User talk:Multichill/Archives/2019/April

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Multichill in topic Re: Whitney museum artists

Commons compatible image available at URL (P4765) upload criteria

Hi Multichill, I found out this set of altarpiece panels for which your bot has set Commons compatible image available at URL (P4765) back in October, presumably when you processed ARTIC web site. But only two of them had the image actually uploaded in December. Both already had lower res images from Commons, but also inception (P571) set. Is this part of the decision-making? Isn't copyright license (P275) enough when set to CCO? Is there a chance the images would be finally uploaded and linked? Thanks --Nono314 (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Nono314: The bot doesn't take into account the copyright license (P275). It only uploads images of paintings that are in the public domain due to age. For anonymous works indeed inception (P571) is used for that.
I happen to have recently updated the painting import bot to better handle imprecise dates and I am running the imports again to catch missing dates and other data. Already imported thousands of new statements. I'll do the ARTIC again soon and that will trigger the upload of these paintings. Keep an eye on Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections missing inception. Multichill (talk) 20:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Ok, will wait for it, then. Thanks for the quick answer. --Nono314 (talk) 21:15, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
@Nono314: bot is running now to add the missing dates. Also figured out how to extract the date when it entered the collection so adding that too. The upload bot has a cool down period of 3 days. So three days after the last edit to both the item about the painting and the painter, the bot will upload the image.
Any other collections I imported before you think I should spend some time on? Multichill (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
I created Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collections by number of paintings with image suggestion missing data to see what collections could use a bit of attention. Multichill (talk) 12:02, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
That maintenance page is useful indeed, and I was able to add a few missing creators.
Imprecise dates are always difficult to handle automatically in a sensible way, and often result in oversized precision (in the example you point to, the bot has set precision to century when actual uncertainty range is one year) which is not very helpful for sorting works on creator pages.
NG and NGS could probably benefit from added inception (P571) if you don't mind. I also found out that all links to SLAM works are now dead: this seemingly was not an import of yours but may be a good future target as they (now?) have high res pics online (see eg [1]) with appropriate license tags (PD).  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nono314 (talk • contribs) at 16:48, 1 April 2019‎ (UTC).
I resume you refer to this edit. Unfortunately this is right on a decade barrier (the 1910s ended in 1919) so the decade precision would be incorrect. That's the fun implication of our current date system.
When you say NG and NGS, which collections are you referring to exactly? Preferably Qid so I'm not looking at the wrong ones.
That Saint Louis collection looks nice. I updated Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Location/United States 4 to keep track of it. Happy to see they moved away from Emuseum hell and now have some api. Multichill (talk) 16:04, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant National Gallery (Q180788) and Scottish National Gallery (Q942713). NGS being the name of your import script I thought it would be just as convenient to pick it this way.
Yes, I'm aware of the decade thing and have seen the same with automated imports from Commons Artwork templates by Jarekt, however humans tend to interpret it in a more liberal way ore use workaround like circa (Q5727902) instead, or even entering both dates, to give the reader a better insight. That's even more true when the interval is like 1910-20 or 1915-20: a bot will still see it as crossing the barrier, while a human will (rightfully I think) interpret it as 1910s / second half of 1910s. That's all about human perception vs. cold logic (and perhaps thinking about 99% of queries that would just use wd:P571 and get the main snak value).----Nono314 (talk) 08:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

AWARE ID (P6637), etc.

Hello.

It wasn't that much and not that important. I could always retrieve your matches from the database if I really want to have a look at them.
I generally don't participate or vote in discussions on wiki's on which I'm not very active.
Thanks for getting that Stedelijk id created. I don't think creating one for works has any added value. Multichill (talk) 16:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Your modification

The RegEx was good and was replaced by a bad one. You can test your version and the current version on regex101.com. Can you explain this choice? Cordially. --Eihel (talk) 05:54, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Eihel: before telling someone off about testing their regex, you should probably test your own regex. Multichill (talk) 08:05, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Maxima mea culpa, I remember, it was this morning: I thought I saw a closing parenthesis without seeing the opening one and I reverted without seeing if the first was valid. I beg you a thousand times to apologize. I put your RegEx. --Eihel (talk) 10:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
No worries. I did realize it was possible to simplify it even more. Multichill (talk) 10:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Yale labels

Now that you've added a title (P1476) for them could you also fix the labels for Yale University Art Gallery (Q1568434)? Is from last year. Here another example: Monkey under gra (Q49205079). It wouldn't be too difficult to compare and QS-replace with right value in title (P1476), but probably even easier to do it for you! Thanks in advance! --Marsupium (talk) 10:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Marsupium: good point. Does this query return all the cases that went wrong? Or do you know of more? Multichill (talk) 20:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Hey, your query assumes same whitespace and capitalization, but it seems they have changed both quite a bit, so this query also finds the cases where the label begins like the title but ignoring spaces/non-breaking spaces and capitalization. It looks like when doing the matching for the titles in a "\s*" regex after the title you forgot the "\" which lead to swallowed "s"s, looking only for those this query finds 574 cases. With this query which even only considers titles ending in "s" I manually find 4 more cases and it becomes evident that they have changed at lot of titles at the Yale University Art Gallery. It won't be possible to find all of them automatically any more now that they have changed. So it seems to me that the only clean solution is to update all labels, in the best case only those that haven't been changed by a user in the meantime? What do you think? --Marsupium (talk) 22:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Re: Whitney museum artists

This was a challenge but finally here it is: https://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/#/catalog/2381 --Gerwoman (talk) 10:48, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

See User talk:Gerwoman#Whitney museum artists. Let's keep the conversation in one place. Multichill (talk) 17:12, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Multichill/Archives/2019/April".