User talk:Vincent Steenberg

English: Welcome to the Commons, Vincent Steenberg!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

--SieBot 18:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

January 2008-January 2009

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/1

January 2009-March 2010

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/2

May 2010-September 2010

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/3

October 2010-December 2010

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/4

December 2010

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/5

2011

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/6

2012

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/7

2013

See User talk:Vincent Steenberg/Archive/8

Creator:Lismonde

Dag Vincent Steenberg, volgens een anonieme editor is Ivo Lismonde niet correct. Kan ik dit hier wijzigen of is dit aan rules onderworpen? Lotje (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Lotje, Dat is dan een fout van het RKD. Wellicht heeft men daar 2 personen onder één naam geplaatst. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Bedankt, ik zie dat het ondertussen door een vriendelijke anoniem werd aangepast. :-) Lotje (talk) 05:59, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Provenance models

Hi Vincent, I happened on provenance templates you created some years ago, such as {{Bought by the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam}} and {{Ceded to the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam}}. {{ProvenanceEvent}} can do the same job with the advantage of being much more used and of being translated into a lot more languages. On the other hand, these specialized templates allow for a more idiomatic languages. What do you think? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jastrow, there templates were created before {{ProvenanceEvent}} was. {{Bought by the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam}} is not in use any more and {{Ceded to the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam}} only on a small number of files. As far as I'm concerned they can both be deleted. Their use is limited. I mean, bought by the Rijksmuseum. Bought from who and for how much. Of course you could add all of these parameters, but then you're just copying {{ProvenanceEvent}}. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I thought as much. I'll do the replacements, then I'll delete the templates. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

ok, thank you. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Featured picture nomination - Ed Koch

Hello Vincent,

Please support or oppose this nomination: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Koch_%E2%80%93_Mayor_of_the_City_of_New_York.jpg

DmitryBorshch (talk) 00:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:KIK-IRPA

Hallo Vincent, blijkbaar is die website veranderd en het template werkt niet meer. Ik kan het niet actualiseren. Ik denk jij kan het. Nieuwe website is voor Category:Christ Carrying the Cross by Hieronymus Bosch (Ghent) http://balat.kikirpa.be/photo.php?path=KN3652&objnr=78628. Bedankt en VG--Oursana (talk) 01:21, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Oursana, ok, de redirect is kennelijk verwijderd. Als het goed is moet de link nu weer werken. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Vincent, het is beter maar het beeld verschijnt niet.

Warom heb je tl Category definition zonder discussie teruggezet? Dit wordt regelmatig gebruikt, vooral als die files verschillende informaties hebben en je kan daar ook die wikidata-link plaatsieren.

Bedankt voor File:Cross, Bosch.jpg.

ok, dat was misschien een beetje bot van mij. Maar, als ik het goed begrijp is {{Category definition: Object}} een poging om data horend bij een bepaald object centraal te beheren, vooral als er verschillende versies zijn van één en hetzelfde object. Dat is op zichzelf een goed idee. Steeds maar {{Artwork}} kopiëren is niet ideaal en de kans op fouten is groot, maar er moet toch een betere manier zijn. Voorbeeld. Ik probeerde laatst File:IngresOdipusAndSphinx.jpg te bewerken via Category:Louvre RF 218, door de nieuwe parameter "Place of creation" toe te voegen. Echter zonder succes. Tl Category definition: object maakt gebruik van tl Artwork, maar is het niet. Dus in feite hebben we nu dus 2 templates Artwork. Dit vind ik nogal vreemd.

En dan is er nog het aspect van gebruiksvriendelijkheid. We maken al gebruik van onnoemelijk veel templates, zodat het voor de beginnende gebruiker haast onmogelijk is om beschrijvingen te bewerken. En dan wil men ook nog tl Artwork (resp. tl Information), de basis van iedere beschrijving, vervangen door een duplicaat van tl Artwork, die zich ook nog eens in de Categorie-pagina bevindt? Zelfs toen ik dit voor het eerst tegenkwam, moest ik eerst een tijdje zoeken om te begrijpen wat er aan de hand was. Sorry, maar ik vind dat gewoon niet kunnen.

Maar hoe zit het eigenlijk met wikidata? Ik dacht dat dat het project was waar data centraal beheerd werd? Waarom wordt daar niks mee gedaan op commons?

Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:20, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Institution:Rijksmuseum Amsterdam

What's your intention with this template redirect? For now I have removed your speedy tag as it drawed 1000+ images into speedy deletion. --Denniss (talk) 16:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

What I want to do is rename Institution:Rijksmuseum into Institution:Rijksmuseum Amsterdam. Because the second currently exists, this is not possible if it isn't deleted first. Unless there's another way. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Couldn't you delete the redirect if there are no links to Institution:Rijksmuseum. Your reasons I do not understand. VG --Oursana (talk) 23:01, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

No, I can't. I'm not an admin. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:09, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Master of the Legend of St. Barbara

Hoi Vincent, ik heb je category voor deze meester weer teruggezet, want het blijkt dat niet alles van deze meester staat op naam van Aert van den Bossche of Aert Panhedel. Zie bericht hier. Ik heb ook net een lemma gemaakt in de engelse wiki. groet, Jane023 (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Template:MFAonline

Template:MFAonline has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Micione (talk) 10:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For all the work you did Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 18:51, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Cheers! Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:18, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Higher resolution files

Hi Vincent, I took great care including relevant information in the meta data of artwork. By uploading higher resolution images you delete this meta data. Could you please consider the pro's and con's. I don't say an overwrite is denied, sometimes a present file is just not a good one, but I think the advantages have to outweigh the disadvantages. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 09:18, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jan, I think I know what you mean, but just to be sure, could you give me an example. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I throw them out of my watchlist when that happens, so it took a while, but f.i. File:Cornelis van Haarlem - Bethlehemse kindermoord.jpg--Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 19:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I saved your upload for this file on my computer and found the following meta data:

Titel: De kindermoord te Bethlehem

Onderwerp: De kindermoord te Bethlehem

Waardering:

Labels:

Opmerking: *oil on canvas *245 x 385 cm *signed: CCornely. H. fecit

Auteurs: Cornelis Cornelisz. vam Haarlem

Genomen op: 28-11-2011 0:51

Programma GIMP 2.6.11

Verkregen op:

Copyright: http://www.rijksmuseum.nl/collectie/zoeken/asset.jsp?id=SK-A-128&lang=en

And so on...

So my next question is, why did you add this information and why is it an advantage? Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:48, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

If you want to be informed about the benefits of metadata it is best to look at appropriate websites. But I would like to point at the source and copyright information that is retained with the file whenever it is copied away from here. Furthermore, the metadata of an image contains the colour profile with which the file was processed the last time. F.i., stripping the metadata from an image that was processed with an Adobe colour profile will make the colours look way to thin. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 12:35, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I think I see what you mean. But isn't it better to put the source in the "Auteurs" field and put "Public domain" in the "Copyright" field? At the moment you give the impression that the Rijksmuseum is the copyrightholder. This is not the case. See for example http://hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.8164. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 14:44, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

That is an old example. I uploaded that image 3 years ago. Since then Rijksmuseum changed their website and even put a link on the image page to the public domain declaration at Creative Commons. See File:Portrait of a 19-year-old man, possibly a self portrait, attributed to Pieter de Hooch.jpg for a more recent version of the metadata I am using, in case of Rijksmuseum images. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

ok. What I'll do is go all of these uploads one by one. See if these were realy an improvement and try and restore metadata. This might take a while. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

If you want, but you don't have to go back and restore metadata. The only thing is, just consider the pro's and cons when uploading a new version. Sometimes an image is mediocre and an upload is an improvement, sometimes it is just a higher amount of pixels, but not really an improvement. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 19:01, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Vincent, File:Jan Steen 025.jpg is a good example of the effects of discarding the colour profile. This file contains a colour profile. This one doesn't. As you can see, even the Mauritshuis is at the process of learning. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

ok, that's interesting, because I have exactly the same experience with the Rijksmuseum. I already had to cancel several uploads of high-resolution images from their website, because although they were higher in resolution they were a bit greyish compared with what we already have. So something must have gone wrong there processing these images. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

No, it does not go wrong, it is simply that they want to give professional publishers an advantage. When you download a file Rijksmuseum actually says in their pop-up "Rijksstudio voor professionele gebruikers: bestel een gratis TIFF bestand met kleurreferentie van deze afbeelding..." So you not only get an image without jpeg artifacts, but you also get the colour profile with the image. Amateurs like us, we have to make a reasoned guess what the painting looks like. Many museums do it like that. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 17:06, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

By the way, I just noticed that the comparison above only reveals the difference in the Chrome browser. Apparently, Internet Explorer discards the Adobe colour profile altogether. --Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 19:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Anatomy lesson of Dr. Tulp

Sorry about that edit I made on the template. Don't know how I got there. I was updating a Featured Image originally uploaded by Durova with the new (public) version offered byu the Mauritshuis. I wasn't aware there was another file with the higher resolution version as well. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:57, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Historical Media Barnstar
		Thanks for working through the Rijksmuseum uploads. Your edits create a lot of extra value. Fæ (talk) 11:16, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for all those wonderful uploads! Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

File:St. Christopher, oil on panel painting by the Master of Frankfurt.jpg

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, om eerlijk te zijn, ik denk dat de eerste geupload afbeelding moet het recht blijven. Het principe zou anders uit de hand lopen. groet --Trzęsacz (talk) 22:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Collections F.W. Ross, La Haye, A. Durand, Paris et al., p 67.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Collections F.W. Ross, La Haye, A. Durand, Paris et al., p 67.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:51, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Google Art Project

Hello! Thanks for your edits in Dolls’ house of Petronella Oortman.

Do you know how to download pictures from Google Art Project page? I want to upload a better version of Madonna col Bambino by Jacobello del Fiore?

I think it's necessary to create Category:Google Art Project works in Museo Correr and upload pictures there. --AnatolyPm (talk) 18:30, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Anatoly, You're welcome. I'm afraid I'm not able to help you with that, but User:Dcoetzee will know. Ask him. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! --AnatolyPm (talk) 07:10, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Johannes Hermanus Koekkoek

I had asked the question as to how to add paintings to the page on this painter, but now I see this is done automatically if the correct category is given. BUT could you have a look at this and - if you know how that is - add a sub-category paintings with details, since I uploaded one painting and several details out of it. Or tell me how to do it? Thanks! --Haendelfan (talk) 16:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Haendelfan, Welcome to Wikimedia Commons. To create a new category you open a file for this new category, for example File:L botan instit 1878.jpg, then click on edit (bearbeiten) and add a new category or rewrite te existing one. For example [[Category:Botho Straußberger]]. Then save (Seite speichern). The new category (if it doens't exist already) should appear in red, like this: Category:Botho Straußberger. Click this link and place the new category in an existing one, for example by adding the text [[Category:Printmakers from Germany]] in the work field. Press save and you're done. For more information, see Commons:Categories. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:19, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Ocker en Johanna Gevaerts

Volgens deze gebruiker zou deze afbeelding een foto zijn gemaakt in het Dordrechts museum. Gelet op de resolutie van de afbeelding heb ik daar zo mijn twijfels over. Jij bent meer ingevoerd in de museale collecties dan ik. Is dat schilderij uit een particuliere collectie ooit tentoongesteld geweest in Dordrecht? Zou jij daar eens naar willen kijken. Met vr. groet, Gouwenaar (talk) 21:16, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, Volgens het RKD is het werk voor het laatst gesignaleerd in 2012 op een veiling bij Christie's. 'Huidige verblijfplaats onbekend' dus. Op de webpagina van het Dordrecht Museum over Schouman komt hij niet voor. Maar het schilkderij kan wel in bruikleen aan of tentoongesteld in het Dordrechts Museum zijn geweest. Maar een concrete aanwijzing hiervoor kan ik niet vinden. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata en creator sjablonen

Hoi Vincent, ik zie dat jij een hoop creator sjablonen hebt aangemaakt hier op Commons. In de afgelopen tijd hebben we een hoop van deze sjablonen aan Wikidata kunnen koppelen. Er zijn op dit moment zo'n 18.000 creator sjablonen en daarvan zijn er minder dan 3000 nog niet gekoppeld aan Wikidata. Ik ben nu voor de Nederlanders (alle varianten) de missende items op Wikidata aan het aanmaken. Heb je er wel eens aan gedacht om wat meer actief op Wikidata te worden? Dingen zoals d:Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings zijn volgens mij best wel in jouw straatje. Multichill (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Multichill, Ik draag heel soms bij aan wikidata. Ik heb bijv. zonet een wikidata link toegevoegd aan Template:Infobox artist. Dat scheelt een hoop werk in het beheren van interwiki links op gallery pagina's hier op commons. Zie bijv. Jan ten Compe. Misschien dat m.b.v. een bot een wikidata link op alle pagina's die een dergelijke infobox bevatten toegevoegd kan worden. Alleen, hoe ik ook andere data vanuit wikidata naar andere projecten kan importeren is me niet helemaal duidelijk. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:35, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Die link toevoegen aan Infobox artist lijkt me niet zo handig. Elke gallery zou gewoon gekoppeld moeten zijn aan Wikidata. Dat ook nog eens handmatig in de infobox zetten is wat dubbelop. Dat sjabloon zou gewoon automatisch moeten kijken of er een koppeling is met Wikidata en als dat het geval is, een icoontje met link laten zien. In de software staat dit nu nog uit, maar dit gaat wel ergens begin volgend jaar worden aangezet. Tot die tijd overleven we het toch wel met de links in de linker balk?

Jan ten Compe ziet er nu heel raar uit. Ik dacht dat het door jouw edit aan de infobox kwam, maar het is zo te zien iets anders.Multichill (talk) 20:48, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

ok, dat is helemaal makkelijk.

Die pagina van Jan ten Compe is nog niet af en bestaat nu slechts uit twee losse schilderijen en twee schilderijen die bij elkaar horen. Vandaar zoveel kopjes voor zo weinig beelden. In de toekomst wordt het hopelijk fraaier.

Ik zie nu trouwens dat die pagina wél is gekoppeld aan wikidata. Super! Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:18, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Rembrandt, Laughing man

Hello Vincent, I noticed you uploaded a higher resolution image of that painting. Thanks for that. I also noticed you uploaded it because it shows the "original colors". You might want to look at http://www.rembrandtdatabase.org/Rembrandt/painting/3064/laughing-man to see that these are not the original colors. The varnish protects the painting, but it starts to turn yellow, the moment it is applied. And it collects dust, dirt, smoke and sticky fingers. It is hard to imagine that Rembrandt willingly wanted to make the subject look this green. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 17:32, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jan, yes, it is rather green. This doesn't seem to have anything to do with any restoration. I'll undo my changes. Thanks for noticing. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

File:'Elk zijn meug' Rijksmuseum SK-A-368.jpeg

Sorry, I didn't realize that Schalcken's 'painter by museum' category was itself a subcat of 'Dutch Golden Age' (the subcategorization of Rijksmuseum paintings seems to be a bit inconsistent). Thanks for catching that. Revent (talk) 09:17, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. The idea is not to diffuse categories that don't need to be diffused. For example Category:Paintings by Jacob Spoel in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam has almost completely taken over Category:Jacob Spoel. If possible I try to avoid that. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:54, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, my main interest in messing with these is to add additional data that wasn't imported by Fae's bot, and 'fix' the licensing (his bot didn't use the autocalculating templates or know the death year, so there seem to be a lot of 'PD in areas with a copyright term over 70 years pma' for artists that died 150+ years ago). As far as the categories like that, most I've looked at seem to be using a 'files in this category are also in' notice pointing at the artist's own category, with some images in both, and not listing the 'painter by museum' as a subcat of the 'painter'. I don't know if that's the 'accepted' method though, or if there really is one. There doesn't, tbh, seem to be a consistently applied method. I'm not really 'opinionated' about it, other than thinking using a consistent method would be good. Revent (talk) 11:08, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

File:'Het ponteveer' Rijksmuseum SK-A-4841.jpeg

Hi. You moved this out of 'Paintings by anonymous artists in the Rijkmuseum Amsterdam', which I had created and intended to populate, and into 'Paintings by Nicolaes Berchem in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam'. Per the Rijkmuseum, this is not the painting by Berchem, but an anonymous 18th-century copy. The painting by Berchem is File:Het ponteveer Rijksmuseum SK-A-31.jpeg. This was misclassified by Fae's bot. Revent (talk) 13:53, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello. 2 reasons. Firstly, even though the painting is a copy, because the painter is unknown, it is still part of a group of paintings by Nicolaes Berchem and his school. Like this all paintings related to Berchem are in the same category instead of being scattered around. Secondly, without any context a caterory called 'Paintings by anonymous artists' is not very useful. According to Commons:Categories categories are there to find files. Why would someone be looking for something that is unknown? Vincent Steenberg (talk) 14:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough, not really arguing with the decision to do so (I didn't change it back). I just wanted to make sure it was 'intentional', and not a misunderstanding going back to the way the bot had attributed it. Revent (talk) 15:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, there is still a lot of work to do. Many files in Category:Paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam that are copies, school of ..., attributed to ..., etc. are listed as "Anonymous", making it difficult sometimes to find files through search. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

BTW, if you have any comments about how I'm filling out the data on these, feel free to let me know. I'm trying to include all the given data from RMA, RKD, and Bild (if I can find it in the latter two), and use as many of the internationalization templates as possible. If there is something I'm missing, or a 'better' way to include the info, just ping me. I'm not really an 'art person', just a gnoming-type that migrated over here from enwiki because I got tired of the drama there. Revent (talk) 16:44, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

You don't say! I know all about it.

Some other interesting references templates are Template:Origins unknown (for http://www.herkomstgezocht.nl), Template:Linz Collection (for http://www.dhm.de/datenbank/linzdb). These concern art looted by the nezis in WWII. Most of the art restituted to the Netherlands ended up in the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands Art Collection (the so-called NK Collection). Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:02, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Something you might find interesting... I had realized while looking at these that the Rijkmuseum website actually offers higher resolution images of most of these works than are available through the API (See 'Le voeu du faisan' Rijksmuseum SK-A-4212.jpeg for the 'drastic example' I uploaded... began talking about this in IRC with Multichill, and it turns out he knows the collections director at the Rijk... he sent her an email, and hopefully we'll get a bulk import of the 'better' images sometime soon. It looks like (from the 20 or so I looked at) that these average between 2-5 times higher resolution... the one we started out discussing here, 'Het ponteveer', is currently at 4.7MP here, but the downloadable one is 37.6MP, which is a massive difference. Revent (talk) 21:30, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that. The files from RM are higher in resolution, but the color on these are slightly duller. Higher resolution doesn't always mean better quality. I think the resolution of the images uploaded by Fæ is sufficient. Maybe you should discuss this with User:Fæ. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:17, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I did look at the "zoomed" version of RM images, as I could potentially have de-zoomified to grab the higher res version. There were some oddities that stopped me going ahead, possibly colour or blurriness, though this was quite a while back so I don't recall the reasons. Multichill understands the issues, so let's see what he comes up with. It might be an idea to have a test sample or set uploaded and compare the quality. I would be happy to automate going back over the uploads and refreshing them with higher versions if these become available (either on the internet or via a shared disk somewhere). --Fæ (talk) 09:52, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

@Fae: I had noticed, from looking at about 20 or so, the differences you are talking about... the 'higher resolution' ones are saved as jpeqs with a quality setting of 79 and 4:2:0 color (and no EXIF), while the smaller ones are saved at a 90+ quality setting and 4:4:4 color, and an EXIF that indicates they were processed in Photoshop. As far as 'detail', the higher res ones seem, to my eye, to show finer details of the painting, but there is a color difference... the question, really, seems to be which is more 'accurate'. The Rijk has a form for requesting 'corrected' tiffs via email, and I just got one for comparison (SK-A-2347), but it came with a disclaimer (I had mentioned a desire to compare the colors in my request) that it was an older photo, and not up to their current quality standards. Glancing at the file, the issue might be that it has only a greyscale calibration target, not a color one, but it is at approximately the larger resolution. I'm on my laptop, atm, and it's not the best for comparing images, but I'll compare the color maps on my desktop in a few, and ping back. As far as comparing, I'd uploaded the one I linked earlier, and also the one I just mentioned ('Bij de wieg' Rijksmuseum SK-A-2437.jpeg) in the web versions, but I'm not going to mess with any of the others (other than adding metadata) until we reach some sort of conclusion (and a bot doing it if needed would be great). 'Bij de wieg' does seem to have a bit of a greenish cast in the higher-resolution, though. Revent (talk) 11:07, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

To reply to myself, lol. Upon examining the color map of the tiff version (and it's visual appearance) it is much closer to the appearance of the original API version. I uploaded it at 'Bij de wieg' Rijksmuseum SK-A-2437.tif for comparison. I also converted it to a jpeg (using higher quality settings than had been used for the 'web' high-res) and put it up over the 'greenish' version at the 'original' location, 'Bij de wieg' Rijksmuseum SK-A-2437.jpeg. My 'experiments' using the greyscale calibration target included in the tiff showed that the image seems to be /slightly/ dark, but not enough to be noticeable without directly flipping back and forth, so I didn't 'correct' for that... it was an extremely minor difference. Examined closely, the tiff-derived version does appear, IMO, to be more detailed, though it's not 'obvious' at a quick glance, I think because the processing of the API version enhanced the 'whiteness' of the cracks in the paint, making them 'appear' sharper though they are not... the difference is more visible if you look at things like the details of brushstrokes.

Please, btw, don't take this as me trying to be 'pushy' about a particular version, btw... if you want to revert the images I overwrote, and have them up separately, or replace them all with better images direct from the museum, that's fine with me... goal here is just to get the best images we can. Revent (talk) 13:49, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Gemeente Museum Den Haag & Mondriaan

Hoi Vincent, Ik was benieuwd of je contacten had bij het Gemeente Museum Den Haag? Volgens de Volkskrant gaat het Gemeentemuseum dit jaar een heruitgave maken van een boek over het werk van Mondriaan, met veel meer beeldmateriaal omdat het nu in het publieke domein terecht is gekomen. Dat zou een mooie aanleiding kunnen zijn om eens contact met ze te zoeken ivm een mass-upload van zijn werken. Als je geinteresseerd bent, Wikimedia Nederland is geinteresseerd in ondersteuning regelen (projectmatig begeleiding, workshop ruimte financieren, contact organiseren, enz). Ga jij naar een van de WMBE of WMNL nieuwjaarsborrels? Groet en Happy editing in 2015! Jane023 (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Even een puntje hierop. Ik begreep uit de krant ook dat de trust in New York die de rechten van de erfgenamen beheert claimt dat de copyright nog niet verlopen is op sommige werken. Ik weet dat dit voor Nederlands recht niet waar is (en waarschijnlijk is het daarom oké om in Nederland de werken als PD te beschouwen en een publicatie te maken), echter voor de VS zou dit weleens kunnen kloppen voor de werken die na 1923 gemaakt zijn (en voor 1968 gezien de overlijdensdatum). Zie Commons:Licensing#Material_in_the_public_domain. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 16:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Zie de discussie op Category talk:Paintings by Piet Mondriaan, die geen duidelijke conclusies oplevert anders dan dat het heel vaag is wat wel en niet beschermd is in de VS. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 11:45, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Hoi Jane, bedankt voor je bericht. Ik steun je voorstel, alleen ik vrees dat Basvb gelijk heeft. De rechten van Mondriaan vallen, wat publicatie of commons betreft, onder de Uruguay Round Agreements Act. Dit is een zeer ingewikkeld verdrag, maar zover ik dat kan nagaan komt het hierop neer: alle werken van Mondriaan die voor 1923 gepubliceerd zijn in de VS zijn op dit moment rechtenvrij. Commons interpreter dit vrij ruim en beschouwt ook ongepubliceert werk van voor 1923 als rechtenvrij, maar hoe het ook zij, ongeveer de helft van de werken van Mondriaan zijn voorlopig niet rechtenvrij (de verjaringsperiode is 95 jaar na publicatie/creatie). En aangezien de Holzman/Mondrian trust in het verleden bewezen heeft er geen gras over te laten groeien, vrees ik dat we het voorlopig met de helft van zijn werken moeten doen. Hetzelfde is ook gebeurd met Theo van Doesburg. Zie Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Paintings by Theo van Doesburg.

