User talk:Billinghurst/Archives/2012

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

New poems with common names[edit]

I am in the process of adding the poems contained in The Garden of Years and Other Poems by Guy Wetmore Carryl. Several of these poems have names that are already used in Wikisource, so I have disambiguated the poem names with the author’s name. The question is: Should the other poems with the same names become disambiguation pages? Or should a disambiguation hatnote be added to the existing pages? Specifically, the poems that I am adding are:

•••Life of Riley (talk) 22:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Our approach to disambiguation is that the base name will become the disambiguation page, and we differentiate works after that along the lines that you identified. If a work is a part of a collection, then we would
  • organise the works as subpages to the collection, eg. Mandragora, especially when we have the page scans, maintaining as a collection allows for variations through republication
  • put in redirects from the root level of the main namespace
  • links from the the disambig pages to the works
  • the works that are being disambiguated get tagged with {{similar}}
billinghurst sDrewth 03:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done disambiguation pages

Treating[edit]

... everything, and do mean everything (see here ) as if the original author/publisher actually meant to convey to the readers that hopefully were going follow that everything he/she put to print was merely simple text as if spoken-word, using simple-paragraphs with simple-indentation & simple line-breaks, leads to simple mistakes in interpretation as well as in reproduction!

Forgive what must be drone-like parroting by me by now, but I realized I haven't tried illustrating this point that way yet. Note how the uniformity of sub-divisions, the understood hierarchy of one section or clause depending on the provisions &/or clauses found under it, the way layout is key to proper interpretation in the legal sense, and so on, all become "lost" throughout the work when the 'symptom(s)' of the paper publication no longer applies online. I realize works of this nature are not your "thing" but I would hope you can better understand why this is such a Big problem for those of us who are "into" that kind of stuff.— George Orwell III (talk) 02:21, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

There is a nuanced argument here that I think that I am missing. I understand about document hierarchy, and indentation, know it well and deal with it through legislation regularly in a week, and tried to replicate here. I am not sure to what you are arguing or that I am missing in what I have said elsewhere or how I have said conflicts with what you are trying to get me to understand or to reconsider.
Take a breath, wipe the fact you were ever exposed to the original as printed before you saw it transcluded first and then consider the following:

Why is the first sub-division in relation to its parent and only its parent

  • 7th [sub]division under Part I ( bold number 7.; i.e. section 7. ) being the parent here;
  • bracketed modern number (1) being the first sub-division found after the parent,

and all the same-level sub-divisions as designated by the first-found that follow that scheme [ (2), (3), (4), ... ] Not outdented,

'outdented' being a term used best only for the momment here,

While, at the same time, the next sub-division in relation to its parent, and only to its parent

  • 1st sub-divsion found [bracketed modern number (1)] being the parent here,
  • bracketed, lower-case letter (a) being the first sub-division found after the parent,
and all the same-level sub-divisions as designated by the first-found that follow that scheme [(b), (c), (d), ...] Are outdented?
What possible other reason is there for such an inconsistant depiction of the parent and its sub-division relationships other than to "save" paper - paper that no longer constrains the content because we're in the digital age. Its a carry over from olden times when standards were dictated by the technology of the day & the empire in control at the moment - the remnants still being applied in the virtual world today out of tradition more so than any useful applicability (or its eventual codification).
Discarding the ability to "hide" behind the reality that the majority of entries are of a word-count large enough to force line wrapping more often than not for the moment and looking again at Part I. Section 7....

7.—(1) The copyright....
(2) In making ....

(a) that the ...
(b) that the ...
(c) that no ...
(d) that no ...
(e) that persons ...
(3) etc... 
... the finished TrAnScLuSiOn version makes (2) and (3) equal in heirarchy to 7. and interpreted as 8. and 9.

(1) in effect, becomes the introductory paragraph to 7. in spite of (1) being present because of " .— ".

Not trying to make a mountain out of a mole-hill with this & Of course we are well-versed in the order and meaning of such letters & numbers; we fill-in most these "gaps in logical layouts" almost without thinking about it actually. Those "original publishers" know this is part of human nature and common to the brain's processing of visual information during reading - they were counting-on that we, the reader, will do exactly that (for cost savings primarily). Still, the implied intent trying to be conveyed to the reader at its core by the author(s), however, is more akin to...

7.

(1) The copyright....
(2) In making ....
(a) that the ...
(b) that the ...
(c) that no ...
(d) that no ...
(e) that persons ...
(3) etc..
... the eventual codification (based on typical U.S. practice not to mention court opinions affirming as much) would be along the lines of...

§ 107.  Special exceptions as respects libraries and archives.

(1) The copyright....
(2) In making ....
(a) that the ...
(b) that the ...
(c) that no ...
(d) that no ...
(e) that persons ...
(3) etc..
... the addition of 100 to signify originally found under Part I, 7 being 7th sub-division of Part I (or 7th Section.) and (for this example only) the text following 7. (now a Section Title) comes from what we first see as a sidenote if one was not originally written-in there by the original author(s).
The last point has varied in application one way or the other over the years but if one didn't exist - its placeholder should not (cannot?) be usurped by a lower-sub-division for it changes the relationships/dependency/hierarchy/etc. as well as, most legislative bodies have come to learn over the many decades, the ability to easily amend or strike existing statute as depicted below....

§ 107.  Special exceptions as respects libraries and archives.

[Works created prior to the effective date of the Copyright Act, 2067, and the provisions outined within, are also subject to, but not limited by:]

(1) The copyright....
(2) In making ....
(a) that the ...
(b) that the ...
(c) that no ...
(d) that no ...
(e) that persons ...
(3) The same etc..

Sorry for the "essay" (again). Is at least this one facet (the indentation-as-if-a-paragraph vs. the stepped-up/down-default-margins found in common list-item heirarchy) of the complexities at play here re:presntation, sub-re:sidenotes any clearer? — George Orwell III (talk) 07:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

{{rule))

p.s. I would have corrected the few typos/indentation ommissions I immediately saw after applying the nowrap test but apparently you used that second-noinclude-within-the-pagebody-field thing to workaround something and that fix wipes everything at that point for editors like me me who try to edit one of those pages. sorry.

Thanks. I corrected a couple with </div> on the wrong line … Yep, they are there so as not to replicate the continuation of the sidenote at page lead. I am tempted to omit the sidenotes that are a continuation, as sticking them inside the top <noinclude> makes it pointless. Also to note that I have been trying to look through and see how else one can manage these noincludes now that you have identified that issue. FWIW we really should do a bugzilla for that issue. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:26, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Don't know if that is warranted yet - nobody as bothered to play beta-tester on this so far. It may just be caused in the way the "second" noinclude is being applied. Much like <div> blah </div> (inline) and
<div>
blah
</div> (parsed)
produces slightly differing results under certain conditions, so too may be the case here. It may even be something as simple as pre-fixing either (or just one?) of the above with a NOP.... or possibly a need to place the whole thing in a span or something which would become "moot" in its effect for both the Page: namespace's rendering as well as the finished tranclusion to the mainspace. I'd hold off on opening a bug-report until some basics of verification are done first. — George Orwell III (talk) 07:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Just saw WS:S. Oh don't take this as me making any sort of ruling, there will always be exceptions, alterations, rational reasons for difference, etc. As a default position, I have heard Cygnis's and others opinions about problematic right margins, and just see more and more issues with screen widths that feel that default left sidenotes is the way to go and seems to be an easy decision. If someone else does different, I still work on the situation of speak once, and leave alone. I really don't care to have the argument. I will sidenote to the left, it isn't always perfect, but it seems less imperfect. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Just saw your 'just saw' and for the sake of brevity I will just reiterate the crux of the issue at hand one more time (with a admittedly poor attempt at wit & sarcasm thrown-in) -
of course, if one treats the designated bullets found on the left-hand-side of any well defined list-item or defined-list document tree as nothing more than monolithic paragraphs of text, ocasionally off-set by other larger or smaller blocks of text, rather than deal with what they really are, were intend to depict when first penned, (ab)used as needed by the publisher profiteer, as well found coded as basic html today because its a waste of 8½ inches of my virtual screen space, one could easily prove that left side notes are the logical choice for a default.... not to mention I only care about blocks of text anyway

No default side for sidenotes - parallel development (the mainspace utilizing one side or the other but not both) and separate application (each side has its own templates - the mirror opposite of the other - not just one template and one side is merely a parameter). — George Orwell III (talk) 07:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I will give it some quality time over the weekend rather than a tired and non-capable brain now. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:15, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Portals, years and dynamic page lists[edit]

In other news, while I haven't really got it working, I have tried to combine two other ideas into this experimental portal. It's based on the Wikinews portals and implements DynamicPageLists to return links relevant to a particular year. I'm hoping to turn it into a template that can be easily subst'ed to form a new portal as required. The main problem is a general lack of content by year (either due to not being categorised into both year and subject/type or being categorised into a sub-category instead). Does this look like something that could work? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh that sort of thing is going to be very sweet, as I look at something like


I so need to try and get my head into some clear space to think through some of the things with which we want to produce output. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:31, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

All Quiet along the Potomac - review request[edit]

Hi, thank you for editing some of my formatting on All Quiet along the Potomac. Obviously, I am new at this. I've referred to your edits on some of the other pages, and believe I may have gotten everything. I know you are busy with other works and guidance, but if you have an opportunity, will you please review my recent effort and see if I am missing anything? I would like to tidy up my previous edits and do things correctly in the future. Page:All_quiet_along_the_Potomac_and_other_poems.djvu/40 Thank you very much, --GreenVelveteen (talk) 00:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I have popped passed a number, and I have been meaning to see whether there is a table of contents for the work. We should be looking to transclude them into the main namespace. I was going to prod you, though thought that leaving you to continue playing in the page namespace was also useful while you learnt the ropes.smiley Billinghurst (talk) 00:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Stuart Pratt Sherman[edit]

Hi. I saw that you created this page Author:Stuart_Sherman. Pls be aware that there is also this page Author:Stuart_P._Sherman already present, in addition to what you redirected. Not familiar yet with merge and redirect on WS otherwise I would act. Moreover too many pages are starting to be involved. Would appreciate if you can take care of this. Thanks --Mpaa (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Stupid question revisited[edit]

... continuing a previous discussion from April...

While I've been enjoying djvu-to-PDF and back file conversion once again & all that I can handle here on my workstation since our last (now archived; linked above), it dawned on me that this latest fix from ver. 4.7 to ver 4.7c [cee] in late May might facilitate some movement in the way of finally resolving our transclusion/djvu/export bug issues.

Again, not being an expert nor familiar with the ins and outs of MediaWiki, etc., I thought bringing this to your attention was worthwhile if not just for suggestions on how to convince "the powers that be" that the latest versions need to be installed or we could be depriving ourselves of possible additional benefits as well as long needed solutions. Thanks for your time. — George Orwell III (talk) 00:42, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

<shrug> Life as as a piece of fluff on the oilpond of WMF. Bugzilla:29905
I don't know whether it is the smaller, underlying djvu libary (djvm djvmcvt djvudigital djvudump djvuextract djvumake djvups djvused djvutoxml djvutxt djvuxmlparser) that is relevant or the bigger DjView. We can let them work it out. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much. A simple file size comparison from the early March revision to the late May current one should show that there were significant changes made to most of those files listed (ddjvu & djvused being the most relevant to the issue and functionality in question). -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Just noticed a slight misunderstanding or maybe it wasn't clear - its the May 26th package thats been refined to fix the PDF creation bug (among a handful of other changes) not the March 6th/9th one (see HERE).

The developer's "git" thingy(?) has been updated as well as the combined main executable download but the wording in the Bugzilla might make that nuance and the desired file versions unclear. (Looks like ver. 3.5.24-8 and 4.8 are days away from being formally released btw) — George Orwell III (talk) 04:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I am presuming that they will know which bits they have and update them, whether it be the smaller djvu library or otherwise. What we are wanting them to do is to implement an automated update functionality so that it sits with whichever version is current. Accessing additional functionality may or may not be useful here or to other functions, and I am not certain that the DjVu to PDF component is necessary or used for Proofread Page extension. If there is a new version then we create the noise by updating the bugzilla to new version. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Not sayng that anybody is going to do djvu to pdf conversions specifically per se. Its the manipulation of the hidden text layer -- that myth that there is some difference between an OCR generated text layer or a PDF embedded text layer and so on -- that is desirable to maintain & keep current. Yes, one type of text layer manipulation occurs in a DJVU to PDF conversion. Another type of text-layer manipulation occurs during the "dump" or the "extract" to plain text and THAT is exactly what the Proofread Page extension incorporates. Regardless of the operation in question, its always the same sub-files being applied in various combinations with different parameters/settings producing slightly different outputs as needed. All I'm saying is if they fix one issue, it just might resolve other issues at the same time. Of course the opposite may also be true, but that's not what I've been seeing locally. A refresh of Index:Cousins's Short Biographical Dictionary of English Literature.djvu managed to bring through the text layer where the previous OCR routine didn't come up in the Page: namespace for example. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:00, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Reply from Mattisse[edit]

I have worked on the following, almost always alone. I haven't an idea what others want to read, as I think my tastes differ immensely from most other editors. Here is a list of ones that I enjoyed and that I did my best with in terms with complying with the rules, but I'm sure they fail in many ways.

