Wikipedia talk:GLAM/Metropolitan Museum of Art

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconMetropolitan Museum of Art Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of Art. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Plan for image import?[edit]

@Pharos: or others - is there a plan for image import? I've occasionally played with William the Faience Hippopotamus, and it would be fun to replace that image with this one, but I don't want to upload to Commons willy-nilly if there is going to be a structured import, template, etc. Any pointers on how best to handle this would be welcome. Thanks! —Luis (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended content
And of course if anyone has a suggestion for a better place to discuss on Commons, I'm all ears. —Luis (talk) 23:18, 8 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey Luis! Hope all is well. I know User:Pharos will have more details, but, I know there will be an eventual mass upload of images, it will just take some time on the Met's end to get some things sorted out. But, it will happens. So exciting!! :) Missvain (talk) 02:46, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So in the meantime, any thoughts? Hang out and wait, or upload to my heart's content, or...? :) —Luis (talk) 03:32, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Luis. For individual artworks please go ahead and upload, just try to follow the guidelines at Commons:Met. Awesome to have you involved!--Pharos (talk) 21:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pharos: Perfect, have put up a few images and improved a few articles. Onward, upward, etc. —Luis (talk) 00:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
FYI for anyone stumbling across this, as Missvain suggested, there is a mass upload already going on (see some of it here) but I have not yet gotten a sense of how long that will take or what best practices are in the meantime. —Luis (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that is a test run that User:Pharos has been fiddling with to work out a few kinks. Missvain (talk) 21:30, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Luis. For individual artworks please go ahead and upload, just try to follow the guidelines at Commons:Met. Awesome to have you involved!--Pharos (talk) 21:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pharos: Question about the guideline at Commons:Met: It wants to limit the description field to a specific set of information, but in many cases there is a lot more information available about the image. (e.g., following the suggested guidelines results in this, which doesn't contain the search string "William", or any information about the relevant dynasty, etc.) Suggestions on how best to handle that?—Luis (talk) 20:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@LuisVilla: If Pharos isn't quick enough I'm just going to transfer all the paintings to Commons. ;-)
Kidding a bit, he is coordinating it so it happens in a structured way. I'm just going to wait for the green light. I did already import most paintings to Wikidata and would love to see them illustrated. Multichill (talk) 14:16, 17 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source help[edit]

I have an article in draft about a former Met president. Is there anyone that I can reach at the Met about getting digital/scanned access to sources? Would save the trekking to & from the Watson Library, at least. czar 07:18, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Armor of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, created by Kunz Lochner for then-Archduke Ferdinand in 1549.

The Met has selected three highlight artworks they'd like to see as first major articles developed: Armor of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, Benin Pendant Mask, Mérode Altarpiece.

