Index talk:Sm all cc.pdf

An html version of this book in on-line at: http://www.emotionalcompetency.com/sci/booktoc.html

The original native digital pdf file is on-line at: https://archive.org/details/sm_all_cc

Style Guide:

• To underline, use the template {{underline}} To avoid obscuring descender, try: constructs like <span style="border-bottom:1px solid black;padding-bottom:2px;">jyghk∫</span> (result looks like: jyghk∫. Adjust the padding-bottom factor to suit your own taste.)

• For the {{Dotted TOC page listing}}, the options are all detailed on the template's documentation page. Just click on the blue link I've just made and you'll be taken there. That said, this TOC is too complex for this template and I would set it directly as a table. When setting a TOC you need to be making decisions about how the work will be structured when it's taken through to the mainspace. This particular work will need to be sub-paged, so how will it be split up?

The original text indents quotations, reducing both the left and right margins. See: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Sm_all_cc.pdf/4 How can that best be done?

This is best done using blockquote tags. i.e. <blockquote>. . .</blockquote>

I found a really spiffy horizontal divider bar, ("Custom rule") you can see it in use at https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Sm_all_cc.pdf/4 How can I learn the parameters to that device?

Again check the template documentation page at {{Custom rule}}. However, we do have a template {{***}} that will reproduce the three asterisk separators that the text uses.--Lbeaumont (talk) 21:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Useful markup codes

These codes are often used in the text markup: {{C|{{size|xl|'''Chapter 1: Introduction'''}}}} {{RunningHeader|||3}} {{custom rule|sp|20|fc|22|sp|20}} {{size|xl|lorem ipsum}} <blockquote> {{underline| {{overline|X}} {{left| [[File:SmFig4 4.jpg|thumb|right| 196px| ]] {{hws | | }} {{hwe | | }} --Lbeaumont (talk) 11:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Possible copyright violation

According to the source of this work[1], "The original work was created by Richard D. Jarrard and remains his intellectual property." The document[2] indicates a 2001 copyright by Mr. Jarrard. That said, I'm noting this for possible copyright violation. Outlier59 (talk) 01:01, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

I worked with the author, Richard D. Jarrard, to release the version imported to Wikispaces version under Creative Commons. I mirrored the version at [3] for many years (Note my name in the footer of each page of that website) because the server space provided at the University of Utah was sporadic. Again, this was done with explicit permission of the original author Richard D. Jarrard. Based on this, I request that there is no copyright violation and this issue be closed. Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 12:33, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

See Wikisource:Copyright_discussions#Index:Sm_all_cc.pdf. I haven't put a copyright violation tag on the index, because it would blank it. I'm bringing this up as a copyright question because, as far as I know, only the owner of the copyright can release it. I'll copy your explanation to that discussion, then let those who know more about this decide whether or not to close this. Outlier59 (talk) 23:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Assuming the broader copyright problem is resolved favourably, the image on Page:Sm all cc.pdf/100 needs to be blanked out (possibly replaced with a explanatory note to assist the reader understand why) per decision on WS:CV. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

@John Vandenberg: Of interest, why this particular page? Why not also (for example) Page:Sm all cc.pdf/6? Are the custodians of Sidney Harris somehow judged to be less litigious perhaps than is Gary Larson? Surely if even one cartoon is to be expunged from the PDF then so should all the other ones as well. AuFCL (talk) 03:16, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

This particular image was listed on WS:CV and I deleted it. See https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Copyright_discussions&diff=6197157&oldid=6197152 . I have no knowledge of any other similar cases in the PDF, but the same approach should probably be used to remove any other likely copyvios within this work. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:06, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

@John Vandenberg: Thanks for your reply so far. O.K. So you are taking the "precedent-driven" approach, is that it? That isn't a problem.

What is however more of a problem is that having put lbeaumont through the wringer like this it would be remiss of the wikisource community to leave him with the impression all has been resolved, only to commence the process all over again just because we have complacently lacked the thoroughness which we appear to be requiring of him?

So, I repeat the question in more detail. Do you wish the PDF to be expunged of any or all of the following possibly controversial status images? Normally I (my sole opinion) would have thought addressing the transcription alone should have been sufficient of itself:

1. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/6—©Harris, 1970
2. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/12—©Harris, 1970
3. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/45—©Harris, 1982
4. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/74—©Harris, 1970
5. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/100—©Larson, 1985 (resolved—phew!)
6. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/117—©Larson, 1989
7. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/118—©Larson, 1985
8. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/133—©Larson, 1980
9. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/149—©Larson, 1987
10. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/158—©Bronowsky, 1973 in turn drawn from John von Neumann (possibly 1940's? substantive to text; this is a harder one!)
11. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/171—©Watterson, 1993
12. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/192—©Harris, 1970
13. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/199—©Watterson, 1993
14. Page:Sm all cc.pdf/215—©Watterson, 1993

—and any others I may have missed in this admittedly lightweight survey?

And perhaps pointing up just how ridiculous the implications of this hunt can become: N.B. on Page:Sm_all_cc.pdf/229 Larson is properly referenced in the "Name Index"—which would sort of become a lasting anomaly if every item associated with the cartoonist has been carefully scrubbed out… AuFCL (talk) 05:59, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for compiling that list. Yes, all images except for von Neumann diagram on Page:Sm all cc.pdf/158 should scrubbed from our copy of the PDF based on the declaration from the article that they didnt secure permissions/copyright releases for those separate works. IMO, the von Neumann diagram should be listed on Wikisource:Copyright discussions, as it is an interesting case; at issue will be when it was first published, and it wouldnt surprise me if Bronowski, 1973 is not considered a proper publishing of von Neumann authors notes, and possibly occurred without permission from him (he was dead at publication) or his estate (academics generally dont bother for snippets like this), so that image might even be still unpublished. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:22, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. "Bronowski, 1973" gets worse, as it is apparently the "book of the television series"—so not quite academic—but tracking down copyright permission on von Neumann images might be a nightmare. AuFCL (talk) 07:13, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Noting that this still has not been done, I have posted a request in Wikisource:Scan Lab to have these images removed from the scan. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:18, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Page Status Colors have Disappeared

The page status colors, (yellow, green, etc.) that typically denote the editorial status of each page have disappeared from this index page. How can this information be restored? Thanks --Lbeaumont (talk) 12:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

This seems to happen every now and then -- I've seen it quite a bit. Next time a page is edited, it'll probably correct itself. Also, sometimes a proofed page will show as unproofed until you proof another page. Technical quirk. Outlier59 (talk) 23:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC)