez (talk) 16:46, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one, thanks! The catalog is generally added to items as published. Void entries are common and yes, choice a) assign the catalog statement to the correct painting even though the creator has changed. There are lots of paintings that flip every 20-50 years as far as attribution - that's fine. See for example this Kitchen Scene (Q19913098) that appeared in a 1908 catalog for Jan Steen (Q205863). It has been attributed to Peter Wtewael (Q595150) for decades. Jane023 (talk) 19:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actief in Haarlem[edit]

Hoi Jane, ik ben de werk locaties van schilders aan het toevoegen. Dit kan ik nu alleen als de work location (P937) er nog niet opzat. Zie bijvoorbeeld Barend Hendrik Koekkoek (Q18335813)

Nu heb ik een aantal schilders gevonden die actief zijn in Haarlem, maar in de bron geen stated in (P248) -> RKDartists (Q17299517) 

SELECT DISTINCT ?item WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P106 wd:Q1028181 .
  ?item wdt:P650 [] . 
  ?item wdt:P937 wd:Q9920
  FILTER NOT EXISTS { 
    ?item p:P937 ?location .
    ?item p:P937 ?location .
    ?location prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 wd:Q17299517 .
  }
}
Try it!

In zelfdzame gevallen is het alleen de referentie bijwerken (voorbeeld), maar vaak is het iets meer werk (voorbeeld) en in sommige gevallen zal het meerdere plaatsen zijn. Beetje wet van de remmende voorsprong, maar dan wordt de data over Haarlem wel een stuk beter! Wil je hiermee helpen?

Met deze query kan je trouwens de steden zien die nog de meeste aandacht nodig hebben: 

SELECT ?workloc (COUNT(?item) AS ?count) WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P106 wd:Q1028181 .
  ?item wdt:P650 [] . 
  ?item wdt:P937 ?workloc . 
  FILTER NOT EXISTS { 
    ?item p:P937 ?location .
    ?item p:P937 ?location .
    ?location prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 wd:Q17299517 .
  }
} GROUP BY ?workloc 
ORDER BY DESC(?count) 
LIMIT 100
Try it!

Alvast bedankt voor je hulp. Multichill (talk) 22:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nog een leuke trouwens, hier ben ik met de robot doorheen aan het gaan:
SELECT DISTINCT ?item WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P106 wd:Q1028181 .
  ?item wdt:P650 [] . 
  { ?item wdt:P19 wd:Q9920 } UNION { ?item wdt:P20 wd:Q9920 } .
  MINUS { ?item p:P937 ?location } 
}
Try it!
Hier zijn geen handmatige edits nodig. Deze personen hebben gewerkt op een plaats die nog niet in de configuratie van mijn bot staat. Dat ben ik nu aan het toevoegen dus die lijst zal wel vlot korter worden. Multichill (talk) 17:47, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wat een lange lijst! En ik ken ze niet allemaal. Ik wist niet dat de zoon van Pieter Post ook schilderde - weer wat geleerd! Jane023 (talk) 17:58, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pair of Hals portraits[edit]

Hi Jane - re: File:Frans Hals - Portrait of a woman with glove in right hand.jpg and File:Frans Hals - Portrait of a man with glove in left hand.jpg: Jonny Van Haeften had them at TEFAF - much better images on Arnet news here and here. Looks like Sotheby's sold them in 2008. Anyway - I don't understand your catalogues and such so I haven't uploaded these, but I can if you want me to. Just let me know. - PKM (talk) 06:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear you can't follow my catalog stuff (I tend to add all paintings described in catalogs, not just main catalog numbers in case that causes confusion), but thanks for the heads up! My upload process in 2013 predated the "Dememorixer" so I just uploaded higher resolution copies over the old ones and fixed the broken dead links from the old RKD website. So those old files are now fixed. That done, I agree that the files you found are gorgeous and much better, so yes, please do upload them and switch them out for their items - go ahead and copy the old artwork templates except or auction websites and dealers I think the files should be added to their catory, so in this case c:Category:Johnny van Haeften Gallery. Jane023 (talk) 07:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I was concerned that the templates were being generated by some code somewhere, but I can copy/tweak and upload. Might be tomorrow before I get to it. - PKM (talk) 19:37, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a mediawiki coder! It's all just templates but nowadays if you add a Wikidata item to an artwork template on Commons the file is enriched with data pulled from Wikidata (creator template if it exists, label if it exists, and ID number if it exists and of course if those fields are not already filled on Commons). Thanks in advance for uploading. Jane023 (talk) 05:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Images replaced on Wikidata and en:Marriage_pendant_portraits_by_Frans_Hals, but not elsewhewre. Old images tagged as superseded. New images are File:Frans Hals - Portrait of a woman with glove in right hand (V2).jpg and File:Frans Hals - Portrait of a man with glove in left hand (V2).jpg. - PKM (talk) 23:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Super, thank you very much. Please do the same when you find õther high quality images like this, because many of the ones from early batch uploads in 2007 and earlier lack the right colors, not to mention resolution and metadata. Jane023 (talk) 06:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

art history (Q50637) is not a (subclass of) literary genre[edit]

Hello Jane, I removed the statement that art history (Q50637) is a (subclass of) literary genre as this is not true (it is an academic discipline/subject area). I see that there are some items that use art history (Q50637) as a value in genre (P136)-statements causing constraint violations, but I don't think that declaring art history (Q50637) a genre is a solution.
I'm not sure how to express the information that a certain book is relevant in a certain academic discipline better. To broaden the scope of field of work (P101) to be applicably to works, too, could be one way. There is also main subject (P921), but this seems to be rather inadequate, as most books in the subject area of art history are about something else - The Great Theatre of Dutch Painters (Q7737966) is not really about art history (e.g. its methods, principles, etc.) but about Dutch art (Q4351610). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting you feel that way, but I strongly disagree. Virtually the only product of work in the area of art history for centuries was biographical dictionaries and catalogs of art. I am not sure how you could possibly even participate in the study of art history without first reading, and then writing. Perhaps art history is ONLY a literary genre therefore, and has nothing to do with the superclasses you have listed now. Jane023 (talk) 15:47, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The encyclopedia britannica defines art history as a discipline: "Art history, also called art historiography, historical study of the visual arts, being concerned with identifying, classifying, describing, evaluating, interpreting, and understanding the art products and historic development of the fields of painting, sculpture, architecture, the decorative arts, drawing, printmaking, photography, interior design, etc." Is there any source calling art history a genre? It just sounds to me like calling mathematics (Q395) a literary genre because they published their thoughts and findings in written form. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So you are in fact advocating the use of the term "Study of art history" and not, as the term implies, "art history" itself. I really don't see what the encyclopedia britannica has to do with this at all. I will just open a new item for art history and change the name of yours to "study of art history" of it will make you happy. Jane023 (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, but I don't see where I am advocating the term "study of art history". The encyclopedia britannica is describing the term "art history", not "study of art history" (see [5]). Please note the difference between art history (art history (Q50637)), history of art (history of art (Q50641)) and art history book. A new item for art history book that can be used as a genre is a good idea. There is already a category in the English Wikipedia [6]. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:54, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you can use that as a source. They are using one term to describe all facets of the concept, which is normal in an encyclopedic summary. There are many facets of art history. The study of it is an activity. A book is a product of that activity but is also generally classified as being "art history". I guess I just don't understand what you are trying to do. Jane023 (talk) 17:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I just don't want to mix up genres and academic disciplines. art history (Q50637) is representing an academic discipline, since November 2012 with respect to the English description ([7]), since February 2017 with respect to the P31-Statement ([8]). The sitelinks I had a look at are about an academic discipline, not about a genre. The encyclopedia britannica, too, is only describing art history as an academic discipline, not as a genre of literature.
Today you added the statement that it is a subclass of genre. I removed it to not mix up the concept of art history as an academic discipline and the concept of literature produced by that discipline (e.g. art history books). Then I wanted to give you a reason for my removal and propose some solutions. To create a new item for the genre, as proposed by you, would be one solution. I would call it "art history book", as done in the English Wikipedia Category ([9]). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 17:22, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks for that explanation. I think the problem is that you have not explained this anywhere, but that would probably be a good idea. Just as genres should probably be separated from academic disciplines, it's probably a good idea to separate genres from books. I doubt that usurping all encyclopedia articles just for disciplines is the way to go. Jane023 (talk) 18:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prado catalogs[edit]

