Template talk:Creator/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to this page.

Change categorization

{{Editprotected}} Hello, please replace these lines 

    {{#if:{{ISOyear| {{{Birthdate|}}} }} |[[Category:{{ISOyear| {{{Birthdate|}}} }} births|{{{Sortkey|{{PAGENAME}}}}}]] }}
    {{#if:{{ISOyear| {{{Deathdate|}}} }} |[[Category:{{ISOyear| {{{Deathdate|}}} }} deaths|{{{Sortkey|{{PAGENAME}}}}}]] }}

by these 

    {{#if:{{ISOmonth| {{{Birthdate|}}} }}
      |[[Category:{{ISOmonth| {{{Birthdate|}}} | en }} {{ISOyear| {{{Birthdate|}}} }} births|{{{Sortkey|{{PAGENAME}}}}}]]
      |{{#if:{{ISOyear| {{{Birthdate|}}} }} |[[Category:{{ISOyear| {{{Birthdate|}}} }} births|{{{Sortkey|{{PAGENAME}}}}}]] }} }}
    {{#if:{{ISOmonth| {{{Deathdate|}}} }}
      |[[Category:{{ISOmonth| {{{Deathdate|}}} | en }} {{ISOyear| {{{Deathdate|}}} }} deaths|{{{Sortkey|{{PAGENAME}}}}}]]
      |{{#if:{{ISOyear| {{{Deathdate|}}} }} |[[Category:{{ISOyear| {{{Deathdate|}}} }} deaths|{{{Sortkey|{{PAGENAME}}}}}]] }} }}

Categories with {{Creator}} template will be automatically categorized to lower births and deaths categories (e.g. Category:January 1900 births or Category:September 2008 deaths). If ISO date in parameter Birthdate or Deathdate doesn't contain number of month, it will be categorized such as now.--Sevela.p 16:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Could you first try your changes at template:Creator/test, and temporarily modify one (or more) of the creator pages to use it and demonstrate how it is supposed to work? --Jarekt (talk) 17:15, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I tried it here: Jack Boucher, Sophie Rostopchine, Cimabue and Egon Schiele.--Sevela.p 17:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks It seems to work quite nice but I still have some questions:
  1. Creator pages will categorize into a LOT of by month categories and I assume most of them do not exist yet. How are you going to check for categories which will need to be created? One way would be to monitor category search for each of 12 months and look for red links. Are you planning on monitoring those categories?
  2. Automatically generated birth/death date categories by creator pages are suppose to (at the moment) to fix the problem that a lot of creator categories did not have them. However this auto categorization is not universally popular and should be at some point replaced with direct categories added to each category wikitext. At the moment majority of creator categories have both: categories added by the creator template and categories added by category wikitext. This change of creator template will affect only categories added by that template. For example Category:Günter Rapp will have both Category:1990 deaths (added by wiki text) and Category:February 1990 deaths (added by the template). Are you planning on cleaning it up for 1000's of categories?
Ideally the change in the creator page could be used as help in adding Category:February 1990 deaths like categories to the wikitext of all creator categories. I hope I was clear enough in my writing. If not than let me know and I will try to clarify further. --Jarekt (talk) 19:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
  1. I requested bot to create these categories from 18th century and others I'll monitor by category search.
  2. Categories added by wiki text will contain both categories 1990 deaths and February 1990 deaths but it will be possible remove or change manually categories without months. At the moment it isn't possible to change categories without months.
I think that this change is now possible and would be very useful.--Sevela.p 09:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
If you want to re-organize deaths by year/births by year, I think you should open a request at Commons:Categories for discussion first. -- User:Docu at 09:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done I implemented the proposed changes. --Jarekt (talk) 18:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

 Oppose I strictly oppose these categories. They are totally useless and clutter our database without any possible use. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 16:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 Comment Several people at Commons:Village_pump#Why_are_we_splitting_up_births_and_deaths_by_month.3F seems to agree with you. I am testing an approach for creator template to be used for adding permanent categories to other categories (using SUBST: mechanism) and get out of the business of autocategorizing files or categories altogether. --Jarekt (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The discussion on the VP is in archive already but the categorization still exists. Can we please remove it? There is no need for by month categorization. --Martin H. (talk) 04:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
✓ Done by month categorization is no longer used. --Jarekt (talk) 13:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

NationAndOccupation (with or without dot?)

Hoi, Template:NationAndOccupation is mainly (and regularly) used in Creator templates to specify the |Description= field. About two weeks ago a dot (.) was added (without a reason) to the end of its content, so that the line in question gives e.g. "French painter." or "German photographer." now. I've changed it back once, but was reverted (again, without a reason). Of course, this dot is just a tiny issue, but it's not unimportant from my point of view. So as I dislike edit wars I'm asking here now, if this change is really good.

I don't know any argument for such a dot, but I know two arguments against it:
1. "French author" or "French author, photographer" aren't full sentences, therefore a dot is neither needed nor formally (grammatically) correct.
2. In some cases further (often non-translationable) information were added to the description field directly after {{NationAndOccupation|Foo}}, e.g. "(Info)", " – info" or ", info", see Creator:Günter Rapp and many others. In these cases the dot is even counterproductive as it makes the punctuation appear really wrong.

Comments, different views and ideas how we should handle this issue are welcome :-) --:bdk: 01:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree the dot is wrong. --Jarekt (talk) 02:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey! I was the one who added the dot. I thought it called for it (as in: "French painter, designer and sculptor.". But I might be wrong on this. Maybe I should've created a discussion first. Anyway, I still think it looks better with punctuation. In the case of the (info) bit, maybe it could be added after the dot. What do you think? ~★ pikolas [[mia diskuto]] 19:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I do not think "French painter, designer and sculptor." is correct since it is not a sentence but a sentence fragment. I recall that occasionally we have discussions about dots after different template added phrases and line {{Own}} etc. but we always settle on no dots. --Jarekt (talk) 19:51, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks for joining this little discussion, and for deciding @Jarekt. --:bdk: 20:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Months of birth and death

Since there are categories of births and deaths by month - might it be possible to modify this template that the categories are jumping in the months categories of birth and death?

for example: George Ştefănescu schould not longer appear in 1914 births and 2007 deaths but in April 1914 births and October 2007 deaths

--anro (talk) 11:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

See Template_talk:Creator#Change_categorization --Jarekt (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Self-portraits

Shall we add additional images in the way done earlier? In the meantime, quite a few additional images use this template and I added a few images to Category:Self-portraits. -- User:Docu at 09:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I had to remind myself how were we doing this. Lucky Template_talk:Creator/Archive_1#Images explains it well. I recreated Template:Creator template no image and changed the template code to use it. I think this time we should leave it as the part of the creator template. --Jarekt (talk) 13:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. It's obviously still updating, but the first one already came up with [1]. -- User:Docu at 13:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Link for better results: CatScan2. -- User:Docu at 09:59, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
I think they are all done now. I think I will leave this mechanism in place so we can do it more often. --Jarekt (talk) 01:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Delinker bug

Delinker might not be working in creator namespace. For a report on a probable bug, see User talk:Siebrand#Delinker in Creator namespace (#100, called "Portal" in some of the other projects).  Docu  at 10:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Template:Occupation needs translactions

Thanks to new maintenance category Category:Pages using Occupation template with incorrect parameters I identified many new occupations used with this template which were not supported. As a result number of occupation supported by the template was expanded by over 50 proffesions. Now all the new additions need translations into other languages. To see what needs translating, display Template:Occupation/doc in your language and look for professions marked in red. --Jarekt (talk) 16:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Chinese people

In order to I suggest (user:Fanghong approved my suggestion) that the following convention should be used by default for the names of pre-20th century Chinese creators (in special cases some info can of course be added) :

  • name field {{langSwitch|en=surname-name in Pinyin, without tone indication|zh-cn=surname-name in simplfied Chinese|zh-tw=Surname-name in traditional Chinese}}
  • Alternative name field :
    • Surname-name
    • Courtesy name
    • Pseudonym

These names are often given on Wikipedia. When they are not we can do with surname-name only.

All names should appear in both pinyin and Chinese characters for non-Chinese users and in Chinese characters only for Chinese. Wade-Giles would not be given as it is not really an "alternative" name and it would make things longish. However, it would be useful to make a redirect from the Wade-Giles name.

I can add parameters and docu in tl:name so that these things are quicker to do. Would you agree with that ?--Zolo (talk) 11:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I've added three parameters to template name:

    • Chinese (to be used for surname and name only, I hope this won't cause confusion).
    • hao for pseudonym
    • courtesy for courtesy name.

For an example, see creator:Ma Yuan.--Zolo (talk) 10:50, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Worshops and similar terms

Is there a way to make the template look better for workshops and things like that ? For instance, in File:Workshop of Joos van Cleve 001.jpg, I think it would be better if "workshop of" and Joos van Cleve were on the same line. Is there a simple way to change that ?--Zolo (talk) 09:54, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

May be we can create {{Workshop}} showing Workshop of in users language. --Jarekt (talk) 20:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Certainly. Is there a way it avoids changing line between "workshop of" and the name of the artist ?--Zolo (talk) 20:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
It's not a clean and clear solution, but we could replace "workshop of/atelier van {{Creator:Joos van Cleve}}" with "{{workshop of|Joos van Cleve}}". {{Workshop of}} would then call the creator template with the name given in the first parameter and nest it within a box like <div class="workshop_of">...</div>. If we then put a CSS statement like ".workshop_of .creator { display: inline-box; }" in MediaWiki:Common.css we would get it on one line. But the words "workshop of" would still be outside the box. We won't get it into the box without either adding complexity to {{Creator}} or doing some ugly Javascript.
In my opinion it's the best to just keep the current two-line solution. --Slomox (talk) 15:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hm, we cannot get it into the box, but we can add some CSS to make it appear as if it was in the box... Look here:

Template:Workshop of

If we now add .workshop_of .creator { border: none; } to MediaWiki:Common.css it should look as if the text "Workshop of Joos van Cleve" is in one box. --Slomox (talk) 15:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
What about just using float? It would be outside the box, but seems like the obvious solution. As for putting it in the box, we can modify the creator template to insert "Workshop of" before the name if |workshop=true or something (if it's used that much). Rocket000 (talk) 16:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I like that. Another possibility is to modify {{Creator}}:
  1. Add a new field "option"
  2. Add "|option = {{{option|}}}" to all creator pages (easily done by a bot)
  3. If option is "Workshop" add words "Workshop of" in front of the artist name. Similar thing can be done with "School of" etc.
New options parameter could be used in the future for other things. But the above solution is fine too.--Jarekt (talk) 16:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't understand much about the technical details, but from an esthetic point of view, it would certainly be better if the "workshop of" is inside the box rather having the big creator box appearing in the middle of the line. Also, I don't know exactly how things work with creators, but I imagine it would ease the maintenance of category if it is automatically recognised say, that "formerly attributed to Toto the Tiger" is not the same thing as "by Toto the Tiger"--Zolo (talk) 16:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
About Creator templates and categories. Currently all (except <100 creator pages) do not add any categories to the files, so categories like "formerly attributed to Toto the Tiger" vs. "by Toto the Tiger" are added by hand. The only categories creator template adds are Category:Creator template maintenance and birth/death dates added to creator homecategories. I would love to figure out how to write a bot to add (and keep on adding in the future) missing birth/death date categories to creator homecategories, but I did not figured out how to do that. --Jarekt (talk) 02:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

As for adding "Workshop of" and similar phrases (translated to local language) we can use the following syntax:

code output
{{Creator:Joos van Cleve|School of}}
School of Joos van Cleve  (circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485–00–00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
– 1540/1541)  wikidata:Q153472
 
School of Joos van Cleve
Alternative names
Joos van der Beke, Joos van der Beken, Joos van Cleef,
Master of the Death of the Virgin
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth/death circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 between 10 November 1540 and 13 April 1541
date QS:P,+1540-00-00T00:00:00Z/8,P1319,+1540-11-10T00:00:00Z/11,P1326,+1541-04-13T00:00:00Z/11
Location of birth/death Cleves (?) Antwerp
Work location
Kalkar (circa 1505–1508), Bruges (1507–1511), Antwerp (1511–1540), France (1529), London (1535–1536)
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q4233718,P1780,Q153472
{{Creator:Joos van Cleve|workshop of}}
Workshop of Joos van Cleve  (circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485–00–00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
– 1540/1541)  wikidata:Q153472
 
Workshop of Joos van Cleve
Alternative names
Joos van der Beke, Joos van der Beken, Joos van Cleef,
Master of the Death of the Virgin
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth/death circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 between 10 November 1540 and 13 April 1541
date QS:P,+1540-00-00T00:00:00Z/8,P1319,+1540-11-10T00:00:00Z/11,P1326,+1541-04-13T00:00:00Z/11
Location of birth/death Cleves (?) Antwerp
Work location
Kalkar (circa 1505–1508), Bruges (1507–1511), Antwerp (1511–1540), France (1529), London (1535–1536)
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q4233718,P1774,Q153472
{{Creator:Joos van Cleve|circle of}}
Circle of Joos van Cleve  (circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485–00–00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
– 1540/1541)  wikidata:Q153472
 
Circle of Joos van Cleve
Alternative names
Joos van der Beke, Joos van der Beken, Joos van Cleef,
Master of the Death of the Virgin
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth/death circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 between 10 November 1540 and 13 April 1541
date QS:P,+1540-00-00T00:00:00Z/8,P1319,+1540-11-10T00:00:00Z/11,P1326,+1541-04-13T00:00:00Z/11
Location of birth/death Cleves (?) Antwerp
Work location
Kalkar (circa 1505–1508), Bruges (1507–1511), Antwerp (1511–1540), France (1529), London (1535–1536)
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q4233718,P1776,Q153472
{{Creator:Joos van Cleve|test of}}
Joos van Cleve  (circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485–00–00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
– 1540/1541)  wikidata:Q153472
 
Joos van Cleve
Alternative names
Joos van der Beke, Joos van der Beken, Joos van Cleef,
Master of the Death of the Virgin
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth/death circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 between 10 November 1540 and 13 April 1541
date QS:P,+1540-00-00T00:00:00Z/8,P1319,+1540-11-10T00:00:00Z/11,P1326,+1541-04-13T00:00:00Z/11
Location of birth/death Cleves (?) Antwerp
Work location
Kalkar (circa 1505–1508), Bruges (1507–1511), Antwerp (1511–1540), France (1529), London (1535–1536)
Authority file
{{Creator:Joos van Cleve}}
Joos van Cleve  (circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485–00–00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
– 1540/1541)  wikidata:Q153472
 
Joos van Cleve
Alternative names
Joos van der Beke, Joos van der Beken, Joos van Cleef,
Master of the Death of the Virgin
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth/death circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 between 10 November 1540 and 13 April 1541
date QS:P,+1540-00-00T00:00:00Z/8,P1319,+1540-11-10T00:00:00Z/11,P1326,+1541-04-13T00:00:00Z/11
Location of birth/death Cleves (?) Antwerp
Work location
Kalkar (circa 1505–1508), Bruges (1507–1511), Antwerp (1511–1540), France (1529), London (1535–1536)
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q153472

This approach works at the moment only with Creator:Joos van Cleve which uses proposed Template:Creator/test. All creator pages which would like to use this parameter would have to add "| Option = {{{1|}}}" to the creator page, like this. --Jarekt (talk) 03:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

This seems to be exactly what was needed, thanks a lot.--Zolo (talk) 05:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

borders and colors

To me, colors and borders don't look great when the template is placed inside an infobox. I think it looks neater without them, especially on file description pages, when creator content is hidden. Of course that's a personal opinion and Jarekt doesn't feel the same.

What bothers me most with the current template is have the blue stripe inside the infobox. It especially strikes me for {{tl:museum}} (possibly because it's placed in the middle of a long infobox and possibly because it's newer), but the same holds for tl:creator.

Here is a comparison with and without colors and borders (English version only). There can also be intermediate solutions, like removing colors and keep borders, or the other way round.

A Court Lady Viewing Cherry Blossoms
Title
A Court Lady Viewing Cherry Blossoms
Date between 1810 and 1865
date QS:P571,+1850-00-00T00:00:00Z/7,P1319,+1810-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1326,+1865-00-00T00:00:00Z/9
Medium Woodblock color print
Dimensions 21.3 × 18.4 cm (8.3 × 7.2 in)
en
Accession number
29.1476
Notes

Bequest of Marion Reilly. Signature:

Gakutei Sadaoka fude
Source/Photographer Online Collection of Brooklyn Museum; Photo: Brooklyn Museum, 29.1476_IMLS_SL2.jpg
Permission
(Reusing this file)
This image was uploaded by the Brooklyn Museum as a content partnership, and is considered to have no known copyright restrictions by the institutions of the Brooklyn Museum.

Note: While the Brooklyn Museum cannot make an absolute statement on copyright status for legal reasons, it supports and encourages the Wikimedia community in researching and applying the copyright status tag that is most appropriate for their purposes.

Yashima Gakutei: A Court Lady Viewing Cherry Blossoms
Artist
Yashima Gakutei    wikidata:Q11475750
 
Yashima Gakutei
Description Japanese ukiyo-e artist
Date of birth/death 1786 / 1785 Edit this at Wikidata 1868 / 1855 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth Osaka
Authority file
artist QS:P170,Q11475750
Title
A Court Lady Viewing Cherry Blossoms
Date between 1810 and 1865
date QS:P571,+1850-00-00T00:00:00Z/7,P1319,+1810-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1326,+1865-00-00T00:00:00Z/9
Medium Woodblock color print
Dimensions 21.3 × 18.4 cm (8.3 × 7.2 in)
institution QS:P195,Q632682
Accession number
29.1476
Notes

Bequest of Marion Reilly. Signature:

Gakutei Sadaoka fude
Source/Photographer Online Collection of Brooklyn Museum; Photo: Brooklyn Museum, 29.1476_IMLS_SL2.jpg
Permission
(Reusing this file)
This image was uploaded by the Brooklyn Museum as a content partnership, and is considered to have no known copyright restrictions by the institutions of the Brooklyn Museum.

Note: While the Brooklyn Museum cannot make an absolute statement on copyright status for legal reasons, it supports and encourages the Wikimedia community in researching and applying the copyright status tag that is most appropriate for their purposes.

Any thought or feeling about that ?--Zolo (talk) 15:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I think removing the borders & colors makes it confusing (because it's unclear what the arrows will show/hide) and messy looking (mostly due to the whitespace). I personally like the current look. Rocket000 (talk) 16:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
So I'm the only one who dislike blue spots on the template ? What about removing colors and keeping borders. This way, I think there can't be any any confusion.--Zolo (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
A Court Lady Viewing Cherry Blossoms
Artist
Geocoded outline Google Maps 
</noinclude>
Title
A Court Lady Viewing Cherry Blossoms
Date between 1810 and 1865
date QS:P571,+1850-00-00T00:00:00Z/7,P1319,+1810-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1326,+1865-00-00T00:00:00Z/9
Medium Woodblock color print
Dimensions 21.3 × 18.4 cm (8.3 × 7.2 in)
  • 1)
  • 2)
  • 3)
  • 4)
Accession number
29.1476
Notes

Bequest of Marion Reilly. Signature:

Gakutei Sadaoka fude
Source/Photographer Online Collection of Brooklyn Museum; Photo: Brooklyn Museum, 29.1476_IMLS_SL2.jpg
Permission
(Reusing this file)
This image was uploaded by the Brooklyn Museum as a content partnership, and is considered to have no known copyright restrictions by the institutions of the Brooklyn Museum.

Note: While the Brooklyn Museum cannot make an absolute statement on copyright status for legal reasons, it supports and encourages the Wikimedia community in researching and applying the copyright status tag that is most appropriate for their purposes.

That's better. I still like the current style more but maybe it's just cause I'm used to it. Rocket000 (talk) 17:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm not particularly attached to the current color scheme, but I think the template within the template should provide some contrast. IMHO, the first one doesn't. --  Docu  at 19:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Actually, what I wanted to do was to make the contrast less striking, at least when the museum (or creator) box is not open. To me, sharp contrasts make the whole thing look a bit unsmooth.
When you say that the first doesn't have enough contrast, does it mean that it suits you in the third proposal ?--Zolo (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Outside some template, I like it coloured, but within the template I even prefer it your way. I'm not sure why this is actually collapsed by default, but with the soon to be MediaWiki:Filepage.css we might be able to use CSS to make it coloured by default and no colour when it's within {{Information}}. --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)--The Evil IP address (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Past discussion regarding the collapse feature: COM:VP/Archive/2008Dec#Creator_templates, Template_talk:Creator/Archive_1#Collapsible?, & Template_talk:Creator/Archive_1#Proposed_changes. -Rocket000 (talk) 02:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I haven't made up my mind on the last one. I think the contrast is needed to differentiate the text of the template from the text of the template.  Docu  at 19:40, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
The second proposal is much better than the first one but I still prefer the original. The new look would not look right when used in the creator home categories, although I think we might be able to use different color scheme when displayed in file vs. category namespace. --Jarekt (talk) 01:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

edit link

what I would love would be a little edit link somewhere in the template so I can easily edit creator templates when I come across them in file description pages. Any idea how this can be done in an unobtrusive way? --Slomox (talk) 22:16, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I like the idea but if the link is for everybody not just few that know then there is more terms to translate, we need to find good place for it and add extra parameter (with creator's name) to all the creator infoboxes. That is a lot of work. I usually find those templates in few clicks by reading authors name, clicking category storing his works. This category, or it's parent should have the creator infobox. --Jarekt (talk) 01:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
If the parameter "homecat" is set, it's value is usually a good guess for the name of the creator template. --Slomox (talk) 09:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
That is true except for Category:Creator templates with non-matching home categories. But that is only about 5%.--Jarekt (talk) 14:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
The number should drop a bit now, I have fixed an error ocurring when apostrophes were present. PAGENAME delivers them as HTML entities and these of course do not match the literal apostrophes. I fixed it by localurl:ing the strings. --Slomox (talk) 15:13, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
It seems to be a known but unfixed bug: bugzilla:16474. Most likely it affects other similar checks as well. --Slomox (talk) 15:18, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks of the fix to this well known and long-standing bug and annoyance :) --Jarekt (talk) 00:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done I added a link back to the creator infobox template, based on "Homecat" parameter. It works fine for creator pages with Homecat the same as page name, other wise for pages in Category:Creator templates with non-matching home categories, it link to the directory. BTW I would prefer the link icon to be on the right hand side just to the left of the triangle. Anyidea how to place it there. --Jarekt (talk) 04:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Span text "Link back to Creator infobox template" should be made localizable. Thank you! 11:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
✓ Done Good idea, but now many language subpages need translations. --Jarekt (talk) 14:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Text-indent

While doing the next major edit, please insert a style="text-indent:6px" into the header of the table for a nicer appearance. TIA, Carbenium (talk) 17:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Sure will remember about it --Jarekt (talk) 01:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

PDF&Books

see w:Help:Books/Feedback#Attribution.  Docu  at 14:54, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

Please correct the Linkback braces.--Patrick (talk) 09:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 13:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks.--Patrick (talk) 20:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Undead

For living people, maybe we should change the label "Date of birth/death" to "Death of birth", i.e. if there is no date of death or death location, skip "death".  Docu  at 17:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

This can be easily done. The only issue would be to create a new label for all the languages. Another thing we can do is to distinguish the cases of dead but we do not know when from still alive cases. We could create some "Still alive" or "living" template but it does not sound very polite. We can also use {{other date|?}} template. --Jarekt (talk) 02:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
✓ Done See for example:
Robert M. Lavinsky  (1972–)  wikidata:Q56247090
 
Alternative names
Robert Matthew Lavinsky; Lavinsky, Robert M.; Lavinsky R M
Description American mineral collector and mineral dealer
iRocks.com (Mineralogical Record)
Date of birth 13 December 1972 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth Columbus
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q56247090
Please help with translation of the new labels in languages you know (see Category:Internationalization templates with incorrect translations.--Jarekt (talk) 02:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. If the servers work today, I will try to split some of the labels. BTW, I'd display "Date of birth/death" even if there is just death location. Or Location if there is date.  Docu  at 11:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
I did 10.  Docu  at 19:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 02:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

"after" option ?

It may be convenient to add more options that could replace {{Attributed to}}, {{After}} and possibly {{Formerly attributed to}} and {{Follower of}}. Perhaps we could even have a "possibly" option for the many works with higly uncertain attribution ? --Zolo (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC) edited --Zolo (talk) 09:51, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

That would be easy to do using the same approach "Workshop of " uses. Once this mechanism is introduced it is easy to add to it. I will look into it. --Jarekt (talk) 18:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
✓ Done I added options to allow use of {{Attributed to}}, {{After}}, {{Formerly attributed to}} and {{Follower of}} inside Creator templates. See File:BoschSelfportret.jpg as an example. I am not sure if I would use it for {{Formerly attributed to}} if {{Attributed to}} is used with the same artwork. I also noticed that {{Circle of}} and {{name|circle of}} seem to have the same purpose. --Jarekt (talk) 03:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I am not sure for {{Attributed to}} either.
I was thinking some more about this and looked at some places where {{Attributed to}} template is currently used, like File:Meebeeck Cruywagen Family by Van Loo.jpg and I think current system is fine. I would not like to replace it with a long list of creator templates for every painter some painting was attributed to. My preference would be to have no more than one Creator template per Author field, but I will leave it to others to decide what is the best way to use this new capability. --Jarekt (talk) 16:21, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I don't like very much the way it looks when there are more than one creator template. However there are cases where there really are more than one author. Since using creator templates is the standard way to display the author's name, it seems logical to use them in those cases as well. Maybe we sould rather find a way to make it look better.--Zolo (talk) 08:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
If there are multiple authors than I do not have problem with multiple Creator templates, but I avoid it if it is for example book author and the author of the preface. --Jarekt (talk) 12:56, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
To me using a creator template for the current attribution only would be okay (see File:The Giant by Goya.jpg )--Zolo (talk) 10:21, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Translatewiki messages

First is the current label (from {{Creator/en}}), second name of message, third is contents (also from {{Creator/en}}, not changed)

  • Alternative names label - wm-license-creator-alternative-names - Alternative names
  • Description label - wm-license-creator-description - Description
  • Birth and deathdate label - wm-license-creator-date-of-birth-and-death - Date of birth/death
  • Birthdate label - wm-license-creator-date-of-birth - Date of birth
  • Birth and deathloc label - wm-license-creator-location-of-birth-and-death - Location of birth/death
  • Birthloc label - wm-license-creator-location-of-birth - Location of birth
  • Workperiod label - wm-license-creator-work-period - Work period
  • Workloc label - wm-license-creator-work-location - Work location
  • Linkback label - wm-license-creator-linkback - Link back to Creator infobox template

What do you guys think? Multichill (talk) 16:31, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I have an naive general question: why do we have "license" in those names? They have nothing to do with licenses, but if it is needed for something I do not have problem with it. Otherwise it sounds good to me. --Jarekt (talk) 16:41, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
wm-license- is the base name, see http://translatewiki.net/wiki/User:Multichill/stats2 for an overview. Multichill (talk) 17:12, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Any last remarks before I implement this? Multichill (talk) 18:50, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I think we are ready to go. --Jarekt (talk) 19:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
✓ Done. Multichill (talk) 22:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Great, I changed {{Creator/layout-test}} to use them. Once new changes trickle here we can swap them. --Jarekt (talk) 03:51, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
{{Creator}} and {{Creator/layout}} should be merged with the translatewiki messages. We'll end up with just one template with one subtemplate (/doc). Multichill (talk) 19:42, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I started using new translations, but it is implemented as {{Creator}} calling {{Creator/layout}}. I like that approach better as it makes templates more readable, since some parameters are preprocessed in {{Creator}} and only a simple format is used in {{Creator/layout}}. I will start updating documentation and deleting language versions. --Jarekt (talk) 02:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I changed my mind and merged {{Creator}} and {{Creator/layout}} - it did not add too much of complexity. --Jarekt (talk) 03:44, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of unused language sub templates is completed. --Jarekt (talk) 19:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

/works subpage in Creator namespace?

To make it easier to view works by creator, should we generate work lists based on creator templates?

As a sample, a list at Creator:Berthe Morisot/works would hold a list of all files using {{Artwork}} and Creator:Berthe Morisot. In table format, it could include thumbnail and data from {{Artwork}}: e.g. title, medium, description, date, gallery.

Rather than people updating it manually, a bot could refresh it once a week.  Docu  at 09:49, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I think the idea is rather appealing. The link doesn't work so I don't know exactly what it would look like but I have a few (interrelated) remarks.
  • (1) Would there be any sizable benefit, compared to category:Berthe Morisot or Category:Works by Berthe Morisot ?
  • (2) In some cases, it would probably look a bit messy (there are ca 1000 images of works by Van Gogh on Commons). Would it be imaginable to sort the files by date or something like that ?
  • (3) Many artworks have several files, it would create redundancies (here again, an artwork namespace could help find a solution)--Zolo (talk) 10:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
To make it easier to comment, I added numbers in your post.
(1) one wouldn't need to click "gallery details" and could sort the list
(2) yes, html tables can be made sortable (and generally are)
(3) it would make it easier to spot them.
 Docu  at 10:31, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
It seems fine to me (sorry I just realize my comment 1 was a bit silly). About sorting by date: many artworks use {{Other date}}, I think the template would need to be edited. Otherwise files will be sorted in a strange fashion -all "circa" at the same place or things like that.--Zolo (talk) 13:57, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, sorting might be tricky. I'm glad about your question on (1), this way I expanded my somewhat dense intro.
When trying to a prototype at Creator:Berthe Morisot/works, it occurred to me that we might want to have the bot copy the entire {{Artwork}} to the subpage and just change the layout (display) to a table. This way one doesn't need to reformat the templates too much.
The museum template might still need a fix to collapse. Docu  at 14:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Sample page at Creator:Berthe Morisot/works is ready.
Formatting is defined in Template:Worklist start (table header), Template:Worklist end (table footer) and Template:Artwork/layout/table for creator (table rows). --  Docu  at 17:01, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I think it looks really good and could be of much help for maintenance. Since many artworks still don't have {{Artwork}}, I wonder if they could be added to the list one way or another.--Zolo (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. If we create a version for table rows with {{Information}}, it could include those too. Most columns would be empty, but at least one would see what's to do.  Docu  at 19:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I like the format and and I think we could use author inventory pages like this, but I do not like it in Creator namespace. Traditionally this kind of pages lived in Gallery namespace and I do not see a good reason to move them out of there. Creator namespace at the moment is only for a single type of templates and I suspect the new pages are not going to be used as templates. Lets not mix them. May be start Works: pseudonamespace. On the other hand if this type of template catches on we could add an "inventory" field to creator templates, the way Museum template have it, and add a specialized link right from the creator template. --Jarekt (talk) 02:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
A separate namespace would be probably be cleaner, we could move the sample page to List of works:Berthe Morisot. It might even work if done for Museum. BTW, I'm wondering with how many works it will start hitting transclusion limits.  Docu  at 03:18, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
I do not remember the number for transclusion limits but it is not very high, may be around 100. I was runing into it frequently when I was cleaning some creator templates by showing bunch of them on some page and than fixing those that had problems. It did not take many creator templates (20-50) before I hit that limit. --Jarekt (talk) 03:46, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Maybe NewPP limit report, Preprocessor node count: 56930/1000000, Post-expand include size: 184327/2048000 bytes, Template argument size: 87158/2048000 bytes, Expensive parser function count: 47/500 means that we could at least multiple by ten the number of templates.  Docu  at 19:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
This all idea looks very good. At first I felt quite uneasy about this, as I feel we are trying to hack features that should exist (maybe through SMW — I said it! :-D), but this loooks too good and useful (for readers and editors) to just sit and wait (so many thanks for your work Docu!).
I agree with Jarekt here, I cannot see why this could not be in the Gallery namespace (it is a gallery), not so sure about a pseudonamespace but why not. Jean-Fred (talk) 09:14, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure there probably is an extension that does that already, but obviously it's not deployed on Commons. In case that happens sometime, the easier it is to remove these again the better.  Docu  at 19:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


I absolutely like the idea, but I do not agree with the redundant storing like it is done in Creator:Berthe Morisot/works. The list should not contain the actual data of the works, but instead call the artwork templates for the single works and hand over a "format=liststyle" parameter that formats the content in table row style instead of the usual standalone template style. --Slomox (talk) 19:03, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Obviously the storage should eventually be done differently, but unless a new extension gets deployed, I'm not sure how that could be done now.
If there was a includeonly feature on file description pages we could use that to transclude only the artwork/information template part and change layout for use in the namespace these lists are being displayed.
At Commons:Bots/Work_requests#list_of_works Krinkle mentions a toolserver option. Maybe he will pursue this.  Docu  at 19:28, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
If we had a transcludeonly tag, this might be much easier to do. I requested it at Bugzilla:26095.  Docu  at 06:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
It exists .. oddly, the following doesn't seem to work:
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}|<onlyinclude>}}
part of artwork/information template for list of works
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}|</onlyinclude>}}
If it worked, we could use that to transclude file description pages in gallery namespace.  Docu  at 21:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I tried to describe this in Bugzilla:26113.  Docu  at 04:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Samples for a toolserver/javascript version can be found at Commons:Bots/Work_requests#list_of_works. --  Docu  at 12:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

companies, groups of people etc.

I think the question has been raised before but I can't find where. What should we do when the "creator" is not really one person, like creator:J. & J. G. Low Art Tile Works, category:Currier and Ives etc. ?--Zolo (talk) 10:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

It is not a very good fit. for the current template but there is not enough of those to create other templates. The original purpose of the creator template was to uniquely identify the author and to show date of death for PD-old files. Creator templates of the companies, groups, etc. can meet this minimal requirement. --Jarekt (talk) 02:04, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Manner of

Hello, in addition to "after", "follower of", "circle of" etc., I was wondering if the option "manner of" (in German "Art des", in French "Manière de" and in Dutch "Trant van") could be added. See for example File:Carlos I Y V.jpg (Manner of Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen) and Category:Manner of Jheronimus Bosch (Manner of Hieronymus Bosch). Thank you. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Technically it is easy. Create {{Manner of}} template and we can link to it from {{Creator}}. Your examples seem to be a fine use of this option: unknown artists working in the manner of some master. But how about File:Wolpertinger.jpg, Shall we use it if known artists work in a a manner of other artist. (BTW, I will be away for a week, so someone else will have to make the change) --Jarekt (talk) 20:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
ok, no problem. Yes, it is used when the artwork is painted in the manner of a certain artist, but for some reason (for example lack of quality) can't be attributed to him or her. As far as I know, when the artist is known you don't have to use this construction. The example you show seems to be a collage, so I don't think you could speak of a work in the manner of Dürer here. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I finished creating {{Manner of}}. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 10:53, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 15:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Manner of Joos van Cleve  (circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485–00–00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
– 1540/1541)  wikidata:Q153472
 
Manner of Joos van Cleve
Alternative names
Joos van der Beke, Joos van der Beken, Joos van Cleef,
Master of the Death of the Virgin
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth/death circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 between 10 November 1540 and 13 April 1541
date QS:P,+1540-00-00T00:00:00Z/8,P1319,+1540-11-10T00:00:00Z/11,P1326,+1541-04-13T00:00:00Z/11
Location of birth/death Cleves (?) Antwerp
Work location
Kalkar (circa 1505–1508), Bruges (1507–1511), Antwerp (1511–1540), France (1529), London (1535–1536)
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q4233718,P1777,Q153472

Option parameter

Hi, I just noticed a mismatch between documentation and implementation of the option parameter. A while ago I added " | Option = {{{1|}}} " to all the creator templates allowing modifiers to creator pages like: "{{Creator:Joos van Cleve|school of}}" which would give

School of Joos van Cleve  (circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485–00–00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
– 1540/1541)  wikidata:Q153472
 
School of Joos van Cleve
Alternative names
Joos van der Beke, Joos van der Beken, Joos van Cleef,
Master of the Death of the Virgin
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth/death circa 1485
date QS:P,+1485-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 between 10 November 1540 and 13 April 1541
date QS:P,+1540-00-00T00:00:00Z/8,P1319,+1540-11-10T00:00:00Z/11,P1326,+1541-04-13T00:00:00Z/11
Location of birth/death Cleves (?) Antwerp
Work location
Kalkar (circa 1505–1508), Bruges (1507–1511), Antwerp (1511–1540), France (1529), London (1535–1536)
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q4233718,P1780,Q153472

. At the same time "Copy and paste" section of Template:Creator/doc suggested use of " | Option = {{{Option|}}} <!-- Do not modify --> " which would require the following syntax: "{{Creator:Joos van Cleve|Option=school of}}". I am planning on fixing the documentation to use {{{1|}}} and fixing creator templates/files which might use {{{Option|}}}. Sorry about this confusion and thank you to User:Krinkle who was lately tracking and cleaning some other problems caused by typos in the documentation. --Jarekt (talk) 19:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done changed documentation and some creator pages using {{{Option|}}} syntax.--Jarekt (talk) 05:05, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Simplifying maintenance Categories

Does anybody uses Category:Creator templates with images or Category:Creator template home categories lacking content? I was thinking about simplifying maintenance Categories and retiring those two. --Jarekt (talk) 14:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

persondata, non-creator people

[sum up of the Village Pump]
I have just edited a series of files on Chinese and Taiwanese politicians. For many of them, it would really be useful if we had some kinds persondata somewhere on which we could rely. Docu and Foroa proposed to put such data in the category namespace. It would make some things quicker and much simpler to maintain. But it does not seem possible to selectively transclude a part of a category -at least not until all people categories have a "persondata" template surrounded by an "onlyinclude". So I think it is better to use the current creator namespace. I have made some experiments with {{Persondata}}, that can is actually better seen as another word for creator/test.

Here are a few potential applications of an extended use of the template:

As Jarekt pointed out, it is quite simple to adapt the creator for this kind of things. The way I did it in persondata is: {{Persondata{{#if: {{{style|}}}|/{{{style}}} |/main . I don't know if it is the best solution, but it makes it quite easy to add new styles.

Other differences are:

  • persondata uses separate parameters for "occupation", "nation" and "gender" rather than a {{NationAndOccupation}} within the description parameter. I think it is better because:
  1. it could give more refined results if we create something like [2]
  2. I think it is simpler to fill a list of parameters with simple words rather than nesting templates.

I guess it would be fairly easy to enable both systems in {{Creator}} and then switch to the new one. Would you support that ?

Consider automatic translations to right-to-left languages. {{NationAndOccupation}} can manage it and display the result correctly, separate templates not: there would appear a problem even if the result language only wouldn't use comma but another separator. --Petrus Adamus (talk) 11:19, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
What I had in mind was to build-in a NationAndOccupation in the template, something like: {{nationAndOccupation|{{{gender|}}}|{{{nation|}}}|{{{occupation|}}}}}, the output would be the same but I think it would be a bit simpler to fill for inexperienced contributors. It would also be more machine readable and would allow more flexibility (eg we could have an alternative version of the template that would display the nation but not the occupation, I don't see any purpose for that right now but we never know).--Zolo (talk) 11:50, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


  • The current persondata looks like an infobox. Obviously this won't do in files description. I think it looks better than creator in categories but that's just a minor matter of taste.--Zolo (talk) 23:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


namespace

If creator is used for non-creators, it shold probably be renamed (persondata ?, person ?). For the namespace, considering that

  • "institution" and "creator" really work in the same spirit.
  • something similar could be useful for many kinds of data (artworks, animal species, ships, whatever)

Wouldn't it better to simply have a "data" namespace rather than create several namespaces. If it ever becomes transcludable to Wikipedia, it will probably be simpler this way. I may be wrong but don't think we would lose anything doing this. That could be something like Category:Yen Ching-piao-Data:Yen Ching-piao (I also added a Interwiki:Yen Ching-piao because I feel it is needed but that's another problem)--Zolo (talk) 21:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC).

Yes, maybe two categories, "Person" and "Institution" would be useful more than too specific "Creator". But what about the namespace "Info"? It could contain all kinds of such informations about creators, non-creators, animals… --Petrus Adamus (talk) 10:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes this is what I meant: merge the existing creator and institution namespaces in a more generic "data", "info" or whatever. Would you be interested in user talk:Zolo#Datawiki-stuff ?--Zolo (talk) 11:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

All auto-categorization was removed from creator templates

FYI, All auto-categorization of files was was removed from last few creator templates. About 2 years back 90% of creator templates were adding categories to files using them. Then a bot removed autocategorization from all pages where Creator name was the same as the category name, but that left few hundred creator templates which had to be done one by one. Those were just finished. So now all creator templates should have the same behavior. --Jarekt (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, that's a great improvement!--Zolo (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Now, I suppose we should fix category:creator templates with non-matching home categories, but that is less important.--Zolo (talk) 22:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Neater ability to crosslink to sister sites

I would like to see a neater and coordinated means for us to add crosslinks to sister sites like English Wikisource, especially where no article may exist in the respective Wikipedias. It would seem more appropriate to be adding such a link to this template, than to be adding it per file, and it would seem that the link may be better to be language variable than to be fixed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:38, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

We could do the same thing as {{Book}} has: "Wikisource" parameter which add an icon (next to ). If Wikisource link is provided than clicking the icon will take you there. --Jarekt (talk) 14:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Over at WS, we do some simple things with en:s:Template:Plain sister and we now embed that into our broader Header template, however, working the reverse way to many types of wikis would a broader concept, ie. a enWS, enWB, enWV, ..., deWS, deWB, deWV, ...  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:09, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
We often handle links to different wikipedias or wikisources based on the language by using {{LangSwitch}} see for example {{London}} which can link to over 100 wikipedias based on the language of the user. We do not use it as often as we could in Creator templates but use it in most Geographical locations templates and Category:Institution templates. So far we used it mostly to point to different wikipedias but we can also use it to point to wikisources (if there is a need. --Jarekt (talk) 03:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Thinking further about this, I do see that the language switch would work, though maybe words are more useful than icons, which often only mean something to people that know, especially as it is never obvious to click an icon like used in {{Book}}; to me icons usually should have text too. At enWS, we now utilise the #if: tested simple en:s:Template:plain sister broadly, even embedding into our standard headers. Something like that as a displayed at the base row to the template would see okay. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree that icons mean more to people who know what they mean and text is easier to understand, but on the other hand text need to be internationalized and we try to avoid using text which do not change from one creator template to another but takes space. --Jarekt (talk) 04:27, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I changed {{Creator/test}} and used it below. Unless there are objections (or competing suggestions) I would add the change in a few days. --Jarekt (talk) 04:40, 11 January 2011 (UTC) Template:Creator/test Opps something not working right. I will investigate tomorrow. --Jarekt (talk) 05:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I like what you have done here, though won't that just work for the primary language of the author? Or would that be the guidance that we would give? We wouldn't want internecine wars over who gets to link ;-)

A thought following what Doug has been doing, I am wondering whether there is some capacity to incorporate into the template {{InterProject}} as an appending row to the table? Doug did something at Creator:Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim which captures the information, though looks less than pretty if it were transcluded.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree that mine would be butt ugly in transclusions of creator. I think that incorporating the ability to have all of these inside the creator template would be ideal as it could then neatly show in imagespace and that would obviate the need for a /interwiki page as I have now at Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa/interwiki which is what is showing through on the creator page.--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 12:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Creator:Saint Reparata‎

Creator:Saint Reparata‎ is currently unused. --  Docu  at 18:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Documentation of Creator templates

Template:Creator/documentation was added as a documentation of all Creator templates. --Jarekt (talk) 18:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

replace description by more spefic parameters ?

It seems that we are always supposed to add a {{NationAndOccupation}} in the description field. If so wouldn't it be better to replace this parameter by five parameters: "gender", "nation", "occupation2" and "occupation3" and put the NationAndOccupation directlyinside {{Creator}} ? It would require to change current templates and users would have to get used to it but apart from that I see only advantages:

  1. it clearly states what is required, which should avoid misuse. Probably a bit easier to underdstand for new-bies
  2. slightly quicker to fill with the preload form (no need to remove the <!--XX-->)
  3. if need be, it would be quite straigtforward to add automatic categories like "US painters who died less than 70 years ago."

And we could keep the description parameter when additional information is needed.--Zolo (talk) 08:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

 Support I was thinking lately about proposing the same. It would be easy to change current templates to fit that format. I do not like "occupation1", "occupation2" and "occupation3" much but do not see a better way.--Jarekt (talk) 16:52, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't see any other solution either. Or would it be possible to use some javascript to enable us to simply separate each occupation by a comma (|occupations=painter, singer ->{{nationAndOccupation|x|XX|painter|singer}}) ?--Zolo (talk) 13:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I think separating occupations with {{!}} would do the trick ; but we don't really want to do that, do we ? ;-)
Well, the idea sounds okay, but it really is a shame to have occupation1 & al. Maybe we can still use a wrapper template |occupation={{Occupation|painter|singer|saint}} ?
Jean-Fred (talk) 18:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Having them separate ("occupation1", "occupation2" and "occupation3") would allow us to add automatically categories like "Painters from France" or "Female writers", if we decide to use this template to add categories like that. However even if this is technically possible I am not sure if we should do that. On one hand a lot of people categories are not properly categorized, but on the other hand, autocategorization is often very hard to remove in the future. I am rather undecided, what is the best way --Jarekt (talk) 02:43, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I changed {{Creator/test}} to include {{{Nationality}}}, {{{Gender}}} ,{{{Occupation}}} (aka. {{{Occupation1}}} ), {{{Occupation2}}}, {{{Occupation3}}}, {{{Occupation4}}}. I am planning on testing it more, implementing the change and running a bot to populate new fields. --Jarekt (talk) 03:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

birthyear/deathyear

I don't understand this (ignore the typo in the date). The years are not known, that's the reason why {{Other date}} has to be used. What's the purpose of still adding the birthyear and deathyear parameters? --Slomox (talk) 02:14, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

birthyear/deathyear is intended when {{Other date}} or {{Lifetime date}} were used in the date fields and year can not be parsed. Those were most often due to uncertainty in day/month not year. I run a bot to add those but probably should have skipped date when the year was uncertain. Year is used mostly to show on the top line, but also to categorize categories and to allow queries like this. --Jarekt (talk) 17:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Not sure if this is understood, e.g. at Creator:Macrino d'Alba. --  Docu  at 12:08, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure it makes sense to replace birthdate = between 1615 and 1620 by 1517 in the first line. But more generally wouldn't it be simpler to add date analysis tools in {{Other date}} and {{Lifetime date}}, things roughly like: 

between={{#if: {{{mean year}}} | {{ISOyear| {{#expr: ( {{ISOyear| {{{2|}}}}}} + {{ISOyear| {{{3}}}}} ) / 2 }}}} }}

--Zolo (talk) 07:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Manual collapse?

Is there a way to make it default to collapse=yes outside of imagespace? I want to place it on a gallery but I don't want it to default to expanded. If there isn't, can we add it?--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 11:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the template was meant to be expanded by default in all namespaces except file namespace. All 6k Category:Creator template home categories have it expanded and all galleries currently using it. If you would like me to I can place it in all the galleries which have names the same as the creator template name. --Jarekt (talk) 17:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, at the moment I think it's awkward together with the info that's ordinarily there; unless it can be set to collapse. But I wrote this before the comment below and my comments on the thread above. If we were to implement those, especially the one below, and put the description in the creator I think it would be exactly what we needed. Then we could also get rid of the description on the category page.--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 17:27, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Creator does have a field for a SHORT description. In order to keep it short and translated to as many languages as possible we use {{NationAndOccupation}} template so the text is often something like "French painter", etc. Longer description is allowed but would not be easily translated. We could add a field for text which would be shown only in gallery and category namespace, in side or outside creator infobox. However in general I do not think we need much more about people in categories. Is someone needs more he/she can go to gallery page or follor interwiki links. --Jarekt (talk) 04:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
See, discussion below.--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 08:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Descriptives as a replacement for the information on a Cat and Gallery

If we incorporated a description section into the creator template that could accommodate different languages, we could do away with the information on the cat and gallery pages. A current problem is the difficulty in keeping this information consistent between gallery and category. I've dealt with the issue in part by placing the information on the gallery page and transcluding it (as discussed here: Commons:Village_pump#A_best_practice_in_Creator.2FCategory.2FGallery_layout.3F, but this doesn't deal with future cases (where we currently have a cat but may later have a gallery) and requires a lot of manual editing to make sure it's right. It is also often redundant to information already in the creator template. If we merged this data into the relevant creator templates, not only could we ensure that it remained consistent by only having to maintain it in creatorspace, we could also set it up to only display the user's language of choice. Combined with sDrewth's suggestion to include interwiki links above, we could ensure that the creator template was the one stop shopping of creator data. The current data on creator or gallery could be botted in to the creator pages once we have the structure. --User:Doug(talk • contribs) 13:14, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

As I said at "Village pump" having the one place to enter the data is someone that I would like to see us implement, especially as when we can better manage meta-data it allows to better mix and match across the wikis, and to look have more seemless interwikis, search forms, data match, etc. Whether that is in this template, I will let the technocrats make the decision, though to me, it seems the most likely place to do so.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Reference Jarekts's comments in the section above: Consider Category:Étienne_Desmarteau. You can see that we are already putting detailed information on the category page and translating it. This is what I'm talking about. We would have a parameter for a description that would be encoded like descriptions for the image themselves currently are {{en|The description in English}} {{de|Die Bieschreibung auf deutsch}}, etc. I'm not suggesting that the template would have to translate the text itself. Yes, I understand that this template doesn't have fields for that yet, but I don't see why it couldn't.--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 08:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Category:Étienne_Desmarteau is not a creator. I tend to integrate only descriptions in the local language(s) (unless the category refers to many keywords in many languages as for example in Category:Mbira). Most categories have no galleries nor templates, they don't really need them neither. --Foroa (talk) 09:48, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Good points, I was only looking for an example of the use of multi-lingual descriptions and I picked a poor one, Category:Heinrich_Cornelius_Agrippa_von_Nettesheim is a better example, though it is now transcluded, the descriptions were there and multi-lingual before I arrived. In fact, it's the reason I started this if I recall correctly, because I found that after I created the gallery for this author someone changed one of the two descriptions, so I transcluded to sync them. A bot has since added the creator template. Category:John French (physician) is another example, albeit with only one language. Your other point that most categories have no galleries and no templates is well taken. I see this as only relevant to the base category of a creator. I notice that category:Aristotle has neither a description nor a template, personally, I think it needs both and the description would be in at least as many languages as on the corresponding gallery, but it at least should have a template I would think.--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 10:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
In the example Category:Heinrich_Cornelius_Agrippa_von_Nettesheim the multi-lingual description should be probably deleted - all the info can be found in the creator template. --Jarekt (talk) 03:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed, which means that too is not the best example, and in the gallery too, if that's all it's going to say; though I could add to it. Even just a notes section though, would allow us to get rid of this separate description on nearly all author/artist gallery and cat pages completely.--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 06:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
It won't lead to a total change of practice as this is only talking about categories relating to creators; so it would be possible to do similar for institutions, however, for the vast bulk of other categories, it is not going to apply, so we do have a differentiation. That said, I still support it for all the reasons mentioned.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


  • It would certainly be useful to have a better and more standardized way to handle the relationship between categories, galleries and interwikis. I have tried a prototype a while ago at {{Interwiki}}. However projects to centralize all interwikis should be taken into account.
  • About the content of creator templates, I still hold the same view as in Commons:Village pump/Archive/2010/12#Create a multi-purpose, multilingual people database. To me, the most sensible solution would be to store many data about people and have various formatting templates so that they can be used in various ways to cater to various needs. Creator could become one these formatting templates (i.e. {{creator:XX}} would become {{creator|XX}})). I don't know about the place where such data should be stored: it would be easy to find arguments to either put them in a dedicated page (as it currently is in creator pages) or use current categories categories (as suggested by Docu and Foroa).--Zolo (talk) 16:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
This sounds like a database table to me. It might be a good long term solution but it would be a very drastic change and I do not see a good way to do it properly using current software. --Jarekt (talk) 05:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts to disambiguation

Have we given thought to how we will disambiguate different creators? Will the base page be for disambiguation? Will it be first-in, first-served? What is the disambiguation process for creators? Is it careers, or will it be dates of live? At Wikisource we disambiguate on years of life, as using profession (such as "writer") becomes problematic on such a site, and there was often cases of snr & jr as being writers. We also declared that the base name would be for disambiguation, to stop the dispute over name primacy.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

We did not have much issues with those yet, but it is only matter of time. So far we often used middle names for disambiguation, but if that does not work than I prefer dates over professions, they translate better, also professions such as "artist" are not helpful when you have several of them. What to do with the base name is tricky since those are templates. I would suggest not heaving one or having page which is <noinclude></noinclude> . --Jarekt (talk) 17:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
I would think that rather than listing a disambiguation page in the Creator namespace, we could be a little different and annotate on the Category page. My reasoning is that if there is multiple people of the same name, then 1) we will likely have to disambiguate the categories anyway, so we have a ready listing, it is then about an additional pointer, and 2) we may need to disambiguate from interwikis. We can justify this direction on the philosophy of NOT in creator space AS those pages are solely for transclusion. Though if we did, we would need to work out to hatnote or cross-reference.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
That sounds reasonable to me --Jarekt (talk) 13:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed changes to "Description" field

As discussed in #replace description by more spefic parameters ? section, I changed {{Creator/test}} to include {{{Nationality}}}, {{{Gender}}} ,{{{Occupation}}} (aka. {{{Occupation1}}} ), {{{Occupation2}}}, {{{Occupation3}}}, {{{Occupation4}}}. I am planning on implementing the change and running a bot to populate new fields. I believe it will make it easier to fill those fields correctly and easier for a bot to synchronize them with categories ( creator templates in subdirectories of Category:Painters from France probaly should have description "French painter", etc. ". The new set of parameters will look like: 

{{Creator/test
 | Name              = Jean André
 | Alternative names = Frère André
 | Description       = 
 | Nationality       = FR <!-- or French -->
 | Gender            = m  <!-- or male   -->
 | Occupation        = painter / writer / musician / physicist 
 | Description       = Additional description
 | Birthdate         = 1662
 | Birthloc          = {{Paris}}
 | Deathdate         = 1753-04-14
 | Deathloc          = {{Paris}}
 | Workperiod        = 
 | Workloc           = {{Rome}}, {{France}}
 | Image             = André Jean - Autoportrait.jpg
 | Sortkey           = André, Jean
 | Homecat           = Jean André
 | Option            = {{{1|}}}
}}

would give Template:Creator/test--Jarekt (talk) 04:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me, and the answers may be implicit.
  • no use of {{date}}? it is implicit? Might be worth adding <-- yyyy-mm-dd or yyyy-->
  • wrapping places in {{ }}, for the example or is that expected?
  • | Occupation = xxxxx | Occupation1= yyyyyyy | Occupation2 = zzzzzz  ? or Occupation = xxxx, yyyy, zzzz or some other use of that field?
 — billinghurst sDrewth 11:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Personnally I would say:
  1. Yes adding <-- yyyy-mm-dd or yyyy--> in the upload form could be a good idea.
  2. Since the templat automatically puts birthloc and deathloc in a {{City}}, it looks simpler not to add the {{ }}. But it is true that we cannot do that for workloc so it would not be very well harmonized.
  3. Occupatiion=xxxx, yyyy would definitely be much better than occupation1 occupation2 if we were able to put them in a {{NationAndOccupation}}, but I don't think there is any easy way to do it with the current MediaWiki version (though judging from w:Category:String manipulation templates it should not be completely impossible) So probably we should have "|occupation1" "|occupation2" and hope that bug 26092 will be solved some day.--Zolo (talk) 15:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
update: I have tried Wikipedia's string manipulation templates. It is not so difficult after all, so it may be worth trying to use them. However, my attempts have resulted in an "expansion size exceeded" message and I can't find a way to get around it (w:User:Superzoulou/test5).--Zolo (talk) 21:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Few points:
--Jarekt (talk) 04:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
w:Category:String manipulation templates are great, although some are very long and mighty complicated. I am not surprised at "expansion size exceeded" message. Thanks to them I found out that {{#titleparts: one/two/three/four|1|3 }} gives "three" and strings separated by "/" can be easily parsed. So I changed {{Creator/test}} to allow Occupation parameters like "painter / writer / musician / physicist". See example above. --Jarekt (talk) 14:14, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

New version of the template with Nationality Gender and single Occupation fields is out. I will write a bot to convert current notation to the new one. By the way I have also made changes to {{CountryAdjective}} (used by {{NationAndOccupation}} to allow genders "male" and "female" in addition to "m" and "f". Also would allow Nationality specified in English in addition to 2-letter country codes: "Danish" as an alternative to "DK" or "Croatian" as an alternative to "HR". I always had a hard time remembering more than a dozen of the most frequently used codes. --Jarekt (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

It seems good thanks.
Sorry to insist on that but since we are on template changes:
Some people have used the template for non-creator people (eg depicted people). To me in would make perfect sense to have a place to store such data, but for various reaons it seems better to have a special template for authors of the file (or artwork shown on the file). So shouldn't we decide to
  1. rename the template (and probably the namespace) to person
  2. create other formatting templates to format accomodate the accomodate the data in other contexts (eg depicted people)
  3. use a formatting template{{creator|XX}} in the author field rather than transclude {{person:XX}} directly (it is not an absolute necessity but it would be more logical given point 2)
Having data for non-creators could have many uses (expecially when it will become transcludable to wikipedias). It could also make category maintenance easier (through something like {{Category definition: Person}}). Replacing {{creator:XX}} by {{creator|XX}} will require a large amount of bot work but it will get worse with time. By the way it would also allow to do without the current "option={{{1|}}}".--Zolo (talk) 14:02, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
@ Zolo, You are making several different points here. The use of the template for non-creator people (eg depicted people) - Currently creator templates when used in the file are used to specify creators of the work. The depicted people should have a link to wikipedia articles or our galleries or categories, even can have a link to creator page, but should not tranclude creator templates (see Template:Creator/doc#Template_Tags). At the same time I do not have a problem with use of creator templates (or similar) in the category / gallery space. We could create {{Person}} template which would be similar to {{Creator}} except it would not be used in the file namespace. I do not see a need to rename {{Creator}} template. {{Person}} template can be used as alternative name right now and can have same look but different properties like tags, categories, etc. If we start using it that way we might need to rename creator namespace in the future. --Jarekt (talk) 05:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
As you mention, creator and non-creators should have the same info, but there should be differences in tags (and possibly in template layout). However I am not sure it would be very convenient to store data in two different templatess. It could lead to redundancies like a "creator:Van Gogh" for paintings by Van Gogh and a person:van Gogh for photos of Van Gogh. To me it would make more sense to have one single place to store the data and two different templates to format them according to the needs
I like the idea of a description field that would only show in categories but to me it shows that even with current template usage, various formatting styles would come in handy. The software is certainly not ideal for complex database entries but it seems okay for this kind of people data. The changes I suggest may be quite substantial but I think it would only require moderate human work. --Zolo (talk) 15:15, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

 Comment the "." at the end of the nation and occupation words looks disturbing to me. That's not a sentence so no "." is needed. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 13:11, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Removed --Jarekt (talk) 05:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
  • I really like the "additional description"! Particularly as it supports sDrewth's and my comments above. ;-) As for the idea of renaming the template and the namespace to cover non-creator persons, I'm a bit ambivalent as there are also non-person creators; at least legally, as when Gov't or an institution "creates" something and we might want creator templates for them. Just a thought.--User:Doug(talk • contribs) 17:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)hown only in c
"additional description" is just regular description which was used for a while before we started using {{NationAndOccupation}} template in that field. After recent removal of most of {{NationAndOccupation}} from description field there is still plenty of creator templates with descriptions. We could make this description field or some new additional verbose description to show up in all the namespaces except "file". This way we can allow for much longer descriptions in galleries and categories. --Jarekt (talk) 05:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

New proposed version of {{NationAndOccupation}}

I wrote {{NationAndOccupation/sandbox}} - Dual nationality version of {{NationAndOccupation}}. Please see Template:NationAndOccupation/testcases and verify if the template works for the languages you know. Then mark which versions are OK in Template talk:NationAndOccupation. Lets keep discussion at Template talk:NationAndOccupation. --Jarekt (talk) 19:23, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Dual nationalities work now, at least in few languages we tested it. --Jarekt (talk) 03:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

non creators: new proposal

Rather than using a specific namespace or the creator namespace for non-creators, can I do what some people suggested when I mentionned the idea at the Village Pump: use athe category namesapce. We can use a template that need to be designed for transclusion right away. It can rather serve as a tool to help harmonize and maintain people categories, (it could add a standard multlingual text like "This category is about {{{name|}}} {{#if: {{{occupation|}}}, a {{{occupation}}} }}".
So could I request a bot to replace: [[Category:People by name}] [[XX births]] [[XY deaths]]

by {{Catbox: Person|name={{subst:PAGENAME}}|birthdate=XX|death date=XY|gender=|nationality=|occupation=|description=}}
(of course I think it should eventually be merged with {{Creator}})--Zolo (talk) 10:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Such a discussion should not be hidden away on this template talk page. That is a broader community discussion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
A while ago I tried to launch a discussion at the Village Pump about a bigger project (a people database) and got feedback from four users ([3]). One was a clear support and two suggested to use categories. Jarekt was more skeptical about the idea but he is active on this talk page. I got no other comment or opposition and nothing really new has happened since then. Create new threads on the subject may be some soft kind of spamming. I do it here so I spam less people :].--Zolo (talk) 07:51, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Some thoughts on the matter in a random order:
  • I think that in case of people who are not authors or creators, it is fine to use generic {{Creator}} template directly in the category namespace without creation of specific creator template. We already have people creating specific creator template which are used only in category namespace. If we do not want to call them using {{Creator}} template than we can use {{Person}} template, which redirects to Creator.
  • I am uncertain about templates automatically adding categories. I like, improvements in harmonization and maintenance, but am afraid of inflexibility and how hard it is to undo it. Now I think a better way would be to create silent tags (like {{Checked}} template) which than can be used to add categories. But tags have their own problems, like possibility for vandalism.
  • Zolo, you mentioned "people database" discussion. I am seriously thinking about creating some "people database" to help me maintain current Creator pages and create new ones. It is not as efficient as your proposal (database as primary source and template pages as display of database info), but it still could be very useful. One think I am not sure about is where to create it: My computer, toolserver, other space (?) --Jarekt (talk) 14:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
  • I am fine with adding creator templates directly in the category, but to me it should eventually lead to the death of the creator namespace -or to confusion.
  • By the way, would there be a way to display the template to the right of other content like Wikipedia's infoboxes rather than at the top as it is now ? I don't like the creator template stretches the page.
  • About categories, I would not advocate automatic categories based on occupation, but for birth/death dates I think the system currently used in creator home categories makes sense. It could cause problems if:
  1. the template is removed from the category
  2. we decide to have more precise categories like "October 1966 births" (in this case however it would still be easier to make some changes to one template rather than to thousands of pages.)
  • @Jarekt: are you thinking about something similar to templatetiger ? If so I suppose it could be done at Toolserver but I am not familier with it.
  • One last point that could be mentioned at the Village Pump: I mentioned a "catbox: person" above. This is because seing {{Category definition}} it dawned on me that categories were of central importance at Commons and that it could be nice to have something equivalent to {{Information}} for the file namespace and to {{TemplateBox}} for template documentation.--Zolo (talk) 22:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Chain link image (link to infobox) links to category

Maybe I missed a discussion somewhere, however, we now have the chain link image going back to the Category page and no link to the Creator: namespace? Is it now envisaged that there is no direct link to the underlying creator namespace pages?  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

The chain link image Is defined as {{{Linkback|{{#ifexist:Creator:{{{Homecat|}}}|Creator:{{{Homecat|}}}|Category:{{{Homecat|}}} }} }}} which means that it tries 3 options:
  1. Link provided by "Linkback" parameter
  2. If missing than "Creator:{{{Homecat|}}}"
  3. If that does not exist (creator name does not match the category name) than it links to the Homecat category
Most new creator pages should have "Linkback" parameter and I added it to all creator pages where creator name does not match the category name, so it should be quite unlikely that you run into one of those. To fix it just add "Linkback" parameter. --Jarekt (talk) 03:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, it was missing that parameter, whether deleted or never there, I didn't check.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

New format - new chalenges

After adding Nationality, Gender & Occupation fields I am running a bot to populate them based on Categories. For examples Creators in subdirectories of Category:Painters from France can get Nationality=FR and Occupation=painter. This approach (like most bot edits) is a 90% solution since artist might have been mostly a photographer who did some paintings, or was really French who did most work in Russia and is mostly considered a Russian painter. So is you see any issues like this please correct.

At the moment each artist can have only one Nationality. User:Zolo started discussion at Template talk:NationAndOccupation about allowing double nationality, but those might be hard to translate. For example in Polish "French-English" would be "francusko-angielski" and "English-French" would be "angielsko-francuski". Do other languages have similar issues?

Also there is still about 300 of Creator templates with "description" field. Most of those should be looked at to see if they just list Nationality, Gender & Occupation and can be moved to other fields. I am slowly looking through them but would appreciate if other people did the same. --Jarekt (talk) 15:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I have checked some templates, however there should be a way to know which ones were already cheked by other users. I propose to add a {{Checked}} to templates that have been checked so that we can look for pages in category:creator templates with description that have or have not this template with catscan2. I have added {{code|?}} when I did not know what to do, it cateogorizes in category:creator templates with description (what should we do about this one ?. One case I have encountered was references included in the description: should we have a reference field for them ?--Zolo (talk) 17:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I like idea of using {{Checked}}. Description becomes now catch all field. I think it is fine for references. We can also move them to <noinclude></noinclude> section under the Creator template. It would be rarely used since for most creator templates the only reference needed is wikipedia page link in Name field. --Jarekt (talk) 19:23, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
All images in category:creator templates with description have been checked. I will remove {{Checked}} templates. --Jarekt (talk) 02:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

pseudonyms

When an author is mostly referred to by a pseudonym I suppose it should be used as the main name. But when a pseudonym is only rarely used, should we add a "pseudo=" parameter. I mean in Category:Caricatures by James Tissot in Vanity Fair, should we have {{creator:James Tissot|pseudo=Coïdé}} -> "Coïdé (James Tissot)".--Zolo (talk) 20:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I think we should name the template after most commonly used name, hopefully matching category, gallery and or name used on (English?) Wikipedia. Pseudonyms should be mentioned in Alternative names, with help of {{Name}}. If creator is know under few names than alternative creator pages with redirects should be used. --Jarekt (talk) 02:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed Commons:Creator

I took a shot at writing proposed guideline/policy of Creator namespace. Please review, and improve. It is a proposed policy so if you see existing pages which should stay in the namespace, but do not fit this policy than lets discuss them. --Jarekt (talk) 19:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, maybe we will need some sort of community approval for who should have a creator template. I like the idea of an image but actually it shows that the way it works is rather complex, so it may be a bit intimidating to new users. (btw is the world "folder" used on purpose on the caption ? to me categories is clearer since it is the word used here).--Zolo (talk) 07:29, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
I will ask for wider review in Village Pump, but thought of pre-release here, from people who are most familiar with the issues. I corrected caption of the image. --Jarekt 14:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Creator templates for Wikimedia users

Is it in the intention of the template to use it for own works of Wikimedians? Like Creator:Petrus Adamus. I don't think so, but I want to hear the opinions of others. --Slomox (talk) 17:53, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

In this case, with no information provided I would say it is not very useful. As a more general rule, I don't know, so just a few thoughts:
  • It can be nice to have info about the photographer and the cutoff for notoriety is far from clear. Should we use creator for press photographer ? If so why not for Wikimedians? So a more general quetion is who should be awarded a glorious creator template ?
  • Among the thing that bother me with Creator:Petrus Adamus is that we should probably not have a Category:Petrus Adamus, so we have an annoying "creator with non-matching home category".
  • Maybe we could somehow use "occupation=wikimedian" to discriminate between our homemade creators and other ones.--Zolo (talk) 20:27, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I do not like the practice, but I do not think we have policy against it. And as Zolo pointed out there is no clear line: contemporary press photographers, flicker photographers, Commons photographers ( with full name), Commons users without full name? I do not know where to draw the line. I do not delete any, except if it is unused and no information is provided by the template, as in Creator:Petrus Adamus (which is used in over 50 files). I think we have some notoriety standards for non-hidden categories. May be we can draw the line there. --Jarekt (talk) 02:18, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
We have nothing that allows it, personal information belongs to the user namespace, not the file namespace. Since there is no ownership on file descriptions I will replace it with a normal author name sooner or later. --Martin H. (talk) 18:02, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
After this and some similar discussions over the years I tried to list current norms of use of creator namespace in the form of proposed policy/guideline: Commons:Creator. In it I listed "Creator templates for Wikimedia users" as "Allowed but discouraged". I canvas for opinions about this policy on Village Pump but got only two replies. Martin, if you would like to prohibit this practice than maybe we should ask again at Village Pump about that aspect of the policy, and see if more people have an opinion. I personally see it as "allowed but discouraged" and when I see one of those templtes I fix it up if it is needed. There are couple dozen of them. I do not see those as "personal information": for exxample Creator:Petrus Adamus template is not listing Petrus' favorite food and cat's name. It just states his real name, username and that he is a Wikimedian (as suggested by Zolo above) and amateur photographer. That seems like a minimal context info relevant to the image. Also everything except name is initially collapsed in the file namespace and available only to those who expand the template. --Jarekt (talk) 03:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Its out of scope personal information outside the user namespace. It combines a specific layout that we use to identify notable artists with someone non-notable in a namespace that is defined as a namespace for notable people. There is enough evidence that something like this does not belong into the creator namespace. --Martin H. (talk) 03:38, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Was the scope of the namespace specified when it was created ? Otherwise I don't see it mentioned anywhere except -as Jarekt pointed out- in Commons:creator. Personnally I see (minor) benefits in using this namespace for Wikimedians and other not very notable people but I suppose the supplementary burden could become non-trvial if this practice was generalized.--Zolo (talk) 10:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
I haven't known about this discussion until today, when Jarekt placed its link to the user talk of Martin H., who removed my creator template from one file and tried to persuade me, that there is a general agreement about prohibition to use the template for Wikimedians and that I automatically declare myself an artist by that (“You use a namespace that is intended to host information about notable artist and nothing else…”, “Of course you claim yourself a notable artist with doing so and with writing your own page in our topic namespaces.”). Yet I can see here, that it was rather his personal opinion and the real opinions are not so uniform.
  • If the namespace is destined just for artists, it should be renamed to "Artist", since the title "Creator" implicates it is usable for any creator. If more Wikimedians used the namespace, definitely much more of them wouldn't comprehend it exactly in the sence of artist. It's similar like declare, that e.g. the namespace "File" is just for sounds: without any doubt a big part of users would neglect it, having not read the instructions and believing the namespace wouldn't be named misleadingly.
  • If it's really a namespace reserved for notable artists, please supercede not only my personal template but also some other creator templates established by myself:
    • {{Creator:Petrus Adamus}} → {{User:Petrus Adamus/author}} (no artist)
    • {{Creator:František Vladimír Lorenc}} → [[:Category:František Vladimír Lorenc|František Vladimír Lorenc]] (author of many books, but no artist)
    • {{Creator:Josef Hradil}} → [[:Category:Josef Hradil|Josef Hradil]] (magazine redactor, but no artist)
    • {{Creator:Marek Blahuš}} → [[:en:User:Blahma|Marek BLAHUŠ]] (no artist)
  • Petrus Adamus (talk) 23:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Before the substitution please renew the template Petrus Adamus from User:Petrus Adamus/Petrus Adamus, as Martin H. arbitrarily moved it. Obviously he is convinced his view of the creator namespace is the only correct, but I don't understand why he is undermining my effort to substitute my creator page by a standard user template, isn't it in conformity with his ideas? I do not know more, what he wishes. Petrus Adamus (talk) 23:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Simply use a normal user template in your user namespace, use {{User:Petrus Adamus/Petrus Adamus}} (or a more suitable template name such as User:Petrus Adamus/Info or /Credits or so). --Martin H. (talk) 00:04, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Creator is bigger than just artists, we have authors, musicians, orators, etc. Creator in a loose way is to equate with the measure of the notability, well at least as used by other WMF sites.

At Wikisource we have this sort of issue with user translations and whether to make an Author page. Our rule of thumb for dealing with these is that if there were published works (our notability) then they are credited directly (author page). If they are a general user who comes along and does a translation full or otherwise, then are simply annotated as translator = Wikisource as anyone can come and edit the translation, etc. which is what can happen with works here for all derivative works. Someone can generate and improve a map, but no one can improve a work of art. So while that doesn't give an exact answer in words, I hope that the intent is clear.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, I think {{Creator}}, combined with appropriate internationalisation templates, is even much more useful for not very known creators, as it can be the only source of information available on the person in many languages. Definitely there is no problem to find something about Homer in nearly any language, but where is accessible for instance some info about Josef Hradil in Portuguese (as many people don't speak any other language)? Just in the creator infobox of the man. Should this unique source of information in many languages be so limited? --Petrus Adamus (talk) 14:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Totally agree with you. Many of the contributions at English Wikisource are by people forgotten in the 21stC, however, if we find their work worthy of reproduction now, then they get the recognition of an author page. Accordingly I would align my viewpoint in this manner. Where there is a work of art (broad and loose definition) that is a case of a contributor's name into a creator template, where it is a local creation for local purposes, then user derived name. To me, the significance test is not a high hurdle, but it cannot be crawled over.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Personally, I think transcluding texts from user namespace is highly problematic. This just creates the requirement to download yet another namespace to have full file descriptions. Fortunately this is being discouraged for license templates. --  Docu  at 11:44, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

French translation

Hi,
There is a problem with a French translation on the template Creator. In the page Creator:Conrad Poirier, you can see the error in the field « Description » :

Conrad Poirier (1912–1968) Rétrolien vers l’infobox du créateur
Description photographe canad{{#swich: m |f=ienne|s=o|#default=o}}
Date de naissance/décès 17 juillet 1912(1912-07-17) 1968(1968)
Lieu de travail Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Can somebody shows me how to solve that (I tried but the templates are hard to follow...). — Riba (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done I think User:Jean-Frédéric have already fixed it.--Jarekt (talk) 22:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Problem with visualization

{{editprotected}} Please see: after this correction part of templates, based on {{Creator}} ceased to appear in file descriptions. Example: Creator:Eduard Hau in image File:Hau. Interiors of the New Hermitage. Room of Russian Painting.jpg. --Art-top (talk) 06:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done I undone latest changes, We should test them and try again. --Jarekt (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! --Art-top (talk) 04:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

creating batches of creator templates

With the help of the wonderful extension of AutoWikiBrowser I was able to scrape information about creators off from EN wiki. Put it into Excel file, clean it a bit and upload it here as creator pages. This process can be done relatively fast. If anybody have some favorite set of creators, that he/she would like to upload than I can help with the process. --Jarekt (talk) 04:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Great. Sadly I don't know how to find a series of missing creators. But the tool could be used for {{Persondata}} too--Zolo (talk) 17:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
One way I tried was to use CatScan2 to find all painter categories which are in category:People by name and are not in Category:Creator template home categories. Than I took only categories of people who had articles on EN Wikipedia and created subset with ~100 examples, of painters who died more than 70 years ago, see user:jarekt/a. I think it will be a good idea to use it for {{Persondata}} but I would like to modify {{Persondata}} first to make it more compatible with {{Creator}}. Than may be we should make {{Persondata}} and {{Creator}} to use the same output format when used in Category namespace. Also at the moment cleanup of the data scraped from wikipedia is time consuming. It is OK for 100 templates but might be too painful for >100k person categories. --Jarekt (talk) 20:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh yes, with catscan. I suppose the same thing could be done with sculptors and writers then. But I have tried twice to use cascan (depth=2) and let it run for more than one hour, to no avail: it just keeps searching, should I wait longer ?--Zolo (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
CatScan2 is often temperamental, times-out often, and sometimes it is impossible to make it do what you need. AWB tool's List comparer can be also used, but it is slow on large datasets. If everything else fails there is always toolserver DB Queries. --Jarekt (talk) 13:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip, I should try AWB some day. I have changed a bit {{Persondata}} so that it supports the "occupation 1 /occupation2" format. Hope this is better.--Zolo (talk) 07:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

It would be very nice to have creator templates for artists in Category:Leningrad School (user:Schlurcher has said he would add an artwork templates to the relevant files afterwards.) I think it would be even better if it could look like Creator:Evgenia Antipova --Zolo (talk) 10:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

image size (Creator:Peter Paul Rubens)

Any idea why the image does not fill the whole space in Creator:Peter Paul Rubens ? --Zolo (talk) 07:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Neither {{ImageNoteControl}} nor "100x150px" seem to generate this, but depending on the screen size, the table padding the cell expands the cell size. The cell would need something like width="100px". --  Docu  at 07:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I think it is due to image size "100x150px" which was optimized for templates without multi-line fields. I tried to add 2 more parameters to Template:Creator/sandbox which would allow control of image size and relative proportions of the column widths. See Template:Creator/testcases. Those parameters default to the old values and would allow fine-tuning the template proportions after text is mostly fixed. Ideally the template would be able to resize images and columns by itself without need for confusing extra parameters, but I do not think I know how to do it. --Jarekt (talk) 13:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Another issue is that the 2 proposed extra parameters "ImageSize" and "BoxRat" can finetune template proportions for a given screen size but it might not be optimal for other screens, so it might not be a good idea at all. Also different languages might have different message sizes which would also change proportions. --Jarekt (talk) 13:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't <td rowspan="7"> include a width attribute, e.g. <td rowspan="7" width=="100px">. --  Docu  at 12:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

That is a good idea I tried it at template:Creator/sandbox2 and tested at Template:Creator/testcases and it does give you better control over fine tuning the template. Is that something other people would find useful?--Jarekt (talk) 12:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I think it would be easier if it could be always automatically adjusted, but otherwise I would support having this. It gives a good result and I suppose that it cannot hurt.--Zolo (talk) 07:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I would much more prefer automatic adjustment too, but I do not know any way to do it. --Jarekt (talk) 02:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done - Added ImgWidth parameter. --Jarekt (talk) 02:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

RTL

{{editprotected}} hi, please do this: 

<!-- Creator name -->
<tr valign="top">
<th colspan="4" style="margin-{{#ifeq:{{dir|{{int:Lang}}}}|rtl|left|right}}:6em; background-color:#e0e0ee; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #aaa;"><span class="fn" id="creator">{{#switch: {{lc:{{{Option|}}} }} 
  | workshop of | circle of | school of = {{name|{{lc:{{{Option|}}}}}|{{{Name|}}} }} 
  | attributed to          = {{Attributed to|{{{Name|}}} }} 
  | after                  = {{After|{{{Name|}}} }}
  | formerly attributed to = {{Formerly attributed to|{{{Name|}}} }}
  | follower of            = {{Follower of|{{{Name|}}} }} 
  | manner of              = {{Manner of|{{{Name|}}} }}
  | #default               = {{#ifexist:{{{Name|}}} | [[{{{Name|}}}]] | {{{Name}}} }}
}}</span> <span style="margin-{{#ifeq:{{dir|{{int:Lang}}}}|rtl|left|right}}: 20px;">{{#if:{{ISOyear| {{{Birthyear|{{{Birthdate|}}} }}} }} | {{#if:{{ISOyear| {{{Deathyear| {{{Deathdate|}}} }}} }} |({{ISOyear| {{{Birthyear|{{{Birthdate|}}} }}} }}–{{ISOyear| {{{Deathyear| {{{Deathdate|}}} }}} }})}} }} {{#if:{{{Wikisource|}}}{{{demo|<noinclude>1</noinclude>}}}|[[File:Wikisource-logo.svg|15px|{{{Wikisource|}}}|link={{{Wikisource|}}}]]}}[[File:Icons-mini-icon link.gif|{{int:wm-license-creator-linkback}}|link={{{Linkback|{{#ifexist:Creator:{{{Homecat|}}}|Creator:{{{Homecat|}}}|Category:{{{Homecat|}}} }} }}}]]</span></th>
</tr>

thanks. −ebraminiotalk 03:30, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you tell us what you would like to achieve? I noticed you are changing margins and dash style. I tried different margins in Template:Creator/sandbox2 and I do not see much of the difference between versions with and without the margins. Can we just remove them and simplify the code? --Jarekt (talk) 16:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, yes of course, it is useful for RTL wikis, this can not seen in commonswiki. you can see it here for example. margin-right is wrong in this case and margin-left must used instead. also you can use {{#ifeq:{{dir|{{int:Lang}}}}|rtl|margin-left|margin-right}} for better code readability. 19:57, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
oh you want remove margin-right totally? okay, it can be better solution. i just want make template compatible with RTL wikis, Other modification is not important for me. −ebraminiotalk 20:06, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
it is a good solution, please do it. thanks :) −ebraminiotalk 20:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done--Jarekt (talk) 02:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Has there been the discussion about disambiguation in the Creator namespace, and with the {{Creator}} template? Cannot say that I have seen it addressed, and we it seems to me that we should either link to any such direction and/or summarise on the documentation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:25, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

We discussed it a little here, and I have seen more cases needing disambiguation since then. I try to follow category names or EN wiki names, or use dates of birth and death after the name. I agree we should provide some guidance for when it is needed. Would you like take first crack at it? --Jarekt (talk) 18:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
(<deskthunk> for not remembering) So to progress, there was only a couple of comments, and about
  • disambiguate by years of life, basically (BBBB-DDDD), where known, and parts of these dates of life if only partials are known.
To note that we can allow and encourage(?) liberal use redirects to be created to point to the page, eg. …(painter) would be a redirect.
  • No specific listing page in the Creator: namespace as all are categorised, and we can disambiguate based on categories.
therefore no Personalname Familyname (disambiguation) required
  • QUESTION — Do we rely on a "first in, best dressed" approach to naming, ie. if someone is there as [[Creator:Thomas Jones]] they are there forever with that name, and everyone else gets disambiguated, or do we move all to be disambiguated. (Issues with all approaches, and sometimes comes down to most successful and/or least painful/argumentative.)
Anyway, some of my thoughts.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
We should not rely on "first in, best dressed" approach. If name needs disambiguation than everybody gets category name with disambiguation, unless one of the people is much more famous than others. For example if we have creator page for en:Thomas Jefferson and we need one for en:Thomas Jefferson (musician) than only the less known Jefferson gets disambiguation name. Guidance should follow en:Wikipedia:Disambiguation except be only for people and without use of pages devoted to disambiguation. I like (BBBB-DDDD) disambiguation style for people because it is better than "(painter)" or "(artist)" since next one can be artist or painter as well. --Jarekt (talk) 03:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Bot that creates creator templates seems to drop often the disambiguation terms from its main category. And creating other disambiguation terms in creator name space is even more a waste of time. That is asking for troubles and creating the need for disambiguation in the creator namespace. --Foroa (talk) 06:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

stars vs bullet points

Is there any obvious reason why the first star of the other names field does not become a bullet point in Creator:Shitao ?--Zolo (talk) 04:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

No idea what is going on and why. But I tried 20 random combinations and adding <nowiki/> in front fixes the problem. --Jarekt (talk) 12:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Maybe it is the same like here. This is the old template:

User:Saibo/SandboxInfotmpl The star does not get parsed as it is not at the beginning of a new line. Just putting it in a new line does not help as whitespace (like this new line) is stripped away in template parameters. Putting anything before it and putting it in a new line helps: User:Saibo/SandboxInfotmpl This is the current (after Krinkle's fix; the two subsequent edits do not seems related):

Description 1111
Date 333333
Source 2222
Author 44444444
Other versions
  • foo
  • bar

So: the creator master template needs to be fixed (maybe the same applies also for other fields except the other names field) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 14:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation - that makes sense. I can try to fix creator fields to allow bullets, etc. I do not think we need that feature at all fields. May be Alternative names, Description and Work location only? --Jarekt (talk) 14:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes I think these are the fields that would need it, though it may be simpler if all fields work the same way.--Zolo (talk) 03:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

creator work period

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Nice to see the Creator:Ulrich Apt (I). I am just wondering wondering if work periods like Northern Renaissance are useful. Not considering that this is not strictly speaking a work period, it seems pretty redundant with life dates and work location. I think work period mostly makes sense when the period is shorter than the artist life dates.Zolo (talk) 05:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

If this is used to indicate a style - like mannerism - rather than simply a period, maybe it would best fit into the "description" field, though I am not sure on how it should be done (using a {{Art movement}}) ?--Zolo (talk) 05:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

In the past when switching from Descriptions to nationality/gender/occupation when I encountered something like "Description=Italian Renaissance painter" I was converting it to "Nationality=italian|occupation=painter|workperiod=Renaissance". With the WGA artists I was trying to match each one to existing creator template. If none existed than to commons category or en wiki article, and than I was creating creator templates based on those. If none still matched (633 cases) I created brand new creators and categories based only on WGA data. WGA artist table, one of the sources of the info (along with DB) has a column called Period, which I used as Workperiod. I piped it through {{Period}} with the thought that I will internationalize it by adding translations to that template. --Jarekt (talk) 02:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
This seems pretty thorough. I know that many websites use a "period" parameter to classify artists. Yet "work period: Renaissance" sound a bit odd to me. Either we consider that the Renaissance is simply a historical period and then it is redundant with life dates/location, or we consider "Renaissance" to refer to an artistic style and then I think it belongs to the "description" field.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


The above 3 messages were copied from user talk:Jarekt in order to hear more opinions about what to do with period/movement/style tags, often added by others to describe artists. Some random examples: High Renaissance, Romanticism, Baroque, Neoclassicism, Medieval, etc. See more in WGA artist table. As I mentioned above I added lately 633 creator templates based only on WGA data all having such tags in "Workperiod" field. I see several options here:

  1. Keep period/movement/style tags in "Workperiod" field
  2. not use period/movement/style tags at all and delete them
  3. Keep tags in description field
  4. Create some new field for such tags

My preference is #1, Zolo (I think) #3, any other opinions how to best use such information (if at all)? --Jarekt (talk) 16:20, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Reference Parameter

Lattely I come to conclusion that one problem with the way this template is used, by me and others is lack of Verifiability for a lot of facts in the template. Ideally uncolapsible part of the template has a link that with one or more clicks will get you to wikipedia or wikisource article about the author/artist. However we have many works by more obscure individuals that do not have such articles (yet). In such cases the standard practice was to add link to external page in the "Description" field or to add <noinclude></noinclude> section under the template. Unfortunately after creating separate parameters for nationality/occupation/gender the links in the "Description" field look odd (in my opinion) and after adding automatic template documentation to all the creator templates the noinclude section after the template becomes very hard to find. I tried to remedy that by adding "Reference" parameter , see for example Creator:Abraham Danielsz. Hondius. --Jarekt (talk) 15:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Good idea - I did document the sources simply in the page history in the past. Maybe this way is a bit better. But: we do also not have (visible) references for categories. So I am not sure if this is really needed.
Maybe the Creator template can display (in the noinclude section) a link to the template's page history with the text: "It is possible that you find references for these data in this page's history". Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 16:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking of proposing a referece too. Maybe we could also have more specific parameters (similar to nationality as a subpart of description). VIAF number that is used in German Wikipedia pages seems rather [4] (though I suspect the second result is wrong)--Zolo (talk) 01:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I think some unique ID linking creators to outside databases is a great idea. VIAF number seems perfectly reasonable. German's use Normdaten template in 164,262 articles to en Wiki uses Template:Authority control in 1,321 articles. We could incorporate all or part of it into Creator template. --Jarekt (talk) 03:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Apparently, "Normdaten" provides the following info
  • Personennamendatei (used by German libraries)
  • Library of Congress Control Number
  • Royal Library of Sweden ID
  • VIAF number that syndicates various libary IDs
I suppose VIAF number should be the more comprehensive but de.wiki probably has reasons to use the other ones as well, so I think I would support incorporating them. --Zolo (talk) 02:39, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
I will play in Template:Creator/sandbox see what I can do. --Jarekt (talk) 13:45, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Call it "References" ?

The parameter is called "reference" here (singular form) but "references" in {{Artwork}}. I think it shold be harmonized and I would rather use the plural form, both because the reference parameter of {{Artwork}} is older and more widely used and because "references" sound more intuitive to me. {{Artwork}} calls a dedicated "wm-license-artwork-references" translatewiki message but I would be surprised if it was different from creator references in many languages. I have no clue about the intended scope of the message used in {{Creator}} Wikieditor-toolbar-help-content-reference-description.--Zolo (talk) 18:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done--Jarekt (talk) 19:44, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Maybe it would be more consistent if we change the parameter name too ?--Zolo (talk) 20:56, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

template scope (again)

The question has been raised about whether we should use {{Creator}} for Commoners. While I have no real strong views on the matter I think it would make sense to use it for users uploading their own artworks, like user:Efsey (uploads). Since we admit these images on Commons while they have no educational value except as work of art, it would make sense to treat their creators as other artists.--Zolo (talk) 02:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The current (proposed) policy Commons:Creator put those in "Allowed but discouraged" category. I personally do not mind except when I need to do maintenance work on those creator templates of commoners because they are not done properly and shows up in maintenance categories. I also think they should use full name, date and place of birth, etc. --Jarekt (talk) 03:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Why do we display parameter option

In the the load of the template we have
| Option = {{{1|}}} <!-- Do not modify -->
Can I ask why we display that in the template if we do not want them to modify it. Couldn't we just have it set that in the background? Then *if* there is any need to modify it, then it can still be overwritten. Or am I missing something?  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

That option is to pass a parameter from specialized creator template like creator:El Greco to the main {{Creator}} template, so we can create templates like {{Creator:El Greco|attributed to}}. If someone modifies that parameter than the pass-through is broken and {{Creator:El Greco|attributed to}} would not work. It is similar to first half of the fields in {{Institution/fr}} which should not me changed either for the same reason. Hope that clarifies --Jarekt (talk) 03:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
My comment was not about why we have the option, but why we don't parse it as a default "behind the scenes" parameter. essentially hide it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
If option parameters should be passed to creator templates like {{Creator:X|some option}}, then Creator:X needs to pass that parameter to Template:Creator. I don't think there is any less visible way to do this than to include "| Option = {{{1|}}}" in Creator:X without completely changing how creator templates works. /Ö 10:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Authority Control

Leonardo da Vinci  (1452–1519)  wikidata:Q762 s:en:Author:Leonardo da Vinci q:en:Leonardo da Vinci
 
Leonardo da Vinci
Alternative names
Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci, Leonardo
Description Italian painter, engineer, astronomer, philosopher, anatomist and mathematician
Date of birth/death 15 April 1452 Edit this at Wikidata 2 May 1519 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth/death Anchiano Amboise
Work period from 1466 until 1519
date QS:P,+1500-00-00T00:00:00Z/6,P580,+1466-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P582,+1519-00-00T00:00:00Z/9
Work location
Florence (1466–1482), Milan (1483–1499), Mantua (1499), Venice (1500), Florence (1500–1506), Milan (1506–1513), Florence (1507–1508), Rome (1513–1516), Amboise (1513–1518)
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q762

en:Authority Control templates are used on a lot of biographical articles in de and en Wikipedias. In the Template_talk:Creator#Reference_Parameter above discussion it was proposed to add such unique identifiers to Creator template. I created sandbox version with some extra parameters and applied it to Creator:Leonardo da Vinci (see above). I would like to propose to add it to the main template. --Jarekt (talk) 16:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 03:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. TUSRL parameter is missing though.--Zolo (talk) 11:51, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
{{Authority control}} has 6 parameters related to authority control for people. {{Creator}} at the moment has 3. I am reluctant to be adding all 6, but TSURL is probably next in line. --Jarekt (talk) 12:40, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't know how many parameters {{Authority control}} should have, but to me thay should all be enabled in {{Creator}}. Otherwise moving data from an isolated {{Authority control}} to a creator page can result in data losses that are a bit embarassing.--Zolo (talk) 13:22, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I do not think there was any loss of data. Only {{Creator}} can not display some of the data. I will fix that. --Jarekt (talk) 15:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

ULAN

Just to let you know that I did not know Union List of Artist Names Online database, but it is probably the best I have ever seen for painters.--Zolo (talk) 10:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I added ULAN to {{Authority control}} which can be added to {{Creator}} through "Authority" parameter. --Jarekt (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Link_back_to_template_icon

Per Commons:Village_pump#Link_back_to_template_icon I am planning on changing to in hopes that it will be more intuitive, unless there are other suggestions. --Jarekt (talk) 03:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

It looks good to me, but I would rather put it before the Wikisource icon.--Zolo (talk) 15:28, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done I was also thinking that it might look better. --Jarekt (talk) 15:33, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Removal of birth/death date autocategorization

Current version of the template automatically adds birth/death categories. I am working on a bot to perform some of the maintenance tasks more automatically. One of the tasks will be adding birth/death categories to the creator homepages, so the template does not have to. Once done I will remove birth/death category autocategorization. --Jarekt (talk) 17:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 18:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Ah thanks. This autocat was a bit disturbing (I wasn’t sure anymore if we had to add the categories or leave it to the template). Jean-Fred (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
I did not like it much either, but I liked even less adding them by hand. Now you can add them yourself or wait for the bot, (which I will run occasionally) to do it. --Jarekt (talk) 19:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Birthyear and Deathyear

George White  (–1732)  wikidata:Q5546214
 
Description British mezzotint engraver
Date of birth/death circa 1684
date QS:P,+1684-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
 1732 / 27 May 1732 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth/death London London
Work location
England Edit this at Wikidata
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q5546214

Hi. The documentation says that |birthyear= and |deathyear= are "[o]nly needed if date is not in ISO 8601 format — which is when {{Other date}}, {{Lifetime date}} or similar templates are used. Used to show the lifespan years in the top line." I tried using these parameters in {{Creator:George White (artist)}} as I used {{Other date}} to indicate that White's birth year is approximate. However, the years of White's birth and death still do not appear in the top line. What's wrong? Can this be fixed? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 18:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The deathyear and birthyear have to be numbers, since we use them to do some calculations. I added the dates to the top line by adding it to the name parameter. --Jarekt (talk) 21:02, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. In that case, the documentation should be updated, because it suggests that one can use templates like {{Other date}} with |birthyear= and |deathyear= and the years will still appear in the top line. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 22:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
I did minor correction to the description. Hopefully it will be less confusing. --Jarekt (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Italian translation

Could you please add the Italian translation Controllo di autorità (check here) for Authority control? Thanks in advance.--Carnby (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Authority control in Macedonian

{{Editprotected}} Could you please add "Нормативна контрола" as Macedonian (mk) translation for Authority control? Thanks a lot --B. Jankuloski (talk) 06:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done--Zolo (talk) 08:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Determiner

It it possible to add the option of using a determiner with this template? Some artist names are conventional names, eg. the Berlin Painter or the Master of the Virgin among Virgins. 'Manner of Berlin Painter' is understandable, but doesn't look very good. I realise in some languages determiners are inflected to agree in gender and number, so this may be too complex. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 07:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand why we need "near", what problem is it solving?  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I do not understand what is "near" either or how would it be used. --Jarekt (talk) 12:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm intrigued as well. Maybe you mean {{Circle of}}? Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I found a new template {{Near}} with this explanation "The phrase Near is used for a work of art whose style is near that of an artist, but not similar enough to be attributed to them". I do not think that phrase works well in English, or if there is a phrase used in the museum environment for that purpose, but I might be mistaken. In French the {{Near|John Doe|lang=fr}} template gives "Près de John Doe". Is that phrase used in museum environment? --Jarekt (talk) 12:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
'Near' is used in the description of artworks when artists are identified by their style only, and bear conventional names. Such is the case of Ancient Greek vase-painting or Italian Renaissance painting. The Berlin Painter for instance is named after a vase in the Antikensammlung Berlin. If the style of a vase is close to that of the Berlin Painter, it will be described as being 'near the Berlin Painter'. I'm fully aware it reads weird, but it's the accepted lingo. To be completely honest I'm not sure how it differs from 'manner of'. I use it when museums use it in their caption, that's all. A Google search for "near the * painter" "corpus vasorum" will show you how it's used in academic context. See also this alabastron in the Met, 'attributed to near the Laurion Painter'. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
By determiner, you mean something like {{Creator|name = Berlin Painter|determiner = 1}} so that {{creator:Berlin Painter|near}} would give "Near the Berlin Painter" ? I had tried to get something similar for French in {{Attributed to}}. It is clearly not nice but I doubt we have anything satisfying with wiki-syntax. --Zolo (talk) 19:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it's exactly what I mean. I'm asking in the hope it isn't too complicated. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Rethinking about it, a determiner parameter could indeed make things better than it is now, and it would be rather easy to implement. I am mostly concerned with the fact that some kinds of names probably require a determiner in one language and not in another. Of course we could use a {{LangSwitch}} in the determiner parameter, but it would start to look fairly intricate. --Zolo (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I have tested it on template:creator/testcases. It seems to work (it seems that MediaWiki developers do not like language dependent things because of their impact on performance so I hope they will not see things like this :-| ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zolo (talk • contribs)
If there is no opposition to it, I will add it to the main template. Since "determiner" is not called when "option" is unused, it should not have too much impact. No need to add it to template:Creator/preload I think: just add it to creator templates that contain keywords like "painter" or "master". --Zolo (talk) 16:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I am still a little blurry on the details. Is this the only change you are proposing? And it is only affecting some languages and only when option "near" is used? That might be a very rarely used option. --Jarekt (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
It is only a cosmetic change, to make grammar more correct when the "option" parameter is used. I have tested it on "near" to avoid messing with more widely used templates but it should work exactly the same way for "attributed to", "workshop of" etc. In English it only adds "the" ("attributed to the Painter of Berlin" rather than "to Painter of Berlin"). I am not sure for English but in some cases the French form without the "The" really looks weird. --Zolo (talk) 17:35, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Probably what you should do is to copy current {{Creator}} to {{Creator/sandbox}}. Save. Than add the parameter to all the calls to {{Name}}, "near" and similar functions. That way we can see the changes. As for "the" in English to me it does not make much difference if it is there or not, but I might be a minority. I am more concerned that a lot of name modifiers like {{Name}}, "near", "attributed to", "workshop of" etc. are not easily translatable to Polish, since in Polish the name itself would need to change its format. My best attempts to translate some of those phrases to Polish sound so bad I prefer to keep them in English, see en:Grammatical cases. I assume that many other languages (Slavic languages, Finish, etc. ) might have similar problems. --Jarekt (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I do not understand your suggestion, do you suggest to copy the template to the sandbox or the other way round ? I have added testcases with the more commonly used "workshop of" option to make things clearer (see especially the French version).
I do not know Polish but I know some Latin that also makes heavy use of noun declensions. In that case, it does not seem possible to fix it with current wiki-syntax, but a stlightly more sophisticated language (Lua ?) could probably solve the problem. --Zolo (talk) 09:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Authority control

I retired the initial approach of adding {{Authority control}} info and left only the "Authority" parameter. That simplifies the template and its documentation and allows future expansion of {{Authority control}} without need for expansion of {{Creator}}. --Jarekt (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Preparing Creator templates prior to batch upload

Help would be appreciated in matching artists or works from Walters_Art_Museum (to be uploaded soon) to Creator templates on Commons and possible creation of new templates and categories. See Commons_talk:Walters_Art_Museum#Preparing_Creator_templates_prior_to_batch_upload. --Jarekt (talk) 04:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Corporations

How are we supposed to use {{Creator}} for manufacturing companies like Wedgwood or Tiffany and Co.? Do we use 'date of birth' for the date of foundation and so on? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it is the simplest solution for now. We do not have many of them yet, so nothing special has been done for them yet, except that the "corporate" paramater should be set to "1". This way the template is categorized in Category:Corporate creator templates and will be easy to find if we want to change all that. --Zolo (talk) 20:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
May be instead of "corporate=1" we should use "type=corporate". That would allow us to create other special types. May be one for commons users ( we could skip most maintenance categories for those). May be "type=group" for Creator:Limbourg Brothers, etc. --Jarekt (talk) 03:34, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Good idea, I have changed it.--Zolo (talk) 08:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
We could probably also have some analogue of {{Occupation}} for companies. --Zolo (talk) 10:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Generating creator templates

See User:Multichill/Generating creator templates --Jarekt (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Web accessibility

{{editprotected}} For web accessibility, change [[File:{{{Image|}}}|{{{ImgWidth|120}}}x360px]] to [[File:{{{Image|}}}|{{{ImgWidth|120}}}x360px|{{{Name}}}]]

Test (with success) in Template:Sandbox.

