User talk:AdamBMorgan/Archive 5

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Archive 4 AdamBMorgan — Talk Archive 5 Archive 6 →
All talk threads for the fourth and final quarter of 2011

SHSP New Format[edit]

Adam, I swear that I do not like asking you nor anyone for help on anything. It's annoying to some people to have others constantly asking questions, or for help, and I try not to bother people in that way. Still, there are times when I have to ask. These 52 volumes are a lot of work, as you well know since you are doing all of the hard things. I have now come to a section where there is new formatting--to a small degree--and I do need help with it.

Please look at and format it. I will use what you do for the rest of the volumes. I thank you for the amazing things I have learned from you and for your help with these 52 volumes. I never would have known how to set up all of this. When I was in school we used a slide rule unlike the modern technology and "coding" we use today. The center of the image shows three names. The top two are what I do not know how to seperate properly, one to the near left and one to the near right and on the same line. Personally I would place all three on the same line but it would not look like the original volumes. Respectfully, —William Maury Morris II Talk 01:37, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[1]

Don't worry, it isn't a problem. As for formatting the names, I used a table. You can use either HTML tables or Wikimedia's own coding to create tables (Wikipedia:Help:Table) but I know that is the least popular element of Wikimedia's coding. There are admins on Wikipedia, where tables are mostly just used for lists, who back away from them. However, it is useful on Wikisource for formatting like this.
To explain this case: there are two rows with three cells in the top row (including a forced gap in the middle), while there is just a single cell in the bottom row that has been made to span all three cells. The {{ts|mc|ac}} formats the table style; "mc" centres the table, "ac" centres the text inside the table. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:28, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource:Periodicals[edit]

Looking over the WS:Periodicals page for direction (and getting some), I have an added question: Using Lippincott's Monthly Magazine as an example,—which is not yet hosted here—about five dozen of Mrs. Coates' poems were published in that periodical (all of which I have volume no. info. for), but I have only been able (online) to pin down the issue numbers for about a dozen of them so far. When red-linking, do you suggest I use the format: [[Periodical Title/Volume/MMYYYY/poem title]] or use no red-linking at all until I am able to identify the issue numbers—when I would be able to link as: [[Title/Volume/No./MMYYYY(?)/poem title]]? Another nit-picky question, sorry! Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:44, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention taking into account periodical title changes which occurred over the years...? Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We have lots of entries along the lines of The Times/1914/Arts/For the Fallen; which is an artificial structure unique to Wikisource. So you could do something similar with Lippincott's, if only for the time being.
Wikisource:Periodicals, which is only a proposed guideline, is based on the system used by Popular Science Monthly. In that case, and the others for which I've used this system, the scans were uploaded (or enough background information was available) from which the volume, issue and/or date. The page can be moved later if you do find the right issue.
I haven't encountered changing titles yet but I would use whatever title was on the magazine (starting a new page for that title separate to the previous title). I think that would make more sense to a reader. On the other hand, I can see why maintaining the original title might be beneficial. If it is only a change in name, some people may expect it to be in the same place as the earlier issues; especially if the name was changed back again later. So, choose which ever you think is best. (Sorry if that wasn't very helpful). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It was helpful, thank you... I'm getting ambitious again, and thinking of all the possibilities: over 300 (known to me) of Mrs. Coates' poems appeared in periodicals—I have about 3 dozen known (again, to me—there may be more) periodicals that she was published in—some 'major' some 'minor' mags... My ambitious thought is to create Mainspace pages for the periodicals so any redlinking won't be "wasted breath." Thanks for the info! Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did something similar with Weird Tales before I added any scans. (Only one scan so far, in fact. I planned more, and I have more issues, but scanning is a lot harder than I thought it would be when I started that page. I really should get back to them at some point. Avon Fantasy Reader too...) You could list all the known issues or contents in the same manner as either The Times or Littell's Living Age. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:36, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good idea... Then as anyone comes along with a mind to work on a particular issue or volume, they'll have a head start with titling at least (or they can change it if necessary)... Thanks :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SHSP volume splits[edit]

Hello again; hope this finds you and your's well...

