Wikidata:Property proposal/artist exhibition

artist exhibition at

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Person

   Not done

Description	Museums and galleries where an artist's work has been exhibited.
Represents	exhibition (Q464980)
Data type	Item
Domain	artists
Example	Clifford Owens (Q17183980) → Contemporary Arts Museum Houston (Q93691), MoMA PS1 (Q1139848), Cornerhouse (Q2997538)
Planned use	add to contemporary artist biographies
See also	exhibition history (P608) for exhibition of single artworks

Motivation

For museums and galleries where an artist's work has been exhibited solo or as part of a small group. This is meant to be used exhaustively only for medium-prominence artists - for very high-prominence historic artists with hundreds of exhibitions, only the most prominent shows should be included.Pharos (talk) 23:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

 Comment Is there a reason not to use significant event (P793) > exhibition (Q464980), qualified with location (museum) and dates? We’d want to add exhibition (Q464980) to class key event (Q2245405). - PKM (talk) 00:13, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I guess you could, as you could replace many other properties with significant event (P793) that way, but I think it's a relevant enough property for many artists, that it is valuable to make it easy to add more directly.--Pharos (talk) 02:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

•  Support David (talk) 07:22, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I think this is a case of "Wikipedia-think" in that a common section in artist biographies list the museums/exhibitions showing their work. On Wikidata we do this the other way around, by making an item for the museum or exhibition and then an item for the work and linking the work to the creator. So this information is inferred from the actual work shown, and the context in which it is shown in adds relevance to the artist in ways a simple statement about the venues could. I understand that we could have more interesting workflows resulting from this however (interested Wikidatans could try to find more info about exhibitions/museums if they found such info in the item on an artist they like). I am not convinced this should reside in a (potentially huge) property field as list of items. Jane023 (talk) 11:29, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

• I think you are seeing this rather too much too from the perspective of WikiProject Sum Of All Paintings and the European Old Masters. Like I said, this is not meant predominantly for very high-prominence historic artists, but will find its most effective use for medium-prominence modern and contemporary artists. We will not have items for all of the exhibitions and certainly not have them for all of the individual artworks - especially as for contemporary artists these are often not in a particular collection, and were on loan from a dozen private hands to the museum for the exhibition. (This property could be used for historic artists too, but it would probably include only the more prominent shows, not every one.).--Pharos (talk) 20:49, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment It would probably be better to have an item about each exhibit and use something like main subject (P921) there. Thierry Caro (talk) 06:39, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't see why we should link from the artist to the exhibition (or individual piece of art). The link should be the other way around. As stated the property wouldn't specify how much works of art of an artist have to be exhibited to qualify for this property. ChristianKl (✉) 15:56, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose. I agree with ChristianKl here that we should mainly link from the exhibition to the artist (using e.g. author (P50), founded by (P112), creator (P170)). If the exhibition is particularly important to the artist, we already have notable work (P800) and significant event (P793) for this purpose. Deryck Chan (talk) 12:50, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
•  Not done as there is no consensus. − Pintoch (talk) 09:42, 10 February 2018 (UTC)