Hi Jane, I have a catalog puzzle you might enjoy solving. The Prado website contains links to several catalogs. Take for example Venus and Music (Q7920622) it links to [10] that contains a whole other inventories section. On [11] we can download three of these catalogs. They use some kind of scary structured data format: 

<p class="mostrable" about="http://museodelprado.es/items/E22_Man-Made_Object_3318ce42-8836-4867-acf7-276e1870294c_41adb2ab-e60c-4e28-acaf-a583efe9dae8" rel="cidoc:p1_is_identified_by">
<span about="http://museodelprado.es/items/E42_Identifier_3318ce42-8836-4867-acf7-276e1870294c_f01536bf-db03-4133-ac64-5b9c7d88fc8e" typeof="cidoc:E42_Identifier">
<strong about="http://museodelprado.es/items/E42_Identifier_3318ce42-8836-4867-acf7-276e1870294c_f01536bf-db03-4133-ac64-5b9c7d88fc8e" property="cidoc:p102_has_title">Inv. Alc&#225;zar, Madrid, 1734.</strong>
<span about="http://museodelprado.es/items/E42_Identifier_3318ce42-8836-4867-acf7-276e1870294c_f01536bf-db03-4133-ac64-5b9c7d88fc8e" property="cidoc:p139_has_alternative_form">Núm. 27.</span>
<br />

Might look a bit scary, but should be easy to parse with a robot. If we have items for these catalogs, I could probably add a feature to also add the catalog information. I don't understand fully yet how the three downloadable catalogs fit in here. You'll notice that the Prado website online has a fraction of the collection online, all works not on display in the Prado don't seem to be on their website. Multichill (talk) 10:39, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm that is indeed very interesting and well worth doing, I will take a look. Jane023 (talk) 12:23, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GTAA on Wikidata[edit]

You receive this message because you previously matched persons from the GTAA (the Thesaurus for Audiovisual Archives) with items on Wikidata. We would like to inform you about some improvements that we have made to that catalogue on Mix’n’Match. We have improved the automatic links and added additional information from our catalogue (what we’ve called ‘extracted terms’) to the terms. We hope that this makes matching the thesaurus with Wikidata that much more fun and easier. Read more about this project here or in Dutch WikiProject Dutch Media History nl here. Best! 85jesse (talk) 08:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Michaelina Wautier cataloguye[edit]

Hello! I was going to start putting the MW catalogue on Wikidata - but before I start do you have any plans in this area? Thanks! Xcia0069 (talk) 10:31, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What a great idea - go ahead. I don't have the catalog, so I can't help you, but if it's google-able then I can pitch in with whatever you add. Jane023 (talk) 13:36, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait of Jacobus Revius (Q17679160)[edit]

Hoi Jane, Portrait of Jacobus Revius (Q17679160) gaat nu over twee dingen: Het schilderij dat zoek is en het kopietje. Zou je deze uit elkaar kunnen pulken? :-) Multichill (talk) 11:14, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Kind of weird that engraving is now on 3 items, but they all link to one or the other, so I think they are now merge-proof. Jane023 (talk) 11:57, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rembrandt in Wenen[edit]

Portrait of a Woman Seated (Q21406458) liep behoorlijk door elkaar. Zou je die nog even na kunnen lopen? Waar had je trouwens de collectie vandaan? Multichill (talk) 20:53, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oeps! Geen idee hoe dat kwam. Misschien het omdat deze vlak onder eentje van de KHM , Portrait of a Woman holding Gloves (Q21468829), staat beschreven in de 1914 catalogus. Als dat zo is, hoop ik dat dit het enige foutje is. Gelukkig zijn de meeste allemaal in heel verschillende landen, dus moeilijk om twee regels informatie met elkaar te verwarren. En ook fijn dat deze in zoveel verschillende catalogi staat beschreven ;) Jane023 (talk) 04:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata work[edit]

Hi Jane,

I said I was going to back to you in July. sorry for being late. I borrowed a large interlibrary loan book from a University for six weeks and wanted to get as many articles creates as I could, before I returned the book.

Last week and this weekend, I looked at Wikidata data structure, tutorials, SPARQL. Wikidata stuff seems pretty straightforward and interesting. On the other hand: Wiki bots, page and user statistics report generation, MediaWiki, Python etc. Pretty complex! This area is beyond my skill level and interest.

In response to one of your earlier comments: " First of all, it is hard to run a project when the only thing you can measure is "number of articles created" against a running total of articles created randomly through organic growth. Also, once you have poked around at the types of articles that are created, you start to realize that quality is all over the map and it would be nice to be able to capture and highlight the hidden gems in all the stuff that comes streaming in."

I agree and it looks like that the only way that I can see to gather that information is outside wikidata, thru MediaWiki tools, bots, etc.
The metrics report does a good job of creating a monthly list. I wonder if additional variables or queries could be added to create additional monthly reporting?

I manually entered 500 August articles from the WiR Metrics report into a spreadsheet to get a feel for the data. What I noticed was the following: 1) only new articles are being reported 2) there many women sports events and sports team articles—which is fine. 3) on quick review of the 500 entries, it appears that at least 50% of article creators are not members of Women in Red 4) Members of Women in Red tend to create multiple articles 5) the non-biography sports articles tend to be quite large, in terms of bytes. There is a lot of work going into many of these articles. I was impressed!

What I found to be missing from the Monthly metrics reports, and I think would be important to WiR's reporting on their monthly achievements is the articles that have been expanded in a major way.

In reference to your comment about "finding the hidden gems of articles", and in my review of the 500 article sample, I found the really good articles (new articles) to be large in terms of bytes and contained images. This could shown by searching on articles with a minimum number of bytes that included 1 or more images. The results could be added to an monthly report with the existing bot (I would think).
There is no way to currently report on "possible gems"— greatly expanded articles. This also could be done, I think, with a query about articles on women where bytes have increased by a certain percentage within a period of time.
In reference to weak articles: I found weak articles to be usually under 1000 bytes and already flagged with citation issues. This information could be added to the monthly report with the existing bot (I would think).
How I would like to help, going forward: Work on the lists of missing information: birthplace, occupation, etc and add them to Wikidata. I also will play around with the SPARQL, and I could start by working on a simple report if someone needed that done. MauraWen (talk) 16:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
2016 female percentages per occupation in the languages en, nl, & ja

Thanks for your thoughtful note! I am so glad to read that you are interested in SPARQL and Wikidata. I can't emphasize enough to everyone I talk to that these two concepts are closely allied with each other. Without SPARQL or some other query method, Wikidata will never transcend its role as "interwikilink" keeper. It is so much more, precisely because you can query the data. Listeria is a bot that uses SPARQL queries to generate periodic reports, and these are important for monitoring projects, no matter what the project is. I am a member of the SoaP project, and through my experience with the gender inequalities in the art world, I started experimenting with the data that we now have. This is the forerunner of the Wikidata:WikiProject Women project. For this project I just reused a lot of the SPARQL queries that were already in use for SoaP artists, except I just take out the check for painter and add a line for the female gender: "?item wdt:P21 wd:Q6581072." My first priority was to add birthdates and occupations on top of the minimum "human, female". It seems hard to imagine now, but just a few years ago most of the women items had no statements besides interwikilinks at all! So the simple fact you are writing here means that this Women project is paying off. Of course I have further ambitions, and you are welcome to help. So e.g. I started the report for Wikidata:WikiProject Women/Number of women per occupation when I noticed some really strange differences in occupations of women per Wikipedia language. Then I realized we should not just be monitoring the percentage female in male-oriented professions, but especially in female-oriented professions! I mean it is bizarre that there are more male-models percentagewise than female-politicians. If you are interested, I can show you how to create your own reports, download them in .csv and get started with data analysis, all specifically for items with English Wikipedia sitelinks (since I assume that you are only interested in English Wikipedia). Jane023 (talk) 09:06, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jane023: I welcome any assistance and direction in getting started and in investigating the data as you have done. I really enjoy looking at the big picture, coming up with questions and reports that will help the overall goal of more coverage for women.

