User talk:Marsupium

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search

Q318117 - Geburtsdatum 1383-1384

Hallo Marsurpium, wie schön das Du hier mitarbeitest. Sachlich hat sich hier meine Frage inzwischen verändert, aber es bleibt ja grundsätzlich interessant, ob auch wie bei template:other date Zeitspannen als Geburtsdatum berücksichtigt werden. zB: 1383/1384. Gebe ich dann beide Daten ein, s. urprüngl. Masolino. Eigentlich ist das doch eher kontroversen verschieden belegbaren Daten vorbehalten. Also das was im Template:Artwork unter template:other date hinkommt, muss doch hier auch seinen Platz haben. Und die ähnliche Frage zu ca. ..(grundsätzlich). Die Alte Pinakothek benutzt hier glatte Zahlen. Ist es gewünscht, dies als Beleg anzugeben? Gruß--Oursana (talk) 01:59, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Oursana, ich bin gleichfalls sehr erfreut Deine Signatur zu lesen! Ich bitte für die arge Verzögerung um Entschuldigung, inzwischen habe ich ein paar Überlegungen zusammengesucht:
  • Mit der Modellierung von nicht exakten (Zeit-)Daten habe ich mich noch kaum beschäftigt und ich fürchte die Vereinbarungen darüber auf Wikidata sind insgesamt noch nicht sehr weit, so kann ich leider kaum befriedigend antworten.
  • Der Beschreibung des Time Datentyp unter m:Wikidata/Data model#Dates and times lässt sich entnehmen, dass die Präsizion angegeben werden kann als „0 - billion years, 1 - hundred million years, ..., 6 - millenia, 7 - century, 8 - decade, 9 - year, 10 - month, 11 - day, 12 - hour, 13 - minute, 14 - second.“ In diesem Fall hast Du dies nun anders gelöst, aber diese Präzisionsangaben reichen natürlich nicht aus.
Besten Dank für Deine Antwort, ich bin ja hier jetzt schon geübter und habe auf Deine Ausführungen hin gesehen, dass bei Datum:erweiterte Anpassungen decade und century angegeben werden kann, immerhin Gruß und einen schönen 1. Advent wünsche ich Dir weiterhin--Oursana (talk) 15:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Ich meine, dass auf jeden Fall eine Möglichkeit gefunden werden muss, die Daten so zu modellieren, dass keine Informationen verloren gehen, also auch eine Möglichkeit, dass „wie bei template:other date Zeitspannen als Geburtsdatum berücksichtigt werden“, die Informationen müssen hier auch Platz haben, da stimme ich Dir vollkommen zu. Deinen ersten Ansatz halte ich tatsächlich auch für unglücklich. Er wurde für <Edward the Confessor (Q130005)> date of birth (P569) gemäß der Diskussion unter Property talk:P569#More than one date so umgesetzt, nunja.
  • Wir müssen auch Fälle, in denen wir nur einen Terminus post quem (Q1102542) haben, usw. irgendwie sinnvoll modellieren. Ich weiß leider auch noch nicht, wie genau wir das machen sollen.
  • Ein passender Ort für Vereinbarung könnte Help:Modeling#Time & dates einmal werden.
Beste Grüße, --Marsupium (talk) 17:56, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Nachtrag: Mehr weiß die Runde, die unter Wikidata:Bistro#« né vers 1132 » ou « né entre 1132 et 1150 » diskutiert. Wir sollten anregen auf Englisch und an anderen Orten weiter zu diskutieren, vielleicht auf der Help:Modeling#Time & dates zugehörigen Diskussion. --Marsupium (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Iconclass[edit]

http://www.iconclass.nl/home habe ich gerade nl:Gebruiker:Vincent Steenberg gefunden. Gruß --Oursana (talk) 18:17, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Ich verstehe nicht ganz, was Du meinst? Ist das eine Anmerkungen zu meinen Äußerungen unter Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Questions#Massacre of the Innocents by Rubens (Q1247103)? Beste Grüße, --Marsupium (talk) 18:40, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Genau und Jane hatte dort auch die Fundstelle von RKD angegeben. Gruß --Oursana (talk) 19:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Copy of en label to es label[edit]