Audubon and His Journals

Mehalah: a story of the salt marshes (1920)

In the Roar of the Sea

Arminell, a social romance

A Book of the Cevennes

Haiti: Her History and Her Detractors - me and another editor

Alaska Days with John Muir

A Thousand-Mile Walk To The Gulf

Travels with a Donkey in the Cevennes

A Book of the Riviera

The Amateur Emigrant

The Silverado Squatters

John James Audubon (Burroughs)/Frontal matter - sorry, I can't seem to get this integrated into the rest of the formatted text, but the rest is there.

A Book of Dartmoor

  • I a working on Index:The cruise of the Corwin.djvu but can't set up the pages as chapter numbers as you suggested, so I don't know whether I will bother and may just read it without making it into a text work.

Thank you greatly for your interest.

Respectfully, Mattisse (talk) 17:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Award and autopatrolled[edit]

Thank you for the proofread award I just found in my user page, and thank you for trusting me with autopatrolled status. Zaran (talk) 12:43, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for the proofreading award! Nice to know my work is appreciated =) I enjoyed getting a taste of Victor Hugo's work, too. -Pete (talk) 19:51, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
[Budding in: The work was an unexpected treat for me too... I wasn't familiar with it before. I'll be buying my own copy now so I don't have to read it piecemeal! Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2011 (UTC)]
As i'm french, i already knew this work well. However, it was fun to see how Hugo's writing renders in English. Zaran (talk) 22:57, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Well, maybe I can ask you then... I just came from Barnes & Noble bookstore, and they don't have Ninety-Three in stock... Not being familiar with any translation other than the one here (if there even are more than one... I haven't yet checked)—do you recommend any particular translation/translator for the book? or for Hugo's work in general? I figure if I have to get a copy online, I'd have more choices anyhow...? Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
As you can guess, I read French books directly in French, so I'm not an expert of English translations of Hugo's book. From one I can tell, the translation here is quite good (I have read several pages with the French and English texts side-by-side). If you want to read it, I can create an epub version of this translation (I'm actually working on a script to export wikisource texts to epub). Zaran (talk) 11:57, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate it... but I prefer reading the old-fashioned way whenever possible—and with pen in hand! Not anti-technology (obviously, since I'm here), I just prefer hard copy :) Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

As I was proofreading...[edit]

"Punch is an English periodical; you must be an Englishman to understand the allusions. The humour is essentially and almost exclusively English; it would never attain any great popularity in other English-speaking nations, in spite of its undoubted claim to be the first comic journal in the world." Isn't that funny!? Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and its naming from "Punch and Judy". Reflective anarchy, <tease>oh wait I am talking to an American, you won't understand</tease>winkbillinghurst sDrewth 21:19, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
smiley 'You' really need to get another smiley... The only reason I used it this time is because using :) after a colon is problematic! And you're right, by the way—although not so much because I'm an American, but because I am me! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:38, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Too harsh on yourself, so many Americans don't understand irony, very dry humour, nor playfully sardonic/anarchic. Of course, it could just be me that is weird. <shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 00:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Not harsh... realistic. I do try!—but prefer the position of spectator in the "sport" though... (I'm boring myself already) :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Ideally[edit]

"This is a community with a shared approach... not one that more seems to reflect one person's ideals or the lowest common denominator approach. I would like to find a less divisive approach but that requires a different approach."

Billinghurst, people have been searching for that approach since the dawn of mankind, and it is itself an ideal is it not?.... Human nature being what it is, we can only continue doing what we are doing... always keeping in mind that there is an ideal... We just won't attain it till we die. Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:38, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
We can strive for peace or we can live at war. The former takes two, the second just needs one. One person can have their ideal, it is called their website. We have a community, we have a shared effort … I should stop striving? — billinghurst sDrewth 10:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
[Don't be afraid to just tell me to "shut up" (seriously!)—I adjust more quickly that way! I think I need to proofread something more benign for a time—like See Spot Run. But that's probably not in the public domain yet... I'm open to suggestions! Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)]
Of course not! What we are doing is striving... But even "peace" has a different meaning for everyone (and not everyone wants it, franklyand different ideas as to how is best achieved). What is "ideal" is different for everyone. You can't separate a man from his ideals. They are with him in his every action, thought, edit, and upload! That is as it should be. Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Proofreading options. Category:Index Proofread or look at Special:IndexPages, and move works to Validated. It is what I look to do when I wish to wander and feel that I have advanced some works to completed status. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Author:Edward Tregear[edit]

Hi. The en:wiki page for this author has the full name w:Edward Robert Tregear. Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename the page on WS with the same name as Wikipedia? Not so many links to be fixed as I added the first work just now. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 17:24, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Generally I do move to the expanded name, and I have Yes check.svg Done so on this occasion. We would usually leave the redirect in place, and the links to the original, and only update if we need to disambiguate. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Toltec Pedagogy[edit]

You are very quick, I decided to finish first the translation (only today) and then go back and insert pictures, it is onging. Thanks--Raúl Gutiérrez (talk) 18:49, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem, we do try to not promote works to proofread status until they are actually complete. It is one practice in which we see the need for a consistency. — billinghurst sDrewth 20:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Understood, thanks for the input, I am somewhat of a novice and learning the ropes. Will remember that, BTW, all pictures are already inserted.--Raúl Gutiérrez (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Soft redirect of NTSB[edit]

Hi! I notice one of your bots did this edit

But Portal:NTSB redirects to Portal:National Transportation Safety Board, and the content of the page was never moved to Portal:NTSB WhisperToMe (talk) 01:11, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Yep and it was definitely back to front, and I grabbed those that were at [[Category:Non-author author pages]] which who knows why it was still on there for a portal, and I missed it among all the author page changes. Thanks for the pickup. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:14, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Noinclude LF issue[edit]

Hi,

I'm the last person who can keep up with all the bells and whistles going on lately surrounding the footer insertion of extra line feeds at first then the sunsequent fix that moved it to the pagetext box. I didn't how or where else to put this other here since your memory might the most likely to recall prior events so that what I'm driving at makes sense.

Hopefully you'll recall that there was an issue with certain version of Internet Explorer and the use of additional noincludes causing content to get clipped when saved awhile back. A bugzilla was opened on this and went unaddressed for quite a few weeks.

Next, hopefully you'll remember that there was a mini-brainstorming event of sorts to address several outstanding/open WS issues a week to ten days before the 1.18 rollout. They took up that bugzilla and supposedly "fixed" the issue by forcing browsers to do a read ahead or something along those lines (above my pay grade to be honest).

Days later, I followed up on that group's efforts per some of your update posts on WS:S but I never got around to finding one of those pages with multiple noincludes to see if anything had actually changed before the 'days of upgrade' came along and the footer problem became apparent.

My point with all of this is that it is possible the problem with extra line feeds might not originate with the 1.18 upgrade itself but with the "brainstorming" group's multiple noinclude under IE fix, applied before/along with the 1.18 upgrade. I thought it best to mention it to someone (you again; sorry) who can further the above to the appropriate places that are involved in a crafting a solution in case it is related.... -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Different fix. The IE fix is bugzilla:26881 with the code fix at mw:Special:Code/MediaWiki/98422 and if I read the code page right, it is yet to be implemented.

bugzilla:26028 has been implemented though diff

Revision Logbillinghurst sDrewth 11:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

If you say 'it is so...'; I believe it. Sorry for the intrusion & thanks for your time (again!) -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Spell-checker[edit]

Hi. Just a wild thought. I was wondering if anyone has ever evaluated the possibility/complexity/benefit to add a spell-checker as part of the proof-reading environment. Spellchecking off-line is of little help (at least to me) but with the page beside to check immediately wether the suggestion is right or wrong would help. --Mpaa (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I would be a little concerned about the implicit message that we would have with a spellchecker available, especially with the variety of US <-> UK <-> Oz spellings, and whether we are wanting a correction, or just an indication of the word not being in the dictionary supplied. Modern browsers have spellcheckers available as a add-on/plugin which would be a useful means for an aware person to indicates words of concern, though doesn't help when the word is spelled correctly but just not the word from the text. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Pardon but I've previously looked into the possibility of a spellchecker add-on elsewhere. The short answer is that a spell-checker (one that can serve English in all its national variants if need be) would be possible if the DjVu-to-XML and parser (also available in DjVuLibre) were operational/functional again. Currently, the Page namespace depends on a plain old text dump that basically ignores the column, paragraph, line, word and other meta/mapping detail-types among some other possible shortcuts that could lead to easier proofreading & validation if developed fully.

    I was schooled to understand that making a flexible spell checker routine part of the Page: namespace without the benefits of XML and a customized WS document type definition file (.DTD) would not be worthwhile even as an attempt (I have no reason to doubt that evaluation if it matters). -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

    Out of my knowledge base. BTW George, I do believe that they updated the base linux builds and that now includes djvulibre, not that I am sure where that gets us specifically. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Again, just repeating what has been explained to me... not very much I'm afraid. The root of the problem even before getting to the lack of XML and .dtd for WS use & utilization lies with the original setup. We strip all that format and/or mapping info present in a DjVu's text layer more often than it is not because we were never concerned with scripting the control characters to be wikified in the process - making for one long run on sentence via a basic plain-text dump if saved w/o any editing on our part.
I'm wondering if we change the current detail default from "PAGE" to "PARA" (an existing DjVuTXT setting) and script in to recognize any paragraph breaks as an extra line-feed (or whatever term that equates to wikicode's paragraph break if you prefer here) instead of ignoring them as we currently do would at least make formatting a bit more simple... but this is just a fantasy of mine - someone with real knowlege would need to verify if any of that is even possible. The XML thing soounds 100x better moving forward but I'm afraid it could break everything already created the current way. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:38, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I have used one for quite a while, and would recommend using it. I agree that adding one to wikisource is not a good idea. Firefox requires getting an add-on; I grabbed the "English (Australian) Dictionary", which I think contains both AM and UK spelling, a good UK dictionary would have both. The Mozilla build for Macs uses the native dictionary (again, I haven't confirmed this), which does have alternate spelling. I've 'taught' the dictionary along the way, and this is a reason to avoid making it an on-site option. What they don't do well is give suggestions for OCR errors, and this is one of many reasons I use a text editor for the OCR layer (I grab the raw file from the site when I create a new index). The OCR keeps making the same errors, when I find these a few times I apply it to the rest of the file; this requires some caution, because my spell-checker won't highlight the erroneous correction when I replace the page's text. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 06:29, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Like my edit summary said, I should write a essay on this. One of the many reasons I favour an external editor over changing the text layer is the liability factor, if I screw up I pay the cost. Another is that the PPE software does things like collapsing the empty lines between paragraphs, et al., adding to the number of keystrokes per page. Yet another is that everyone know how to do 'search and replace', having boffins doing this by hacking the djvu file will go wrong (sorry, but this almost certain, Murphy's Law). There are some common errors with OCR, and I would cautiously add them to the clean-up script, but many are specific to each index, because it depends on many factors: which OCR program, how that was tweaked, the type of text, the font, the formatting, etc. One needs a lot of experience to see how it can go wrong. Tip of the day: you can fix the spacing around many of the quote marks by searching on \r"_ (the underscore represents a space here). CYGNIS INSIGNIS 11:43, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I'd be happy enough if upon Page creation, chapter headers, paragraphs, section breaks, etc. were retained in the dump never mind the ability to spell check on the fly. Without keeping that basic mapping/formating found in the OCR'd file all the way to Page: creation, the idea of a "built-in" effective spell-checker is pretty much impossible to achieve. I wouldn't worry about anything like that materializing anytime soon.
I can't say I see the logic of correcting (the spelling in) the dumped text file over correcting the actual embedded text layer of the DjVu but if that approach is working for you on your end - more power to you. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
After reading all your comments, I realised I raised something already discussed and also with technical implications on implementation.

Just to put my thoughts in the right context, I am following what CI does, i.e. completely working the whole text off line in a text editor and then put things back when I proofread single pages, exactly for the same reason (that you are most probably able to fix at once several errors for the whole text). But I use this method when I work on a whole book. What I meant here is not a magic button that fix everything in one shot automatically, but at least something that can highlight the most common mistakes when you go page-by-page (e.g. tbe instead of the, wliile insted of while), which I usually take care of with CI approach but that I cannot easily detect/handle if I work on single pages. You can object that I can add these words in the clean-up script, but errors are particular for each and every text and the script would need continue adaptation. I'll try the browser dictionary to see if it will accomplish what I meant when I posted this. --Mpaa (talk) 08:59, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Comment I started using browser dictionary (ABC Spellbound add-on on Firefox) and found it useful. It underlines words it cannot match, highlighting what deserves special attention. A good help. Thanks for the tip. --Mpaa (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Tarmstro99 (talkcontribs) (via his bot) has a means to fix typos from an OCR scan, and he basically has a library of errors for the type of works that he reproduces. Maybe with the help of some similar schema, and utilising Pathoschild's gadget, and some of the clean-up scripting of Hesperian, there is a product. As I see it, if we were able to have an editable text-based file per work where we have per line of the file we have something like
"tysop" "typos"
" AU " " All "
that we could have applied to a work. I would see that we could have this at something like &#91&#91Index:Workname.djvu/corrections]] which could just iterate per page of the work, probably at a click. We would need something that is simpler rather than more complex, and definitely without coding, something that can iterate the lines of a page to do the work. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:37, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

(trim trailing LF, replaced: → using AWB)[edit]

billinghurst/sDrewth, am I doing anything wrong to have the above appended to pages I work on? I am not sure what is taking place. Is there anything *I* can do to fix the situation--perhaps something I'm not doing? Thank you, —William Maury Morris II Talk 18:03, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Nope, you are not doing things wrong, and if you were, I would be politely saying something on your talk page. If you follow the link in the edit summary you will see the explanation. In short there was a programming error introduced to Wikisource and rather than stop people editing until the problem is fixed I am quietly tidying up afterwards.

Blank Line in Main Namespace.[edit]

After I have finished proofreading a page, and the next, and view it in the main namespace, there appears to be a blank line between all the pages, where there shouldn't be one. I'm a bit confused as I did not insert {{nop}} or {{blank line}} in the pages where there shouldn't be one. It's occurred on this chapter, and the rest. Thanks. --Angelprincess72 (talk) 19:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

User:SDrewthbot/trim trailing LF. I didn't get a run done last night, so I will endeavour to do so tonight. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:32, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for running SDrewthbot through the chapters Face-grin.svg. I'm just so curious as to how you managed to fixed the chapters. Thanks again. --Angelprincess72 (talk) 19:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Black magic! … It ran through the Page: pages and removed the extra line feed, and that fixes the chapters. The bot is able to work around the introduced problem with ProofreadPage, where we as users are unable. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:06, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Then your bot is definitely magical and unique. If I see it again I will have to request your bot to fix it; though I really don't want to add another job to SDrewthbot's probably sky-high list of requests and jobs. Poor bot already works round the clock. --Angelprincess72 (talk) 19:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)--Angelprincess72 (talk) 19:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

PSM pages in maintenance[edit]

Hi. I am currently helping with PSM. I need an opinion without generating a lot of discussion. Do you think this is sorted out now Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2011-08#What the heck? And this kind of pages can be deleted as there is an appropriate structure in place? I saw Hesperian saying: revert pending consensus; discussion ongoing at scriptorium but I was not able to figure out the final decision. --Mpaa (talk) 00:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

No, it was sort of left hanging, though the pages exist as original transcluded, though the text/pages should not be seen to be at their final resting place.
To answer the second question … the discussed pages as they stand, I would see could/would be redirects to the same text within the PSM hierarchy/subpages framework.

My reasoning … I am biased as I am a framework person. So let me answer in how this could be progressed with a good outcome (from my biased PoV).

My personal belief is that we should not be including/transcluding snippets of articles in isolation, especially out of context / without apparent purpose / without authors — the articles hang nowhere. For the example pages given at the beginning of that conversation, I believe that had we proofed and transcluded all the pages within that POPULAR MISCELLANY section, had it under that framework name within the hierarchy, it would have been perfectly alright & in line with the project's direction. The snippets isolated and highlighted don't sit well with me. To get to the specific components of the articles, we can put {{anchor}}s on the pages and then put in links from portals, etc. Similar result, different presentation and in line with the publication.

If that doesn't give clarity, then let us continue the discussion as I may have missed the nuance in your questions. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
My opinion is that those "snippets" pages are/will be useless once the framework where they belong is in place, as you say (if I got you correctly). So my approach would be to tag them for deletion as soon as the proper article in the PSM framework is proofread. But I saw the whole discussion and I do not want to step on anyone's toes. And as it is still hanging there, what is the next step then? --Mpaa (talk) 14:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
I would suggest turning them into redirects with anchors. #REDIRECT [[.../Popular Miscellany#Name of the page]] — billinghurst sDrewth 14:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Comment by User:Ineuw on User:StateOfAvon's pages[edit]

Please don't assume that I ignored this issue, but I needed time for the opportunity to present a justifiable rationale: I suggest that StateOfAvon's incomplete contributions should be moved to subpages of his user page and without any main namespace redirects because his use of the full article titles conflict with the redirects we need. There is a PSM redirect system implemented by Hesperian, and this cannot be interrupted by incomplete work. — Ineuw talk 03:26, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Authoritative comment always welcomed. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 03:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Does that mean we can go ahead and proceed accordingly? :-) — Ineuw talk 04:26, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Your guiding the project, and I would expect that you would know is better for the respective pages. I would look to maintain as many unambiguous and valuable titles as redirects as that will be useful from the portal links, but that is your call. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, and yes, I know both the project and followed StateOfAvon's work, since I recommended him to create sub pages. I will contact Mpaa and discuss it with hime when he return. ty.— Ineuw talk 04:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I started acting as indicated above and created redirects to anchors in relevant point in PSM structure. --Mpaa (talk) 11:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


Re:SDrewthbot requested to run through and fix the Line Feed thingy[edit]

I have already made this on svws and daws once. But, you can feel free to see if there is anything I have missed. -- Lavallen (talk) 06:08, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

If you have done it, is there a further need? If you borrowed the criteria or did similar, then I am happy, in fact it was only to make things easier. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
I do not know if any pages older than Oct 17 still has this bug. Oct 17 is the oldest date I have found. -- Lavallen (talk) 08:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
First dud page seen at enWS was 16 Oct 23:13, so that equates. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

AWB at ru.ws[edit]

See ru:Викитека:Форум#Fix for the recent Proofread Page application issue. -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 03:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Separators[edit]

Billinghurst, is {{***|6|char=·|3em}} automatically centered upon transcription into the Main? I get it how I want it on the Index:page, but I don't like how it looks once transcribed. Any ideas/suggestions? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

<shrug> too late for my brain to decipher html. George? — billinghurst sDrewth 13:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Beats me at the moment too. What about closing the the block-center right before it and opening another one right after it again? -- George Orwell III (talk) 14:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Looking back at the template's Talk page, I had forgotten that I inquired about the same (or similar) issue back in February, and {{Letter-spacing}} was then recommended... George, I'll try your suggestion as well and compare it with letter-spacing results. But once I get back... Thanks to you both, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
This is another one that is caused by extraneous calls for additional divs ( {{***}} calls --> {{center}} along with {{loop}} ) within an existing main div or table ( {{block center}} ) that for some reason is set to a default class (in this case "tiInherit") when the template(s) should be relying on a paragraph tag to control alignment under that main div or table instead in these cases.
I find skipping {{***}} to avoid its built in design to call {{center}} (thus dropping the class enforced but un-needed additional div) and wrapping {{loop}} in a paragraph tag instead allows the mainspace to render more like the original format than the other way. The line I used was...
<p style="text-align:left;">{{loop|8|2=·<span style="display:inline-block; width:1.9em;">&#160;</span>}}·</p>
Note that the gap is reduced to 1.9em from 2.1 and the 9th dot is added manually instead of being part of the loop template. Hope that will do & I'm sure it can simplified even further with some effort. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:16, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all the work! I'm going to have to go over your response above with a fine-tooth comb, but my brain can't handle it right now (burned out)! :) But I promise to give it the consideration it deserves when I'm thinking more alertly and critically! :) Appreciated, Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok, good deal... and it renders well in the Main too... But in what way does that formatting differ from {{letter-spacing}} formatting?:

·········

· · · · · · · · ·

Letter spacing, as used here on en.WS via a template (typically),affects line height so if you highlight both for say a copy and paste, you'll see the difference more clearly. Using the paragraph tag allows you to use it inline if need be. In your case it falls between two sections (two paragraphs) of text so it really doesn't matter which one you use - the extra spacing up & down doesn't matter.
Perfecto! Thanks again :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:17, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
And quick question: What does "& # 160;" render? Thanks! (And sorry Billinghurst for taking up space here!) Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:27, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Its actually the same as & nbsp; and is what the Gap template ultimately translates as a hard space. George Orwell III (talk) 13:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
And the technical reason is that the means we use to apply {{gap}} is that if we had the <span> empty then nothing would display. So this way the non-displaying character is of a set width. To find out which character is behind a code, I usually run a search at http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/search.htm . And you are correct, we probably can have such conversations in which broader knowledge is being shared may be useful in a shared forum. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:10, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Excellent Work[edit]

billinghurst, I saw you working tonight/this morning and I was impressed with your swiftness. You are the best administrator that I have ever seen and you keep WS clean. You are an excellent worker! My respects, Maury. (—William Maury Morris II Talk 10:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi! & Thanks![edit]

Hi! And Thanks very much for the welcome message you left me in August. After signing-up I had retreated back to the English Wikipedia because my initial explorations here told me that I cannot bring Government Works from India to WS because of the existing laws and policies. Re-visiting today, and following the likns in your note I find that a solution may be workable in the not so distant future. So thanks again. VivekM (talk) 15:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I_went_to_Heaven[edit]

Hi. I wasn't really sure on what to do with this newly created page. Might be up for deletion, as there is a work which covers this. But proofreading is not completed yet. I proofread this particular page and linked it to the on-going work but I guess this page will be delete in the long term. I leave up to you how to tag/proceed with this. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Done a variety of things to the work in the main namespace. We would keep it, if it duplicates the same work, we would do a {{versions}} page. — billinghurst sDrewth 20:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. --Mpaa (talk) 20:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

m- dash[edit]

Billingsworth, or whomever,

Why is it that we connect the m dash between words (Products—Her..........Population—Political) when it makes the text look bad? Often it would look better if the m dash were not connected to words such as Products — Her Population — Political. Thank you to whomever is willing to help.—William Maury Morris II Talk 17:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

All I can say is that we try to follow the book's example on here, so if its word-word we put word-word. But I always separate them. - Tannertsf (talk) 17:23, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Close help please[edit]

In this edit I closed a delete discussion, I got most of the clean up done, but now I have a problem Category:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology still has 5 author categories in it. I am not sure but think it related to {{DGRG initials}}. Can you take a look and see what the best next move is? Feel free to make what ever changes you believe are indicated. Jeepday (talk) 00:18, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I have fixed the template, and removed the categories from those that were manually added. Removed sub-cats, not touched the overarching cat. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I did not see those categories in the template was focusing on the "DGRG initials/doc". I deleted the overall category, housekeeping done :) Jeepday (talk) 13:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

  1. Volume 29 of the EB1911 has no text layer (if that's the right term). Can that be fixed? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
    No text layer in the files. We will either need to find an alternative or to ask IA to process those files for djvu text. I need to remember how to check for the original processing log to see if I can at least identify the issue.
    Thanks. I might actually have an improvised solution, for my purposes at least. It would be helpful to have the Contributor pages transcribed/transcluded at least (they are currently being added by hand, it seems). No need to jump through any hoops with IA unless it is a fairly easy thing for you to do. Much of V. 29 seems to be "end matter" anyway... Some stuff would be useful to transcribe, but other stuff perhaps not yet, if at all... Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
  2. Question: If I were to "abandon" my WS account at some point—never to use it again, then another person could theoretically come along and "usurp" my account name and use it as their own? Is there a way that this could be prevented?...like "retiring" a sports jersey number or something? Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
    You have a unified account, it cannot be usurped, and that name is now reserved for your login. Plus with the current system, someone cannot make an account that is a close approximation of it. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
    Thanks for the info. Not that anyone would want to assume my "identity" anyway! ;) Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

RunningHeader[edit]

Billinghurst, I asked that the 52 Southern Historical Society Papers be placed on WikiSource. It was set up and you did some examples so that I could follow them. You used RunningHeader in this manner

219
Treatment of Prisoners During the War.

which I have been doing as per your example at the very beginning.

In the following example we see a shorter way which I figure is just as good as what you originally did but is it better in some way other than being shorter than what I had? Why should it be changed to the shorter version?

219
Treatment of Prisoners During the War.

The correction, if it be a correction, can be seen here. But to what purpose? http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Southern_Historical_Society_Papers_volume_01.djvu/227

I can use either method and am used to what you, billinghurst, originally showed me from the beginning. However, I can change to the 2nd method if that has anymore value. In the example, the RunningHeader is the only thing that was changed. It has happened more than once and I would like to know if I should change from what you showed me. Respectfully, —William Maury Morris II Talk 17:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

{{rh}} = {{RunningHeader}}, the reason that I use the expanded form is 1) it is more self-explanatory; 2) I have some code to insert it, so I don't have to type it manually. Similarly, we can set up header self-insertion from the Index: page of works, or Inductiveload has a javascript application that you can utilise. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I will use the shorter version. Thank you for the explanation. —William Maury Morris II Talk 23:04, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
If you like I can set you up with a little script that gives you a click ability (on the left hand sidebar) to add the template to header section. To use it you would just need to turn on the REGEX gadget in your preferences. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

editing my user talk page[edit]

I think deleting things from my user talk page is high handed, especially without discussion. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 22:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I was asked by LBJ to do so by private email. If you want any of your bits back I am happy to do so, the request was around that section and asking in public was going to bring attention to the detail. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Please restore the material. I can be contacted by private email as well. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 00:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Partially restored. See email for further detail. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
My request to Billinghurst only involved the last two posts in the section (written by me), Bob, and did not include any of your comments. Apologies for catching you unawares. I trust Billinghurst has explained the situation sufficiently. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the restoration and the email. This seems like a reasonable solution from my perspective. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 23:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Sisters[edit]

Would you take a look at Wikisource:Proposed_deletions#Templates_.E2.80.93_Sisterlinks_.26_Sisterlinkswp, any thoughts on what to do to move towards closure on it? Jeepday (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

For {{sisterlinks}} it looks like it should be {{deprecated}} as it exists widely elsewhere through WMF. So if we delete it may just confuse people, such a deprecate will guide people to use another and we can tidy usage that persists. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:07, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Stedman's Genius and other essays[edit]

I just tonight noticed your addition of the scan link next to Stedman's work! I guess I owe you a belated "Thanks"... and apparently to another over at Commons as well for the addition of the text there... I had forgotten about the work, having added it to the author page just prior to a crazy-busy time! But I am anxious to get started on it :) I just this weekend gave a copy of Stedman's (as editor) An American Anthology as a gift, so he was on my brain :) Thanks... even though you may not have realized it would have been appreciated when you made the edit :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

smileybillinghurst sDrewth 01:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

"It is to laugh." Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

copyvio[edit]

Could you please see my answere to your question about possible copyvio. Thanks HAKmasnakic (talk) 21:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

sorry link was not correctHAKmasnakic (talk) 21:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Reverting a validation[edit]

Hi, just wondering what the reason for this revert was. Beeswaxcandle's validation looks perfectly legit to me. What's going on? Angr 23:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

NFI. I was patrolling, though sometimes the refresh changes layout with the Resource Loader in that a link moves at the last moment, and may have been asleep in charge of a keyboard. I reverted. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:58, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
OK, no problem! "NFI"? No fuckin' idea? Angr 07:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Maybe, or maybe "feasible". <angelic smile> — billinghurst sDrewth 08:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


No Fine Ideas[edit]

Billinghurst, why does LARGE HATS "small-caps" not work in a list as seen on this url? And what's wrong with your feet--more than two? —William Maury Morris II Talk 09:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC) Page:Confederate_Military_History_-_1899_-_Volume_3.djvu/711

William Maury Morris II Talk 09:28, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Our rendition of small-caps just applies the formatting, and the css code can only convert standard case text to small-caps. When you have capitals and apply small-caps, they are still capitals, so you need to have them as lower case letters to get it to work. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. In the old publications surnames and other words are often larger text on purpose to be seen easily. On Wikisource (WS) editors make them small lettering thereby not matching the original text. Why is that done? Why isn't the format of the original text retained? I myself had No Fine Ideas as to how to format that list as you have. Now I do. Thank you for your Nice Fine Inspiration. —William Maury Morris II Talk 17:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Bot account request[edit]

Hi. I would like to get a bot account to help Ineuw with PSM page creation. Can I get one and if so,how? Thanks --Mpaa (talk) 22:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Me too, I want a Schazzz-bot account. —William Maury Morris II Talk 22:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Wikisource:Botsbillinghurst sDrewth 11:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Image vertical or horizontal on page?[edit]

Billinghurst, I am working on a book that has a fair number of images. Often the are vertical images where one would have to turn the image to see what is really involved regarding details. Should we keep the image in the same direction of the book page or work the image so that it can easily be seen and enlarged. My example of a cleaned image is here—

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Mexico,_California_and_Arizona_-_1900.djvu/301

William Maury Morris II Talk 04:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I would always have the images rotated to be viewable in "normal" perspective. All the obvious reasons about web vs. typeset of & image width in a book, whitespace, ability to rotate, intent … <yaddada>.
Thank you! I had to ask before I ended up doing them wrong. —William Maury Morris II Talk 05:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
There is no wrong, just preference. In the end if you wanted to have them all one way, while I may disagree, if you have done the whole work and it was purposeful, then so be it. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
For online my preference is to have the images (cleaned first!) so that I can view them without turning my head towards my right or left shoulder and still not be able to see the details of the image. In the real world we turn the book to see the image. In the virtual world, click on the image and it gets larger, click again and it get even larger. The final image is very large and the details are easily seen. Now, that is for "online". Someone who wants to print a book would only have a smaller image printed as per the url example I have shown. If the image were kept as is then a book could be printed with better images. So, I am not so sure it is a matter of preference—or preference for whom, the editor or the printer? WS is connected to a printing company that will print out pages, or entire books that we select, as you probably know. That company keeps a portion of the printing costs. It also (supposedly) donates money from these printings back to Wiki areas including wiki areas in many other nations as seen when reading about the printing options. So there is another factor. I myself place finished works in .PDF files. I have no need to print them and it costs mucho dinero for paper and ink. But other people prefer soft cover and hard cover books they can carry around. I would love to see an artist color those images. I would buy my own editing as a book like that! They could have wiki space in a totally different wiki area. Wiki books could make a fortune selling books with colored images via it's partnership with that printing company and the portion of money donated back to wiki areas. After all, it's a color world! -- Maury. ( —William Maury Morris II Talk 20:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
I do not know if it is possible but if InductiveLoad is in a creative mode with his javaScripts and css cascading style sheets, bed-knobs and broom-sticks, it would be a major option if the images remain online as then are shown in the book and yet create something so that the online user/editor/administrator/visitor could rotate any image to see the full image properly. The full image can easily be seen larger just by looking at the already option of "image" but can that possibly be rotated with a javascript, or whatever, as InductiveLoad created colored pages for =Eye Strain= recently? I believe it can be done by someone who has the knowledge and is willing to experiment. It would make online vertical images far better to view and yet would remain as they are for the printers. Thus both viewers and printers would have the best of both worlds — virtual and printing reality.—William Maury Morris II Talk 21:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the welcome. Carminowe of Hendra (talk) 20:57, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Response to "Your help me" (tables)[edit]

I did some research on my own and figured out how to include tables in a page. Once I finish Perry v. Schwarzenegger, I will work on San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist., which has the tables. I will post questions to Scriptorium in the future. Thanks, Dlarmore (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

JVbot[edit]

JVbot was restarted a few days ago. Sorry it went down when someone unplugged my computer. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC) We keep missing each other on IRC .. ;-)

Excellent news. Indeed we do, you seem to be keeping human hours that involve having a life. Shame! — billinghurst sDrewth 04:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


Volume information for EB1911[edit]

Please see Wikisource talk:WikiProject 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica#Volume information for EB1911 --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 00:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


Alpha collection[edit]

What is an "alpha collection"? I assume(?) that it has to do with a collection of volumes that are sorted alphabetically/numerically, etc? Like a multi-vol. dictionary, encyclopedia set, etc. (i.e., "alpha")? Also, to bring the conversation over here, I plan on working some with WS magazine pages (like The Century Magazine), and I want to be sure—before I add/change things ad nauseum—that I'm not making a mess of things that someone else will have to clean up later. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, alpha was just short for alphabetical. For serials, I think that the work that has been done by Ineuw on PSM has stepped through the sorts of issues that come up. unsigned comment by Billinghurst (talk) .
You forgot a signature in your comment here. Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I did too, I'll fix. In cases like that, we encourage another party to add {{unsigned}} against it. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
You "did too?" Did I somewhere? Thanks for the {{unsigned}} tip. Londonjackbooks (talk) 05:28, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh... And hey—I resemble that remark... Londonjackbooks (talk) 05:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
"Two?" you mean? Ugh, I'll stop now... Londonjackbooks (talk) 05:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for the welcome, I understand what you are saying. I appreciate for the notice. I will be back shortly --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 01:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The Oxford book of Italian verse[edit]

Hello Billinghurst, I've started to transcribe the notes about the authors in the book (pages 534-565). I've created the first author's page (The Oxford book of Italian verse/San Francesco d'Assisi), but I'm not sure:

  • If I create a page for each author, every page would contain too little text
  • If I put all authors' notes in a page, it would contain too much text
  • In the book authors aren't subdivided (for example by century), so every subdivision we could use would alter the structure of the volume

What should I do according to you? Soon, Erasmo Barresi (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, no easy answer. Personally I like for books to have logical breaks, and sometimes these don't become obvious until a good part of the work is undertaken. Each of three ways that you mentioned have all been used to display books here. I don't fuss about smaller transclusions if the pages are going to be easily and readily referenced, either from an Author: ns page, alternatively from a wiki, so sometimes if the work has many internal (cross-)references. If not going to be referenced that way, then we can do longer pages, and look to have anchors put through the work, and this works well if there is an index. Sometimes I just work off the Table of Contents, and if that seems to work, then I fly with it. As the major contributor, you do get to set the standard for the work. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


Cricket[edit]

Started on the cultural-partners list when I was lamenting the lack of old editions of Wisden here. That said, I can't find them anywhere, so perhaps even the very old editions are still under copyright. But then that got me to the severe lack of cricket books altogether here :-). Lankiveil (talk) 11:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC).

Considering how much has been written about the subject it is a shame. See Category:Cricket. May be the folks at w:WP:CRIC could be revved up a bit. Moondyne (talk) 00:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Useful (easier? more likely?) to lead, and grab followers, than the reverse. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
There's a few other promising looking cricket books on archive.org, this one looks particularly interesting. Of note is that the WG Grace book was catalogued under "Americana" (!). Lankiveil (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC).
At archive.org, Americana has a non-specific meaning IMNSHO. You probably noticed that Inductiveload and I changed the scan, the other had duplicate pages. As a pointer, that is a UToronto scan, and in our experience they are the better quality scans, and we would generally use Google when other lookups fail, they were very hit and miss with quality and getting all pages. I am presuming that you are wanting the other set up, that I can do. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:54, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
The model in that Philadelphian book appears to be w:George Bromhead[1] which is still redlinked at enWP. Moondyne (talk) 14:28, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
At Index:A "Bawl" for American Cricket.djvu. Those in the west can play, those in the east are retiring. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:38, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome and the tips[edit]

As the header says, thanks for the welcome (on my Talk page) and the tips (on the talk page for Adler's grammar). Thanks also for the quick changes that you have made on our projects. Nikolaos (talk) 13:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Most welcome. We try to be a supportive and wish to be a helpful community. Best spot for general help is Wikisource:Scriptorium, though happy to take questions. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:09, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

1922 works subpages[edit]

Billinghurst, I'm sorry, I didn't know moving the year would cause problems with these dynamic page lists; I wasn't sure what I was going to do: just clear out this large category by shifting the years to different places, or look for a general way to reduce clutter, if possible, by coordinating the "year =" of the header template in a better way on sub-pages.

Your examples of dynamic lists somehow allowed me to see to the heart of the problem and gave me an idea: do you suppose we could change the header template to automatically place works from 1922, for example, that are subpages, to a new category: "1922 works subpages". Then you could use your dynamic lists by entering in this new category instead of the main "1922 works" one.

I can see a problem though beyond what programming problems might present, if there is a great demand for lists that present works from both main space and subpages, AND these dynamic lists don't have an "OR" function. It might not be possible for example, to do a combined list with categories "Obituaries" and ("1922 works" or "1922 works subpages") in case there is main page (that is, not a subpage) that is an obituary. And I don't know how if by using two separate lists with both 1922 works categories in sequence, you could mesh them together into one well-formatted list.

You seem to have spoken more with the best programmers here, so that is why I am asking you first, in case you know a quick answer to the possible difficulties with my idea. And maybe you have an interest in preserving these categories while reducing clutter as well and can help me try to solve it. ResScholar (talk) 23:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, so let me understand. From your review of Category:1922 works there was an issue that it was too full, or overly burdened with the subpage works. So your thought is that we try to separate the subpage works from the root level works.

