Wikidata talk:WikiProject sum of all paintings

See also: Wikidata talk:WikiProject Visual arts and Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Questions

genre (P136) : mythological painting (Q3374376) how to be more precise ?

For lot of paintings, such as Odysseus in the battle with the suitors (Q124212032), we have the statement genre (P136) : mythological painting (Q3374376).

What is the right way to specify which mythology (Q9134), for instance here classical mythology (Q1367434) ?

Thanks ! Léna (talk) 08:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Genre is and should be a broad classification. You can add the relevant main subject (P921), see Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top mythological art main subjects for some examples. Multichill (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

main subject (P921) are very specific (and it's a good thing), for instance here slaughter of the suitors (Q117830676). It means that queries for "all classical mythology (Q1367434) paintings" will be complicated no ? Léna (talk) 08:53, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@Léna: not sure what a consistent way is to (indirectly or directly) link the main subjects with Greek mythology (Q34726). Multichill (talk) 20:52, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

"Genre painting" (Q214127) and "genre art" (Q1047337) must be merged.

Guess which one has 15,738 items and which one has 11? Answer here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings/Top_genres. But merging these two is quite difficult because of all the interwiki links. Edelseider (talk) 20:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

genre painting (Q214127) is a subclass of genre art (Q1047337) so shouldn't be merged. Multichill (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

How has this project been such a success?

Hi, I'm writing an article about Wikidata as a platform for cultural data. I'm an active member of this wikiproject and I do GLAM outreach, so there's a lot of background I already understand. Still, I'm curious as to how we got so many items. I'm aware of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Q160236) CC0 data set, but for some collections I don't know how we got so many items. National Trust (Q333515) has no Wikidata partnership or data sharing policy, yet we have 12,600 of their paintings. How did we get so many paintings from Department of Paintings of the Louvre (Q3044768) or The Palace Museum (Q2047427)? Did the institutions deliberately share the data? Did we get it via an intermediary? I realise that a lot of US museums are okay about freely sharing metadata and some European museum data has come from dedicated projects such as the Flemish museums project. I know that some museums share their metadata on platforms like GitHub, such as Tate (Q430682) and Metropolitan Museum of Art (Q160236). Is something similar the case with all the institutions for which we have huge numbers of paintings? MartinPoulter (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

@MartinPoulter: except for the Palace Museum, I added the paintings of those institutions to Wikidata. I just scrape whatever factual data is available about collections. See my assorted collection of scrapers. Multichill (talk) 20:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Multichill it's no surprise that you're an essential part of this success. Thanks for the link. MartinPoulter (talk) 09:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@MartinPoulter: We could have much more. For instance, if we had a bot that collects all the data from the navigart databases. We could then have all the 6,576 paintings of the Musée national d'art moderne (Q1895953), instead of just 679, like we have now; and that's just one French museum among many. And don't get me started about the National Museum of Serbia (Q1277393), which really deserves better than this puny list: Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/National Museum of Serbia. This project has been a success in some areas and for some museums, but not everywhere. --Edelseider (talk) 10:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Sure, it's a work in progress and far from complete, just like all of Wikidata and Wikimedia is. But it has enabled some very impressive applications and with a million paintings it's many times larger than Google Arts & Culture or Art UK without the backing of a major funding organisation. Due to its size, diversity (still lots to improve there) and rapid growth I think it can play a big part in the future of resource discovery. That's the case I'll be making, anyway. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

You are right to make this case. But as a volunteer who has done a lot but could have done a lot more if I had not been discouraged by the amount of work that is gratuitously left to us volunteers instead of being given to bots, I can tell you that this database is first and foremost a distorted reflection of the actual reality. There are about 1 million paintings in Italian collections, and at least 200,000 of them can be found on Wikimedia Commons, but barely over 7,000 are registered here. There may be some kind of "rapid growth" in the eyes of the outsider, but for the insider, it's mainly the unfillable gaps that are striking. At least, in my opinion. Edelseider (talk) 17:36, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@Edelseider: in my experience it's better to focus on the positive parts. Not that we should not be aware of what is missing, but the way you're writing it gives me a lot of negative energy and actually discourages me to work on it. It's easier to motivate people with honey than with vinegar (free after).

