User talk:Ham II

	Archives: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025

Hi Ham - I've done this, but what do you think about the above? Feel free to act if you want to! Best, Johnbod (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of statues of English and British royalty in London, a link pointing to the disambiguation page George II was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Ham II (talk) 19:55, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ham - hope you're keeping well. I've been doing a bit with the lists of entries on the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England, mainly just alphabetising, and adding bluelinks and images. The Listed parks and gardens in Greater London one was already almost complete, so here I'm just looking to see what gaps can be filled. Which has led me to doing Pimlico Gardens. Now, try as I might, I cannot get the little locator red dot to show on the map. Any idea why? KJP1 (talk) 13:28, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Have now got the red dot to appear, but it does so just off the map! London Westminster obviously won't work. Given Greater London is too big, can you suggest any other map that will include it? Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 14:20, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@KJP1: Hi KJP1! If you replace the | map = parameter altogether with | mapframe-zoom = 15, and adjust the number according to your preference, you get a map with the pushpin at the centre. That's what I always prefer to use in infoboxes. All the best, Ham II (talk) 14:33, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Now that’s a nifty tool! Many thanks. I now feel I should use that on the others I’ve created, which is a rather daunting prospect… All the best. KJP1 (talk) 14:46, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Have you lost interest in this discussion, or are you still thinking? AmateurEditor (talk) 02:30, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@AmateurEditor: Sorry I couldn't give this my full attention until now. It needs one's full concentration when there are so many interrelated issues to consider. Ham II (talk) 09:38, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How fast he has faded! Had mega stroll on Wednesday, can't work out if this is in Fitzroy Place art or not! Really can't find Randall-Page's One and the Many on Artuk either. Mysteries upon mysteries. No Swan So Fine (talk) 12:50, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

He hasn't weathered the last 13 years too well, has he? I've created a new entry at List of public art in the London Borough of Camden § Primrose Hill. That's another one that's not on Art UK, so their coverage isn't complete. Not been able to find anything out about the Fitzroy Place one – is it too low to be seating? Ham II (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@KJP1: Looking at the Portmeirion list do you two think it would be inelegant if I aimed to replace it with the Cardiff listed building box? It would help with the commons link and Cadw ref etc. I've just bought the new book on Portmeirion from Yale University Press and am greedily devouring it! [1] No Swan So Fine (talk) 13:28, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks a beautiful book. I can see what you’re saying re. the list. My starting point would be to ask Sionk for their view. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 16:04, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this pretty poor near-stub article, is (looking at the creator's talk) clearly some kind of copyvio/AI/unacknowleged translation. Or OCLC maybe. All but one of the sources are foreign, mostly German. I think the reader would be better served by a disam to the long Gothic sculpture, Romanesque_art#Sculpture, and sections in other articles (Ottonian, Anglo-S) etc. Needless to say, none of these are even linked to. What do you think? Also User:Mccapra, who has taken an interest. Johnbod (talk) 14:33, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: I was about to agree to the dab page idea, but the author seems to have big plans for the article and has written some substantial sections on late antiquity so far (albeit logged out some of the time). Presumably if he gets on to the actual subject of medieval sculpture in the body text there'll be something equally beefy there? I'm inclined to wait and see what he comes up with. The stuff written so far will have to be seriously trimmed and rehoused elsewhere, and I'd like to give the page a thorough copyedit at some point so that it reads as more idiomatic English (as I did previously with Florentine Renaissance art, which was translated from French). Ham II (talk) 06:51, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in the Destubathon of the Americas, a contest/editathon which will run from May 1 to May 31. The goal is to destub as many of our 475,000+ stubs for the Americas (from Alaska down to Chile) as possible. A good chance to have fun in expanding many of our old stale stubs and win up to £2000 ($2680) in Amazon vouchers for expanding stub articles. Sign up in the Contestants/participants section on the contest page if interested. Even if not interested in prizes you are still warmly welcome to participate in it as an editathon! Hopefully we can achieve something significant in the month of May together! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:02, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you are well! What are the next steps like for google sheet --> List? – Aza24 (talk) 05:03, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Aza24: Great to hear from you! In September I put the spreadsheet through QuickStatements, which transferred all but 171 of the entries onto Wikidata. I put all those errors into another spreadsheet for me to work away at. Thanks to your prodding I finished fixing those yesterday, so every drawing in the catalogue is now on Wikidata! There's a list extracted from Wikidata at User:Ham II/Leonardo drawings – sorting them by ascending order in the "Cat. no." column puts them in their order in Zöllner's catalogue (after the blank entries, which are ones he hasn't included).

