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.

Maintenance category for pages using nonexistent parameters[edit]

I suggest adding an examination for nonexistent parameters used in file description pages transcluding Template:Artwork. This has previously been done for Template:Information. The affected file description pages are found in Category:Pages using Information template with incorrect parameter. Thousands of parameter errors (spelling errors, markup errors, vandalism, use of wrong template) have already been fixed (semi-)automatically or manually. Thoughts? --Leyo 08:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Good idea, do it! Multichill (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Yup, sounds good! Jean-Fred (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support overdue --Mattes (talk) 21:18, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Is the list of parameters at Template:Artwork#Parameter complete? --Leyo 21:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Nice, I had long thought it would be good to check that.
The list is not really complete. There are at least {{{other_fields_1|{{{Other_fields_1|{{{other fields 1|{{{Other fields 1|}}} }}} }}} }}}{{{other_fields_2|{{{Other_fields_2|{{{other fields 2|{{{Other fields 2|}}} }}} }}} }}}. At some time many files had a "country" parameter as well, It is not shown, and useless, but it does not really do any harm. --Zolo (talk) 16:58, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
I implemented the examination. Category:Pages using Artwork template with incorrect parameter is being filled.
I did not define the legacy parameter country as allowed. IMO only current parameters should be used to avoid confusing users. If there is relevant information, then it needs to be moved to another parameter. --Leyo 03:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Useless "Country" parameter is a strange case. To my knowledge it was never used but a lot of early images used it. We should expect much more of them. --Jarekt (talk) 10:28, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
I removed the empty Country parameters I could find. For the ones with a content, what about moving it to the Location parameter? --Leyo 11:41, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I think "country" is originally from Commons:10,000 paintings from Directmedia, and it seems to refer to the nationality of the artist, not to the place were the artwork iskept, so I think it can be safely deleted. --Zolo (talk) 14:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I've corrected a few pages:

  • If a parameter has been misspelt it will be sensible to search for occurrences of that misspelling and correct them all in one session.
  • There were a few cases where a hard space had been used in the parameter invocation: "|0xA0Medium =" for example. I'm not sure how best to search for those, so there may be more.

--Mirokado (talk) 14:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree, but I do not know how to find such cases.
Do we have a consensus concerning the removal of country, also for non-empty parameters? If yes, this could be done by a bot. --Leyo 12:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Country, was never a part of this template or its predecessors. It was used by Directmedia mass upload, since they had it. I think it is safe to delete. --Jarekt (talk) 22:20, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
OK. Shall I add a request on COM:BWR or do you want to do this with your bot? --Leyo 22:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
I will tackle it. Directmedia uploads have many other issues as well, so I might fix few things at the same time. --Jarekt (talk) 23:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support just beware that this task is dangerous or hard to code (may have a pipe inside another template) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:18, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
There are currently 200 files in the category that match \|\s*[Cc]ountry\s*=. --Leyo 14:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I clean up all "country" images last week, but I guess the template changes were still not applied to all images so more and more images are found. Anyway I removed "Country" from those 200 files. --Jarekt (talk) 03:11, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I've cleaned out the category, except for half a dozen files that IMO should not be using the Artwork template at all. They appear to be photographs of a parade. The uploader seems to be asserting that they are commissioned photos he took of a performance. Is there a "photo of performance" template? Laura1822 (talk) 01:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Provenance, Publisher[edit]

What shall be done with image description pages using the parameters Provenance (example) or Publisher (example)? --Leyo 12:20, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Provenance is a more precise term for Object history. It was debated if we should use it or not and it was rejected as too elitist. Publisher is more of a problem, we can always add it to Notes, or this. --Jarekt (talk) 13:26, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
I fixed the remaining Provenance cases. The other case, however, is too complicated for me to perform in a semiautomated way. --Leyo 22:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
I thought I fixed remaining Provenance cases too. I guess we split the work. I also agree that the remaining cases in this and book and information categories are getting too varied for automatic or even semiautomatic fixes. One think that might help is sorting. If we sort based on the name of the first mismatched field we might be able to find groups of files with similar issues. That might be helpful. --Jarekt (talk) 03:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Using the search in VisualFileChange I get 112 hits with \s*\|\s*[Pp]ublisher\s*=. The majority are “File:Lovro Janša …”. So it might be worth to fix these cases in a semiautomated way, but I don't know what is the best solution.
I agree that having some sort of statistics on incorrect parameters would help. Also statistics on uploaders (that might have used always the same incorrect parameters) would help. --Leyo 09:07, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