From my check there is no means to know whether something is a subpage from the API, so we are left with other means. I have been trying to identify better means to display category aspects, so if you can explain what you see as the desired outputs, we can look to what we want. I have also been trying to identify how we can more easily display

  • All Obits
  • 1922 Obits
  • Obits per work, eg. Times
  • Other works ...
basically without having to generate manual pages when we have subpages. So your inputs there would be great. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
You said you couldn't tell a subpage from the API, but I was able to find some good variables that do through APING my betters in Wikimedia template programming.
As for these displays you want, maybe if we originated a special newspaper header, we could assign multiple categories automatically when the header detects when a certain page is down on either a root directory, a subdirectory or a sub-sub directory. These displays could be gathered and displayed in the category lists.
I looked up dynamic page lists at the Wikimedia website. They don't have an "AND" "OR" function, but a bootleg version does, so maybe in the future it will be available. I tried meshing together two lists, too. It leaves a hairline gap, but it works.
Now that I know it's possible, I think YYYY works subpages is good idea, because without it, it defeats the purpose of having a "= year" entry on the subpages; when users employ that field, it obscures the work in the YYYY category it belongs to. Oo oo, ResScholar (talk) 08:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC) correction -> 02:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Go to Category:1922 works subpages to see two works categorized by the new template. It's on hold in case it conflicts with a long range solution of the problems you have brought up. ResScholar (talk) 09:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Blank lines in references.[edit]

In references that have paragraphs, I have been trying to add blank lines, but when I save it, they don't show up. Paragraphs show a single letter space rather than a whole line space, like on this page. I have also tried <br/>, {{blank line}} and {{nop}} but they don't work either; as well as trying the normal "miss a line" technique but it still won't work. Is there any way to overcome this or do we just leave it like that? but then the whole reference will just be one huge paragraph, instead of smaller paragraphs. Thanks. --Angelprincess72 (talk) 12:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

either 2x <br/> or a <p>. mw:Extension:Cite is a bit of a hack with a number of aspects. :-( — billinghurst sDrewth 12:30, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Billinghurst. I stuck with using <p>, because its quick and simple, and now the references look so much more better. Thanks again :)--Angelprincess72 (talk) 18:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Custom CSS for a project[edit]

Any way to include custom CSS for my project to style a great number of various tables? I want to use the same background color for all of them but I might change the color in the future and it would be rather bad to have to do it on 100 pages or more. Please advise.

Sergius g (talk) 19:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Generally we look to replicate what is in a work, rather than to impose our own colour scheme, see Wikisource:Style guide. There are already default table classes within mediawiki wikis, and you can read more about those at w:Help:Tables, though usually something like class="prettytable" is sufficient. If you did want to look to have a level of uniformity for a work, then you can create a template that can be plug into your table, eg. in a page called &x91;[Template:TableFormatWorkXYZ]] you could have something like style="your style formatting...", or sub-components of style like colour schemes. As stated earlier we generally haven't tended to do much in that regard as we replicate the look of the work. If you need some guidance, do some basic formatting for tables, and then we can fine-tune in situ rather just talk. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Sergius g, following this post, I had a look at what you are doing. May I ask if there is any special reason why you are handling footnotes with anchors/returns instead of using the <ref></ref> and <references> tags? --Mpaa (talk) 10:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Exclamatory Mark[edit]

Billinghurst, or anyone else, what does the red exclamation point mean at the beginning of a Users:Name such as this one:
 ! User talk:Billinghurst‎; 19:40 . . (+391) —Brother OfficerTalk 01:54, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

An unpatrolled mark. Help:Patrollingbillinghurst sDrewth 05:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
I have marked pages as patrolled but I never really knew what the red exclamation mark was for. Thank you for educating myself and the rest of the world in the work you do. I did read the link above but it seems that your one statement here covers it all. —William Maury Morris II Talk 05:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
As a follow-up, admins have the ability to have people marked as autopatrolled, which basically means that you don't get the red exclamation. It means that you know what you are doing or know when to ask and I believe that you have both had that mark for a while. So please do patrol works as it spreads the load, and helps the learning; and if you see someone who you are repeatedly patrolling across the namespaces and who you believe should be autopatrolled then club an admin and suggest that we do so. If they are only working on a certain work, and doing an okay job, then there are other means to manage that too. Again club an admin for assistance. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:41, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
I was given the right to do "mark patrolled" and I have done that on a few occasions. The source of my query, as shown above, is that you, "billinghurst", had a red exclamation mark in front of your name as seen on my watchlist. It surprised me. I *think* I marked that as patrolled. But it was that source that caused me confusion since you are an administrator. I didn't think you would have a red exclamation mark thus the question. I will try to proofread more of those and mark them appropriately—or come running to you with a question. Okay? (I don't get those red patrolled marks as I type a page but I find some following me and they are annoying.) P.S. I wouldn't want to club an administrator on Wikisource, they are too valuable but I wouldn't mind clubbing some on Spanish Wikipedia or Spanish Wikisource. "Theornamentalist" <sp?> ("Chris") is still stuck over there now defending right from wrongs from admistrators (some really are bad guys!) and wasting his excellent creativity. Think back to that recent survey about en.wikipedia where the questions want to know *why so many people are leaving.* That's almost a sad joke. The survey should let people write down what they *think of wiki areas* then the surveys could help progress but no, the questions are "tailored" in a manner that you cannot speak your mind. Open surveys would help every wiki area. En.Wikisource is the best I have seen and learned/contributed to and it's worth my time and efforts. Thanks again, Respectfully, —William Maury Morris II Talk 08:17, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
The page was edited, though by Sergius g (talkcontribs) who doesn't have the patrolled right, though the red mark was against this page as that is where they edited. If you look at Special:RecentChanges you will see decidedly more red marks. I know that there are people who have come to validate some of the works that you introduced. Even if you patrolled their edits, that would be fantastic. If you are at the index page of a work, and click the Special:RelatedPages in the left menu that would show you the recently edited pages for the work. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay, since it will help out I will do it. Respectfully, —William Maury Morris II Talk 16:05, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Billinghurst, this is a follow-up from statements immediately above. Please set User:Gumr51 to autopatrolled. I know who he is, an administrator here knows him, and we three are working on books together in English and Spanish. That way he won't keep having those red exclamatory marks to be marked as patrolled. He has posted a lot of material here, validated, and did books on Spanish Wikisource. Thank you, Maury ( —William Maury Morris II Talk 20:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Rename pages[edit]

Without knowing that this book had chapter numbers, I created the namespace links with the chapter names in the links, so I was wondering if you could please rename these pages.

Thank you.--Angelprincess72 (talk) 10:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest that you just move them into place and leave the redirect in place, though I would ask that you call them Chapter 1, 2, 3 etc. as that is the preferred methodology — billinghurst sDrewth 12:58, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Template non comprendo[edit]

I created {{au}} quite casually yesterday, and it now redirects to {{lkau}} which wasn't on my radar. OK, but is there a reason such a thing has to be a subst? Charles Matthews (talk) 08:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I didn't do the redirect. The reason why the link would be subst: would be so that it gives a [[Author:[[Author:Firstname Lastname]] format which is readily bot'able, and also some consistency and more readily identifiable to the standard user. I think that I can probably do a little something to make {{au}} automatically subst: as I have learn a little more in the past year. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:27, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't complaining about the status quo, given that the redirect works. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete file[edit]

I was wondering if you could delete this file as the DjVu file has been deleted from Commons. Thank you.--Angelprincess72 (talk) 20:28, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done at this time. I do not believe that the file has been appropriately deleted, as I don't think that it fits the criteria for speedy deletion and I have my doubts are that the images are copyright from my initial look at the work. I have recovered the file and have started a normal deletion process at Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Lost Prince.djvubillinghurst sDrewth 00:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Even better, a 1915 edition was located which seems a good copy scan and I have put that in place. Problem solved. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bottom[edit]

—billinghurst, what am I supposed to do with a spacing near the bottom of a page that breaks up a paragraph somewhere near or on the bottom of the page that I am editing? The < br > at the very bottom works but isn't there something else I am supposed to use instead of < br >? Thank you, —William Maury Morris II Talk 04:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

If we are talking about a paragraph that terminates at the end of a page, we use {{nop}} on a new line. This is just a trick to stop the work being concatenated. If that is not what you are asking, then could you please link to an example. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. That is what I was wondering about. —William Maury Morris II Talk 18:14, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

without text[edit]

Hi, I ran it this morning and tried to post it, but Wikisource is running like a dog for me today — I am getting 504s — and I haven't been able to post the results despite repeated attempts. I've just noticed that at some point this morning something has managed to stick and there is an edit that looks like I've posted an update. However this is not what I intended to post. I haven't checked but I assume it is valid data but incomplete. I'll post actual results when I can. Hesperian 02:56, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Couldn't make it work. Beset with dramas every time I tried to post a large page. So I have altered my script to do one month at a time. October 2011 is now available. Poke me when you want it updated to November. Hesperian

Ausie band and article titles[edit]

If you have the time, please look into Wikisource_talk:Protection_policy#Amplify. The problem is over on Wikipedia (and I've been unable to skin that cat!).

name of band is s:amplify (lowercase s colon lowercase amplify) so of course when they go to make shortcuts for it we get [[w:s:amplify]], bringing the User here only to attempt to point our Amplify article back to Wikipedia. -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Have we tried : — billinghurst sDrewth 10:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Of course.... but the issue is not on Wikisource so that won't fly over on Wikipedia (where the un-piped shortcut would be [[s:amplify]]) to Wikipedia. How in blazes do you explain to an annoymous teenager that s-colon "means" Wikisource and that one has to pipe ALL the shortcuts, no matter what, using Samplify (cause' I sure can't figure out if/how "s:amplify" can be a legit mainspace title over there or not) -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
K. I don't particularly want to do anything there in case we had a work of that name. I have put a note at enWP and they can heed the not, or end up visiting us. Transcription required to leave. :-) I think that the protect should work, and we may wish to have a talk page there too. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


I'm not seeing why you guys are against this. There is a music production house that goes by the name "s:amplify". It is reasonable to expect readers interested in that topic to go to Wikipedia and type "s:amplify" into the search box. What they want is the Wikipedia article entitled "Samplify". Where they end up is at a nonexistent Wikisource page entitled "Amplify". This doesn't serve the readers' needs, and for technical reasons it is impossible to fix it at Wikipedia. Putting something on our Amplify page here seems like the only available option. We don't have to do so, but it seems courteous and does us no harm. Hesperian 14:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

February's featured text[edit]

Following a message on my talk page to remind me, I have started to add Picturesque New Guinea to Template:Featured text/February. It has had very little discussion as a candidate but two votes in favour and none against is technically enough. As we haven't had a new featured text in months, this seems the favourite choice for February. However, as I haven't done this before, and you have the most experience (at least, according to the history of the template), can you check if I'm doing this properly? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Main Page/sandbox looks good to me. Nice. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Oh, though there is all the additional bits to do that are noted on Wikisource:Featured text candidates (protection, ...) — billinghurst sDrewth 00:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you...[edit]

...for your welcome! I hate being the new girl on the block and having to learn the rules all over again... Have a nice one :) ! Shir-El too (talk) 07:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:EB1911[edit]

I think that the real solution to making it cleaner is to follow the suggestion made by user:Bob Burkhardt and get a "section_author" added to the parent template as was suggested in Template talk:EB1911#Changes to make more like DNB.

However an area that can be simplified quite easily is to move the title mess into a sub template. As this is identical to that in the DNB (with the exception of some strings which can be passed in as parameters) It would mean only one template to maintain for both DNB and 1911. This would go a long way to simplifying the look of code in the two templates.

Another thing that can be tackled is the notes section. It seems to be much simpler in the {{DNB00}} why is it so complicated on {{EB1911}}? Is it because the new parameters in {{header}} have not accounted for in {{EB1911}}?

