Talk:Gettysburg Address

From Wikisource

Gettysburg Address was the featured text for June 2006 (discussion). It is considered among the most complete works available on Wikisource.

Information about this edition
Original edition	Original handwritten manuscripts
Source	Memorial inscription: Library of Congress Nicolay draft: Library of Congress (page 1 and page 2) Hay draft: Library of Congress (page 1 and page 2) Everett copy: Virtual Gettysburg Bancroft copy: Cornell's Rare and Manuscript Division (page 1 and page 2) Bliss copy: The Papers of Abraham Lincoln (page 1, page 2, and page 3)
Contributor(s)	BirgitteSB
Level of progress	100%
Notes	Completely proofread. Source image for memorial version is captioned as "Transcription of the version of the Gettysburg Address inscribed on the walls at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C." by the LOC. This is a trusted source, but verification of this would be a bonus.
Proofreaders	BirgitteSB, AllanHainey, Bookofjude

It is believed that an image of the original text should be included in this article to help illustrate the nature of the work. Please use {{image}} to add this request to other pages.

Contents 1 Bulgarian 2 Textual variants 3 Editorial commentary 4 Merge textinfo boxes 5 Images 6 Year category 7 Update interwiki 8 Add spoken copy 9 Categorization 10 Image change 11 Memorial Version Error

[edit] Bulgarian

Can somebody take the Bulgarian translation and put it in its own page? That way it'll be easier to interwiki when we've gotten sub-domains. Thanks! Zhaladshar July 1, 2005 22:47 (UTC)

copied from my Wikipedia talk page

I think I put it in the right place in bulgarian sector.--Makedonas 02:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I moved the others translations myself--BirgitteSB 13:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Textual variants

(moved from User talk:Dovi)

I wonder if it might be better to use a subpage transclusion instead of a template? It works exactly the same way, with curly braces. But you just put a slash in front of the name: {{/Main Text}}, or {{/Section 3}}, etc. The hard links are then e.g. [[Gettysburg Address/Main Text]]. That would allow protection of absolutely stable parts of a larger article, without having to create a bunch of templates. Of course, it's just a matter of organization, rather than substance. Wolfman 15:56, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Technically it could be done either way. At he: we already have a "culture" of basic text stored in templates that can be recombined in various ways for various editions.

Here, since there seem to be several slightly different manuscript version of the GA, it might make sense to store each in its own template and allow the user to view them all at the GA page.

Alternatively, we could select one version, and start thinking about how to best indicate textual variants.Dovi 18:23, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Sure, it's technically equivalent. I was just thinking more about namespace pollution. It seems to me a bit tidier to keep various protected parts organized as sub-pages to a main article. As you point out, it loses some parsimony if there are multiple versions of the main page; but no less so than an article in template-space already does (e.g. {{Gettysburg Address (1863 edition)/Section 3}} rather than {{/Section 3}} ). But, it's no big deal either way. Wolfman 20:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I mentioned it on your talk rather than here, as I'm not particularly concerned with this article per se. It seems that the broad question of how to stabilize an article is coming to a boil. This particular article just happens to be an example I noticed from your edit comment in RC. Wolfman 20:10, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

You're right, I wanted to use GA as an example of a nonprotected page with links and stuff that contains the basic text as a protected template. But that didn't work out so well, since the template obviously can't be frozen until the issue of variants is sorted out (which I was previously unaware of). Oh well. Maybe we'll find a different example.Dovi 20:28, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Editorial commentary

As a UK reader of these it would be helpful to have a WS Editorial note on the main page about the origins and significance of the different versions posted. Apwoolrich 21:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