After resolving an issue or two in the series of SHSP volumes, I see some of the DjVu files are actually bundles of 2 or 3 volumes a pop. Not clear if you were the actual uploader or not but in case you were, would you mind if I split them up into individual volumes? I understand from William Maury Morris II the volumes were indeed bound and published as separate volumes as well. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:42, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to go ahead. I was the uploader but I only noticed a few combined volumes at that time; I only realised the majority were also combined when I tried to add page numbering to the index pages. (I didn't split the bundles I knew about because I lost my DjVu software in a computer crash a while ago—I've only recently re-downloaded DjVuLibre—and I've never actually practiced splitting files. I didn't want to hold everything up.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:45, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Were the SHSP 'volume splits' ever done?[edit]

George or Adam, or whomever —

Were the SHSP volumes ever split? It does not *appear* to have been done but they should be split no matter who knows how and is willing to do that properly. There are 52 volumes totaled. None are combined. Thank you, —William Maury Morris II Talk 20:59, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Statements and a question[edit]

Statement: I want to state that I feel that it is a high honor to be allowed to work on Wikisource. I derive great pleasure in the various works and little by little learning the various codes. Therefore, I also want to thank all who have assisted me over the years. Billinghurst was the first to welcome me on Wikisource and personally as opposed to a form "Welcome" page.

Over the years many have helped me with the works here. Wikisource is a community of friendly people helping one another — oh, how the rest of the world should be so good! I was even blessed by inductive load by providing me with a colored background to prevent eye strain. I would not have been able to continue here if not for him/her. I am sure LondonJackBooks appreciates it as much as I.

Question: Adam, I want to thank you for all of your work and teaching me regarding the 52 volumes of the Southern Historical Society's "Papers" — no way could I have set up the volumes as you have. With that I need to ask this, how do I make two words on one line be as far apart as possible while leaving empty space in the center? (i.e. Word------Opposite side of page.) Kindest regards to all.-- Maury (—William Maury Morris II Talk 19:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you too, and I agree about the Wikisource community. It's one of the main reasons why I've made my "home" on Wikisource rather any other site.
As to your question: I can think of two ways, depending on how far apart you want the words. There is the template {{gap}}, which will create a large space between words; the width of this space can be increased or decreased if necessary. If, on the other hand, you literally want the words on opposite sides of the page (or screen in this case), then you could adapt the {{running header}} template.
For example, using the first method:
Word{{gap}}Opposite side of page

Word⁠Opposite side of page

While using the second method:
{{running header|Word| |Opposite side of page}}
Word
Opposite side of page
I think the second method is the one you want. NB: Remember to leave the middle option blank or it will add text in the center as well. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"High Flight" Copyright[edit]

I noticed that you are one of the people who contributed to a discussion concerning the poem "High Flight" and possible copyright violations. I wrote a response even though the issue was marked "closed."

I am writing a book and producing a film based on the life of John Gillespie Magee, Jr., author of the poem "High Flight." Having done nearly 20 years worth of research on Magee and his most famous poem, I have the definitive answer to the copyright question. In short, "High Flight" is in the Public Domain. This is clearly stated in a letter that Mrs. Faith Magee, John's mother, wrote to the Royal Canadian Air Force in June of 1942.

For more details you are welcome to read the rest of the information I posted regarding this topic, or contact me directly at: ray@highflightproductions.com

I have contributed several times to the Wikipedia article on John Magee as well as his father.

I hope that my information will be included in the copyright discussion before it is "archived."

Treasure Island[edit]

There has been recent activity on the 'validated' edition, the result of a problematic match and split. Some of the corrections were not typos, rather it was replacing curly quotes with typewriter ones, but there were problems found the 'migrated text'. My earlier comments on the problems associated with this work have been blanked, but are visible before this diff. Match and split is rarely a good idea, for reasons I believe I have clearly identified elsewhere, it certainly inappropriate in this example. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 23:00, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

URL2Commons[edit]

Regarding Help:URL2Commons, somebody at Commons told me that only administrators are allowed to upload directly from the Internet, and that they didn't know if the feature was enabled there or not. I couldn't find the policy anywhere. Also, Magnus Manske doesn't have URL2Commons listed on his website. He may not be supporting it anymore, but I posted a bug. Heyzeuss (talk) 12:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't remember now if I became an administrator here before I started using the tool or not. However, I am not an admin on Commons, which I think is the important project here (I don't think the rights spread between projects), and I've been able to use the tool. It might not matter either way as the actual uploading is done by a bot, Commons:User:File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske), which may have the appropriate permission itself. (The bot is used for a few other similar tools as well.) I haven't found anything to determine what is happening here but I'll look around a little more. Thanks for letting me know. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rolled back header[edit]

