Wikidata talk:WikiProject Music/Archive/2022

deletion of Property:P6893

I nominated P6893 for deletion:Wikidata:Properties_for_deletion#Property:P6893 Bigbossfarin (talk) 10:35, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Parts or sections of musical works (second attempt)

WikiProject Music has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.

Hi, I read archived comment and the unsuccessful property creation talk. In fact, I came here to ask about using tempo marking (P1558) as qualifier of movement. However, I figure out that the debate about "how to define movements" is not agreed yet. Does anybody know why the P1558 was not being involved in the property's creation discussion ? And why it does not appear in this project list of composition properties ?.

In my opinion, the Symphony No 7 or Concert No 2 solution is correct when the movement is remarkable to have its own item because has a specific title -for instance-, but also we may use something like first (Q28469711), second (Q28469712), third (Q28469713), ... in the others. In any case, the P1558 with the tempo should be as a property of the movement item (when specific) or as a qualifier under the mentioned general values. With this structure, we don't need a specific property (as the rejected one), nor an item for each movement of each composition.

Last, but not least: These two examples use has part(s) (P527) to list the movements. However, some other as Gloria (Q5571300) or La traviata (Q186162) contains songs or aria (Q178122), and the figure in number of parts of this work (P2635) doesn't match with number of entries in P527, obviously. So, probably, we'll need to find a solution for these cases.

What's your opinion?. --Amadalvarez (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

@Kosboot@Moebeus@Robertgarrigos@Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE)@Airon90 I'd appreciate your opinion. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Qualifier, yes. Even though it's very typical to list unnamed movements by their tempo marking, I think it should be emphasized that this is only a custom, and that more typically movements are indicated by their numerical position in the entire work. -Kosboot (talk) 12:45, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

"Adopted date" in anthem

@Kosboot:@Moebeus:@Airon90:.Hi, I'm trying to implement the infobox anthem with WD information. The "Adopted date" is one of the most significant data, it is, the date when the song became anthem for a country. As I observed, usually it appears in inception (P571), but with inconsistent values in relation with publication date (P577), as happens in Juno and Avos (Q4534600). In addition, some other compositions (for instance, La traviata (Q186162) ), different from anthem, have P571 and I don't understand the correct meaning, as it is not defined in Wikidata:WikiProject_Music#Composition_properties. My proposal regarding anthem is:

• to use service entry (P729) - service retirement (P730) to show the "adopted date" for anthems as a main property, but alternatively as a qualifier of applies to jurisdiction (P1001) when anthem were valid for several territories (ex.:God Save the King (Q40807)).

• Do not use country (P17) nor located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) to describe the user territory, but applies to jurisdiction (P1001) because not always is valid for a state, but for a region.

• to use country of origin (P495) to describe the origin of poem or traditional song, when applied.

I appreciate your opinions. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 06:28, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

I prefer "start time"/"end time" qualifiers on the anthem property directly on the country/state/municiplaity/territory,city, football team, that uses the music. That way there is no need to duplicate this information onto the item about the composition itself. Moebeus (talk) 11:25, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Understand. However, in the composition item we need the user's item (country/state/municipality/ etc.) to use on wikipedia, because we can not get by backlinks from LUA modules. I'll try to find an alternative solution. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 18:23, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, @Moebeus, we got it !. See La Marsellesa. The code of wikidata list is generated by the expansion of ca:template:WDlist/llistaP85, as its catalan documentation describes.

In addition, in https://w.wiki/5Qmh we have a match between the values in P17 on anthem items and the P85 that points to it.

My intention is do nothing with P17 or P1001 that already are in anthem items. The project's participants may consider to delete or not these statements. Salut ! Amadalvarez (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Authority control templates and songs

According to this WikiProject, Wikipedia articles about songs should be connected to the item about the song and not the single. However, the single is often the item that contains useful identifiers like MusicBrainz release group, Discogs, Last.fm, etc. Because they are on a different item they don't show up on authority control templates. Is this something that is fixable? I mean the template would have to look for an audio track that is a recording or performance of (P2550) the song, and then look for the single that has tracklist (P658) with that audio track. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 10:32, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Hindi (Bollywood) Film Song Performers

In South Asia, specifically in Indian Hindi cinema, most songs are picturised on specific actors and dancers. For which they are also sometimes credited and are known for in the cultural zeitgeist, along with the singers.

There is no property for "picturisation", but I assumed adding actors or dancers as performers and qualifying them as such may be the best approach.

