User talk:Multichill/Archives/2016/September

Creator qualifiers

Hi, thanks for you new uploads of files however, it seems to be missing qualifications to creators: Portrait of a Young Woman (Q26692246) should be after Paris Bordone, [1] but that does not show either in the description or in the statements. --Zolo (talk) 12:15, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, noticed that too. Seems to have been stripped from the source data I'm using. By the time I noticed this, most works were already online so I decided to complete the upload and fix it when it's done. All paintings are currently at User:Multichill/Zandbak and based on the url sorting it's not that hard to manually check them. Sucks, but doable. Multichill (talk) 12:39, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok thanks. There might be deeper differences between your souce and the gallery's public website though, as I don't really get how the creator of The Virgin and Child in a Landscape (Q26693260) relates to [2]. --Zolo (talk) 14:21, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

@Zolo: I'm using http://cima.ng-london.org.uk/collection/ because it has an api. I bet that is just using an old data dump..... Multichill (talk) 14:26, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I've had a look at User:Multichill/Zandbak and a few small things I have noticed:

• some are actually not paintings [3]
• addons to names like "Sir" or "The Younger" are not parse accurately [4] [5]
• something wrong with quotation marks [6]

Another point: for quite a few of them, we have images on Commons, but of lower quality than what is available on the gallery's website. Not sure if I should add them, or if that will actually make if that will only make maintenance more messy and it is better to wait for some upload of better quality image.--Zolo (talk) 14:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I've been working on the newly uploaded items via User:Multichill/Zandbak, combing through c:Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London for images, and I have to say it's a godsend to have the National Gallery's catalogue finally uploaded to Wikidata, so thanks Multichill! I also have a few points:

• The data is old and a lot of more recent acquisitions are missing, e.g. Men of the Docks (Q18748763) (bought 2014), c:File:Guercino, The Samian Sibyl, 1651.jpg (bought 2012), etc.
• Many of the URLs for loans (with accession numbers starting "L") are broken because the works have been returned to their owners and the online catalogue entry has been taken off the NG's website – e.g. the URL at Three Dancers in Violet Tutus (Q26699558)
• @Zolo: I've been adding the low-quality Commons images to the items as well as the superior ones because that at least makes it possible to see if there's a Commons image or not, and the lower-quality images can always be overwritten. The other small things you mention in your list above I'm happy to fix myself.

Multichill, did you see my reply to you on my talk page? Not being impatient, I just don't know if Flow automatically messages the creator of a thread when a user replies. Cheers, Ham II (talk) 09:33, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Zolo: and @Ham II:, happy to see you're interested in this set. I keep track of what collections I have done and the ones I still want to do at User:Multichill#Indexed in case you were wondering. It all depends on having good quality metadata available. In this case the quality turned out to be not that good. That's a real shame. To address your points:

• Not a painting: I believe that was only one. I already noticed it in the web interface. I wonder if it's more than one
• Naming issues: I seem to have only imported the bare name, no "workshop of" or "The Younger". I might be able to find another field, but changing existing descriptions and updating it without accidentally overwriting things already manually set by users is always a pain. I think manual is the best option here. Do you agree?
• quotation marks: Yes, noticed that too. I probably messed up encoding/decoding somewhere.
• Images: Please add them whatever crap quality they are. You can find plenty of suggestions at User:Multichill/Image suggestions. I plan to make a similar kind of report in the future to suggest images to be upgraded. Say we have a small and a large image of the same painting. The small image is in use on a painting item and the big one isn't. The big one is ten times larger than the small one, than suggest it to be replaced. I bet we'll find plenty of images to replace!
• For the missing paintings: I could probably write another bot to go over http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/artists?group=Aa-Ah and scrape all of those. That might find more information per painting (like data made) and find new paintings. Not sure when I do that. I might do another collection first and than go back to this one.
• Broken loans: I already merged a couple or expanded them. You can set the rank of the url to deprecated

Multichill (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

• The list includes quite a few sculptures which used to be on loan on loan from the Victoria and Albert Museum – e.g. An Angel holding a Curtain (Q26689484) is this sculpture. These items are definitely welcome but a lot of the metadata will have to be tidied up, something I'm happy to do manually. I think their National Gallery accession numbers should be kept in addition to the V&A ones being added, but there would need to be a good reference URL. It would also be a good idea to request a good photographer in London to take pictures of the sculptures on display.
• I'm still happy to do all the "Workshop of...", etc., edits manually. There isn't an "imitator of" property yet, though, so that will need to be created. (See Conversation Piece (Q26708035) and many others.)
• A bot scraping the catalogue for missing images sounds amazing!