Ik heb helaas geen tijd om naar een wiki borrel te gaan. Misschien ga ik dit jaar naar een wiki bijeenkomst op zondag. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:05, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Inmiddels heb ik begrepen dat alles in de collectie van de Gem. Museum in den Haag wel OK zijn, maar dat de kwestie heeft ook te maken met waar Mondriaan woonde toen hij de werken maakte. Zucht. Dus er zijn werken in de V.S. die niet vrijgegeven zijn en dat ik mijn tijd op deze aarde niet vrij zullen komen. Toch leuk om te weten. groet, en wie weet, tot een Wikizondag! Jane023 (talk) 21:03, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Anonymous

Beste Vincent,

Bedankt voor de identificatie via de bron (had ik kunnen zien, maar nu ook opgelost!) van plaatjes in Category:Paintings by Anonymous in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam). Mochten zich echte anoniemen - wachtend op identificatie? - voordoen,

• hoe en waar zou jij daar een categorie voor zetten?

Jij hebt hier meer ervaring in. Groeten en bedankt, Hansmuller (talk) 17:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

PS. Vaak zit een beeld (bijv. File:Diponegoro by Pieneman.jpg) zowel in de categorie van de kunstenaar als in de categorie Paintings by ... in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam). Dubbelop lijkt me, of wenselijk voor het overzicht (maar dan moet ook alles in die categorie)?

Beste Hans, Een categorie voor anonieme werken leek mij niet zo handig omdat het dan erg lastig wordt te vinden wat je zoekt. Een Rembrandt kun je plaatsen in Category:Paintings by Rembrandt in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, maar als je alle anonieme werken op eén hoop gooit, dan is het erg lastig daar wijs uit te worden. Voorlopig kun je de anonieme werken kwijt op één van de subcategorieën van Category:Paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, bijvoorbeeld Category:Dutch 18th-century paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam. Natuurlijk wordt die steeds voller, maar dan kun je deze weer differentiëren in subcategorieën, bijvoorbeeld Category:Paintings by Cornelis Troost in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:44, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Beste Vincent,

1. ik dacht meer aan een aanvullende categorie waar liefhebbers uit de hele wereld kunnen kijken naar ongeidentificeerde schilderijen, wie weet komt iemand met de juiste schilder. Dus Category:Paintings by Anonymous in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam gaaat niet ten koste van Category:Dutch 18th-century paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, t'is extra.
2. wat is je idee over mijn tweede vraag (boven, PS.)? Groeten en bedankt, Hansmuller (talk) 08:38, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Hans,

@1: Volgens mij is commons niet de aangewezen plek daarvoor. Origineel onderzoek is niet toegestaan. Daar kan ik verder weinig aan doen helaas.

@2: Over die categorieën. Het rijksmuseum heeft iets van 7000 schilderijen in zijn beheer. Die zijn allemaal op commons te vinden. En dan ga je differentiëren, en differentiëren, en differentiëren. En op een gegeven moment merk je dat je categorieën aanmaakt die je niet had zien aankomen, bijvoorbeeld Category:Paintings by Pieter Dubordieu in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam. Bovendien bevat die cat bijna evenveel files als Category:Pieter Dubordieu zelf. Ik vind het een beetje een raar gezicht dat Category:Paintings by Pieter Dubordieu in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam bijna alle files in Category:Pieter Dubordieu opslokt. Daarnaast komt het een goed overzicht naar mijn mening niet ten goede. Vandaar deze oplossing. Natuurlijk zijn er voorbeelden waarbij deze oplossing niet nodig is, maar dan is er meestal een metacategorie, zoals Category:Paintings by Rembrandt by museum. Naarmate het aantal files hier op commons groeit, zullen er steeds meer van die metacategorieën bijkomen en zal de oplossing die ik had bedacht steeds minder vaak nodig zijn.

Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

template Template:De Anderen

Hi Vincent, zou jij dat kunnen repareren. VG --Oursana (talk) 14:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done ok, bedankt voor de tip. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:03, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

;-)--Oursana (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Jan Sadeler (I)

You removed Category:Painters from the Southern Netherlands (before 1830), yet according to the definition on the category page, he seems to belong to it, since it includes artists born in Brussels before 1786. --Robert.Allen (talk) 07:40, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but there are now voices on commons to use the name "Flemish". Since this name is more accepted in the English speaking world than the name "Southern Netherlands", I'm slowly letting this category 'die out' in favour of Category:Painters from Flanders. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Fine with me. Thanks for clarification. --Robert.Allen (talk) 02:10, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Voor je onvermoeibare, precieze en veelomvattende werk voor de beeldende kunst. Voor al die vele honderden artwork templates die je zo zorgvuldig toevoegt en invult. Dank je wel! Spinster (talk) 13:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Frans Hogenberg

@ Vincent,

that gallery was not a good idea.

• Frans Hogenberg's main work was Civitates orbis terrarum.
• That world atlas of cities comprised six volumes, all edited by Georg Braun.
• Frans Hogenberg was the main autor of that atlas, but not the only.

Best regards, Ulamm (talk) 18:43, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

hello Ulamm,

I'm not familiar with this artist. I have noticed that a lot of engravings are attributed to him (or designed by him?), but I've also noticed that a lot of those engravings are not signed. So you're saying that many of these cannot be attributed to him? Then, how do I establish who was responsible for which engravings? Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:25, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

According to this portal I think that for most tables of Civitates orbis terrarum the author can be identified.

But Civitates orbis terrarum is such a magnificant work that all tables of it available in WM Commons aught to be presented together. (Clicking "Suddivisione dell'opera" you can get to the other five volumes.)

Frans Hogenberg's other prints shan't be forgotten, but they are not that big step in the history of media.--Ulamm (talk) 20:27, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Wim Pijbes

Hallo Vincent. Ik merk dat jij zowat de expert bent van de collecties van het Rijksmuseum. Ik heb me al suf gezocht welke twee schilderijen op de achtergrond staan bij het portret van Wim Pijbes, en nu je de categorie verwijderd heb, begin ik te vermoeden dat de foto daar helemaal niet werd genomen. Heb je enig idee waar? Groet, Henxter (talk) 07:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hoi Henxter, ja, de datum op de foto klopt volgens mij niet helemaal. Ik denk dat de foto eerder is genomen, vermoedelijk tijdens de tentoonstelling Rembrandt, the Late Works. Deze afbeeldingen, File:Amsterdam - Rijksmuseum - Late Rembrandt Exposition 2015 - Portrait of a Gentleman with a Tall Hat and Gloves c. 1656-1658.jpg en File:Amsterdam - Rijksmuseum - Late Rembrandt Exposition 2015 - Portrait of a Lady with an Ostrich-Feather Fan, c.1658-1660.jpg, hebben dezelfde achtergrond, dus dat moet haast wel. Dus de foto is wel in het Rijks genomen. Alleen heb ik hem uit die cat verwijderd omdat Category:Wim Pijbes al in Category:Rijksmuseum Amsterdam staat. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Schitterend. Dank je wel. Henxter (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Pieter Franciscus Peters

Hallo Vincent, du hast in der Kategorie und in dem Creator eine Namensform gewählt, die nach allen mir bekannten Quellen höchstens als eine Nebenform, aber nicht als Hauptform des Namens angegeben wird. Meiner Meinung nach soll die Kategorie und der Creator in die übliche Namensform Pieter Francis Peters umbenannt werden. Grüße --Mewa767 (talk) 05:07, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Mewa, Das RKD (Niederländisches Ambt für kunsthistorische Dokumentation) spricht von Pieter Franciscus Peters (II) oder Pieter Franciscus Peters (jr), aber nennt geichzeitig die Quelle Pieter Francis Peters, Maler : Biographische Notizen (siehe https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/artists/62906). Die Ursache dieses Unterschieds ist mir unklar. Ich kann also nicht genau sagen welcher Form die Hauptform sein sollte. Es macht aber schon neugierig. Welche Quellen hast du bis jetzt gefunden? Grüße, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Zoomable images

Hi,

I see you upload a lot of archive material. I would like to direct your attention to Help:Zoomable images, a page that directs you to tools that let you download the full resolution from sites that have their images in image viewers. --Vera ^(talk) 19:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

ok, dank je. Ik zal de volgende keer kijken hoe dit werkt. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:07, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

JarektBot (talk) 15:14, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

tl:RMAaria

Hi Vincent, kan {{RMAaria}} gecanceld worden omdat het nu geen extra website meer is? VG --Oursana (talk) 03:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Klopt dit sjabloon kan vervangen worden door {{RMAonline}}. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:17, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Watercolors

Hi! A watercolor is a painting, not a drawing [1][2], see: en:Watercolor painting. --Micione (talk) 22:51, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Watercolours are usually classified as drawings. See for example http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/search.aspx?searchText=watercolour. I think the criterium for drawings is that they have to be made directly without being re-worked in a later stage. However, this is a bit confusing, because frescos for example are also made directly. And you wotldn't call a fresco a drawing.

But we are talking about categories here. If it is less confusing or easier these two files can be put in Category:British paintings in the Art Gallery of New South Wales. That's ok with me. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:46, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Pieter Balten 001.jpg

Hi, Vincent Steenberg, volgens Rijksmuseum Amsterdam/Collection/Paintings/Hoogendijk collection bevindt dit werk zich niet langer in het Rijksmuseum Amsterdam. Aangezien het Theater Instituut Nederland, (ik citeer: ...in 2013 opgeheven en opgevolgd door Theater in Nederland... (zie ook discussie Brimz) stelt zich natuurlijk de vraag waar de collectie van het Theater Instituut nu is beland. Enig idee hoe dit kan worden achterhaald? Het spreekt voor zich dat alle lemmata, waaronder ook Marskramer, die verwijzen naar het werk, dementschprechend dienen te worden aangepast. Alvast bedankt. Lotje (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Lotje, Ik heb het even gegoogeld. De collectie van het Theater Instituut Nederland heet nu Bijzondere Collecties Uitvoerende Kunsten en schijnt onderdeel te zijn van de Bijzondere Collecties van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zie http://vintagetin.adlibhosting.com/default.aspx. Het door jou genoemde schilderij is dus niet teruggegaan naar het Rijks, maar bevindt zich nu dus in de UvA. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 14:03, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Dankuwel, ik heb het bestand gelijk aangepast. Lotje (talk) 16:30, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Temporary Exhibition templates

I'm been looking at the lately, and I noticed that you were the last to touch many of these, so I thought I'd drop you a note. It's my intention, unless someone screams bloody murder, to start working over time on converting the 'many' of these that are basically just 'slightly variant' copies of {{Temporary Exhibition}} to actually use the template itself. I'm not quite sure why it evolved as it did (all the local copies), but it's totally unmaintainable as is... I've seen at least four or five different 'sets' of translations, and we can't really move toward using wikibase for this type of information as it currently stands. I'm not talking about changing how they 'work', or what text is rendered, just getting rid of several hundred-odd copies of essentially identical code. Revent (talk) 05:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Revent, That's ok with me, as long as there's no loss of information and as long as there won't be a category for each and every exhibition that ever took place. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 04:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

(nods) Yeah, not intending to use that 'feature' of the template anywhere it isn't already. Eventually, however, WikiData will have items for these exhibitions, and the catalog information... there is a "Sum of All Paintings" project you probably know about. Cleaning these up will make using that data, or at least connecting to it, easier down the line. Revent (talk) 05:40, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

