Wikidata talk:WikiProject sum of all paintings

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shall we introduce properties indicating copyright status[edit]

I think it might be a good idea to introduce properties indicating copyright or Public Domain status of the original work (not of the photograph or other digitization). At the moment we have properties license (P275), copyright owner (P3931), public domain date (P3893) and applies to jurisdiction (P1001), but none seem build for tracking reasons works are in Public Domain in different jurisdictions. We could expand the scope of license (P275) to include PD, or have a new property just for PD. The new property could be called Public Domain status and could link to items like Template:PD-old-100 (Q12270136), while specifying applies to jurisdiction (P1001) qualifier. Eventually we would be able to query for public domain public art without images within some region, etc. Thoughts? --Jarekt (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

There was already this discussion a while ago: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/48#Copyright_status which was closed as 'Not done'. However, I strongly suspect that something along these lines will be necessary, in tight-consultation with the Structured Data on Commons team. The key issue for me is that "Public Domain" is NOT a license - it is the absence or expiration of copyright. So, in my estimation the "copyright status" property is very useful for, as you point out, tracking the copyright-expiry for different jurisdictions (through the use of end time (P582) and applies to jurisdiction (P1001) qualifiers).
Copyright is a temporary addition/extra to the default status of no-exclusive-rights: Just like in all disciplines of Intellectual Property law, things should understood to have no exclusive IP rights UNLESS specified otherwise. So, we could say that the structure [of a made-up Qitem] could be:

Copyright status

copyrighted (Q50423863)
->applies to jurisdiction (P1001) - United States of America (Q30)
->start time (P580) - 25 March 1885 [ref]
->end time (P582) - 1 January 2087 [ref]
->applies to jurisdiction (P1001) - France (Q142)
->end time (P582) - 1 January 1995 [ref]
->end time (P582) - 1 January 2025 [ref according to a competing legal opinion...]
public domain (Q19652)
->applies to jurisdiction (P1001) - France (Q142)
->start time (P580) - 1 January 1995 [ref]

Note: the particular advantage of this system allows for different start and end dates for different statuses, not just for the different jurisdictions but also allows for competing [referenced] legal opinions to be modelled. This ALLOWS for Wikidata to track, for example, the museum's OWN statement of rights as well as what wikimedians might say in Commons templates. This, at the very least acknowledges the existence of a (c) claim on a painting [if we disagree with it] rather than merely ignoring/overwriting it as we currently do.

And then associated related properties would be structured like this:
license (P275)

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (Q6905942)
->start time (P580) - 1 January 1995 [ref]

copyright owner (P3931)

->George Orwell (Q3335)
->start time (P580) - 1 January 1995
->end time (P582) - 2008 [ref]
->The Walt Disney Company (Q7414)
->start time (P580) - 2008 [ref]
->end time (P582) - eternity (Q138045) [ref]
So, I am all for reviving the Copyright status property discussion (but only once it's been run past the SDoC team to ensure compatibility with their plans). Furthermore, I would request that we keep in mind how a copyright-status property is compatible with other structures in IP law. That is, that we ensure compatibility with any future properties associated with Patent or trademark (etc) status/expiry. Wittylama (talk) 17:15, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for this history background, I was not aware of this. I just found similar discussion at Property_talk:P275#Public_domain. Wittylama your proposed structure seems to have qualifiers of qualifiers, so I modified it below. My solution would require us to rename and expand the scope of license (P275) to Public Domain rational or license and each license or PD rational item would have some tag to indicate if it is PD or copyrighted. You are right that if we come up with anything we should check with SDoC team, but their task is a bit different as they only need to track why things are in PD or under open license, while Wikidata might also need to track why something is still copyrighted. I changed the example to a specific item
Diary of Anne Frank (Q6911)
Copyright status - copyrighted (Q50423863)
->Public Domain rational or license (P275) - all rights reserved (Q1752207)
->copyright owner (P3931) - Otto Frank (Q7336)
->end time (P582) - 19 August 1980
->applies to jurisdiction (P1001) - world (Q16502)
Copyright status - copyrighted (Q50423863)
->Public Domain rational or license (P275) - all rights reserved (Q1752207)
->copyright owner (P3931) - Anne Frank-Fonds (Q565286)
->start time (P580) - 19 August 1980
->end time (P582) - 1 January 2016
->applies to jurisdiction (P1001) - world (Q16502)
Copyright status - public domain (Q19652)
->Public Domain rational or license (P275) - Template:PD-old-70 (Q6535634)
->start time (P580) - 1 January 2016
->applies to jurisdiction (P1001) - European Union (Q458)
Copyright status - public domain (Q19652)
->Public Domain rational or license (P275) - ?
->end time (P582) - 1 January 2042
->applies to jurisdiction (P1001) - United States of America (Q30)
--Jarekt (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2018 (UTC)