Ham II (talk) 19:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh, nice, even more sculptures. Thanks for helping out here! I'm not sure if you're aware of Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structure#Use of creator (P170) in uncertain cases. This is based on the system in museums. I don't think a new property is needed here. We can use manner of (P1777). The scraping would be for the wikidata meta information. I'm quite careful with scraping images, I generally only do it with collections that actively promote the sharing of their online collection. Multichill (talk) 19:38, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Zolo: and @Ham II:, did a query to find possible better images. This query took forever. The result is here as text and I put it in my sandbox. Some of the suggestions are good, but sure not all of them. Multichill (talk) 13:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, the suggestions are rather good, I have changed a few images (and discovered a duplicate item in the process). --Zolo (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Calling area codes

Hi Multichill,

Although every local calling area code always requires the zero, in that field should be stored the local calling area code according to the used in international calls, and I've removed the 0 because in the Netherlands the zero must be removed just like Great Britain for example and differently to what happens to Italy for example.

Let me give you few examples to better clarify:

• Italy
  • Local area code: 06
  • Local area code + number: 06 123456
  • International area code + local area code + number: +39 06 123456 ...the zero must be kept
• Netherlands
  • Local area code: 030
  • Local area code + number: 030 123456
  • International area code + local area code + number: +31 30 123456 ...the zero must be removed

You can easy understand that only removing the zero is possible to know how to use the local area code in an international call.

That said, please consider to revert what you have reverted :-)

Regards, --Andyrom75 (talk) 20:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Waiting for your answer I've thought on a better alternative. You can write the local area code for Netherlands (and all the other nations that lose the zero) in this way:

• • Local area code: (0)30 ...(0) in many business cards indicate the double use of zero
  • Local area code + number: (0)30 123456
  • International area code + local area code + number: +31 (0)30 123456

Let me know you thoughts. Without indication I would proceed with this second approach. --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

map

In the Netherlands we call this a "netnummer" or "kengetal" which is exactly the name of local dialing code (P473). It always includes the zero. Plenty of sources to back that up and also see the map on the right. Multichill (talk) 10:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Let me explain it again providing you a practical example. You have to include the zero when you dial the number within the Netherlands, but you have to remove it when you dial it outside the Netherlands.

The number of the Van Gogh Museum is 020 570 5200 and you have to dial as it is within Netherlands.

I've just tried to call from abroad the +31 020 570 5200 but it doesn't work. To call the musem I have to dial +31 20 570 5200.

That said, the best way to represent those code is +31 (0)20 570 5200, so the stored code should be (0)20 instead of 020.

I suppose that you live in Netherlands, so you can't test it directly, so maybe you can make this test with the Louvre in Paris.

If you try to call +33 01 40 20 53 17, you won't reach the museum, but if you call +33 1 40 20 53 17, than you'll succeed.

That's why the museum number in the official webiste is shown this way: +33 (0)1 40 20 53 17.

France and Netherlands has the same rules to operate the network: removing the zero for the international call.

Let me know once you tested it, I'm sure that you'll understand it easily. --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I know how telephones work. You don't have to explain me that. I you want to use the local dialing code to construct the international number, you remove the zero. Than and only than. So that's exactly what you should be doing if you're going to use this somewhere on wikivoyage. Don't mess up the data here. Multichill (talk) 12:50, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Good! Since you know how telephones work, you can easily understand that storing "(0)30" instead of "030" you'll provide more useful information. Do you agree? --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

No, the code for Utrecht is "030", not "(0)30". Multichill (talk) 13:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, actually you wrong :-) is exactly "(0)30", but I understand your firm position. Maybe we should formalize inside the property how to formally store the information involving the community. Thanks anyway for your time. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:15, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

farm (Q131596) vs farmhouse (Q489357)

A couple months ago you added many statements instance of (P31)=farm (Q131596). Was that really the intention or did you mean farmhouse (Q489357)? --Pasleim (talk) 09:22, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Most of them that I've clicked on don't seem notable, though. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 09:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about the Rijksmonumenten like Westeinde 4, Opperdoes (Q7475957)? farmhouse (Q489357) is probably better for quite a few of them. Multichill (talk) 19:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)