Template talk:British-Museum-db

Broken?
I recently tried testing this template out on a draft page, and found that it didn't seem to work. The links using this template at Mold cape also don't seem to work. The Museum's website states that it's "recently updated." Is it possible that the template syntax needs to be updated to conform? AleatoryPonderings (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

British Museum website redesign has broken our links
The British Museum have redesigned their website, and unfortunately broken our template. Here are a couple of test cases:

File:British Museum Flood Tablet.jpg (used at Gilgamesh flood myth):
 * Using :  "Sorry we can't find that page..."
 * Search the new collection site using museum number: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?museum_number=K.3375 ✅ (but you need to click through for full details)
 * Search the new collection site using our object number: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?museum_number=309929 "Your search returned no results"
 * Direct link based on accession number: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/W_K-3375 ✅

File:Early writing tablet recording the allocation of beer.jpg:
 * Using :  "Sorry we can't find that page..."
 * Search the new collection site using accession number: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?museum_number=1989,0130.4 ✅ (but you need to click through for full details)
 * Search the new collection site using our object number: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?museum_number=327218 "Your search returned no results"
 * Search the new collection site using new museum number: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?museum_number=140855 ✅ (but you need to click through for full details)
 * Direct link based on accession number: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/W_1989-0130-4 ✅

As the "object number" we use seems to have now been removed or replaced by a different "museum number", it is not possibly to fix the issue by simply replacing "http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_collection_database/search_object_details.aspx?objectid=" with "https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?museum_number=". Maybe it is possibly to algorithmically construct the direct url from the accession number in all cases, but I somehow doubt it. BabelStone (talk) 11:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The URLs for specific objects look like they have the reference number in the URL - for example, object 1928,1009.378 is at https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/W_1928-1009-378. Don't know how the prefix W was picked though. 173.79.65.16 (talk) 07:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have another example where prefix H was used, https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1857-0623-1 for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seax_of_Beagnoth. I believe that additional letter indicates a collection or a gallery, such as Ancient Egyptian = Y, Anglo Saxon = H, Ancient Greek = G, African = E, along those lines. The suggestion to replace the wikipedia link template by "https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?museum_number=" and to append the museum number e.g. "1857,0623.1" seems the simplest solution to me, even if the user then has to click once more onto the search result to arrive at the actual object description. Macholl (talk) 10:59, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think this is a suitable fix too. The above poster is also interested in fixing the Royal Game of Ur page and another artifact on there (33333,b) now has an address with "object/W_Rm-III-6-b" so quite a different number.  The above search method of Macholl finds it though. Hoverboarder (talk) 18:59, 6 June 2021 (UTC)