See, for example, {{Fayum Portraits: Painted Portraits from Roman Egypt}}... not that it's an old one, I just created it, but that's what I'm intending to do to them. Revent (talk) 05:53, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Stadhouderskade 81

Beste Vincent, je het me wel aan het werk gezet. Ik ben momenteel bezig met het beschrijven van monumenten aan de Stadhouderskade. Bij het oproepen van die categorie kreeg ik steevast een smal gebouwtje van Isaac Gosschalk. Dat zou toch wel een monument zijn, dacht ik. Ik kon het niet plaatsen en fietste diverse keren de Stadhouderskade op en af. Niet te vinden. Dan maar zoeken en zoeken. Gosschalk is de ontwerper van de Heineken, stond het wellicht op hun terrain? Nee. Bij toeval kreeg ik een foto te zien op de Beeldbank Amsterdam. En ja. In 1931 is het gebouw zodanig door brand beschadigd door brand dat het afgebroken is. In 1933 kwam er nieuwbouw op die plek, maar ook die is alweer weg. Er staat nu een saai kantoorgebouw. In dat Stadhouderskade 81-artikel een link naar de brandfoto.Ceescamel (talk) 15:03, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hoi Cees, Goed speurwerk! Zo zie je maar, nieuwsgierigheid loont. Ik bedoel, je had het ook als een vergissing kunnen aanmerken en dan was er waarschijnlijk nooit iemand achter gekomen welk huis dit precies was. Bedankt! Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Untangling links to Hermitage paintings

Hoi Vincent, ik ben bezig met de collectie van schilderijen van de Hermitage die Multichill net op Wikidata heeft gezet. Ik dacht helemaal in kerstsfeer te komen met het zoeken naar afbeeldingen en kwam File:Magi-rembrandt.jpg tegen die een bijna kopie is van File:Rembrandt The Adoration of the Magi.jpg. Op de RKD staan beide te boek als Hermitage, maar volgens Bredius (1935) is de eerste 70 cm hoog uit Göteborgs konstmuseum en volgens de website op Hermitage is die van hun de 45 cm hoog. Ik zag dat jij een hoger resolutie van de eerste had ge-upload, maar de Göteborgs konstmuseum website heeft geen afbeelding. Weet jij waar je deze nog vandaan had? Ik twijfel omdat Hermitage zegt geen tweede te hebben en ik kan geen ander info vinden in de latere documentatie. Groet en fijne dagen alvast, --Jane023 (talk) 15:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Hoi Jane, Ik wist niet dat Multi schilderijen van de Hermitage heeft geüpload. Klinkt als een interessant project. Ik weet helaas niet meer waar ik die afbeelding vandaan heb, maar bij de meta data staat "COPYRIGHT @ 1998 by The Hermitage Museum, All rights reserved. : JRX-1990;0; Anonymous artist of Rembrandt's school. Adoration of the Magi". Dus misschien toch Hermitage? Staat de publicatie van Bredius online? De grisaille staat in Corpus deel 2. Ik zal kijken of we daar verder mee komen.

Ik heb trouwens wel een plaatje gevonden van de Göteborg Adoration. Zie https://www.pubhist.com/w541. Vergelijking met File:Magi-rembrandt.jpg wijst uit dat het hier om een ander schildeij gaat. Je ziet het met name aan de tulband die op de grond ligt. Kennelijk zijn er dus 3 versies. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:27, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Ha leuk, zo kom ik verder, bedankt! Mijn Bredius catalogus is de oude uit 1935 van mijn bieb. Zij hebben (helaas) geen online versie beschikbaar gemaakt. Ik ga deze pubhist versie die je gevonden heb ook al uploaden. In HdG werd al gezegd bij cat. nr. 84 dat er meerdere kopieen in omloop waren van de RCIN versie (die kopieen heb ik nog niet opgezocht). Deze grisaille versie komt helemaal niet in HdG voor. De Wikidata lijst van Hermitage schilderijen heb ik in mijn enwiki gebruikersruimte gezet hier. Er is nog een aardig lange lijst van "unmatched painters", maar hier wordt aan gewerkt. Dat is hier.--Jane023 (talk) 17:42, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

IJme Gerardus Bijvoets

Hoi, ik kwam hier weer evens langs voor een plaatje. Ik ben nog bezig met de Stadhouderskade (nr 62 nu) en zie nogal wat gebouwen voorbijkomen van architect (kennelijk b-garnituur) IJme Gerarddus Bijvoets. Zou het niet handig zijn op commons een aparte categorie te hebben. In zijn Nederlandse artikel staan sowieso al vier foto's.Ceescamel (talk) 12:10, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hallo, tuurlijk. Hij heeft een eigen wikipedia artikel nl:IJme Gerardus Bijvoets dus waarom niet? Mvg, Vincent

Sorry, mijn vraag was eigenlijk of jij hem wilde aanmaken. Ik ben hier "slechts" bezoeker.Ceescamel (talk) 13:28, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

 Done gepiept. Zie Category:IJme Gerardus Bijvoets. Meer kon ik zo 1, 2, 3 niet vinden. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Beeldbank Amsterdam

Vincent, jij hebt in het verleden nog wel foto's/beelden van de beeldbank Amsterdam geladen. Zou jij deze of deze kunnen laden. Ik zou ook graag [[http://beeldbank.amsterdam.nl/beeldbank/indeling/grid?q_searchfield=5221BT906721+ deze] willen hebben, die kan ik voor 3 artikelen gebruiken. Alvast bedankt,Ceescamel (talk) 14:06, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Hoi Cees, De afbeeldingen die je noemt zijn gemaakt door Herman Misset (zie RKD). Mooie tekeningen, maar Misset overleed in 1958 en zijn werk is dus nog niet in het publieke domein. Ik kan ze dus niet zomaar uploaden. Als het nou bijvoorbeeld een anonieme ansichtkaart was geweest, uit die tijd, was dit anders geweest. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:25, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Dank je voor je bericht, zo is het leven.... Ik heb bij Bijvoets nog wat kunnen zetten. Iemand is lekker aan het fotograferen voor me.Ceescamel (talk) 11:36, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

De schilder van deze is al wat langer dood. Zou dat mogen; hij is wel wat ver weg, maar toch.Ceescamel (talk) 11:42, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Eindelijk gelukt. Gebruiker 1Veertje heeft een machine gemaakt waarmee je afbeeldingen van het stadsarchief eenvoudig kunt downloaden. Zie http://veradekok.nl/Dememorixer/. Misschien biedt dit uitkomst in de toekomst. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:03, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Dank je wel. Je schrijft eenvoudig, maar ik begin al bij het eerste scherm te stuitere en heb geen idee van de auteursrechtenproblematiek. ik zal Vera vragen of ze bereid is sommige plaatjes over te zetten.Ceescamel (talk) 16:35, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Dat is op zich niet zo lastig. Je zoekt eerst de geboortedatum van de auteur op. Is dat op 1 januari van het jaar waarin we leven meer dan 70 jaar geleden, dan is het werk in de meeste gevallen rechtenvrij. Gaat het om een tekening of schilderij, dan vink je aan "Reproductie van een schilderij dat zich in het publieke domein bevindt". Gaat het om een foto of een document, dan vink je aan "Deze licentie staat in de volgende wikitekst (moet een geldig auteursrechtenlabel bevatten)" en vul je in {{PD-old}}. Als het om een anoniem werk gaat en dit werk is zo oud dat je er van uit mag gaan dat de auteur meer dan 70 jaar geleden overleden is, geldt hetzelfde. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:59, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Beste Vincent, dat kan voor jou niet lastig zijn; ik heb geen flauw benul wat je hierboven (be)schrijft. Maar goed, ik kan wel uit de voeten met wat er soms te vinden is. Ik heb bv het door jou geladen portret van Monarosa Monnickendam weten te koppelen aan een artikel van haar moeder. Paps was Martin Monnickendam, die ik dan weer tegenkwam bij Stadhouderskade 92. Ceescamel (talk) 15:25, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

ok, sorry. Welk scherm bedoel je dan? deze of deze? Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

De Dememorixer levert voor mij al problemen op. Ik ben daar ontzettend onhandig in en dat is voor een groot deel weer toe te wijzen aan mijn gebrek aan interesse is alles wat met foto's etc. te maken heeft. Dat laat ik graag aan anderen over.Ceescamel (talk) 15:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Maar tekeningen en schilderijen wel? Prima. Als je weer eens hulp nodig hebt, hoor ik het wel. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

SK-A-1437

I agree that the colours do seem changed. I'm worried that the RM may have done something odd with the move from the previous image versions available through the API compared to the versions downloadable at higher resolution from their website. Can you shine any light on why there is this apparent difference?

It may be possible, at some point, to mass upgrade the image resolutions for Rijksmuseum uploads. However if the colour profiles are haphazard, this would not be sensible until we can correct the images to whatever is the most accurate colour versions. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 16:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fæ, I don't really know what's going on. On the Mauritshuis website something similar is going on. If you rightclick an image there you can download a low resolution image without all the color information. But, if you peek deeper, you are able to download a high res image with full color info. This beats me. Apparently both the Rijksmuseum and the Mauritshuis want the public to use the inferior version while keeping the better one to themselves? I don't know. What I do know is that you can download a good quality image with sufficient resolution to see all details and with the most color infor through https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/assetimage2.jsp?id=SK-A-13 by entering the accession number of the work of art you are looking for in the url. The image you get by downloading them from their website are useless, if you ask me. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Vincent, we have discussed this before. It's just a commercial decision, I think. If it is for free, it is of less quality. Compare [3] with [4]. Both are the same picture from Rijksmuseum, the first one with colour management, the second without. There is an undeniable difference. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Exactly. And this one is even higher in resolution. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:20, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

I have had a follow up, with further contacts from the Rijksmuseum. I hope to get somewhere on it in a few weeks and perhaps in a month or two may be able to replace the 'asset2' versions via the API with higher resolution originals with good colour profiles, albeit using a specially agreed workflow. --Fæ (talk) 10:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

ok, great! Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:25, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

I recall seeing a discussion about adding colour profiles to the Rijksmuseum images that can be downloaded from the website rather than the API. I have had an initial email from WMNL for a local contact but yet to hear more. I suggest alternatives like this fix are put on hold until we know what the Rijks can do. It would be a shame to invest time in fixes and then later overwrite them with similar quality 'official' versions. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 08:44, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

ok, no problem. But I might straighten out previous errors here and there made by myself. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:57, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Hendrick Avercamp 008.jpg

Hallo Vincent, this painting was former attributed to Jan Brueghel (I), and then to Hendrick Averkamp. Now is it Jan Brueghel (II). See also the Web site of Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Kassel. A larger image is here (6000px) and in colour. greatings --Trzęsacz (talk) 12:00, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

ok, that might explain why I couldn't find further information on this painting. Thanks very much. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Caspar Netscher

I don't like getting into revert wars with another experienced editor, so let's try to work it out here.

First, use of Creator versus Infobox. Almost all artist's galleries on Commons use the Creator template. It fits the page layout better and is easily reusable on the relevant categories. It also has more information and, since it already exists, I see no reason why you have insisted on the Infobox here. (see Creator:Caspar Netscher)

Second, default image sizes. Commons galleries are used on many different computers, ranging from small screen smartphone to very large screens, and even multiple screen setups. They are also used by people with poor vision who require much larger images than normal. The sizes of screen will inevitably change over time, certainly getting more pixels.

