Why did you delete the "Studied By" sections of the wikidata item for the David Levy Yulee sculpture? The point of the addition was to "see" the sculpture in many different ways.
User talk:Spinster
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
About this board
Welcome to Wikidata, Spinster!
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:
- Introduction – An introduction to the project.
- Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
- Community portal – The portal for community members.
- User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
- Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
- Project chat – Discussions about the project.
- Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
If you have any questions, please ask me on [[User talk:|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! Cycn
Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Spinster/Archive 1 on 2016-06-16.
Because that is not how we model sculptures here on Wikidata. We don't use that property in that way. For more information on how to correctly describe sculptures on Wikidata (agreed by the community), see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Public_art/Data_model
Thank you for responding on this! I can check with Will Kent (Wikidata) as well since I am in his class. If one is to see the sculpture from different lenses, what would you use instead if not "Studied By" in Wikidata? Perhaps "Interpretation" or "Perspective" type properties? You can look at the sculpture from different disciplinary angles. I'd like put this "studied by" intent in a community-appropriate fashion.
Hi Metaphorz, yes, a check with Will Kent will be great. You can look at every sculpture and, by extension, every notable creative work (book, film, building...) in the world with different angles, but that does not mean that this should be (generally) added to each individual artwork at all. I can imagine that, if an artwork would be the main subject of e.g. a scientific article, you would use main subject (P921) like in the example of The Venus of Milo and the dawn of facial asymmetry research (Q37421889) - but I would only create Wikidata items for notable scientific articles.
If a physical object, sculpture or otherwise, can be viewed and interpreted in N different ways, this would seem to suggest that new knowledge should be created around these interpretations. The place for that knowledge seems to be Wikidata. Let's consider the "math lens." Math educators (K-12 education) create math walks or math trails. Artwork is one example set of objects that has been used by the math ed community to interpret the objects. As a follow on note, this idea of seeing through diffferent disciplines (Central Park in NYC) is captured in this book, https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/on-looking-alexandra-horowitz/1116150301 Let me take some time to better understand your community and also confer with Ian and Will for ideas.
Will is going to talk on this modeling in the next Wikidata class, so I'll return with some ideas on Tuesday. The question seems to be: what property is appropriate that is community acceptable?
@Metaphorz No property at all. You want to add vague and subjective statements. Wikidata is a repository of referenced factual statements. As I described above: if you have notable literature which describes your specific artwork, you can also create Wikidata items for the relevant books/articles and point to the artwork via main subject (P921). I understand that you contact me because I happened to be the one editor who bumped upon your edits, corrected and reverted them. Any other experienced Wikidata editor would have done the same. I would hereby like to close this conversation, I've given you the feedback that I have. Wikidata is a community project - if you disagree / are dissatisfied with my response, I suggest you continue asking the community at large. A good place to do that is Wikidata:Project chat or the Wikidata Telegram group.
In Aberdeen is het niet helemaal goed gegaan met labels en beschrijvingen. Denk je dat je https://w.wiki/5MHF gemakkelijk met OpenRefine wat kan opschonen zoals ik hier handmatig heb gedaan?
@Multichill ja, is inderdaad typisch OpenRefine klusje, ik heb het gisteravond gedaan. ✅
Dat ziet er een stuk beter uit. Eerste query was alleen de schilderijen. Kan je nog wat met https://w.wiki/5N2$ ?
Ik heb deze architect aangemaakt en vond zijn geb. datum in een van de bestanden geannexeerde gebieden van Amsterdam en zijn keuring militaire dienst. Ik heb geen idee hoe ik dat moet schalen boven het jaar van de architectendienst. Zijn overlijdensdatum komt van zijn grafsteen,~~~~
Hi, can you take a look at the catalog setting of https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/#/catalog_editor/4327 ? It looks like 5567 (National Research Institute for Cultural Properties artist ID (P5567)) should be specified as the property, but the slot is empty, at least to me. I thought you might have forgotten to set it. Thanks.
Hi @Whym, yes, I noticed that property indeed after I created the catalog. I have tried to update the catalog by hand with the catalog editor, but adding the property doesn't seem to work. I've already asked Magnus whether he could help to update the catalog, but have gotten no reply yet. If this stays unresolved for a bit more, I'll take a look and will check whether I can disable this catalog and create a new one with property.
If he doesn't respond, trying a clean start sounds like a good move in that case. I imagine Magnus has too many things on his plate to respond quickly. Hopefully we can salvage the matches already done by downloading and importing/mass-adding them.
I agree. Normally it shouldn't be hard to export the matches and create them via another way (e.g. QuickStatements), so I'm not very worried. Feel free to ping me if you think it takes too long :-)
Please note that the bust is a specific subclass of sculpture. Please also that your use of genre (P136) got rather messy. I seriously think you should reconsider it.