For {{header}}} there were six icons displaying. We need a means to just have one icon, not multiple, and off the top of my head, I cannot figure out the means (not that I have concentrated thinking power). — billinghurst sDrewth 03:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Six icons? The most I saw when I checked were two (featured star and padlock). There are only three top-icon templates of which I'm aware (locked, featured & referenced). Which page had six icons?
If having both featured and locked on one page is a problem, it can be solved by bringing featured into header as a parameter (ie. | featured = yes). This can both call the featured template and deactivate the locked template. If we stop automatically locking featured pages, we can either use two separate icons or choose a separate set of icons for locked AND featured pages. For that matter, I had planned to add a different colour of padlock as a provison for pages that are move-protected but not edit-protected. Referenced does not overlap in purpose with either locked or featured, so there will always be two icons in those cases. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:21, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, six padlocks on the Template:Header page itself becasue there are several more headers in the documentation. Is there any other situation where more than one header will be on the page? I think detecting the namespace and only calling the template from the mainspace might solve the problem. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing springs to mind about where we might have more than one header (though one never quite knows at WS), and you would think that header itself would indicate one, not many. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:47, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to try it again, limiting it to the main namespace. I can't think of any reason it wouldn't work and it's not something with which I can really experiment in a sandbox. I'll mention it on Scriptorium too, to increase the chance of catching any errors. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 23:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Creating Indexes[edit]

Good morning! I was wondering if you (or someone else) wouldn't mind jotting down a detailed step-by-step process for me to be able to add a text from Archive.org to Commons? The process would need to take into account that my computer has only basic capabilities (I can't open up .djvu documents, for example)... I have tried adding texts on a couple occasions, and something in the conversion process always goes awry. Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:37, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

London, maybe you should try to save it to your computer? Mine doesn't let me open them, but I can save them. Then you go to commons, and select upload file. You put your file in the uploader, and then it will upload it to Commons. Then it will prompt you to fill in the info on the book.
Once done with that, you select Publish and it will ask you if you want to use it somewhere else. It's not too hard - if you have questions or trouble, I can do it for you. - Tannertsf (talk) 11:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Tannertsf! I can save djvu files to my computer too... I think it's somewhere between the saving and the uploading...? But I haven't tried it for some time. I don't remember the 'Publish' part... Come to think of it (sorry, I'm thinking as I write), I had tried using the online converter (Any2DjVu) for a text saved to my computer as PDF (from Google books if my mind serves me correctly), converted via the Any2DjVu site, and that is where I had issues (something with the settings at the website, I think)... I'll give things a second look with your recommendations. I tend to make things more complicated than they need to be! Thanks for the direction! I'll give you a holler if I get stuck. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am working on some new help documents. Regarding the Internet Archive, I have an unfinished guide: User:AdamBMorgan/Other help/Internet Archive. It might be enough for you to get the file you want. I usually don't download files myself as I have a monthly bandwidth limit that can disappear quickly; I use URL2Commons. If you would like to try that, I have written Help:URL2Commons (you just need to copy and paste the file shortcut/link from archive.org to URL2Commons). There's also Help:Beginner's guide to Index: files (not mine) which mostly focusses on the Index page but includes some upload information. For uploading files from your computer to Commons, I find Commons' Upload Wizard easy to use.
Is any of that helpful? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:29, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to you too, Adam! I am sure it will be helpful. Not ready to upload just yet, but definitely needed more direction once I am... I don't want to keep having to ask others to do it for me :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Personally for me, especially with djvu at archive.org I use the url2commons tool. Also, with that please look to use {{book}} rather than {{information}}. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:50, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Copying to one of my User pages for future consideration as well. Thanks, Billinghurst! Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

another Q. from me[edit]

Reformatting Mrs. Coates' Index pages, I got to one of her poems surrounding the "Dreyfus affair" and thought to add her 4 poems to the "Portraits of the affair in various media" section of the WP article. There are no author pages here at WS for Dreyfus or Picquart, so I wondered whether her poems could be added to the Antisemitism section of Portal:Hate groups somehow. Do you think that would be okay? Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, go ahead. The portals collect (in theory) all the material on their subjects. If you want, you could also add a specific subheading for the Dreyfus affair or add notes after the wikilink, to explain the inclusion to a casual reader. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 14:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A subheading under the Antisemitism subheading? or its own subheading? Also, if you think you can improve on anything I end up adding, please do! Thank you, Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:23, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A subheading under the Antisemitism subheading. It's just to group similar things together; it isn't necessary. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 15:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and done! :) You can take a look and feel free to tweak anything you think needs it. I also noted some other articles here that mention the Dreyfus affair... I'll take a look now and see about adding them to the sub-subheading as well. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:55, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What's the "proper" way to cite an article from the 1911 Britannica for the purpose of adding it to the subheading? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also found a couple more instances:
1) In the Notes section (Note #3) of Hull v. United States/Opinion of the Court
2) "Dreyfus, l'Affaire" from The Nuttall Encyclopædia/D
I have to run for now, but will try to get to adding those in a bit. Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are special templates for citing Nuttall and Britannica.
  1. For 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, try {{EB1911 link}}
  2. For the court case, there is no linking template, so just use a normal wikilink.
  3. For Nuttall, try {{Nuttall link}}
I should also point out {{autolink}} which I made to make this a little simpler (after adding a few hundred links to portals), although it won't work with Nuttall. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:38, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nice! Thank you! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on the EB1911 article, "Anti-Semitism", and was trying to find an already-existing article that has been transcribed into the Main in order to copy the formatting for when I get to creating the Mainspace article for the one I am currently working on... The text for other articles I've come across were not transcribed from Index pages, but were typed directly onto the Mainspace pages. Can you (or anyone) possibly point me to a transcribed complete Mainspace EB1911 article (preferably with a link back to its 'Source') for comparison purposes? Thanks again, Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NVM I think I found one... Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:08, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

