Talk:Q19675

I have moved data about the architecture to Q6297212. We still have to find a way to link the two items. --Zolo (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zolo, I could not find your data? Regards--Oursana (talk) 02:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{I suppos I meant Q1075988. --Zolo (talk) 20:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.isni.org/000000012260177X: page not found --Oursana (talk) 02:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that it was removed from the item.

I can't find any ISNI for the Louvre. --Zolo (talk) 20:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When using http://www.louvre.fr/sites/default/files/rapport_activite/fichiers/pdf/louvre-frequentation-musee-louvre-chiffres_0.pdf I have excluded musée Delacroix (which would be included in Template:Q11680199 but not in musée du Louvre, but I have included Auditorium du Louvre (Q15940441) is it appears to be what was done in http://static.data.gouv.fr/24/4d726d35436d485b5987de90d5c12d02afdb689e1838e826041c3bb7e0146e.xls .

We have to figure out how to model the collection(s) here. See also Commons:Commons:Louvre/accession number and Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections. Multichill (talk) 12:55, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Poulpy: @Shonagon‎: @Oursana: @Coyau: dear French or French-speaking friends. I hope you can help me with a question. For paintings that are in a museum collection we usually enter the item for the museum for the collection (P195). For the Louvre this seems to be a mix of this item and Department of Paintings of the Louvre (Q3044768). Why are we using Department of Paintings of the Louvre (Q3044768)? Why do we care about the internal structure of the Louvre? I'm pretty sure Metropolitan Museum of Art (Q160236) and Rijksmuseum (Q190804) have similar departments, but we don't use these for the collection in the paintings.

I did find a hint at Commons:Louvre/accession number. Is it because the inventory numbers are not unique?

Would be nice to discus this, document the result and than clean the data to reflect that. Multichill (talk) 21:21, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was in my first discussion on Wikidata with Zolo and with the same question User_talk:Shonagon#collection (in French)

It is not just a question of internal structure. In French museums, as written in the Code du patrimoine http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000024239726&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006074236&dateTexte=20150119 the collection, not the museum, as a regroupment of objects, artworks and documents is the concept that has the most value. In this approch the collection, by its coherence, has more value than the sum of all individuals items. Scientific publishing, particularly catalogs, are made with collections. Conservators in charge of collections are scienficly autonomous from the museum. In Joconde Database all paintings of the Louvre have "musée du Louvre département des Peintures" as juridical status and insitution of conservation.

But if this concept of collection is relevant for scientific value, and art hisory especially, we have to think of the reuse and the access for people who don't know, who don't care, who has another point of view and just want a link between an object and a institution.

For wikidata the point is: can we deal with it? And it was my doubtful issue too in the discussion above-mentioned. Yes, we can, as I succeded to do with Crotos http://zone47.com/crotos/?p195=Q19675 in which I removed this collection to simplify the access for search results.

For the physical regroupment of artworks in a museum there is another property location (P276), It is not either simple to make queries. For example Healing at Bethesda (Q18618731) is in Room 725 (Q18572802) which is in Denon Wing (Q14619172) which is in Louvre Palace (Q1075988).

But there is more complicated like querying artworks from museums. Because there will never be a strict consensus on what is an artwork, Wikidata query will never give an answer that is satisfying for everybody. And imho this is good news. We put data, accurate, reliable and usable, without a strong classification in mind, to make possible the promotion of different approach of knowledge. With the department collection it's possible to have already two approachs, the historic, juridic and scientific one and by inference another more global approach. Shonagon (talk) 01:42, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense Shonagon. Thanks for the explanation. Anyone else care to comment? Or should we just document this? Multichill (talk) 19:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have the strong feeling property location (P276) is not used in these cases as it is intended. I should direct to a city or place, not to be used to describe the roadmap to the piece of art. So in my feeling the collection collection (P195) gives information about the instituion, p276 about some geographical unit. part of (P361) can be used to link the collections to Louvre. I´d consent to use not only the collections and Louvre (not because it is the right thing to do, but to get better results in searching) in later days when qualifiers work better I´d like to see the collecions used as qualifiers to Louvre. I´m aware that museums do collect items, that are not artworks, for those collectable items we have item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264) and there it just does not matter if it is a painting of Picasso or a piece of petrified poo.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 20:53, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Giftzwerg 88:: location (P276) was just renamed, formerly German expression was Standort. Consistency and merger with P1134 (P1134) has to be completed, until then it is a mess, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2015/Properties/1#Lage_.28P1134.29--Oursana (talk) 03:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The true entity is Paris (http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q90), possibly Paris 01 (http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q161741)

@Jcmoissinac: why and how is it wrong? It's maybe a bit too precise (but we usually do put the most precise administrative unit in located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) which is Saint-Germain-l'Auxerrois (Q2409554) here) but it's seems quite right to me. Cheers, VIGNERON en résidence (talk) 10:53, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks for the hint. i missed this notion of administrative district. Jcmoissinac (talk) 11:51, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]