Three thoughts for now:

  • In this system I miss a property for the legal base. With public domain date (P3893) we introduced a laws applied (P3014) and determination method (P459) to conclude the status as without the legal base it is guessing why it is in public domain, I write them as source and qualifier, see for example no label (Q29910194)
  • As the copyright status has a date it will change, we could automatic calculate it from the public domain date property.
  • Europeana is using the right statements and promoting museums to use them as well. I added them in Wikidata as items: Good thing about the rights statements is that we can just import them as a property (probably a new property or license?). Not sure if some of those items are useful for us as well as a license idea? --Hannolans (talk) 22:07, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Hannolans Thanks for mentioning laws applied (P3014) and determination method (P459), as I was not aware of them. laws applied (P3014) takes an item,and I agree that is should be a property of the license (license meant as Public Domain rational or license template. I also like the use of determination method (P459) 50 years pma (Q29870405). --Jarekt (talk) 20:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Rights Statements
With regards to your import of the RightsStatement items Hannolans - very kind and helpful work! Thank you. I'm looking forward to seeing how we can integrate those into any Wikidata ontology of copyright concept - with specific reference to the StructuredDataOnCommons project. FYI (to you, and indeed anyone interested in this issue): are you aware of this forthcoming conference in Rotterdam - EuropeanaTech2018 in May. There will be a large Wikidata component to it and vocabulary/rights issues will feature (cc user:Isaacantoine) :-) Wittylama (talk) 12:39, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
@Wittylama, Hannolans, Jarekt: With regard to the RightsStatements, I do think that that is a very useful top-level summary of the copyright status, that it would be useful to place on items, perhaps with the existing license (P275) as a qualifier.
In respect of the StructuredDataOnCommons project, a little of their latest thinking can be found in this thread in the latest consultation. Essentially the copyright message would need to be determinable from the properties, and it may very well not be expressed through a template, but directly from text stored in the Wikidata item.
Therefore its questionable whether any of the values of "copyright status", license (P275), etc should point to a template, as those templates may soon no longer exist as part of the system. But on the other hand, those templates give the best typology of different copyright status reasons that we currently have, and using them as values ties directly to the text that should be used. There are downsides to introducing an extra element in the chain (eg: "Property:Copyright status reason" -> "Item:Copyright status reason" -> "Template:Copyright status reason"), because that brings in the need to keep a separate item in sync with the template if any changes are made. On the other hand, a reason is not a template, so perhaps the two should be separated; but on the other, if the two should always be in 1:1 sync, is it not much less accident-prone to keep them together?
One other thing is that I do like the idea of making "copyright status reason" or license (P275) a qualifier to a top-level broad "copyright status" statement, but we run into the problem that in the wikibase system a qualifier cannot have further qualifiers; and there may be multiple licenses/"copyright status reasons" applying to different parts or different aspects of the image -- eg it may be the final result of a chain of derivative works; or there may be separate considerations for the part of the image of the canvas of a painting (PD) and the part of the image of its frame (copyright, licensed by the photographer). So we may need to have a "copyright status contributions" property, taking multiple values for different aspects or parts of the final image, each then qualified by owner, licence, etc.
But I do think that a clear overall top-level "copyright status" statement, limited to the RightsStatements values, is a nice idea. Jheald (talk) 14:24, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Jheald, My original idea was only related to Wikidata and relates only to objects/artworks not to images depicting them which might be stored on Commons. But you are right of course that two topics are closely related, as they would have to interact with each other and we do not want different systems for specifying image from system to specify original object. --Jarekt (talk) 20:15, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
About only one level of qualifiers issue: there might be 2 solutions:
  1. Allow multiple identical "copyright status" as we have in the example, with different jurisdictions, dates and licenses.
  2. make "Public Domain rational or license" top level and "copyright status" the qualifier. I do not like that solution as much because some templates could have confusing names so the copyright status might not be clear to humans without clicking on specific items.
--Jarekt (talk) 20:23, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@Wittylama, Hannolans, Jarekt, Jheald: Wittylama called me here. I am not sure I understand all the current template intrincacies, but I can certainly recommend being cautious about using a property called license in combination with rights statements that may not be licenses (for example public domain, but also rights reserved or other kinds of statements). At Europeana we use something that's analogous to http://purl.org/dc/terms/rights Antoine_Isaac (talk)
Antoine_Isaac, That was the exact reason I mentioned that it would make sense to extend the scope and change the name of license (P275) to "Public Domain rational or license". --Jarekt (talk) 20:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@Jarekt: good point, and I'll extend it: it would make sense to extend further than "Public Domain rational or license", as the original question seems to have a wide scope. There are many other statements that are neither Public Domain nor licenses. For example none of the statements at http://rightsstatements.org/page/1.0/?language=en are licenses strictly speaking (they may indicate the presence of a license, though). Antoine_Isaac (talk)

