IMAO we should make for Heinrich Gleißner (Q1597358) the decision if is image (P18) OR commemorative plaque image (P1801). Shall we delete commemorative plaque image (P1801) instead?
Topic on User talk:Hsarrazin
In P1801, you could replaced it with this
Okay, it's done!
Hi, on many projects, image (P18) is the main or only picture used (like wikisources). Removing a portrait from image (P18) because it is the portrait depicted on commemorative plaque image (P1801) is desastrous to those projects.
Please, stop removing those pics, or crop them to restrict them to "portrait", but do not empty image (P18) when it is the only portrait we have for the person. Thanks
We are working here to improve the data and data quality of Wikidata. If any other application or project (like Wikisource) does need any image, it's welcome to use image (P18) or commemorative plaque image (P1801) or coat of arms image (P94) or logo image (P154) and so on. That should be an individual decision! Our goal here is link any data as accurate as possible. I think, that one image can't be image (P18) and commemorative plaque image (P1801) at the same time. It's a either/or-thing.
I too work on improving data, and removing the only portrait we have of a person is certainly not an improvement... there are many plaques...
I can't think of a reason why that image shouldn't be in P18. At least, given the current choice at Commons.
There may be the mistaken assumption that only Kodachrome portrait photographs are acceptable.
...and all these plaques should only be in commemorative plaque image (P1801), because they're plaques. Maybe we should think about a software which helps to extract depictions of persons which are part of plaques. Then we could upload these parts to Commons as individual images and link it in image (P18). Another idea (and I'm not sure if this is already possible) is to specify coordinates which part of the plaque contains the depiction of the person. This information could be stored in image (P18), too.
Crop tool already exists. If you remove plaques, please use it to extract the portrait.
Once you have removed the plaque from image (P18), there is absolutely no way to know there is a portrait on the commemorative plaque image (P1801). :(
Usually, I crop the portraits out, but Crop tool seems to be down today :/
On many projects, commemorative plaques are used to illustrate infoboxes, not as commemorative plaques, but as "portrait".
Using commemorative plaque image (P1801) as alternate image (when no image (P18) is available) is not a satisfying solution when you want a portrait, because most plaques do not have a portrait on them, and there is no way for a template to know whether there is one or not from the property, while image (P18) implies there is a portrait, for people at least...
A bust is not a plaque ..
If for whatever reason this doesn't work for your software, you could add a qualifier to the image instead.
indeed, to me, a bust is a portrait, definitely not a plaque :)
@Jura1: image (P18) shouldn't be the 'waste dump' for any kind of image we have for a subject. :-(
@Hsarrazin: Okay, I understand that. If you like to we could collect those images somewhere!? Where can I find the crop tool and how's it working?
It's a gadget you can activate on Commons preferences. Very easy to use, and does not loose quality.
image (P18) is not a ''waste dump'', it is the main picture for infoboxes.
It can be improved, but emptying it while it represents what the item is, without adding better data, is a loss of info for all those who need it.
If you don't appreciate Wikimedia Commons resources, I suggest you don't edit statements with properties linking exclusively Wikimedia Commons files.
@Jura1: I totally appreciate Wikimedia Commons resources, but some are not very useful. I like to have high quality data in Wikidata and that's what I'm fighting for.
You might want to start by adding images.
Calling portraits "waste" isn't helpful at all, unless they actually get deleted from Commons.
@Jura1: If there's an image on Commons which fits into image (P18) I always add it. I never said that portraits are waste, I said, that image (P18) is sometimes used for very different kind of images. And we really should work to improve that! And yes, improving data quality means quite often to delete unnecessary and (of course!) incorrect data.
removing imprecise data without improving it, results in an objectiv loss of info, not an improvement ^^
but obviously[https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Hanshandlampe&namespace=0&tagfilter=&start=&end= ], you much prefer to remove info you dislike than add better info ^^
maybe you could try adding pictures ? https://tools.wmflabs.org/fist/wdfist/
I think we still haven't read a valid reason why the photograph of the bust should be removed.
A good reason to remove it would be that it doesn't exist on Commons.
We already (tried to) discussed that on my discussion page!
or that it is the bust of someone else :)
yes, typically when it was sculpted by the person. (I try to avoid that, but it might have happened).
@Hsarrazin: I wouldn't say that in any case! You're right that maybe some information (on this plaque is a depiction of the person, too) is getting lost. Most image (P18) with plaque images I removed - I really always have a look on the images - only have text. Your case (a plague with depiction) is seldom. So that's again one of this cases where you try to improve one thing, but another is getting (hopefully only a little bit) worse.