Template talk:Artwork/Archiv/2009

Translations?

can we put some translations in thoses templates ? ( Title / Titel / Titre / etc ... ) FoeNyx 12:23, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Other versions

Note that many of the usages of this template (I think all of "The Yorck Project") have the "other_versions" parameter misspelled "Other versions" (i.e. capital O and a space instead of a underscore). For the images with these misspellings other versions cannot be added without first changing the parameter name. /Lokal_Profil 22:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Country

Why isn't the country displayed (after "Current location")? See Image:Pietro Longhi 060.jpg for an example. --Mattes (talk) 08:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The "Country" field does not exist in the template: either it was deprecated or it was an error of the York Project bot. You're supposed to use "Location=City, Country". 62.147.37.248 10:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

OK then, your guess seems to be right - do we need an extra veriable for the country or is it enough to put it to the end of the city? --Mattes (talk) 11:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well... A quick look at the template's history shows Country= originally existed and was either deleted or forgotten during this 2006 makeover. That's happenstance for you. But I don't know it's possible or desirable to go back on this:

• As pointed out in the history, the original field was confusing because it was NOT the country of the gallery, but the "Country of origin" of the painting, which is a redundant or problematic field: if all paintings from a Dutch artist are Country=Netherlands then it's redundant with the creator's bio; and if a Dutch artist doing one painting in Paris means that its Country=France, it's even worse. I dunno if this was discussed somewhere else in 2006, but I'd rather believe it was deleted on purpose.
• Also, we now have separate table cells for Gallery= and Location= because it allows to fill each of them with multilingual values. Adding "Country" (for the gallery) would require a third table cell on the same row as Gallery and Location (that would be awfully narrow for each of them and a waste of space), and adding back "Country of origin" would require its own table row somewhere else (more waste of space), for a debatable field.

All considered, I think that "Location=City, Country" is good enough for the place the painting is now located, and I think that the "Country of origin" concept was flawed and rightly deleted. 62.147.37.248 11:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

On "Location"

I even think that this field could be implemented in the "Gallery=", as there will be few major collections with more than one location. And even if, the exact name of such remote collection would be different, albeit just by adding the location. So "Gallery (city, country)=" might be more wise, for saving one of those often more awful than useful multiple language templates.

That the tpl got rid of that misleading "Country=" is fine for sure, but I would feel that a field like "Location created=" might do a good job, as this is not necessarily clear from the data given by tpl:Creator, and no viewer should be forced to read the article on the artist to be allowed to see where this single piece was made. For my actual project I try to work around this shortcoming by adding the location to the filenames, but I do not think this is the best solution. Wolfgang (talk) 06:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Doc

{{editprotected}}

As per Template:Documentation, I have copied the whole doc to Template:Painting/doc. To complete the process, please edit the template to replace the whole bottom (noinclude area):

|}</includeonly><noinclude>
<!-- -------------------- -->
<!-- Self-calling Preview -->
<!-- -------------------- -->

...

</noinclude>

with:

|}</includeonly><noinclude>
{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

Thanks. 62.147.37.248 10:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done but please note this is not required for templates. Rocket000 (talk) 15:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but I wanted to update the doc with mention of {{Size}} and details. Thanks. 62.147.38.237 13:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Stolen paintings

How should these labeled? On Image:Edgar Germain Hilaire Degas 053.jpg, I changed location to unknown and gallery to "stolen from ..". -- User:Docu

ONE more line?

(by copy+paste from /copy Talk page; please delete there --Wolfgang (talk) 09:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)) {{editprotected}} Hi, while preparing to improve on Category:Vincent van Gogh I feel that one more line, "|ID=" or similar would considerably enhance the efficiency of this template.