Jane, Are there guidelines within Wikidata (some Wikidata rules committee?) on how the gender properties should be used? With non-binary persons, there appears to be a variety of ways of listing them, which is fine. But if some people are listed as transgender female with no start date, and others with a combination of male, transgender female, stop and start dates, or another person with three or four properties, it will be difficult for data analysts like you and me to get accurate reporting of instances non-binary people. It would make more sense to have guidelines to protect the integrity of the data. thx MauraWen (talk) 12:42, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is a dizzying array of links! I am confused why non-binary is important for WiR because it is statistically so insignificant. I did create some lists for the project, but they don't seem to attract much interest. Non-binary is best tracked in its own project. Most humans on Wikidata are one of three genders: male, female and unknown. The main rules for the gender properties to keep in mind are that you should use the human genders for people and fictional people. Use the organism genders for the rest of taxonomy. This may sound obvious but you would be surprised how many times I have had to correct these. Use of a non-binary human gender should be sourced, but there are too few volunteers to check this for all living people. You are welcome to add properties wherever you can, since we are missing so many. If you like Wikisource there are still lots of Wikisource article items that need to be connected to the people they are about (male and female) with "main subject". There are lots of women buried in those articles without items yet. Data analysis only becomes fun once you have more of an idea of the data in the dataset. Items about women are still generally empty. For example, it is sometimes quite surprising to me the number of orphan items without any incoming links at all for top women writers, though their wikipedia pages have long lists of books. Maybe when we get the bibliographic imports this will change. Jane023 (talk) 13:13, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jane023: Sorry about all the links, I thought they would clarify my comments. "Use the organism genders for the rest of taxonomy." I do not understand that sentence. Can you explain? I understand about non-binary being statistically insignificant, but I know its become an important issue for the proposed new Gender Diversity user group. I will leave that topic alone for now, because I want to work in other areas. I do not even know what Wikisource is. I have not been introduced to that area. How do you use it in your work with Wikidata? I am going to play with the query language today and any tips you can give me for generating results--tables, csv, etc would be appreciated . I liked your graph!MauraWen (talk) 13:33, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Adding a gender to the P21 property - note the correct human gender choice is not the top choice, and often people will click too soon on the "male organism" item.
Well the easiest way to understand this stuff is to just get started in Wikidata. For example, you created a new article for a Welsh poet and now her item has statements that you added with a gadget, but you can also add references and other properties by editing this directly from Wikidata. Kathryn Gray (Q56452474) could use a few references or you could also create an item for one of her books and link it to her item using author (P50). When in doubt, you can look at e.g. the item for Jane Austen for ideas about the type of statements you can add to writer's items. Here is an item for a Wikisource article from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica about her. It is connected to her item with the "main subject" property: EB-11 / Austen, Jane (Q20669110). Jane023 (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Exhibitions on Wikidata[edit]

Hello jane023! Question: have you ever tried listing all the paintings for an art exhibition page on Wikidata? I see you've added Wikidata items for exhibitions, and created Wikipedia pages for exhibition contents, but not actually listed the contents on Wikidata? I also have no idea what WikiData property to use to indicate a painting has been in an exhibition. Contains? Has Part? Do you have any ideas? Thanks ! Xcia0069 (talk) 12:51, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A bit late, but short answer is yes. I tend to use the catalog though, so technically I add the paintings in the catalog that are also only there to illustrate the author's point about some painting in the exhibition. See e.g. Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/The temptations of Flora : Jan van Huysum (1682-1749). This catalog had various numbering issues, but I just used the catalog numbering. Jane023 (talk) 12:12, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And here is one from a recent Maurithuis exhibition: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/National Trust - Dutch Masters from British Country Houses. I just added the paintings using exhibition history (P608) because I didn't have a catalog for catalog numbers. Jane023 (talk) 13:21, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ugolino da Nerio[edit]

Hi, in 2015 you mentioned that Ugolino da Nerio was a journalist. May I assume that was a typo? Thanks. 195.195.116.100 20:31, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall doing that - thanks for correcting it! Jane023 (talk) 21:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Temptation of St. Anthony[edit]

Hoi Jane, zou je The Temptation of St. Anthony (Q47520204) wellicht even langs kunnen lopen? Is volgens mij niet helemaal goed gegaan met locatie en collectie. Multichill (talk) 20:44, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tja - qua locatie weet ik het ook niet, maar het is wel onderdeel van de Otterloo collectie, dat na de aankondiging van donatie aan de Museum of Fine Arts nog verspreid was. Het is niet meer in Yale, dus waarschijnlijk was het schilderij met de rest van de geleende stukken terug gegeven in 2017. Ik heb een eind datum ingevuld. Toen ik vorig jaar bezig was met Teniers heb ik de links gecheckt, dus toen zal de link nog wel goed zijn geweest. De rest van de geleende nummers van Otterloo aan Yale hebben ook TR nummers gehad. Jane023 (talk) 23:01, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Je was de collectie vergeten dus was er een duplicaat aangemaakt. Multichill (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah dat had ik gemist - hartelijk dank! Jane023 (talk) 07:07, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Hello. Thank you for this. I'm here just to let you know that here is currently a full review of Template:Arts links (Q45312151) on the French Wikipedia – there. You can, so would you mind voting? We are deciding which properties we should call from Wikidata and the vote ends tonight, with quite a few about to be dropped. Your efforts when it comes to building many of those properties here would see your opinions appreciated, I guess. Thierry Caro (talk) 00:42, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Hope it helps - sculpture-related external ids are so hard to find. Jane023 (talk) 07:08, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Q26922736[edit]

Jane023, waar vindt deze link zijn plaats in dit wikidata item? Het beschrijft maar één van de vier schilderijen. En voor zover ik weet is enkel dit schilderij in het vermelde museum aanwezig. Groet Paul Hermans (talk) 10:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ik heb het gelinked hier: The Four Seasons (Spring) (Q26924948) Dit heb ik gevonden door op de Wikidata item van het plaatje te klikken. De meeste Teniers plaatjes op Commons heb ik vorig jaar al op Wikidata gezet. Je had het ook kunnen vinden door te klikken op de gelinked item die je hier al plaatste boven. Gr. Jane023 (talk) 10:19, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Detroit Institute of Arts two images[edit]

Hi Jane, I uploaded images for Detroit Institute of Arts (Q1201549). About 80 paintings now have two images. Most of them are paintings created by you. Care to go through them and make a selection or adding some qualifiers and ranks? For quite a few it's just removing the old lower quality upload, but it also contains cases of with and without frame. Thanks, Multichill (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, thanks! That is a todo list that I really want to do! Jane023 (talk) 12:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown value for creator[edit]

Hi Jane, I noticed you're introducing inconsistencies for creator (P170). Per Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structure#Use of creator (P170) in uncertain cases you should use anonymous (Q4233718) and not unknown value. I know that we talked about maybe changing the system, but had no consensus for that so please stick to anonymous (Q4233718). Thanks, Multichill (talk) 12:00, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I never really followed that conversation - I will switch all my templates back then. Jane023 (talk) 12:51, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, created Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Anonymous to fix to keep an eye on it. Multichill (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pff! I see a bunch that I created in there Jane023 (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For some rainy afternoon :-) Multichill (talk) 20:34, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Multichill: I've used unknown value on a bunch of textiles. Should change those to anonymous (Q4233718)? - PKM (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PKM: For consistency for works of art this would be a good change. Multichill (talk) 16:07, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Jane023,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikidata and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 17:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Jane023,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New page for catalogues[edit]

Hi, I created a new page for collecting sites that could be added to Mix'n'match and I plan to expand it with the ones that already have scrapers by category. Feel free to expand, use for property creation. Best, Adam Harangozó (talk) 13:21, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I tweeted the link in case anyone finds something that became public domain in 2020. Jane023 (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Equestrian portrait of Anton Giulio Brignole-Sale[edit]

Jane, two paintings you merged into Equestrian portrait of Anton Giulio Brignole-Sale (Q3937774) are quite different. The left one seem to be a sketch for the right one with much simpler details (see the hat or the tops of the columns). Can you undo?

