1

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

I have renamed 'Borough Museum' (incorrect) to 'London South Bank University Sarah Rose Collection A David Bomberg Legacy'.  The University building is located in Borough Road.  That is not the name of the 'museum'.

2

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

I have transferred the 7 artworks under South Bank Centre to Arts Council (UK) as this is the same.  I have renamed Arts Council - 'Arts Council at the South Bank Centre'

3

(240 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

There were duplicate entries for the University of Liverpool (Victoria Art Gallery).  Art works under Victoria Art Gallery have been transferred to the University of Liverpool heading.  Not to be confused with the Victoria Art Gallery (Bath).

However, the original entry for Victoria Art Gallery was changed to University of Liverpool and there now appears two Univ of Liverpool (Victoria Art Gallery) in the dropdown list.  ONLY THE ONE WITH WORKS should be chosen. The Victoria Art Gallery (Liverpool) is also extant in the dropdown list, although all works have been transferred.

I would like to have the ability to delete museums from the dropdown list, which still shows many 'museums' that are obsolete.

4

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

The Tate paintings are not listed under which museum.  The Tate in London loans artworks to Liverpool and St Ives.  Artworks advertised are generally said to belong to only the Tate.   However all modern (20th/21st century) FOREIGN artworks should be placed under TATE MODERN and all artworks by British artists, from 14th century to present day, should be entered under TATE BRITAIN.

I have transferred those 'modern' art works by foreign artists to TATE MODERN.

IF ANYONE READS THESE MESSAGES??!!

5

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

All paintings that belong to the York City Trust are shown under York Museums Trust rather than York Art Gallery (they may not be located in the art gallery but in other locations indicated on the Trust page).

It is best that all future works are put under the York Trust holding.

6

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

To Irene/Rocsdad:

A large number of British Embassies/High Commissions were created for artworks.  All the works belong to the Government Art Collection - UK and not the individual embassies.

Heads of Missions for British Embassies/High Commissions may select artworks from the Government collection to display (usually in the Residences) for the duration of their tenure in office, after which the incoming Head may decide if he/she wishes to retain the work or have it sent back to London.  These are moved around according to the wishes of the Heads of Missions.

I have therefore transferred the artworks (nearly all by British artists) to the correct collection:  Government Art Collection - UK.

The embassy entries should be removed to avoid errors in the future.

7

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

Sorted.

8

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

All now replaced.

9

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

I would like to see an easier research mechanism for works in Venice.  There are numerous old master paintings in small churches in Venice and it is not easy to capture where they are represented.  Currently one has to scroll through the artist or mu seum list but if someone wishes to know where a lot of Venetian artworks in minor churches are located it is a difficult task.

I think Venice is the sole and unique example in this case as so many major artworks are scattered in small, little known or unknown churches and 'scuola'.

I would like to see some sort of cross reference e.g. 'Venice - (names of locations)'.

This, of course, leads on to a listing of all museum holdings on this website under major cities:

'Rome - (.........)
Paris - (.........)

etc

10

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

I am trying to remove some of the obsolete and duplicated museum entries. 

I have replaced the commercial ad with a Venetian church:
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=2686

But could not remove the original logo (for the commercial enterprise) and had to insert the artwork.

How does one remove a logo?  If you know please do it.

11

(240 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

Your comments above are indicative of most United Kingdom provincial collections, whereby a collective body (usually the county town or main administrative city in the county) controls a number of museums and galleries under its wing.

It is a question of whether we maintain a single name (example Norwich) or create separate museum pages (as with Merseyside).

12

(240 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

John Constable - one deleted

13

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

When you say "have all the NT manors under the same entry" this is what I proposed at the beginning, after joining, in that we could have kept it to 'National Trust' and 'National Trust for Scotland' but expanding the location in the notes for that artwork?

But I think we can leave the NT and University entries as is without resorting to the collective titles.

What concerns me now are the numerous new entries being created for UK's civic collections - these will run into hundreds, if not thousands of so-called museums.  It has happened with a large number of US institutions, where only one or two works are held.