For v.Gogh, there are two catalog systems, but I think that for many other important painters there are renowned catalog-IDs. Of course, such information can be written in "|Notes=", but imo it would be better to have a separately prepared line in the template for this. --Wolfgang (talk) 11:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Shortened proposal "|ID-number(s)=" to "|ID=" --Wolfgang (talk) 10:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Desrciptions where I used my idea "in advance" can be fond on Category talk:Vincent van Gogh#Samples of good file descriptions where BTW I badly lack feedback. Thanks, --Wolfgang (talk) 09:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

PS: In case someone gives feedback there, please also do so on my concept of optimized filenames, Category talk:Vincent van Gogh#Talk on File names. I'd like to upload some 100 vanGogh items soon and can not do it without any feedback by competent+experienced persons. A simple "I agree" might do ;) --Wolfgang (talk) 09:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

moreover

Has it ever been discussed to display the line |Other versions= above the usually very large template in |Permission= ??? (if this is properly used at all, which is but imo rarely done) --Wolfgang (talk) 09:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it's entirely unclear what the requested edit is. Please state clearly what the requested edit is and place {{editprotected}} directly above it. Thanks  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 05:15, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Multilingual Technique tags

I feel it is quite boring that e.g "Oil on canvas" blows up the display the way it does -- most COM readers would understand the English term. How about making thisone template and similar ones "dropdown", with just the English term necessarily displayed? Was that ever discussed? --Wolfgang (talk) 13:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully more clear now

{{editprotected}}

{{{Title}}}
Artist	{{{Artist}}}
Title	{{{Title}}}
Date	{{{Year}}}
Medium	oil on canvas medium QS:P186,Q296955;P186,Q12321255,P518,Q861259 See note 3.
Dimensions	{{{Dimensions}}}
Collection	{{{Gallery}}}
Current location	{{{Location}}}
Accession number	some unique {{{identifier}}}, e.g. from a catalogue raisonné
Notes	{{{Notes}}}
Source/Photographer	{{{Source}}}
Permission (Reusing this file)	{{{Permission}}}
Other versions	{{{Other versions}}} Should better show up just below "Notes=". See note 2.

Sorry about my shortcomings in English and technical belongs, which obviously caused the problem.

1. I now introduced the requested "ID=" (however you're going to call it, if it's granted at all), which of course does not display. In the #ONE more line? I've tried to explain that such would be extremely helpful especially for van Gogh, who often did very similar versions of same sujet, but it might be useful for most major artist's works. It would be less desirable to use field "Notes=" for such.
2. In #moreover I suggested that content of "Other_versions=", if existing (filled-in) at all, might be displayed above the content of "Permission=" (minimum requirement), as most viewers would stop scrolling as soon as "permission" shows up. Its best place to show up would be just below "Notes=", imo. Wolfgang (talk) 07:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
3. In #Multilingual Technique tags I asked wheter it would not be more wise to design those templates as dropdowns (popups?) which, when closed, just display the English caption. Reason: as of now, they uselessly blow up the display, see my sample for "Oil on canvas" above. Thanks, Wolfgang (talk) 07:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Additional note on (3): I, for myself, will be reluctant to use this template again unless its display would be "slimmed down", as for most viewers "oil on canvas" is quite an obvious and sufficiant information, and the template just waists space on their screens. Wolfgang (talk) 07:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I did 1 & 2 which seems to have worked nicely. For 3, that requires javascript, I think. You might get Dschwen to take a look, since I'm not sure what we have that will work.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 17:52, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

TX, Mike. I'll have a closer look on this tomorrow. Remember: vG is dead for 100+ years, therefore he will not claim ;))) Best, Wolfgang (talk) 18:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Multilinguality

Sure, the folding can easily be implemented. The Javascript is already in place. Take a look at {{QICpromoted}}. Essentially this:

other languages 

lots of translations here

<div class="NavFrame" style="border: none">
<div class="NavHead" style="background: none; font-weight: normal; text-align: right; font-size: 90%; padding-right: 2em">other languages </div>
<div class="NavContent" style="display:none;">''lots of translations here''</div>
</div>

would already do the job. --Dschwen (talk) 18:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

@Dschwen: 1.=TX. 2.=unfortunately being "kind-of-nut" on technical/programmer's issues, I-for-myself do not see HOW to implement such into "average-incompetent-user's" display. Best, Wolfgang (talk) 19:04, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

It would have to be changed on the template, and two separate fields, one for english technique and one for "other languages" technique would have to be introduced. A bot could change this. But the current design is flawed anyways. The set of possible techniques is way smaller than the set of paintings. Subtemplates for all techniques with translations should be created once, and should then be included in this template, removing the need to copy a whole block of translations onto every image page. --Dschwen (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Would you do such, on "oil on canvas", for a trial run? I, for sure, can not.