In 99.9% of cases the editions are correct, also I have the consensus of Wikipedia in Spanish to make these changes. If there are no more problems the bot will continue. --Kizar (talk) 23:20, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, thank you for your answer, --Marsupium (talk) 08:39, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P180#"Type Werk (Q386724)" violations[edit]

especially portrait (Q134307) see Property talk:P180#changing/permitting constraint, Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Questions#Kindermord in Betlehem (Q15676570) LG--Oursana (talk) 17:45, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh, really, there are some … Thanks for prodding to the two discussions! --Marsupium (talk) 20:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC), corrected 20:18, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

painting (Q3305213)[edit]

Why did you remove the subclass of (P279) work of art (Q838948)? That broke the chain to work (Q386724). Also visual artwork (Q4502142) looks a bit weird/incomplete. Multichill (talk) 19:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I removed it based on the discussion Wikidata talk:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structure#Root item I had with Zolo. And I think that work of art (Q838948) is still a messy item that should not be used as a superclass, far from being well-defined as well as work (Q386724). But I am happy to talk about these classes. --Marsupium (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
I'd say it is ok to keep it. It makes some intuitive sense to look for subclasses of artworks and get painting, sculpture etc. aven though we should not not take work of art (Q838948) too seriously. Possibly, we should give "subclass of artwork" a normal rank and subclass of no label (Q15222213) a "preferred" rank. --Zolo (talk) 21:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
I am afraid that a handling like that – intuition and ranks for subclass of (P279)-statements – will lead to more inconsitencies than one clear line. However, it might be OK. Do you have any concrete use in mind for the classification under discussion, Multichill? Perhaps we can find a third perfect solution … --Marsupium (talk) 21:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Strange removal[edit]

Hi,

Why did you remove material used (P186) on oil painting (Q174705) on some items about paintings like The Tiger Hunt (Q544488), Wolf Hunting (Q17484684) and The Museum of Rennes in around 1900 (Q17484654) ? Did I made a mistake or did you ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 15:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey! The description of oil painting (Q174705) is "process of painting with pigments that are bound with a medium of drying oil". That is not in the value range of material used (P186). There is even a type constraint on material (Q214609) subclasses at Property talk:P186 – though that might not really be realised. The common way to express what apparently was intended is material used (P186) <oil paint (Q296955)>, e.g. at Mona Lisa (Q12418). Aussi cdlt, --Marsupium (talk) 17:49, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Oo I see, it's my mistake, in French the two items have the same name ; I didn’t pay enough attention. Sorry.
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Italian Evening Landscape (Q20017804)[edit]

Hi Marsupium . I come again with another way on those painting and I see that are two different version one is at Alte Pinakothek (Q154568) and the the other Schleißheim palace complex (Q680166). There are no duplicates and this is a bad merging. Could you split them again? Thanks Shonagon (talk) 18:51, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

That is why I oppose to add artworks without inventory number (P217). I do not see evidence that they are two artworks. Visually the files are very similar. The collections of Alte Pinakothek (Q154568) and Schleißheim palace complex (Q680166) are both operated by Bavarian State Painting Collections (Q812285) and exchange their paintings. So the data of the Yorck Project and the Web Gallery of Art reflect just a changeable state each. Hence I think they are both photographies of inv. no. 266. --Marsupium (talk) 13:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Ammonia / ammonium hydroxide[edit]

Hallo Marsupium, thank you for checking changes on Wikipedia. E.g. you corrected a mistake of me on Fulbe Q202575 vs. AAT.