By selecting a particular image size that you think looks good on your screen, you ignore the fact that it will waste space on large screens and require scrolling on small screens, as well as making it more difficult to view for those with poor eyesight. If you allow the images sizes to default, they will appear at the size that the viewer has chosen as his or her default. It seems to me that the viewer should control the size of the thumbnails he or she sees, not you. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:23, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jim, I don't really understand your first point. At the moment Infobox artist is used in 772 pages and seems to work reasonably ok. If you don't like its appearance or layout, then let me know. Maybe we can improve it. Personally I prefer it on gallery pages. After all, {{Creator}} was originally indended for use only in {{Information}}, {{Artwork}}, etc. Only later it was added to category pages for maintenance purposes (to see which creator had its own creator template and which doesn't, if I understand correctly). However, I see no point or need to use it on gallery pages, like the one you pointed out. You say that template creator "fits the page layout better". I think template Infobox artist does that job much better with TOC on the left and the box itself on the right, just like on wikipedia. And yes, template creator contains useful information, useful for example for filling out {{Artwork}}, but do you really need to repeat all this information on a gallery page. I think not. I mean, what works better Piet Mondrian or Piet Mondrian?

Sorry I got carried away a bit, but might have become a little attached to this template to be honest.

About the image sizes, I wasn't aware of any of the points you made. It was never my intention to cause problems to people who use different divices/screen sizes that I do. I will have a good look at that. Thanks for pointing that out.

But staying with Mondrian, what is your take on autogenerated gallery pages based on wikidata like Category talk:Paintings by Piet Mondrian. Are they the future?

Regards Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:16, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

On the first point, I agree that it's a toss up if there is a TOC. Piet Mondrian works at least as well your mockup with Creator. Most of the galleries I see do not have TOCs so, my opinion is biased. That's probably because I do New Page Patrol, so I see every gallery created by new editors -- those who do not have the Autopatrolled user right. I think the layout question is different on Commons than on WP, because on WP the content is text and that easily sets to the left of the Infobox. In a Commons gallery, the content is rows of images, so I think it is better to use the horizontal Creator rather than start the page with a vertical box and then switch to horizontals. However, it's a subjective choice, and there's no policy on it, so do what you will.

On the second point, yes, please think about it. Why not let the viewer choose a convenient size?

As for autogenerated galleries -- why would we want them? We have categories, which are an alpha-sort list of all the images on a subject. Then we have galleries, which are both carefully selected and put in a rational order by humans. While both "carefully" and "rational" are not always the case, that's the intention. Why do we need a new collection? I see that these are in date order. We could accomplish the same thing by adding a tab to the category pages that allowed sorting by creation date, perhaps by upload date, as well as in alpha order. It would take some coding, but far less human time than creating a third collection method.

I also see that the collection includes works for which we do not have images. It seems to me that that may be against policy -- Commons is fairly aggressively a place for media files, not articles, so creating a page that shows works of art that we do not have seems much like writing more than a sentence or two

Category:Still-life_paintings_of_game

Category:Still-life_paintings_of_game has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Themightyquill (talk) 09:19, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

File:BoschTheCrucifixionOfStJulia.jpg

File:BoschTheCrucifixionOfStJulia.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Oompahloompah2016 (talk) 14:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Andreas_Herrlein

Andreas Herrlein has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Achim (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Amsterdam photos?

Do you take photos of places in Amsterdam? WhisperToMe (talk) 02:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

At the moment, no. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:00, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok, Happy editing :) WhisperToMe (talk) 01:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Damenporträt von "Fabritius"

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, du hast das Damenporträt dem Barent Fabritius zugeordnet. Ich war diese Woche wieder im Niedersächsischen Landesmuseum. Dort ist immer noch die Beschreibung, die dieses Bild ohne wenn und aber dem Carel Fabritius zuordnet. Ich könnte dir die Beschreibung notfalls zumailen. Woher hattest du deine Information? Wollen wir nicht der Museumsleitung glauben? --Hajotthu (talk) 08:28, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Hallo Hajotthu, Das stimmt. Ich habe mir damals basiert auf https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/images/102612. Aber deine Anmerkung hat mir zum Zweifeln gebracht. Ausserdem gibt das RKD keine richtige Quelle für ihre Zuschreibung, nur eine Ausstellungskatalog.

Ich jedoch die folgende Quellen gefunden:

http://www.worldcat.org/title/carel-fabritius-1622-1654-das-werk-anlasslich-der-ausstellung-carel-fabritius-1622-1654-das-werk-mauritshuis-den-haag-24-september-2004-9-januar-2005-staatliches-museum-schwerin-29-januar-2005-16-mai-2005/oclc/253760074&referer=brief_results

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/42711721.pdf?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/187501706x00393

Ich hab diese (noch) nicht geprüft, aber die letzte Quelle (Women with Pearl Earrings: On Paintings Apparently by Carel Fabritius, in Hannover, Vaduz, and Amsterdam) schlägt vor das dieses Bild in die Literatur Carel Fabritius zugeschrieben wird. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 10:58, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Vincent Steenberg, danke für deine prompte Antwort. An der Zuschreibung für Carel besteht für mich kein Zweifel. Kannst du dein Verschieben bitte wieder rückgängig machen.--Hajotthu (talk) 11:21, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done Entschuldigung für die Verspätung. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Rijksmuseum Amsterdam/Collection/Paintings/NK collection

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, waarom werden bepaalde nummers doorstreept? Op het Instituut Collectie Nederland verving ik een rode wikilink door een interwikilink. Brimz zal het wel weer terugdraaien (business as usual...), maar ondertussen zal het er toch gestaan hebben, en kunnen bezoekers via de bestandsgeschiedenis terugvallen op commons. Lotje (talk) 14:50, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Hoi Lotje,

De titel is misschien een beetje misleidend. Het gaat hier alleen om dat deel van de NK-collectie dat aan het Rijksmuseum in beheer is gegeven. De hele NK-collectie is op dit moment alleen maar te vinden op deze site: http://herkomstgezocht.nl

Ik heb wel een aantal NK-kunstwerken op de pagina Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands Art Collection gezet, maar deze is nog zeer incompleet. Het is de bedoeling dat straks de hele NK-collectie hier te vinden is.

Met de doorhalingen heb ik willen aangeven dat het betreffende werk niet meer in het Rijksmuseum te vinden is. Omdat het in bruikleen gegeven is aan een andere instelling of omdat het teruggegeven is aan de rechtmatige eigenaar, zoals recent gebeurd is met de collectie Goudstikker. Gewoon, voor de volledigheid.

Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:03, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Hoi Vincent, ik haak hier ook even op aan. Zoals je wellicht weet ben ik in al een tijdje bezig met Sum of all paintings. Voor het Rijksmuseum zijn de automatisch gegenereerde lijsten te vinden op d:Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Museum/Rijksmuseum. Hier staan ook twee lijstjes met de missende SK-A schilderijen en SK-C schilderijen. Is niet 100% waterdicht, maar bijvoorbeeld die verbrande schilderijen uit Arnhem die je net online hebt gezet passen er precies in.

Om de missende werken en discrepanties te vinden (zoals werken die ik twee keer op Wikidata heb gezet) ben ik het Rijksmuseum ook met RKD aan het matchen, dit werklijstje staat op d:Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/RKD to match/Rijksmuseum. Matchen gaat vrij goed, op dit moment hebben meer dan 3200 schilderijen in het Rijksmuseum een link naar RKDimages (volledig overzicht op d:User:Multichill/Painting collections RKDimages).

Zoals je kan zien ben ik naast het Rijksmuseum ook andere collecties aan het matchen met RKDimages. Die lijstjes zijn te vinden in d:Category:WikiProject sum of all paintings RKD to match. Als er voldoende links zijn dan ga ik de RCE kunstcollectie (van collectienederland.nl) en de SNK collectie (van herkomstgezocht.nl) uploaden naar Wikidata. Dat zou een stuk meer overzicht moeten geven.

Is het je opgevallen dat sommige schilderijen op de site van het Rijksmuseum geen afbeelding hebben? Die zijn zo te zien aan de RCE uitgeleend en hebben daar wel een afbeelding. Met deze query kan je dat mooi zien. Ben nog druk bezig om de boel aan elkaar te knopen. Volgende de RCE site zijn het er meer dan 300. Dus mocht je de behoefte hebben om missende Rijksmuseum afbeeldingen toe te voegen.......

Is het wellicht mogelijk dat je {{Artwork}} gebruikt voor schlderijen? Na upload via de uploadwizard kan je "{{Information" vervangen door "{{subst:Artwork/subst|subst=subst:" (voorbeeld. Dat maakt het gemakkelijker om de informatie toe te voegen.

Welke collecties ik heb opgenomen houd ik bij op mijn gebruikerspagina op Wikidata. Ik heb nog een aantal Nederlandse collecties staan die ik nog een keertje moet doen. De eerste keer heb ik het gedaan met data uit Europeana, maar dat blijkt helaas incompleet te zijn. Als je nog een idee hebt qua missende collectie dan hoor ik het graag, voorwaarde is wel dat ze een behoorlijke collectie website hebben anders kan ik er vrij weinig mee. Multichill (talk) 12:58, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Hallo Multi, super. Handige links. Ik kwam ook een heel aantal ontbrekende nummers tegen, maar had niet het inzicht om die te noteren. Dus ik ben blij dat jij dat hebt gedaan. Ik heb ook even nummer 72 achterhaald: https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/images/15543 Ook verloren gegaan in WOII. Bedankt voor al je werk. Ik zal proberen meteen een tl Artwork toe te voegen aan nieuwe oploads i.p.v. een tl Information. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:26, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Ben nog druk bezig met informatie toevoegen, ontdubbelen en koppelen aan de RKD, maar ik dacht dat jij d:ikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Museum/Stichting Nederlands Kunstbezit wel leuk zou vinden. Dat zijn alle NK schilderijen gesorteerd op nummer.

Het Rijksmuseum is trouwens zelf ook bezig om herkomst aan te vullen. Op sommige schilderijen zie je dat nu de herkomst informatie is aangevuld ook met oude inventarisnummers zie [5] & [6]. De tweede link heb ik al verwerkt op Wikidata, de eerste moet ik nog doen. Multichill (talk) 15:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Beste Wensen

	Zalig Kerstfeest	Vincent Steenberg, een Zalige Kerst en een bruisend 2017!	Lotje (talk) 16:02, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Bedankt. jij ook! Groetjes, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:29, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Alweer een jaar verder

Beste Vincent, zou jij voor mij twee foto's kunnen overhevelen van Fotoleren.nl naar de Wiki Commons. Je kan de foto's vinden op Fotoleren en dan invullen Denijs. Ik zoek de foto's van Wouter Denijs en Thomas Denijs. Zoals ik de nu krijg is het de tweede van links en de eerste van rechts. Foto's zijn al zeer oud. Alvast bedankt, Ceescamel (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

SK-A-4625 and SK-A-791

Hello Vincent Steenberg. I'm very confused about those two paintings, this one and this one. The identification on access number doesn't match with today Rijskmuseum's pages. I contacted the Rijksmuseum in november 2015 about [7] where there was a photograph of the other one. After investigation, the image was changed on the website and I uploaded the new one. But after that the match was changed in WikiCommons. I have never seen those paintings IRL so it's impossible to me to be sure which is SK-A-4625 and SK-A-791, even more if there was confusion about them. Could you confirm that the matching access number/image on WikiCommons are good ? Thank you. Best regards. --Shonagon (talk) 06:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Yes, they are good as they are now. Ignore the Rijksmuseum website. It was the Rijksmuseum that uploaded the wrong image. It concerns two individual paintings. SK-A-791 is part of a double portrait together with SK-A-792 showing Bernardus de Bosch and his wife Bernardus de Bosch. SK-A-4625 is, as Jane023 pointed out, part of the Panpoeticon Batavum, a large series of portraits of Dutch artists mainly from the 17th and 18th century. These portraits are easily recognisable because of their horse shoe shaped golden frames. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 10:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

The problem was never really resolved on the Rijksmuseum side, because the conservator of the panpoeticon cabinet said it was too much trouble to open the cabinet to pull out the miniature and count the buttons. Looking at the history of both files, only the one showing seven front buttons instead of 4 front buttons is inside the horseshoe-shaped frame. This doesn't mean that the poet didn't commission the other one with a similar frame for the pendant portraits though (in which case it is possible that the paintings were switched during restoration in 2014, which is another possibility). I agree we should leave these both as is for now. Jane023 (talk) 12:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your response. I understand now. It's ok for WikiCommons and Wikidata, but not yet for the museum's pages. Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 06:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