• I BTW think that similar would be good for tpl:Artist -- if someone browses more than one piece of same artist, it is quite ennoying to see the screen filled with same stuff again and again. What happens pracically, due to this, ist that people quote te artist and link him/her (albeit to enWP), and put the template:Artist additionally at the bottom of the page where it creates a most ugly display, see sample and/or and the rest of that file's history.
• Next: drawings are not paintings. How about either renaming => tpl:"Artwork" or similar, or, maybe even more practicable, creating tpl:Artwork (or tpl:Art -- however you call it in proper English) in a better way, and give it a try. I for myself want to do a cleanup on CAT:vGogh before Christmas, and would take the effort of using such trial version on the ~350 items which are in this category, plus another ~100 which I might upload myself (the category terribly lacks vG's draughtmanship, and not only the category: There is a fantastic Van Gogh Exhibition in Vienna just now which, for the first time (as an exhibition), focuses on the interrelation between vG's draughtmanship and painting, thereby really enlightening his complete oeuvre. So, I plan to create, by-and-by, some "mirror" of that exhibition on commons. To prepare, I have computed a table of some 2000 (two thousand) vG pieces which contains all information required by tpl:Painting. The 450 pages catalogue of the exhibition gives further detailed information on the 140 pieces shown in the exhibition, plus (I guess) some 100 more which could not be shown.
• Before feeling able to start this "MyBaby" project on COM, I need feedback on optimized design of file names. The only feedback I got, up to now, was by user:Gryffindor, with whom I unfortunately highly disagree. Would you be as kind as to pass by at Category_talk:Vincent_van_Gogh#Talk_on_File_names and comment? Wolfgang (talk) 07:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

• I have a proof of concept implementation of the better way (tm) to implement a type parameter here User:Dschwen/Sandbox. Please note that adding section hiding to that is trivial, and that the example is simply about making the type field into a short parameter to keep all the lengthy translation centralized. --Dschwen (talk) 16:19, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; I'm unfortunately somewhat to stupid to understand how this will work/display. I'm going to comment in your sandbox within 1-2 hrs (maximum). Wolfgang (talk) 16:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

you know what: never mind, I'm the moron here. I'll change {{Oil on canvas}} as an example. --Dschwen (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

For sure, you're not. Sooo sorry to disagree ;))) Wolfgang (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

He he, thanks ;-). Anyhow, if the change I made in {{Oil on canvas}} does not rise any considerable opposition I could change the other technique templates in similar vein. --Dschwen (talk) 18:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm going to be out for some ~12 hrs. What do you think we'd have to wait for "possibly considerable opposition"? Wolfgang (talk) 19:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

no need to rush things. In the meantime I'll wrap the ugly divs in some nice templates. --Dschwen (talk) 19:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

template may use user's prefered language

Hi, I have just seen your changes to the template. I would like to suggest that the User's prefered language, if any, and if the translation is available, would be displayed instead of English. I understand that this can be technically complicated or even impossible, but it would be nice. By the way, why not consider translating the whole template (Titel/titre/title/...) ? Frédéric (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

There is currently no clean way of doing this as far as I know. Sorry. --Dschwen (talk) 01:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

@Frédéric: Besides, I think even if this is technically possible (which, imo no doubt, will be some day), how would you guarantee that the required translation exists at all? As en is the basic language on COM, I think we should be quite content if we reach the suggested "step_1", soon. Let's leave some jobs to do for later generations ;))) Wolfgang (talk) 12:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that was just a suggestion. Never mind. Frédéric (talk) 16:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Location created

Although there was not talk on my proposal from November 27 (no opposition either ;), I request adding one line for "Location created=", for reason given at #On "Location".

In case someone could give me names of users who might like to talk on this issue before, but are just unaware of my question, I'd ask them personally to pass by.

As of now, I feel unable to properly edit the /doc page myself, sorry. Wolfgang (talk) 06:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

On what I'd approximately like to have, please see diff Wolfgang (talk) 09:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Outdated. I'll upload a dummy for the suggested layout within 5 hrs from now, maximum. Wolfgang 10:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

• Note: It would be nice if the displayed order of fields would be same as in the dummie above (not the actual display of the dummie, but its source). Wolfgang (talk) 03:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I find out just now that what I'd like to have as "Location created=" is similar to "Workloc" in the creator template (but specific to one piece of art) -- maybe, if such field is created, it might be better to use the latter term? --Wolfgang 10:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

For display, I would now suggest "Workloc=" to share the line of "Year" (like "Location" and "Gallery"), where it would be rather self-explaining and not force any user to scroll more than necessary.