@Jarekt, Isaacantoine, Hannolans: You all might be interested in the first structured licensing and copyright discussion for Commons, and participating in the discussion. This thread was brought up there. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 22:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

@Keegan: thanks I will try to find time and look at it, or ask if other people from rightsstatements.org can! Antoine_Isaac (talk) 10:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Yes, we need a property for "copyright status". I don't understand why this was not created long ago. This is not equivalent to a license. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
I wrote a proposal: Wikidata:Property proposal/copyright status. Yann (talk) 15:35, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Multichill (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC), focus on the Netherlands Husky (talk) 11:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC) - Cool, i'd like to focus on building tools to visualise progress. Spinster (talk) 07:00, 9 August 2014 (UTC) Happy to help with manual finetuning that can't be done by bots, and anything else on the 'soft/wet' side of this project. I'm dreaming of complete artists' oeuvres on Wikidata! Rich Farmbrough (talk) Time to learn2Wikidata Jheald (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC) Kippelboy (talk) 07:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC) (Focus on Catalan paintings (subdivision of Spain) Mushroom (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC) Jane023 (talk) 09:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC) work on Dutch 17th-century paintings and landscapes of Haarlem; Most recently, the sum of all "attributed" paintings by Frans Hals, which is nearly done Missvain (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2014 (UTC) (talk) 13:27, 15 November 2014 (UTC) Zolo (talk) 14:57, 23 November 2014 (UTC) Beat Estermann (talk) 10:33, 3 December 2014 (UTC) (Focus on Swiss heritage institutions) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC) KRLS (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC) (Focus on Catalan area museums) DivadH (talk) 11:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC) ,happy to help out with any questions in regards to the Europeana API, how to best query it, and/or our metadata Xcia0069 (talk) 11:49, 8 March 2015 (UTC), Work on data related to Gianlorenzo Bernini and Artemisia Gentileschi. Work at Europeana too ! Susannaanas (talk) 07:29, 9 March 2015 (UTC) Wittylama (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2015 (UTC) Fabrice Florin (talk) 02:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC) I can help in California later this year. Vaughn88 (talk) 15:58, 15 July 2015 (UTC) I can help! Raymond Ellis (talk) 19:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC) Hsarrazin (talk) 14:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC) - will give a hand with Creators and AC :) louis-garden (talk) 14:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC) for italian paintings (XIIe-XVIIe) Olivier (talk) 21:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC) Kopiersperre (talk) 11:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC) ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 03:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC) Micru (talk) 11:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC) Stuart Prior (WMUK) (talk) 11:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC) Hannolans (talk) 23:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC) Geraki (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC) (Focus on Greece) PatHadley (talk) 12:16, 3 January 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) 14:54, 11 January 2017 (UTC) Working to get data from the University of Oxford (Q34433) and its component institutions shared on Wikidata. Pablísima (talk) 18:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC) Carl Ha (talk) 22:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC) Marsupium (talk) 19:44, 22 May 2017 (UTC) Mauricio V. Genta (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC) Shani Evenstein (talk) 10:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Nasty nas (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Bodhisattwa (talk) 14:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC) Joalpe (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC) Sarasays (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC) Thierry Caro (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC) John Samuel 18:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC) Jklamo (talk) 12:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC) Reosarevok (talk) 10:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC), focus on Estonia Ambrosia10 (talk) 19:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC) Subsublibrary (talk) 03:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Martingggg (talk) 07:00, 22 February 2018 (UTC), focus on Argentine and Hispanic America Kruusamägi (talk) 16:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC), focus on Estonia SIryn (talk) 10:36, 9 June 2018 (UTC) Jarekt (talk) 13:49, 7 September 2018 (UTC), focus on moving metadata from Commons to Wikidata Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject sum of all paintings the proposal for property creation was done by Yann, and Ping did not work - please come and support - see above :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 11:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