Thanks. --EmmanuelFrance (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I move your edits to Template:Sandbox to Template:Creator/sandbox. What is the purpose of this change. Can you demonstrate it at Template:Creator/testcases. --Jarekt (talk) 22:33, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
This simply sets the name of the creator as the alt-text instead of the file-name. May be useful but I'd suggest using [[File:{{{Image|}}}|{{{ImgWidth|120}}}x360px|alt={{{Name}}}]] as this is more explicit. -- RE rillke questions? 19:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
If I understand correctly, it means that when the image fails to load it would display the name of the creator instead. It may be better than a file name but since inside a creator template that already displays the creator name on the first line, it is not very useful, and maybe even a bit strange. Image of {{{Name}}} would be more descriptive. Or couldn't we simply have nothing at all ?--Zolo (talk) 22:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, Image of ... would be the best. Some screenreaders for disabled persons may also use the alt-attribute. -- RE rillke questions? (ریلکه) (里尔克) (リルケ) 09:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done I added "|alt={{{Name}}}" to the image. --Jarekt (talk) 12:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Bot run

For a while I am tweaking my Commons creator maintenance.py. This code so far was used to add creator templates to creator home categories, but my resent changes are meant to edit creator templates themselves. My aim is to help this time consuming repetitive tasks while not loose anything many users are adding by hand. At the moment I am planning to do 3 tasks:

  1. add option field when missing
  2. add linkback field when missing
  3. add {{LangSwitch}} to Name field if interwiki links are present in home category

This last task is a bit more tricky. I first create {{LangSwitch}} block:

  • if creator has a gallery it is added to the "default" field
  • if there is no gallery and no English version than page-name (minus "Creator:") is used as a default

Than I add it to the template:

  • if current name field is in the format "Name = page-name", "Name = [[page-name]]" or "Name = [[*:page-name|page-name]]" than I replace it
  • otherwise I leave current "Name" field alone and add "Name1". Name1 is not displayed but pages with it can be detected and "Name" and "Name1" fields can be merged manually.

I run the code on 10 creators (see below). And unless I hear otherwise I am planning on running it on 100-200 more before I run it on the full set.

--Jarekt (talk) 16:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks good to me, thanks. I am just not quite sure that the "default" is needed unless it provides better translation than the normal fallback. ---Zolo (talk) 17:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
In {{LangSwitch}} the normal fallback is first "default" and than "en" option. I think that a gallery page (if exists) might be a better first fallback than EN Wiki and it should have all the interwiki links to all the available wikis. Ideally when there is no Gallery and no EN wiki article than some other wiki would be used as an fallback instead of the current page-name with no link to anywhere, but I did not want to get the code even more convoluted then it is right now. --Jarekt (talk) 19:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Ok. Another, probably very minor thing is that Russian article titles use a <surname>, <first name> format but <first name> <surname> is commonly used within the article text and is apparently more natural. So I suppose it would be better if the name - surname order was dispalyed. --Zolo (talk) 08:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
I changed the code to correct Russian names and changed the code responsible for creating LangSwitch default options to allow links to few big Wikipedias. I also run the code on 100+ templates. See here. I will try to run on all the templates latter today. --Jarekt (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Would it be complicated to sort languages alphabetically. this is not very easy to read. --Zolo (talk) 08:12, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Good point, I did not notice that. I fixed it. I will run another batch of 200. --Jarekt (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The bot is running now. In case current name does not fall into one of the usual patterns a new undisplayed parameter Name1 is added with {{LangSwitch}} and the template is added to Category:Creator templates in need of cleanup so the old Name and the new Name1 can be merged by hand. Help with those would be appreciated. --Jarekt (talk) 12:06, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

There are several issues I noticed while doing random checks of the edits:
  • Some people categories have nonsense interwiki links, see for example here. And those nonsense interwiki were copied to the creator templates, see here. I will try to identify and correct such pages.
  • I also run into some pages with disambiguation issues, see here.
--Jarekt (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Comma

What about commas? Many languages don not use the character ',' for comma. --Z 10:30, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

In the work location field, I dont know what should be done possibly a {{int:comma}} but it will make creator code look rather cluttered. For occupation (eg "poet, calligrapher and callgrapher") you can edit {{Conj}}. Just be careful not to increase the template depth to avoid bugs. There is "NaturalLanguageList" that could help, but its deployment seems to take forever.-Zolo (talk) 10:55, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes. I created Template:,. As you know, Chinese (and also Japanese) do not use space after comma (and colon, etc.) Maybe we should change comma-separator value for different languages and put space after those which need, I don't know. --Z 16:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC) My mistake, the values are already using space for those which need it. The template may be still useful anyway, because it make code less cluttered, particularly in pages which are handled by regular users (creator namespace, etc.) --Z 18:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Template:Conj is not directly used in individual creator templats, but I agree {{,}} could be used into {{Conj}} (by the way Chinese comma is right at MediaWiki:Comma-separator/zh but not at {{Conj2}}.
{{Conj}} should not be used for work location because it only accepts five input items and that is not always enough, but {{Conj/comma}} could be tweaked to make it possible to separate work locations with "/" the same way as occupations. --Zolo (talk) 14:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

image height

{{Editprotected}} Currently the image can overflow as visible in File:Giulio Romano - Meleager et Atalanta.jpg. The current file height is at 180px with the code "120x180px". It should perhaps be made "120x150px" or something more suitable so that the height of the file does not exceed all other fields all the time. -- とある白い猫 ちぃ？ 00:13, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by "overflow". The creator template in the image you mention, seems to look just fine to me. --Jarekt (talk) 02:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
looks fine for me on that page as well (Firefox, Win7). What browser/OS are you using? Rd232 (talk) 14:40, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Indeed. It's a table. The image is embedded in a cell with rowspan. It doesn't use absolute positioning or the like. There is nothing that can overflow. -- RE rillke questions? 18:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Fields for copyrights extensions?

I think will be good idea to add fields for year after works will fall into public domain (if not same as date of death) and reason for extension. For example, in cases like participation in WWII and repression and rehabilitation as in {{PD-Russia-2008}}. Similar provisions exist in Latvian and French law and probably in some other countries. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

That is fine with me, but I am not sure what will be done with that field. I assume that the field will not be displayed, or may be displayed only in Creator namespace. Any categories based on the field? --Jarekt (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikiquote link

Wondering whether we could do a Wikiquote link similar to how we have done a Wikisource link.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I think that would be OK. We would probably use . --Jarekt (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 01:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Very nice! Here is one that I prepared earlier :-) Creator:Thomas Bracken  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:13, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Homonymies cases

Hi all ! I wondered to know the good way to do in the case of a of creator. For example en:Alexandre Dumas (disambiguation). Otourly (talk) 20:06, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the preferred way of disambiguation is to follow the name with the dates of birth and death, like in Creator:Andreas Groll (1812-1872). --Jarekt (talk) 01:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Changing the initial display state

Is there a way to change the initial display state? I added Creator:Jean-Baptiste Carpeaux to Category:Charles Garnier by Jean-Baptiste Carpeaux, but think it might be better collapsed for this type of use. --Robert.Allen (talk) 15:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Some years ago when that feature was designed, the consensus was to have the template initially collapsed only in File namespace. --Jarekt (talk) 17:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Better RTL compatibility

{{Editprotected}} Hi, please use 

File:Gnome-go-{{#ifeq:{{dir|{{int:Lang}}}}|rtl|next|previous}}.svg

instead of File:Gnome-go-previous.svg. It will switch the icon when visitors' wiki is RTL. Thanks in advance! :) −ebraminiotalk 15:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

New value for option

Hi, would it be possibly to add {{Possibly}} to the list of options for this template. I mean the list containing "workshop of", "maner of", etc. Thanks. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

 Comment. It could probably be useful, but I am a bit bothered by the fact that things like "possibly" and "workshop" have a different kind of relationship with the creator (certitude versus degree of certitude). An artwork can be "possibly by the workshop of Rubens". What about using {{Possibly}} directly ? Well on the other hand "attributed to" is more similar to "possibly" than to "workshop of"--Zolo (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's exactly what I meant. So not "possibly workshop of ...", but "Possibly Rubens" used in the following way: {{Creator:Peter Paul Rubens|possibly}}. Of course you could also use "attributed to", but sometimes even that is too specific. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Added "possibly", "probably" and added a maintenance category Category:Bad use of creator template - option ‎
It seems that most files in Category:Bad use of creator template - option ‎ try to use the option as a sortkey (say Creator:Rembrand|Selfportrait. Possibly a remnant of times gone by. There is also "attributed" used instead of "attributed to", possibly such options should be added to the list. --Zolo (talk) 10:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Recent changes to Commons:Creator

Recently User:Martin_H. was deleted parts of Commons:Creator, If you have opinion on the matter please see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Martin_H. --Jarekt (talk) 14:09, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

link-back icon

We went through several versions of link-back icon, which brings the user from file of category where template might be used to the creator page where he can modify the template content. I think current choice (by user:Rd232) of a pencil is the best so far, clearly suggesting process of writing. The issue I have with it is the color, I find the icon quite hard to see. So may be we should use or instead? I added the blue one to Template:Creator/sandbox to see how it looks. Any opinions? --Jarekt (talk) 13:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed - either of those is better than the current icon version. Rd232 (talk) 15:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Parsing and retrieving field contents

Both Information and Book templates assign a significant, very useful id to any first td in rows of resulting html mtable, so allowing a simple parsing/retrieving of contents from html template expansion by jQuery.

I.e. td tag for Information author td tag is id="fileinfotpl_aut" fileinfotpl_ is prefix and aut is an obvious name for content (author).

On the contrary, Creator td tags have no similar significant, content-related id or any other implementation of microformats or similar tricks.

Can this convention be applied to table resulting from Creator template expansion? It would be great and far from difficult, since Commons information page is exported and very simply retrieved into any wiki project. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 09:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

(For background on the HTML tags Alex mentions in {{Information}}, see Commons:Machine-readable data)
That sounds like a welcome addition. Jean-Fred (talk) 12:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes Jean-Fred! Thanks for link! Exactly that. I was not aware of the page since I discovered the whole thing by reverse-engineering of html code. :-). --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 15:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 Support unless there are any objections I will add ID's to {{Creator}} and {{Institution}} templates. --Jarekt (talk) 15:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Very interesting, thanks Jarekt! Consider only that Creator page differs from Book page, since it's a little bit more complex. Book is has simple structure with a 1:1 relationship between a "name of content" cell, and a following, single "content" cell; Creator generates a differently structured table, where such a 1:1 relationship is sometime broken. And what about id prefix? Do you think to use the "fileinfotpl_" or a template-specific prefix? In the former case, I presume that some cases of ambiguity might occur by present or future homonymy. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 20:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
I see what you are saying, and I will try it first on Template:Creator/sandbox. I was planning to use "fileinfotpl_creator_" tags. So here I have a question: why do we tag with ID's the "name of content" cells instead of the "content" cells in {{Information}}, {{Book}} and {{Artwork}}. That does not make much sense to me. --Jarekt (talk) 13:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


I added id attributes to <td> html cells of Template:Creator/sandbox. Alex_brollo, would that format work for you? --Jarekt (talk) 14:13, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

About cells to tag with IDs; yes, surely I too think that content cells whuld be tagged. Table from Creator template differs from tables from Infromation and Book templates, and there isn't 1:1 relationship between name of content cells and content cells - making very difficult to parse them. On the contrary, tagging content td tags will make parsing extremely simple; a single jQuery call would extract all contents td tags by id prefix. I can parse Information and Creator table, but their parsing would be much simpler too, if content, instead name of content, td tags would be marked.
Yes, I'll go and see tests; I presume that this work could be extremely useful in phase II WikiData project, since Information, Book and Creator infoboxes are IMHO excellent candidates to feed Wikidata with good quality data. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 11:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
I tested
$("td[id^='file']")
on some running File: pages, and "file" prefix seems sufficient to select data td cells --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 12:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


✓ Done I updated the template. I will follow up by documenting it at Commons:Machine-readable data. --Jarekt (talk) 13:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Excellent Jarekt! I just run our script show(1) into it.wikisource from a subpage of s:it:I promessi sposi, it's a proofread book linked to File:I promessi sposi (1840).djvu using a Book template containing a Creator template, and data produced by Creator are there, easy to find and easy (I hope) to use. For a number of lucky reasons, the same scripts retrieving data into it.wikisurce run into any mediawiki project using a Common file avoiding AJAX inter-project tricks based on JSONP. I'll work a little bit about the global script to parse them and to build a kind of js object to use them for any purpouse. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 20:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
There was a talk here about adding ID attributes to content cells instead in addition to current name-of-content cells to other templates. This might make scripts using that data simpler and more robust. --Jarekt (talk) 20:48, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Microformat

Can an admin add these microformat related small improvements to the template ? It add the photo and the description of the person to the microformat. An other good improvement may be to add a title to the node with class="dbay" with the date in ISO format (see microformat wiki). Tpt (talk) 18:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I will look into it. --Jarekt (talk) 04:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 12:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks but there is a problem: it's [[Image: |class=photo]] and not [[Image: |class="photo"]] ("class" (like "alt") is here a parameter of a link and not an attribute of a node). Tpt (talk) 17:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Opps, sorry about that. --Jarekt (talk) 17:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Test js scripts to retrieve Book and Creator data

I imported into User:Alex brollo/Library.js some it.wikisource scripts to retrieve data from a file information page. They run into it.wikisource from any nsIndex, nsPage and ns0 page linked to a Common image file (usually a djvu file); here they run from any nsFile page, but yu can run them for test aims only, since they read by AJAX.... simply the same html of current page. Nevertheless, if you like to run them, simply add 

importScript("User:Alex_brollo/Library.js");

into your vector.js or common.js, you shoud get some snall buttons into bottom left corner of the page, the interesting one is show1.

From any nsFile page here, or from any Index, Page or ns0 page into it.wikisource, open a js browser console (I use Chrome console) and write: 

data=$("*[id^='fileinfo']");

You'll get a jQuery collection of all the elements tagged with a ID starting with "fileinfo", just to see them and to begin reverse engeneering to get data.

I use File:I promessi sposi (1840).djvu for my tests, an interesting file since it contains two Creator templates. The results are very interesting, but they point to two issues.

  1. there's no data containing the name of the author. Something should be added to template code to wrap into a <span id="fileinfotpl_creator_name">...</span> the author's name into row 1 of creator table.
  2. presently, html content elements from Information and Book are not listed into jQuery collection of elements, since the two templates assings ID to definition td elements; therefore you'll find definition, and not content, td elements into jQuery collection. This makes a little tricky to retrieve Book and Information data, but on the other hand it avoids some conflict IMHO from "microdata nesting", I've to think&test a little bit about.

You can't imagine how rough and primitive a "programmer" I am (you'll see from my "programming style" if you'll browse scripts...), so any help/suggestion/development of my test scripts is strongly needed and welcome. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 21:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

First tests running

I wrote a small "parser" for Book & Information template, which parses too Creator data if any. I just saved it, so there's much to do. If you like, you can load scripts with: 

mw.loader.load( '//it.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Utente:Alex_brollo/ParsingHproduct.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&smaxage=21600&maxage=86400' );

Then go into a nsFile page, open a js console and run parseInfo(); it would return a js object containing all the data (as html strings by now), where keys are IDs with prefix fileinfotpl_ or fileinfotpl_creator_ stripped away. Just a starting point. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 20:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Users are free to introduce into some fields of Book differently structured data, so sometimes html content got by parseInfo() is tricky to parse.... this will be the main job, next days. I hope, it will turn out possible even if tricky. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 05:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

As

Hi. Sometimes I need to specify the kind of input the artist made to the artwork, for instance "Joe Bloggs as draughtsman; John Smith as engraver". It's not very easy with {{Creator}}, as the template blocks the whole line (see for instance File:Grande Galerie Louvre by Thomas Allom.jpg). What would be the best solution to my problem? Could {{Creator}} include a parameter "as"? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:38, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I run into that issue sometimes. I usually do "Drawing: {{Creator:Joe Bloggs}} Engraving: {{Creator:John Smith}}". I think it looks OK. I can not think of more clear way with "as" parameter. Are there any better ways? --Jarekt (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
There's still a line break, but it looks better. Thanks. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 06:54, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

multiple occupations

Hallo, how do you handle multiple occupations with this template. I have problems with "animal painter and author" "singer and song writer". Kind regards, --PigeonIP (talk) 09:44, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I do not have much to add to what you find at Template:Creator. You would have "animal painter / author" and "singer / song writer". If one of those occupations is not translated at the moment, than it will show up in red, so you can change it or add it to {{Occupation}} template. But I guess you have figured it out already. --Jarekt (talk) 13:07, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thank you. File:Grande Galerie Louvre by Thomas Allom.jpg from above helped there. But should't the slash be mentioned in the description of the parameter occupation? --PigeonIP (talk) 13:26, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
It is (and has been for a long time), however only in English version of the documentation. That is a drawback of using {{LangSwitch}} in template documentation - we all can be readings the same page and find very different content. Could you help correcting the German version of Template:Creator/doc so others do not run into the same issue. --Jarekt (talk) 14:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Hope I got the important ones. (Nationality + Occupation) --PigeonIP (talk) 14:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 17:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Purpose of this template?

What's the basic purpose of this template? Is it to link creators, or to link notable creators only? Clearly it's useful for "notable painters" etc. who will have Wikipedia entries that are then auto-linked to the encyclopedia. Is it also intended for use outside this, such as a prolific Commons contributor? If so, how do we stop the auto-linking going on, as that would now be inappropriate. Or should the template just not be used in such a case?

This is in relation to this and this, where a photographer called "Jacques Rousseau" ended up linked to the 17th century philosopher. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

You mention a number of points. I'm not sure which you want addressed. Errors of linking are not unheard of. And the edits you mention were made by a bot. The error was reported on the bot talk page, where it should be reported, but it's not particularly relevant to this talk page. (Regarding "auto-linking", I'm not sure what you mean. I don't think the template was intended to be used for Commons contributors, but perhaps it could. If the template is thought to have been misused, that is an issue that can be dealt with on a case by case basis.) Besides providing more information about creators in a drop-down form, the template provides links and text that are internationalized. It's convenient, like other templates, because the information can be shared on the file pages where the creator is cited without having to redo it for each page. Probably as a result, it seems to be fairly popular. --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned, its primary use is for notable contributors (who could, or should, have Wikipedia entries). Commons contributors can be linked to their userpage, so there's no need for a Creator template to centralise info. The grey area for me would be whether external non-notable contributors might warrant Creator templates, at least if they have many uploaded files. Rd232 (talk) 10:16, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Creator talks about it (especially deleted sections dealing with gray region). Any entry should have as many as possible disambiguating details: creator template, links to userpages for commons users, links to external websites (like flicker or panoramio, etc.), dates of birth and death for historical figures. --Jarekt (talk) 16:19, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
I certainly do not disagree. Is there an incident that needs to be dealt with? I did not see one linked. If this is entirely hypothetical, it's not worth a lot of time discussing it. --Robert.Allen (talk) 17:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikidata

There is on going discussion about Wikidata and this template : Commons:Village_pump#Creators_and_Wikidata. Otourly (talk) 21:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Creator templates in need of cleanup

Yet again, I was running my bot with commons creator maintenance script to automatically fix variety of issues with some creator templates (mostly the ones added since the last run). As before, in case of small percent of templates that do not use interwiki {{LangSwitch}} in the "Name" field, but the category has interwiki links, when current name does not fall into one of several usual patterns, a new undisplayed parameter "Name1" is added with {{LangSwitch}} and the template is added to Category:Creator templates in need of cleanup, so the old "Name" and the new "Name1" can be merged by hand. I could use some help with inspecting and correcting those by hand. --Jarekt (talk) 04:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Mass addition of wikidata codes

I am planning a bot run with mass addition of wikidata codes, based on http://creatorlinks.wmflabs.org/ database. With queries like http://creatorlinks.wmflabs.org/index.php?site=commons&title=Creator:Victor_Hugo I will be able to access database records. In this run I am planning to add Wikidata, Authority Control fields, Wikisource and wikiquote links. Some test edits can be found here and here. At this stage I am still tweaking the code and inspecting each edit, but I will probably run the code sometimes next week. I would appreciate feedback on those edits. --Jarekt (talk) 21:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The edits looks good, I'll update creatorlinks from commons this weekend in order to make your bot works on updated data. Tpt (talk) 20:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
May be there is a way to have some sort of weekly or monthly updates of the database, by rescanning commons, wikisource, etc. another possible use your database would be creation of of new creator templates based on data in the database, for example for wikisource authors, that would be easier if the database kept track of Commons categories, as well, and may be places of birth/death. --Jarekt (talk) 02:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
About updates, yes it's possible to do it with a cron task, I'll maybe work on it. About creation of new templates, it will be very difficult because wikisource author pages doesn't contain information like the place of birth and death. I think that a better project is maybe to write a gadget (or an extension) to edit creator pages with form like the one use in index pages of Wikisource (exemple). Tpt (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
because wikisource author pages doesn't contain information like the place of birth and death - which language? de:wikisource does: http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Martin_Luther (+cs +hu; Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: +eo +nl +pl +pt +ro +ru) --PigeonIP (talk) 21:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
About automatic (or semi-automatic) creation of new templates: I would not worry about filling all the fields, as long as there is enough data to disambiguate different people with the same name. Also content of some of those additional fields could be also pulled from other repositories, linked from authority control template, for example BnF or ULAN. As for template editor gadget: User:Alex brollo was experimenting with such editor which could preload fields with data pulled from EN wiki or IT wiki. See, User:Alex brollo/Library.js. Unfortunately, I do not speak JavaScript, but I am getting better at expressing myself in Python, so I am focusing on bots not gadgets. --Jarekt (talk) 21:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
@PigeonIP: I was talking about fr and en Wikisource, it's the two Wikisource I know the best about.
@Jarekt: Thanks for the link to Alex Brollo gadget. It looks very good. About creating automatically creator templates, I don't think that it's a good idea to create a lot of creator templates that won't be included as the same time into file descriptions because this creation will give us more work to maintain all this pages for something not really useful. Tpt (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I've finished the update of creatorlinks database. Tpt (talk) 18:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I am running the bot now ... --Jarekt (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Paused the bot after finding examples of records from creatorlinks with bad data, like http://creatorlinks.wmflabs.org/index.php?id=27839&format=html --Jarekt (talk) 13:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done with bot run. I also created Category:Creator templates without Wikidata link for templates without wikidata links (I suspect that the number of templates in that category will increase over time as the server catches up). Random sampling of many templates in that category revealed that many of them have interwiki links to articles which already have Wikidata codes, so I assume that as creatorlinks database get updated I will be able to add add more links automatically. --Jarekt (talk) 15:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata hyperlink

Hi,

You can view a Wikidata page with almost any web adress, like

  1. wikidata.org/wiki/Q7186
  2. en.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7186
  3. www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7186

However, you cannot edit a page if you use the first two adresses, only the third allows that. If not convinced, try to append or remove a period in the description field of [5], [6] and [7].

