User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/7

Translation in inscription-template

Hoi Vincent! Allereerst een gelukkig nieuwjaar gewenst! :)
Verder ook een vraagje: je hebt in template:inscription/label handtekening (terug)veranderd in signatuur. Maar volgens mij is een signatuur niet hetzelfde als een handtekening. De Van Dale geeft: sig·na·tuur [sinjaatuur] de; v -turen aard, karakter: het nieuwe kabinet draagt een liberale ~. [1] Ik denk dat signatuur in de betekenis van handtekening een anglicisme/gallicisme is. Is het dan niet beter om gewoon handtekening te gebruiken? Het bijvoegelijk naamwoord gesigneerd komt wel in de Van Dale voor als het zetten van een handtekening, dus die kunnen we laten staan.

Met vriendelijke groet, DutchHoratius (talk) 00:34, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

DutchHoratius, Dank je! Jij ook de beste wensen.
Volgens mijn woordenboek (Kramers) wordt het woord handtekeing gebruikt voor ondertekening en het woord signatuur voor 1. handtekening, 2. - ik citeer - de "ondertekening van een kunstwerk", en 3. karakter. Aangezien tl {{Inscription}} vooral gebruikt wordt voor de beschrijving van kunstwerken leek het me beter om van signatuur/gesigneerd te spreken dan van handtekening/ondertekend. Hoe het komt dat jouw woordenboek maar één betekenis van signatuur geeft begrijp ik niet. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

(1815) NNL vs (1830) NNL again

Hi Vincent, I cleaned up a bit yesterday and emptied a bunch of categories:

• Category:Painters from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)
• Category:Draughtsmen from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)
• Category:Publishers from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)
• Category:Stained-glass artists from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)

I then asked User talk:Foroa to delete these, since they are sorted before the corresponding "(before 1830)" categories in HotCat. User Foroa is against this categorization structure, and wants to move all of "Painters from the Southern Netherlands (before 1830)" into "Painters from Belgium". You may want to drop by and explain things there. Jane023 (talk) 12:34, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello Jane, yes, I saw the work you did fixing these categories. Thanks for that. I had a discussion with Foroa on this earlier and my impression is that this user does not mind "Painters from the Southern Netherlands (before 1830)", as long as subcategories of this category are also stored under "Painters from Belgium". That's why you will find a lot of painter categories in both "Painters from the Southern Netherlands (before 1830)" and "Painters from Belgium". We also discussed the overcategorisation this causes, but user Foroa doesn't seem to mind. I think this is a little bit strange, but I can work with it. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:51, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, that's fine. I couldn't see what the problem was with Category:Jan Pauwel Gillemans (I), but I guess all's well now. Jane023 (talk) 14:19, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Portrait drawings by Jean-Étienne Liotard

Dear Vincent Steenberg, following advice given to me by Túrelio, I would be grateful to you if you could answer the following question: do you intend to request to move the content of Category:Portrait drawings by artist to Category:Drawings by artist,“for easier navigation”? Thank you.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 09:33, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Thorvaldsson, I'm not sure how I got to this, but looking at Category:Drawings by Jean-Étienne Liotard, I see it only contains 6 files and 1 subcategory, and therefore doesn't need diffusion in my opinion. But to answer your question, I don't think Category:Portrait drawings by artist needs to be moved to Category:Drawings by artist, although I think that (with regard to user-friendliness) Drawings by artist should be the starting point and Portrait drawings by artist should only be applied when diffusion is inevitable. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 11:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Vincent Steenberg, since your criterion of inevitability, in the context of Liotard, seems to be determined by quantity [of the files], I would like to add that most of the files in Category:Jean-Étienne Liotard could be moved to Category:Drawings by Jean-Étienne Liotard and then, to its subcategory Category:Portrait drawings by Jean-Étienne Liotard. Kind regards, --Thorvaldsson (talk) 12:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's determined by quantity. I mean, if Category:Jean-Étienne Liotard only contained 5 files, it probebly wouldn't be diffused. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 14:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Very well, then. With your consent I shall recreate the category in question.
I would like to ask you an additional question for the purposes of my own clarification: I noticed that you have removed Template:Title from File:Jean-Étienne Liotard - Portret van Louis de Bourbon.jpg and File:Jean-Étienne Liotard - Portret van Marie Josèphe van Saksen.jpg. May I know the reason for that? Thank you.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 14:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I kinda doubt if that's really necessary in this case, but we'll see.
About these two drawings, they were made in France by a French artist, so if they had anything close to an original language title (I still don't fully know what that means), it would be in French. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The description of the template speaks of ‘title in original language,’ which is not necessary the same as ‘original title.’
In my understanding, in the case of the aforementioned works, the original language of their titles is Dutch due to their place of conservation and, the latest official edition of the catalogue, published by that museum, establishes their titles.
I shall write to the creator of the template, Zolo.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 20:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