collection (P195) and location (P276)[edit]

I need help with which statements to use regarding artworks in the Norwegian National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design (Q1132918). I suspect I have made a lot of mistakes and if so, I will have to correct them.

National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design (Q1132918) is the national museum of art of Norway and consists of National Gallery of Norway (Q3330707), The National Museum – Architecture (Q28803354), The Museum of Contemporary Art (Q28803361) and Norwegian Museum of Decorative Arts and Design (Q7061182) (temporary closed).

When I have added statements I have used National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design (Q1132918) both at collection (P195) and location (P276), and that is what I think is wrong. Shall I use National Gallery of Norway (Q3330707) than that is what you should use for as location (P276) and National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design (Q1132918) as collection (P195) ? This item is one example Winter at the Sognefjord (Q21980572). --Anne-Sophie Ofrim (talk) 18:19, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Anne-Sophie Ofrim, inventory number (P217) of Winter at the Sognefjord (Q21980572) has collection (P195) = National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design (Q1132918) qualifier, so item's collection (P195) should also be National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design (Q1132918), but if the painting resides at National Gallery of Norway (Q3330707) than that is what you should use for location (P276). --Jarekt (talk) 17:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Jarekt; thank you! --Anne-Sophie Ofrim (talk) 05:22, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Becoming and being a master[edit]

Finoskov and me, we had some considerations about how to model that an artist became a master. Finoskov uses occupation (P106), I've proposed to use position held (P39). The killer property significant event (P793) could also be a possibility. Any thoughts? Or have you modeled this so far? If so how? Thanks in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 13:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Definition first. What do you mean master? old master (Q435989), master craftsman (Q1284709) or something else? Nurni (talk) 19:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
@Nurni: Sorry, master craftsman (Q1284709). There is also test taken (P5021) that would only be correct for a small share in the cases and academic degree (P512) which has a more narrow scope. --Marsupium (talk) 21:11, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
@Marsupium: master craftsman (Q1284709), like apprentice or journeyman, is a grade in the guild so it seems that it should be used in conjunction with the position held (P39) property and appropriate qualifiers (start time (P580), end time (P582), of (P642), etc.). Using the occupation (P106) property would be confusing because it does not really say anything about the subject's profession. master craftsman (Q1284709) can be a member of any guild: sculptors, painters, stoneworkers, merchants, etc. Nurni (talk) 06:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
@Nurni: Agree! You use of (P642) for the guild? It is very unspecific. What about member of (P463)? And for the profession for which the person became a master craftsman field of work (P101) as a qualifier should fit, right? Thanks in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 06:35, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
@Marsupium: Sounds good to me Nurni (talk) 14:50, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I have added the memberships in the Guild of St. Luke from the English Wikipedia as I come across them. See e.g. Haarlem Guild of St. Luke (Q5636545) adn the items linking to it. I use member of (P463) for these links, and if you know the date, you can add the qualifier start time (P580). Jane023 (talk) 16:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for this hint! Does being member of Haarlem Guild of St. Luke (Q5636545) imply being a master craftsman (Q1284709)? On the other hand being a master craftsman (Q1284709) does not necessarily mean to be member of a guild I think. So we probably have to continue this double structure? --Marsupium (talk) 17:56, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
As with all things Wikidata, the answer is "it depends". So typically one becomes a master craftsman after being a journeyman working for a craftsman, and the moment is defined as one of three things: 1) membership in an organization (such as a guild) 2) passing an exam at an institution (such as a vocational school of some sort) 3) being in service for a period of 6 years and then signing works (usually one can only sign works once the title is attained). So this all depends on locality of the person and the time period he/she lived. Jane023 (talk) 18:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Help modelling work by unknown artists[edit]