--Jarekt (talk) 04:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will look into it. I noticed a bit late that a few Wikipedia lists (en,fr) that I added to my metadata had the wrong images. I am now going through the corrections. Not sure if this was one of them, but in any case I hope the damage isn't too bad! Jane023 (talk) 06:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK I checked and there is no study for this painting. It was purchased along with two others that are quite different. It was loaned for an exhibition in 2018-2019, so it was probably recently cleaned. One of those images is quite old and the Google Art image is the one on their website. I used the website as a reference and removed all commons references. Relieved to know my metadata problem wasn't any bigger!! Jane023 (talk) 06:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at File:Anton van dyck, ritratto di anton giulio brignole-sale, 1627, 01.JPG and the details match Google Art image and image on the museum website. So the Yorck Project image is the odd-ball. Originally it had a different size 250 × 127 cm, as opposed to 282 x 198 cm at museum website or w1510 x h2860 cm at google. Sizes might be wrong and the look can be explained by cleaning. Another possibility is that Yorck Project image is someone's else copy of the original. Either way, We do not know anything about it so a single Wikidata item seems OK. --Jarekt (talk) 13:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just an FYI to my future self and anyone else interested - I have notcied a few other problematic Yorck project images. So much time has passed that they could of course be explained by cleaning, but maybe also by some original flaws in the metadata. I hope no one uses the Yorck project as a source! Jane023 (talk) 11:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Property proposal: TED speaker numeric ID[edit]

Hi Jane,

In response to this issue from 2016, I proposed the creation of a new Wikidata property to capture the numeric IDs of TED speakers. There is now a discussion about the best way to proceed, and we would benefit from your input. —Ringbang (talk) 16:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The quickest way to solve the issue is to remove the constraint. Jane023 (talk) 16:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interview Invitation[edit]

Hi Jane,

I noticed your editing stats in Wikidata, which led me to look up your profile. Thank you for all the great work!

I’m reaching out to you because I’m working on a research project about understanding what motivates editors like you to contribute to Wikidata. We’re also interested in learning about how you feel your contributions are being used outside of Wikidata. Since you are such an active community member, I thought you might also be interested in helping to build the broader community’s knowledge about Wikidata, and why it matters.

If you’re interested, let’s schedule a time to talk over Zoom, or whichever platform you prefer. If you are interested, please fill in a questionnaire. The conversation should take about 30 min.

Hope you have a great day,

Chuankaz (talk) 03:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for the thanks! You can find a bit more about some of my earlier work such as previous presentations in my category on Commons and most recently I was interviewed as part of a series by Shani for her Wikidata course here and the whole series is worth watching here. I don't really have much to add but if you link to your research I will consider whether I can be more forthcoming. My motivations never changed, so I am still a history & arts fan. I have just upped my game as far as sharing goes. Jane023 (talk) 07:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Einar Friele and Ivar Heming Skre[edit]

Good evening! For Ivar Heming Skre (Q6098387) and Einar Friele (Q5349624) I have changed (removed) extermination camp (Q153813) for place of death (P20) as it gives a value type constraint. I can see that this will remove some information as it no longer will give the essensial information that these persons died in an extermination camp. The reason why I am adding this info is that there now is official information available throu Foreign war churchyards in Norway ID (P8387) for their imprisoning place. If the removals are not wanted pls let me know. Pmt (talk) 20:10, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Q73406985[edit]

Hi, do you have any reference for Female Figure (Q73406985)collection (P195)Department of Paintings of the Louvre (Q3044768) ? Thanks -Zolo (talk) 14:06, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not if it's not in there. Looking at the file I see I uploaded a higher resolution, but none of the links appear to work now. Odd but not unheard of. It's possibly an artifact of some old catalog that mentioned it being in the Louvree 1794-1810, but without a link, who knows? If it's not in the Louvre, then it should go back to private collection. Jane023 (talk) 15:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I could no see any evidence that it held by the Louvre or any other museum. I have changed the value to "private collection" until we have more data. -Zolo (talk) 14:21, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Jane023 (talk) 15:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

J.F. Scholten en Zonen[edit]

Dag, Jane023. Blij te zien dat je data over J.F. Scholten en Zonen toevoegt, want de geschiedenis van dat bedrijf is nog maar summier behandeld op Wikipedia. Ik heb me er in het verleden ietwat in verdiept, met name vanwege Ina Scholten-van Heek – misschien ook jouw invalshoek? Maar: je geeft aan dat Jan Scholten de oprichter zou zijn, terwijl dat diens vader, J.F. (zoals de naam al zegt), was. Ook lijkt me de opheffinsdatum niet juist – was begin jaren 70, als ik me niet vergis; ook de bron die je geeft zegt alleen dat J.F. de N.V. Katoenfabrieken overnam in 1956, niet dat het bedrijf toen ook meteen werd opgeheven (wat ook raar zou zijn). Overigens is die bron, acheruitkijkspiegel, welhaast woordelijk overgenomen op nl:J.F. Scholten en Zonen, wat natuurlijk niet wenselijk is en strijdig met het auteursrecht bovendien (ik ben nog geblokt op NLWiki, dus kan het daar niet aanpassen). Ik zal op Wikidata de punten die ik heb genoemd aanpassen, dan je weet je dat, maar niet meteen, waarschijnlijk later vandaag. Groet, Eissink (talk) 10:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Dank! Ga gerust je gang, want het was me allemaal te doen om één schilderij van J.B. Scholten geschonken aan Rijksmuseum Twente, dus bij het uitzoeken van de eigenaarschap het hield niet op. Ga gerust nog een J.F. toevoegen als founder, want ik raakte de draad een beetje kwijt. Jane023 (talk) 11:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interessant, de schenking van Scholten aan Rijksmuseum Twente schijnt werk van hoge kwaliteit te behelzen: is er een overzicht van die schenking beschikbaar? Eissink (talk) 11:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Ja volgens de RKD wel, maar of het online is weet ik niet. Jane023 (talk) 12:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request for creation of a SoaP list[edit]

Hello Jane, I have tried to create it myself, but I failed; and you wrote that I could ask you for help whenever I wanted to create a new list for the sum of all paintings. So, here is my request: could you create a list Sum of all paintings/paintings in Alsace? It would be based on the following: all paintings located in Bas-Rhin (Q12717) + all paintings located in Haut-Rhin (Q12722). The columns would be the following: image, commune (Q484170), creator, inception, Joconde ID (five columns). Thank you very much!! --Edelseider (talk) 07:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It would help if I knew more about what you want to do with the list. Theoretically I can build it, but sight unseen I can imagine it returning zero items. The reason is because in order to create a useful Listeria list, you need to think about how the items are modelled that you want to capture. We don't currently have a way to say "This painting is physically hanging in Haut-Rhin". We infer that from other statements, such as collection (P195) or location (P276) having a targets that either contain geo coordinates, or some other property that indicates location. Then that combo (the chosen property and the method of determinig location) need to be consistent. The use of Listeria helps to track and monitor, but only when you have someone actually tracking and monitoring. I will try to get such a list started, but it should be a subpage of Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Location/France. Keep in mind that paintings in private collections do not have a specific location, so they will be skipped. Only known locations are possible. Jane023 (talk) 08:44, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Edelseider: I created Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Location/France/Alsace. Click edit to view the query - you can copy/paste this query and use it in the query editor to try other ways to model this. Jane023 (talk) 14:41, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WOW, THANK YOU JANE, this is an incredibly useful and beautiful list! It is even more than what I expected! Fantastic! --Edelseider (talk) 14:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you find it useful (looks like a lot of church locations). This query is based on two administrative location layers: location is in <some municipality> that is either in Haut-Rhin or Bas-Rhin. Jane023 (talk) 15:29, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One last question. Technically speaking, Alsace isn't an administrative territorial entity (Q56061) anymore, but it will become one again next year: en:European Collectivity of Alsace. How can we link the list to Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top administrative territorial entities? --Edelseider (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well that list is actually just single layer use of administrative entity - you can quickly scan it and see it's just for cities. You would need to do a mass upload of paintings in Strassbourg, and even so there are probably not enough collections in that city. Jane023 (talk) 16:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, the list is not just for cities, please have a closer look and you will see that there are also boroughs of cities, and whole regions. It's a real mixture of entities.--Edelseider (talk) 16:31, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well the shortest answer is to run through the same exercise I noted above: how are the paintings modelled that are in the results? In this case, I scroll to the very bottom and choose the sample painting listed at the right. It is in the results because of its location (P276) which is Ardress House (Q17779062), which has a very general administrative entity (P131) of Northern Ireland. I assume that for Haut-Rhin and Bas-Rhin you would also have a few paintings like this (located in remote churches not connected to towns). In order to have paintings show up in that query, they need to have P131 filled with European Collectivity of Alsace. This is not a good idea. Modelling paintings should be abbout the paintings, and not about Listeria lists. Jane023 (talk) 08:01, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Jane, another feedback a little while later – this list is just the most amazing tool (in my eyes, at least)! The overview it allows is simply breathtaking, especially for 20th-century art. People do not realize that the axis Strasbourg – Sélestat – Colmar is also one big MOMA. :) --Edelseider (talk) 10:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait of a noble young lady by Pieter Pourbus[edit]