With a bit of thought, rather than just a sub template for title, it might be possible to come up with a combined template for all of the encyclopaedia type projects: {{Encyclopaedia}} and {{DNB00}} etc become wrappers around it. -- Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 02:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit watchlist[edit]

—billinghurst, how do I edit my watchlist? I remember seeing (or imagining?) an area where I could add or subtract names on my watchlist. I *think* it showed "edit raw watchlist" where you add or remove a name. Thank you, —William Maury Morris II Talk 18:47, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Individual pages are removable from the page (unwatch), or your can edit it from the Watchlist. Up the top of your watchlist are the links to view the list of pages, or to raw list. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I had finally found it in front of my eyes after looking everywhere else. I do thank you though, you always come through with a good answer. Respectfully, Maury ( —William Maury Morris II Talk 10:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I work on the philosophy that all things hide on a wiki when you really look for them, so finding things thereafter is good luck not good management.winkbillinghurst sDrewth 12:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
That statement and excellent smiley face produced a real smile with me. By "hide" I hope you mean they just turn invisible and remain in one place as opposed to being invisible and moving around. I like to follow what Einstein said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge" (note: I mentioned "imagination" above) but on wiki areas I'm not so sure Einstein is right. Wiki areas defy all explanations. "May the Force be with us". —William Maury Morris II Talk 12:45, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

You as steward[edit]

Hello Billinghurst,

I've voted yes at the election for you as steward. Your "foreign language skills are not the best" (most votes against or neutral refer to this), but learning is not difficult! If you'd like, I can give you French (and Italian) email lessons. For now... good luck!--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Erasmo. I did German and French at school so I am still okay at reading the Romantic languages, especially due to the shared base with English; and Google translate is helpful. Grammatically undertaking a conversation and getting the right tense is always going to my issue. I find some of the concerns around language a little bit of binary approach as my strengths are clearly in addressing and managing spam, etc. and that will be my concentration as a steward, I am comfortable with others with greater language skills managing permissions. Weirdly nobody rejects a steward on the grounds of the other technical skills which are required, but that is something with which I have to content. Such is life. Thanks for your support. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Right. So why don't you add German and French to your Babels (not only here)?
Manage expectations. My school time was a long time ago, and I tend to understate rather than overstate my abilities.<shrug>
Off topic: can you delete this page, please? After the above discussion I decided to use an only page (/Notes) for all authors.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 15:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Probably worth chatting with others about the variety of ways that we have handled compilations. For setting out these sorts of works I have found that two heads can be better than one.
Billinghurst, I hope that you get what you want because you have certainly earned it with all that you've done for the sake of others. I don't believe a person should be held back because s/he is so valuable in what you already have achieved. I read that area of voting and the skills you have and have been using and I think you have earned whatever position you want. Respectfully, —William Maury Morris II Talk 20:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Gday WMM2. The interesting conundrum: the balance between more time for creating pages of information in a fantastic community, and the protection of WMF ideal from abuse, and the people gymnastics. I suppose that the best that I can say is that I believe that I can help, I will contribute though it will lessen my input here, put it will not put a stop to it, editing helps to maintain balance and keep your feet grounded. Stewardship is a shared responsibility. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Collier's header template[edit]

Andrew, I reverted your changes to the {{Collier's}} header template since the change was a rather radical one and didn't handle multiple Wikipedia links. The current method is tried and true and is very flexible, being able to handle two and more links in a uniform manner and also links to other projects. I can't see much reason to change, although granted it is inconsistent with the way {{header}} handles things. The method of handling in the pedia articles has the advantage that the reader can instantly see any difference in article titles which with the old encyclopedias is frequently useful information, and the more accessible and transparent the better. A wikipedia box on in the notes is less transparent on this issue I think. My revert also included the author parameter. For this particular template, I don't think it matters as I don't recall ever seeing a Collier's article with an author, but in general I think the {{header}} template needs a sectionauthor or some such parameter to do this right, and I submit this for your suggestion box. It seems like a fairly frequent need. The visual layout seems reasonable, but implementing it in {{header}} would make it more uniform and easier to implement at lower levels with only a parameter assign being required. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 00:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Info[edit]

Amazing where you find spam :) Cross wiki but not sul. Blocked on Commons now etc etc. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

[OMG, he found my hideout.] I didn't do it Guv, it was the butler, in the drawing room with the pipe. But being a good snout, I will do some snooping for a lighter sentence. :-) Oh and thx — billinghurst sDrewth 09:31, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Book upload to commons[edit]

Author

कालिदासः

Translator

दक्षिणावर्तनाथः

Title

मेघसन्देशः

Year of publication

१९१९

Language

Sanskrit

Description
English: Meghasandesha of kalidasa with dakshinaavartanatha's interpretation
कालिदासेणप्रणीतः दक्षिणानाथप्रणीतप्रदीपाख्यव्याख्यायसमेतः मेघसन्देशः
Source

http://www.archive.org/details/MeghadutaWithTheCommentaryOfDaksinavartanatha

The file is at http://ia600309.us.archive.org//load_djvu_applet.php?file=10/items/MeghadutaWithTheCommentaryOfDaksinavartanatha/Meghaduta_with_comm_Daksinavartanatha.djvu and the filename---->meghasandesha - Dakshinavartanatha - 1919.djvu Abhiram (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


"Let It Be..." ?[edit]

2B or -2B..illinghurst? I wandered into a conversation of yours that led me [HITHER]and I was wondering if this is correct or you overlooked something when working on The Times/1883/News/Joseph Lister; and specifically the strange L/ at the end of this, "at Glasgow University in 1879, D.C.L/ The song by the Beatles came to mind as did Shakespeare and I decided I would risk asking you about it. So, should it B or - B? As always, "Respectfully", —William Maury Morris II Talk 06:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

a tysop. Ficked/ — billinghurst sDrewth 15:53, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Editing of CDNs[edit]

Hi Billinghurst, i noticed your corrections of my refilling CDNs lists. I have added working CDN to list of working CDNs in form like others CDNS are added (like Yottaa CDN). What is the problem with that?

I thought the lists of functional CDNs are here for review of funcional CDNs. It wasnt mass link spam, but mass completion of CDNs list.

Thank you :)

Tjedi1

Hi. I am trying to remember back to the url that was being pasted. If it is helpful for you, please look at w:Wikipedia:External links. If you can give me a link to one of the reverted pages, then I can have a second look and give specific guidance. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations![edit]

Congratulations on becoming a steward! (as of 4 minutes ago, wow!) ClayClayClay 01:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. More buttons, more instructions, and the roar of the crowd to do something. A little weird, however, I will just plod in my normal monotonous way. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:54, 4 March 2012 (UTC)


Frankly, I demand a recount. Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

VOTE HERE!

A Colossal task for one...[edit]

Billinghurst,

The thought just occurred to me after trying (unsuccessfully) to find an available online version of Byron's poetical works mentioned here, that I'd scan the pages myself to make the text available on WS, but it would take me forever. What reliable resources are out there for me to have someone do the scanning for me that wouldn't cost me an arm and/or a leg? Thanks, AKA Londonjackbooks 23:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I would not want to mail the set somewhere... Preferably it would be great to watch how the process is done myself. Some of my books are like my "babies" (but not since I've had real ones!), and would be hesitant to part with them... even if only temporarily! AKA Londonjackbooks 23:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Not my area of speciality. You should ask Uncle Mattwj2002 he has done bits, and has his grand plans. Alternatively point him here. Make him get up of his bum and earn the peanuts that we throw his way. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:06, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
I uploaded The Corsair (Byron). I hope that works for you! --Mattwj2002 (talk) 16:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Inductiveload pointed me to newly uploaded scan indexes of Byron's works—Vol 3 of which includes "The Corsair"—that I have begun work on. I do like to compare and contrast, however, and there's no better way to familiarize one's self with a poem than to work on it more than once! Appreciated, AKA Londonjackbooks 00:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


George Orwell[edit]

Hello Billinghurst,

I believe you were incorrect in reverting my edit on George Orwell's page. While life+70 is the rule in most western countries, in the US, it only applies to works created after January 1, 1978. See this useful diagram from Cornell-anything from 1923 to 1978 is copyrighted until January 1, 2019 or later. All of Orwell's major works are, unfortunately, copyrighted past 2021.

To give you an example of this, all of James Joyce's works entered the public domain this year in most countries because of the life+70 rule; however, because Finnegan's Wake was published in 1939, we must wait until 1/1/2035 =(.

As ridiculous as it is that we have to wait until 2045 for Nineteen-Eighty Four in the US, it's the way it is. SVeach94 (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The templates we use Help:Copyright tags takes into account the issue that you raise and displays the multiple situation as relates to the copyright within the US and in the remainder of the world. These tags have components that calculate and update. The situation is more complex than you describe as it relates to when and where works are first published too. I am well aware of copyright issues and the page and have been dealing with it here for a number of years. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:23, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Set width issue in PotM[edit]

Hello. Just thought I'd throw this your way before I make more of a mess. If you take a look at this rendering & etc., you'll kind of get an idea of where I'm coming from (compare other telegram widths in same chapter; large image (with its own set width) messes with the text (and text width) that comes before & after it)... If you've no clue what I'm talking about, I'll try to rephrase... Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

It did look a tad ugly. I have had a play with joining the text together. Ultimately we need to do whatever works best for the work in the screen presentation, and someotime that only comes at the end when we come to tidy it up, especially when so many people get to play with the PotM. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I had also block-centered (in the header/footer) the pages that lie between the text (image/without text pages), although it was likely unnecessary. I learned the lesson (from you, I think) some time ago about waiting for the finishing touches (tidying up) on the PotM before obsessing about format uniformity. Thanks again, Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Putin and Premier.gov.ru license[edit]

Hello! Thank you for the greetings. For Author:Vladimir Putin we need to have the Template:Premier.gov.ru license modeled after commons:Template:Premier.gov.ru, just as we have Template:Kremlin.ru modeled after commons:Template:Kremlin.ru. Greyhood (talk) 20:30, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, looking further at http://premier.gov.ru/eng/about.html it would seem that we cannot host it, and I would hazard a guess that Commons cannot host the works either. Their addition of the licence as is described on the pages is misleading. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

miscellaneous[edit]

Billinghurst,

1. I would like to volunteer for a positive and good award. I am becoming disheartened with no awards for so much work. What does it take, an "I love you"? wink It did not bother me for a long time but it has become more and more saddening within my soul. I have posted to WP and WS since 1996 and am left a virgin in the arena of awards. I do not want a negative award for one mistake after all of these years. I have posted several volumes by myself including Exploration of the Amazon vol.1 by Lt. William Lewis Herndon and volume 2 by Lt. Lardner Gibbon, as well as others in the days before we had to place every book or volume into each page and having proofreaders and validating and adding cryptic code.

If you are talking about WikiLove as used at enWP, it hasn't really been part of our culture. We generally are a quieter introspective crew. For a bit of fun I did implement recognition for participation in Proofread of the Month and I did give out those gongs yesterday for March. With regard to the "negative" event, I would put that done as some misfortune, and some poor practice (including some from the community). I stand by my comments that there you are a respected member of this community, you do work of quality, and I didn't see any malicious intent with your actions.

2. Do we have "Library of Southern Literature" on Wikisource which consists of many volumes? If so, please point the url to me. Too, let me know if we have all volumes. Let me know if any are missing. I have the volumes in hardcopy (i.e. vol.VI 1909, &c., &c.) I cannot find those many volumes on WS which are approximately 100 volumes. Has it been renamed to something else such as a volume of "Life in Southern Literature" that I saw?

Not something of which I am aware, though I am not a literature geek. I do see that archive.org has a large slab of them search. If you are after those, where possible we avoid the Google scans and generally we find those to be of a lesser quality.

Thank you for listening to reading this. —William Maury Morris II Talk 16:08, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Welcome. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:48, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
I know nothing of "WikiLove used on WP, I was jesting in that statement, please notice the wink icon. In reference to introspection I don't think anyone could do that any deeper than I. That has been my life since 1969 after my service in the military. With regard to a negative event that would be lessons learned for many of us. I don't focus upon it as I might be overly concerned about writing anywhere and especially here as I have. I thank you for your answers and regarding a literature "geek", I have never heard of any since a geek is in reference to technology and science but not literature. As a defense of literature and technology, the word geek doesn't really touch me as I am far from being any sort of geek, a word by the way, that is not good and is a reference to someone accomplished in scientific or technical pursuits which we all should respect because they are pillars of our society and of our great nation. Think NASA and John Glenn. Yes, archive.org has those volumes not nowhere near all of them. I have looked over those scans and saw nothing wrong with those I saw. They are similar to what we do have here, "Life in Southern Literature" which elicited my questions. Another that increased my curiosity was a few poems I saw that you have done. Earlier today I added an illustration of a lady that I found when reading over a few very short works that you and others have done. Literature would never be classified as something geeky in any manner and certainly no more so that works of art and architecture. These are all various beauties of creationism within mankind -- the peaceful and beautiful side of our culture as opposed to man's warring nature. In the recent past I also felt as you do about Google until good ole George Orwell III talked some since into me about in which I later agreed and concluded "something is better than nothing".—William Maury Morris II Talk 03:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Re geek, don't take it more than a jovial reference where I was more setting a contrast with me who is "literature neanderthal." If I did poetry it was for typesetting reasons, not for any literary value. I wouldn't know literary value if it can and bit me on the arse. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:12, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh, it doesn't bother me even though I do like poetry. Too, I think you must have been thinking of the word, "nerd". Both geek and nerd are expressions, in my opinion, of envy from decades passed. I can honestly say I envy people with those qualities. They are involved with creativity, beauty, and culture. My thinking was harkened back to the days when I was in high school when in my science classes of physics and chemistry we used a slide-rule because a "calculator" did not exist until NASA's work produced transistors that replaced "tubes" for a reduction of size. Geeks and nerds are to be admired or at least respected as much as those who protect this nation of ours today. The geeks, (an expression I personally never did not like as it is intended as a put-down of others) are those masters of technology today -- those that created the technology for wikisource to exist -- and who created a fantastic editor that we all use which one day will be far more advanced. The editing tools of today will soon be a memory and placed in the archives of technology by our memory and by the "Wayback" archives. Literature is an art form--something often of great beauty, an art form, that I wish I could excel in but while I like it it isn't exactly my "cup of tea" other than to admire it and respect those who create it. Before going to work on the SHSP volumes &c., I would like to state that I do like your way with words as I look above and see your statements. You are not dull but instead you are a witty wordsmith and I admire your intelligence and you as a hard worker. —William Maury Morris II Talk 03:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Life is not meant to be boring … and I will try for the delightful as well. smiley (with full apologies to George Bernard Shaw) unsigned comment by Billinghurst (talk) . 11:53, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