Hi all, can someone advice me on how to register work by unknown artists, for example Madonna and child (Q1680446) and Our Lady of Perpetual Help (Q178754). Should I use anonymous master (Q474968) or anonymous (Q4233718)? The last one seems inappropriate, because of the distinction of wanting to remain anonymous and of a maker being unknown because his or her name has just been lost to history. Is there an item like 'unknown' I can use? Also, how do you go about adding the school an artist was part of, can this be done on work or on artist level? Thanks for helping out! SIryn (talk) 20:25, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons - community consultation on basic properties for media files[edit]

Multichill (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC), focus on the Netherlands Husky (talk) 11:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC) - Cool, i'd like to focus on building tools to visualise progress. Spinster (talk) 07:00, 9 August 2014 (UTC) Happy to help with manual finetuning that can't be done by bots, and anything else on the 'soft/wet' side of this project. I'm dreaming of complete artists' oeuvres on Wikidata! Rich Farmbrough (talk) Time to learn2Wikidata Jheald (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC) Kippelboy (talk) 07:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC) (Focus on Catalan paintings (subdivision of Spain) Mushroom (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC) Jane023 (talk) 09:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC) work on Dutch 17th-century paintings and landscapes of Haarlem; Most recently, the sum of all "attributed" paintings by Frans Hals, which is nearly done Missvain (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2014 (UTC) (talk) 13:27, 15 November 2014 (UTC) Zolo (talk) 14:57, 23 November 2014 (UTC) Beat Estermann (talk) 10:33, 3 December 2014 (UTC) (Focus on Swiss heritage institutions) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC) KRLS (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC) (Focus on Catalan area museums) DivadH (talk) 11:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC) ,happy to help out with any questions in regards to the Europeana API, how to best query it, and/or our metadata Xcia0069 (talk) 11:49, 8 March 2015 (UTC), Work on data related to Gianlorenzo Bernini and Artemisia Gentileschi. Work at Europeana too ! Susannaanas (talk) 07:29, 9 March 2015 (UTC) Wittylama (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2015 (UTC) Fabrice Florin (talk) 02:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC) I can help in California later this year. Vaughn88 (talk) 15:58, 15 July 2015 (UTC) I can help! Raymond Ellis (talk) 19:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC) Hsarrazin (talk) 14:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC) - will give a hand with Creators and AC :) louis-garden (talk) 14:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC) for italian paintings (XIIe-XVIIe) Olivier (talk) 21:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC) Kopiersperre (talk) 11:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC) ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 03:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC) Micru (talk) 11:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC) Stuart Prior (WMUK) (talk) 11:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC) Hannolans (talk) 23:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC) Geraki (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC) (Focus on Greece) PatHadley (talk) 12:16, 3 January 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) 14:54, 11 January 2017 (UTC) Working to get data from the University of Oxford (Q34433) and its component institutions shared on Wikidata. Pablísima (talk) 18:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC) Carl Ha (talk) 22:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC) Marsupium (talk) 19:44, 22 May 2017 (UTC) Mauricio V. Genta (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC) Shani Evenstein (talk) 10:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Nasty nas (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Bodhisattwa (talk) 14:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC) Joalpe (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC) Sarasays (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC) Thierry Caro (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC) John Samuel 18:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC) Jklamo (talk) 12:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC) Reosarevok (talk) 10:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC), focus on Estonia Ambrosia10 (talk) 19:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC) Subsublibrary (talk) 03:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Martingggg (talk) 07:00, 22 February 2018 (UTC), focus on Argentine and Hispanic America Kruusamägi (talk) 16:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC), focus on Estonia SIryn (talk) 10:36, 9 June 2018 (UTC) Jarekt (talk) 13:49, 7 September 2018 (UTC), focus on moving metadata from Commons to Wikidata Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject sum of all paintings. Hello friends! This month (July 2018), we are hosting a quite crucial community consultation on Wikimedia Commons: we are listing the Wikidata properties that media files on Commons will need (including ones that might not exist yet, and might need to be created for this purpose). The consultation runs at least till the end of July, maybe longer.