Nevertheless, i can not agree with your revert on Q421888 (de:Ammoniumhydroxid en:Ammonium hydroxide fr:Ammoniaque nl:Ammonia), which I, through Mix n Match, connected with the item "ammonia water" of AAT. Your explanation was "incorrect", which is eh... not correct... Some confusion can be explained by the fact that the wikidata item and most (but not all, see: fr, pl, nl, sk, io)) linked wikipedia articles seem to focus on a chemical compound NH4OH or ammonium hydroxide. However, also the en- and de-version state very clearly that NH4OH does not really exist. --Paulbe (talk) 17:03, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I tried to be clear and concise and correct, which turned out to be quite challenging. I spent much more time in writing my above reaction, then i expected. And it is, though correct, not complete. If you need more information, please ask. Yours, --Paulbe (talk) 17:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your work on the – really not that trivial – mapping to AAT and for your post and sorry for my overhasty revert. I found ammonium hydroxide (Q421888) on Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P1014#"Single value" violations and removed ammonia water (300015156) before reading the note of ammonium hydroxide (inorganic material) (300266781) which points out that it refers also to the solution. So do you also think that it is a mistake of the AAT? In general the qualitiy of the definitions of the AAT is quite high so that I thought that the two entries would rather require two items on Wikidata. But here AAT seems to have two entries for the same thing. As it looks like a mistake to me I wrote to the managing editor of the Getty Vocabulary Program and hope to get an answer at the end of August after holidays. Yours, --Marsupium (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi @Paulbe: I got this answer: „They are currently linked through associative relationships. "ammonium hydroxide" is "constituent of" "ammonia water." Ammonium hydroxide would be an alkali [NH4+][OH−] that ideally should be a separate record from the "solvent" made from it. However, I see your point, since it cannot exist except in solution. Conceptually they may be separate, even though in physical reality they are almost always or always the same thing. If I cannot find warrant for them as separate entities, we will merge them. In any case, the SNs need to make the distinction clearer.“ And indeed the distinction between the AAT records has been clarified. I think we could perhaps create a separate item for the hypothetical salt. I asked how to handle this at Wikidata talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Items for hypothetical compounds? Cheers, --Marsupium (talk) 14:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Reminder for myself: Discussion now on Wikidata talk:WikiProject Chemistry/Archive/2016#Items for hypothetical compounds?. To prevent those edits a new item has still to be created … :) --Marsupium (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

collection[edit]

Hi Marsupium, I see you're adding new paintings like no label (Q22116937). Great! Could you please add the collection (P195) ([1]) to these new paintings? I noticed because you're new items popped up at User:Multichill/Paintings without collection. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh, of course, sorry! It was my stupid mistake. They belong all to Bavarian State Painting Collections (Q812285). I'll try to fix it soon! --Marsupium (talk) 21:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! No worries. I used this query to find the items that need the collection. Multichill (talk) 22:17, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! Done! --Marsupium (talk) 22:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Hast Du[edit]

dafür einen Beleg? Gruß--Oursana (talk) 20:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh! Das ist eine sehr gute Frage! Ich habe auch gerade Gegenteiliges gefunden. Ich fürchte ich habe hier eine Bringschuld, der ich baldmöglichst ausführlicher – denn das scheint notwendig zu sein – nachzukommen versuchen werde! Ich hoffe zwei Änderungen in frwiki und augsburgwiki.de sind 2014 nicht falsch und durch meine Schlampigkeit zustande gekommen! --Marsupium (talk) 15:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Ich habe es gelöscht. Ich kann mich nicht mehr erinnern, wo ich es gelesen habe, ob ich es womöglich verwechselt habe. Wenn ich es doch finden sollte, füge ich es wieder hinzu. Ich habe sogar einen gegenteiligen Beleg gefunden: „In Anwesenheit des Stadtvogtes Jörg Ott und des Stadtschreibes Dr. Konrad Peutinger fand in dessen Hause am 20. (21.?) Dazember 1497 das Verlöbnis des Malers mit Anna, der etwa 20jährigen Tochter des Georg und der Barbara Allerlay statt.“ (Hannelore Müller: Die Malerfamilie Burgkmair, in: Bilder aus dem Bayerischen Schwaben, S. 52). --Marsupium (talk) 14:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
und auch hier--Oursana (talk) 17:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Ja, ich habe keine Ahnung, wie ich darauf gekommen bin :o --Marsupium (talk) 07:40, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

champagne stemware[edit]

Hi! champagne stemware (Q1635923) in enwiki is "Champagne glass", and the description exactly matches aat:300043247 Champagne glass, which says the same (shallow saucer or flute). I've added that AAT ID with normal rank.

Q1635923 in at least 4 other languages is described as "flute", so that matches aat:300197100: I've added that as deprecated rank. So the problem is that the enwiki article doesn't exactly match the articles in those 4 other languages.