Hello,
On working on this entry, I found that the image is wrongly attributed to another painter. I reverted one of your addition here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q99542712
But the name of the other painter still appears.
As I am no expert of this wiki, can I ask you to clean the other misleading info?
thanks in advance, best regards,
PS: you can view everything about this painting, including the signature by Pieter Pourbus, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portrait_of_a_Noble_Young_Lady_(Pourbus)
--Emigré55 (talk) 03:18, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't make reversions of attributions of paintings. On Wikidata, attributions can be added based on multiple sources and multiple attributions are possible, such as in this case. In general, for the SoaP project, attributions are based first on what the artist's experts say and next based on what leading institutions say (such as the painting collection itself). In this case, the attribution I added is currently listed in the RKD and the Pourbus attribution has been deprecated. Their attribution may be incorrect, but that is where you need to direct your complaint, not here. It is a very nice painting, which I got to see in Gouda. Reverting. Jane023 (talk) 09:13, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your answer. If, for your project, you base first on what artist's experts say, then maybe you could add the more recent references on attribution (which is certain as evidenced by the signature appearing on IR photos) by Paul Huvenne, former Director of the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp, who wrote his thesis in 1984 on Pieter Pourbus, organised the same year the first exhibition on the painter, wrote in the catalogues of the 2 exhibitions of Bruges and Gouda in 2017 and 2018, about this painting and its certain attribution. You can also add Josephina De Fouw, who organised the exhibition in Gouda in 2018, who wrote also in the catalogue of this exhibition, and is now curator at the Rijskmuseum for Dutch paintings. On the other side, with all due respect to them, Van Dam and Waterschoot are absolutely no experts of this painter, and to my best knowledge never claimed to be. I believe that this mention in RKD is an error. In my humble opinion, reporting errors, or information which is easily verifiable as untrue, giving them an equal or even superior importance to the information/content published by serious experts, is more damaging Wikipedia than adding usefully to it. What do you think?--Emigré55 (talk) 07:29, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I absolutely agree! In fact, being able to include all current attributions as well as previous attributions is the key to rediscovering hidden gems and rebuilding lines of art provenance. Of course wars and natural disasters will make it impossible to recreate lines of art provenance all the way back to Pieter Pourbus himself, but it is always nice to retrace older paintings back to when they were first documented on camera, with or without x-ray, pigment or wood analysis. Having seen the painting, I recall being captivated by it, but wondered at the time about those empty hands, which seem to be holding a ball of air. It is quite possible that the RKDimages ID (P350) database is completely wrong on this one (I have found many errors in their database in the past and the entry for this one is littered with mispellings anyway). I have never understood how they work, but I have written to them in the past, and a few times I have received an answer, though it can take months. The past few years I don't bother mailing anymore and I use the comment box for specific records. Since I got tired of waiting I only do it for truly obvious errors (e.g. image not applicable to description and/or duplicate records). I can highly recommend approaching them. It's not clear to me what their attribution is based on, but obviously they have plenty of the catalogs of Flemish painters in their RKDlibrary (Q50731518) database, so if you reply in the comment box with the catalog number of the exhibition entry then they might budge their attribution (or at least correct it, if it is indeed a typo). I also looked for this image in BALaT object ID (P3293) but it appears that no one works on that database anymore? Someone working on Rubens told me they don't bother with it at all. I do use it for anything in Belgian churches. Jane023 (talk) 07:54, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As to youur comment about Wikipedia, I cannot stress enough that you should not equate Wikidata with Wikipedia. Totally different projects, approaching the same goal but with widely different methods and policies. In general, no institution or art historian is placed above another, but as the WD:SOAP page says, a painter can be adopted by a "definitive" art historian and of course that person has more weight (re: Huvenne, who I see now is deserving, but sadly lacking an item). Jane023 (talk) 08:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well that was easy to fix - no lack of sources for this one: Paul Huvenne (Q100256344). Jane023 (talk) 09:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good evening, I just noticed that the entry for this painting was changed at RKD. here: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/284496. So, feel free to complete your own database with their sources and indications. cheers, --Emigré55 (talk) 16:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done! See diff. I see they also added more information, which is very helpful too. Jane023 (talk) 17:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Great! You have been fast! :-)
May I suggest some improvements?
1/ in the section called " depicts", you could usefully add:
2/ in the section called "described at URL", you could usefully add an additional reference, different from the one you mentioned:
3/ in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Portrait_of_a_Noble_Young_Lady, don't know if you can change this?
Have a great day!
cheers, --Emigré55 (talk) 09:22, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a list of art historians in your project?[edit]

with their publications, etc....linked to the painters, the paintings, etc...? thanks in advance for your help on this too. cheers, --Emigré55 (talk) 09:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to your bot I discovered something interesting[edit]

Thanks to your bot adding an identifier to Tim Berners-Lee: The year open data went worldwide (Q22946133) I discovered sooner rather than later the link to TED so I could watch the video which I thought was an amazing video about linked open data (Q18692990). In short, you are amazing and thank you for creating that bot! I wanted to thank you but I couldn't since there is no functionality to thank a bot, because basically there is no functionality to forward "thank yous" from bots to the users that created them, which is why I post this long post here. Though I think even this long post was worth it, thanks again! LotsofTheories (talk) 04:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! There are lots more amazing and educational videos on the TED website and since I ran that bot I should probably do an update for the more recent ones. Jane023 (talk) 07:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nostell Priory[edit]

I have updated the wikidata items for Nostell Priory paintings (200+) to add the location field. Could you spare the time to produce a Nostell Priory version of your Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Shugborough Hall for Nostell. I am not technically competent to do it myself. RegardsRouletteer (talk) 12:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Images and and Art_UK IDs matched too - impressive. Here's your list Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Nostell Priory. Let me know if you want anything in the columns. Jane023 (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your impressively prompt response. The columns to check missing inventory nos, etc are there so I am well happy. Rouletteer (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to see you folks working on Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/National Trust! I see we've gotten to the point that enough paintings have creator (P170) and/or inception (P571) to split up the lists based on when it's made. Multichill (talk) 16:50, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh yes it would be nice to have the 17th-century paintings split out. Jane023 (talk) 17:09, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Woman painters - Lou Albert-Lasard[edit]