I've just started Armor of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, which didn't exist at all before. I would love to collaborate on the armor topic with folks (maybe as a DYK?), as well as on the other works. Benin Pendant Mask might also be an excellent choice to work on this month as part of Wikipedia:Black WikiHistory Month.--Pharos (talk) 21:35, 16 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pharos, I could help with the Benin mask. Do you have any source material digitized? I'll be in the Watson & NYPL tomorrow so let me know if there is anything I should pick up/scan (or someone who can compile the sources for us) czar 00:17, 17 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For example, the object page's References section lists a dozen useful sources that I imagine the museum has already digitized or otherwise has on file, if you know the right person to ask. Otherwise I can take a shot czar 03:56, 17 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you could work on it some today or in the coming days using Met resources, that would be great. I'll put some effort into it too, maybe we can get it good enough by next weekend that we can encourage translations to other language Wikipedias at the upcoming edit-at-hons on February 25-26.--Pharos (talk) 18:55, 17 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've been working on the mask in a separate draft. The trouble I'm having is whether the Met & British Museum ivory pendant masks are somehow independently notable from Edo/Benin hip masks as a group. Without access to the older, offline sources, it looks like not. Otherwise the article would be constructed almost entirely with affiliated (Met) sources. czar 23:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Don't see the problem. Both pieces are quite famous, and certainly "independently notable from Edo/Benin hip masks as a group". That doesn't mean it may not be best to cover the whole group. Johnbod (talk) 17:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My point was that the Idia/ivory masks are best covered as a group rather than a focus on the Met/BM mask, but we have a disagreement on the scope czar 17:39, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have they actually looked at what we already have (museums often don't)? Mérode Altarpiece has been pretty large, around 13KB, for years. Of course it could be expanded, but may well be at GA level already, and it seems a slightly odd priority (especially as we have so many Early Netherlandish painting FAs already). Benin Pendant Mask would be a great idea, but sources for a "major article" are likely to be difficult for any piece of African art. Johnbod (talk) 17:14, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Johnbod: The WikiThree articles were chosen by the museum based primarily on importance to the collection, not their quality level on Wikipedia, all before I became involved. It's kind of nice, though, that they are a mix of different levels of starting quality, as it lets us experiment with different kinds of collaboration. In particular, your previous work on Mérode Altarpiece has been great, and I'd love to help connect you with museum resources and staff to help push it to GA and beyond.--Pharos (talk) 16:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You might interest User:Ceoil in that; not me at the moment - I don't do GAs, nor FAs in recent years. I would be interested in as many photos as possible of their Sèvres elephant-headed vase(s?), which I would do an article on. We don't have photos of anyone's examples I think (oh, we do). More for Sèvres pot-pourri vase in the shape of a ship would be good too - I expect they have one of those (yes, this guy). Also photos of Renaissance painted Limoges enamel, especially backs and details. In my experience with big museums, notions "on importance to the collection" depend very largely on the departments of the people you are talking to! Are we going to get mass-uploads a la Walters or LACMA? I hope so. Johnbod (talk) 16:24, 1 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Johnbod: It would be great if you could start an article on Sèvres elephant vase using Met images - and there are quite a few, including the tab for 'Additional Images' for each work. We are still working on mass-uploads, but for now you can just upload them manually if you follow the format at Commons:Met.--Pharos (talk) 19:29, 7 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, it may take a week or two. Johnbod (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm inclinded to agree with Johnbod, in that the Mérode Altarpiece is already well developed, and it doesnt seem they have looked. For my own part, I am focused on the Cloisters article, and don't want to get side tracked. Note my enthusiasm is in large part renewed by the sudden ability to freely use Met images of objects (ie 3-d), which has been a real joy, and opened doors. The FAC by next Wednesday approach doesn't fit; its not how these things work, and best abandoned for further drives. Ceoil (talk) 09:02, 11 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In my experience (eg with the British Museum & British Library), while it does no harm for the museum to suggest things it would like to see created or expanded, the most (and best) results usually come from volunteers following their own interests. Johnbod (talk) 15:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pharos, just added to armor page with images of personages discussed and additional citation from a Met journal. Is there a ref list compiled by Metsters like for the Merode that we can pull from to expand? I'm interested in building out, though I know it's past the "launch" deadline. Is there a queue in general of uploaded files that do not yet have an article? New to project but interested in collabing. -- RYPJack (talk) 17:44, 22 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@RYPJack: One very soft-launch point has passed, but we'd welcome more contributions to these articles, and it ill still be a bit it seems before they are shared through social media channels. The Met collection page on Ferdinand's armor also has an extensive 'References' section especially expanded for this project, although in this case a number of the published sources are in German.--Pharos (talk) 20:53, 24 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pharos, cool thanks. will take a look. cool project. -- RYPJack (talk) 20:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ceoil and Johnbod: I agree that FAC-by-next-Wednesday is hardly a sustainable long-term model. However, Met curators have researched, for this special case, a number of references to potentially add to the article, and it might help encourage future collaborations if we could use these if and where additional citations might be appropriate — see References section for Annunciation Triptych (Merode Altarpiece). Not asking for an FAC, or even additional text to the main body, but since you're more familiar with the subject, perhaps you can find a better place to add some of their suggested references.--Pharos (talk) 22:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's a huge number - it must be well over 100, going back to 1887 & with some in Hungarian etc, & many surely only with very passing references. Even an FA wouldn't use many of these. The Wikipedia/Watson Library collaboration has only added one that I can see, and a few could be added to FR (especially Met ones that are online), or certainly used in expansion. I'll take a look later, or Ceoil? Johnbod (talk) 03:31, 14 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes I'm interested, and there are very interesting sources there, especially in terms of attribution. Note, myself and ms Ceoil stood before this again last x-mass. Thank you Pharos. Ceoil (talk) 11:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The former Tapestry Room at Croome Court - now rather bare!

@Pharos: Congrats on the collaboration / image release! As a special request, would it be possible to get some pictures released of the Tapestry Room from Croome Court, which was moved to the Met in 1958? The room at the Court now looks rather bare, and it might be quite nice to have a before/after image in the Croome Court article. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mike Peel, any of these work? (Click "Additional images") They'll be included in the batch upload but if you want them sooner just holler czar 23:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Czar: They look good - when will the batch upload be happening? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:29, 25 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mike Peel, @Pharos is the Met's contact and would know best but my understanding is that it'll be ASAP, just figuring out how best to upload. If you'd like it sooner, I can help manually czar 02:37, 25 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Czar: OK, if the bulk upload is coming soon, then this can wait until then. This is more of long-term project for me than something urgent. Thanks. 12:53, 25 February 2017 (UTC)`````Reply[reply]
@Mike Peel: Here you go: Commons:Category:Tapestry Room from Croome Court.--Pharos (talk) 17:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pharos and Czar: Many thanks! One of them is now in use at Croome_Court#Interior. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. For the last year or so, I have been wanting to bring the Cloisters article to FAC status. It will prob take me, on my own, about another year to work it up. I have always been impressed with the Met's involvement and engagement with wiki, and have done a Met FAC article before, largely because they have been so generous in sharing sources. I was wondering if members of this project would be willing to set up a collab, or drive, to help get the Cloisters over the line. Not necessarily direct editing even, but access to sources. Ceoil (talk) 17:27, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ceoil, what sources do you need? czar 06:07, 19 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would like to know more about the acquisition of the collection of illuminated manuscripts, and if possible, have free images of the two (that I know of) miniature rosary beads. Also, I would love to have feedback from ye guys as to how the page might develop. Ceoil (talk) 14:22, 19 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am seriously impressed with the work here, and czar's access to reproductions. See here on the difficulty re study and conservation of miniatures; a real blocker for wiki editors. This is a most valuable initiative, thanks guys. Ceoil (talk) 17:13, 19 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Left some images on your talk page. Pharos might be able to recommend a staff member for sources on the illuminated manuscript collection. On the article, it's quite laden with jargon. Readers with art/architecture history can handle it, but I think some parts should be rewritten with less detail for a general audience, or at least reprioritized. I liked the intro to the Fuentidueña Chapel as a mix of stating what is important or interesting about the room while giving its physical description. I'd like to help further but I'd need to close up a few projects first. Feel free to {{ping}} me on the article's talk page if there is something I can add czar 17:42, 20 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I appreciate all your help with other pages czar, as well as feedback here. Jargon, eek...will comb. Ceoil (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open Access & image descriptions[edit]

The OA policy doesn't cover the descriptions on the file pages, right? It appears to cover the image metadata ("basic information") but doesn't mention the descriptions. If the Met wants to add the descriptions to the release, I think they would be useful if uploaded alongside their respective Commons images. czar 20:44, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have been (quite literally) hoping since 2005 to be able to use the images of the Met's mantuas (this one and this one). If I get disentangled from my current project before the images are uploaded, I'll probably grab a few shots of them. - PKM (talk) 01:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

These images have been uploaded to Commons and some placed in Mantua (clothing). More placements to follow... - PKM (talk) 23:39, 25 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@PKM: Wonderful! Glad to see the use in fashion articles, hopefully we can encourage more of this. I wonder if there are any individual pieces of clothing in the collection that might be notable too.--Pharos (talk) 15:53, 1 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I think so. Just need to find non-Met based references to establish notability. I think the early mantua will probably qualify. - PKM (talk) 19:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done: Mantua (Kimberley Hall) - PKM (talk) 23:36, 21 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Musical Instruments[edit]

Cross-posting from Commons talk:Met.

