Template talk:Walters Art Museum artwork

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Needed ?[edit]

Do we really need this template ?

  1. {{artwork}}'s object history field is currently used mainly for conservation history.
  2. Exhibition history is something many museums provide so we could add it directly to {{artwork}}.

Special-purpose templates tend to make things a bit more opaque and less flexible. --Zolo (talk) 08:42, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

It is a preparation for a 20k+ mass upload by user:Dylan k and this is only a first version of the template. There are still many fields in his database (some of which can be seen as commented out text in the template) which we are still not sure what to do with. Some of the fields might be collected but not displayed. His database keep separate track of Provenance, Conservation history and Exhibition history and I would like to be able to preserve it. We can also add it to {{tl|Artwork]] but I am not sure how often we will need it. --Jarekt (talk) 12:43, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
The Metropolitan Museum and the Art Institute of Chicago among other have an "exhibition history" field. I dont know if we plan to have partnerships this kind of institution but the field can certainly be useful. I had created a {{place made}} field (from a Brooklyn Museum database field name). Maybe it could be useful here ? Nice project in any case.--Zolo (talk) 13:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


It looks like something is broken now: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tibetan_-_Identification_Deity_Vajrabhairava_with_Retinue_-_Walters_35293.jpg Kaldari (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I do not see any problems. What do you see? --Jarekt (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
In Firefox the table is all wonky. I've reverted the template for now. Kaldari (talk) 21:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
I wonder if you looked at it after I reverted. The problem seems to be for works that have exhibition history and provenance. For those works the table gets badly broken. Kaldari (talk) 21:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
I will test it in the sandbox. --Jarekt (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
I moved previous version to /sandbox and tested it using code from File:Tibetan_-_Identification_Deity_Vajrabhairava_with_Retinue_-_Walters_35293.jpg in /testcases. It looks fine to me. --Jarekt (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Weird. I'll see if I can reproduce the problem. In the meantime, I recreated the new fields inside other_fields_3 rather than exhibition_history. I think the problem is that exhibition_history already creates the tr and td for you, while other_fields_3 doesn't (since it's made to handle multiple fields), so you end up with invalid table syntax (which some browsers will ignore and others will try to render). Kaldari (talk) 02:28, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


You sure you need the ISOdate template in the date field? Isn't this superfluous since the artwork template itself already wraps it around the date parameter? Also I think it is this extra template which breaks the date in e.g. this image. /André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 14:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

That was expansion depth issue, but you are correct that superfluous ISOdate template added to the problem. We need the ISOdate template in case parameter "period" is, when used and artwork template's ISOdate will not be able to do the job. I tweaked the wikicode so ISOdate template is only called when "period" is present. However may be a better way is to move "period" to a separate line and keep "date" field as simple as possible to avoid similar expansion depth issues. --Jarekt (talk) 14:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
OK. The only issue is therefore if both date (as a plane ISOdate) and period are entered. I suspected it might still have it's uses =) /André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 19:45, 28 January 2013 (UTC)