Hi Jane. Do you know the artist Q273197? As it happens, Q845468 has 2,004 works by her in its collection: 199 paintings, 690 drawings and 1,115 prints (navigart.fr/mamcs/). Two thousand and four works! And none of them is here on Wikidata. Now, I cannot and will not copy by hand all the information pertaining to the works, not even to the 199 paintings. But maybe a bot can do that? Do you know someone who could create a MAMCS bot and take care of Lou Albert-Lasard, but also of Q543444 (348 works) by copying all the relevant info minus the copyrighted images to WD? The project "women in arts" would make a gigantic leap forward! All the best --Edelseider (talk) 10:08, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not that person, but I do know someone very good at uploading collections to Wikidata and that is User:Multichill who is backlogged but off and on adding collections. I am not familiar with all the criteria needed for upload, but it would be nice to have that collection on board! Jane023 (talk) 10:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating the list Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Strasbourg Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art! I added it to Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Location/France. Someone should probably document this process, but our processes could change I suppsoe. Jane023 (talk) 10:26, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And now she has her own list Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Lou Albert-Lasard. Jane023 (talk) 10:31, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Edelseider: Strasbourg Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art (Q845468) looks like a nice and easy painting collection for me to work on with a bot. Some images are marked as public domain so I'll upload those. I prefer bots doing the bulk and humans focusing on sorting out afterwards. If the paintings go well, I can also do the drawings and prints if you're planning to work on those too. Multichill (talk) 12:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Multichill: This is incredibly great news, thank you!! Quite a few of the public domain paintings/works have already been uploaded on Commons (Collections of Musée d'art moderne et contemporain de Strasbourg), but not all have an item on WD. But of course, most works in the collection have neither Commons image, nor WD item. By the way, Q25391820 uses exactly the same database and is a much smaller collection, it does however have no public domain works. All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 13:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WHY does it not work???[edit]

Hello again Jane, I created Q104536315 yesterday but I am unable to create the page Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/De Giotto à Goya. Peintures italiennes et espagnoles du musée des Beaux-Arts de Strasbourg correctly, where am I doing something wrong? Please help me (again)! Thank you, --Edelseider (talk) 19:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You created the catalogue properly and also the list for it, but you didn't add any catalog codes with P528 so there is nothing to put in the list. You only added the catalog to the items with published in (P1433), but we never use that property for cataloguing. In fact I have never used that property on any painting. In general, if a catalog has no catalog codes, then I will use the described by source (P1343) or exhibition history (P608) if it's an exhibition catalog. Jane023 (talk) 20:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Aaah, okay! And I suppose that "inventory number" and "catalogue code" are not the same thing... I will try to fix that! Thank you very much! --Edelseider (talk) 20:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I just did an El Greco catalog for an exhibition that did not have catalog codes, so I used page numbers (but I only used codes on the paintings by El Greco - there were also some other objects, like archival documents after his death, which I should probably take a picture of an upload too). Because of you, I just created the catalog list (even though I am not quite "done" with that book, which I borrowed from the library before lockdown and now have more time to read and wikify: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/El Greco. Domenikos Theotokopoulos 1900. Jane023 (talk) 09:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately, both Q104536315 and Q104536363 have codes for each painting, so there will be a lot of work ahead. WD covers only a small part of Commons, which in itself covers less than a half of the collection (but all the major works or big name painters). --Edelseider (talk) 11:03, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Nice to have these, for obvious reasons. The Prado has also uploaded historical catalogs going back to royal inventories in the Madrid palace. It's nice to have those provenance records on WD and I wish we had them for all (former) noble collections. Jane023 (talk) 11:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tadaaa! Here it is: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/Collection du Musée des Beaux-Arts. Peinture flamande et hollandaise. XVe - XVIIIe siècle. --Edelseider (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that's lovely! Thanks so much for making that one! Jane023 (talk) 19:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merging Louvre and Louvre[edit]

Dear Jane,
yesterday I have tried to merge Q3044768 into Q19675. The reason was very simple and, well, reasonable: nobody uses or indeed knows the term "Department of Paintings of the Louvre" outside of the administration in Paris; and we don't separate the painting department from the rest in the case of the Metropolitan Museum or the Hermitage Museum, which have exactly the same profile as the Louvre, either (see Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of paintings, and Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of painters).
There is a very strong case to be made for merging, but when I tried, I failed! I do not understand what happened. But read the first line of Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles and see for yourself that the situation without merger is absurd! Thank you; --Edelseider (talk) 09:04, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your question! We should probably document this case because it is probably the most visible case of all collections split like this. There are many more, including large collections such as thhe most famous in Florence, London, Munich, Berlin, and Dresden. Though we draw a line at instance of (P31)->painting (Q3305213), we do not have hard and fast rules for collections, because it gets very messy very fast. For example, many paintings in the Tate Britain collection are no longer considered "modern art" and are not in the Tate museum, though their item's collection (P195) remains the same. So while we like to think of a depot being stored at the museum location, many paintings formally considered in depots such as the Louvre's department of paintings, are in fact hanging somewhere else in the country. Consider portraits by 1st-rate painters of 2nd-rate politicians: these often hang in municipal museums where those politicians have 1st-rate relevance. The Metropolitan doesn't have the same issue at the same scale, simply because they have an active deaccessioning system whereby they sell works to fund their acquistion efforts, and/or they transfer legacy gifts from donors to the Brooklyn museum. The Louvre rarely sells anything, and I am unaware of important Louvre sales. Similar intramural collections exist in most national collections, and here in the Netherlands we had a painting item merging spree when imported collections turned out to have large amounts of overlap (mostly between Amsterdam museum and Rijksmuseum). Certain paintings are commissioned for museum buildings, and these are the ones that could never be in a depot. Similarly, destroyed or lost paintings last seen in a museum building will also never be in a depot, though they have items. In summary, to answer your question, the answer is completely the opposite to what you would expect: we should probably split museum buildings (many of which are notable for their history architectural features that have nothing to do with their collections) from their collection departments, and we should probably also split large collections' painting departments into their various curatorial departments. In general, we keep to a "keep it simple" position and only split when a structural need calls for it. I hope this answers your question, and sorry about this gumming up queries - we just need to make better queries! Jane023 (talk) 10:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wow Jane, this is a very interesting answer and I suggest that this matter be discussed with the community at large, because we definitely seem to agree that things have to change, and profoundly so! What I am talking about is basically "brand recognition", which is important, and what you are talking about is splitting with more precision between ownership and location; I am sure that a compromise can be found between all three but the fact remains that the Louvre is dealt very bad cards in an overview like this one, where it appears to own only 2 (two) paintings! In fact, the more I look into the bowels of Wikidata, the more messy I find it... you said it somewhere else, it is a victim of its own success! No wonder that I focus on a tiny group of museums with middle-sized or smallish collections, whenever I catch a glimpse of bigger collections, I am struck by the incoherence! All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, by the time you find that list that you are talking about, you are already pretty "deep in the bowels of Wikidata"! It's actually just another way of looking at what Wikipedians refer to as the "Bonnie and Clyde problem". As far as "brand recognition" is concerned, I think the various Wikipedia articles are pretty good at presenting the highlights about collections. As far as collection departments are concerned, they probably think Wikidata oversimplifies their collections! It's all a question of perspective of course. We hold the same principle (split when there is a structural need) for altarpieces by the way. Jane023 (talk) 10:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First a technical explanation: it is impossible to merge two items on Wikidata when there is two different page on a Wikimedia project. So here, if you want to merge, Department of Paintings of the Louvre (Q3044768) and Louvre Museum (Q19675), first you need to merge fr:Département des peintures du musée du Louvre and fr:Musée du Louvre.
Next the editorial point of view: merging these items (and articles) seems to be a very bad idea. It would be like merging "France" with "Europe". Plus, pages like Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles could easily be fixed to take into account all departments of a museum.
Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 13:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Nicolas! it would be nice to include the departments in that list, if only to prove how hard we Soapies have worked to add items about paintings and how hard the literary folks have worked to add books from department libraries! Jane023 (talk) 14:16, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jane: I changed the query for this particular list, now the numbers include the departements and look more "logical". The same could easily be done elsewhere if needed.
@@Edelseider: I see that you removed the column list in that table, is there any reason why you removed these links?
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 14:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VIGNERON: the particular reason is that the query was overloaded. Jane and I had to remove "list" almost everywhere! See here if you don't believe me: Wikidata talk:WikiProject sum of all paintings#"error decoding response body: expected value at line 1 column 1". Cordialement, --Edelseider (talk) 14:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Edelseider: hmm, in theory this is a very good reason but something is strange here. Jane: are you sure this error is linked to a timeout? I just checked and tried on Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles, the query does not timeout (not by quite far actually) but Listeria does give the error. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 15:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VIGNERON: Do also take into account this discussion and that discussion. There have been multiple difficulties to address lately. Cordialement, --Edelseider (talk) 15:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm yeah I am not sure that the query test always works for listeria anymore - I think listeria also takes a lot of time to build the properties requested in the columns. I don't think there is a way to optimize this. It might be easier (especially in light of recent discussions about a Soap page overhaul) to just reduce the number of columns to reduce confusion and only give detailed columns per region (for collections, location (P276) , for painters, work location (P937), etc). Jane023 (talk) 15:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mhh, I'm confused. Removing columns seems as useful as a chocolate teapot. I'll try to look into it and find the real problem and solution. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 15:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@VIGNERON: Jane: HA, look at that mess now: Top collections by number of Wikipedia painting articles! It's the result of changing the query exactly like this. Terrible! --Edelseider (talk) 15:39, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Edelseider: why on earth would you do that? If you don't know SPARQL, don't make bad changes like this, I reverted it. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 15:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No the point of this query is really to see most popular museums, not to measure the most paintings per collection with Wikipedia articles, which should be a separate query, but then no link to Wikipedia in the list output, since that is so confusing to readers. Jane023 (talk) 15:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(after edit conflict) @VIGNERON: Why would I do this? But for the same reason you did it in "Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles"! Why is "Top collections by number of Wikipedia painting articles" different from "Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles" (I do not mean the content, but the way the list is established)? I don't think anything will be solved by putting more blame on me than I deserve. --Edelseider (talk) 15:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Edelseider: I don't want to put blame on anyone, but you should never use a code you don't understand, nor using the same code to do different things. It is *never* a good idea, it might sometimes work by chance but only by chance. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 16:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just tried to rename this list to reflect the content better and found there was already this one, with similar problems Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles. I should probably split these lists per theme, then by region or something. Jane023 (talk) 18:48, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Jane, what are you on about, are you allright? Did you just discover Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles? We have been talking about that list since yesterday! Diff, diff... Or do I misunderstand something? --Edelseider (talk) 19:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
These lists are a bit redundant here and there. Try hitting that url again after adding the word painting before the last word. Jane023 (talk) 20:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of Wikipedia painting articles and Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections by number of Wikipedia articles. :) We have been talking about these two all day. Good night, --Edelseider (talk) 20:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Killed by OS for overloading memory.[edit]