Even with these huge gaping holes, we already have nearly 1 million paintings on Wikidata. We'll manage to plug these holes one day. It's just a matter of time. Multichill (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I love you, Multichill, and I love your work. Edelseider (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes a glass filled up to the middle can be half full or half empty, and I also prefer the first. With Wikidata we can more easily spreed informations and control it. This is very effective and saves time. I always wonder because one can hardly find items in the arts untouched by Multichill. Thanks to both of you. And it is not only the number of items which have increased, but also the number and quality of statements, references, links and provenance informations.Oursana (talk) 23:30, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Offered at auction but not sold

I am working on King Edward VI (Q128061753). Sotheby's offered this painting in 2012, but it did not sell. Do we have a way to indicate that? - PKM (talk) 22:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

A case of 2 lookalikes and possible wrong metadata

While randomly browsing watermelon pictures and saw in Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica 2 files attributed to Abraham Brueghel, which looks suspiciously similar ( notwithstanding the frames ) despite their differing names and metadata :

• Flowers and fruit (Fall and Winter)
• Flowers and fruit (Spring and Summer)

According to the source in both file (barberinicorsini.org)  : "La coppia di dipinti, inoltre, sembra far riferimento anche all'allegoria delle stagioni, considerando i diversi tipi di oggetti rappresentati con il primo (inv. 66) relativo alla primavera-estate e il secondo (inv. 50) all’autunno-inverno." ("The pair of paintings also seems to refer to the allegory of the seasons, considering the different types of objects represented with the first (inv. 66) relating to spring-summer and the second (inv. 50) to autumn-winter.")

So I guess :

• the top painting in each file ("al Festone di frutta con melograni, zucca e meloni (inv. 50)." : with pomegranates, pumpkins and melons (and grapes, and figs)) should be (Fall and Winter), which should be linked to Q120499412 ?
• the lower painting in each file ("al Festone di frutta e fiori con cocomero (inv. 66)"  : with flowers & watermelon) should be (Spring and Summer), which should be linked to Q120499415 ?

Maybe should the lower and top paintings in File:Abraham Brueghel - Flowers and fruit (Spring and Summer).jpg be splited & extracted then reuploaded as a new version of their correspondly named File ? And what should be done for the version without frame ?

--FoeNyx (talk) 19:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, I would use the crop tool and extract two new images each and upload as new files. And then put the correct images (with frame and without frame) into the specific Wikidata-Item. One could consider creating a third Wikidata-Item for the Set, making the existing items part of that set. Please also consider to create the proper Commons Category for the set and the single images, and make it worth your while to search for other versions in Commons. It's teadious, why I am not doing it here, I am too busy doing it with other artists. Wuselig (talk) 03:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Inventory numbers for Musée National d'Art Moderne

Hi. I'm trying to understand the inventory numbering format. Looking at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Musée National d'Art Moderne, all of them have more or less the same format. However, some do not have the same format at the museum website.

Ex: Q128246033inventory number (P217)AM 2013-DEP 35 but the website says "FNAC 28551, AM 2013-DEP 35", and so does the API. Could someone who is aware of this collection provide some insight into this? Thanks! (cc Multichill - do you know?) DaxServer (talk) 12:48, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

@DaxServer: classic case of art people having fun with data.

"FNAC 28551" looks like an inventory number and as I suspected, this the inventory number in the original collection, see https://www.cnap.fr/en/collection-en-ligne#/artwork/ahmed-cherkaoui-le-couronnement-140000000027165

You don't have any babel box on your user page so I don't know if you understand French. The second inventory number is "AM 2013-DEP 35". AM is most likely "Art Moderne" like in the other inventory numbers. 2013 is the year the loan as given. "DEP" probably stands for "dépôt" (see long-term loan (Q94796160)).

So looks like they concatenated the two inventory numbers. Not the best way to do it, but it's nice to have the inventory number in the original collection! Multichill (talk) 17:54, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation @Multichill. I can only speak DE, EN, HI, TE. I probably would have had a hunch if it’s in DE; EN of course is a no brainier. I wanted to work with data from Navigart API, but I’m having second thoughts because of the language barrier.

