jæja
Logo of Wikidata

Welcome to Wikidata, Oursana!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

  • Introduction – An introduction to the project.
  • Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
  • Community portal – The portal for community members.
  • User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
  • Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
  • Project chat – Discussions about the project.
  • Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards!

--Ymblanter (talk) 07:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

all subpages T · m:special:CentralAuth

Instanz / TeilEdit

Hallo, ich habe deine Änderungen an Department of Paintings of the Louvre (Q3044768): die Gemäldeabteilung des Louvre ist keine "Instanz" des Louvre sont ein Teil des Louvre (part of (P361)). Siehe Help:Basic membership properties. --Zolo (talk) 08:30, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Merci, Zolo, es-tu vraiment sûr, sur département de conservation, voie la discussion d'élément. --Oursana (talk) 10:21, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Je ne comprends pas très bien, je vois le département des peinture à la fois dans le décret initial et dans la version actuelle. --Zolo (talk) 12:02, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Oui, ma ta référence n'indique pas, que le département des peintures est Property:P31 de département de conservation du Louvre. Voie s'il te plait Talk:Q3044768. --Oursana (talk) 12:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
P31, ne veut pas dire "subordonnée à", mais plutôt quelque chose comme "est un". La Joconde est un p31 de tableau, Picasso un P31 d'humain et le département des peintures du Louvre un P31 de département de conservation du Louvre. Je ne vois rien d'anormal. --Zolo (talk) 12:40, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Merci beaucoup pour tes explications patientes et pardonnes mon changement. --Oursana (talk) 13:25, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

FreskenzyklusEdit

Die has part(s) (P527)-Aussagen in cycle of frescoes (Q16905550), die konkrete Zyklen als Objekt haben, sind – meine ich – nicht korrekt. Es handelt sich zum Beispiel bei Paintings of the Months in Palazzo Schifanoia (Q548688) nicht um eine part of (P361)has part(s) (P527)-Beziehung sondern um eine subclass of (P279)–superclass-Beziehung. Sag doch bitte, ob Du es auch so siehst, und entferne ggf. die betroffenen Aussagen. Merci beaucoup d'avance et meilleures salutations, --Marsupium (talk) 11:23, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic#Ist die Oberklasse von ist vielleicht die Antwort dafür, dass ich das rückgängig machen möchte. Hier sind wir uns einig. LG --Oursana (talk) 14:42, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Ich bitte um Entschuldigung für die späte Antwort! Zu den von mir angesprochenen has part(s) (P527)-Aussagen in cycle of frescoes (Q16905550), die konkrete Zyklen als Objekt haben, hast Du nichts gesagt. Ich habe sie jetzt jedenfalls entfernt.
Du hast hingegen meine Änderung in cycle of paintings (Q16905563) angesprochen. Während es keine Oberklasse-Eigenschaft gibt, stattdessen has part(s) (P527) zu verwenden, halte ich für keine gute Idee. Ich beließe es deshalb lieber bei meiner Entfernung der Aussage.
Liebe Grüße, --Marsupium (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Vielleicht hast Du Recht. Warten wir die Entwicklung von Wikidata ab. Liebe Grüße --Oursana (talk) 23:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

EditionsEdit

Bonjour Oursana, d'après les recommandations de Help:Sources, il faut créer un élément différent pour désigner une oeuvre et pour désigner une édition particulière de cette oeuvre que l'on veut utiliser comme référence, même lorsque c'est l'édition originale, et même lorsqu'il n'y a eu qu'une édition de l'oeuvre. Jamot and Wildenstein, Manet, catalogue critique, 1st edition (Q15619449) est donc bien une instance d'édition. C'est Manet, catalogue critique (Q17586287) qui est une instance de catalogue. --Zolo (talk) 06:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

J'essayerai de le comprendre, merci.--Oursana (talk) 16:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Adoration of the Magi (Q522792)Edit

Look at contents of the pages - they are lists of paintings. So I believe that the item describe some class of paintings. Please don't mention technical template "disambig". --Infovarius (talk) 10:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

IMHO a Wikipedia disambiguation page, also when listing paintings, can never be a subclass of painting, (one painting). Please don't mention technical template "disambig".I'am sorry, this I do not understand, further more applies to part (P518) makes no sense. And I want you to consider, that even an other experienced user, does not agree with these changes of you.--Oursana (talk) 11:27, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
"Disambiguation page" is defined by inclusion of some template, technically. But by content it can be of different senses. Here we have "disambiguation page" as a list of paintings. And I suppose that a list of paintings should have properties linking it to the painting. By P518 I've meant that at least some language versions can be fully considered as a list. Infovarius (talk) 12:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Blue BoyEdit