Here on Commons, the Wikidata adress should begin with www.

Regards,

Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Creator template just follows the default interwiki calling so the link to d:Q7186 is done by [[d:Q7186]]. If there are some issues with those links than I am sure they will be fixed at some point. --Jarekt (talk) 18:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
You do as you wish, but on the English, the Italian, and the Hungarian Wikipedias, the link is set with www. There must be a reason, don't you think ? Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 05:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
I asked around about it and apparently it is a known bug bugzilla:45005, where "the pages are editable but the edit doesn't actually save. It's one of the main pain points we have atm. Fix waiting for review and deployment by ops" according to Lydia Pintscher. It sounds like it should be fixed "soon". How about if we revisit this question in about a week? --Jarekt (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I see something similar into the management of nsFile; but in the case of a global File page, opened into a local project, there's a clear warning and a link to Commons to allow editing of the page. Wouldn't simple to add a similar link to wikidata "local" pages too? Or some other common solution of the problem, just to help users with a similar behavior? Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 07:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

This template breaks attribution chains in the information template

Something about the coding of this template breaks the information template when part of a bulleted list - see File:Fast aeroplane with motion lines.png. Thryduulf (talk) 19:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

What exactly is the problem? The only problem I see is you taking ownership of a file you just cropped from a Latuff work. --Denniss (talk) 22:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that the author information field should read:
However what it actually shows is only the first of those lines, with the derivative work line above the information template removed from any context. This is not a major problem with this image as the modifications I made (cropping, converting to indexed png, cleaning up jpeg artefacts, removing the Israeli flag from the aircraft and removing the falling paper/bombs/whatever) are relatively minor, however exactly the same problem will occur whenever anyone creates an image derived from one or more other images that attribute the creator using this template.
I would also appreciate you explaining how my noting myself as the creator of derived work (in accordance with policy) is a problematic? Thryduulf (talk) 00:22, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I've been aware of the problem for a while, and I'm sure I've mentioned it before. You can't use bullets with Creator templates in the Info template, as it puts later Creator templates outside (above) the Info template, far away from where they should be. The only immediate solution is not to use bullets (use <br/> to force a newline "manually"). I'm pretty sure the problem is with the Info template, however, not the Creator template, but I could be wrong. A problem that is with the Creator template is that it puts a newline after itself, so you can't use it in the middle of a sentence, as would often be handy in a description for instance. Rd232 (talk) 07:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Also mentioned in 2011: Template_talk:Information/Archive_3#Poblems_with_lists. It's possible that an eventual conversion of the template to Lua might be an opportunity to finally fix this. Rd232 (talk) 07:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Rd232, is right - it is a known issue we do not have solution for. See template:Artwork/testcases for more examples. The key is not to use bullets with {{Creator}} or {{Institution}} templates. I applied standard workaround to File:Fast aeroplane with motion lines.png. --Jarekt (talk) 11:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote Link

--> Date of birth Location of birth Angers

in which the second row is titled "Date of birth" even though it also has death-date info (the "1901" in the separate cell has no context). DMacks (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

That is because we do not use deathyear much. It is only if death date uses some templates. But it still should be fixed. --Jarekt (talk) 14:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Fixed See
Fortuné Méaulle  (1843–1916)  wikidata:Q3078590
 
Fortuné Méaulle
Alternative names
Fortuné Louis Méaulle, Fortuné-Louis Méaulle
Description French engraver, visual artist, painter, graphic artist and writer
Date of birth/death 18 February 1843 Edit this at Wikidata 11 May 1916 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth/death Angers Montrouge
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q3078590

--Jarekt (talk) 14:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt solution! DMacks (talk) 15:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata

What is the relationship of Template:Creator and Wikidata? Can the Creator templates be created automatically using Wikidata? --Robert.Allen (talk) 08:10, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

At the moment, there is no relationship because Wikimedia Commons is not able to draw information from Wikidata like the Wikipedias are. This could be done at some point in the future − and once it is I do believe Creator templates would be one of the first Commons feature to use it. See d:Wikidata:Wikimedia Commons for more information on the current status. Jean-Fred (talk) 08:50, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Collapsible class

As file page content is available on all projects, then you might want to use classes that are available on all projects, e.g. mw-collapsible instead of collapsible. It's design is probably less flexible, but at least it would work everywhere. 90.190.114.172 20:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

 Agree however I do not know much about different collapsable classes. Can someone more familiar with it try to create one in the sandbox? --Jarekt (talk) 18:23, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

User name parameter

Can we add a |user name= parameter, for cases where the creator is also active on Commons, or on a sister project? Andy Mabbett (talk) 16:06, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I think that would be such a rare case that it would be more easily handled by adding username to description field. Some users created their own Creator templates but it is mostly discouraged unless they meet Wikipedia notability criteria (see Commons:Creator) and very few of us do. --Jarekt (talk) 18:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

parameter and workshop is broken

e.g.File:Titian and workshop - The Vendramin Family, venerating a Relic of the True Cross - Google Art Project.jpg--Oursana (talk) 11:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Oursana, It seems fine to me. Is it still broken for you? --Jarekt (talk) 03:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jarekt, this and other files are broken for about 10 days: Template:2} und Werkstatt (1490–1576) ; I have vector and it looks the same in Safari or Firefox.--Oursana (talk) 21:25, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I see the German version was broken. I Fixed it now, see here--Jarekt (talk) 04:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Jarekt, I apologize, I caused it myself. I didn't remember I had been busy there and forgot the way back. Many thanks--Oursana (talk) 11:08, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Not a big problem (to non-German speakers), but I thought it was a little funny how it worked out. --Jarekt (talk) 11:32, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Translation

I want to make a little fix to the galician translation of this template but I can't find where, could anybody tell me where is the galician translation? Thanks!, --Elisardojm (talk) 22:00, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

It is on Translatewiki. Go to https://translatewiki.net/wiki/User:Jarekt and look for messages starting with "wm-license-creator-". --Jarekt (talk) 17:49, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I can't find it there... I want to fix the text of the "Authority" parameter..., I want to change from "Controle de autoridade" to "Control de autoridades"... Thanks, --Elisardojm (talk) 18:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh that one was done by {{Authority control tag}} the old version was defaulting to Spanish.--Jarekt (talk) 19:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks!, --Elisardojm (talk) 20:46, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit request

{{Edit request}} {{#if:{{NAMESPACE}}|File|[[Category:Bad use of creator template - option]]}}

should read

{{#if:{{{{NAMESPACE}}|File|[[Category:Bad use of creator template - option]]}}}}

Jheald (talk) 18:51, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done I used different fix but I think Category:Bad use of creator template - option should work now. --Jarekt (talk) 00:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)


Steps towards making Creator draw directly from Wikidata

Some current efforts to get Creator templates to draw directly from Wikidata can be seen at d:Template:Creator/wrapper/test -- still with quite a lot of weirdness still to be fixed at the moment, some of which is identified at d:Template talk:Creator/wrapper/test, plus some that probably isn't.

This has to be hosted on Wikidata at the moment, because it requires "access to arbitrary items" -- the ability for template code called from one page to access information about a Wikidata item sitelinked to a different page. (Also called Wikidata Phase 3).

Such arbitrary access won't generally be possible until some quite heavy technical work has been done first, to enable MediaWiki to be able to work out whether (and which) pages need to be regenerated if an item on Wikidata changes. So it's not expected to be generally available on wikis including Commons until some time in 2015. But it is now possible, for development work without page regeneration, on Wikidata itself.

So that is why the development pages above are on Wikidata, rather than here.

See also d:Wikidata:WikiProject Structured Data for Commons/Template workshop, d:Template talk:Creator, d:Template talk:Creator/statictest and d:Template:Creator/statictest for more information on the development.

The last of those pages, at d:Template:Creator/statictest#Template_wikitext_generation attempts to show what's going on 'under the bonnet' and passed to the existing template, in a form that will be possible to cut-and-paste to make new Creator:xyz templates here. (Once some more of the bugs are sorted out).

All thoughts and comments gratefully received, Jheald (talk) 22:20, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

d:Property:P1472 now added to 13,528 Wikidata items, identified by entries in the wikidata = field of the template. Lots more remaining, of course, that don't have Wikidata links. Jheald (talk) 17:27, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the update and great work on this technical challenge. I wonder if there is a way to create a text box using mw:Extension:InputBox where one can type in wikidata Q-code and which would provide link to wikidata with the proposed text of the template. We could add it to Template:Editnotices/Namespace/Creator and combine it with Template:Creator/preload. By the way, I am not certain what the purpose of d:Property:P1472 is. I guess if Commons has a link to wikidata than it might be nice to know about creator pages when in wikidata, but I can not think about the uses. --Jarekt (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
@Jarekt: What seemed useful to me, regarding P1472, is that one can now query Wikidata using WDQ, to see what the property-values on Wikidata look like, for items that have Creator templates. This I think can be sometimes useful as a quick check, but also for more detailed data extraction and comparison with the values on Commons. (Something I intend to try to do more of this week).
I have made a proposal at d:Wikidata:Property_proposal/Organization#Commons_Institution_template for a similar property for the Institution template, but not had any comments yet.
Note that there are still some issues to fix with the Creator template wrapper -- for example it's not yet pulling out Wikisource links; BCE dates need fixing; there are issues with ancient and sub-national nationalities (Scottish, Welsh, Catalan, etc); and I don't know why my attempt to remove the newlines in the wikitext generated for the Authority Control section is failing. I'll try to work through these, but appreciate if you could look at the last, and tell me why what I've tried to do doesn't work, and if there's a fix that would do it. Thanks. Jheald (talk) 16:19, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Another parameter to categorize?

I don't know much about this template, but it seems that it could do with an extra parameter instructing it to categorize files using this creator template in a chosen category. For example, I'd like Creator:Sam Hood to put any picture using it into Category:Photographs by Sam Hood. I know we don't let templates do subject-matter categorization (so that they can be subcatted), but I don't see why templates like this can't do creator-based categorization. What am I missing? --99of9 (talk) 04:25, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

You are missing the history of this template. Originally many people creating Creator pages for specific artists would add a category which was than passed to the files using the creator template. That was great until you had enough files that you wanted to create subcategories, and than you discover that the files categorized that way does not behave like other files in categories and can not be easily removed from the category. As a result, many people started removing creator templates. At some point we went through the process of cleaning few thousand templates, and re-categorizing the content. It was such a huge undertaking we would like to avoid it in the future. --Jarekt (talk) 13:20, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Ok, fair enough. I would have thought that blanking the parameter value would be a reasonably quick way to uncategorize the files so they can be subcatted? But anyway, if creator-subcatting is common, that's a good reason to let the categories work like normal. --99of9 (talk) 06:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Collapsible option

I would like to request that the collapsible option be added to this template. Here is an example of why: Category:Fontaine Médicis.

The documentation might read:

To manage this template's visibility when it first appears, add the parameter ...

|state=collapsed .......... to show the template in its collapsed state, i.e. hidden apart from its titlebar;
|state=expanded ............ to show the template in its expanded state, i.e. fully visible;
|state=autocollapse .... to show the template in its collapsed state but only if it is on a File page

Unless set otherwise (see the state parameter in the template's code), the template's default state is autocollapse.

--Robert.Allen (talk) 04:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

That parameter would have to be added to all Category:Creator templates, which is not really possible. That category page should link to creator pages using [[]] brackets or it should link to wikipedia articles. --Jarekt (talk) 03:12, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm requesting an optional parameter, not a required one. It would only be added when an editor felt it was desirable. If it is not added, the behavior of the template would be exactly as it is now, which is what I meant to describe in the example documentation. By that I mean, the default behavior (without the addition of the state parameter) would be equivalent to adding "state=autocollapse". My intention was to avoid having to add the parameter to all the Category:Creator templates. But maybe I am misunderstanding something. --Robert.Allen (talk) 04:17, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Duplicates

Hello, ~25 duplicate templates were detected during data export to Wikidata: d:Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P1472#Single value. Maybe somebody is interest to fix these. Thanks in advance. Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 20:56, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks that is great work detecting those. The duplicate creators and categories will need to merged and redirected, which is easy but time consuming. I will start, but help of others would be appreciated. --Jarekt (talk) 03:15, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
@Ivan A. Krestinin and Jarekt: The constraint violations page only updates every 24 or 48 hours, and also gets auto rewritten in a slightly laggy way, so here's a local copy, that people can remove entries from as they're done. (Remember to merge the categories and change the Wikidata entries!) Jheald (talk) 12:55, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
All issues are fixed. Thank you Jarekt, Jheald and others. Great job! Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 21:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

LUA and Wikidata

This template should be rebuild as LUA module at Module:Creator and have the option to fallback to Wikidata, see phab:T89597 (part of Commons:Structured data). Multichill (talk) 14:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Arbitrary access for commons to fetch Wikidata values is coming (soon) after Wikimania. Andy Mabbett (talk) 20:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
AFAIK, We are still totally unprepared for it. I will be at Wikimania and I put my name on a "Looking for a Hackatron buddy" list where I proposed to work on this problem, in case someone is interested and will attend Wikimania. --Jarekt (talk) 23:29, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
@Jarekt, Multichill, Pigsonthewing, and Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): Did WM2015 bring any joy to getting this converted? What is it that we see as the hold-up for this to move forward? Is it a Commons issue? Procedural? Hacking? Bot requirement? I know that I saw mock-ups undertaken at WD at a previous time. With my enWS hat on, I know that with adding more data at WD, that having to do it at Commons for the same data is problematic, and I am just as likely to link to the creator: ns and not get to the template. <Bad Billinghurst!>  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:17, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
I worked on other tasks at the Wikimania, and from what I heard Arbitrary access is still work in progress. Rebuilding this and other similar templates as LUA modules is still on my to do list (unless someone beats me to it). I heard that there were plans to create some "official" LUA libraries for accessing wikidata, but I do not remember who might be working on it. --Jarekt (talk) 04:22, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
It can't be far off, judging from d:Wikidata:Arbitrary access, where you an always find the latest news. Andy Mabbett (talk) 19:26, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Andy if you look at d:Wikidata:Arbitrary access there is not expected date for Commons. So I would not hold my breath. --Jarekt (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
The dates for most of the 12 & all of the 18 August roll-outs were only added yesterday. Andy Mabbett (talk) 13:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Arbitrary access is here! I started working on the feature on Beta Commons, but there's still a lot to do that I don't have time for. If anyone else wants to pick up from there, see [8]. BMacZero (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

interwiki and sister links

As the arbitrary access is now available, maybe we can look at addition of certain elements, maybe as sub-modules. The sister links are required to be manually added at this time and it would be great if those could be added, they are already there and part of the ready data that can be pulled, and separate from other components.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:43, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Collapse in Template:Category definition: Objects?

Currently the template contains a <table class="toccolours collapsible {{ifimage|collapsed}}"> element. Is there a way to collapse the template also in Template:Category definition: Objects? It should be a fine visual improvement. --Marsupium (talk) 15:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I can not think of a simple way to do it. --Jarekt (talk) 15:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
For 21667 transclusions even a very simple parameter could be appropriate. Don't you think? --Marsupium (talk) 16:23, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
The problem is that one would have to add a parameter to all 20k Creator templates which would be passed to {{Creator}} and then use some complicated syntax in 5822 transclusions of {{Category definition: Object}} in category namespace. I assume that within next few years Template:Category definition: Object will the totally rewritten or retired after all that info is on wikidata (same with creator and institution templates). --Jarekt (talk) 11:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
My inventory of the Père-Lachaise Cemetery is a big user of this template (3812 transclusions in category namespace). I will move to Wikidata my structured data when Wikidata will have the basic functionalities. Pyb (talk) 14:45, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
A lot of moving of data to wikidata should happen automatically by bots, so hopefully there will be no need for manual transfer. --Jarekt (talk) 16:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
If the collapsible state was an optional parameter, then it would not have to be added to all 20k creator templates. The optional parameter passthru code to collapse the template (e.g., on a Category page) would only need to be added to those creator templates where it is desired to override the default behavior. Adding this line could be covered in the documentation, so that almost any editor could add it to specific creator templates. For example, something similar for changing the Opera navbox image on specific pages from the default image. --Robert.Allen (talk) 23:22, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
@Jarekt: A parameter is already passed to the template with the line:
 | Option = {{{1|}}} <!-- Do not modify -->
. With a little ingenuity, this could be used to pass more than one parameter, e.g., if a separator is used that the Wikimedia software will not parse (perhaps a comma?). The template code could determine if a separator is present and parse the parameters from the string, and if one of the parameters is "collapsed", then the it could collapse the template on specific category pages. Robert.Allen (talk) 08:09, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Moving of data to Wikidata

A bit off topic, however: @Jarekt: Since you talked about moving data to Wikidata automatically, do you know any approaches to convert data like from {{Other date}}? Since I work on a semi-automatical way to move data from file descriptions here – and hopefully from {{Artwork}} soon – to Wikidata I'd really appreciate any groundwork! --Marsupium (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

{{Other date}} and {{Complex date}} have their own syntax and Wikidata have its own syntax. {{Other date}} and {{Complex date}} are interfaces to Module:Complex date which I wrote while keeping an eye on Wikidata format. Any {{Other date}} can be converted to {{Complex date}}-like parameters and those should be easier to map to Wikidata format. Other way to tackle it would be to start with all {{other date|circa|...}} and other single date options and move them than pick some other type and move them one type at a time. --Jarekt (talk) 14:48, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
OK, thanks! Ah, so we will have to start with a mapping! With earliest date (P1319), latest date (P1326) and d:sourcing circumstances (P1480) there are yet some fine possibilities. Then d:Help:Modelling/general/time has to be updated. --Marsupium (talk) 21:00, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

For general issues, Commons talk:Wikidata is available. Andy Mabbett (talk) 13:14, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Creator templates without Wikidata link

Perhaps the best way to deal with them would be through https://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/? in case any one feels like importing the data. --Zolo (talk) 09:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

That sounds like a good suggestion. However we should probably try to follow wikilinks first. For example if name has a link to wikipedia article and wikipedia article is linked with wikidata than we can grab that link that way. It is just matter of writing some Python code to do it. Once we are done with this option than we can ask volunteers to match them by hand. --Jarekt (talk) 18:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I think user:multichill and user:poulpy have already done this sort of thing ? Zolo (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Most Creator templates were matched with wikidata, but those that did not still have wikilinks. For example Creator:Auguste de Creuse -> en:Auguste de Creuse -> d:Q2871477. Maybe the issue is that since that code run, commons, wikipedias and wikidata were changing, so the connections that were not possible then might be possible now. May be it would be possible to rerun those codes. --Jarekt (talk) 20:08, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Another interesting way of linking would be through VIAF numbers for example  Creator:Antonio González Ruiz has VIAF value = 86950878, same with d:Q8201255. I wonder if there is an easy way (from LUA maybe?) to look up what item has VIAF=86950878. --Jarekt (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
This sounds like the sort of thing User:Magnus Manske often does. Andy Mabbett (talk) 20:23, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
I actually figured out a way to use User:Magnus Manske's multibeacon tool to do the job. When combined with this trick one can use AWB (or even visual file editor) to edit large batches of images. --Jarekt (talk) 23:46, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Near

I have no idea what {{Near}} template means, when used as creator option, as in File:Olpe athletes Louvre G242.jpg, where {{Creator:Kleophrades Painter|near}} gives

Attributed to an artist close to Kleophrades Painter    wikidata:Q1347940
 
Alternative names
Cleophrades Painter
Description Greek red-figure vase painter and Attic vase-painter
Date of birth/death 6th century BC
date QS:P,-550-00-00T00:00:00Z/7
 Edit this at Wikidata		 5th century BC
date QS:P,-450-00-00T00:00:00Z/7
 Edit this at Wikidata
Work period between circa 505 and circa 475 BC
Work location
Attica Edit this at Wikidata
Authority file

. It might mean something in other languages but it is meaningless in English. And we need to fix it or remove it as one of the Creator options. The phrase makes sense when used as in Creator:Walenty Wańkowicz, where Kaluzyca {{lcfirst:{{near}}}} {{Minsk}} gives "Kaluzyca near Minsk". I hope it makes sense in other languages. --Jarekt (talk) 03:34, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Also "namepiece" option oes not make sense in English as in {{Creator:Master of the Brandon Portrait|namepiece}} that gives
Master of the Brandon Portrait  (fl. circa 1510–1540)  wikidata:Q21995764
 
Alternative names
Master of the Brandon Portraits, Master of Queen Mary Tudor
Description Southern Netherlandish painter and drawer
Date of birth 2nd millennium
date QS:P,+1500-00-00T00:00:00Z/6
 Edit this at Wikidata
Work period circa 1510-1540
Work location
Southern Netherlands, England
Authority file

. Maybe french version makes sense: "objet eponyme", but both phrases do not show up in wiktionary.--Jarekt (talk) 03:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Près (literally "near") indeed shows up in the Louvre's entry [9] but I had never seen that, and I am not quite sure of the meaning. @Jastrow:  ?
"Objet éponyme" means that after which the artist was named like Brandon portrait -> Master of the Brandon Portrait. The English spelling seems to be "" [10]. Not sure this really belongs here though: it is usually self-evident, and might get confusing if the artist has different names in different languages. --Zolo (talk) 09:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

About {{Near}}, please refer to Template talk:Creator/Archive 2#Determiner. "Namepiece", "name piece" and "name-piece" are different spellings used in the literature, the latter being more frequent. A search on JSTOR, for instance, will attest their academic use. Just because you don't know what a word means doesn't mean it's meaningless. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:03, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok I guess both of those make sense now, and I found "namepiece" used in some wikipedia articles. I wrote wiktionary:namepiece definition and probably should write short article about the term and link it from the term when used. "Near" is a farther streach, maybe it means something to art experts, but we should link to some explanation of the term, when we use it. Alternativly we can use "Manner of " which is more clear. --Jarekt (talk) 18:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Strange behaviuour

File:Rytec Ludvik Arnost Buquoy ; kreslir Antonin Pucherna 1776-12.6.1852 - Serie pohledu na pozoruhodna mista v Praze a okoli Sarka Eine Partie aus der Scharka.jpg Creator:Antonín Pucherna with the paramater "after" does not give "after ..." but "formerly attributed to..." What is wrong here (and where? in that Creator page or in the Template:Creator itself?) --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 18:56, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Found it myself eventually. It was in the Template:After. I reverted that change that must have been a mistake. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 19:01, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Name from Wikidata

The template will need a major rewrite, probably in Lua to make full use of Wikidata, but maybe we can already use Wikidata for name retrieval, so that we do not need to maintain all those {{langSwitch|en=blabla|ru=bloblbo|ar=bliblibli}}. I think that simply requires transforming all {{{Name|}}} into {{{Name| {{label|{{{Wikidata|}}} }} }}. --Zolo (talk) 08:59, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

This would be a major improvement. --Robert.Allen (talk) 08:32, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I came here to post the same thing. Kind of silly to maintain this manually when Wikidata is already organizing the translations. czar 07:58, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
So user:Jarekt, would you implement this version ? Not a nice code for sure, but it should work until we get the Lua version. --Zolo (talk) 13:44, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
That is an ugly code but I agree that it would work. However once we pull name from the wikidata than I am afraid we will get request to pull dates or locations, or wikisource links. All of them would be great but it would overcomplicate the already messy template. Another solution would be to keep current template as "core" and write outer layer to deal with wikidata. I was experimenting with that in April, here, but in the end decided that it would be better to just rewrite it in Lua. I have started to work on Lua version and hope to finish it this summer. --Jarekt (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
I have a better (hopefully) idea: as part of rewriting Creator template in LUA, I wiss start with {{Name}} template and write it to handle more cases, that will simplify template:Creator code and make it easier to add wikidata based name. --Jarekt (talk) 12:04, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done For example Creator:Peter Paul Rubens is missing "name" field and it is pulling it from the wikidata. --Jarekt (talk) 17:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your work, Jarekt. But I am not sure if the code works right. With https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Creator:Peter_Paul_Rubens?uselang=ar I expect to see the name in Arabic but it is written in Latin script. Or do I misunderstand the functionaliy? btw: the link goes to arwiki. Raymond 18:35, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Raymond, That is due to phabricator:T140792
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T140792
bug; If you switch your native language to ar the Creator:Peter_Paul_Rubens page will have correct translations. --Jarekt (talk) 18:53, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Jarekt, thank you for pointing me to this bug. Raymond 19:02, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
@Zolo: , maybe the issue is with module:Wikidata. I can imagine that if "lang" is provided but not used in all parts of the code we would have that issue. For example if some parts of the code relied on "lang" provided by the template and some on {{int:lang}} we could have issues described in that phabricator ticket. Could you check? --Jarekt (talk) 19:07, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
It is actually related to the behavior of mw.wikibase.label() that is not compatible with ?uselang. I have disabled it here and it fixes the issue, with potentially large large cost on memory usage that will need to be addressed in a more technical place. --Zolo (talk) 20:03, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

dealing with duplicate templates

This query lists all the wikidata items linked to 2 Creator templates. Many of those are duplicates ( 2 templates for the same person) or templates with wrong wikidata codes. If someone needs a interesting puzzle please help me cleaning them up, which involves either combining 2 templates or removing link from one of the commons creator templates and removing one of the Commons Creator page (P1472) links. --Jarekt (talk) 02:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link: item mismatching P373

Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link: item mismatching P373 is a category which detects mismatch between Wikidata's P373 (Commons category (P373) and Commons Creator, Homecat category. In most cases it is due either to old category name still kept on Wikidata or due to multiple categories related to the same person on Commons. If someone like puzzles, I invite to help me fix them. --Jarekt (talk) 18:03, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Lua version of the code

We have very preliminary version of the LUA code that mimics the current display part of the {{Creator}} template at Module:Creator. See for example:

Eugeniusz Lokajski  (1908–1944)  wikidata:Q735173
 
Eugeniusz Lokajski
Alternative names
"Brok"
Description Polish photographer and athlete
Date of birth/death 14 December 1908 25 September 1944
Location of birth/death Warsaw Warsaw
Work period 1944
Work location
Warsaw Uprising mostly in Śródmieście district.
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q735173

I will be adding more capabilities to look up info from wikidata and will work on large section that creates maintenance categories. But I hope to have something ready for testing soon. --Jarekt (talk) 14:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request

{{Edit protected}} This template's documentation is displaying on pages in the Creator namespace that use the template. I believe it's because of the following line under "automatic categorization of pages in Creator: namespace". 