Interwiki Links[edit]

Shall we replace the interwiki links by linking the template to the wikidata item d:Q6064255? It is more infobox-centered than our current interwiki links … --Marsupium (talk) 13:10, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done--Jarekt (talk) 16:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata parameter[edit]

And yet another issue concerning Wikidata: I think we should add a Wikidata parameter linking to the Wikidata item of the artwork to the template. It think that this would be the most simple solution to link Commons files to Wikidata items for d:WD:Artworks task force since there are often more than one file depicting the same artwork. It is of course not necessary to display it flashily. One could perhaps simply add the Wikidata-logo.svg-sign in the upper right corner similar to the solution in Template:Creator. Would that be OK? --Marsupium (talk) 15:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support however this part is a bit tricky. Since I have to add it to some field and all fields are optional. May be in front of a title? and we can assume that we will always have a title. --Jarekt (talk) 16:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
The source parameter is said to be "required" … Though that wouldn't be an elegant solution. --Marsupium (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
I added it to title in Template:Artwork/sandbox. See Template:Artwork/testcases (second box) to see how it works. I will move it to Template:Artwork if there is no objection. --Jarekt (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Not all artworks have a title, but I suppose it makes sense to always use the title parameter to provide a very short description or simply "untitlted", so I am fine with using the title parameter. However, I think the Wikidata link should be displayed after the title, to be more consistent with the layout of the creator and institution. --Zolo (talk) 07:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
You are right. The current position in the sandbox is a bit too flashy imho, the wikidata sign could even be right aligned for my liking. --Marsupium (talk) 08:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I placed Wikidata-logo.svg-sign after the title. I prefer it without special right/left alignment: it is easier to find and code and still looks OK when using RTL languages. --Jarekt (talk) 13:07, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Do you think of this usage? I do not get the preview like in the templates.--Oursana (talk) 08:26, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Just need to add "wikidata= QXX". I have made the necessary update to {{Category definition: Object}}. --Zolo (talk) 09:19, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response. --Oursana (talk) 09:33, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, Jarekt and Zolo! Though I suggest not to display the icon if the parameter is not set? Just a link to the Wikidata main page is quite useless.
The documentation at Template:Artwork/doc, Template:Art Photo/doc, Template:Category definition: Object/doc has still to be done. I might care for it somewhen soon.
And yet another question: Does anybody run a bot which could add the parameter to all Commons templates whose artworks have already an item on Wikidata and for which a match is possible? Zolo and me have yet talked about the issue on Wikidata. --Marsupium (talk) 14:03, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
If parameter is not set the icon is not visible, see here for example. The bot was not run to add those links and I am not sure if it would be easy to find them. May be we should revisit the question of creating specialized templates for Artworks in its own namespace, like we have for Creators and Institutions. That might be more intuitive than Template:Category definition: Object approach. --Jarekt (talk) 14:19, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
I think Template:Category definition: Object can be replaced with calls to Wikidata once bugzilla:47930 is solved, but there is no timeline yet --Zolo (talk) 06:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Stupid me looking at the icon on Template:Artwork/doc, ok! @Zolo: … and once the data is on Wikidata. That requires (ongoing) decisions for the data model and a way to transfer the data. I fear it will not be a possibility to transfer the data of now 502,954 transclusions of Template:Artwork manually, maybe at most half-manually. Therefor many other templates have to be mapped like Template:Other date and so on. This one may be not that complex. But it is necessary to teach it a bot or script or whatever … . Unfortunately DBpedia does not extract Template:Artwork, that could have been a preliminary. --Marsupium (talk) 07:26, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Nice that we have the wikidata parameter now, but unfortunately it's not in the documentation. Had to look in the source to spot it :) I'm not a mod, so i can't edit the template, so could someone else add it to the docs? Huskyoog.jpg Husky (talk to me) 13:03, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Parameters positions[edit]

Parameters positions in Template:Artwork/doc are not consistent.--Oursana (talk) 14:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Agree, I think it is a problem with {{TemplateBox}} --Jarekt (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Archive lag[edit]

I think the threads on this page are archived too fast. I'd appreciate it if we could increase the maximum age of the threads (the algo-parameter of the template User:MiszaBot/config) from currently 21 days to at least some months or simply archive manually. I don't have a problem with long talk pages. What do you think? --Marsupium (talk) 13:10, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done 90 days --Jarekt (talk) 16:16, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

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)