Bonjour, j'ai ajouté "propriétaire : Huntington Library" avec rank = privlieged à l'élément sur le Blue Boy. Je ne trouve pas de source, et je ne sais pas si c'est juridiquement exact, mais c'est nécessaire d'avoir le propriétaire actuel avec rang privilégié parce que Wikidata a été activé dans le champ propriétaire de fr:Modèle:Infobox Art, et si on a pas ça on se retrouve avec la liste entière des propriétaires sur fr:L'Enfant bleu (Gainsborough), et c'est un peu trop long. --Zolo (talk) 07:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Merci Zolo, très intéressant. J'ai fait quelques changements.
Est limité la quantité des références? Je voudrais ajouter pour Duveen aussi le livre du dernier URL avec stated in (P248) et pages, mais je ne peux pas enregistrer.
Et il y a beaucoup des constraint violations p.e. parce que les expositions ne sont pas nommé comme expositions temporaires, mais IMHO sont désormais importantes

Oursana (talk) 13:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

bitte ru:Чупан-ата & de:Çopan-Ata mergenEdit

Çopan-Ata gibt's auch in ca: --Jmv (talk) 13:52, 30 March 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done, jetzt alle 3 in Chupan-Ata Mausoleum (Q16718771)

Hast Du schon bei Entstellungen, Helferlein den Haken bei Merge gemacht? :)--Oursana (talk) 14:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Ja gestern, war aber erst heute sichtbar. muß man dazu neu einlochen?--Jmv (talk) 07:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC) Eigentlich nicht. Manchmal daher die Sichtbarkeit wohl. Aber da kenne ich mich nicht aus. Oursana (talk) 08:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Please do not "base" artworks on biblical referencesEdit

Hi Oursana, thanks for your work in Wikidata! I noticed that you used the "based on" property based on (P144) to show that a particular painting (e.g. here) is based on a biblical story. A painting is not a story of itself, and only stories can be based on other stories. An artwork can be based on another artwork, but not on a story. So the biblical reference belongs in the "depicts" property depicts (P180), which I made for example here. Hope it helps. --Jane023 (talk) 09:11, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jane023 perhaps you can look here where we discussed about using based on (P144). depicts (P180) IMHO is too weak, you use it for e.g. mountain, man etc. But for the whole story behind a painting I would still prefer using based on (P144), which I always did with no one bothering about it. Wikidata:Forum/Archiv/2014/01#Die Erschaffung Adams (Q500242) √ und andere Bibelstellen Kindermord in Betlehem (Q643474) , Literaturgrundlage--Oursana (talk) 01:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
@Jane023: Hi Jane023, following your above mentioned proposal I created constraint violations using section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958), see example The Miraculous Draft of Fishes (Q3900659)--Oursana (talk) 11:42, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

located in the administrative territorial entity (P131)Edit

Hallo, schau dir mal die Constraints und Beispiele für diese Eigenschaft an. P131 ist für ortsfeste Dinge gedacht. Für "Aufbewahrungsorte" (im weiteres Sinne) gibt es location (P276). --Srittau (talk) 13:12, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

The Virgin and Child under an Apple Tree (Q16038763)Edit

Hi Oursana, can you explain what you did with this item? I don't understand why you would remove the collection property. Jane023 (talk) 22:26, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Hmm paintings should not have official websites. Jane023 (talk) 22:49, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Are you really sure? Or shall we discuss it more broadly--Oursana (talk) 18:58, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Source of the Berckheyde mix upEdit

painting 1
painting 2

File:Het stadhuis op de Dam te Amsterdam Rijksmuseum SK-A-1733.jpeg. That's showing The City Hall on Dam Square, (Q17791414), but the SK-A-1733 is Amsterdam Town Hall on Dam Square (Q17324643) which is File:SB 1160-De Dam, naar het westen gezien, met het Stadhuis.jpg. Multichill (talk) 12:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I did not answer yet because I'm still checking. At The City Hall on Dam Square, (Q17791414) I saw you at 13. Januar 2017, 12:29: adding by merge Het stadhuis op de Dam te Amsterdam Rijksmuseum SK-A-1733.jpeg, which I corrected yesterday. There was and still is a perfect image (P18)--Oursana (talk) 17:33, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