File:File:Nicolaes Pietersz. Berchem - The City Wall of Haarlem in the Winter.jpg‎

Hi Vincent, normaal doen wij geleende schilderijen niet in het uitleende museum, hier Rijsksmuseum, zo Berckheyde om verwarring te voorkomen??--Oursana (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Hallo, Daar weet ik niets van. Maar waarom zou dit verwarring veroorzaken? Men kan de herkomst (provenance) lezen. Bovendien denk ik dat je van bruiklenen kunt zeggen dat ze altijd ooit eens terug kunnen gaan naar het uitlenende museum. En dan is het goed als deze al in de categorie hiervan staat. Herinner je je deze nog: Category:The Holy Kinship by Geertgen. Ik meen dat dat ook tot de nodige verwarring heeft geleid. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Ja bedankt, heb ik weer gezien, en met Berckheyde is ook hetzelfde. Maar het bevalt me echt niet, beter was een eigen Caz voor on loan of allen maar in cat. Collectie....Groeten--Oursana (talk) 04:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Re: Eau de cologne-fontein

Hi,

de beschrijving van deze tekening vind je hier: http://zoeken.hetnieuweinstituut.nl/nl/projecten/detail/?q=eau%20de%20cologne&page=1

Als je vervolgens via http://zoeken.hetnieuweinstituut.nl/nl/zoeken zoekt "reukwaterfontein", en dan bij Archieven --> Bureau Cuypers/Archief doorbladert, kom je hier: http://zoeken.hetnieuweinstituut.nl/nl/archieven/file/110379801

Daar staat bij CUBAt103 de afbeelding.

Deze kun je helaas niet in hi-res downloaden, dus ik heb screenshots gemaakt en deze met photoshop aan elkaar geplakt om tot de afbeelding zoals die nu op Commons staat te komen

Met vr groeten, --OlafJanssen (talk) 23:37, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

ok, nou snap ik het. Hij stond onder archieven en niet onder objecten. Bedankt voor de uitleg. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:34, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

De Stijl

Hej Vincent! De afbeelding die hiernaast staat werd op 7 november 2008 door jou geüpload en op jouw verzoek op 26 april 2016 gekanteld. Nu staan weliswaar 'De Stijl' en de jaartallen rechtop, maar de rest van de afbeelding vind ik in de oorspronkelijke oriëntatie toch beter uitkomen. Stond de tekst van dhr. Giedion werkelijk zo op de voorkant? Richard 08:57, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Richard, Ik heb hem destijds inderdaad liggend laten maken. Het gaat hier namelijk om de omslag van een aflevering van het tijdschrift De Stijl en deze verscheen sinds 1921 in liggend formaat. Zie ter vergelijking deze omslag van een eerdere aflevering. Deze heeft als het goed is dezelfde afmetingen. Dus hij hoort m.i. liggend. Zo wordt hij ook in veel literatuur (niet alle) afgebeeld. Ik weet even geen voorbeeld, maar ik kan het evt. voor je opzoeken. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:44, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Nee hoor, dat hoeft niet. Als hij zo hoort, dan hoort hij zo. Bedankt voor je reactie, fijne dag verder! Richard 11:04, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Category:Samuel de Clerq

beste Vincent, je hebt in 2013 deze categorie aangemaakt: Category:Samuel de Clerq. De man heette echter Samuel de Clercq, dus de Clerq is zijn alias en niet andersom. Zijn geboorteacte staat hier. Groet,Ceescamel (talk) 11:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Cees, Category:Samuel de Clerq bedoel je? Ja, je hebt helemaal gelijk. Ik heb het even opgezocht op nl.wikisource en zijn naam spel je inderdaad met een c en niet zonder c, zoals het RKD meldt. De variant zonder c heeft 0 zoekresultaten, dus ik neem aan dat dit op een fout berust. Bedankt voor de opmerkzaamheid. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:10, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Kan jij hem (laten) omzetten, ik heb geen idee hoe ik dat moet doen. Ik heb het RKD trouwens bericht, want hij stond er ook vermeld onder zijn "goede" naam.Ceescamel (talk) 12:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Prima. Zal ik binnenkort doen met het goede RKD record. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:37, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry dat ik zomaar kom binnenvallen, maar kan ik ondertussen de commonslink aan het lemma toevoegen? Daar staat nl: Samuel de Clercq, ook wel Samuel de Clerq ... Lotje (talk) 05:32, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Hoi Lotje, Laat me de categorie eerst hernoemen dan zal ik vervolgens zelf wel een commonslink toevoegen op wikipedia. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

 Done aangepast op commons, wikidata en wikipedia. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Frits Eschauzier

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, zou een Category:Frits Eschauzier of Category:Frits Adolf Eschauzier nuttig kunnen zijn? Lotje (talk) 05:53, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Lotje, Wat mij betreft wel. De voorkeursnaam van het wikipedia artikel lijkt me de beste. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Portretminiatuur van een officier Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed B1988.jpg

Ook afbeeldingen die de RKD in deze lage resolutie heeft kunnen met de Dememorixer watermerk-vrij worden gemaakt. Speciaal voor de RKD heb ik een stukje code toegevoegd die bij thumbs het watermerk weghaald door een stukje te knippen uit de thumb van 500x500, die geen watermerk heeft, en deze over de 650x650 thumb te plakken. --Vera ^(talk) 22:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hoi Vera, super! Heel erg bedankt. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:51, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Lino_Salini

Lino Salini has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Szczebrzeszynski (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Creator:Désiré De Keghel

Vincent, you created the page Creator:Désiré De Keghel which states that artist was female, while Wikidata claim that artist was a male. The only articles are in Dutch and French, which I do not know, could you check it for me. --Jarekt (talk) 12:25, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Jarekt, Wikidata is right. He is male. I was confused with Désirée, the female form. Sorry about that. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:21, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 20:11, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Template:KMMonline

Template:KMMonline has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Plagiat (talk) 01:04, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

 I made an update and revoked the nomination –Plagiat (talk) 02:25, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:19, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Van den Broucke-Vranx Diptych 001.jpg

Hallo Vincent Steenberg de beschrijving op het werk geeft aan: Heer van Wilder. Is er iets wat mij ontgaat? Lotje (talk) 09:14, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Lotje, Ik heb even gekeken en het RKD is er een beetje cryptisch over. Het RKD zegt over het familiewapen linksboven op het schilderij: "met dit wapen: Van den broecke gez. Musch: uit Brabant bestaan 2 plaatsen: 1) Prov. Noord Brabant, bij Zundert 2) Provincie Antwerpen, bij esschen". Beide plaatsen heten Wildert met een t: Wildert (België) en Wildert (Zundert). Maar welke het moet zijn? Ik zou het niet weten. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:13, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Fijn, bedankt Vincent Steenberg, als ik het ooit te weten kom vul ik het bestand vanzelfsprekend aan. Lotje (talk) 03:53, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Piet Mondrian 1.jpg

Why did you revert the image I have uploaded? I only removed the border using the croptool and there is nothing wrong with that. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, This file is intended for use in the wikisource article Piet Mondriaan en Theo van Doesburg/Schilderkunst, which, I think, should show the image as in appeared in December 1922. Besides, there is a borderless version available at File:Piet Mondrian 2.jpg. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 23:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Slag op de Zuiderzee

Hallo Vincent Steenberg,

Vandaag heb je drie wijzigingen gedaan aan het bestand Slag op de Zuiderzee: een groter bestand, een categorie dat het in het Rijksmuseum zou hangen en na mijn terugdraaiing een categorie dat het ooit in het RM heeft gehangen. Ik vraag mij af of je überhaupt weet waar het zich bevindt en wat de geschiedenis van het schilderij is. Zo niet, dan wil ik je aanraden om in ieder geval het artikel over de schilder te lezen. Ik kan je vertellen dat het schilderij uitsluitend tot de collectie behoord en dat het in eeuwige bruikleen is gegeven aan de gemeente Hoorn. Het schilderij is gemaakt voor de ontbijtzaal van de Staten van Holland en Westfriesland en het heeft die plek, sinds het daar is opgehangen in 1665, slechts een of twee maal verlaten.

Vriendelijke groet,

Dqfn13 (talk) 22:12, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Dqfn13,

ok, dat was even iets te kort door de bocht van mijn kant. Ik lees nu inderdaad op de site van het Rijksmuseum "transferred to the museum, but kept in its original location, 1935". Ik moet zeggen dat dat niet erg vaak voorkomt met schilderijen in het Rijksmuseum. Ik zal het dan ook binnenkort aanpassen op wikidata 'The battle of the Zuider Zee, 1573' (Q17331972), want de informatie daar is dus incorrect.

Maar wat de categorisatie betreft. Het is wel een schilderij dat zowel voorkomt in de Rijksmuseum database en diverse catalogi van dat museum. Ik denk dus dat het geen kwaad kan het bestand ook in Category:Paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam te plaatsen. Op die manier is het bestand ook via die weg vindbaar.

Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 22:47, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Achteraf denk ik dat dat wel de beste optie is ja, mijn eerste terugdraaiing is met de huidige kennis ook niet nodig geweest. Hoewel de voorgestelde categorie incorrect is, is het bij het ontbreken van een collectie-buiten-de-instelling-categorie wel het meest juiste. Het gebeurd ook niet vaak dat iets uitsluitend tot de collectie behoort en zich definitief buiten de instelling bevindt. Mocht je meer vragen hebben over Hoorn, schroom je niet om het mij te vragen. Ik ben woonachtig in Hoorn en werkzaam bij Bureau Erfgoed van de gemeente Hoorn. Groet, Dqfn13 (talk) 20:50, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Bedankt. Ik zal het bestand zodra ik daar tijd voor heb een uitgebreide beschrijving geven, zodat misverstanden worden voorkomen. Als ik een vraag over Hoorn heb zal ik me bij je melden. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Expositie in Goes jan-feb 1984.jpg

Hoi Vincent, er klopt iets niet met deze nominatie. Ik reageerde en dan komt het sjabloon steeds in beeld en dat hoort niet. Misschien kun je het nog eens nalopen? Alvast bedankt, - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 21:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Hallo, dat klopt. Ik zag dat je sjabloon {{Delete}} gebruikt. Misschien bedoel je sjabloon {{Support}}. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 23:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Nee, ik reageer op jouw nominatie, ik heb geen sjabloon gebruikt. Mijn tekst staat nu onder het sjabloon i.p.v. op de overlegpagina die bij de lijst hoort. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 22:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Oeps, je hebt gelijk. Ik gebruik altijd {{vd}} . Geen idee waarom ik nu 'delete' gebruikte :-) - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 22:56, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Hernoemen van file?

Hallo Vincent Steenberg "Landscape with a Kid by Frans Deutmann Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed B1943.jpg", het kind zie ik niet... Lotje (talk) 13:59, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Hoi Lotje, Kid is engels voor een jonge geit. Vergelijk Tobit and the Kid. Ik heb het ook voor de zekerheid opgezocht in Pieter J. J. van Thiel et al. (1976) All the paintings of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, Maarssen: Gary Schwartz, ISBN 90-6179-010-7.
en de titel komt daarmee overeen. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:30, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Jean Siméon Chardin

Hallo, Vincent Steenberg, vind je de verwijzing naar de interwikilinks in combinate het sjabloon creator nog noodzakelijk? Lotje (talk) 05:28, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Hoi Lotje,

Die opmerking kan inderdaad weg. Of een sjabloon {{Creator}} thuishoort op een gallery pagina is een andere vraag.