Hi @Hjart, as an art historian who has been working with art databases since the early 2000s I'm sorry to say I disagree with you.
I want to refer to the answer I gave at Topic:Vm8jaav1aixh3pta. At Wikidata we aim to keep P31 for artworks high level, and describe genres, movements etc. under their respective properties. This is also how the Sum of All Paintings project has been doing it for many years now, and for various reasons (ease of querying, consistency among types of art) we are using that same system for sculptures too. Additionally, please check bust (Q17489160) which is indicated as an instance of (P31) genre of sculpture (Q18783400).
As you seem to be of a different opinion: can you tell me which sources and guidelines you would be using for genre, and what kind of system you would advice with which arguments?
If we don't manage to come to an agreement, I suggest we continue this discussion at the talk pages of Wikidata:WikiProject Sculpture, WikiProject Public Art and also engage other editors active in cultural heritage.
I went ahead and started a discussion at WikiProject Cultural Heritage.
Hello Spinster and thank you very much for your message. Very glad to meet you! I admire a lot the WikiProject Public Art and is willing to contribute. I understand perfectly your point, the Atlasmusem homepage can not be a enough precise reference URL for notable work (P800). In fact, there is a page dedicated to each artwork in Atlasmuseum (artworks /one percent for art pieces in France, data provided by the French Ministry of Culture in the context of Atlasmuseum, a research project conducted during and since my PhD in Aesthetics at Rennes 2 University). If the specific URL, for exemple like on the Anti-Robot page for each artwork can be indicated for notable work (P800), could it be in line with the Wikidata guideline? Kind regards, Atlasmuseum 💬
Hello @Atlasmuseum, thanks for your message! Hm, I'm not entirely sure. Personally I'm not a big fan of the notable work (P800) property because it's so extremely subjective. When is a work 'notable', and why, and according to whom? If you add the property for all works and creators on Atlasmuseum, why shouldn't I add it for all works and creators on all the other websites I'm using to add public art to Wikidata (for instance vanderkrogt.net and bkor.nl which I use all the time, but I'm not associated with these sites)? Do you see my point?
That said, any other 'hard' data you add about the artworks is absolutely very welcome (items for the artworks themselves, creators, dates, coordinates etc). It's indeed very much preferred that you use the artworks' own web pages as references there. It's a pity that there is no freedom of panorama in France... it would be so nice to be able to add images to modern and contemporary works.
Please keep up the good work and feel free to ask anything.
.svg)
Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for updates about Structured Data on Commons (SDC) functionalities in OpenRefine.
The OpenRefine team has made quite a bit of progress in the past months. We warmly invite you to a meetup with updates and a first demo of the newly developed SDC editing functionalities in OpenRefine. Bring your questions!
- When? Tuesday, February 22, at 15:00-17:00 UTC (check the time in your timezone).
- For whom? For anyone who is curious about the current status of SDC support in OpenRefine!
- Where? Online, via Zoom. The event's info page has the link.
- The meeting will be recorded and the recording will be published to Wikimedia Commons afterwards.
Check the event page for more info. With kind regards, SFauconnier (talk) 14:50, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for updates about the Structured Data on Commons (SDC) features that are currently developed for OpenRefine.
Short survey for SDC features in OpenRefine
OpenRefine is running a short survey to learn about user needs and expectations for its new SDC features. If you upload files to Wikimedia Commons and/or edit structured data there, please help by filling in this survey!
Monthly OpenRefine and Wikimedia office hours
OpenRefine's community meetup of February 22 was very well attended. You can see its recording, slides and notes here. The team now hosts monthly, informal office hours for Wikimedians (online, via Zoom). Upcoming office hours are:
- Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 4PM UTC (how late is this in my timezone?)
- Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 8AM UTC (how late is this in my timezone?)
- Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 4PM UTC (how late is this in my timezone?)
The Zoom link of the next office hour will be posted on OpenRefine's info page on Wikimedia Commons. Please drop by and say hi!
All the best! SFauconnier (talk) 14:00, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
There are two separate blog entries for Structured Data on Commons posted to Wikimedia Space that are of interest:
- Working with Structured Data on Commons: A Status Report, by Lucas Werkmeister, discusses some ways that editors can work with structured data. Topics include tools that have been written or modified for structured data, in addition to future plans for tools and querying services.
- Structured Data on Commons - A Blog Series, written by me, is a five-part posting that covers the basics of the software and features that were built to make structured data happen. The series is meant to be friendly to those who may have some knowledge of Commons, but may not know much about the structured data project.
Why are you reclassifying busts (such as Johannes von Tepl (Q1698774))to sculptures?
Busts are a genre of sculpture. When we classify paintings on Wikidata, we also classify most of them as instance of (P31) painting (Q3305213). Genres like portrait painting (Q1400853) go under genre (P136).