Hello Jane, I hope you are fine! A new problem has appeared. Whenever I try to update Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Location/France/Alsace, I now get the message Killed by OS for overloading memory. What can I do? Cheers, --Edelseider (talk) 12:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't help! Maybe reducing the search parameters further, like I did here? But it would leave us with nothing in the end. --Edelseider (talk) 12:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tested the query with and without the labels (listeria adds the labels, so you don't need them in the listeria version of the query). I get the same message. It's a longish query which is shortened by that change, but the result is the same, so it looks like a bug. Jane023 (talk) 13:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This query works fine: https://w.wiki/xLz Jane023 (talk) 13:06, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, we have exactly the same problem with Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Staatliche Kunsthalle Karlsruhe. :( All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jane, I hope you are fine. I am so depressed by these fucking technical issues that I have decided to leave Wikidata altogether. All the "overloaded memories" are driving me crazy. What kind of database is this, where not a day goes by without problems limiting the scope of our work? All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 11:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to hear that, but I totally get it. It can be extremely frustrating and it used to get me down a lot. The infrastructure really is improving and I am enjoying seeing the newer possibilities as they roll in (slowly, but surely). Taking a step back can be very helpful. Queries are great, but they aren't everything. There is more to Wikidata than just the queries. I hope one day we will have our own robust reporting database just for art, but until then, we just limp along. Take care! Jane023 (talk) 11:34, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Rest of Diana by Jacob Jordaens[edit]

Hello Jane023
Always in a good mood, you created an item The Rest of Diana (Q106091590) about a painting by Jordaens, the Rest of Diana, derivated from the one in the Louvre museum The Rest of Diana (Q29644572). The reference was https://www.pop.culture.gouv.fr/notice/joconde/000PE030069 but there is an issue. It's the same as https://www.pop.culture.gouv.fr/notice/joconde/00000106262 and there is obviously a duplicate - no doubt in reading the history.
There is indeed a derivative painting , The Rest of Diana (Q104472044) which is located in the Musée des Beaux-Arts de la ville de Paris and has already an item. There is also a drawing, the study, in the musée Condé. The reference is https://www.pop.culture.gouv.fr/notice/joconde/00000106973. So I changed the item you have created, in this one relative to the drawing The Rest of Diana (Q106091590) which, I think, is the study on which you created the item. The reference of the catalog, based on historical information, is about the one in the Louvre so I put it there. I think it's clean and hope this is ok for you.
A nice painting, in front of which I took several my time. Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 18:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for puzzling this one out! Jordaens needs a lot of work, so I hope to spend more time on him one day with a good catalog. This one was confusing and my French is not that great. Would love to see either painting in person one day! I will only be viewing online from home until the museums open up and I am double vaccinated. Jane023 (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another catalog[edit]

European miniatures in the Met. I haven’t made an item for this yet. - PKM (talk) 06:11, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now it does! European Miniatures in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Q107172423) also has an archive.org id as borrowable book, so you can link to pages of that as persistent urls. Jane023 (talk) 06:21, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have created items for other important MMA catalogs (most notably the Highlights guidebook) and we should probably ask to have all of these overviews of sub-collections added as items. @Fuzheado: has anyone considered this yet? Jane023 (talk) 06:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your question - we haven't done this comprehensively for a subcollection, but this seems like a great time to try one. If you have a list of the accession numbers or the Met Object IDs, I can whip up a quick user interface to help cross correlate whether they are in Commons or Wikidata, and then give us some options for creating items for them. In theory, OpenRefine can do most of this, but not necessarily with the Commons part. Though that should change soon with the grant that User:Spinster is part of. -- Fuzheado (talk) 12:07, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cool! The Met is pointing to the Google Books version too, so you can also do a page-specific linking to Google Books. Whatever you folks think makes sense. Here's an example of linking to page 11: [12] -- Fuzheado (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, do we have a model item for "miniature" and how we want the genre and other fields to look like? Here's an example of one I just sampled, which was brought in as a "painting" by Botmultichill, but has no miniature designation - Henriette Sontag (1806–1854) (Q19913941). The associated Met record is [13] and this was from pages 168-169 of the catalog. Also @Pharos: in case you have any insights. -- Fuzheado (talk) 12:17, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good, thanks! I was wondering if the miniatures were treated as paintings (I know they have all sorts of media on frames, frame cross-sections, and backs of frames on Commons, so hopefully they will have bejeweled lockets on Commons already too). Jane023 (talk) 14:30, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Jane!
@Fuzheado: I've been working through all of the Nicholas Hilliard miniatures - I've done everything already on Wikidata, and now I am adding Wikidata items for other miniatures in Commons and linking them up to be multilingual (also doing SDC when I don't forget). As for a model item, Self-portrait, aged 30 (Q107106081) has the model I have been using. P31 = painting has advantages in that the bot will (eventually?) add the descriptions in a bunch of languages, and it's consistent with our other genres of paintings.
So far I have not found any miniatures where the metadata describes the frame/mount/locket/setting (I'm sure there must be some). I think we need to decide how to model these. The licensing may be different than that on the painting (the image shouldn't be PD-art if there's a frame, though there are some in Commons ...). -
I have not been capturing "shape" but we probably should for these. - PKM (talk) 20:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone back through and added "shape" to these. I used disk (Q238231) for round miniatures - open to changing that to "circle" or something else. - PKM (talk) 00:47, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I never used "shape" before, but sounds useful! I wanted another property for this to go with "depicted format" called "physical format" which could include things like "locket" or "snuffbox" besides shape. As to circular, I think "tondo" is used for the shape, or does that have a size restriction? Jane023 (talk) 05:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gemäldegalerie lost paintings[edit]

Hi Jane, these paintings show up in the subset "GGVerlust" which is for lost paintings that used to be in the Gemäldegalerie (Q165631).