Please consider to take a look and give input. We already have a few cases related to artworks, but more thought on this topic is very welcome. Thanks! SandraF (WMF) (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

NPG (smithsonian) property[edit]

Just a quick mention here that I spotted that there is no property yet for the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery object id. Instead these paintings, e.g. Carlton Fisk (Q47513245), only hold the id in inventory number (P217) and make use of described at URL (P973) to link out. Should be a fairly straight forward property proposal and migration for anyone with a little bit of time (which disqualifies me, hence the mention here). /Lokal Profil (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Does anyone know how to get all the possible formats for the identifier? The Time magazine collection has examples like NPG.97.TC43, so I assume there may be many collections with slightly different formats. - PKM (talk) 19:59, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Merge Notname and Anonymous master[edit]

User:Zolo
Jane023 (talk) 08:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
User:Vincent Steenberg
User:Kippelboy
User:Shonagon
Marsupium (talk) 13:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
GautierPoupeau (talk) 16:55, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Multichill (talk) 19:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Susannaanas (talk) 11:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC) I want to synchronize the handling of maps with this initiative
Mushroom (talk) 00:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Jheald (talk) 17:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Spinster (talk) 15:16, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
PKM (talk) 21:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 17:12, 7 January 2015‎ (UTC)
Sic19 (talk) 21:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Wittylama (talk) 13:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Armineaghayan (talk) 08:40, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Hannolans (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
User:Martingggg
Zeroth (talk) 02:21, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
User:7samurais
User:mrtngrsbch
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Visual arts Multichill (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC), focus on the Netherlands Husky (talk) 11:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC) - Cool, i'd like to focus on building tools to visualise progress. Spinster (talk) 07:00, 9 August 2014 (UTC) Happy to help with manual finetuning that can't be done by bots, and anything else on the 'soft/wet' side of this project. I'm dreaming of complete artists' oeuvres on Wikidata! Rich Farmbrough (talk) Time to learn2Wikidata Jheald (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC) Kippelboy (talk) 07:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC) (Focus on Catalan paintings (subdivision of Spain) Mushroom (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC) Jane023 (talk) 09:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC) work on Dutch 17th-century paintings and landscapes of Haarlem; Most recently, the sum of all "attributed" paintings by Frans Hals, which is nearly done Missvain (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2014 (UTC) (talk) 13:27, 15 November 2014 (UTC) Zolo (talk) 14:57, 23 November 2014 (UTC) Beat Estermann (talk) 10:33, 3 December 2014 (UTC) (Focus on Swiss heritage institutions) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC) KRLS (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC) (Focus on Catalan area museums) DivadH (talk) 11:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC) ,happy to help out with any questions in regards to the Europeana API, how to best query it, and/or our metadata Xcia0069 (talk) 11:49, 8 March 2015 (UTC), Work on data related to Gianlorenzo Bernini and Artemisia Gentileschi. Work at Europeana too ! Susannaanas (talk) 07:29, 9 March 2015 (UTC) Wittylama (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2015 (UTC) Fabrice Florin (talk) 02:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC) I can help in California later this year. Vaughn88 (talk) 15:58, 15 July 2015 (UTC) I can help! Raymond Ellis (talk) 19:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC) Hsarrazin (talk) 14:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC) - will give a hand with Creators and AC :) louis-garden (talk) 14:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC) for italian paintings (XIIe-XVIIe) Olivier (talk) 21:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC) Kopiersperre (talk) 11:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC) ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 03:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC) Micru (talk) 11:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC) Stuart Prior (WMUK) (talk) 11:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC) Hannolans (talk) 23:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC) Geraki (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC) (Focus on Greece) PatHadley (talk) 12:16, 3 January 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) 14:54, 11 January 2017 (UTC) Working to get data from the University of Oxford (Q34433) and its component institutions shared on Wikidata. Pablísima (talk) 18:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC) Carl Ha (talk) 22:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC) Marsupium (talk) 19:44, 22 May 2017 (UTC) Mauricio V. Genta (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC) Shani Evenstein (talk) 10:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Nasty nas (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Bodhisattwa (talk) 14:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC) Joalpe (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC) Sarasays (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC) Thierry Caro (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC) John Samuel 18:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC) Jklamo (talk) 12:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC) Reosarevok (talk) 10:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC), focus on Estonia Ambrosia10 (talk) 19:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC) Subsublibrary (talk) 03:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Martingggg (talk) 07:00, 22 February 2018 (UTC), focus on Argentine and Hispanic America Kruusamägi (talk) 16:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC), focus on Estonia SIryn (talk) 10:36, 9 June 2018 (UTC) Jarekt (talk) 13:49, 7 September 2018 (UTC), focus on moving metadata from Commons to Wikidata Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject sum of all paintings