.djvu vs .pdf[edit]

Why are .djvu documents downloaded and not .pdf files? I work with .pdf files and am familiar with them. Is it a matter of the dpi in one format (.pdf over .djvu) documents? Where is the advantage and disadvantage that causes WS to download .djvu documents? The answer will become important to me if I ever get to volume 5 of the Southern Historical Society Papers as well as a few other volumes that are missing. Kindest regards to all, Maury. —William Maury Morris II Talk 00:25, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually from before my time here but I believe it's mostly habit. The proofreading system will work with PDFs but that is a fairly recent update to the software and may still have a bug or two. I think people got attached to DjVu when it was the only option. These days, you can upload a PDF file to proofread if you want (or, if not, you can try converting it to DjVu). DjVu files have the advantage of being much smaller and I believe the format is also open source (which some people prefer). PDFs have the advantage of better image quality and more common usage. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:39, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read my talk page[edit]

This small portion was brought from there:

If taking them means setting them up, then I will totally do just that. - Tannertsf (talk) 20:41, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Eek! Just saw that it would be sectional transclusion. Im not good at that, so I might not be able to help set up. - Tannertsf (talk) 20:48, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Never fear, AdamBMorgan is around here, and he handles all of the transclusions. You can still edit as I do and you are better at that than I am. OR I think it would be good for you to place your scanned books on WikiSource that you have already done for your school. You've completed those and WikiSource can use 1800s books. "All for one and one for all" -- we hold the world in our hands. Use your real name and let it travel down through history for untold generations. What we do is not just for now, it is forever. —William Maury Morris II Talk 21:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

—William Maury Morris II Talk 21:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check[edit]

Is this page a good creation? Just wanted to make sure i'm doing it right.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Southern_Historical_Society_Papers/Volume_03/January/Defence_of_Mobile_in_1865 —unsigned comment by Tannertsf (talk) 22:30, 2 December 2011‎.

Yes, it is excellent! You know you do excellent work or if you really are not aware just ask others and they will tell you that you do. If they say "no" then they don't really know what excellent is. The way you handle difficult work makes for easy reading.—William Maury Morris II Talk 22:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as William Maury Morris II said, that's great. I've just added some little bits to help readers navigate around the papers (which isn't necessary but it can't hurt). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. A link to the next article in the volume: next = [[../Detailed Minutiae of Soldier Life /]]
  2. Portal links: portal = Southern Historical Society/Confederate States of America
  3. Category:Articles on the Confederacy

Thanks guys. My only caveat with people is they think my proofreading method of random pages (technically not random, but more selective), is bad. Its no big deal, until it makes people stop me from working on a book. Yet to happen though. - Tannertsf (talk) 23:17, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Judah Benjamin's book[edit]

Could you ASAP upload and make an index page for this book? (http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924018830350) I am very interested in it right now. - Tannertsf (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tannersf, very recently you had an issue in that you asked me not to proofread a book that you were going to do. I asked, How on this earth can anyone know what work anyone wanted as a personal project. These statements are on my talk page where you started the conversation. Next you asked AdamBMorgan to upload the above for you "ASAP". I also asked for a book that I had already started to a good extent but needed AdamBMorgan to set it up properly. He assisted us both. Now I see that you are editing that same book I have partially done and that Adam setup in a better form. Meanwhile, the project you asked for (above) has no work done on it. WHY are you doing this? We do not edit the same way and the differences show. I do not use "ref" on a book that shows the need for "sup", and there are other ways our editing differs. Why not work on what you asked for and let me do the project I asked for? On my talk page that is exactly what you wanted but that is the opposite of what you are doing. WHY? Are you seeking to annoy me and argue with me -- what are you doing? PLEASE work on what you asked for and stop editing the work I asked for in the center, or anywhere else, of the project I asked to be , oh, let us say, "updated" by Adam in a better format than what I had already done. PLEASE keep your word and live up to what you want others to do as opposed to asking me for something and then doing the opposite of what I agreed to. As I stated, it is a matter of manners and you are not stupid -- you know exactly what you are doing. You saw my request of Adam and started editing my request and so far have continued. I am not doing the same to you. I have not touched the project you asked Adam for in the above request on "Judah Benjamin's book". Onlookers, please be fair. I do not want this conflict. —William Maury Morris II Talk 07:27, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heresies of Sea Power[edit]