About original language in {{Title}}. The main use I see is for artworks that were clearly given a title (for instance a title in Tahitian in paintings by Gauguin). In other cases, I am not sure about what is best. Having the exact title used in an authoritative source sounds interesting, but things become complicated when there are several arguably authoritative sources. I like Vincent's practice of adding "as=" in the reference section is it allows multiple titles without too much cluttering (but note that we can use {{Title}} with no "lang" parameter- {{title| {{Madonna and Child}} }} provides better formatting than ''{{Madonna and Child}}''. For instance it avoids strange italics Chinese)--Zolo (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I see. I am glad that I raised the matter.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 07:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Portrait of an Old Man in Red by Rembrandt

Hi Vincent, do you have any idea why Portrait of an Old Man in Red by Rembrandt does not show up in the RKD database, nor in a search in the collection at the Hermitage? It seems that the information here solely relies on the Web Gallery of Art. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 13:05, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea. The only thing i could find on this painting is this. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok. So it is actually there. For a moment I got the impression a myth was being created. Thanks. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Cat changes

like this one [2]: Whatever the value of this new category, the "Dutch Golden Age Painters" cat is now empty until letter R, and starts from letter S with a lot of painters. If you change things like this, please make sure to change everything quickly, or at least make clear what you do in the category description or talk page. I added a link to the new category now, but the present state with the two "half" categories is really a shame for the Commons. --FA2010 (talk) 13:27, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, The value of this new category is to separate painters from the Northern from painters from the Southern Netherlands. To make sure I'm not making any mistakes I also create a creator template for each category (see subcats of Category:Painters from the Northern Netherlands (before 1830)). I'm sorry if this is taking too long, but in the end we should have a reliable, complete and well documented system for all painters from the Netherlands. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I was just wondering about these categories, and I didn't notice the complicated nature of the change. It would be good if the old and new categories are linked by wikilinks until the change is done. Thanks for your work. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 10:54, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Exhibitions

FYI: Template talk:Temporary Exhibition--Zolo (talk) 21:16, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

{{Provenance}}

Hi, why do you remove the template from picture descriptions? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I'm doing that because this template was made redundant after the "object history" field was added to tl {{Artwork}}. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 10:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's redundant: 'object history' doesn't make any difference between the place where the object was made and its findspot. The two can be very different. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

If 'object history' doesn't make that this distinction then both are covered, aren't they? Also with {{ProvenanceEvent}} you should be able to describe both the object's findspot and further ownership history. I don't see how tl Provenance is of use in all of that. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 11:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

{{Provenance}} describes where the object comes from; it's more precise than 'object history', which doesn't make any difference. Conversely, there is no way with 'object history: Iran' to know whether the object as found in Iran or was made there. Sometimes it's both, sometimes it's not. That's why I use {{Place made}} and {{Provenance}}. I agree {{ProvenanceEvent}} is better because it's more precise, but you don't always have enough documentation to mention how exactly the object came into attention. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

ok, I see. No problem. In that case I will leave tl Provenance as it is whenever it's unclear how an object was found or when for some other reason tl ProvenanceEvent hasn't been used. Thanks for the explanation. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 11:56, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Obviously the best course would be to add a specific field for the place where the artwork was made, so there's no ambiguity. I'll ask about it on Template:Artwork when I have more time. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

ok, I'm all for that. Other websites to this too, so why not we.

