[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - artwork_subject=sheela-na-gig

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 23, 2022, 10:46 by annekadistel at web.de:

>
>
>
> On 22/03/2022 15:46, Mateusz Konieczny      via Tagging wrote:
>
>> "subject:wikidata=Q509424" applied "for all sheela-na-gigs"        is a bad idea,
>> pity that this remained in a proposal.
>>
>> This is 
>> (a) complete duplicate of >> artwork_subject <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:artwork_subject>>> =>> sheela-na-gig <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:artwork_subject%3Dsheela-na-gig&action=edit&redlink=1>>>  that is being proposed
>>
> We're clearly thinking of different applications for the wikidata    links.
>
About which application of the subject:wikidata you are thinking?

I use it for marking subject of artwork etc.
And sheela-na-gig is not subject of typical sheela-na-gig, in the same way as
linking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mural or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_smile or 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skull_symbolism
would not be fitting for murals, sculpture with archaic smile or every 
symbolic skull.

(would be fine for artworks depicting murals and some meta artwork
ABOUT archaic smile or human skull symbolism)

In the same way 

>> (b) incorrect as sheela-na-gig is a type of        sculpture, not a subject of this artwork 
>>
>> (though in theory some case like this may be        created)
>>
> They are mostly artwork_type=relief actually (if they's not street    art) and it IS the subject of the artwork, if following the logic of    "artwork_type" (relief, sculpture, mural etc) on the wiki.
>
Would you link https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2223449 with subject:wikidata on
artwork just because it contains skull which is symbolically used?

At least for me this is the same.

Sorry if I am missing something, I am basing all my knowledge on reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheela_na_gig

But it seems that it is style of carvings
("figurative carvings of naked women displaying an exaggerated vulva"),
rather than a depiction of some legendary/mythical/real entity.

> I don't know of a single case where they depict a specific person      (at least in Ireland and the UK). At least not one that has been      identified. And there are no objects to be depicted. It's like      saying statues of the Virgin Mary could depict a specific person/      object.
>
linking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary,_mother_of_Jesus on wooden carving 
of Virgin Mary as subject seems fine, but linking 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_carving as subject on a wooden sculpture 
of something seems not fine to me (unless it is sculpture with wood carving as a subject).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheela_na_gig discusses that they could represent something,
but article itself being linked is not about this hypothetical fertility or mother goddess but
about style of carvings.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20220323/2ca2eda2/attachment-0001.htm>