Template talk:Artwork

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Info non-talk.svg Template:Artwork has been protected indefinitely because it is a highly-used or visible template. Use {{Edit request}} on this page to request an edit.
Please test any changes in the template's /sandbox or /testcases subpages, or in a user subpage, and consider discussing changes at the talk page before implementing them.

Catalog raisonné[edit]

Hallo, it would be nice if there was still the heading „List of Works/Number of works“ or „Catalog raisonné“ would be in the "Artwork template". --Trzęsacz (talk) 00:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I had to look up en:Catalogue raisonné, since I am no art expert. I think it would fit in "references", But if there is a need for it we can add. As for „List of Works/Number of works“ I do not know how would it be used. --Jarekt (talk) 02:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
No, not references. Thats is for {{Van Gogh catalogues|F=...|JH=...}}, Wildenstein Nr. ... by the French impressionists ({{Gauguin catalogues|W=...|W2=...|S=...}}) and other. ( in pl Raisonné katalog). --Trzęsacz (talk) 02:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
I do believe this fits in "References". On Greek pottery pictures we use this field for {{Beazley ABV}} and {{Beazley ARV}}, inscriptions corpuses and so on (see for instance File:Athena aigis Cdm Paris 254.jpg). Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Your two links are bibliographies. Here is reference ok, because references is the museum's website or further reading books, or maybee a directory of the catalog raisonné. But the catalog number is not a reference, its only a number. See here for exemple.
In this variant, however, this is true, the process is a bit more differentiated . Because it is a link to a website --Trzęsacz (talk) 12:32, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
An inscription corpus isn't the same as a museum description either. Have a look for instance at the Corpus of Attic Vase Inscriptions; it's not exactly further reading. A corpus number is used to identify a work reliably just the same as a catalogue raisonné number. The same situation is exactly with Beazley IDs: they're used so everyone knows which vase they're talking about. See for instance this vase from the Cabinet des Médailles. "De Ridder.1066", mentioned as the accession number, is actually a catalogue number: it stands for Catalogue des vases peints de la Bibliothèque nationale by André De Ridder, no.1066; same with "Luynes 699" which is shorthand for Catalogue de la collection de Luynes no.699. Both these catalogues can be considered as further reading as they include descriptions, the author's interpretation and so on, as do both of Beazley's books. They are also mentioned under "bibliography" in the notice of the Cabinet des Médailles.
What I'm saying is that all art fields don't use the same terms or tools. "References" is a very large term; in my opinion it can encompass all these. A "catalogue raisonné" field would be more precise, but it's not wrong or misleading to include a catalogue raisonné under "references". It's probably less puzzling for the naive reader. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:17, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


Is it worth adding a "creation place" field to the template?

This can sometimes be very useful information to record, eg for images from manuscripts, especially if the actual artist is not known. Jheald (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

{{Walters Art Museum artwork}} uses "place of origin", and I found this old discussion that mentions place of origin, but I no longer remember why we added it to one but not the other. It is fine with me If other users feel the same way. --Jarekt (talk) 03:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
So, inspired by the {{Walters Art Museum artwork}} template, it seems I can put the information in other_fields_2, using something like:
{{Information field|name={{ucfirst:{{I18n/location|origin}}}}|value={{city|{{{place of origin|}}}}} }}
Thanks. Jheald (talk) 11:31, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
You can always add any field using other_fields and similar. The question is that if there is enough need for some field than we can make it official and add it permanently to the template and its documentation. --Jarekt (talk) 13:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I am fine with adding it. If we do we should try to move content from {{place made}} to the new field. --Zolo (talk) 12:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
I know some of us also store information in the "artist/author" field, like some museums do (e.g. "anonymous (Meuse)" or "unknown (Myrina)"). "Object history" is also used that way. I think a specific field would be useful. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:17, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 15:17, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the parameter. I have problems getting it to work properly: on File:Ewer Nishapur MET 38-40-240.jpg ‎ for instance the new field is displayed, along with the warning "Error in template * unknown parameter name (Template:Artwork): 'place of origin'". What am I doing wrong? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 15:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Opps, It is fixed now (see last edit). I am also clearing Category:Pages using Artwork template with incorrect parameter. --Jarekt (talk) 16:12, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Rethinking about it "place of origin" sounds stlightly ambiguous, especially for archaeological object, as it may refer to both the place where the object was made and the place where it was discovered. Sometimes both are relevant. --Zolo (talk) 13:42, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Sounds evident. I would prefer to rename it to "place of creation" or "creation place", too. --Marsupium (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done Changed "place of origin" to "place of creation". --Jarekt (talk) 16:40, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
in German:Herstellungsort, sorry I do not find the place to do it myself--Oursana (talk) 18:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done I added it to {{I18n/location}}. Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 19:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I could not add it with Template:Category definition: Object and would also like to have it with Template:Object photo--Oursana (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


Hi! I'd to use {{painting}} just as {{drawing}}. Therefore the old {{template:painting}} should be changed into {{template:artwork}} on all Wiki pages. I'd volunteer to do that but how do I find pages with {{template:painting}}? Greetz! Bukk (talk) 11:07, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

There are over 4k pages using {{painting}}, and you can see them at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Painting. I am not a big fan of shortcut templates calling {{technique}} like {{drawing}}. With some techniques having shortcuts and some not having them, it makes using them less predictable. Direct use of {{technique|drawing}} is preferred to {{drawing}}, so I would leave {{painting}} just as it is. --Jarekt (talk) 12:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

ISOdate testing[edit]

Prior to full scale deployment of new version of {{ISOdate}} now stored at {{ISOdate/sandbox}}, I swap the call to {{ISOdate}} from {{Artwork}} with {{ISOdate/sandbox}}. Please report any issues here or at my talk page. If there are no issues, {{ISOdate/sandbox}} will soon replace {{ISOdate}}. --Jarekt (talk) 18:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Add identifying class[edit]

{{edit request}} Please add fileinfotpl-type-artwork to the <table> classes (second line of the template)! See Commons talk:Machine-readable data#Identifying information-like templates for background. Thanks, --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 13:17, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 01:27, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Artworks missing infobox template[edit]

We have 14k files using {{PD-Art}} which do not have any infoboxes and could really use {{Artwork}} templates. I can volunteer the services of my bot (User:JarektBot) for help with adding the templates if some can analyze the files and see if there are some cases where many files follow the same description pattern that can be parsed and copied to the Artwork templates. --Jarekt (talk) 14:45, 2 January 2015 (UTC)