Template talk:Artwork
Boldfaced or italic original-language title?: italicised titles and translated titles
← Older revision
Revision as of 16:08, 15 March 2013
Line 51:
Line 51:
:::In many languages, it is customary to add italics to titles. I think adding boldface as well looks slightly better. It is true that usage may vary across languages, and that it is not always clear what the "title" of an artworks means (given by the artist, used by all art historians ? or just used in the museum's database ?). {{tl|Title}} tries to deal with those points. --[[User:Zolo|Zolo]] ([[User talk:Zolo|talk]]) 11:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
:::In many languages, it is customary to add italics to titles. I think adding boldface as well looks slightly better. It is true that usage may vary across languages, and that it is not always clear what the "title" of an artworks means (given by the artist, used by all art historians ? or just used in the museum's database ?). {{tl|Title}} tries to deal with those points. --[[User:Zolo|Zolo]] ([[User talk:Zolo|talk]]) 11:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
::::I guess the Wikipedia Manual of Style dictates the use for all of Wikimedia, which says: [[:en:MOS:ITALIC|''Italic type should be used for the following names and titles: … Works of art and artifice … Paintings, sculptures and other works of visual art'']]
It would be a good idea to strive for a consistent style and describe explicity the formatting of the parameter descriptions, if they deviate from plain (un-italicized, un-bolded) formatting, and also actually format the example texts themselves to reduce contradictions and confusion. Note that even the ''Mona Lisa''-example further down the guide doesn't italicize '''or''' embolden the titles.
I have also noticed that some titles of portraits include the year when the person lived, in parenthesis, also italicized, like in [[:File:1stLordClifford.jpg]]. The original title probably doesn't include these numbers, so should they be just erased? ~ [[User:Nelg|Nelg]] ([[User talk:Nelg|talk]]) 15:19, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
::::I guess the Wikipedia Manual of Style dictates the use for all of Wikimedia, which says: [[:en:MOS:ITALIC|''Italic type should be used for the following names and titles: … Works of art and artifice … Paintings, sculptures and other works of visual art'']]
It would be a good idea to strive for a consistent style and describe explicity the formatting of the parameter descriptions, if they deviate from plain (un-italicized, un-bolded) formatting, and also actually format the example texts themselves to reduce contradictions and confusion. Note that even the ''Mona Lisa''-example further down the guide doesn't italicize '''or''' embolden the titles.
I have also noticed that some titles of portraits include the year when the person lived, in parenthesis, also italicized, like in [[:File:1stLordClifford.jpg]]. The original title probably doesn't include these numbers, so should they be just erased? ~ [[User:Nelg|Nelg]] ([[User talk:Nelg|talk]]) 15:19, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
+
:::::Yes, I think we should reconsider the handling of artwork titles in Commons, taking in consideration [[:en:WP:VAMOS#Works of art]] (which I am adapting for German Wikipedia right now). In Anglo-American (and also German) use such titles seem to be italicised normally. I think titles should be italicised, too. However, with titles in Commons we have the problem of the possible but not necessary existence of an original language title. If we boldface a title it should be the original language title – if existing – rather than the translated one, so I would prefer to change the template description here and the function of {{tl|Title}} somehow that way and find a possibility to indicate the origin of a title (by artist, by use and so on as Zolo said above) explicitly since there is no possibility to denote them in an article text here! --[[User:Marsupium|Marsupium]] ([[User talk:Marsupium|talk]]) 16:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
== Parameters ==
== Parameters ==
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Artwork&diff=92627939&oldid=92625929