Actually, same line ("YEAR") might display "ID" as well, as all three are somehow "identifiers".
Order: created in: Year -- Location -- (ID, if any) Wolfgang 10:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

One way to layout the template

Talking about this version of the file, which unfortunately was not discussed on this place for quite some time ;[ (another one will follow ASAP [=~1 or more hrs]) (signed 1+year later -- the next idea is still missing ;) [w.] 10:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion: Rename m|Painting

Actually, same template could imo as well serve for almost any piece of art. For drawings and mixed media, for sure. I'm not totally sure about e.g. sculpture, video installations, ..., but I do think it would apply.

From my POV, I'd suggest to rename thisone to m|Art or m|Artwork (or similar, whatever is better English and most widely comprehensive) and allow to use it by far more generally -- has such ever been discussed? Wolfgang 10:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Additional boxes

I've been using this template quite a lot and I was wondering if a box called Provenance and a box called Inscription(s) (or something similar) could be added. I now can only to put these in the "Notes"-box and it looks a little messy (see for example File:Abraham Beerstraaten The Blauwpoort in Leiden in the winter.jpg). Thank you. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Technique

The "Technique" parameter at the moment uses a set of templates like {{Oil on canvas}}, {{Watercolor on cardboard}} to allow localisation. But there are many possible techniques and many possible combinations of painting techniques and surfaces. Therefore I created {{Technique}}. The template takes the painting technique as first parameter and the surface as second parameter. This has the advantage, that the translations of a specific language are all present in a single place instead of being spread over many templates and it's more flexible.

But before I create additional localisations for {{Technique}}, I'd like to know, what techniques need to be added to {{Technique/en}}? Are there any important ones lacking? --Slomox (talk) 23:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I searched through some hundreds paintings and collected what was present in the technique filed. Values that are often used:

• oak, maple, beech, European beech, linden, pear, mahogany (for works on wood)
• on floor, ceiling, wall (for frescos and some other techniques)
• different techniques: wet in wet technique, impasto technique.
• then there is "transferred to" like in "fresco transferred to canvas" or "oil on wood transferred to canvas" or "tempera on wood transferred to canvas"
• colorized ceramic lithgraphy (if that is the right term for 'Tonlithographie koloriert')

Gouache, Grisaille, Camaieu, Verre églomisé. Are all those special painting styles relevant for the technique parameter?

Some paintings mention the painting style in the technique field (like "cubist" or "pointillistic"). Is it right to place them in the technique parameter and, if so, should the style be present for every painting?

At one painting I found "Oil on wood, cradled". What does "cradled" mean and is it relevant?

Does somebody know what's the exact English counterpart of German "Tusche"? And are "ink" and "tint" very different things in English?

Is "on parchment on cardboard" a special type of surface?

Is "marouflé" relevant and important for the technique parameter?

File:Edgar Germain Hilaire Degas 037.jpg says "Terpentin und Pastell". Is terpentine a special painting technique?

File:William Blake 002.jpg says "tempera heightened with gold leaf on mahogany panel" Is "heightened with gold leaf" relevant and important for the technique parameter?

Would be nice, if somebody could give advice, which of these possible values for the technique parameter are relevant, so I can try to design a flexible template around it. My knowledge in art techniques is a bit limited, I have to admit. --Slomox (talk) 00:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I added etchings, drypoint and woodcut to en and pl versions of {{Technique}} - other translations are needed. Also in some languages "engraving on copper" have a specialized name (english: Copper engraving; polish: Miedzioryt) as opposed to other engraving techniques. Those might need special attention. --Jarekt (talk) 17:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

description

I really like this template, but I've got one question concerning descriptions (eg naming all the persons / animals shown in a picture or explaining the scene) - should this be added as Notes? --Anna reg (talk) 14:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. It's the only parameter where it fits in. --Slomox (talk) 17:25, 8 May 2009 (UTC)