A grand piano, Erard, ca. 1840.

Hi, I just realized that the Met collection also contains a whole bunch of musical instruments, which I would like to use as part of the German Wikipedia project Wiki Loves Music to illustrate the history of musical instruments in the respective articles, e.g. this 1830 bassoon. Can you tell me where I can stay up to date regarding the planned mass upload? Looking at the commons:Category:Musical instruments in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I understand that so far only one image of a musical instrument, the grand piano on the right, has been uploaded, which has since been reverted. Thank you, --Gnom (talk) 00:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gnom, I imagine you'll hear about the uploads here first. If you want anything in specific expedited, such as the bassoon, let me know and I can help. The grand piano is actually from Flickr. Someone incorrectly overwrote the image with one from the Met, but that was several years ago. The Met image will be uploaded in its own file at full resolution with the batch upload, unless you want it sooner. czar 02:41, 25 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, Czar. Actually, there is no rush at all, I will just watch this page. --Gnom (talk) 19:43, 25 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cleanup listing[edit]

If you're looking for some small cleanup tasks (e.g., citation and link fixes), you can now find an automated listing compiled here czar 16:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missing articles?[edit]

I may have identified some missing Wikipedia articles based on my last trip to the museum:

I may have the names wrong, or articles may be hiding here somewhere. Just thought I'd point these out in case folks want to help identify these works and create articles. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cloisters Library[edit]

Looking for sources on the Cloisters Library, of any editors know of where to find. Ceoil (talk) 17:21, 5 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Showcase item for Wikidata Project Fashion[edit]

@Pharos: and team - I'd like to select a metadata-rich extant garment from a museum collection to be one of the best-practices 'showcase items' for the new Wikidata Project on fashion and clothing. One of most iconic garments I can think of is Dior's Bar suit, and I'd really like to develop an item for it on Wikidata.

If you have not created a metadata map for costume items, I'd be interested in working on that with the project team. The whole area of clothing is very underdeveloped on Wikidata so far. I've been playing with possibilities - here's my first cut at deep metadata for a jacket in the V&A. - PKM (talk) 00:31, 6 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@PKM: I think the Met would prefer an initial focus on some of the public domain works that were part of the CC0 release, if possible. There is one that is actually part of the WikiThree project, Armor of Emperor Ferdinand I, if you might consider a royal suit of armor as falling under WikiProject Fashion. The mantua you mentioned earlier might also be a good public domain option.--Pharos (talk) 16:26, 6 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, I hadn't thought about the Dior not being CC0. We'll look at the armor and a mantua. Thanks! - PKM (talk) 18:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

March 16 goal-point for WikiThree[edit]

I'd like to encourage folks to shift some of their energies to these "WikiThree" articles, so that we can get them up to a higher quality before March 16, when we will start sharing more widely:

Hopefully one of these is of interest to you! I'm going to put some of my energy going forward into the Ferdinard armour article. Also, note that each of the Met website pages (for example, Merode Altarpiece) has a specially-expanded References section, added with the help of Met staff as part of this project.--Pharos (talk) 21:35, 6 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Met Open Access Artworks Challenge: May 15 - June 30, 2017[edit]

We'd like t invite folks to participate in the Met Open Access Artworks Challenge, which starts its soft launch today! All edits related to the collection and using the CC0 images are most welcomed - you can sign up at Met Open Access Artworks Challenge/Participants :)--Pharos (talk) 18:59, 15 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, er, ok. Actually don't count on ALL edits being "most welcomed". There has been a lot of inappropriate spamming by volunteers connected with the Brooklyn Museum for one, which it has been a pain to remove. Please try to think objectively whether the MMA image is the most appropriate addition, checking Commons for alternatives, and the text for the most suitable things to illustrate. Of course these are superb images so in very many cases they will be very welcome. Johnbod (talk) 20:39, 15 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


@Pharos: I would like to see the following images on Common for concrete use in German wikis. All these files are sadly (up to now) not marked CC-0. But I hope that the Metropolitan Museum of Art can provide permission or free images of these objects.

-- Reise Reise (talk) 14:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Based on the articles recently created, I think it's worth noting that the general notability guideline requires that "significant coverage" from reliable sources "independent of the subject". It isn't enough to link to the Met's website and a Met journal/book/publication as proof of the object's independent notability when writing about it. Better is to look to other art history sources that write about the item. If the object is covered in depth even outside Met publications, then you're looking at a reason for creating a separate article about that specific item. Otherwise you're better off just covering the item within an existing parent topic (the artist or an article on the period/style) using the Met sources. In short, the Met sources aren't a good judge of whether a specific object is important because it they are too closely affiliated with the item (the Met pubs serve to promote the museum's collection), but the Met sources are fine for writing generally about an artist/period as they lose that conflict of interest. I am no longer watching this page—ping if you'd like a response czar 16:00, 31 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just wanted to compliment the Library staff for efficient, helpful, and professional interactions with visiting researchers. I was in NYC for 10 days back in July, and took some time over several days to visit the MMA and its library. The library website was very helpful in describing what was available, rules for access, and encouraging advance online requests for research materials. Being a new researcher, I also applied online for an ID card.

Upon arrival following excellent directions, I identified myself, received my ID card, stored my backpack in a secure locker, and proceeded to the reserve shelves. On the way, I noticed an exhibit of materials by and about the French-American artist Niki de Saint Phalle. Ironically, this was the reason some of the materials I sought were listed as unavailable, due to this ongoing exhibit. Fortunately, I was still able to request a number of other useful books about Saint Phalle, as well as several other artists of interest. Compliments go to the curator who organized the mini-exhibit on Niki de Saint Phalle, which gives a nice overview of her work.

I edit a very eclectic and wide array of Wikipedia articles, including those on a number of women artists, such as Marisol Escobar, Isabelle Collin Dufresne, Louise Bourgeois, Yayoi Kusama, Nancy Reddin Kienholz, Muriel Cooper, and Jacqueline Casey. I have also done work on male artists such as Jean-Robert Ipousteguy, Eadweard Muybridge, Thomas Eakins, Marcel Duchamp, Alexander Calder, Ed Kienholz, Richard Estes, Duane Hanson, Ron Mueck, Miguel Ortiz Berrocal, Charles Eames, Edward R. Tufte, James Turrell, Jamie Wyeth, and Wen-Ying Tsai.

I have done work on Charles Proteus Steinmetz, the less-known but far more effective pioneering electrical engineer, as well as his flashier contemporary Nikola Tesla. Other interesting engineers include Bob Pease, Jim Williams, Bob Widlar, Richard Stallman, Chuck Hoberman, and Charles Babbage. I have worked on scientists and educators, such as George Gamow, Richard Feynman, Mary Roach, and Frank Oppenheimer.

I am interested in connections between technology and art, including Neon art, Kinetic art, Light art, Surrealism, and Op Art. I am interested in scientific phenomena and devices such as Dust explosions, Fire pistons, Stirling engines, Tippe tops, Rattlebacks, and Plasma globes. I have worked on Anamorphosis and Mathematics and art.

I have worked on articles about various specialized exhibitions, such as Mathematica: A World of Numbers... and Beyond, both New York World's Fairs, the Empire State Plaza architecture and Art Collection, and numerous museums and science/technology centers. I also work on architectural articles, such as the Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library, and architects, such as Harry Weese. I expanded the Thomas J. Watson Library article, adding mention of the Nolen Library as well.