As for the BBC Paintings lists for which I am a major culprit (!) I am starting to think that there is little point in [basically] copying their entries to this website.  Why have a parallel website when the BBC one is so much better?

Athough I use the BBC a great deal (it is good), I only include major 'international' artists and you will see from the BBC that they include a very large number of local (and unknown) artists.

It looks as if Rocsdad is simply going through the BBC alpha lists and copying them all over to this website.  This will definitely consume the servers.  It is bad enough at present.

I am not sure if, by containing works under a collective title, such as 'Civic Collections - UK' is better for the server than creating new museum entries for each and every provincial collection?  If it makes no difference, then I can delete the Civic Collections museum entry and transfer the contents to new/existing museums on this web.

Example:  I have been transferring recent entries for Perth and Kinross Council' to Civic Collections - UK, as this is where they are. 

Currently, we now have two entry points (Civic Collections + indiv council museums).  So it's not satisfactory.

I can only speak for the UK.  Don't think this same problem arises in Europe or American collections.


I do need direction?

14

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

Josselin, I note that Rocsdad appears to be going thru the BBC Paintings lists alphabetically and therefore creating numerous new museums entries.    This is just what I would want to avoid as it is overloading this system.  The majority of the new entries are not necessary and should be captured under 'Civic Collections' with a descriptive note as to where they are.

I could endeavour to transfer a lot of these but it will be  an enormous task.  I really haven't got the inclination to correct hundreds of these entries. I think it is up to the systems manager (is Chris still in control?) to perhaps decide how this is to be done, before Rocsdad enters too many more.

I see little point in creating new rural holdings for less than five entries. 

It is also pointless to have a Civic Collections museum listing, which I produced, if users continue to disregard this and create yet more galleries.

CHRIS - IF YOU ARE STILL WITH US, WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS?

15

(240 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

kohn1fox wrote:

Entry for 'Scottish National Gallery' has been removed and all paintings have been transferred to the correct titles, National Gallery of Scotland/Scottish National Portrait Gallery.


It would be very helpful if the redundant museum entry, as above example, could be removed altogether to avoid it being reinstated.  Although it disappears from the alpha listing for museums, it remains as an entry when one opens the drop-down window against a location.  This can lead to someone reopening the duplicate (and incorrect) museum.

16

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

Josselin wrote:
kohn1fox wrote:

I'm not so sure we should be adding numerous 'locations', i.e. hundreds of tiny rural buildings that house one single artwork (usually a modern piece by maybe by a local artisan)?  Some of these 'museums' in central Russia and beyond are an example in mind.

This is why I opened a page for 'civic collections - UK' as these run into hundreds and do not, in my view, justify a separate museum page.  Anyone in the town and interested in searching out any odd artworks on display can check locally.

If one looks down the listings of museums there are hundreds that have only one or two works.  What are we trying to achieve?  Some sort of Guinness Book of Records!

The problem comes from the BBC Your Paintings website, that has listed all the places where at least one public-owned artwork is located. It's the only country for which we can have such details. I know that many small public-owned manors, city offices or other public buildings, own artworks in France, Germany, or Italy, but we don't know which ones (most don't have websites) unless by looking in catalogues raisonnés where they are sometimes mentioned. It's especially true for modern and contemporary artworks used to decorate public buildings.

As a result the 'museum' list for the UK is becoming very long with hundreds of entries - and potentially thousands.

I think we should be as accurate as possible, and create these 'museums', most of National Trust manors are open to the public and several artworks have been in there for centuries.

I'm however concerned that the website will lost in consistency as the UK will be extremely detailed. The database will also have a hard time loading the list of museums - it's already the case.

But you have helped to create this extra long listing for British establishments by splitting up 'University of Oxford' (and University of Cambridge) into separate colleges.  Hitherto, I had entered works under the generic title of 'University of Oxford' with a note in the descriptions as to where the work is housed.  This was sufficient and removed the need to have about 50 extra museum entries.