canvas (Q4259259) and canvas (Q12321255)Edit

I noticed you sometimes changing canvas (Q4259259) to canvas (Q12321255). I don't think this is correct canvas (Q12321255) is about the surface to paint on, not exactly what kind of material it is. The Dutch Wikipedia mentions several possibilities. Please have a look at Talk:Q4259259 and don't change anything until this is sorted out. Multichill (talk) 15:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

after message above I was hesitating talking about that. I'm afraid, we cannot solve it. In German (Q4259259) does not work at all, in all museums you will always find the German text of canvas (Q12321255). The linking seems to be a little bit conflicting, when I have time, I will explain, perhaps solve a little, there are more items like linen (Q1426327) awful German naming. Anyway I stop and will read nl.--Oursana (talk) 19:15, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Dutch is the same mess. I'll see what the AAT made of this. Maybe we can copy their solution. We will solve it some day..... Multichill (talk) 20:22, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Unused propertyEdit

This is a kind reminder that the following properties were created more than six months ago: Denkmalschutzamt Hamburg object ID (P1822). As of today, these properties are used on less than five items. As the proposer of these properties you probably want to change the unfortunate situation by adding a few statements to items. --Pasleim (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Denkmalliste BrandenburgEdit

Ich bin niemand der gerne über die Versionsgeschichte kommuniziert: Die Denkmallisten-Eigenschaft war unter dem kryptischen Namen nicht auffindbar, sodass sie bis auf ein paar Einträge nicht genutzt wurde. Eine Großzahl der Einträge stammt heute aus dem Import von der deutschen Wikipedia. Ich werde "Denkmalliste Brandenburg" nun als Alias setzen, schön ist es nicht, aber gut. Queryzo (talk) 05:46, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Es bleibt aber immer noch falsch, http://www.bldam-brandenburg.de --Oursana (talk) 10:42, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

A Lady seated Writing a Letter (Q48709579)Edit

Hi Oursana, reverting back and forth is not helping, so I will just explain it here. If you see a painting and can't find the collection or disagree with the collection, please try to find the collection and add it. Please do not remove metadata from the item. In this case, the rkd disagrees with your statement that it is not in the collection. If you feel it is not in the collection, that does not make the statement in the rkd untrue. The painting could easily have been on loan there and that is why there is no id number in the collection. Jane023 (talk) 16:37, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

In this case I am very familiar with the actual collection of the less than 200 paintings of Bildergalerie Sanssouci. There has been published an actual catalogue as well as documentation of Google Cultural where you can check, that the painting is not within the collection. It is a mistake by rkd. You did not even search the actual catalogue. Only if you show me the catalogue entry supporting your opinion, you can revert me. THe catalogue from Bildergalerie in this case counts more than the rkd. By the way it is circle of ter Borch, what you mixed as well. Your stubborn and teacher-like behaviour in this project is not appreciated. Try to discuss in 2019. Regards--Oursana (talk) 16:49, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Please see the record - I added the qualifications for time. You seem unable to comprehend that collections change over time. Jane023 (talk) 17:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
But it was not there in 1772 and 1773. Rkd cites , Gudlaugsson: 'Die von HdG. angeführte Provenienz aus der Sammlung Choiseul bezieht sich nicht auf dieses Exemplar, sondern auf die Kopie g.' etc.; after hdG in 1833 : Six van Hillegom; The Bildergalerie is a historic baroque collection and therefore generally is not changed, but you are ignorant to this gallery, which you do not even know.--Oursana (talk) 00:23, 3 January 2019 (UTC)


Joachim and Anna leave the templeEdit

Why did you make this edit? That main subject was added because it is the one that corresponds to the iconclass code. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:42, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Because of your deletion and as there is no Anna--Oursana (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Hmm. My goal was to just replace the "depicts iconclass code" with a link to the item that corresponds to the iconclass code. I see your point re: no Anna. I still think it probably would make sense to include this as "depicts" (if not "main subject") because in my mind expulsion of Joachim is a subset of expulsion of Joachim and Anna (also "expulsion of Joachim" is also listed as a synonym for the artistic theme item but maybe that isn't the best approach?). But I don't have strong feelings. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #389Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #390Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #391Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #392Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #393Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #394Edit

Weekly Summary #395Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #396Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #397Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #398Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #399Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #400Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #401Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #402Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #403Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #404Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #405Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #406Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #407Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #408Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #409Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #410Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #411Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #412Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #413Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #414Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #415Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #416Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #417Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #418Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #419Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #420Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #421Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #422Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #423Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #424Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #425Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #426Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #427Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #428Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #429Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #430Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #431Edit

Wikidata weekly summary #432Edit