The main significance of the versions is the discrepencies between them as no one is sure exactly what was said that day. Wikipedia has an excellent article on w:Gettysburg Address with much detail. It will probably soon be on the main page. Should we suggest checking out WP earlier in the article? Do you think the comments I added are sufficent?--BirgitteSB 21:54, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you should start the page with an explicit WS Editorial note in bold saying that much more detail about the provenance of the versions is on the main WP article, (which I have just read - its excellent). Maybe you might beef up your comments a bit - saying who Hay etc were. As a general thought I have felt its not a good idea to have WP link buttons tacked at the bottom of pages in WS. In this case it takes time to scroll down to the link button. And readers are often lazy. Apwoolrich 08:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Coming back today and looking at the page "fresh", I understand your points. In fact I agree we need significant editorial remarks. However I am also thinking there will be users who come for a casual look. I feel that we really need to start with the actual text. I chose the version from the Lincoln Memorial because it was designed to be read and is literally "set in stone". Then I followed with an explanation lifted from WP before the reader would come across any other version. This is something nearly every schoolchild in America is asked to memorize, so it is quite likely to attract casual interest. How do you think this works?--BirgitteSB 16:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

EXCELLENT! :-) Could not be better.Many thanks Apwoolrich 18:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

The revised design looks fine to me. It makes plain what is WS input and what is the text. Kinf regards. Apwoolrich 08:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge textinfo boxes

Since we've reached 100%, the fields for the {{textinfo}} boxes above are all identical with the exception of the source. I propose we merge them into the box below, which will also let us remove the extra {{edition}} boxes on the main page in favour of the one in the {{header}}.

Information about this edition
Original edition	Original handwritten manuscripts
Source	Memorial inscription: Library of Congress Nicolay draft: Library of Congress (page 1 and page 2) Hay draft: Library of Congress (page 1 and page 2) Everett copy: Virtual Gettysburg Bancroft copy: Cornell's Rare and Manuscript Division (page 1 and page 2) Bliss copy: The Papers of Abraham Lincoln (page 1 and page 2)
Contributor(s)	BirgitteSB
Level of progress	100%
Notes	Completely proofread. Source image for memorial version is captioned as "Transcription of the version of the Gettysburg Address inscribed on the walls at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C." by the LOC. This is a trusted source, but verification of this would be a bonus.
Proofreaders	BirgitteSB, AllanHainey, Bookofjude

// [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 15:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I made some minor changes and support replacing the various infoboxes with this one. --BirgitteSB 16:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Call me a sucker for images, but I see the Library of Congress has some Public Domain images of the drafts, I wouldn't mind seeing added, but am too lazy to do myself at the moment Sherurcij 19:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Year category

Please add [[Category:1863 works]] to the page. --Spangineer^wp (háblame) 19:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Added.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 22:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update interwiki

Hi, Catalan translation has been made: [[ca:Discurs de Gettysburg]] Thanks. Aleator 20:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Added.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 22:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, please add pl:Adres gettysburski and replace the current spanish interwiki to es:Pronunciamiento de Gettysburg. Thanks Lugusto 22:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Done--BirgitteSB 00:54, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello. We also have a Finnish version nowadays: fi:Gettysburgin puhe. Please add! --Wwwwolf (talk) 14:49, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --Spangineer^wp (háblame) 16:05, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Add spoken copy

{{editprotected}}

Please add {{audio file|LibriVox - Everrett Copy of the Gettysburg Address - Michael Scherer.ogg}} beneath ===Everrett Copy=== —Remember the dot ^(talk) 06:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Done... much later! --Spangineer^wp (háblame) 04:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Categorization

Could Category:United States Civil War be added to this page? Quadell 15:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Category:American Civil War added. --Spangineer^wp (háblame) 04:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Image change

please correct to File:Nicolaycopy.jpg.

Done. Yann (talk) 09:44, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Memorial Version Error

The version on the wall at the Lincoln Memorial reads, "who here gave their lives that that nation might live" and not, as recorded here, "who here gave their lives that this nation might live."

See (large file): http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Lincoln_Memorial_%28south_wall_interior%29.jpg

I fixed it. (No kidding about "large file"!)--BirgitteSB 20:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)