I propose to merge notname (Q1747829) and anonymous master (Q474968).

They are used widely (eg there are a number of ULAN entries linked to them, but there are no clear criteria to distinguish between "anonymous artist" and "anonymous master". At least I've examined some ULAN values, and I can't see a clear difference between one and the other. Can someone point to a meaningful difference? --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 13:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

I noticed this too. I have no idea how they got separated (or how the extra one got picked up). I know that on an individual basis you have notnames for specific artists, but those should just be handled with "said to be the same as" in the normal way. I would also vote to merge these. Jane023 (talk) 13:32, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes please! - PKM (talk) 19:47, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Easy source of depicts[edit]

I've been working on the following query to get a source of paintings where I can easily set the depicted person whenever I have a few minutes on the bus. Its essentially paintings with a image (P18) but no depicts (P180) where the same image is also used as a image (P18) for a person. It contains a few red herrings (e.g. the image of the painting is used in the item about the painter etc.) but the vast majority give a good hit. Just thought I'd share it in case anyone else have a few spare minutes every now and then. /Lokal Profil (talk) 06:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

The above query is even filtered for genre (P136)  portrait (Q134307) which removes most false positives where the image is used on the painter item. /Lokal Profil (talk) 06:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Lokal Profil, that is great. I was just thinking about adding "depicted people" field to Commons c:template:Artwork, so we could get some good use of those depicts (P180) properties. Unfortunetly, some items have several hundreds of depicts (P180) properties and it will be hard to load all those items to check which one is for a person and which one is for some objects. --Jarekt (talk) 18:55, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
@Lokal Profil: The query improved a bit. Nurni (talk) 20:20, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Ooh I see you check for human (Q5) now and you also pick up the self-portraits. For those you can better check that the link i the same as the painter however, since e.g. the Rembrandt self-portraits were massively re-attributed by the RRP. Jane023 (talk) 06:12, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
I think this would be very useful, but you would need to check that the depicted item is a human (Q5). Ideally, you could also check for a family name (Q101352) string in the title, but of course this would only give good results for people whose names are consistently spelled the same way (so it would fail for Russians, people with "of this or that empire", or youthful portraits of women whose names changed upon marriage). Jane023 (talk) 06:08, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Is there some way to approach this from the Commons/Petscan side? I mean finding images in need of a Q that are portraits of people and used in some Q? Thanks. Jane023 (talk) 06:15, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

