User talk:ShiehJ

Hope you are enjoying the workshop! Let me know if I can orient you in any way in Wikidata. Chicagohil (talk) 18:34, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ShiehJ,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel_(WMF): I failed to notice this prompt back in September until now. However, I am still not able to make out heads and tails of what the bot has done. At any rate, thank you. jshieh (talk)

Hi Markus Krötzsch: Thank you so much for providing tools like Sqid for displaying Wikidata in an end-user friendly view. I am fairly new in using the tool. I noticed there are crossed-out data for the Smithsonian Institution entity. Though, these statements are present in Wikidata repository. Since I was not able to find way to email directly from the Sqid page, I hope, by initiating a Wikidata Talk will eventually reach you concerning the representation of such data being scratched in Sqid? Thank you!

jshieh (talk) 18:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any citation for "Crow and egret" being a name for Go (Q11413) in English? I've been playing for about 50 years and never heard that, nor can I find anything online. (Please ping me when responding, I don't keep a watchlist on Wikidata.) - Jmabel (talk) 15:47, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks for checking and I hope you read Chinese scripts, here is an article from Baike Baidu. In ancient time, Go game was called "圍獵” (Wei lie)=hunting, where white was referenced as Egret for its feathers (usually white) and crow's black. Go was also called "Fang yuan" (Square and circle) because it's played on a square board and the chess pieces are round. Unfortunately, there is no place to provide reference for <Also known as>. jshieh (talk) 16:40, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ShiehJ, could you please remove Commons category (P373)Chinese ancestor portraits on the items where you have set the statement? Commons category (P373) is for the category that matches the thing the item describes exactly, not for a category it could fit in. It should be present on at maximum one item, but currently it is present on many as can be seen on the maintenance page Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Duplicate Commons category. Thanks a lot in advance! Best, --Marsupium (talk) 13:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies @Marsupium, I fail to understand your comments. The Wikidata (WD) items described are from our Chinese ancestors portraits collection in digiatl form, originated from the museum's "Chinese ancestors portraits" painting collection. Are the WD items associated with the Commons category (P373)Chinese ancestor portraits not intended to collocate ancestor portraits that are Chinese ancestors portraits in WD as well as in Commons? When you said "Common category is for the category that matches the thing the item describes exactly," a single item, that is "Chinese ancestor portrait" item? Thanks again! jshieh (talk) 16:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the fast reply! Now I have checked the description of Commons category (P373): name of the Wikimedia Commons category containing files related to this item (without the prefix "Category:") which I think is not unambiguous to explain its purpose. But it is as you say, there should be and I have created the "Chinese ancestor portrait" item: Chinese ancestor portrait (Q130889151) and made it subclass of (P279)portrait painting (Q1400853). So the item describes a painting genre (that is what I think it is judging from the super-categories of c:Category:Chinese ancestor portraits). Do you think that fits? Are they all paintings? Then the items like Portrait of Lirongbao’s Wife (fl. 17th century) (Q108040728) could get a genre (P136)Chinese ancestor portrait (Q130889151) statement. (BTW: I've only noticed now that maybe most of the statements concerned have been added by Km31284, not by you.) Also thanks again! --Marsupium (talk) 20:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the digital surrogates that our team described in WD are all paintings (in scroll) in the National Museum of Asian Art (NMAA). The Museum curator determined these were "ancestor portraits" for nobility (high ranking officials and royal houses) and from Chinese various dynasties. I know "portrait" is defined as genre. But is ancestor portrait a genre? Subclass of genre? Perhaps. I am not an art materials specialist and will need to consult with the curator. (Please check out Hongtaiji, Emperor Taizong (1592–1643), Meditating with a Buddhist Rosary (Q108297320) as opposed to Emperor Huang Taiji.jpg (if the latter were in the NMAA's collection, it'd be included in the Chinese ancestor portraits collection). Thanks so much! jshieh (talk) 14:46, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]