Please don't delete the AAT info: when someone gets around to split the WD item, he'll know to split the AAT IDs. Do you agree? --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:09, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I think neither is really correct and would prefer not to add a AAT ID (P1014) at all. Now it shows up at Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P1014#"Single value" violations. I'd rather try to shorten that list than enlarging it. It is quite easy to add AAT IDs that almost fit, it is a lot of work to do the sitelink and sub-/superclass sorting on Wikidata that improve the Wikidata structure and end up in better matching with AAT.
In this case I would better do the item splitting than adding two AAT ID (P1014) values, but I guess we have no general guideline on this and it is kind of up to each of us … :-) --Marsupium (talk) 15:28, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Bavarian State Painting Collections[edit]

I see you're working on the Bavarian State Painting Collections. I'll have a robot import the missing paintings. Multichill (talk) 10:18, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Cool!!! Do you think it is doable to import all fields from there? You're gonna use https://www.sammlung.pinakothek.de? I'd like to help with the mapping that is necessary at least for the creator, material and location fields. --Marsupium (talk) 11:05, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I fired up the bot for a first pass. See for example no label (Q29896861). Haven't done location (P276) yet, that can be done in another pass. Creator will be added by another bot tonight based on the name. For material I currently only support oil on canvas. Total is 18400 paintings so this might take a while to import. Once we have more works online, I'll probably split it up like the Rijksmuseum. Multichill (talk) 14:45, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Descriptions and creator (P170)[edit]

@Multichill: Great work! However, perhaps hold on and stop the bot for a moment!
On: creator (P170): There are quite a lot of tricky cases like "Abraham van Diepenbeeck (zugeschrieben)"[2] that have to be converted like this.
You better should not set the labels/descriptions to "Abraham bewirtet die drei Engel (zugeschrieben)"@de and "Gemälde von Abraham van Diepenbeeck"@de but "Abraham bewirtet die drei Engel"@de and "Gemälde von Abraham van Diepenbeeck (zugeschrieben)"@de and "painting by Abraham van Diepenbeeck (attributed)"@en and likewise for nl!
And there are even worse cases with two artists in one field! The database is not the best formalized one …
--Marsupium (talk) 15:34, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Similar cases:
--Marsupium (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I noticed. I don't see a lot of occurrences yet and anonymous works like this generally need a bit of manual attention anyway (based on my previous imports). I'll leave it running for now and keep an eye on it. I wanted to make a sparql query based on [3] that would get all the items that have a label like "<something>(<nach/kopie/etc>)", but don't have it yet,. Can't seem to get the REGEX to work. You an idea how to fix it? Multichill (talk) 16:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
At least 9 now: :-)

The (hopefully complete) list of those cases I collected from the PDF version of the inventory before https://www.sammlung.pinakothek.de existed and a mapping for Wikidata:

BStGS string Count Property Note
'Art des' 23 manner of (P1777)
'Kopie nach' 181 after a work by (P1877)
'Nach' 3 after a work by (P1877)
'Nachahmer' 51 manner of (P1777)
'Nachfolger' 65 follower of (P1775)
'Schule' 36 school of (P1780)
'Umkreis' 50 circle of (P1776)
'vermutlich' 12 possible creator (P1779)
'Werkstatt' 60 workshop of (P1774)
'zugeschrieben' 95 attributed to (P1773)
'?' <111 possible creator (P1779)
'Anonymer Meister seiner Werkstatt' 25 workshop of (P1774)
'Werkstatt?' 2 different solution necessary, perhaps workshop of (P1774) with sourcing circumstances (P1480) presumably (Q18122778)
'Replik' 1 after a work by (P1877)
'Werkstattkopie' 20 workshop of (P1774), after a work by (P1877)

For copypasting into code:

(from this script (Github)):

'(Art des)', '(Kopie nach)', '(Nach)', '(Nachahmer)', '(Nachfolger)', '(Schule)', '(Umkreis)', '(vermutlich)', '(Werkstatt)', '(zugeschrieben)', '(?)', '(Anonymer Meister seiner Werkstatt)', '(Werkstatt?)', '(Replik)', '(Werkstattkopie)'

(from this script (Github)):

       creatorqualifierdict = {'Art des': ['P1777'],
                               'Kopie nach': ['P1877'],
                               'Nach': ['P1877'],
                               'Nachahmer': ['P1777'],
                               'Nachfolger': ['P1775'],
                               'Schule': ['P1780'],
                               'Umkreis': ['P1776'],
                               'vermutlich': ['P1779'],
                               'Werkstatt': ['P1774'],
                               'zugeschrieben': ['P1773'],
                               '?': ['P1779'],
                               'Anonymer Meister seiner Werkstatt': ['P1774'],
                               'Werkstatt?': ['ERROR NO MAPPING: Werkstatt?'],
                               # FIXME: Wikidata ontology is not sufficient
                               'Replik': ['P1877'],
                               'Werkstattkopie': ['P1774', 'P1877']}