THE HE-ANCIENT. When a thing is funny, search it for a hidden truth.
STREPHON. Yes; and take all the fun out of it.
AKA Londonjackbooks 13:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

". . . there is no real evidence to the effect that Darwin showed, at any period of his life, a deep feeling for poetry, or a profound understanding of it. . . . The true love of poetry, and the intimate understanding of poetry, are matters primarily of a man's temperament. . . . Now Darwin's temperament was scientific: 'My love of natural science,' he writes, 'has been steady and ardent.' I suggest that the combination in a single individual of the scientific and the poetic temperaments is and must be rare. And I suggest, further, that, where it occurs, the temperament will almost inevitably develop one-sidedly, so that poetry outtops science, or science poetry. . . . poetry must be taken for its own sake, or it may as well not be taken at all. . . . I do not think that Darwin ever had a profound interest in poetry; the scientific temperament was too strong in him. The historical plays in which as a schoolboy he took 'intense delight' probably interested him in the main as stories. . . . I have spoken only of poetry. The considerations which I have here urged apply, however, with the necessary modifications, to Darwin's loss of pleasure in pictures and music."

I worked on the above article last December... Thought about Billinghurst while I proofread. IMHO, that's how we show "WikiLike" around here—or should! :) AKA Londonjackbooks 11:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

  • I totally agree that life is not meant to be boring and I don't recall it ever being boring for me. Perhaps Darwin was having a wonderful time in his work. When it comes to what one may call "boring", I would call that "Peace". There is a difference in a fast-paced and highly-exciting lifestyle that an individual experiences and how much of that lifestyle is not "boring" as opposed to too much excitement for long periods of time in life that an individual determines what is boring as opposed to the same situation being peaceful. That's introspection on a personal level. Ask any fellow in the military what he or she thinks is boring and what is peaceful. Those having gone through combat will know the difference between boredom and peace. It's a judgement call on an individual's level. Darwin never had to experience an abundance of excitement in his world other than that of of his world of science. I do not agree that "poetry out-tops science" as that is dependent upon many other conditions. It cannot be an accurate blanket statement. If at war we don't need poetry to toss an an enemy but we do need what science and technology can produce. I also do not agree with Darwin states regarding science and poetry and I cite Audubon as an example as a scientist and artist. I believe most those that are artistically inclined would also be inclined towards the art of poetry. I disbelieve a lot of what Darwin states. At one time, long ago, I could have written a paper on this subject as the history of both were fresh in my mind back then. I do enjoy most of what you come up with though. I image Darwin had a lot of debates in his time.wink Peace, —William Maury Morris II Talk 12:49, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Requesting a book[edit]

Billinghurst, would you (or anyone else reading this with the ability and authority) please place this book in the proper format on WikiSource? I would very much like to work on this book! I thank whomever before the deed is done. It is not a Google book. It comes from the Library of Congress.[2]William Maury Morris II Talk 09:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Done, File:Memorials of a Southern Planter.djvu. Are you right to do the Index page? It would be a great help with these if you were able to give a populate version of {{book}}. Also, we have a tool available that uploads files from around the web to Commons, and we can show you how to use if that is of interest. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure I even understand all that you are asking. I usually ask AdamBMorgan to upload a book here and he does. I see all pages in small squares as page numbers and edit those. I have looked at what you have done and it appears it stopped short of making those pages. Things are easy when one knows what is happening and gets used to it. I have no idea as to the intricacy of placing a book from archive.org on Wikisource. I do know how to scan and make .PDF files, upload them and use them, OCR them offline, or save to individual images. tlx-book-SISTER-commons? I don't know what the tlx means but just guessing I suppose that all images are actually placed on "our sister" recource, Wikicommons. That doesn't make sense to me but again I am guessing at something unknown to me. I can probably do this kind of Index.page from observing how AdamBMorgan does them but as good as he is he often makes changes in what he does. I am no where as capable in this as you fellows are. I just edit text. The text is really all that interests me although I must admit learning code for editing is becoming more fun thanks to watching others and asking questions. Before it was just an unwanted task because it is the text that interests me even if it is in ascii. You state that you have a "tool that uploads to commons", where is this tool and what is it called and by "commons" do you mean Wikicommons or here on Wikisource? I would think you mean on Wikicommons since images are no longer uploaded here on Wiksource and our "sister" wiki handles all images for WP and WS et al. Are you indicating that a person can download a djvu file to his computer and then upload that file up to Wikicommons to be used here on Wikisource? I would like to see and read about the tool you have mentioned but the process of using that, or any tool is another matter. I can hand you a tool for various outdoor construction work but that doesn't mean you would be able to use the tools properly. While all that you have stated sounds interesting to me, at this point I just want to edit the pages of a book. The codes used in various editing projects is enough for now. I have looked in wonderment at some works done by LondonJackBooks and how she uses code as if she were born to innovate and conquer all tasks with code. She makes code "dance and dazzle". Others here work with complicate code for formatting intricate tables. To each their own and I sincerely respect their likes and abilities to explore and work on our old books. I however am not that good with such tasks. I learn codes slower as I edit and when I need a code I seek it out from these people I have mentioned as I know their abilities and learn by copying and then doing. So, in making a long story shorter, No I cannot do those things you have asked of me. It is okay, no hard feelings, if the book is not to be done as Adam sets a new book up. I was not aware that it in itself is a task or how much time that task takes any person to set up. IF I could just upload a PDF file up I can get the text from that. In fact, I can get the text without comparison images as I did with the older books I placed on Wikisource with my Brother Officer account. What is wrong with that format? It's easier and faster. Alas! I have always been far more worthy at physical things throughout my youth that with technological things at my present age. If I knew how to do what you have asked I would do it to help out of my own kindness for others. I do not know how the overall exchange systems, the various wikis, exchange favors with one another. For example, I look at this, ["would be a great help with these if you were able to give a populate version of tlx|book|SISTER=Commons:] and wonder what are you talking about. It seems to be the spreading around of images to various (at least two) wikis but I am guessing. I do apologize for not being as technological as I perhaps should be. I just like and editing and saving old books for the people of the future. It reminds me when we had to do all webpages with html (Hyper-Text-Markup-Language) by hand and then out they came -- programs to do everything for you including using templates, javascipts, cascading style-sheets, and more-- thereby making webpages archaic. I prefer to BeeHappy in MyWork which is as Ben Franklin stated, "Simplify, simplify, simplify".—William Maury Morris II Talk 11:22, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Not to fuss, it was just an idea. I can manage … Index:Memorials of a Southern Planter.djvu Yes check.svg Donebillinghurst sDrewth 12:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
I'll just intrude here (as I've been mentioned) with the following:-
  • There's a help page for creating index pages, Help:Beginner's guide to Index: files, but the quick version is: if the DjVu file is "File:Memorials of a Southern Planter.djvu" just replace the "File" with "Index", create the page and save. The details like title and author can be filled in at any time.
  • The tool mentioned is URL2Commons; I created a help page, Help:URL2Commons, although I'm not sure how clear it is.
  • The book template is the table you see under "Summary" on the File: page (with the title, author's name etc). It is indeed on Wikimedia Commons rather than Wikisource. Filling in all the parameters helps to provide all the information about the book.
Sorry to respond with bullet points but I thought it would be the clearest way to reply. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
We have copied {{book}} to here as it seemed wise, and I was meaning to complete it where possible with as much info as available, and to paste it with a request as it saves me some time. I now try to an upload right first time if/as possible. unsigned comment by Billinghurst (talk) . 15:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
I thank everyone here who has helped me with so much for so long a period of time. I do have a question though and it is; "Who would be best to ask amongst all on WS for placing a book where others like myself can edit that book?" I have looked over what Billinghurst so generously placed here and told me about the "tool" and other statements so that I can learn to do these things myself in time. I also thank Adam for always being so very helpful as all of his tips are great tips and I just finished using one of his tips that is very important. That is his tooltip|Robert D. Minor|Robert Dabney Minor that when placed inline produces an underline and shows a question nark and then the full name. He knows I am inclined to fill in the middle name when I know it. In fact, I can usually write out the history behind many of these Virginian names. R D Minor was flag officer on the ironclad CSS Virginia on her maiden voyage out when they sank a man-of-war attacking the Congress and Cumberland. He was wounded lending aid to the burning ship when hit by shots from shore &c &c &c and the 2nd day Catesby ap Roger Jones (ap is "son of" in Welsh) took on the ironclad Monitor on the battle between the ironclads with Capt Buck Buchanan of Maryland being in charge of the CSS Virginia. I know these (often full names) names and events so Adam's tooltip is a serious and wonderful tip to work with. Again, I thank you both in this learning experience. Where's the spell checker? winkWilliam Maury Morris II Talk 16:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
The most public place to ask for a book to be uploaded would be WS:S and the first available person attend to the matter. That said, you don't ask that often, so it is not a major issue. Any bit that you do to make it easier to upload, eg. prepare the template for use, means that I can achieve something in a short space of time. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Understood and I thank you for answering my question. I never knew there was a template to fill out for a book until I saw what you set up for this "Memorials of a Southern Planter" by a "Dabney" descendant; i.e. kinslady to Maj. Genl. "Dabney" Herndon Maury. These Virginia families have a tendency to write throughout history, and they rarely, if ever, leave out ancestry and collateral kin as well as trials and tribulations which is why they all know, or know of, one another today and often form modern family societies. —William Maury Morris II Talk 12:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Billinghurst, even as I transcribe, "After the revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685), a branch of the d'Aubigné family left forever the land of their ancestors, because they could no longer there worship God with freedom of conscience. They took refuge in Wales...", your words remain in my mind, and in thinking back, I am quite positive that I have never before asked you to upload a book for me. I harken back to your wording above where you state, "That said, you don't ask that often, so it is not a major issue." Now I can continue onward with my work as my thinking has been settled on that issue. Other issues have also come to light here today. My destiny was never to be a writer, except for one book, but rather to be a person who saves old books for untold generations of the present but more so for generations of the future. Well then, Eureka!, today is a grand ole day! Respectfully, —William Maury Morris II Talk 13:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Doon School (Obituary-T Singh)[edit]

Hi Billinghurst, This is regarding http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Guardian/2008/Obituary/Tejeshwar_Singh I am not sure about the rules here but is a Newspaper obituary also copyrighted?????? If yes, then it can be labelled copyvio but I'm not so sure whether newspaper obituaries are restricted by any copyright. Correct me if I'm wrong...thanks! Merlaysamuel (talk) 04:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that sort of work would have copyright, either by the newspaper, and/or the author. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Okay, another question:- the recent ones you marked copyright-vio like Speeches by the President or Dalai Lama at Doon, how come they qualify for copyright infringement?? Because it's exactly like Manmohan Singh speech at Cambridge (which, in fact, is not a copyright). ????? Merlaysamuel (talk) 09:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like it is, and should have been challenged at the time of entry. Rectified. See http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm for guidance — billinghurst sDrewth 10:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Pardon my ignorance but if speeches are made in public, why are they copyrighted? :P Aren't they, by very definition, in the public domain? Merlaysamuel (talk) 10:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

P.S:- I hope I'm not bothering you with my questions. It's my first time here. Sorry if I am... Merlaysamuel (talk) 10:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Unfortuately I cannot have a long conversation with you about copyright here, and there are plenty of pages on the web that cover this and you can start at w:Copyright, but to quickly answer your question … No. A person will still have copyright over their intellectual property whether they express it on the printed page or as verbal speech, though there is some variation between countries specific statutes. That a speech is in public or in private is not relevant. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand how busy you must be. But thanks, I have understood what you said...!!! Merlaysamuel (talk) 10:29, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Author-Author[edit]

