Template talk:Louvre

departments

The line becomes too long when the department is added. Yet it is useful information: departments are the offical subunits of the museum collections. Let me propose another possibility.

• We have now :

Musée du Louvre, Richelieu, 2nd floor, room 33................................................Paris

• I think it would look much better to have:

Musée du Louvre, Paris
Richelieu, 2nd floor, room 33

• or

Musée du Louvre, Paris
Departments of paintings, Richelieu, 2nd floor, room 33

This would probably the creation of a "location within museum" line in painting template (The template has not been changed yet, and we should probably find out as many ways to improve it as possible). Then we should create a model location louvre to put it in the new field. It would be similar to the current Louvre template, except that it does not display "louvre". A bot can certainly make the necessary changes for files that already have their room number. This would also have the additional advantage that the template could be used for files that have {{Information Louvre}}. By the way, I find that in most cases the tl:information louvre could advantageously be replaced by tl:painting, but that's another question. --Zolo (talk) 17:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I'm afraid, I have to I disagree with you. First of all, I don't see a reason to merge "gallery" and "location". Secondly, the Louvre departments are curatorial divisions. With that I mean that wings and rooms are not linked to a certain department. You can't say: "The department of painting is located at the Richelieu wing". File:Charles I Lami Louvre Inv5579.jpg – there he is again! – illustrates this very well. It's part of the department of paintings, but it is located in a room dedicated to decorative arts. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, it's true that the departments don't necessarily correspond with rooms. If we can put the the name in two different places of the template, that's fine with me. I do think it is something that could be interesting to have, but if you think there is no place where it can be put, we can surely do without it.

I don't want to merge "location" and "gallery" in that I don't want to turn them into one single parameter. I just think it would look better if we separate them by a comma rather than by a long space. That would be a small, cosmetic change in the template.

That may just be my own particular think it looks a bit strange to have: Musée du Louvre, Wing X etc., and only then to be told: "by the way it is in Paris". True, that's not really important, but to me it would look more natural if we had Musée du Louvre, Paris, then the references of the room. Best,--Zolo (talk) 07:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean now. I never took notice of that, but you are right. It is strange to put the Location-box in tl painting behind the gallery-box. According to the art historian standard convention "City" should precede "Museum", which in this case would be "Paris, Musée du Louvre". This construction would fit nicely in this template, because everything then is ordered from large to small (for example: "Paris, Musée du Louvre, Richelieu, 2nd floor, room 1"). However, for that to work you'd have to change {{Painting}}. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems the most logical solution. But I'm a bit unsure about what it would like for museums in small towns that most readers are unlikely to know. Should we have:

Shelburne, Shelburne Museum

It seems it would be simpler to have ? :

Shelburne Museum, Shelburne, Vermont.

So shouldn't we adopt the middle-ground solution that would lead (through changing the template and a simple bot intervention) to:

Musée du Louvre, Paris (this is the line useful to most readers)
Richelieu, 1st Floor, Room 12(this is the line for those who may have an interest in finding the work in the museum)--Zolo (talk) 08:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I've done a beta version of a {{Louvre location}}, that is similar to this one, but that takes into account the existence of :museum:louvre. I've readded the "department" options because:

• Now there is one full line for the location within museum, that's more than enough to display it properly.
• More importantly, I've stumbled across the following talk:

What abou using the official diction Denon/Sully/Richelieu, then floor, then the room number? I took some picture of the Ancient Roman busts in the Italian paintings gallery (I think I was the first commoneer to shoot them), I was quite troubled how to categorize them... it's ancient Roman, but it's in the paintings department... I would prefer a category per room, rather then per department. PS: don't use "Musée du" Louvre. Louvre is enough, or btw let's use the English Louvre Museum, I wonder what would happens if we apply the original local language names to Polish or Chinese museums too... --Sailko (talk) 18:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Rooms are numbered by curatorial departments. For instance, there are two "room 2" in the Richelieu wing: one for the Department of Sculptures and one for the Department of Near Eastern antiquities. Conversely, room 9 of the Department of Near Eastern antiquities is located in the Richelieu wing but room 10 is located in the Denon wing. Btw, you're not the only one who shot Roman statues in the Great Gallery, see File:Richelieu Apollo Louvre Ma614.jpg :) The files should be under Category:Musée du Louvre - Department of Paintings - room 8 because the room *does* belong to the Department of Paintings and under category:Ancient Roman statues in the Louvre.

Original names are used in a lots of museum categories, see category:Alte Pinakothek for instance. We'd be hard press to translate the name, I don't think any equivalent exists in English. The problem with "Louvre" alone is the ambiguity

--Zolo (talk) 19:42, 2 September 2010 (UTC)