Were there any previous efforts to import this data? I’ve enough things on my hands atm, so I probably won’t continue either way DaxServerOnMobile (talk) 19:33, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden

We have nearly all objects by Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden as items. As the plural shows (Kunstsammlungen), it is a connection of different collections. It actually doesn't make so much sense to give "Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden" as a collection statement, it should better given the museum it belongs to, e.g. Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Puppentheatermuseum, Kunstgewerbemuseum etc. as they all give their own inventory numbers. The same was done correctly for Berlin State Museums. Who made all the Dresden Wikidata items? Was that a bot? If yes, could it fix that problem? Carl Ha (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

See also this discussion, where it explains the same thing for the Louvre. Carl Ha (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Same for Harvard Art Museums Carl Ha (talk) 21:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@Carl Ha: we have two situations:

1. One museum (one collection) with multiple locations where the works are displayed. Each location has a name
2. Multiple museums (multiple collections) that form a group of museums

Currently Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden (Q653002) and Harvard Art Museums (Q3783572) are modeled as the first situation (and Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Q700216) as the second). If the second situation is the case, I would expect inventory number (P217) collisions. Did you find any?

As for who added them, I keep a list at User:Multichill#Indexed. Multichill (talk) 16:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I think as "collection" we should always add the institution that gives the inventory numbers. In case of the SKD the inventory numbers are given by the sub-institutions. Carl Ha (talk) 18:00, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Carl Ha: I agree that the collection should be the institution that gives the inventory numbers, that's the approach I always used.

Just to be sure: Do you have a source to support that (SKD inventory numbers)? I recall their website being unclear about this and works floating between collections. Multichill (talk) 19:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Not exactly sure that do you mean by source. The website always states the belonging collection (fourth point in the charts, given as "Museum" (e.g. https://skd-online-collection.skd.museum/Details/Index/335564). If you sort this inventory list you see the logic behind the numbers. E.g. the "Kunstfond" has numbers according to the logic "x/YYYY" while the "Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister" always is "Gal.-Nr. x" or the Albertinum has "Inv.-Nr. YY/x" (Y=Year, white X=ongoing numbers). Carl Ha (talk) 14:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Possible new property for "beneficiary of transaction that transfers possession or usage but not ownership" ?

I have just proposed Wikidata:Property proposal/leased to.

But in writing up the proposal, I realised that if the proposed new property were to be a qualifier on a "significant event (P793) = lease (Q716894)" statement, it might be possible for it to have a somewhat wider meaning, to identify the beneficiary in any kind of transaction that transferred possession or usage but not ownership -- ie a transaction for which "afterward owned by (P11812)" is not appropriate.

Such a property might be usable to indicate the beneficiary of eg a significant event (P793) = loan (Q3777645) / commodate (Q1580844) / long-term loan (Q94796160).

(Albeit noting from this 2023 discussion Long-term loan that the project may have been moving towards "collection (P195) = <collection> / subject has role (P2868) = long-term loan (Q94796160)" for such works).

• Would this be of any interest/value?
• And is there any name for such a property that would be particularly good? (eg perhaps "beneficiary" or "recipient" -- or would those be too broad, and encourage (mis)use of such a property for too many other purposes?
• (And did the Mauritshuis (Q221092) really pay money to lease Girl with a Pearl Earring (Q185372) -- cf statement [1] ?)

Thanks in advance for your thoughts, Jheald (talk) 13:39, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Bot request on correcting translation mistake on Italian descriptions

Hi all. Please note the bot request that I just made for correcting a translation mistake on the Italian language descriptions of paintings. Nearly 440.000 paintings use the word "pittura" which refers to the art of painting while "dipinto" is the correct word for a painting. Samoasambia ✎ 17:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Royal Collection URL change

They've changed the URL and broken our links Property_talk:P11057#url_format_change. I don't plan to fix this myself. Vicarage (talk) 09:50, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! It's probably a good idea to propose a property (hopefully they kept the same IDs) for the new url noting this problem. That way the old urls can be adjusted on the fly. Linkrot is everywhere and I have fixed a few myself. Having a working url in each item helps with this. I think there are bots which do this at scale, but I don't know who imported the Royal Collection to begin with. Jane023 (talk) 09:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Wrong author of art works

There are art works items that incorrectly indicate the author, instead of Gladys Emerson Cook (Q52150939) (correct) it is Gladys Cook (Q56248008) (incorrect). I can't change it en masse, Quickstatements is able to remove statements and add new ones, but without a reference. Maybe there is a way to query references and add them to newly created statements, but I can't figure it out? Nibemben (talk) 05:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

There are only about 30 items to fix, so a good case to test your use of quick statements if you're interested. Use the query service to save the current items and their references (if you want to keep the references). Then use quick statements twice: once to remove the statements from the incorrect Qid, and once to add the statements with references to the correct Qid (not necessarily in that order). Jane023 (talk) 09:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)