Wikidata:Property proposal/Music mood

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

The music industry, notably digital listening platforms and audiovisual music supervisors, have long used the notion of Mood to add enriched description to an audio recording (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3302947), music track with vocals (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q55850593) or music track without lyrics (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q55850643).

It is now possible for music fans to create Mood centric playlists (https://www.moodplayl.ist/). The international DDEX-MEAD standard is involved in trying to better standardize this concept (https://kb.ddex.net/implementing-each-standard/media-enrichment-and-description-(mead)/). The DDEX industry standard body has not yet reached an agreement on whether or not mood allowed value set can be determined by industry stakeholders. I sustain the idea, it would be better served by crowdsourced dynamics, such as the one offered by Wikidata.

While it is possible to add a Main subject (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P921) as a predicate-property to an audiovisual object-item in Wikidata, it seems that being able to add a Mood to an audio recording would help the digital music ecosystem to better describe such entity. The one argument against this would be the very subjective nature of mood semantics. Therefore, we have done a literature search in order to identify databases and current usages of the mood concept by some industry stakeholders.

My research has identified several Mood systems initiatives : the Greek physician-philosopher Hippocrates humors, University of California at Berkeley Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Cowen et al., 2020), psychologist Robert Plutchik’s emotion theory, DDEX-MEAD (Media Enrichment and Description) industry consortium standard, simbals mood and audio descriptors, Deezer Flow dynamic mood playlists, Cyanite.ai multi-label score based classifier, SoundCloud’s Musiio tag system and the Musicovery research initiative. Other initiatives include crowdsourced user-generated mood lists or extensive mood lists, like the AllMusic mood exploration tool (https://www.allmusic.com/moods). Our literature search is public and available on Zotero : https://www.zotero.org/groups/2165362/laticce/collections/AIH4HA3A

The AllMusic mood exploration tool (https://www.allmusic.com/moods) allows to retrieve the moods of tracks and their relative weight based on votes by the community. This could permit to source the moods added to Wikidata. See this example for the track 'My Generation" : https://www.allmusic.com/song/my-generation-mt0005694826#moodsThemes

For now, I’m proposing to be synthetic and have narrowed down a potential mood list to eight primary moods shown in the above examples. The community could add more music mood items over time. Youyouca (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•   WikiProject Music has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. Youyouca (talk) 11:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
•   Support I am in favor of this property proposal because it will provide more context to musical pieces, [Music mood]. More granularity on mood terms and hierarchy between parent/child mood terms could be provided at a later stage. VincentCastaignet (talk) 12:09, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
•   Support I support this property proposal. The 8 moods cited here represent the basic moods which seem to embody the general consensus in different official sources. Appplied in Wikidata, I believe that this property will add depth to the classification of recorded songs. In an ideal world, this would benefit Wikidata users and the artists themselves and the organizations representing them. WikiTantôt (talk) 20:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
•   Support I support this property proposal. The research behind it is thorough, and the use cases are clearly defined. --ChristianBRoy (talk) 12:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
•   Comment @ZI Jony: Marking this as ready with only two supports − one of which from a user with no other edits on Wikidata than on this page? In my opinion, this has nowhere near enough support to go ahead. WikiProject Music has over 80 registered participants, we need more buy-in. Jean-Fred (talk) 13:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jean-Frédéric:, no objection from my end to revert the status. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 13:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  We are in no rush and yes, we should rather wait furthermore. Youyouca (talk) 13:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you! (For what it’s worth, I think this proposal is exceptionally well-researched and written). Jean-Fred (talk) 07:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•   Support I support this property proposal. Moods are already used in music description but is always used in promotion purposes. To create mood description without any promotional use will be useful in the wiki environment.Jacynthepe (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•   Support --Kdkeller (talk) 22:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
•   Support ~~~
• @Joplam, Kdkeller, Jacynthepe, Jean-Frédéric, ChristianBRoy, ZI Jony:   Done as music mood (P12830). --Wüstenspringmaus _talk 13:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •   Oppose - I think it's a very bad idea to have a property which is that subjective. Are you going to tell me I'm wrong to consider a particular song sad or romantic? What if it's a song where the mood of the music is in conflict with that of the lyrics (e.g., No Children, Pumped Up Kicks)?

  DS (talk) 19:05, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  With regard to your comment, I would like to point out the criteria for the creation of a property; all the conditions are met here, so a creation has taken place. Your rejection of the proposal could not be taken into account in my decision, as it came after the creation. The research behind the property is thorough, and the use cases are clearly defined, so this property benefits as a better description. If you don't agree, you can submit a request for deletion to WD:PFD. --Wüstenspringmaus _talk 10:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]