I'll also add the other missing paintings. This is a very sad collection of about 570 paintings. I'll use "lost painting by ..." as description. Multichill (talk) 21:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

nice! Sad yes, but would be very nice to have, even without images. Jane023 (talk) 21:23, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To have the links somewhere visible: https://w.wiki/3c2X is the list of lost paintings based on the description (currently 542 items).
At https://w.wiki/3c2V is the list of paintings for which the creator (P170) still needs to be added. Already added many, but still 324 left to do. The more painters added, the more at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/RKD to match/Gemäldegalerie, Berlin be be linked automatically. Already more than 182 new links to RKDimages added.
The bildindex returns more than 6000 paintings to link with Bildindex der Kunst und Architektur ID (P2092). That's really a lot. For now I'll probably just use it to identify paintings. Multichill (talk) 21:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks I will see what I can do with those queries. Bildindex is virtually useless for anything other than looking up individual paintings. They have multiple versions of some paintings and are missing whole swaths of important German collections. It's a mystery to me how it works exactly. Jane023 (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is anonymous (Q4233718) on a focus list?[edit]

I see that you added the claim that anonymous (Q4233718) is on a focus list. What is it doing there? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 09:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably as a mistake. I have no purpose in adding it and certainly didn't mean to. I did notice it was added by another project - probably also a mistake. Does it matter? I you remove it, it might just be added again (lack of proper filtering mechanisms). Jane023 (talk) 09:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lists with several catalogs[edit]

Hi Jane023, for long I think about lists which show the works of an artist at several exhibitions concerning him in the form similar to this https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings/Catalog/Canaletto:_Giovanni_Antonio_Canal,_1697–1768. What do you think and could you please help me to start. Is there an example for a list on wikidata and can I list up the catalognumbers of several exhibitions? --Oursana (talk) 10:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes to get started all you need is a catalog and you can start adding catalog numbers after you have created an item for the catalog. I create items for catalogs more often than I try to complete them. If you pick a popular painter many of the paintings will be on Wikidata already so you only need to add the catalog statement. It's not hard to do and I generally create the list after I have created the catalog item and linked about 20 paintings to it with catalog statements. The template to create the list is the same for all lists: Template:Wikidata list (Q19860885) Just click edit on a short exhibition catalog list to see how it is made. Jane023 (talk) 10:18, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your quick response. What I would like to create is a list combining several catalogs of one artist in one list to give an overview of the exhibited paintings. What do you think about this idea? Is it possible as Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/... and how can I create several colummns with the catalog numbers?--Oursana (talk) 22:45, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The list template only works with one query. You can always create a list of lists for navigation purposes. I have created a few catalog lists with multiple catalogs when the actual catalog is split into multiple parts by using the author and publication date. I only do this if the catalog numbers still go up in order, otherwise it's a useless list. See e.g. Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Catalog/Herbert Cook collection, Doughty House, 1913. Jane023 (talk) 05:40, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I think about it and many thanks for your great lists--Oursana (talk) 10:47, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mulhouse[edit]

Hi Jane, happy new year! I bet that you have never heard of that museum: Musée des beaux-arts de Mulhouse. It doesn't even have its own article in English or Dutch, yet! Well, it's really not world-class, but it's better and richer than one might think. Please have a look! Cheers, Edelseider (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year to you too! We should proably have articles for all museums in Mulhouse since it's such an important city with a rich history. I will take a look. Jane023 (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notable event?[edit]

Hello. I saw that you were one of the main organizers of the TED project. Could you please say me if this event is notable enough for Wikidata? Cheersǃ 2A01:CB1D:8CC3:6500:F87F:F449:DF99:A9FE 08:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Year of death of Elise Hoyer[edit]

Hi, five years ago you added ad year of death for Elise Hoyer (Q1330638). Do you still remember the source or the reasoning you used? Thank you! --Emu (talk) 17:55, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No sorry I do not. Probably it was something referencing her in the past tense. But I don't even recall ever working on this item. Jane023 (talk) 18:12, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your quick response – then I think it’s best to delete this statement. --Emu (talk) 18:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not vandalism[edit]

My edits aren't vandalism. I don't intend that. A confusion by Tryon County Jail instead of Fulton County Jail, which you have modified. Apologies, in any case. --Galopax (talk) 11:34, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I apologize. I didn't notice there were two items for the Trump mugshot and one of them linked to the wrong Fulton County Jail. I have tried to fix it so nobody else will make that mistake. The older, historical jail was never even called that while it was in use as a jail. Jane023 (talk) 12:57, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thoughts about several instances/versions of artwork[edit]

Hi Jane, I've digged a bit into Antoine Bourdelle's Hercules the Archer sculpture and try to sort things out. Apparently, we have an original plaster Hercules the Archer (Q122310355) (I've just created this item), and several bronze casts all around the world, in collections and public spaces. I stumbled upon an item that combined two of them (this version), which made me a bit nervous ;-) so I fell into this rabbit hole … Apparently there is no problem to create several items for all these instances of the original (if we take the plaster version as „original“, and there are already a couple of items), but how could we connect them? The only logical thing I can think of is instance of (P31), but it has no inverse property. I'm thinking of something like has edition or translation (P747) and edition or translation of (P629). Until now, the different casts were connected by different from (P1889), but I don't find this semantically very satisfying. Do you have an idea? I'm envisioning a group of items that are interconnected by the "original" and can be nicely visualized … ;-) Best wishes Elya (talk) 16:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, the old sculpture problem! Sculpture is not my thing, and to properly model these can be tricky in Wikidata. Since way more work goes into production of a bronze (than say for a book), these are all instances of "sculpture". If the artist him/herself was involved in production, then they are still creator and if not, then creator is unknown, with quantifier "after a work by" creator. Then you need the item linked to the original with property "derivative work", and on the item for the bronze "based on" the original. All derivatives should link bank the the original theoretically.~I have spent hours tracking down originals for paintings that are known copies. Jane023 (talk) 06:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good morning, and: ahhhhh! yes, that's exactly what I was looking for. I didn't want to make my text too complicated, but yes, most of the series we are talking about here were artist-involved derivatives . It was even quite interesting that the patron of the first version tried to put an exclusive right on it, but gave up on it later when the object was so successful and the artist wanted to sell more items … of course there are later copies galore, however I don't expect too many of them in Wikidata. Thanks a lot for your help! Elya (talk) 06:44, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! Coincidentally I have been looking for original paintings of known copies today, and I just made an item for a copy that I could link to its original here A thief steals from a thief (Q122380391). Jane023 (talk) 07:32, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
well, that cutpurse looks complicated, too … happy Sunday! Elya (talk) 07:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't send me down another rabbit hold for cutpuses! Shouldn't you be out taking photos for Monuments Day (lots of museums are open for free too today). Jane023 (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah, indeed – open but extremely crowded. Moreover, the "famous" Cologne monuments are done already, and there's left a lot of serial stuff (houses after houses after houses in narrow streets, parked cars in front of them …). We plan a group excursion in two weeks to one of the suburbs to get one of those settlement buildings done on one day ;-) Elya (talk) 08:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nice! Yes I went out yesterday and it was pretty crowded here too. Also very hot. Jane023 (talk) 08:47, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jane023bot[edit]

Hello Jane023, The last edits by your bot Jane023bot date from April 7th, 2016. I would propose to remove its bot flag. Do you oppose to that? Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 07:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I have it re-instated afterwards? I haven't done any large imports since, but I don't want to lose the right to do one. Jane023 (talk) 08:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is always possible to request a new bot task to get a new flag. The current task is only about using QuickStatements. In most cases you don't need a bot flag for that. If it is about single import, a flooder flag would be appropriate as well. Okay? --Lymantria (talk) 10:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK yes I see now. I didn't know about the flooder flag, which possibly post-dates my bot account! Go ahead and remove that bot flag then. I tend to work item by item these days with batches of max 100 or so quick statements, and these go through for me these days. Jane023 (talk) 10:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll remove the flag. Thank you for all your good work! --Lymantria (talk) 11:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Miracles de saint Remi vs Miracles de saint Benoît ?[edit]

Hello, didn't you mix up the both in the article Q29184814 (first is ivory, second is a painting) ? Best FHd (talk) 20:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that wasn't me. I only populated the item with information from the French Wikipedia article added here. The Palissy information probably did not have an image of the painting at the time, but it does now here PM51000846. Jane023 (talk) 09:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jane023&oldid=2125278316"