May be we could write the query in such a way that one of the links present is a link to help:QuickStatements which can be used to add the image to the correct item. That is something I did a few times when manipulating a list of images in a spreadsheet (see here for an example). --Jarekt (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Experienced user help needed with painting series[edit]

Based on the discussion at c:User_talk:Jarekt#Adding_warning_when_a_painting_is_liking_to_a_painting_series? with Multichill, I began to work on cleaning some of the issues with "series" items where we have one item for a group of artworks and each individual artwork also has (or should have) its own item. c:Category:Artworks with group Wikidata item detects cases where a file is linked to one of group items, and in most cases it needs to be linked with individual artwork item. Also many of the group items were poluted by metadata related to a single artwork, like date, size or collection (some of which was added by me) and also needs be be inspected. The work on such items is time-consuming and might require item splits or merges, searches for correct existing items or new item creation. I would appriciate help from experienced users in cleaning up some of them. --Jarekt (talk) 15:58, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this - this will never be "done" because we still get lots of items from Wikipedia articles that discuss groups of paintings somewhat randomly, such as The Procuress (Q63341). I agree that these should be split out into each actual painting, but there are still so many paintings on Commons without a Wikidata link that I don't see this as a high priority task at all. I suppose if you can make a regularly updating list somewhere then it can be monitored, but I don't think the problem will ever be "solved". Jane023 (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree that the task will never be completed. However what I would like to correct is the issue of files on Commons linking to group items, unless the file shows a group of artworks. Linking of files showing a single artwork (or an article about a single artwork) to a group item, is likely to result in wrong metadata beeing transfered. So if we try to keep wikidata structures related to series of artworks vs. indiviual artworks, clean as we go, we will have less wrong artwork metadata. We cannot wait untill we have an item for every last artwork on Commons, because that will never happen. --Jarekt (talk) 18:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Paleolithic art?[edit]

I'm wondering whether and how paleolithic art like cave paintings or the freshly described L13 drawing (Q56600434) fit with this project. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Help with collection and choice of sources[edit]

Could somebody lead me the way here please: Given no label (Q27033538), I have one source telling me that the painting is owned/in the collection of Gemeentemuseum Den Haag (Q1499958), given as a loan to Fries Museum (Q848313). the other source relates to a Fries museum's collection URL that's gone and tells me it's in the Fries Museum collection (with inventory number). Two questions arise for me:

  • how to structure this kind of item: location (P276) for the actual collection where the painting resides, and collection (P195) for the actual owning collection? Or should I use owned by (P127) for the owning collection?
  • and, if the sources' information is a bit contradicting or missing like with this example (RKD gives at least a "last changed" date), how to deal with it? Can we tell which of the "meta" databases are more reliable or authoritative?

no label (Q27033538) is just an example, I suppose there are more of these in rkd.nl vs. data.collectienederland.nl, so any advise would be helpful because I would like to add more items of this painter. Thanks. --Elya (talk) 09:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking an interest in this important painter! Your questions are completely valid and it seems you have filled in the item to the best of your ability. You are correct that there are various inconsistencies across aggregator websites such as the ones you mention. If you have or can gain access to art catalogs for this artist, then you can use the metadata in there and then the metadata is anchored in time (publication date) and place (location at publication). I made a tracking list for you here: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Jan Mankes. Hope it helps. Jane023 (talk) 12:46, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Jane023, so I suppose I will slow down a bit and try to gain access to some catalogues in our local art library instead of interpreting aggregator databases ;-) --Elya (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Brick-and-mortar libraries are still extremely useful and necessary for any work on documenting artists, but even from your desk you have access to public domain art catalogs on archive.org (including recent catalogs under copyright that you can "borrow"). Some museums have also published catalogs of their collections on their website or in Google books. But a trip to any library's art section is always inspiring and of course there is no deadline ;) Jane023 (talk) 15:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
beyond all question … --Elya (talk) 17:04, 7 October 2018 (UTC)