I connect many articles via Wikilinks, which I consider to be an important feature of Wikipedia. For example, I overhauled the article on Infinity mirrors, including adding a new "Cultural references" section referring Yayoi Kusama, Josiah McElheny, Ivan Navarro, and Taylor Davis as visual artists who have made use of the phenomenon. I crosslinked the articles on Gustave Courbet and Karst springs. I have connected the article on Salvador Dalí to the article on the Willis Tower in Chicago, via the article on Glass floors. I have corrected a serious technical error in the article Evolution of mammalian auditory ossicles, Wikilinking it to relevant articles on Mechanical impedance and Transformers.

I have added new "Cultural references" sections to articles about mathematical phenomena and artists, connecting mathematics, science, technology, and art. For example, I added a brief section to the article Peaucellier–Lipkin linkage, linking to a new monumental sculpture in the Netherlands which incorporates the linkage.

In the future, I hope to work on the articles about Jean Tinguely, Paul Delvaux, Anish Kapoor, Otto Piene, George Rickey, Claes Oldenburg, Isamu Noguchi, Philip Morrison, James Burke (science historian), some overlooked women photographers, and some pioneering audio engineers. The Watson Library and the MMA are invaluable resources for information on art and artists, from prehistoric times to visions of the future.

While at the MMA, I noticed a small but interesting exhibition on synthetic textiles and art conservation (, near the entrance to the Antonio Ratti Textile Center. The individual costumes and art objects in the exhibit are documented online, but the educational explanatory text concerning materials degradation and preservation is not otherwise available, as far as I can tell. I took a number of photos to document it, and hope to use the material to enhance Wikipedia's coverage of synthetic fabrics as well as art conservation. Reify-tech (talk) 22:16, 9 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Starting the Met Weekly Challenge: The Horse Fair + help pick future collaborations[edit]

Rosa Bonheur's The Horse Fair has been chosen as the first-ever Met Weekly Challenge for the coming week. There are a lot of resources at the artwork's Met Collection record (see 'Catalogue Entry'), and also lists of other references. We could also benefit from the French Wikipedia version and Commons:Category:The Horse Fair — see the section for Week 1: The Horse Fair (Sept 25 - Oct 1) for more on how to participate, or just get started editing!

I also very much encourage folks to share and vote for their ideas on future collaborations at Met Weekly Challenge - Proposals!--Pharos (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Met Weekly Challenge, Week 2: The Princesse de Broglie (Oct 1 - Oct 8): + help pick future collaborations[edit]

Ingres' The Princesse de Broglie has been chosen as the Week 2 focus of the Met Weekly Challenge. There are a lot of resources at the artwork's Met Collection record (see 'Catalogue Entry'), and also lists of other references. See the section for Week 2: The Princesse de Broglie (Oct 1 - Oct 8) for more on how to participate, or just get started editing!

I also very much encourage folks to share and vote for your ideas on future collaborations!--Pharos (talk) 16:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Met Weekly Challenge, Week 3: Portrait of Juan de Pareja (Oct 9 - Oct 15): + help pick future collaborations[edit]

Velázquez's Portrait of Juan de Pareja has been chosen as the Metropolitan Museum of Art Weekly Challenge for the coming week. There are a lot of resources at the artwork's Met Collection record (see 'Catalogue Entry'), and also lists of other references. See the section for Week 3: Portrait of Juan de Pareja (Oct 9 - Oct 15) for more on how to participate, or just get started editing!

Simultaneously, we are also encouraging collaboration on the biographical article for Juan de Pareja, the artist depicted.

I also very much encourage folks to share and vote for your ideas on future collaborations!

Global online Wikipedia Asian Art Month (Nov 1-30)[edit]

As we give a break to the weekkly collaborations, I'd like to invite the folks here to join the global online Wikipedia Asian Art Month, running November 1-30. As part of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month, there will be Met postcards for all who participate, and books as prizes. Let me know if you have questions, or need help finding a good topic and matching images.--Pharos (talk) 17:38, 1 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update on The Met and Wikipedian Asian Month[edit]

New article: An 18th century Suzuri-bako depicting a warbler in a plum tree. Done in lacquered wood with gold and silver.