Adam, I don't like to bother you or anyone else but I have gotten myself into a complexity. You mentioned on a page that no books that you listed on that page were on WS. Therefore, I tried to remedy that and I do love the text (nautical). However, for the first time with working on books alone, I have come to a point to where I do not know how to set up pages so that I can place text and images in it. It is kind of like an outline, which I used to love doing, but am confused when it comes to setting it up on WikiSource. Would you please help setting it up or should I ask someone else? It's okay if you are too busy. Here is the url:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Heresies_of_Sea_Power

—William Maury Morris II Talk 06:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. I think this is what you wanted: Index:Heresies of Sea Power (1906).djvu. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 14:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Adam, I logged on moments ago to withdraw my request. Overnight I started thinking about how much administrators have to do for others while they themselves have their own projects they want to complete. But you have done this work now so I will state that I sincerely appreciate your kindness just as I appreciate what other administrators and their kindness. I looked at your WS user page and all of those projects you have done and plan to do. I went to your user page and saw all that you have done on WP as well. Alone the two areas are an amazing amount of contributions. Add up the total by adding WP plus WS plus the help you give others is a bit stunning to me. Perhaps it is because I don't know the coding as well as you do and thus it is easier and faster for you, but all in all, I began feeling selfish in the above request. I sincerely do appreciate your work in what you have done. On an administrator's page I saw only about 8 administrators. While I don't know how many "editors" exist that are not administrators it seems that administrators on WS are over-loaded with help given to others while their own projects are set aside. WS administrators like you are obviously altruistic. Is there a page that shows me how to do what you have done with this book so that I won't have to ask anyone else to do this for me?

I thank you for all that you have done for myself and for others. —William Maury Morris II Talk 17:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a problem. As for how, I can't find an appropriate help page at the moment (one of my potential side projects is improving the help pages as it happens). A very quick version is:
  1. Find (or make) the DjVu or PDF file you want to add to Wikisource.
  2. Upload the DjVu or PDF file to Wikimedia Commons (just like an image or any other file).
  3. Create a page on Wikisource with the same name, except that it starts "Index:" instead of "File:" (ie. File:Filename.djvu on Commons means Index:Filename.djvu on Wikisource).
A lot of the rest should be filled in by the computer. There is a help page for creating the Index page: Help:Beginner's guide to Index: files. I use the URL2Commons tool to upload files without having to download them myself first (although either works), for which I have written a help page: Help:URL2Commons. Sorry about the delay in response; I've been doing Christmas stuff recently and didn't have much free time. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Acts of the Parliament of England[edit]

This edit is has a problem as it can be misread.

"These are the Acts of the Parliament of England, which remained in existence until the Act of Union 1707," It is not clear if "which remained in existence until the Act of Union 1707" is referring to Parliament of England or the Acts. The problem is that at most only one Parliament remained in existence at the Act of Union so it must refer to the Acts of Parliament ... I guess that is not what you meant, but that is the most likely interpretation that someone would conclude from it unless they know what is meant, in which case they do not need the header information!

There is a further problem with the specific references to those Acts passed during the Interregnum. The Parliaments of the Protectorate were British not English Parliaments and all acts of Commonwealth Parliaments during the Interregnum were passed into oblivion on the Restoration as they never gained Royal consent.

I think it would be helpful if you were to go through your edits to the headers of the pages in Portal:Acts of the Parliament of England and amend to make them clearer, or remove them. -- Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 06:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what the original meaning was; I copied the text from the pre-existing pages when I was cleaning up the Acts pages mess. I believe it refers to the Parliament and not the Acts, as (for the portal in general) the Parliament is the only thing that ended in 1707. I've removed that part from the Interregnum subpages.
Incidentally, I don't own the portals. If you see an error, you are free to edit them yourself without my permission. :) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:29, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AdamBMorgan/Archive_5&oldid=3846181"