Wikidata:Property proposal/image of representative work

image of representative work edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Person

Not done

Description	image of work created by this person
Data type	Commons media file
Domain	people
Allowed values	Commons image link
Example	Michelangelo (Q5592) → David von Michelangelo.jpg Georgia O'Keeffe (Q46408) → Georgia O'Keeffe, Series 1, No. 8.jpg Allan Warren (Q533799) → 10th Duke of Buccleuch Allan Warren.JPG House of Fabergé (Q2567352) → Chalcedony cape-clasp (Faberge).jpg Charles Rennie Mackintosh (Q220703) → Wfm glasgow school of art.jpg

Motivation

I've been doing a lot of image work adding Wikidata images (image (P18)) to Wikipedia articles and have very frequently run into cases where someone has put a painting/building/drawing done BY the person in the image field. Often this then pulls in to various wikis as the official infobox "portrait" of the person, which gets very confusing. It's particularly undesirable when, for instance, a male painter painted a man, and this painting is listed as image (P18), making it seem for all intents and purposes that it is a portrait OF the artist. (Like the one I just came upon had Peter Hurd (Q7174800)'s image as "LBJ National Portrait Gallery.jpg", which is a portrait of LBJ.) It is also very odd when a building pops in as the main image of an architect, or a book title page as the main image of a 17th-century author, etc.

It's a similar issue to those that led to the creation of properties like plaque image (P1801) and image of grave (P1442). I know image properties are fraught with abuse and confusion, and Wikidata can only be as good as its wide-ranging contributors, but it seems worth getting a discussion going. Sweet kate (talk) 17:27, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support. The intent is certainly a good one. Thierry Caro (talk) 00:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(was support) Comment another way to do this might be to have a "representative work" property that links to an item for which the image does what this property proposes. Not sure which approach would be better but one or the other seems useful. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment we actually have that already.
  --- Jura 03:50, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - notable work (P800)? Then maybe this property isn't needed? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:11, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I would prefer that approach and it is what we do for authors, and would like it to be attempted unless it clearly isn't going to achieve the aim. We need to stop the use of P18 on people pages for their work. At the same time, "notable" is a term that can have issues if users conflate its meaning with that used by the WPs. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:59, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - In that case I Oppose this property being created until that other route is attempted first. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - I have mixed feelings about this solution, with the "perfect being the enemy of the good" mantra rolling in my head. Topmost is that, as @billinghurst: referenced, editors are going to keep putting works in image (P18) (especially when the Wikidata Game image games exist) unless there's a clear, easy solution otherwise. Many, many of these artists/architects etc. have images of work on Commons, but no associated Wikidata items for these works, so a lot more work is required. Then logistical query questions come into play — to pull a notable work image into a wikipedia article using some sort of template would have two levels of query, since it would not need the label of the notable work, but instead the image (P18) property of the notable work, which is another level deep. So you couldn't just query "go get this item's notable work" in a standard way, you have to have a chain. I'm not as knowledgeable on use cases here, but I'm not sure that possible or preferred. Sweet kate (talk) 02:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - On the flip side, maybe the perfect is worth striving for. I just really, really want to stop the practice of non-portrait images getting fed to 20 language wikis in the primary "photo of this person" property. On English Wikipedia, where I have to add things manually, I can choose not to add the P18 image, or change it in the Wikidata item, but a lot of other languages pull in image (P18) automatically and it's often a misleading (if not straight up erroneous) mess. Sweet kate (talk) 02:42, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - We should try to find a way to do a cleanup if there are too many non-portraits in P18 for people.
        --- Jura 10:14, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        I would love a push to 1. remove wrong, non-portrait images from P18 for people 2. change P18's description to clarify it is OF the subject, not BY the subject or whatever and 3. work with the various image-related Wikidata games to update all the surrounding text to discourage selecting someone's work as P18 for the creator. Sweet kate (talk) 15:00, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      (ec) If we adjusted the current descriptions, 1) to add "image of representative work" as an alias to "notable work"; 2) update image (P18) to say "image of person/subject" or similar. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - notable work (P800) has a domain of "item," not a Commons image, so the alias wouldn't quite work. The image link would go in as P18 of the work's item. Like in David (Q179900). Sweet kate (talk) 15:00, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        If this work is relevant I would prefer to create an item in WIkidata for a relevant work as that work (painting, building, sculpture) would sooner or later get an wikidata item anyway, or has already. --Hannolans (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support "image of representative work" with link to an image, could be a twin of notable work (P800) with image instead of a item. That could ease the process of cleaning up image (P18). We could also have process of converting "image of representative work" properties to notable work (P800). --Jarekt (talk) 13:14, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
If the motivation for this property is doing a cleanup, then I'm asking why we cannot do it without a new property.

Redundant to notable work (P800)/image (P18), works are different concepts than their authors, so images of works do not belong to items of authors. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose per Matěj Suchánek. --Marsupium (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment So Q114112#P18 should be removed since File:Fotografi av fris med fyra män, från Parthenontemplets norra del i Aten - Hallwylska museet - 103044.tif depicts a work of Callicrates (Q114112) but not himself? I think it is the best thing to do to state this – or discuss it previously – at Property talk:P18 and prevent bots from importing images without knowledge about their content. --Marsupium (talk) 15:45, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
P18 is for images of the subject. Oppose new property, redundant. --Yair rand (talk) 20:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Links to Commons images of a creator's work should not be mixed in with links to Q items representing the notable works themselves. Unless there's some way to add an image as qualifier to a notable work link, I'd like to have this property added. - PKM (talk) 00:57, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think we abuse of properties when we are allowed to use qualifiers. The "image of representative work" is the image (P18) of the corresponding work in the notable work (P800) list. Beside, I obviouly agree with no put this images in the statement image (P18) of the item. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amadalvarez (talk • contribs) at 31. 7. 2017, 13:45‎ (UTC).
because separate item with image (P18) and notable work (P800) claim are possible now and this allows us to have multiple images for multiple "selected" works without qualifiers. Way without qualifiers is better than with qualifiers and we should have an item for every "work", Oppose d1g (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per d1g and Marsupium. The image of notable work for infoboxes should be obtainable from image (P18) of notable work (P800). --Hsarrazin (talk) 15:07, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pre prev bullet --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 17:24, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
strong Support - I work in the field of ancient artists. We don't know how they look like, only their own works speak for them. We NEED the possibility to show examples of their work. Marcus Cyron (talk) 15:18, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- You can show examples using notable work (P800) with the corresponding image --Hannolans (talk) 15:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Marsupium, D1gggg, Hsarrazin, Vladimir Alexiev, Marcus Cyron:@Hannolans, Thierry Caro, ArthurPSmith, billinghurst, Sweet kate, Yair rand: Use notable work (P800) with the corresponding image. ChristianKl (talk) 19:15, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]