Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Hello John I'm not sure that Wikidata is the right place for this kind of information, due to it's high granularity. As Zolo points out, maintaining a large directory of small things may be quite a burden for the community. However, Wikibase is by design well suited for representing research data

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

John, Yes, it is related as both could be useful for tagging Commons images. (Acanthostichus hispaniolicus SMNSDO5205-1 01.jpg and Acanthostichus hispaniolicus SMNSDO5205-1 02.jpg

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

I'm not sure if this quite fits here but it's related. A few months ago I went to a meeting of natural history organisations in the UK, they were looking for a way of creating a centralised directory of specimens held in different institutions in the UK. Wikidata seems like a possible place for t

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Hi Daniel, thanks for getting back to me. A couple of quick points, which I digest in more detail what you've written: (1) I don't think that one can say a-priori that for all files based on a specific book, the same approach would be chosen. If you look at either of the categories I cited,

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Am 24.10.2014 02:17, schrieb James Heald: > I think the issue I'm stuck on is: what property would the qualifier be > attached > to ? > ... > The first choice might be attaching the information to a "Creator" property. I would prefer "Contributor", but yea, something like that. > But for the un

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Daniel, and Gergo, I've been thinking some more about Daniel's replies in IRC chat last week, about using qualifiers to handle underlying works that images are derived from, if the underlying work isn't either (i) another image, or (ii) something with its own Wikidata item https://tools.wmfl

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

On 13/10/2014 13:03, Daniel Kinzler wrote: Am 13.10.2014 00:17, schrieb Jane Darnell: I think the place for all data about an image should be Wikidata. Do you really mean *any* image? E.g., if we have a scan of an old book with 50 engravings, do you want to make a wikidata item for each engra

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

@Daniel - the further back you go, the more notable the engravings in books become (see for example the whole family of engravings and copies thereof for the 17th-century "Counts of Holland" series) and sometimes engravings from books are the source for paintings. @Nemo - I don't follow your thinki

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

In my opinion "how many items will X add" is a false problem. If p.a. we moved file categories to subpages as we do on templates, we'd have 20 millions new Commons pages: but the question would be, are they as accessible as they were before? Similarly, the only danger is when items' statements

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Am 13.10.2014 00:17, schrieb Jane Darnell: > I think the place for all data about an image should be Wikidata. Do you really mean *any* image? E.g., if we have a scan of an old book with 50 engravings, do you want to make a wikidata item for each engraving? Or just for the book? Engravings are of

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

I think the place for all data about an image should be Wikidata. It will be trivial to update a Wikidata item with an image when that image becomes available on Commons. Until that time, the item can point to a catalog's online or offline entry where the image can be viewed. I am thinking for exam

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

One case that particularly comes to mind is where we have multiple different scans of the same work -- eg we have multiple (incomplete) sets of the early 1800s colour engravings from Ackermann's Microcosm of London, or Pyne's Royal Palaces, or Audubon's Birds of America etc. It seems a shame n

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Gergo One of the big advantages of commonsdata over wikitext is that commonsdata is Internationalised and ready for localisation. For this reason alone I believe it is worth looking closely at all wikitext to see if it can be expressed as a Commonsdata statement. Joe On 10 Oct 2014 17:09, "Gerg

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Thanks for the pointers, James! I'll try to digest them. Our thoughts on the issue of representing relationships between works are not fully formed yet, but the current idea is loosely that * if the original work has a Wikidata item (according to whatever notability guidelines the community prefer

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Gergo, Thanks for this -- and hoping you have a very productive set of sessions, to all of you in Berlin this week. Yes, where one has a derivative work of another Commons work (a restoration, or a cropping, say), I can see it makes sense to point to the CommonsData entry for that other wo

Re: [Wikidata-l] [Multimedia] Inclusion criteria for Wikidata items for paintings, engravings, illustrations, manuscript folios, photographs, old postcards, etc ?

Hi James, thanks for starting this conversation! It is indeed important and has been overlooked by us. there seems to be the key assumption that, for any image that contains > information relating to something beyond the immediate photograph or scan, > there will be some kind of 'original work' i