Example: In the song - Yeh Mera Dil Yaar Ka Diwana (Q55657899)

I have added an additional instance of (P31) = musical number (Q73067531);

And then,

performer (P175) = Asha Bhosle (Q38393)

• subject has role (P2868) = playback singer (Q1755412)

performer (P175) = Helen (Q467223)

• subject has role (P2868) = dancer (Q5716684) or actor (Q33999)

Other Examples in the songs - Chandni O Meri Chandni (Q113155178) & Zara Zara Touch Me (Q113151376)

However, is the property cast member (P161) more appropriate, as it is in a film? Example: In the song - Kabhi Kabhie Mere Dil Mein (Q6344091)

I personally prefer the use of performer (P175), but am open to any suggestion as I am trying to have some consistency going forward, and cannot seem to find any other examples, including in western music videos. Wallacegromit1 (talk) 22:00, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Some more doubts about structure and properties

Hi @Moebeus, Kosboot, Sweet kate: and any other wikiproject participants. Looking at the structures and properties defined, I have some doubts:

• What structure should be used for music performance in live (I.E. performed music (Q106805967), Eurovision Song Contest entry (Q63481999) or opera performance (Q11931373))?. It is a performance of a composition, as a track, but is not a track; it's not recorded and can't be a part of an album, for instance.
• Property recording or performance of (P2550) is not listed in any kind of structure. However, it is used in track items. I assume that it may be used for performace too, as it is defined "item is a recording or release of this composition".
• In the Overview it is explained that "a single with only one track...should be connected to the item about the composition. Otherwise, it should be connected to the item about the release". It seems reasonable to avoid over-segmentation of the structure when the relationship is 1 composition >> 1 track >> 1 release (single). However, using recording or performance of (P2550) to link the release with its composition, doesn't allow single (Q134556), nor single (Q134556). We have +200 items in this situation.

Nothing else, by now. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 20:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

My thoughts:

• recording or performance of (P2550) is not limited to recordings, as indicated by the label. In my opinion it's the correct property for your examples of performed music, Eurovision, etc.
• linking a single directly to a composition using Property:P2550 just because the single only contains 1 track is clearly wrong in my opinion. Singles and tracks are conceptually distinct, different things, and have completely different sets of External Identifiers that apply to them. It's not "over-segmentation" to add the track to the tracklist of the single, it's doing it right.

Moebeus (talk) 20:47, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, @Moebeus for your fast and clear answers.

Regarding #1

• Currently, a track item can be identified with instance of (P31) = audio track (Q7302866), music video (Q193977) or subclasses. Should unrecorded musical performance be under a subclass in order to know any kind of composition use?. If so, which one?

Regarding #2

• You know my point of view, but I have no problem to share your opinion. However, for a late comers to the project as me, we need some kind of graph to understand and avoid doubts about the structure relationships in order to doing it right, in each situation.
• To illustrate this lack of basic information, let me show some doubts:

• Can we have "release" of composition without "track"?. Overview section defines "Tracks comprise individual audio and video entities"
• Let's see the case of "videos of live concerts". For instance: Live in London (Q4255612), Exposed (Q3511913) or Peacetour (Q7157612).
• Now, their P31 are album (Q482994), it's "release"; or film (Q11424), so, "out of music" item in Exposed (Q3511913) case.
• As albums, may they have tracklist (P658) ?. With which tracks?. Can we use P658 or another generic property as contains (P4330) with compositions ? (I assume the aswer is "no").
• How we would know all editions and performances for a song if we are not able to indicate in all releases where it has been played?
• In the Exposed (Q3511913) case, we can consider to change film (Q11424) by music video (Q193977)?. No, because is not an individual song. And, to change by musical work (Q2188189) (one of the subclasses of videoclip)?; No, because is not an allowed value for a track.

• After your answers, I promise to make a graph with relationship among entities.

New questions

• Property release of (P9831) doesn't show in the list of properties (and it's difficult to understand to me). What's the difference with a release ?. Is it just for different formats of the same track?
• A curiosity: How to describe a piano roll (Q1142040) record?. Obviously, the material is a audio release format (Q108037652), but IMHO, when used it is a track, because is a record of "individual audio entity" that always play same version of composition. The difference with present tracks are the playback equipment. See piano roll with Ballade F-Dur, op. 38 (Q111659696), as a model.

Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 16:34, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

• Regarding release of - Wikidata :This is fairly new, but let's us add specific releases (country specific, date specific, specific catalog number, set tracklist, etc.) belonging to a release group. This modelling is mirrored by MusicBrainz, Allmusic, Discogs, etc., with corresponding ExtIDs like MusicBrainz release ID , Discogs release ID, AllMusic release ID .
• Re "piano roll" - Heh, pretty niche! My instinct would be p31 = release with distribution format = piano roll , with the tracklist pointing to the recording.

Moebeus (talk) 17:20, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

• Regarding #1: Good question. I mostly work on recorded music, but maybe performed music could be such a superclass, given the very generic name?
• Can we have "release" of composition without "track"? : Sort of, yes. Published sheet music would be an example of that.
• Let's see the case of "videos of live concerts". The p31 should be video album, while form of creative work should be live video album
• As albums, may they have tracklist (P658) ? Good question. I'm leaning towards "yes", but I don't edit audio visual releases much myself, and frankly have been hoping for someone interested in that to come along and start working on the modelling in a serious way.

Moebeus (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Many, many thanks. Really the piano roll and videos of live concerts are just a few cases. But is interesting to write down a criteria. I agree with your suggestion. By the way, piano roll are "single"; I mean, they have just one song each. So, the P658 won't be necessary.

I agree too with "performed music" as a class for any "non recorded music played" (today, I went to a classic concert without recording, and found a new situation to add: the artist performance curriculum.)

I'll wait the maduration of P9831 and P658 in video of live concerts.

Tomorrow I'll begin with the promise graph !.

Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 21:33, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Moebeus: Just to take a glance.

I'm working in a "set of changes" in wikiproject text in order to fit our comments, then publish it for comments with project participants before incorporate it. Amadalvarez (talk) 07:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I do have some comments, for one "release group" is missing, but maybe too much to go through it all here. Are you on Telegram? We have a music chat there: https://t.me/exmusica

Moebeus (talk) 16:32, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Regarding #1: The modelling of live performances could/should be dealt with in the context of the WikiProject Performing Arts. When describing theatre performances, we often use the double-structure of "production" (= a run of quasi-identical performances) and individual "performances"; some heritage institutions only describe the "production" level. When describing music performances, we may stick to a simpler model, just describing individual performances. - What comes closest to that so far, are the reflections on how to represent the performance history data from Carnegie Hall; see: Wikidata:WikiProject_Performing_arts/Data_sources/Carnegie_Hall.

--Beat Estermann (talk) 06:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

You may also have a look at the ingests from the Montreux Jazz Festival Database. Query:

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel WHERE {  ?item wdt:P361 wd:Q669118.  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". } }

Try it!

(the URL shortener seems to be broken at the moment). Beat Estermann (talk) 06:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Artículo Luisao

Artista Ecuatoriano con base en Wikidata Q113815479 chequearlo para revisión y efectuar correctamente la información 190.89.129.2 01:08, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

new subclass for Lied

After some conversations with Beat Estermann (Q63216809) I'm proposing a new subclass lyrico-musical work (Q114586269) as P31 for Lied and Lieder cycle as analogy of dramatico-musical work (Q58483083) for Opera works. I believe Lieder have enough entity to have a subclass for it and I would extend it to Lieder cycle also. This would be an example of a Lied: Die Forelle (Q630565).

If there is no opposition to this new subclass, I will apply the changes to other Lieder and cycles.

BTW, I take this opportunity to introduce you the WikiProject:Lieder (Q114586095) with projects pages on the Catalan Wikipedia, WikiData and Commons. You are very welcome to collaborate. Robertgarrigos (talk) 15:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

It seems sensible to have a property to capture song cycles/lieder. My question, and excuse me if this seems obvious, is how is it different in concept than song cycle (Q893466) which I tend to think of groups of lieder or is this specifically groups of lieder only performed within the context of opera?--Smallison (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Smallison for your answer. Both song cycle (Q893466) and Lied (Q216860) are values for property form of creative work (P7937) as we recommend in our models proposal.

Indeed, song cycle (Q893466) is a group of lieder and have nothing to do with an opera. Robertgarrigos (talk) 05:59, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Cinemaazi ID

I have created a property proposal for the Cinemaazi ID for Indian Cinematic works and people, including regional languages.

Lyricists/Songwriters & Composers are also listed, with a special sections for film songs "coming soon" on the site.