{{documentation|Template:Creator/documentation}}

The template already includes its documentation within noinclude tags at the bottom of the template. Could someone remove the line shown above? Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:24, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Auntof6 I am lost why do you want to remove that documentation, for example in Creator:Sorin_Adam, or any other. Documentation within noinclude tags at the bottom of the template adds documentation to the template. --Jarekt (talk) 04:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
@Jarekt: I don't understand why the creator pages need documentation on how to use the template. Doesn't template documentation need to be displayed on the template page, and not on the pages that use the template? There are two places in the template that include the documentation page: the one at the bottom that displays the doc on the template page, and the one I suggest removing that displays it on creator pages. There are other types of pages that use this template, and the doc doesn't display on those. Am I missing something? --Auntof6 (talk) 04:19, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Auntof6, All templates including Creator or Institution templates should include documentation. Creator templates are more or less the same and do not need individual documentation, so a single documentation page is added to 20- something thousands creator pages with the command you are proposing to remove. --Jarekt (talk) 04:33, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
@Jarekt: I'm still not sure I understand. Are you saying that the creator pages are templates? --Auntof6 (talk) 04:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Auntof6, they are pages used like templates, (transcluded to other pages,) but which are in a specialized namespace. --Jarekt (talk) 05:03, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Ah! I didn't know that. Now it makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Bugfix in this template

There are two tests using this code: 

{{#ifeq: {{localurl:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{localurl:{{{Homecat}}}}} || ... }}

It does not work at all, there's no such "localurl:" parserfunction. This causes a tracking category to be overpopulated.

I think that the purpose of this test was to compare the current page name (as returned by {{PAGENAME}}, where it may be HTML-encoded for some ASCII punctuation characters allowed by MediaWiki such as the apostrophe ', with the value of a plain-text parameter ({{{Homecat}}}) which may include non significant whitespaces or different lettercase in the first letter, and which is generally not URL-encoded). The work around is to use this simple code (passing the specified parameter to the PAGENAME parser function to normalize it the same way as for the current pagename returned by default): 

{{#ifeq: {{PAGENAME}} | {{PAGENAME|{{{Homecat}}}}} || ... }}

Another equivalent solution uses #titleparts (reverse conversion from the HTML-encoded characters to plain UTF-8 characters), but still with the equivalent canonicalisation of pagenames (leading/trailing whitespaces removed, whitespaces compacted, canonicalisation for the namespace or for the leading character of the page title, resolution of relative URLs...).

Please unprotect this template to make this necessary change (two occurences). verdy_p (talk) 03:21, 10 October 2016 (UTC) {{Editprotected}}

Note: the Template:Creator/sandbox version fixes that (it also fixes various dangling newlines at end of the table, adds scope="col/row" in header cells and eliminates unnecessary HTML elements (notably the outer div to contain the table; it also fixes the layout of descriptions containing bulleted or numbered lists or multiple paragraphs). verdy_p (talk) 06:25, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
verdy_p, localurl magic word is explained here and it seems to me that it is working fine. Category:Creator templates with non-matching home categories holds creator pages whose name does not match the category name. It is not a problem by itself but since most creator template names match the home category names, if someone needs a list of creator pages and their home pages, one can often use a shortcut and guess the name of the home category based on creator page name. However creator pages in Category:Creator templates with non-matching home categories need to be treated differently. You are saying that "category [is] overpopulated". Can you give any examples? --Jarekt (talk) 17:37, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
It is one of the tracking categories tested using "localurl:"; all these page are cetegorized due to missing links to pages named with a "localurl:", edit one of these pages, you'll see at the bottom a red link for missing included "templates"... verdy_p (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Note: localurl does not work correctly to compare pagenames as they are returned by the internal PAGENAME parser function (and similar), because they are HTML-encoded (this is a problem for all pages containined as ASCII apostrophe for example in their name becaues tests with "#ifeq:" will not match them. We need a name canonicalisation (and unfortunately localurl does not work coherently when there are optional namespaces). To have coherent results, "#titleparts:" works much better (it has been tested since lon in French wikis where there are many page titles with apostrophes, and even here on Commons.
For some resons the proposal to change the way PAGENAME returns HTML-encoded names has not been accepted (because PAGENAME is frequently used within attributes where quotes cause problems.
The alternate proposal to fix #ifeq: so that it will HTML-decode its parameters was also rejected. And anyway we need a way to canonicalize pagenames with their correct namespace name (replacing aliases) and a single capitalization form for namespaces, and a correct capitalization for pagenames outside the namespace. verdy_p (talk) 21:03, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
verdy_p I edited one of the pages and I see no red links for any missing pages. The purpose of localurl is to grab 2 strings that could be in many alternative formats and create a 2 strings in unified format (whatever that might be) so they can be compared. Can you point out a specific page where something is not working right? --Jarekt (talk) 04:06, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Attributed to

why is attributed to not working?--Oursana (talk) 02:08, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

@Oursana: Links to where it is not working are always valuable. Making others do all the work is not helpful, nor often a good way to get assistance. FWIW it works for me edit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:56, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought it might be a known problem with so many files. I mean the additions within the {{Artwork}} Revision of File:15-07-05-Schloß-Caputh-RalfR-N3S 1712.jpg--Oursana (talk) 03:12, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done @Oursana: The Option parameter was empty, as in it was missing Option = {{{1|}}} <!-- Do not modify -->. @Jarekt: Do you have a ready means to check for empty Option parameter?  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:42, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you--Oursana (talk) 05:13, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
The only way to check for empty Option parameter is to crawl through all the pages and verify that it is there. I do not remember the last time I have done it so I will run it again. --Jarekt (talk) 13:19, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
I added ~260 Option parameters. As of now all creator templates should have them. --Jarekt (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
perfect, thank you--Oursana (talk) 15:46, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

problems in ast

https://ast.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ficheru:Durer-self-portrait-at-the-age-of-thirteen.jpg&veaction=edit#filelinks --Oursana (talk) 15:46, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Also for this see the first comment on your question in the last section! {{CountryAdjective|DE|lang=ast}} is not supported and gives alemán. The result is visible on https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Creator:Albrecht_D%C3%BCrer&uselang=ast and thus on ast:Ficheru:Durer-self-portrait-at-the-age-of-thirteen.jpg. Template:CountryAdjective/ast should be created, but that should better be discussed on Template talk:CountryAdjective! --Marsupium (talk) 09:40, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
The problem with "ast" language (Asturian language ?) is deeper, as it is not in Module:Fallbacklist list. It is recognized by Wikimedia {{#time:l|now|ast}} returns "xueves" but I do not know what does it fall back to. Should it fallback to Spanish and than English? --Jarekt (talk) 12:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

What to do with redundant fields?

If Wikidata is present and after we migrate all the data from Creator templates to Wikidata we should remove redundant data from Commons, after verifying that all the data was moved to Wikidata. For example "Name" field is not used if wikidata field is present and has labels. We could be deleting name fields in all verified templates. Same with dates or places. --Jarekt (talk) 05:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Definitely! Many of these are quite out of date, I have noticed. Jane023 (talk) 06:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Lua version is now live

I just switched {{Creator}} template to new code written in Lua: Module:Creator. Please report any problems here or at Module talk:Creator.

The code is mostly a copy of the old template, which is preserved at {{Creator/old}}, but there are changes:

  1. template relies heavily on data pulled from Wikidata, for example local "Name" parameter is not used if there are labels on Wikidata
  2. there is more wikidata maintenance categories like subcategories of Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link
  3. I removed support for Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link while keeping Category:Creator templates without Wikidata link.
  4. I also removed Category:Creator templates with authority control data while keeping Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link: local authority control

--Jarekt (talk) 15:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Nice! The next step is to have creator templates auto-added to the creator categories. Jane023 (talk) 10:24, 22 April 2017 (UTC
Jane023 I actually do not know what you mean by that. Can you elaborate?--Jarekt (talk) 03:15, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
What I mean is this: often when a creator template is first created, it is placed in the "homecat" but not added to the homecat category file. I navigate to painter categories quite often and will add the creator template when I see it (and will often create it & then add it if not there at all). It would help if the category would just show the content of the creator template by default. Jane023 (talk) 06:51, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Excellent Jarek! I added some more constraints on Wikidata to improve quality. I wonder how many constraints on d:Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P1472 we can clear based on Commons. Multichill (talk) 12:45, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
One issue with Wikidata constraints is that they assume creator templates are for people, so records associated with them have gender, date of birth and death, etc. However many records are for porcelain manufacturers, photography shops, etc. and they do not have gender, etc. I deleted some "anonymous" creator templates, and we probably should delete some other odd-ball templates. Something that still should be done is transfer of as much info from creator templates to wikidata. I created many new creator template maintenance categories and would like to use them to find what to move. I will also try to add more automatic ways to copy content to Wikidata, maybe with help of Quick Statements or some other means. Once we move all the data to Wikidata we probably should remove it from Commons to simplify maintenance. --Jarekt (talk) 03:14, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
On Wikidata we have 25586 humans with Commons Creator page (P1472) and 85 without (0,33%). That's an edge case. For other properties I just add these to the exceptions so they don't clutter the constraint report. Multichill (talk) 15:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks ! There is a problem on this page though File:Christolf et Cie - Amphitrite - Walters 71450 (2).jpg. -Zolo (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
It seems fine now. Hopefully something I already fixed. --Jarekt (talk) 17:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, it works fine now. --Zolo (talk) 12:48, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

The ID entered is unknown to the system. Please use a valid entity ID.

 please check your last edit twice, see Creator:Yakov Perelman, Creator:Victor Brauner, Creator:Toni Schneider-Manzell, Creator:Tomás Povedano and so on. Use of the previous version makes them fine. Sealle (talk) 12:47, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Sealle, I wrote at en:Wikipedia_talk:Lua#How_to_debug_.22The_ID_entered_is_unknown_to_the_system._Please_use_a_valid_entity_ID..22_errors asking about those errors. They make little sense to me as the error message suggests that q-code is incorrect, which is wrong. I think it might be some wikidata software error and I will try phabricator, if nobody has any idea at Wikipedia. What is weird is that some of the affected pages are OK now, without any changes to the creator template or Wikidata. We can just use {{Creator/old}} for time being at the affected pages. --Jarekt (talk) 17:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Jarekt, apparently all of those are OK now, but it looks like a heisenbug: pls see now Creator:Alfons Mucha and Creator:Wilhelm Groß. Sealle (talk) 17:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Fixed Creator:Yakov Perelman, Creator:Victor Brauner, Creator:Toni Schneider-Manzell, Creator:Tomás Povedano and others by using {{Creator/old}} instead of {{Creator}}. --Jarekt (talk) 17:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
OK, I see now. Sealle (talk) 17:35, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
In phabricator:T163815 User:Matěj Suchánek figure out the issue. So I hope to fix it in code soon. --Jarekt (talk) 17:50, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Minor spacing-bug

Namaste. There is a bug involving value-spacing when (at least) Nationality and Occupation are munged into beginning of Description field. An example can be found in Creator:Edward Snowden where it renders without space as: "American activistComputer professional who leaked..." instead of expected rendering with space: "...activist. Computer..." or the like. Separator can be semicolon or comma in lieu of full-stop/period -- that's an editorial decision. --dsprc (talk) 06:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I will fix it, although I will wait until a few of those accumulate before releasing next version. Thanks for reporting. --Jarekt (talk) 11:50, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Dates on the Julian style

Hello. Incorrectly indicates dates for the Julian style. Example: Creator:Konstantin Pervukhin

I think I fixed Creator:Konstantin Pervukhin. If others are wrong please fix them. --Jarekt (talk) 19:51, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Shows dates in the Julian style as Gregorian, if the wikidata date is in the Julian style. Example: Creator:Mikhail Kudryavtsev

References

The old template only used to show the "References" information if the current namespace was Creator (i.e. they were hidden from all other uses). This is no longer completely the case, it seems -- see Creator:Emma Kissling. The base data in that field is not displayed, but it contained regular wiki references itself, and that part *is* being displayed in transfusions. More minor, but it does not appear that the first bullet in the list in that section is being respected. Carl Lindberg (talk) 12:52, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Carl, I just figured out what you are saying and that is strange. I just tested it and the old template did not show any wiki-references on the page. I have no idea why they are doing it, since if the text is not shown on the page than the references should not show either. But I will try to fix it. --Jarekt (talk) 22:41, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Mistake in template

mistake in template creator

I think there is a mistake in template creator. Nationality and occupation and the content of the field "description" there shown in the same line without any blank (see pic). Can somebody fix this? Greetz! Bukk (talk) 11:28, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't noticed the bug mentioned above ("Minor spacing-bug"). Greetz! Bukk (talk) 11:38, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Recommendations for new templates

Due to new changes in the template the recommended format of the new templates will be to add all the info to Wikidata and create new Creator template only with: 

{{Creator
 | Option    = {{{1|}}} <!-- Do not modify -->
 | Wikidata  = Q12022773
}}

There are several fields which are not presently handled at 100%, like: alternative names, complex dates not in ISO format, work places with list of places and dates, but I hope to better support them in the future. I will need to began task of updating the documentation. At the moment tools like [ https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/creator_from_wikidata.php creator_from_wikidata] should not be used. --Jarekt (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

We could also consider to allow the use of direct transclusions of Template:Creator instead of the creating of new creator template pages, e.g. {{Creator|Wikidata=Q29473318}} instead of a newly created Creator:Master of the Virgin of Benediktbeuern. (However, the linkback symbol should not be rendered then.) On the one hand the source code is probably less clear then. On the other hand this source code is anyway spare when the creator information for the artwork can be fetched from Wikidata through the item ID in hopefully near future.
At least Template:Creator possible or its rendering can now be transformed into that of Template:Creator if the Wikidata parameter is set and perhaps even without when the page is sitelinked to the creator's Wikidata item. --Marsupium (talk) 06:10, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 Agree, use of {{Creator|Wikidata=Q29473318}} instead of creation of Creator:Master of the Virgin of Benediktbeuern is fine. --Jarekt (talk) 11:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Would it possible to use Wikidata to allow use of the creator template with simply providing any authority control identifier? That is, could {{creator|viaf=61625857}} be used to pull back Ansel Adams by somehow looking up the Wikidata item where the property for VIAF identifier is 61625857? Dominic (talk) 18:56, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Not at the moment. There is a phabricator proposal to allow look up of q-code based on value of a property, but at the moment that functionality does not exist. However if you have a list of VIAF numbers you can look up the q-codes and use those. You can also create a lookup template which when given a viaf number returns a q-code. if you than substitute this template ({{creator|Wikidata={{subst:viaf2qcode|viaf=61625857}}}}} you can end up with {{creator|Wikidata=Q....}}. I can set it up for you if you are interested. --Jarekt (talk) 20:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
The problem with the above recommendation that the new creator template not include all the authority controls as before (for example NLI is missing) also the Alternative names disappear. See this and this. And also, this tool. instead of saying not recommended anymore! why not to adjust to the new format? -- Geagea (talk) 21:34, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
The Authority control part did not change in last year or two and I do not recall supporting anything called NLI in the past. However if there is a good case for having it we can add it to Module:Authority control. As for {{creator|Wikidata=Q....}} being equivalent to hand crafted Creator template, That is more of an aspiration than reality at this point. Current template does not add alternative names, and I have a long list of things to fix. As for, creator_from_wikidata tool, current code has 90% of its functionality. creator_from_wikidata tool never handled alternative names properly and if those are needed they should be filled by hand. --Jarekt (talk) 02:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
NLI=National Library of Israel and you have already add it in the past - Template talk:Authority control/2016#National Library of Israel identifier. It was ok with the old format but it's missing in the new creator template format. -- Geagea (talk) 01:07, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I looked more closely at NLI and we do support it. See for example

Authority control

. --Jarekt (talk) 03:23, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

NLI: 000093130 it's there...-- Geagea (talk) 03:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

On the Creator page for a new person, it still recommends using the old tool: "Use Commons from Wikidata Tool if you know wikidata q-code." The Haz talk 14:30, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Hazmat2: I have modified the editnotice template, removed lines and added a simple search facility for Wikidata.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:43, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Creating creator templates is now awkward ...

Help ! I have made a number of creator-template-things for artists etc. The first times were awkward, having to understand every step, but doable.

But things have radically changed. There seems to have been a bad change of policy. It is more linking to Wikidata, which seems, in se, good. But it has become now very difficult to create a Creator-item, there is no guidance or guided procedure for persons like me, who are not within the circle of Wikidata-illuminati. After the deprecation of the previous guided procedure, i twice (or maybe three times) managed to create a new creator-thingy, but i do not know how i made it and if i will manage in future ...

So, i do have some questions:

  • Why do you, managers/masters of the infrastructure of the Wikimedia Commons, hate the common Commons contributors this much ?
  • Will there be some form of understandable guidelines for creating Creator-thingies again ?
  • Will it in future be possible again for common people like me, to add a full name or an alternative name in a creator-thingy ?

Yours , --Paulbe (talk) 23:21, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Paulbe, I am sorry you found current system harder to use. The intention was just the opposite. Relying on Wikidata data makes Creator data much more likely to be updated when better or new information is available and more likely to be in synch with the rest of Wikipedia. Also majority of new Creator templates were created by tools like "Creator from Wikidata" and there is no need for that as it is just easier to just give the template wikidata q-code and let the template pull the info from Wikidata. That said there is still a lot too be done: There are numerous small involvements that can be done to the new template. There is also a need for better documentation as you pointed out. One issue with documentation is the {{TemplateBox}} used for creating documentation pages is hard to use for pages that don't fit the most common pattern. Maybe what we need is documentation that something along the lines that there are really 3 ways of using the template:
  1. Most preferable (from maintenance point of view) is Syntax #1 or the template only has Wikidata and Options fields and all the rest is added to wikidata if needed. This syntax does not work at the moment for 100% of pages and I guess we need to link to How-to pages on Wikidata for those unfamiliar with it.
  2. Slightly less preferable is that you start with Syntax #1 look at the results and if some information is needed than you add local fields to the creator template (instead of adding info to Wikidata) until it looks right. It would be more convenient if you do not replicate Wikidata, so if date of birth shows up without adding birthdate than do not add it, Otherwise somebody in the future will need to compare them and check if they agree.
  3. The least preferred solution is Suntax #2 which relies 100% on Commons fields the way pages in Category:Creator templates without Wikidata link do. This option might not be convenient but people maintaining creator templates but it still works and will likely be with us for years to come.
So in other words, if new system it too painful to master than just use the old system or most convenient subset of the two. --Jarekt (talk) 02:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
@Paulbe: I have added a simple search to Wikidata for the creator name that you are undertaking, and hopefully that will make things easier. There is still the link to the template above the search, and you can stroll down to the #2 section. If you could explain the difficulties that you face, or the shortcomings on the presentation of the template then please express them.

Re the change, can I saw HURRAH, adding/fixing data at one place is a win. The Wikisources have been pulling wikidata data for a while and it is a godsend, especially with regard to images. I suspect that it will be even better here as there is more data pulled.  — billinghurst sDrewth

Support for 'near'

I see support for the 'near' option was removed from the template. Why? Its use also triggers Category:Bad use of creator template - option, even this option *is* mentioned in Template:Creator/doc. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:37, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

from User talk:Your revert on File:Chariot-race BM GR 1837.06-09.75.jpg

Hello Jastrow!
  1. I removed this option from this image, because it isn't and wasn't an entry in Module:I18n/name, which is used by Template:Name ← Template:Creator for validation. Pages with near pop up at Category:Bad use of creator template - option, which I work on.
  2. I checked all versions of {{Name}}, but found type near none-existing ever.
  3. If you want to use this entry, please give me a hint, what the near type means due to a creator. If possible post an example sentence or a synonym. I will implement it.
  4. Are there further discussions about these type entries? I read your post concerning {{Name}} discussion, but these give no explanation relating to near.
I would be glad, to add entry near to {{Name}}. –Plagiat (talk) 11:49, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Near? For an author name? That doesn't make sense to me either.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:48, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm not talking about {{Name}}. {{Creator}} supported the 'near' option until 21 April. This option should have been ported along with support for 'manner of', 'follower of' and so on. Regarding usage, please refer to Template_talk:Creator/Archive_2#Determiner and Template_talk:Creator/Archive_2#Near. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:01, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
We had this discussion 5 years ago. I still find that term very confusing in English, but it might be just s specialized term used by art historians. wiktionary:near and w:Near do not mention that meaning of the word. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Art Terms does not mention it either, nor does Art Glossary of Terms of The Art History Archive. Jastrow can you find any references describing use of that phrase In English? If we have references for such use we should add it to wiktionary:near and than link to it, because most English speakers would not know what that means. My theory is that in French "Près" might be used that way and "Près" is translated as "near" but in English we do not use word "near" that way. In English we would say in the manner of ... or in the style of .... We already have manner of ... so how is it different? If we decide to add it or add other terms in the future, then at the moment the support for 'manner of', 'follower of' and so on is in the Module:I18n/name so adding support for "near" would be done there. --Jarekt (talk) 01:58, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
We've had this discussion many times before, which I find a bit tedious to be honest. I can only quote what I wrote five years ago: "I'm fully aware it reads weird, but it's the accepted lingo. To be completely honest I'm not sure how it differs from 'manner of'. I use it when museums use it in their caption, that's all. A Google search for "near the * painter" "corpus vasorum" will show you how it's used in academic context. See also this alabastron in the Met, 'attributed to near the Laurion Painter'." Jastrow (Λέγετε) 08:55, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
I have added the option near. Output is Attributed to near the $name. I think this solves the problem phrase, which is used in academic descriptions. I hope I will find an suitable German translation, the meaning is similar to "Près". --Plagiat (talk) 12:16, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Template Near has some translations of term "near" but I am afraid that those might be spacial proximity meaning. I still think we should add this meaning to wiktionary:near if we can find some reference justifying it. Currently {{name|near|John Doe}} gives "Attributed to an artist close to John Doe" which I would not know what it means. We need a link to some explanation of the term. Also much more comprehensible English phrase would be "Attributed to style of ...". --Jarekt (talk) 12:34, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
I sometimes see phrase "Attributed to an artist near the Chicago Painter" as in here. That is much more clear in English. --Jarekt (talk) 12:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I think its meaning is the environment, sphere or zone of influence of a person, group or organization. We shall add a person to attributed to near, because an artist doesn't make sense corresponding to a field author. --Plagiat (talk) 15:34, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

New Version of the template

I did a major upgrade to Module:Creator, fixing bugs in previous version and improving Creator template maintenance categories and Quick Statements (used to upload data to Wikidata). See Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link: quick statements. Please report any issues here. I have plans to do a lot of improvements to the template including rewriting parts or all of Template:NationAndOccupation in Lua. If anybody wants to collaborate, let me know. --Jarekt (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

This is great! I like the one-click preloaded QuickStatements form with data to import to Wikidata a lot! I hope the data transfer for Template:Artwork will also run this smoothly! Perhaps it could also add the properties reference URL (P854) and retrieved (P813) to the source. The function will be used a lot I guess, so this could pay off. Though it's not demanded here it would conform to the more strict rules for bots: d:Wikidata:Bots#Statement adding bots. retrieved (P813) may be especially relevant if you plan to remove the data from the templates here once it is transferred. --Marsupium (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Marsupium, thanks for link to d:Wikidata:Bots#Statement adding bots I can easily add reference URL (P854) and retrieved (P813) to each statement although in my opinion it is kind of silly in this case, since it provides no additional information and only makes items more bulky. Since I can do it either way I might just ask at d:Wikidata:Project chat to see version is preferred. There is still a lot to be done on {{Creator}}, but than I was thinking about looking at {{Institution}} template, since they are so similar. So it is likely someone will beat me to {{Artwork}}. --Jarekt (talk) 19:24, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Great Jarekt! I hope you'll take on {{Institution}} too :-)
What would you put in reference URL (P854)? Commons sure is not a valid reference. Multichill (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Multichill, my understanding is that d:Wikidata:Bots#Statement adding bots ask for reference URL (P854) to URL of the wikipedia page so I would do URL to Commons page + date. It is still a very weak reference. --Jarekt (talk) 19:45, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Someone messed up the bot policy page. Awesome. Fixed it. Multichill (talk) 19:56, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps sometimes more diligence isn't vain: That was not "someone messing up the policy". User:ArthurPSmith "added requirements from conclusion of RFC d:Wikidata:Requests for comment/Improve bot policy for data import and data modification. --Marsupium (talk) 14:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Approximate dates not reflected in output

cf. Creator:Sir James Prior.