By the way, I had a closer look at File:Rider Kashan Louvre MAO1228.jpg and it's description by the Louvre and am I correct in assuming that this piece was made in Kashan? If so it might be better to put this in {{Anonymous}} in the artist field, like this: {{Anonymous|{{RelativeLocation|Kashan|,|Iran}}}}. Like this you free up the object history field, which can then be used for the real provenance (bought by the Louvre in 1999), which is now incorrectly in the credit line field. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:49, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	looks like you're doing a lot of good work :) Vera (talk) 21:48, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vera, Thank you very much! Vincent Steenberg (talk) 10:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Request for opinion

Hi Vincent, can yoy shine your light on Commons:Village_pump#Mass_renaming_needed_for_.22d._.C3.84..22_articles. Thank you. --Foroa (talk) 18:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I will. Thanks. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Paintings by Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam

Hallo Vincent, warom is dat geen gewone subcategorie van Paintings by Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem voor een bete overzicht in de hoofdcategory? MvgOursana (talk) 07:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Oursana, Het idee daarachter is dat je op die manier alle schilderijen van Cornelis Cornelisz. in één categorie hebt. De categorie Category:Paintings by Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem bevat nu 61 bestanden en hoeft mijns inziens niet verder opgedeeld worden in subcategorieën. Althans niet op dit moment. Dit lijkt misschien omslachtig, maar als je bijvoorbeeld kijkt naar Category:Paintings by Johann Georg Schwartze in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, dan zie je dat de hoofdcategorie 1 bestand bevat, terwijl de subcategorie 4 bestanden bevat. Ik vind dat geen fraaie oplossing en ik probeer dit als het kan te voorkomen. Vandaar. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Ik zie jouw punt, maar Category:Paintings by Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem heeft ook subcat Category:Paintings by Cornelis van Haarlem in the National Museum in Warsaw‎ met alleen 2 bestanden. Ik ben over Category:Paintings by painter by museum naar Category:Paintings by Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam gekomen. Als je over Category:Paintings by Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem kommt, zie je subcat Category:Paintings by Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam niet. Andere vraag, wordt Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem echt onder Cornelis gesorteerd of niet beter onder van Haarlem? Zie Brekelenkam‎, Category:Paintings by Claes Dircksz. van der Heck in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam onder H. Zoms wordt ook onder van gesorteerd, volgens Engels.MvgOursana (talk) 23:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Ja, dat weet ik. Ik denk er ook over om een categorie Category:Dutch Golden Age paintings in the National Museum in Warsaw te beginnen. Als je kijkt naar Category:Dutch paintings in the National Museum in Warsaw dan zie je dat de subcategorieën van deze categorie vaak maar 1 of 2 bestanden bevatten en dat is wel erg gedetailleerd.

Over de sortering, het RKD geeft aan dat deze schilder onder de C van Cornelisz. moet worden gesorteerd, zie http://www.rkd.nl/rkddb/dispatcher.aspx?action=search&database=ChoiceArtists&search=priref=18412. Alleen waarom dit zo is, is mij niet duidelijk. Misschien is "van Haarlem" een latere toevoeging? Vincent Steenberg (talk) 14:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hartelijk dankOursana (talk) 20:51, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Italian paintings in the Kunsthistorisches Museum‎ en Category:Paintings from Italy in the Kunsthistorisches Museum‎

Hallo Vincent, kijk je of die twee italiaanse cats so goed zijn? Category:Paintings in the Kunsthistorisches Museum is ook erg gedetailleerd. MvgOursana (talk) 10:11, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hallo, Ik zou zeggen dat "Italian paintings" meer voor de hand ligt dan "Paintings from Italy", maar blijkbaar wordt hier verschillend over gedacht. Maar ik zie ook dat de tweede cat meer gebruikt wordt dan de eerste, dus ik zal van de eerste een doorverwijzing maken. Voor nu dan. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

CFD

Hi Vincent Steenberg. Next time if you have a query or a question, before to making a CFD it's better to ask before the user. It's easier. Best regards, --DenghiùComm (talk) 11:50, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

ok, no problem. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Peter van Bleeck

Hi Vincent, sorry but you've made an mistake by redirecting the category under (esp. the perspective of the history of art) the wrong name Pieter, because he's well known since his moving London under this name (Peter). Also in the literature and the two wikipedia-articles on de: and en:. And the deleting of the Category-Description is not very helpfull.