After deciding on how we'd like the drawings to be ordered (which is bound to involve some more cleaning up of the data), we can copy and paste the code of the automatically generated list into a Wikipedia list. If we want to sort by date, the best way I can see of adding dates is to add them to the date parameter of c:Template:Artwork on the individual Wikimedia Commons files, make sure that the Wikidata item is in the wikidata parameter, then click on the icon to transfer the dates to the Wikidata items. (Ditto for medium and measurements, but dates might be a higher priority if we want to use them for sorting.) It's been a very long time coming, so thanks for your patience with this! Ham II (talk) 10:43, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So glad to hear re the Wikidata alignment! That's a good resource for many reasons (our purposes included!).

The order is a good question. I was leaning a bit towards preserving the Zöllner order, because then perhaps we could have sectioning of the different categories he gives in embedded sections, which I think would help with navigational ability. For example: User:Aza24/sandbox (perma link). I think dates would work too for the default sorting (then the section titles would just appear at the bottom of the list by default), but not sure which is preferable. We could see what John or Ceoil think as well. The two issues with sticking with Zöllner order are 1) it's probably against most artwork ordering practices which exist on the site to begin with and 2) it puts a lot of emphasis on a single authority. But to be fair I'm not sure that there are any recent catalogues of this depth (I have this newish (2021?) 4-volume Bambach set, but I don't think has a catalogue even.

We may end up having a lot of columns, and I think that's okay, since each piece of information is relatively small, text-wise, aside from the titles. We probably need a central place to move this conversation, should we start a draft page? (or did you want to use the one you linked?) I also have this page started, though I think the dates may not necessarily be the same as Zöllner. I'd also like to move these notes somewhere, with errors/inconsistencies I found while going through Zöllner. – Aza24 (talk) 17:38, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Aza24: Thematic grouping along the lines of Zöllner's chapter divisions might work, and there is a "part of the series (P179)" property on Wikidata which could possibly be used for that purpose.

This is starting to sound like a WikiProject Leonardo da Vinci! Shall we start one? It could host the Wikidata lists currently at User:Ham II/Leonardo drawings and (for a broader range of topics) User:Ham II/Leonardo. (I'd probably keep at least the one for drawings in my userspace for experiments with ordering.) That would be similar to the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject London/Public art/Wikidata, which has Wikidata-generated lists which help with the maintenance of the manually created lists at List of public art in London. The main project page could incorporate parts of User:Aza24/Leonardo overview and User:Ham II/Sandpit B. Ham II (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I am suspicious of new WikiProjects, since most existing ones lay defunct, aside from a few exceptional ones (MIL-HIST and the Hurricanes project, for instance).Although, if our goal from the outset is really just a thorough tracking system and such, it does not seem beneficial for keep such things in disparate userspaces.

Either way, maybe it would be better to start a task force of an existing project? Aza24 (talk) 23:06, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Aza24: A tracking system is exactly what I use Wikipedia:WikiProject London/Public art for (and mostly for maintaining lists at that). Any collaboration between users that results from it, which can admittedly be thin on the ground, is just a bonus. As Leonardo was a polymath it seems to do him a disservice to have a task force of any one WikiProject, and I don't think there's any practical difference between a WikiProject and a task force; it's just the difference between having a dedicated talk page banner or a parameter of another talk page banner, as far as I'm aware. Ham II (talk) 07:30, 3 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late response. I believe (not sure) that WikiProjects need some kind of community approval to be formed. So if we're going for a more low-key tracking area, a task force might be quicker to get up and running. Aza24 (talk) 01:40, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]