Kindly requesting any comments or concerns. Wallacegromit1 (talk) 20:56, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

UNIMARC Medium of Performance ID

I created a property proposal for the UNIMARC Medium of Performance vocabulary. The proposal is here. This is a vocabulary used internationally by libraries to describe the medium of performance of musical works. It is technically an IFLA vocabulary, but it is maintained by IAML (the International Association of Music Libraries, Archives, and Documentation Centres).

Please take a look at this property proposal and leave any comments. Cholden86 (talk) 22:54, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

RISM siglum

@Podonnellfm: has proposed RISM siglum as a new music related property for your review and comment. Dhx1 (talk) 12:40, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Album with booklet

Hi,

WikiProject Music has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.

I created Q115345681. This is a CD with a booklet, and all informations about the book triggers constraints violations. If anyone has any advice, this would be very welcome.

Cheers, VIGNERON en résidence (talk) 08:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

@VIGNERON en résidence: You should use booklet (Q106581242) instead of introduction (Q305178) but it's not a solution. Actually if we are talking about albums it could has part (Q24575087) of compact disc (Q34467), booklet (Q106581242), jewel case (Q1023101) and even additional sheet (Q106575204). I think booklet (Q106581242) could be separate item. Eurohunter (talk) 15:25, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

What would a good structure of an item and the items of cover versions of it look like?

I was looking the song "Hard to Handle" by Otis Reading and saw its property's were a mixture of its and a notable cover version of it.

I have tried to separate them out but wondered if we have an example/documentation of a good structure of an item a notable song and the items of cover versions of that song and relationships ? Back ache (talk) 09:03, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

modelling of genres and sound sculptures

Hi, I have two interrelated questions:

1) What is the preferred superclass of music genres, music (Q638) (4432 direct and indirect, 37 direct instances of music genre with this superclass) or musical work (Q2188189) (679 direct and indirect, 8 direct instances of music genre with this superclass)

Just going by the numbers it is obviously music (Q638). But is this "official", e.g. should the other subclass of (P279) be moved to music (Q638)?

2) sound sculpture (Q2236597) is currently defined as an instance of art genre and music genre which looks fine to me (at first glance). Single works should probably have instance of (P31)sculpture (Q860861) and genre (P136)sound sculpture (Q2236597). But now two questions arise:

1) that way single sound sculptures are not classed as musical work, violating some constraints (See Polytope de Montréal (Q7227110) that violated constraints set on BRAHMS work ID (P5302) that it should be an instance of musical work (I added it as an exception)). Should all single sound sculptures have both instance of (P31)sculpture (Q860861) and instance of (P31)musical work (Q2188189) (which is not allowed, currently)? Or should sound sculptures be both a subclass of musical work and sculpture (violating the rule above that music genres should be a subclass of music (Q638)) and have instances (instance of (P31)sound sculpture (Q2236597))?

2) musical road (Q11344139) is a subclass of sound sculpture (Q2236597): Does it seem weird to set instance of (P31)musical work (Q2188189) (or whatever class we take), instance of (P31)sculpture (Q860861) and instance of (P31)road (Q34442) and genre (P136)sound sculpture (Q2236597)? To me it seems weird, but there may be differing intuitions. (there are currently no instances of music road, but there might be) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:28, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Should musical road (Q11344139) even be a subclass of sound sculpture (Q2236597)? Actually, calling a street a sculpture already seems weird in the first place. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:55, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Valentina.Anitnelav Really, items should be using music (Q115484611). This topic should give some more insight as to what I'm doing to try solving this and help clear up some issues. Lectrician1 (talk) 13:26, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

This would be one solution. Another solution would be to not allow any instances of music genre (Q188451) to have instances themselves. That an artwork is of a certain genre should be expressed via genre (P136). If musical genres should subclass <work> rather than <activity> musical work (Q2188189) would be currently actually preferred over music (Q115484611).

There has been a lot of thought about the music ontology and about the modelling of musical works so we should first listen to the people that build it before changing core concepts. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:50, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

A musical work is actually not a physical entity of music like music (Q115484611) is (although at the moment it ontologically is but that's because we haven't distinguished the difference between works and manifestations like FRBR/BIBFRAME does in Wikidata yet). A work is a conceptual idea of a piece of music and music (Q115484611) is its manifestation. Music genres should be subclasses of music (Q115484611) because we're describing the classification of the physical music produced. You could technically have a musical work whose manifestations are different genres so we should attribute the type to the manifestation. Lectrician1 (talk) 17:34, 5 December 2022 (UTC)