So there has to be put some more work into the SPARQL query or queries … :-) --Marsupium (talk) 16:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC), 16:18, 11 May 2017 (UTC), 16:18, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

That's a nice list! If you parsed the whole PDF: How many cases did you encounter? I put the bot code on Github. Multichill (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
You might like Wikidata:Property proposal/Pinakothek artist ID. Multichill (talk) 16:31, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the code and the proposal and everything! I have never counted, but should be easy with the product of my parsing efforts: https://github.com/jjmhtp/art-data/blob/master/data/bstgs_inventory.csv --Marsupium (talk) 17:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Now I have done the counting, results in the table above. --Marsupium (talk) 17:21, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

instance of (P31) and material used (P186)[edit]

Inferring this is not always correct. E.g. this work is a drawing. --Marsupium (talk) 17:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

If it's a drawing, why does the museum classify it as a painting? Multichill (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Good question! I'm quite sure theThe database is not really high quality … I think the way to filter out as many non-paintings as possible is to parse/match the material field, here for example "Papier" is suspicious. --Marsupium (talk) 18:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm wrong probably. I came across this case a while ago. It is just that there is "Zeichnung" meaning "drawing" in its title. Perhaps it is a painting though, perhaps it is actually a drawing. I have investigated the issue further now and it seems there are not that many of those things and it is probably not possible to find them somehow systematically anyway. Sorry for the consideration! --Marsupium (talk) 18:35, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Just a last question for today: Could you somehow create a list of different entries in the material and location fields in the next run? I'd then create a mapping table so that the information can be used here. --Marsupium (talk) 18:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Inventory numbers[edit]

If you look at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Bavarian State Painting Collections at the inventory numbers, you'll notice several types. Do you know the meanings of them? For example "L <id>" is a loan. Multichill (talk) 19:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

The "most important groups" are explained under ABOUT THE ACCESSION NUMBERS. --Marsupium (talk) 12:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

location[edit]

  • BStGS locations:
    # BStGS locations
    SELECT ?item ?itemLabel WHERE {
    {
      ?item wdt:P361 wd:Q812285 . # parts of BStGS
    } UNION {
      ?item wdt:P361 ?sub1 . # parts of
      ?sub1 wdt:P361 wd:Q812285 . # parts of BStGS
    }
      SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en,de,fr,it,es,pt,ca" . }
    }
    
    Try it!
I mapped some of the locations. The rest can be done later. Multichill (talk) 19:27, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Great, thank you! --Marsupium (talk) 23:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
How did you do the mapping? This – like many other location statements – seems to be wrong unfortunately. --Marsupium (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
@Multichill: Great that you have found a way to get over the page 200 threshold of https://www.sammlung.pinakothek.de/api/ and thank you very much for all your work! Could you take out the code that generates the location (P276):Alte Pinakothek (Q154568) statements? They are wrong in most cases … Thank you! --Marsupium (talk) 08:46, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Or are you using the information given under "Stock"? --Marsupium (talk) 08:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
What is wrong with the stock? What would be the correct one according to you for no label (Q29965679)? Multichill (talk) 20:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Sorry! I thought about it another time, I think it's fine. I'm not sure if the "Stock"/"Bestand" really indicates the location, or e.g. a storage inside or outside Alte Pinakothek building that just belongs to the Alte Pinakothek sub-organization of BStGS so to say. But it is good how you imported it I think at is valuable information that a painting is in either perhaps even if we don't know perfectly and cannot view the painting in whatever storage. The "Displayed" field is more precise, often it reads "Not on display" though – as in this case. I think here it is perhaps the best solution to use both the "Displayed" and the "Stock" field and take for the value of location (P276) an item like locations of the Alte Pinakothek with works not on display (Q30068277) (I just created the item). But that can also be done later of course. --Marsupium (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
BTW: How did you solve the page 200 threshold problem? And would you be OK if I'd reuse your code? You have'nt given a licence for https://github.com/multichill/toollabs/blob/master/bot/wikidata/bavarian_import.py if I did not miss it … (just the print ( u'Dude, write your own bot')) I'm not sure if I can find the time this summer anyway but if so, I'd do a try parsing and mapping the "Material / Technology / Carrier" field and adding that information here perhaps after further developing our technique/material ontology for the information from there and also from c:Template:Technique. --Marsupium (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2017 (UTC)