I'd like to invite folks to see Asian art article recommendations and see some of the articles written so far (in multiple languages!). Help improve some of the new articles, or write your own. Anyone who writes one article will be sent a commemorative Met postcard, and grand prize winners will get the Met guidebook or Asian art publications. Our in-person edit-a-thon is on Sunday, and you're welcome to participate in parallel remotely for that too. And I remain available to assist anyone who'd like help getting library sources or appropriate images from the collection.--Pharos (talk) 18:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

3 days left for Met's Wikipedia Asian Art Month project![edit]

If you'd like to start a new short article for Wikipedia Asian Art Month, you have 3 days left to join in the fun. I'll be glad to collaborate with you on whatever topic you like, and we'll send you a Met postcard lovingly signed by me. Expanding an article by a significant amount works as well.--Pharos (talk) 18:23, 27 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Horse Fair Picture of the day Dec 15[edit]

The Horse Fair is appearing as Picture of the day on the Main Page on December 15 UTC, which is in about five hours! Might be a good chance if anyone would like to collaborate on it today or tomorrow.--Pharos (talk) 19:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Horse Fair
The Horse Fair is an oil painting on canvas completed by the French artist Rosa Bonheur between 1852 and 1853. Depicting dealers selling horses on the streets in Paris, the work was first exhibited at the Paris Salon in 1853. In 1887, having been held by several private collectors, the painting was donated by Cornelius Vanderbilt II to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It is one of Bonheur's most popular works, such that Queen Victoria requested a private viewing at Buckingham Palace during the painting's 1855–1857 tour of England.Painting: Rosa Bonheur

This is now at PR, with the aim to take to FAC in a month or two. Page has been significantly improved by the Met's image release, and the work of people here to make those available. Any further input from project members more than welcome. Ceoil (talk) 11:15, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chromatic Harp

Hi, I would like to use this image. It has been deleted before – is it not freely licensed? Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 13:28, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Gnom, it was probably deleted before the Met donated all their website images in 2017. Version here now. Ceoil (talk) 17:39, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're the best, Ceoil. Thank you! --Gnom (talk) 16:11, 19 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks to this GLAM![edit]

Hey all! I thought I'd acknowledge publicly to you that this GLAM has been a true inspiration! In Brazil, we've just set up a page in the context of our work with Museu Paulista, and the way the work at the MET was organized was definitely our main influence: WP:MUSEUPAULISTA. I hope you like it! :) --Joalpe (talk) 23:26, 6 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki Loves Pride and June LGBT collaboration[edit]

I'd like to propose a collaboration for the Wiki Loves Pride 2018 campaign covering LGBT artists, their major artworks, and other themed works in the Met collection. I've done a Wikidata/category analysis to make a preliminary list of LGBT artists in the collection, but I'd also like to think of ways to encourage all works that are tied to this theme.--Pharos (talk) 19:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@PKM, Jane023, Missvain, Rosiestep, Wittylama, Antonioatrylia, Ceoil, RYPJack, Raymond Ellis, Jasonanaggie, and SamHolt6: I'd like to share a custom table of works by LGBT artists: Wikipedia:GLAM/Metropolitan Museum of Art/Artworks/LGBT artists. This uses the Mbabel draft-tool to create starter articles from the redlinks. There are a bunch of artworks from several artists here that could potentially have the requisite sources for an article, as well as existing bluelinks that could be improved. I think I'll start on Draft:The Annunciation (Sandro Botticelli) if anyone wants to join me, but there are a lot of options..--Pharos (talk) 19:37, 7 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is now at FAC. Constructive feedback would be gratefully received. Ceoil (talk) 01:16, 13 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Although this project seems to have faded, Ingres' The Princesse de Broglie is now at FAC. Largely thanks to Met's generosity in making sources available, Mérode Altarpiece should be expanded and there by year end. Ceoil (talk) 15:03, 29 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Asian Art Month with Met images and prizes[edit]