The same had applied to the National Trust, which was perfectly acceptable as a collective title for ALL NT works.  You will note that I always add in the descriptions box in which collection the work is housed (e.g. National Trust at Petworth House, Petworth, West Sussex).  However, by adding individual 'houses' the listing has now grown by , perhaps, 200 extra museum entries.  I consider this unnecessary.

17

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

Having glanced at the museums listing under 'A' I noted that a new entry had recently been made for Apsley House (English Heritage).  This is the Wellington Museum that already exists.  I will therefore cross-reference them and I have transferred this entry to the existent Wellington Museum.

Unfortunately duplicates such as this are going to happen occasionally if the user doesn't know that a  museum has more than one name.  In this case it is documented as the Wellington Museum (home of the Duke of Wellington), who lived at Apsley House.

18

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

I'm not so sure we should be adding numerous 'locations', i.e. hundreds of tiny rural buildings that house one single artwork (usually a modern piece by maybe by a local artisan)?  Some of these 'museums' in central Russia and beyond are an example in mind.

This is why I opened a page for 'civic collections - UK' as these run into hundreds and do not, in my view, justify a separate museum page.  Anyone in the town and interested in searching out any odd artworks on display can check locally.

If one looks down the listings of museums there are hundreds that have only one or two works.  What are we trying to achieve?  Some sort of Guinness Book of Records!

19

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

kohn1fox wrote:

I consider that some of the entries and 'corrections' made on this website is becoming a nonsense.  It is somewhat degrading the whole principle of this website.  Commercial galleries for example should NOT be included.  Josselin has highlighted one in Germany that has a listing of 54 artworks.  Is this really a commercial gallery? I'm unable to open the file at present due to a server failure.

This museum/gallery is M Bochum Kunstvermittlung.  Do you know that this is primarily a commercial enterprise (for the sale of artworks)?

20

(59 replies, posted in Suggestions from users)

I consider that some of the entries and 'corrections' made on this website is becoming a nonsense.  It is somewhat degrading the whole principle of this website.  Commercial galleries for example should NOT be included.  Josselin has highlighted one in Germany that has a listing of 54 artworks.  Is this really a commercial gallery? I'm unable to open the file at present due to a server failure.

21

(240 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

Entry for 'Scottish National Gallery' has been removed and all paintings have been transferred to the correct titles, National Gallery of Scotland/Scottish National Portrait Gallery.

22

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

I have combined the college collections of London University to a new museum entry - 'University of London' (with a note indicating which college).  I see no point in creating separate London University college collections, which belong to London University. Holloway College and Uni of Roehampton should be removed from the drop-down list (they no longer appear in the listing of museums).

23

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

Josselin wrote:
kohn1fox wrote:

The Hermitage in Saint Petersburg has been renamed in it's proper title 'The State Hermitage Museum' .  The alphabetical listing is therefore shown under 'T' but the site identifies 'Hermitage' when entered under an artwork.

I put back 'Hermitage Museum', because the dropdown menu doesn't list it if you just type 'Hermitage' in the search box; it only lists the Hermitage in Norfolk and Switzerland.

I'm happy to accept your explanation and to reinstate the title but it is actually incorrect;  the same applies to other State museums in the Russian Federation.

However if one types in 'Hermitage' it will find it under The State .....  Same applies to the State Russian Museum.

I don't tend to use a drop down list as it is now too exhaustive.  I type in a search word in the title and it will find it.  Example: natgalscot will bring up the National Gallery of Scotland.

24

(137 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

The Hermitage in Saint Petersburg has been renamed in it's proper title 'The State Hermitage Museum' .  The alphabetical listing is therefore shown under 'T' but the site identifies 'Hermitage' when entered under an artwork.

25

(240 replies, posted in Bug reporting)

There is already a listing for Jan Brueghel (the Elder).  The works entered have been transferred to the existing person.  The newly created artist Jan Brueghel should be removed.