Talk:Q134307

inconsistency in the statements

The combination of the following statements contradicts Help:Basic membership properties:

• <portrait (Q134307)> instance of (P31) <artistic theme (Q2160811)>, <genre (Q483394)>.
• <portrait (Q134307)> part of (P361) <hierarchy of genres (Q2595720)>.
• <hierarchy of genres (Q2595720)> subclass of (P279) <genre (Q483394)>.

Since we have begun to discuss the problem at WT:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structure#Use of genre (P136) I propose to go on there. Best regards, --Marsupium (talk) 18:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Instance

Should portrait (Q134307) be an instance of art genre (Q1792379) or artistic theme (Q1406161)? Senator2029 (talk) 03:31, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

portrait (Q134307) is not art genre (Q1792379). The art genre (Q1792379) is portrait painting (Q1400853)Tanzmariechen (talk) 22:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't think there is a good reason to change portrait from its previous status as an instance of art genre. "Portrait painting" is a kind of portrait; do we have to create art genre items for all portrait media, for example "Portrait engraving", "portrait pastel", "portrait drawing"? I am working on a project that involves portraits of scientists and the artists who depicted them and have added portrait as a genre (previously existing without a constraint) to over a thousand items. Now that's not valid? Why change it? Uncommon fritillary (talk) 22:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@Uncommon fritillary: I see you practical problem, but we must not make mistakes. So @Multichill:, @Spinster: I would like to discuss this issue. If you compare Wp about both items

portrait painting (Q1400853) is the only genre, portrait (Q134307) is not and this is approved by the items description and wp articles, not telling anything about genre in this connection. Shall we ping others as well or take the discussion to another place? In my strong opinion it is a big mistake.Tanzmariechen (talk) 00:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

@Andreasmperu: please see description and wp s portrait (Q134307), it is not a genre, it is a picture, a representation. Not one wp language versions states "genre". So there is no reference for wd. And the thesaurus for graphis materials is about portrait paintings (plural), not about the genre portrait painting (without s and in the meaning genre). One cannot use portrait (Q134307) in the sense of portrait painting (Q1400853), then we must use portrait painting (Q1400853). What a mass, we use portrait (Q134307) and portrait painting (Q1400853) for the same statement--Tanzmariechen (talk) 21:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

It's a genre. portrait painting (Q1400853) is just the genre mixed with the painting. Multichill (talk) 22:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

A portrait is not a genre, why does not one description or wp language version portrait (Q134307) express "genre", https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/p/portrait. --Tanzmariechen (talk) 22:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

What makes you think that? Both the English and Dutch Wikipedia's classify it as an art genre. Multichill (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

So you think not express but within the context of using it for painting, photography. And I see Uncommon fritillary's arguments. OK I try to follow you, though I still would need some statements. But then I still have the problem, that most portrait paintings state as genre portrait (Q134307) instead the more specific portrait painting (Q1400853). Using portrait painting (Q1400853) you get portrait (Q134307) as super class. So for portrait paintings one should use and prefer the more specific portrait painting (Q1400853) otherwise the painting component is missing as genre.Tanzmariechen (talk) 23:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand why whether "portrait" is a genre or not has become an issue now. Back on 15 August 2013 user Coyau (R.I.P.) designated portrait as an instance of genre. By changing this now, you've created constraint violations in all Wikidata items that used portrait as a genre since then, done by editors thinking that was a valid usage. Is Tanzmariechen making this change as part of an art history Wikidata project that supports the change, or just because it seemed to that user to be an incorrect usage? I'll be eventually importing the portrait artist Wikidata entries into my institutional Wikibase (that's the plan anyway) and will be free to designate them there as working in the genre of portrait, so I'm not going to fight this, but it seems an arbitrary and ill-timed change. Uncommon fritillary (talk) 15:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

The fact that a subclass exists doesn't mean it's better and that you should use it. Reminds be a bit of the categories on Commons like Category:Portrait paintings of women sitting in chairs outdoors. Why does including the medium make it better? If it's a aquarel or a drawing, it's still a portrait, right?

For paintings the genres are actively normalized, see Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Genre#Normalization. Multichill (talk) 19:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Uncommon fritillary:, yes it seemed to me an incorrect usage for a long time and your arguments made the use of portrait (Q134307) for portrait as genre clearer. As I was reverted I wanted to know and discuss the reasons. And as you see by the unanswered question of senator 2029 it was not only me. I did not realize "normalized" genres. In my mother tongue we have different expressions for portrait as object and genre. So it has also to do with the wording. On the other side we are very precise using etching technique (Q186986) and etching print (Q18218093). And the difference of portrait drawings or portrait paintings brings the artworks into different museums at least departmentsTanzmariechen (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

genre art (Q1047337) unsystematically naming genre art, with the same naming for portrait.. I would never have had a problem. With genre art (Q1047337) we classify more than 90% genre paintings in genre art (Q1047337).Tanzmariechen (talk) 01:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)