I'd like to invite WikiProject participants to sign up at Wikipedia Asian Art Month 2018 and find some Asian art topics they would like to write about with Met images. Grand prizes will be offered as well.--Pharos (talk) 07:40, 3 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Pharos, any suggestions? How about something overarching like art from a certain place or era art in Southeast Asia? I'm interested. Hayholt (talk) 14:02, 20 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pharos, anything? Hayholt (talk) 18:43, 24 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hayholt You might like something in South and Southeast Asia essays, article expansions count for the sub-contest too. Some existing topics are Dvaravati art, Palepai, Sumatran ships cloth, Indonesian ceremonial bronze axes. Maybe something new could be on a particular cultural art tradition, like an aspect of Batak art or a historical pre-Angkor art tradition, a jewelry tradition, or the depiction of a particular deity.--Pharos (talk) 20:49, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended to Dec: Wikipedia Asian Art Month with Metropolitan Museum of Art[edit]

Suzuri-bako, now in 12 languages!

I'd like to invite you to join Wikipedia Asian Art Month in the December extension of the sub-contest; if you write or translate just one article and include one of our images, you'll get a special Met postcard. And if you're one of the grand prize winners, you'll get a Met guidebook or Asian art publication. One place to look for inspiration might be Open Access "Highlights" from Asia (PD artworks marked as Asian, but be careful of border cases)--Pharos (talk) 16:15, 7 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How many artworks are there in all museum catalogs?[edit]

At d:Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings there is the goal to use the wiki platform to catalog all paintings.

@Pharos: You had a "Museum of Babylon" concept for cataloging all artwork. Did you publish documentation for that anywhere?

I am trying to build out d:Wikidata:WikiProject Limits of Wikidata and we want to collect counts of numbers to estimate the storage and computation needs of Wikidata for certain projects.

Suppose everything in the Met were in Wikidata - how do you describe that amount of data? Do you have guesses for the entire museum world? Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Art UK has over 200,000 paintings in British public collections - excluding watercolours etc and prints, which are probably more numerous. In the British Museum "There are currently 2,335,338 records available (online), which represent more than 4,000,000 objects" - but not all are "artworks" - 6,000 nails from the Sutton Hoo ship burial have individual catalogue numbers. But eg they have "approximately 50,000 drawings and over two million prints" - many of the latter not in the 4 mill online total. Have wikidata begun to think how to handle multiples like prints and pieces of factory-made pottery? I doubt it. The number of "artefacts" in archaeological collections are just colossal, if you're doing them. Globally, I'd say perhaps 40 million artworks and 400 million+ artefacts, many just recorded in pen and ink. Hope that helps. Johnbod (talk) 16:06, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki Loves Pride Art Contest extended to July 31![edit]

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride Art & Artists 2019, supported by WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of Art, which has now been extended to July 31. Eligible articles for this sub-contest should use be at least in part about a work in the Met's collection that is by an LGBT artist or has an LGBT theme. You can use the article-draft tool for LGBT artists in the collection, start a new article in the normal way, improve an existing article, or translate something. Winners will be shipped a Met art publication of their choice!--Pharos (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd like to encourage all the good editors here to join Wiki Loves Pride/2019/Art, which has art book prizes and perhaps not as much competition as you might think. We also have a custom tool to start article drafts for works by LGBT artists that you are very welcome to make use of.--Pharos (talk) 18:41, 25 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Pharos, I've been curious about whatever happened to this? Was there a winner? Has it been announced? Does one have to watch elsewhere? (i.e not on en.wp?). Victoria (tk) 18:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We invite all fashion-minded editors to join the virtual event for Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/MetFashion 2020 on Saturday September 26. Please RSVP.--Pharos (talk) 16:39, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AI experiments using ChatGPT[edit]

Here's an attempt to try creating some exhibition articles using AI and ChatGPT. Treat with caution! But seems promising.

Feel free to edit and improve! - Fuzheado | Talk 16:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]