Hallo Vincent, entschuldige, aber du hast einen Fehler gemacht, indem du die zugehörige Kategorie in einen Redirect verwandelt hast (insbesonders aus der Perspektive der Kunstgeschichte heraus) und seinen Taufnamen Pieter verwendet hast. Als Porträtmaler und Graveur ist er ausschließlich seit seinem Umzug nach London unter diesem Namen bekannt. (eigenständige Werke unter seinem Taufnamen, die er in den Niederlanden geschaffen hat, sind mir bis dato nicht bekannt) Siehe dazu auch die entsprechende Literatur, die zwei Wikipedia-Artikel auf de: und en:. Darüber hinaus war das Löschen der Kategorie-Einleitung/Beschreibung nicht gerade hilfreich. Mit freundlichen Grüßen --Laibwächter (talk) 16:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Laibwächter, Oops. Meine Entschuldigungen. My information was based on the RKD. Usually they are quite reliable, but in this case they must have overlooked his 'international' name. I will correct this right away. Thanks for pointing this out. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 06:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vincent, thank you for adding further categories! Regards & Alles Gute --Laibwächter (talk) 15:04, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Voilà!

File:11040.jpg

Hi! Are you sure this painting has to do with the Category:Le Mas-d'Agenais you added in may 2012 ? Friendly, ℍenry (Babel talk !) (Francophone ?) 16:41, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, according to this page the painting is located at the parish church of Le Mas-d'Agenais. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi! So you are right. I just transfer it in the category of the church/collegiale Saint Vincent. Le Mas d'Agenais is about 30 km from my home... Maybe I'll have the pleasure to see it ! Thanks, ℍenry (Babel talk !) (Francophone ?) 04:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Category:Dutch paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin

[×] Dutch paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin‎ (156 D)

[×] Dutch Renaissance paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin‎ (13 D)

[+] Dutch Golden Age paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin‎ (4 K, 52 D)

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, zijn die laatste twee categorieën niet subcats van de erste? Misschien is ook een korte verklaring van 'Golden Age' praktisch, ik denk er zijn ook vele dateien in Dutch paintings....diee in Dutch golden Age horen?? VG--Oursana (talk) 21:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Oursana, Mijn bedoeling was om de eerste categorie te vervangen door de laatste twee categorieën. Op die manier heb je op Category:Paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin een beter overzicht. Stel, je bent op zoek naar schilderijen van Rembrandt dan hoef je maar op Category:Dutch Golden Age paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin‎ en dan ben je er al. Ik kan me voorstellen dat Category:Dutch paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin als tussencategorie als hinderlijk wordt ervaren. Ik zou het zelf in ieder geval niet zo handig vinden. Een definitie van Dutch Golden Age painting kan natuurlijk altijd. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:22, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Jan Gossaert 008.jpg

Early Netherlandish paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin

Southern Netherlandish paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin

Dutch paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin

Zijn deze 3 categorien echt praktisch ? Ook de laatste? Overcat? Mvg--Oursana (talk) 21:45, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Category:Portraits by Frans Hals en Category:Portrait paintings by Frans Hals

Sorry, maar ik begrijp het verschil niet en blijkbaar andere ook niet, omdat het erg gemixt is. Catharina Hooft hoord naar...? Mvg --Oursana (talk) 23:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Volgens mij moet de eerste categorie (Category:Portraits by Frans Hals) vervangen worden door Category:Portrait paintings by Frans Hals. Een portret is niet per definitie een schilderij. Kan ook een tekening, een beeldhouwwerk, etc. zijn. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:40, 23 September 2012 (UTC)