Groeten,

Vincent Steenberg (talk) 06:24, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Pieter isaacsz, ritratto familiare, 1609.jpg

Hallo Vincent Steenberg zou dit een (zelfportret) kunnen zijn van Pieter Isaacsz (1569-1625)? Zo ja kan iemand misschien ooit eens een detailfoto maken om in zijn creatorbox te plaatsen. Bij Hendrick Avercamp staat (nogal verwarrend) dat Pieter Isaacsz een Deense historieschilder en portrettist is. Lotje (talk) 05:45, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Hoi Lotje, Volgens het gaat het hier volgens het RKD om een portret van een onbekend echtpaar met hun zoontje (zie https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/images/142477). Wel kwam ik een tekening tegen van lang na Isaacsz.' dood waarop een portret te zien is van Isaacsz. (zie https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/images/253763; nr. 17). Misschien hebben we daar iets aan? En over Isaacsz. zelf: hij werd in Denemarken geboren, maar hij had een Nederlandse vader. Is hij dat automatisch Deens? Ik zou het niet durven zeggen. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:07, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Category:De_Pinto_House

De Pinto House has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Paulbe (talk) 22:38, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Harie Jonas

Zie ook deze categorie. Vysotsky (talk) 08:23, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Ja, daad ben ik nu mee bezig. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Category:Pubs_in_Amsterdam

Pubs in Amsterdam has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Paul2 (talk) 01:00, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Rijks images

Hi, I have reverted the overwrite of File:Heksensabbat Rijksmuseum SK-A-2373.jpeg. The top has been cropped lower in the new download. I have no idea what caused this, or if it is deliberate by the Rijksmuseum, however clearly if higher resolution versions exist, but they are smaller crops of photographs of the paintings, they must be uploaded as separate files.

The worry is that you have done several of these overwrites, this is the first one I have taken a closer look at. Could you double check your previous overwrites to see if there was a pattern that should be repaired? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:15, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Fæ, sorry, I completely missed that. Thanks for the correction. I had a quick look at other overwrites, but this seems to be a one off. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 11:35, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Bernardus de Bosch I (1709-86). Dichter en kunstbeschermer te Amsterdam, Jan Maurits Quinkhard, Rijksmuseum SK-A-4625.jpg

Hoi Vincent, Ik heb deze toegevoegd zodat de hogere resolutie file er in iedergeval bij komt te staan. Anders werd het weer een los bestand. Revert hem naar believe.

Groetjes

Alf van Beem,

Mr.Nostalgic (talk) 07:57, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Er bestaan twee versies van dit portret, één als onderdeel van de panpoeticon batavorum (SK-A-4625) en één los exemplaar (SK-A-791). De foto die het Rijks gebruikt bij SK-A-4625 is duidelijk een uitgesneden versie van de foto bij SK-A-791. Het gaat hier dus blijkbaar om een fout in de website van het Rijksmuseum. Zie ook de discussie User_talk:Vincent_Steenberg#SK-A-4625_and_SK-A-791. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Hendrick Goltzius 014.jpg en File:Gorlaeus Abraham-crop.jpg

Hallo Vincent Steenberg deze afbeeldingen bracht ik onder bij Category:Jacob de Gheyn (I) gezien het jaartal 1580. Ik kan mij moeilijk voorstellen dat Jacob de Gheyn II reeds op 15-jarige leeftijd in staat was dit te maken. Wat denk je? Lotje (talk) 12:17, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Ik heb even gekeken op de site van het Rijksmuseum (https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/zoeken?q=Gorlaeus&ii=0&p=1) en er schijnen er 2 versies van deze prent zijn. Eén uit 1580 door Hendrick Goltzius en één uit 1601 door Jacob de Gheyn (II). De twee afbeeldingen laten dus twee verschillende prenten zien. Let op het haar en de kraag. Bij Goltzius heeft Gorlaeus een kuifje, bij Jacob de Gheyn (II) niet. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:12, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Dordrechts Museum online

Beste Vincent,

Heeft dit sjabloon nog een functie? Kan het anders weg? Vriendelijke groet, Hansmuller (talk) 10:28, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Beste Hans, Dit sjabloon is in gebruik en werkt nog prima. Dus wat mij betreft hoeft hij niet weg. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 10:55, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Category:Pieter de Kempener

Hallo Vincent Steenberg omdat ik de category op familienaam wilde uitbreiden, kwam ik op Pieter de Kempeneer terecht. Hoe zou je deze category linken? Pieter lijkt mij de meest logische, of moet de category hernoemd worden naar Category:Pieter de Kempeneer of zelfs naar Category:Pedro (de) Campaña? (lijkt nogal omslachtig). Thnks. Lotje (talk) 09:50, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Lotje: , Naamswijziging is prima. De spellingswijze Kempener, met één e, is gebaseerd op het RKD. En dit lijkt weer gebaseerd te zijn op een schilderij, dat gesigneerd is "Petrus Kempener". Maar dit is maar één variant op een heleboel varianten en hoeft dus niet perse de voorkeursspelling te zijn. Daarnaast komt Kempeneer, met 2 e's, in de literatuur het meest voor. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Bedankt Vincent Steenberg, als ik het goed voorheb, worden dergelijke renames in de regel uitgevoerd door een bot, daar heb ik hier echter weinig (of geen) ervaring mee. Dus los ik het anders op. :-) Lotje (talk) 14:42, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 109.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 109.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:43, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 p 013.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 p 013.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:45, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 p 009.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 p 009.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:47, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 p 005.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 p 005.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:49, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 front cover.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 012 no 001 front cover.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:49, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 011-012 p 161.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 011-012 p 161.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 107.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 107.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:53, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 103.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 103.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:54, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 097.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 097.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:56, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 010 no 004 p 061.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 010 no 004 p 061.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 10:23, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 010 no 007 p 103.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 010 no 007 p 103.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 10:31, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 010 no 008 p 125.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 010 no 008 p 125.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 10:32, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 001 p 004.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 001 p 004.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 002 p 024.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 002 p 024.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 10:38, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 108.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 108.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 10:42, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 110.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 007-008 p 110.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 10:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Vincent Steenberg,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Vincent Steenberg,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Vincent Steenberg,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Hendrick Avercamp.jpg

Hi Vincent! A decade ago you uploaded File:Hendrick Avercamp.jpg. It seems to be the only portrait of the artist on the internet and we have almost no information on its orginin. Are we sure the image depicts the painter? Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 23:32, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Helli Polarlys, Yes, you're right. I can't find any information about this image either. But I did come across a drawing that is listed as a (self-)portrait of Hendrick Avercamp in the Rijksmuseum, see https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/collectie/RP-T-1940-2. There the sitter has the same type of beard with the large moustache as on this image. So maybe it is the painter. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:28, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Creator:Tim Verfaillie

Creator:Tim Verfaillie has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this creator, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

– BMacZero (🗩) 17:21, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at Wikimedia Commons.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Portrait of Geertruida Margaretha Craeyvanger by Pieter Christoffel Wonder Centraal Museum 8771.jpg

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, ik vroeg me af of dit een portret van Geertruida Margaretha Craeyvanger, de echtgenote van Gerardus Craeyvanger kan zijn. De data zouden kunnen overeenkomen. thnks. :-) Lotje (talk) 14:44, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Hallo Lotje, Volgens het Centraal Museum was zij de vrouw van Carel Constantijn Martens. Craeyvanger is dus haar meisjesnaam. Volgens deze stamboom (hij zit een beetje ingewikkeld in elkaar) was zijn een nicht van Gerardus Craeyvanger. Haar vader en zijn vader waren dus broers van elkaar. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:24, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

​ Hartstikke bedankt voor het opzoekwerk. Ik breng de afbeelding vooreerst onder bij Category:Craeyvanger (surname). :-) Lotje (talk) 16:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Categorization

Hallo Vincent Steenberg op dit Corona-paasweekend waar iedereen omzeggens huisarrest heeft, had ik een vraagje m.b.t. deze edit. Ik ben daar een beetje de draad kwijt: Portrait of the children of Catharina de Neufville (1683-1729) (Q43381920), Jacob Appel (Q6118295) en de naam die op de afbeelding voorkomt. Heb jij daar misschien een verklaring voor? Thx. Lotje (talk) 06:22, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hallo Lotje, ik weet niet precies wat je bedoelt. Bedoel je het verschil tussen Jacques en Jacob of heb je het over de toevoeging (II) na zijn naam? Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

​ Het verschil tussen Jacques en Jacob :-) Lotje (talk) 08:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

oh, op die manier. Die afbeelding is gebruikt in een Franstalige uitgave over Vlaamse, Duitse en Hollandse schilders. Als ik even een snelle rondgang doe door Category:La Vie Tome Quatrieme dan zie ik dat de schrijver van deze uitgave veel namen verfranst. Een grappig voorbeeld is File:Jean-Baptiste Descamps - Segres-Jacques van Helmont Tome Quatrieme p 236.gif: Segres-Jacques van Helmont voor Zeger Jacob van Helmont. Dus ik denk dat de naamvariant Jacques Appel alleen in deze uitgave voorkomt en dat je die verder voor lief kan nemen. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:03, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Héérlijk toch, die verfransing van vroeger. Bedankt voor de verduidelijking! :-) Lotje (talk) 09:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

"Paintings by Anonymous" a subcategory for the Rijks?

Dear Vincent,

What about a subcategory "Paintings by Anonymous" in the category Category:Paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam by artist ? This might turn out to be a tool for discovery (identification) and further investigation, and comparison etcetera, a service Commons can render. Anonymous is an important extremely versatile but neglected artist at the Rijks :-)! (An alternative might be a similar category outside Category:Paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam by artist..., but to me Anonymous remains a special artist in her? own right. Or does something similar already exist?)

Vincent, i ask you but @Vysotsky @Lotje and other interested people might chime in.

• What do you think?

Thanks! (Do not gently wear that crown! after Dylan Thomas) Hansmuller (talk) 06:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

PS Is is not massive, just 2049, very small compared to, say Category:Uncategorized images of the Rijksmuseum Hansmuller (talk) 06:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

You can do that if you want. But again I have to point out that it may be difficult to find what you are looking for when the input is "anonymous". That's why I sorted most of these files by school. See Category:Paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam by school. But first I have to do something about the mess that is Category:Paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam. I do a little bit every now and then. That's why it's taking forever.