His date of birth is given as "c. 1790", and I set that on Wikidata (d:Q17014517) using the appropriate magic qualifier. This template seems to fetch the year fine, but the qualifier is not reflected: it says "1790" instead of "c. 1790". --Xover (talk) 05:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jarekt: Pinging in case you missed this yesterday. You'll want to support the sourcing circumstances property, with the qualifiers listed there (circa, near, presumably, and disputed), for dates (birth, death, floruit, etc.). --Xover (talk) 05:30, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes at the moment the creator template does not handle complex dates from wikidata or any dates other than in YYYY-MM-DD, YYYY-MM or YYYY formats. I am planning to write some module to combine Module:Wikidata and Module:Complex date. In the mean time, if something does not work based on Wikidata, than fallback on local parameters. --Jarekt (talk) 10:56, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Is Template:Creator needed after Wikidata?

[ the answer is "yes", but I wanted a catchy heading. :) ]

Looking at something like Creator:Edmond Malone, where all that's left locally are technical parameters and everything else is fetched from Wikidata. Do we really need to go by way of the T:Creator meta-template and a creator-specific T:Creator-wrapper, rather than just bung the Wikidata ID into a "creator-id" param on T:Artwork? Or less radically, just use something like {{Creator|Q1229512}} (without the creator-specific T:Creator-wrapper).

Of the four params left there (Sortkey, Wikidata, Linkback, and Option), |Option= is purely technical and an implementation detail; |Sortkey= can usually be derived from the structured data on Wikidata, or in a pinch can be explicitly set on Wikidata; |Linkback= has some purpose I'm not quite sure of but seems to be another implementation detail; and |Wikidata= which is the one value-adding param left.

In fact, for all creators where all relevant info is on Wikidata, software support in Mediawiki could provide proper UI for picking the association visually and by name rather than futzing with opaque technical identifiers (users should never have to deal with "Q1229512" unless they really really want to).

Anyways, I'm sure these aren't new ideas, but wanted to sort of send up a trial balloon to see if we're there yet. ----Xover (talk) 07:12, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

There are plans to introduce Wikidata-style structured data here, see Commons:Structured data/Sloan Grant. Hopefully, we will be able to fill the name of the creator through a nice interface, and the software will automatically render it in a creator-template-like using Wikidata. If that works, we might be able to get rid of creator pages that do not add any information relative to Wikidata. But no idea how things are going on in this respect. --Zolo (talk) 09:11, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I think what Xover is saying is that, since for example {{Creator:Ramon Alorda Pérez}} and {{Creator|Wikidata=Q20006382}} gives exactly the same results than why do we need to set up Creator templates? Also why not just pass the creator q-code to {{Artwork}} instead of passing Creator template. And the answer is that the only advantage of creating page in creator namespace is to have a place to customize the look of creator infoboxes over what is generated with the wikidata, for example current software does not handle complex dates (that need {{Complex date}} template) or alternative names. Places have an issue described in Phabricator:T167521. So if creator page created only based on wikidata does not look right, you can customize it. Also {{Creator:Ramon Alorda Pérez}} might be easier to remember than {{Creator|Wikidata=Q20006382}}. If Wikidata has all the relevant properties than Sortkey, and Linkback, are not necessary. I assume that in the future artwork pages will look like {{Artwork|Wikidata=Q20006382}} and the template will add its own Creator template. --Jarekt (talk) 20:41, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 Comment I am still using Alternative names = ... parameter; and with a separate namespace one can create redirects for alternate names.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:15, 28 June 2017 (UTC

birthdate

does not show any more, only death date--Oursana (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

I just tried Creator:Biagio Camagna and it has both dates. Can you give an example? --Jarekt (talk) 02:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I see dates all right, but there appears to be formatting issues when there are more than one of them. See [[Creator:Anselmo Bucci ]], when data stored locally are removed. 

{{#invoke: Wikidata|formatStatementsE|entity=Q569638|property=P569}}

works fine: and .

That said, It would make more sense to use "or" rather than "and": 

{{#invoke: Wikidata|formatStatementsE|entity=Q569638|property=P569|conjtype=or}}

works fine: or .

It would be even better if dates were sorted chronologically and if "may 1887" was shown only once. 23 May 1887 or 21 May 1887.-> 21 or 23 May 1887.--Zolo (talk) 13:52, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

There are still many issues with the new template and with date handling. I keep track of some of them at Module talk:Creator/sandbox. I was thinking about writing a new module to interface Wikidata and Module:Complex date, just did not get around to do that yet. I will concentrate on merging simple creator templates with wikidata, before I look into more complicated data. --Jarekt (talk) 14:57, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Creator:Rogier van der Weyden doesn't show the birthdate, I saw several examples like this.--Oursana (talk) 20:21, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
I see the birthday in Creator:Rogier van der Weyden. Maybe purging will help. --Jarekt (talk) 02:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
I have the ›and‹ issue with location (P276) too. Workaround: Change rank:normal to rank:preferred, so only one (preferred) entry will be displayed. –Plagiat (talk) 12:17, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
If the values are equal, it's quite a bad idea to manipulate them in Wikidata to circumvent the flaws of a template on Commons not combining them correctly I think. --Marsupium (talk) 17:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Current handling of dates works for a single ISO date and maybe foe other cases, but not much else. I am planning to Write some Lua code combing wikidata and module:Complex date, but at the moment we are stuck with 90% solution. Unless there is a clear preference between 2 Wikidata versions I would not be changing preferences there to suit our needs. Until there is new code for handling dates I think we need just add challenging dates by "birthdate" and "deathdate" parameters. Also if someone knows Lua and wants to try writing Lua code combing wikidata and module:Complex date, please give it a shot. --Jarekt (talk) 19:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I still do not see the birthdate after creator's name in Creator:Rogier van der Weyden, nor in Creator:Claude Lorrain as in many others. These give 2 birthdates by year--Oursana (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Fixed with help of parameter "Lifespan" (I ought to document it). I also hope to release better handling of dates by Creator templates soon. I just finish testing Module:Wikidata date I wrote for that purpose. --Jarekt (talk) 03:04, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
please check Creator:Antonello de Saliba--Oursana (talk) 22:04, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
@Oursana: This looks like an artefact of the limited support for complex dates in the current integration with Wikidata outlined above. I've added a |Lifespan= parameter as a workaround for now. @Jarekt: Pinging on the off chance you're not already aware of this issue. --Xover (talk) 07:22, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
thank you--Oursana (talk) 16:40, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
I do not see any issues with Creator:Antonello de Saliba. What was the issue there. --Jarekt (talk) 18:56, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Revision of Creator:Antonello_de_Saliba did not show the birthdate--Oursana (talk) 23:24, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
At the moment the lifespan years if not precisely known are not shown and you are right I see a problem since in the revision you have shown the local death date should have overwrote wikidata one. --Jarekt (talk) 02:47, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Issue with nationality from Wikidata

cf. Creator:Sir James Prior.

If I remove |nationality= from the template, the Description field disappears from the rendered output. Also removing |occupation= does not affect anything (in case there's a dependency that both be either local or both be from Wikidata). One possible reason I can think of is that his nationality on Wikidata is set to the w:Kingdom of Ireland (and should probably be w:United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland). The local parameter here is "IE" (which I'm guessing is either w:Republic of Ireland or, possibly, w:Northern Ireland). In our description, all the historical nationalities (and quite possibly also the modern ones) should be aliases of a meta-nationality displayed as "Irish". --Xover (talk) 05:55, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

I will revisit handling of |nationality= and |occupation= that might help with this issue, but in the mean time if something does not show properly based on Wikidata, than fine-tune it using template parameters. Last week I was removing many redundant fields from Commons templates, which are the same on Commons and Wikidata, simplifying the templates and making them easier to manage but I suspect that most will still rely on some local parameters. --Jarekt (talk) 11:54, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I've run across a lot of Creator templates for artists whose nationality is Flemish, Southern Netherlandish, or Northern Netherlandish. These can't currently be pulled from Wikidata because Module:Creator assumes modern nation states (Template:CountryAdjective) with a two-letter ISO code, rather than historic countries (Template:Nationality). I think this can be fixed by simply adding the historic nationalities' Q-codes onto Module:Creator/conf mapping to the country adjectives that Template:Nationality understands (it's a short list, you might just snarf it all for a quickfix). But I'm not sure that solution scales with the number of historic nations that might be relevant (England and Ireland alone probably amount to 10-15 country-level legal entities).
And this raises a related issue: Commons has (aiui) treated |Nationality= as interchangeably either "Country of citizenship" and "School of". This sort of duality won't work when pulled from Wikidata where those concepts will be distinct and orthogonal properties. For instance, I just ran across a painter whose country of citizenship is Germany but is from the Flemish school. I suspect this will require changes to the information model of T:Creator to resolve; I don't think can be handled by simple preference/fallback type logic. Not sure how to handle that, so just flagging it as something to look into. --Xover (talk) 19:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Work location from Wikidata

cf. eg. Creator:Théodore Baron. Pulling Workloc from Wikidata is limited to the last defined property. Should handle multiple locations, including the time periods specified there. (just dropping a note for Jarket's todo list ;D). --Xover (talk) 10:32, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Work location is also something Module:Creator does not handle well. Ideally we could pull all the locations and the periods of residence, but that might become very long. To me this field on Commons often has too much information I never use. I find Work location mostly useful if places of birth and death are missing; otherwise I never look at it. But I agree that current approach of returning only (random) one from the list is wrong. At the moment my priorities were dates and places of birth and death. --Jarekt (talk) 15:57, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
I agree with your priorities. :) But I've not really seen any egregiously long list of work locations so far. Is it really a problem, or merely a dislike? Perhaps an approach could be to fetch them all but cap the number displayed to some generous but not excessive number? --Xover (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
I think it is more of a "merely a dislike" than "really a problem" but some creator pages have very long local lists of places and dates that must have taken a lot of work to research and assemble and I think make creator templates very long and unwieldy. I do not have example at the moment. I will try to fetch at least a list of all the places from Wikidata. --Jarekt (talk) 02:29, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
If the incidence is high enough to matter, perhaps a collapsible list could be used for display? --Xover (talk) 10:42, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
The whole creator template is collapsible. Collapsible list in collapsible template would be strange. Less developed Work locations might be my mild preference, but it is not much of a deal. --Jarekt (talk) 13:09, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Quality of wikidata data

Just a general remark. The quality of data from wikidata is often bad, sometimes really bad. For starters, the dates are often very crude. Result: dates become distorted. Wikidata has to do better than this, otherwise there's no point using it. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

"The quality of data from wikidata is often bad" So fix it. (Note: seems to relate to this edit.) Andy Mabbett (talk) 12:14, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Well, Wikidata is not to blame per se, but I’d agree that wide-spread removal of all local data can seem a bit hasty.
The approach that Jarekt is leading is very sensible to me: get bots to compare data, remove it locally when identical and flag it for human review otherwise. This makes a lot of sense. Jean-Fred (talk) 13:10, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Right. Important context is that Vincent Steenberg's complaint does not appear to be with one of Jarekt's bot-assisted edits, but rather with one of my manual ones. I've not yet had time to unravel what it was specifically that was offensive in it (I suspect it's the date of birth/death vs. baptism/burial), but perhaps Vincent might be prevailed upon to make their complaint specific? (Vincent: on a personal note, I appreciate feedback; if you have a problem with my edits, please do let me know!) --Xover (talk) 17:40, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I got a bit frustrated after that edit on Creator:Simon Luttichuys. The thing is, only his baptism and funeral dates are known. For example his baptism took place on 6 March 1610. The RKD then concludes that he could have been born as early as February 1610. Fair enough, but a user on wikidata then took that date (fabruary 1610) and made it his birth date, refering even to the RKD record. That's not the way forward I think. Right now his birth date on wikidata is 1610. That's an improvement, but I think in these cases – and there are many of them – the baptism date/funeral date should be imported from wikidata rather than the factual date. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Vincent Steenberg: No worries. I'm prone to some measure of frustration myself in such circumstances (Shakespeare's birth vs. baptism and attempts to "fix" it are the bane of my existence!). :) In any case, thanks for the clarification. My edit there was clearly too aggressive and I should have checked it better. Mea culpa!
I do, however, have to disagree with you slightly on some things. The way Wikidata handles multiple, possibly conflicting, datum is to include all of them, but, where possible, to mark them as deprecated/normal/preferred. If a wrong, but cited, datum appears on an item, it shouldn't be removed but marked deprecated. And, in general, the information should reflect what the sources say, not what a Wikidata editor "knows" to be true. In other words, if Luttichuys's birth date is explicitly unknown, or is explicitly 1610 with year resolution, then that information should be added, cited, and set to preferred, rather than the bad date deleted. There are intricacies of course, like what to do with unsourced claims. but in broad strokes...
I would also question whether Commons really needs day-resolution dates for birth/baptism and death/burial, and thus also whether we need to care about baptism/burial dates (at year resolution, inferred birth/death dates are good enough). Wikipedia does, certainly, as will many other users of the data. But on Commons, I think, the year should suffice in practically every case. That's neither here nor there, of course, because in the task at hand we really do need to preserve whatever granularity of data is present on the Commons side.
And per Jarekt below, that probably means getting the handling of burial dates on Wikidata settled, and then adapting the code of the Creator template. In the mean time, please do let me know if you have concerns with any of my other edits! --Xover (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

"The quality of data from wikidata is often bad" might be true but as I am reconciling many of Commons/Wikidata conflicting dates, places and even genders - it is mostly Commons that is wrong (at least according to the online references available from Wikidata). One of the issues with wikidata is that as it aggregates information from many sources it also aggregates mistakes from many sources with no way to tell them apart. I have seen entries with 3 or 4 different dates each one with a different "reliable" source. About Vincent suggestion to import baptism date and funeral dates: the code's logic at the moment uses baptism date if birth date is completely missing, however that is probably rare as the birth date is set to the same year. At the moment I am not pulling funeral date as the discussion about how to save it continues here (please join the discussion). --Jarekt (talk) 15:37, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

As a first approximation, I'm thinking use the date with the highest resolution, or the birth/death date if resolution is the same. But since Wikidata has no way to indicate rank between two separate properties ("birth date" vs. "date of baptism"), perhaps it might even make sense to have a boolean flag on Creator to indicate editor preference for one or the other? As a safety valve for the possibility that there is some case where using a day-resolution birth date would be undesirable. --Xover (talk) 13:36, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
For instance, take a look at Creator:Sven Markelius. Both Birthloc and Deathloc would in most cases be given as "Stockholm" (analogous to "Greater London area"). The actual birth and death locations given on Wikidata are too specific for the use on Commons (but Wikipedia might want it that specific). A way to indicate desired granularity may be needed for most params, and for this example, relatively complicated code to walk the tree up to a relevant level (municipality, in this case). --Xover (talk) 13:50, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Oh, and mustn't forget about floruit dates. --Xover (talk) 08:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Ok I will try to use date of baptism if it is more precise than date of birth. Or maybe just show both dates in the same field. Anyway any information from wikidata can be overwritten with the local parameter (all except for name at the moment), so if place is too precise or date if wrong than just overwrite it. My bot is assisting me in removing redundant field, but the only way other fields should be changed is once someone look at them and decide that wikidata info is better than Commons. --Jarekt (talk) 02:13, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Right, we can override data locally, but then we're no further in the goal of reducing local possibly-conflicting local data. I've been chipping away at one of the maint. categories, and it's a bit too high an incidence of the problems above and necessitating the use of local overrides. Some can be fixed by fixing the data on Wikidata, but for others we run into conflicting information models (lack of burial date on WD, just as a obvious example) or contextually specific display preferences (like specificity of locations). Some of this stuff will require significant code changes to resolve, and, as mentioned above, conflicting goals will require local overrides in a way that does not propagate duplicative data (e.g. a boolean param to prefer baptism/burial or floruit dates over birth/death). --Xover (talk) 10:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
I do not think we can ever have creator template that will always pick ideal display format based on available Wikidata data. Most new templates do not use a lot of customization with local parameters and stick with the default, which I guess is good enough and might improve. By the way, floruit dates would be going into "Workperiod" field not birth/death dates. Right? --Jarekt (talk) 13:20, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
No, I think floruit dates would usually be used in place of birth/death when the latter are unavailable or otherwise undesirable (disputed, too imprecise, etc.). So in parens after the name in the header, or to replace the birth/death date in the table proper. Speaking from a historicist perspective, the idea is that birth/death and floruit are there to help identify the specific individual in question. Thus also work period; i.e. "The artist that worked in watercolours and that painted bridges and windmills, that was active in Antwerpen between 1280 and 1322." But when we're into that level of detail on presentation, I'm probably not the best person to ask. I'm a dabbler on Commons, and deal much more with writers than visual artists, so the conventions in that field on this project may be different. --Xover (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
So the dates in the top row after the name usually come from birth/death dates (local or from wikidata) or in some cases birth/death year fields (used when date is uncertain but year is not), but if those were missing than people usually added them to the end of "Name" field. With the wikidata based templates "Name" field is no longer used and I am moving dates found at the end of "name" field to "Lifespan" field. If there are no birth/death dates or local "Lifespan" field than I place dates from "Workperiod" field in the top row with "Fl." in front of them (see here). However we never place Workperiod dates in birth/death date fields or properties. I hope this makes sense. --Jarekt (talk) 16:52, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Historical place names

Another issue that may bite us in use of Wikidata... Present day Saint Petersburg has changed names several times. In 1914, the name was changed from Saint Petersburg to Petrograd; in 1924 to Leningrad; and in 1991 back to Saint Petersburg. For a birth or death date in 1954 say, it would arguably be correct to say that death location was Leningrad. Pulling this from Wikidata will result in Saint Petersburg (Leningrad is just an alias of Saint Petersburg there). Currently the only ways to handle this is to either accept the anachronistic name, or to override it locally with all the issues such local overrides carry with them. I can't really think of a good solution for this, so I'm just dropping it here for better minds than mine to chew on. --Xover (talk) 14:41, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Saint Petersburg, Leningrad and several other spellings were always redirected to "Saint Petersburg" if used in creator template and the same way on Wikidata last time I checked there was only one item for them. The only exception is Tokyo and Edo which for some reason have separate items and in the past had separate internationalization templates on Commons. --Jarekt (talk) 02:40, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Alternative names from Wikidata

Alternative names from Wikidata seems to still be missing. (just dropping a note for Jarket's todo list ;D). --Xover (talk) 14:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

I was not sure how should I handle them and I did not want to repeat bad handling of alternative names by the Magnus' tool that was used in the past to cast Wikidata info to Creator template. The issue is that on Wikidata you have list of alternative names for each language. Magnus' tool gathered them all and added different spelling of the names in different languages and alphabets. That resulted in often a very long list of with Alternative names in every alphabet. I think that for example for Russian names an Russian, English and German spellings are all you need and for western European names we do not need variants in other alphabets. I could start pooling only alternative names in English, which will be better than nothing but will not work for names in other alphabets. --Jarekt (talk) 15:48, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Isn't LangSwitch the established way of dealing with that on Commons? --Xover (talk) 13:42, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Most names do not have different alternatives in different languages, but some do. We could run all the alternatives from all the provided languages through LangSwitch, buth than if there are 5 alternatives in english and 1 in french than french speaker will see only one. I now know how to access aliases so I will give it a shot. --Jarekt (talk) 02:23, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
That would be the case here too (absent Wikidata) if LangSwitch is used. And any existing LangSwitch alternate names locally can be moved to Wikidata. --Xover (talk) 10:40, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
I think it isn't a good idea to use the Wikidata aliases instead of the current local alternative names here on Commons. The aliases are often very messy, containting ASCII-normalized labels, aliases imported from ULAN by Multichill and similar messy data, they simply serve another purpose obiously. Some of the local values here could be replaced by evaluating birth name (P1477) and pseudonym (P742), e.g. the {{name|birth|Jeffrey Koons}} on Creator:Jeff Koons. For other uses we need a new property on Wikidata perhaps. Perhaps native label (P1705), name in kana (P1814), name in native language (P1559) have some value, too. (I haven't investigated how those are used.) --Marsupium (talk) 17:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Mix'n'match

I started a Mix'n'match project to use that tool to match some of creator templates in Category:Creator templates without Wikidata link with wikidata items. If anybody wants to try to work with this cool tool please give it a shoot. The manual for the tool can be found at meta:Mix'n'match. The tool will add Commons Creator page (P1472) properties to the matched items. --Jarekt (talk) 17:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Occupation/natinnality description in Hebrew

The description in English is Nationality and then occupation. But in hebrew it should be the other way round. First occupation and than nationality. Can work also: "occupation1, occupation2, and occupation3 nationality". I fixed it what evryting was in template. But now with "module", I dont know how to change it. -- Geagea (talk) 07:31, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Need help reconciling Creator templates and Wikiata

Current version of Creator template looks for different types of mismatches between data on Commons and data on Wikidata, see Category:Creator template maintenance. In case of mismatch one should compare Commons version and Wikidata version, verify that it is truly different, check the sources and references and correct information either on Commons or on Wikidata. At the moment I ahve a large number of cases where birthday or death day on commons is at day precision while on Wikidata it is at year precission. You can click to upload high precision dates to Wikidata but than one should evaluate references for each date and add references to day precision dates. If someone is interested I can provide more info. --Jarekt (talk) 03:42, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@Jarekt: If I were to decide to try helping chip away at this backlog I would wish for some more information. For instance, I see that "quickstatements" link, but I don't know what it does nor what a "quickstatement" is in the context of Wikidata. And perhaps you could expand on the "evaluate references" bit? Commons will usually not have citations for such dates, and if the day-precision dates had been available on Wikipedia they would have already been on Wikidata (Referenced with "Imported from Wikipedia"). In other words, I see no particular pressing need to go digging for cites for these dates in the case when Commons has day-precision and Wikidata only year-precision dob/dod. --Xover (talk) 10:32, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Xover, "quickstatements" is a tool that simplifies adding data to wikidata. I can create a spreadsheet of data and if I format it correctly and cut and paste to quickstatements I can add them batch at a time. I can also add data through URLs. {{Creator}} in some cases is able to construct URLs that prefill quickstatements. In this case {{Creator}} when it notices situation where Commons have day-precision date while Wikidata have year precision date than it creates url that allows sending day-precision date to Wikidata. At this point there are 2 dates on Wikidata. The way I was handling it was as follows:
  • If there were no references (other than imported from ... Wikipedia type) than I was just deleting the year dates. See this example
  • If there were references attached to year date than I would leave it be, but I would try to find a reference to support day precision date and than elevate its status to preferred, see for example d:Q92539. Sometimes it lead to total confusion where each reference had different date, like for d:Q2265356, where I mostly recorded all the dates in the literature and left it for others to figure out. Most of the items on Wikidata have a lot of qualifiers and some of them like RKDartists ID (P650) or Benezit ID (P2843) usually have dates with day precision.
Hope this helps and let me know if you have more questions. Thanks for considering helping. --Jarekt (talk) 12:36, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
It seems to me that adding dates before 1584 or 1582 via QuickStatements should be deactivated asap. I just used it for this edit. It has no calendar support and adds dates as Gregorian dates to Wikidata from Commons that are probably meant to be Julian dates on Commons. Am I mistaken somehow? --Marsupium (talk) 16:47, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Creator/Archive_2&oldid=708097865"