Open main menu

Property talk:P6379

Documentation

has works in the collection
collection that have works of this artist
Data typeItem
Domainhuman (Q5) and group of humans (Q16334295)
ExampleGerrit de Wilde (Q59700806)Museum Flehite (Q29908492)
M. Zwartser (Q60268368)North Holland Archives (Q2200595)
Piet Mondrian (Q151803)Gemeentemuseum Den Haag (Q1499958)
See alsoarchives at (P485), collection creator (P6241), exhibition history (P608), collection (P195)
Lists
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses40,456
Search for values
  Type “human (Q5), group of humans (Q16334295): element must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “human (Q5), group of humans (Q16334295)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6379#type Q5, Q16334295, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
  Value type “collection (Q2668072), archives (Q166118), museum (Q33506): This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of (P31)”. On these, the value for instance of (P31) should be an item that uses subclass of (P279) with value collection (Q2668072), archives (Q166118), museum (Q33506) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6379#Value type Q2668072, Q166118, Q33506, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
  Qualifiers “applies to part (P518), collection or exhibition size (P1436), collection creator (P6241), notable work (P800), number of works accessible online (P5592), number of works (P3740), license (P275): this property should be used only with the listed qualifiers. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6379#Allowed qualifiers, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)

Some queriesEdit

@Hannolans:

The creators and the number of has works in the collection (P6379) statements they should have:

SELECT ?creator (COUNT(DISTINCT(?collection)) AS ?count) WHERE {
  ?painting wdt:P31 wd:Q3305213 . 
  ?painting wdt:P195 ?collection .
  ?painting wdt:P170 ?creator .
  } GROUP BY ?creator
ORDER BY DESC(?count)
LIMIT 500

Try it!

The missing has works in the collection (P6379) statements:

SELECT DISTINCT ?creator ?collection WHERE {
  ?painting wdt:P31 wd:Q3305213 . 
  ?painting wdt:P195 ?collection .
  ?painting wdt:P170 ?creator .
  MINUS { ?creator wdt:P6379 ?collection } . 
  } ORDER BY ?creator ?collection

Try it!

Beware that I didn't do any filtering for special cases like "unkown value", "novalue", anonymous (Q4233718) and private collection (Q768717). Multichill (talk) 16:00, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Now do you want to add 190 statements to Vincent van Gogh (Q5582)? I think I rather oppose this and might even prefer this property to be deleted if it's intended to be used like this. Then, Pigsonthewing in the proposal discussion was right. Do we have any figures how much the performance advantage of those “cached” would be for some realistic example queries? Figures are crucial for those considerations. Do we need to query this data with Lua somewhere? In my eyes there is already enough stuff where maintenance doesn't keep up and it's preferable not to create even more. --Marsupium (talk) 17:20, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
190 items? No, we are just adding the most relevant museums to artists. The main reason of this property is that we know were in which other museums those artists are, notably photographers and designers, for example Pierre Petit (Q55070601) .--Hannolans (talk) 19:43, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
This property is very useful as GLAMs will use this property to do lookups and add license information related to that artist and museum. Should we create a limit to let say the top 10 collections with the most works of an artist? --Hannolans (talk) 20:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
@Hannolans: Most relevant museums? That's very subjective. How would you determine that? Sounds a bit like notable work (P800). At least with that one we can have a look at the number of sitelinks. Here we could have a major museum with just one important work and a minor museum with a bunch of works from not the most notable period of an artist.
And your contradicting yourself by these kind of edits. Multichill (talk) 12:27, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
No, for copyright information we need a dataset of artists in museums for lookups. When we have a base set of museums we can start comparing. If one museum display the work of an artist online and another not, one of them has a license, or there is a difference in jurisdiction (MoMA versus Tate), another interpretation, or one of them made a mistake. This was one of the outcomes with testing for Boijmans. They check regularly the copyright of Tate. Some museums also display information about the right holders. If so, we can use this for correction or licenses. We can also compare the copyright policy of that artist with our images we have on Commons. So, we are not interested in all the museums with Van Gogh, but certain museums that have a professional license policy and artists in multiple collections. But that is our perspective. I know that art historians are interested in all museums that have work of an artist. If we start adding that, it would be helpful to add collectiegrootte and other information --Hannolans (talk) 16:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Return to "P6379" page.