But if you think a category like Category:Anonymous paintings in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam is useful then go ahead. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Your classification by school is very nice and of course should be extremely useful for identification! (I think but then, i'm not an art historian :-). Enjoy our fabulous star, Hansmuller (talk) 09:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Jacob van Ruisdael

Though third and fourth seem to have similar description typo

• 

  Landscape with Dune and Small Waterfall

  label QS:Len,"Landscape with Dune and Small Waterfall"

  label QS:Lpl,"Krajobraz wydm z małym wodospadem"

  label QS:Lnl,"Landschap met duin en kleine waterval"

  
  1643-1682. oil on panel

  medium QS:P186,Q296955;P186,Q106857709,P518,Q861259

  . 27.5 × 35.8 cm (10.8 × 14 in). Tokyo, National Museum of Western Art.
• 

  Oak Trees on a Lake with Water Lilies

  label QS:Lde,"Eichen an einem See mit Wasserrosen"

  label QS:Len,"Oak Trees on a Lake with Water Lilies"

  label QS:Lpl,"Dęby nad jeziorem z liliami wodnymi"

  label QS:Lnl,"Eiken aan een meer met waterlelies"

  
  1643-1682. oil on canvas

  medium QS:P186,Q296955;P186,Q12321255,P518,Q861259

  . 116 × 142.2 cm (45.6 × 55.9 in). Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Gemäldegalerie.

here they show right, on the gallery page, File:Ruysdael Landscape with Dune and Small Waterfall.jpg > gives artist's name instead of title. Do you know the reasons

could you please controle documentation and homage Oursana (talk) 18:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Oursana, I see what you mean. There seems to be a bug in the {{Title}} template, but I don't know how to fix that. Maybe User:Jarekt can help. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Vincent Steenberg

@Jarekt: can you help, same problem Abraham Bloemaert--Oursana (talk) 22:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Yes it was an issue with the Module:Title which was incorrectly fetching some labels from connected wikidata item, if they were missing. in the language of the viewer. --Jarekt (talk) 04:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank youOursana (talk) 11:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Schalekamp, Schalenkamp

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, misschien weet jij wel raad. Op deze en deze wijzigde de naam Creator:M. Schalekamp, zoals de prent vermeldt. Pas ik de andere ook aan of zie ik daar iets over het hoofd. Thnks. Lotje (talk) 10:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Geen idee. Misschien Matthijs Schalekamp? Zie https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/zoeken?p=1&ps=12&involvedMaker=Matthijs%20Schalekamp&st=Objects&ii=0 In dat geval is het Schalekamp zonder n. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hij gaf in ieder geval wel atlassen uit, deze Matthijs, zie http://objects.library.uu.nl/reader/index.php?obj=1874-12879&metadata=1&lan=en#page//12/19/59/121959031961153856441614736167892919505.jpg/mode/1up Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 011-012 p 145.jpg

File:Der Sturm vol 011 no 011-012 p 145.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 04:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Postcards

Thanks for uploading postcards to commons. Maybe you are interessted in COM:WPPC. Best regards. -- sk (talk) 14:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome. I will have a look at this project. Thanks for showing. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Willem van Konijnenburg

Hoi Vincent Steenberg, bijna twee jaar geleden heb je de pagina Willem van Konijnenburg aangemaakt en onderaan aangegeven dat je nog niet klaar was. Dat was ook meteen je laatste edit van die pagina. Destijds was je blijkbaar van plan om er nog meer aan te doen maar vermoedelijk ben je dat later vergeten. Kan die opmerking onderaan weg, of ga je er na mijn bericht er toch nog wat aan doen? - Robotje (talk) 23:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hallo, ja, die opmerking kan wel weg. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done - Robotje (talk) 10:01, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

User:Nimue_2018

Dag Vincent, ik heb geen idee hoe zoiets aan te pakken, maar ik weet vrij zeker dat deze gebruiker met deze uploads de copyrightregels heeft overtreden, waarschijnlijk niet eens met opzet. De uploader kan natuurlijk niet tegelijkertijd Fred Berghmans en Jonathan Vos zijn. Fred Berghmans is een vrij bekende fotograaf in Maastricht. Het is geen halszaak, dus als je er geen raad mee weet, geen probleem, dan laten we het zitten. Groet, Kleon3 (talk) 16:50, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Hoi Kleon, ja, deze gebruiker rekt het begrip Eigen werk wel erg ver op. Dit lijkt me dan ook een duidelijk geval van copyvio. Helaas. Want het zijn wel mooie foto's. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 23:43, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Creator:Farzin Fakhr Yaseri

Creator:Farzin Fakhr Yaseri has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this creator, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Hanooz 19:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

The Pedlar

Hi Vincent Steenberg,

ik heb deze cat verschuwd naar The Pedlar by Hieronymus Bosch. 5 files zijn in de oude cat nog zichtbar. Kan je als je blieft helpen.--Oursana (talk) 01:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Hoi Oursana, Ik heb de categorie op Wikidata aangepast. Hopelijk werkt dat. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Hartelijk dank--Oursana (talk) 18:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Bestandsnamen "verbeteren"

Hoi Vincent, hernoemingen zoals File:Dirck van Baburen - The Lute Player - Google Art Project.jpg en File:Dirck van Baburen - Young man with jew's harp - Google Art Project.jpg zijn niet de bedoeling. De oude namen was niets mis mee en het is niet de bedoeling om bestandsnamen te verbeteren. Zie Commons:File renaming voor het ook alweer zat. Zou je iets voorzichtiger willen zijn met het hernoemen van bestanden? Multichill (talk) 11:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Beste Multichill, Zie criterium nummer 5 "blatant advertising". De naamswijziging is m.i. dus wel een verbetering. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Nee nee, dat is echt veel te ver gezocht. Bedenk je dat nu ter plekke? In het log heb je namelijk "more descriptive" gezet. Het is gewoon bronvermelding en zeker geen "overduidelijke reclame". Multichill (talk) 12:16, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

ok, Multichill. Ik zal me de volgende keer wat meer inhouden. Maar de praktijk om de bron in de bestandsnaam te vermelden (wat gelukkig weinig voorkomt) vind ik onnodig. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Dank je. In Special:ListFiles/BotMultichillT heb ik natuurlijk meestal wel de bron staan omdat dat de collectie is waar ik de afbeelding vandaan heb. Multichill (talk) 19:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

We need your feedback!

Hello. Apologies if this message is not in your native language: please feel free to respond in the language of your choice. Thank you!

I am writing to you because we are looking for feedback for a new Wikimedia Foundation project, Structured Data Across Wikimedia (SDAW). SDAW is a grant-funded programme that will explore ways to structure content on wikitext pages in a way that will be machine-recognizable and -relatable, in order to make reading, editing, and searching easier and more accessible across projects and on the Internet. We are now focusing on designing and building image suggestion features for experienced users.

We have some questions to ask you about your experience with uploading images here on Wikimedia Commons and then adding them to Wikipedia. You can answer these questions on a specific feedback page on Mediawiki, where we will gather feedback. As I said, these questions are in English, but your answers do not need to be in English! You can also answer in your own language, if you feel more comfortable.

Once the collecting of feedback will be over, we will sum it up and share with you a summary, along with updated mocks that will incorporate your inputs.

Also, if you want to keep in touch with us or you want to know more about the project, you can subscribe to our newsletter.

Hope to hear from you soon! -- Sannita (WMF) (talk to me!) 09:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

curation

While I didn't find the piece—the "Temptation of Jesus" by Lucas van Leyden the devil is habited as a monk with a pointed cowl"[s:Page:Devil_stories_-_an_anthology.djvu/319]—I wanted to convey some appreciation for your efforts on the curation of the artist. cygnis insignis 15:24, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Did you mean this work: File:De verzoeking van Christus, RP-P-OB-1618.jpg ? Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:27, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Flemish/Southern...

Hoi Vincent Steenberg,

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3AFlemish_paintings&type=revision&diff=97438362&oldid=69832510 Moet dat niet anders om c:Southern Netherlandish paintings subcat of c:Flemish paintings? --Oursana (talk) 19:08, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hallo Oursana,

Niet per se. "Zuidelijke Nederlanden" is een term uit de recente kunstgeschiedenis en omvat grofweg het huidige België en zo je wilt het groothertogdom Luxemburg. Vlaanderen valt hier dus onder, maar ook Henegouwen, Luik, enz. Soms wordt ook Noord-Brabant (voor 1648) tot de Zuidelijke Nederlanden gerekend. Leuk voor mensen die het zichzelf graag moeilijk maken. ;) Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Dank je--Oursana (talk) 22:00, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Category:Nederlandsche Staatscourant of Category:Nederlandsche staatscourant

Hallo Vincent Steenberg, wat stel je voor? Volgens de hoofding zou het iets als Category:Nederlandsche Staats-Courant moeten zijn. Thanks. Lotje (talk) 08:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Warburg1866: nog effe pingen. :-) Lotje (talk) 08:05, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Hallo Lotje,

Goede vraag. Deze krant is een aantal keren van naam veranderd:

1814-1903: Nederlandsche Staats-Courant

1904-1947: Nederlandsche Staatscourant

1948-....: Nederlandse Staatscourant

tegenwoordig: Staatscourant

Ik zou zeggen, neem de tegenwoordige titel, Category:Staatscourant

Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Portrait of Chris Beekman.jpg

Hoi Vincent Steenberg, ik heb net een nieuwe versie van het portret van Chris Beekman geupload van dezelfde bron. Nog bedankt voor deze upload, en (ik heb het even bekeken) je enorme inzet met bijzondere impact. Die nieuwe upload is van een wat hogere resolutie, iets gedraaid, geretoucheerd en "harder afgedrukt." Om dat laatste heb ik hem niet als nieuwe versie op de bestaande file geupload, want beide hebben hun eigen kwaliteiten. Nu zou ik die nieuwe versie in ieder geval op Wikidata willen plaatsen, maar ik dacht ik vraag het eerst maar of je dat ook ziet zitten? -- Mdd (talk) 15:15, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Hallo Mdd, Geen probleem. Ik heb die foto ook niet zelf gemaakt. ;) Bedankt voor het compliment. Die pagina kende ik niet. Leuk om te zien. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:37, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Bedankt Vincent, bedoel je die glamtools.toolforge.org tool? Daar zit nog een knopje bovenin "Show details" en als je dan nog een keer op "Do it" drukt, dan krijg je vele details te zien met "Details (top 1000 images)." -- Mdd (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Klederdracht schilderijen

Hoi Vincent, weet je zeker dat de schilderijen zoals File:Woman from Oosterleek Holland School Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen Münich 3602.jpg dezelfde zijn als die ooit in het Rijksmuseum als bruikleen hebben gehangen? Viel me op dat ze op nl:Lijst van schilderijen in het Rijksmuseum Amsterdam/Anonieme Noord-Nederlandse schilders zijn toegevoegd. Ik kan geen bron vinden om te ondersteunen dat het hier daadwerkelijk om hetzelfde schilderij gaat. Multichill (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Hallo Multichill, Deze serie (SK-C-1491 tot en met SK-C-1514) zijn in 1971 door Beieren in bruikleen gegeven aan het Rijksmuseum. Bron hiervoor is Pieter J. J. van Thiel et al. (1976) All the paintings of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, Maarssen: Gary Schwartz, ISBN 90-6179-010-7, p. 736.
. Wanneer ze terug zijn gegeven weet ik niet. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:01, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Ok. Dan ga ik de missende data op Wikidata toevoegen. Multichill (talk) 12:03, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Ik heb deze nu allemaal samengevoegd. Wat is precies de samenhang met File:Vrouw uit Hensbroek in streekkostuum Nederlands Openluchtmuseum (destroyed in 1944).jpg en Category:Dutch women's folks costumes of circa 1550? Is dat dezelfde serie? Multichill (talk) 12:48, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Ja, ik zie het. Bedankt daarvoor.

Je had oorspronkelijk 2 series (SK-A-4627 t/m 4638 en SK-C-1491 t/m 1514). De eerste serie met A-nummer werd in 1889 gekocht door het Rijks van een zekere Etienne in Amsterdam. In 1925 werd hij in bruikleen gegeven aan het Openluchtmuseum in Arnhem, waar hij in 1944 werd vernietigd door oorlogshandelingen. Serie 2 met C-nummers werd dus in 1971 door de Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen in bruikleen gegeven aan het Rijks. Eigenlijk gaat het hier om twee series met elk net iets verschillende afmetingen, maar in de catalogus worden ze gezamenlijk gecatalogiseerd, A- en C-nummers door elkaar heen op alfabetische volgorde op plaatsnaam. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:41, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Zullen wij het ook als een serie documenteren of als twee? Multichill (talk) 13:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Als één lijkt me. Ik bedoel als iemand hier ooit een wikipedia-artikel over schrijft zal die persoon er ook geen twee artikelen aan wijden. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Paintings in the Sonderauftrag Linz

Hoi Vincent, Category:Paintings in the Sonderauftrag Linz vind je wellicht ook wel leuk om in rond te struinen. Multichill (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Goed werk, Multichill. En, zijn ze al teruggegeven? Aan Israël bijvoorbeeld. Belachelijk dat deze werken nog in staatshanden zijn. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Ja, het is echt een enorme beerput. Niet alles is in staatshanden, Goudstikker zit er bijvoorbeeld ook tussen. Plaatjes zijn natuurlijk van beroerde kwaliteit, maar maakt het ontdubbelen wel een stuk gemakkelijker. Bijvoorbeeld The Astronomer (Q544315) is nu goed te volgen. Multichill (talk) 21:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:Lodovico_Carracci

Lodovico Carracci has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

JopkeB (talk) 08:01, 18 May 2022 (UTC)