Billinghurst, I need help on two authors with the same name. They are related to each other. I need to know how they can be separated when a search for Author:name is done. I added the birth and death date in one of them to separate them. They are Author: Virginius Dabney (1835–1894)) [[3]] and Author:Virginius Dabney (1901–1995)[[4]] —William Maury Morris II Talk 16:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Donebillinghurst sDrewth 09:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. It was getting worse as I tried to add to and yet separate them. There is a 3rd Virginius Dabney but he didn't author a book that I am aware of. Besides Virginius Dabney (modern), Virginius Dabney (old) there is also a sister, Susan D. Dabney (sister of author of the old Virginius Dabney)who married Rev. L. Smedes that authored the book I have been working on and then there is Robert Lewis Dabney who authored and was an aide to Stonewall Jackson. All of these Dabneys are related. It is a huge family so there were and are plenty of people with that surname for a few to become writers. I believe all families are like this but many if not most are not aware of it. I was working on the genealogies when I got confused with not being able to delete one of the Virginius Dabney authors. I thought that if I continued I would have made things worse. I am sure I would have. But why could I not delete one of the Virginius Dabney authors and start anew with him? I got frustrated with the mess when I could not delete one of the names and start over while trying to use their birth and death dates. Virginius Dabney, the modern one, won a Pulitzer Prize for his works on defending Thomas Jefferson. He is a kinsman, a FFV descendant, and I often talked with him about families and authoring when we both lived in Richmond, Virginia. I was juggling too many things in my mind, including sources, links, and genealogies when I encountered the fact that I could not delete one of these authors I had created and start over. So, why is it that I could not delete one of the names of "Virginius Dabney" and use those dates for disambiguation? Now I need to place two of them with dates, under Author: Da. and Susan D. Dabney has to be placed under Sm. due to her marriage. The Smedes is a name I am not familiar with and is not a Virginian name that I am aware of. I typically know Virginia names and their Virginia connections. The book I am working on introduces much material that I an not familiar with and yet much that I am familiar with. It is not just another book to me. I seek out Virginia families to learn of them and their kinship. The seeds of "Civil War" and other situations scattered many families. I believe it must have been annoying to you but I did try to delete one and start over with him. I was not allowed to delete him to start over with him for "Author:search" reasons. —William Maury Morris II Talk 11:42, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Ipso Facto Forgo the Ergo[edit]

Why is my IP address showing on an Author post when even now I am still logged in. I have not logged out yet.—William Maury Morris II Talk 19:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Happened to me once or twice too... A couple times I did it on purpose to compare/test something out, and on numerous occasions in the past, I just simply forgot to log in. As Billinghurst might say,—<shrug>—but I won't speak for him... Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
It does not really matter to me. I signed my name. Internet Service Providers have more than one IP address if that is what you were looking for when you did your comparison. However, I do not think it happened through my ISP being a direct cable Time Warner ISP. But that really would not matter to me either, and perhaps due to the fact that decades ago on Internet we used numbers extensively. It was just a curious situation because I had not logged out and still haven't logged out. BeeHappy in your work, —William Maury Morris II Talk 21:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Beats me too but I've seen this before and have had it happen to me as well. Some things will always be quirky I guess. Anyway, I've hidden that Author history entry just in case already. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:31, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, George Orwell III. I wouldn't want anyone to know that I am a Virginian living in Texas amongst Fontaine Maury Maverick kin just because I met a Texas girl and married her. She is worth it though. I also appreciate her Christianity. Respectfully, Maury.(—William Maury Morris II Talk 08:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Usually happens when you are in unsecure login, and click a secure link, or vice versa. Which is why I look to do protocol neutral links starting with the // and omitting the http:/https: components — billinghurst sDrewth 11:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
@WMMII: I don't remember the exact reason I tested my IP address, although I do know it had something to do with fixing/checking the settings on my wireless router to see if they had changed or needed to be adjusted. Either way, whenever you enter your IP address into an IP address lookup website, your exact location doesn't show up... My experience has been that it renders at nearly your location—sometimes even a different city altogether... Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

University Education for Women (Sidgwick)[edit]

I'll be uploading this to Archive.org within the next couple hours, and will post the link here for you when I get it. (If the power doesn't go out in the meantime) Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:55, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, doing that already, and it is now at http://www.archive.org/details/UniversityEducationForWomenPresidentialAddressDeliveredToTheEducation and it is bubbling away in the derive queue, oh it is done smiley. I excitedly saw your email and was quickly downloading and uploading that, answering mail, grinning to myself, planning the days ahead, and what was going to get deprioritised … — billinghurst sDrewth 11:26, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Ok... Well, now there are TWO, 'cause I just uploaded it! :) I can delete mine... I wasn't sure if you got the email or not... Glad it's good to go! Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:29, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Bountiful :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 11:38, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Autumn harvest at Wikisource! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

That was fast! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:55, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Which is why I like the lectures. I get less bored, and maintain motivation. I also think that for some of these small subject matters, we may get more casual/passing interest whereas for the larger works they are going to be for devotees. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:02, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Dbl redirects[edit]

Hi,

I was wondering what the story is with a handful of redirs created a week or two ago. They've come up on the last few list refreshes so I'm wondering if they are still works in progress or are OK to delete (plus that's a neat trick - how'd you manage doing that???).

They were circular redirects, so kept pointing to themselves. We suffer an ndash <-> hyphen issue within the DNB, so we resolved to have all pages as hyphens. We create redirects from the ndash dates to the hyphen dates, and on this occasion, I created hyphen to hyphen by mistake. Deleted them on this occasion.

Also, the same batch of broken DNB-related links keep coming up every week (& are even older) - who should I check with on fixing/deleting those? -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Which other DNB links? Are you meaning ndash links to hyphens? If yes, then it is a hard one. We know that we will complete the end pages with the project, so we either create the redirects as we go, or we have DNB redlinks that will be hard to find to create redirects later. I don't know of a means to be able to find the redlinks from a set of articles, so they can be created at a later time, hence that methodology. If no, then I am not sure of your reference. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Sorry - Special:BrokenRedirects. They do have ndashes and hyphens but the base link is slightly different. Not a bother either way. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:34, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, [q. v.] links (become our redirects) from the works, and as expected in a 63 vol./15 year project they come in a variety of styles. If you can think of a different means for in the works redlinks, I am open to suggestions of a better way.
Well I guess I'm missing the point of adding the &ndash containing redirect(s) "now" rather than in masse "later" if its true that the actual work will always have a name where the hyphen is always the rule. My point was(is), for example, that (as best as I can tell) the target exists (or merely needs transclusion) BUT earlier editors did not include the b&d years in the mainspace title(s) at all.
If I follow all this right....
Should both be pointing to
or the latter needs to be moved(renamed) to the former's hyphenated title maybe?? -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
PLUS - sometimes there is a comma after the first name, or before the (DNB00); sometimes there is not. Seems to me too many variables to effectively cover all the possible combinations this way. -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:01, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Complexity. If we work on the philosophy of links later, we would basically have to wait to the end of the work to complete all wikilinks, and we would have to work through all the biographies looking for redlinks. [Big complex discussion deleted, I so need a whiteboard!].

In short, we are having to identify the eventual target without knowledge or extensive research for each and every link (unfeasible). We have tried to keep is simple and where possible we end up with just name, though if the work differentiates we presume that we will need to too. So in the above example, the work differentiated a year so we presume that there are multiples, so coded for it, when we trip over cases that didn't need differentiation like above, we fix it and move all to the base, as I have done with the example above. There is no perfect scheme, it simply has to evolve, and to fix when the exceptions are identified. An imperfect world. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Tsk. This is the same problem Ineuw has over on the PSM project. Create a page in flux that is tracked and resolved in a timely manner or just don't create the link; especially if it goes nowhere. One can try to skirt the logic of no bad mainspace articles by creating redirects that don't really go anywhere - making it just as "bad" as transcluding gibberish "prematurely" in my view - or we create the the damn page and make the effort to finish it properly within ~30 days. I'm really finding this notion that anybody outside of our merry little group of 30 or so regulars would even notice or never mind care if there where mainspace DNB or PSM articles in such stages of flux rather silly. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
GOIII we are talking about how many problematic pages here? If you can find me a ready way to identify redlinks that only go through to DNB articles from DNB articles, where the dates are involved in the nomenclature, then come forth with the information. Please don't give me a problem without a solution when we are talking something less than 20 links for more than 10000 DNB articles. We are not breaking the bank here. I agree that it is less than ideal, however, it is better than 100s of links redlinks when the articles exist. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:15, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Struck a nerve eh? Ok - Solution: Have the project monitor the list on a schedule that amounts to something sooner than once every royal wedding (once a month maybe?) so I don't have to. Prost. -- George Orwell III (talk) 15:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Only the one that make comparisons about people stuck on rule-based decision-making, rather than about reasonable and practicable; especially in consideration of when neither tools nor infinite resources exist. I believe that I carry my fair share currently. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
You do way more than you should be required to by anyone around here imo and I did ask for just a pointer on the broken ones way back at the start of this for just that reason - not to be a bother when you weren't the one affecting things.

As for the other thing; the whole 'if nobody speaks up, that equates to consensus or means it is working fine' bit is wearing a bit thin and rarely provides meaningful stepping stones for actually moving forward. All it really seems to do is insure that the status quo remains (which I admit is not always a bad thing). Besides, this was not anything earth-shattering or controversial; its basic housekeeping. -- George Orwell III (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Stupid questions revisted[edit]

Hi, congrats on the Steward bit (I will rise to stand when reading your posts now)

aha, sure, right, of course, nothing lesser expected.
Stupid question -
Any suggestions on how to get this change (set for the 1.20wmf update whenever that happens) added as a patch or something to the current build in use here on en.WS now? -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:05, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
If it is part of a bugzilla, request, I always find the naïve approach of asking can this be reviewed and rolled early works, by asking in the bug. If you cannot find a bug then start one, and explain why it should be rolled out early with sufficient detail for me to then be an IRC nag. May also be worth jiggling the door knocker of Krinkle to see if he would be willing to assist. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Bugzilla: 31417 exists but they arrived at the decision to adding the "id" attribute to the page-content-container div (also a relatively new addition; 1.18wmf) as being pro-active; heading off the possibility of some developer coming along and building something that intrudes beyond the accepted wrapping of content by including #contentSub or #catlinks in their creation. The sad reality is "we" have already executed what they had hoped to avert by that and previous patches with our introduction of Dynamic Layouts and its creation of a psuedo-page-content-container div(s) - a container wrapping div that does exactly what they now consider problematic moving forward (i.e. the use of #contentSub thru #catlinks for the creation of what at the time was the lack of a universal user & skin generated default div container at the time see the talk page).
This "over-reach" in the Dynamic Layout implementation has loooooooong been the root of many issues - especially the one I need to standardize the Statutes at Large and other sidenote intensive layouts. I'm just looking for a way to "fix" what the now-absent developer has abandoned. This change might make fixing DL's just matter of substituting the new div i.d. over the old ones. I won't know unless the Skin.php automatically creates the new & more accurate container and I play around with my theory. --George Orwell III (talk) 04:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Zaran is picking up the running on PrP wikitech, so is this an issue to fix properly in PrP? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Well yes in the sense that it would be nice to have the Proofread pages transclude only between the opening and closing tags of what amounts to the textarea box in edit mode when saved. Right now, everything is not only styled according to the layout but getting pushed up into areas where things like the featured icon use to reside upon save (remember? we had to .js those bits back up top again after Dynamic Layouts was rolled out?). Move forward in time and we got the MediaWiki induced green navigation header when invoked from the <Pages> command line - also forced up and out of the proper container. You probably haven't seen it for some time now but if you're not logged in, you can actually get the annoying donation banner below the transcluded content in some instances.
In short, Dynamic Layouts are loading up into the light blue bar when everything could be taking place between the 2 yellow bars in this watered down HTML IMAGE. Gettig between the 2 yellow bars allows us to move only the header into the blue bar and move the Viaf/LLC & License, etc. bars out of Dynamic layouts but still before the bottom green bar (straddling the Categories bar). That way, only transcluded text is actually subject to the Dynamic Layout. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Done r113933 (1.19wmf1 patched: MFT r111647, Bugzilla: 31417 )-- George Orwell III (talk) 22:18, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

That looks like a congratulations. You know how #class illiterate that I am, so I look forward to the English explanation to the community about how we/I can do things better. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks - getting it patched was easier than I thought it would be since somebody actually understood what I was rambling on about!!!
The new container allowed me to move the License and Authority Control templates out of the Dynamic Layout mainpage scheme fairly easily ( see the end of page HERE for example ). I know there was (is?) some discussion on where to place the Authority Control template - well this new opportunity moves it down above the Categories bar no matter where its placed in the mainspace editing field via a small common.js entry (so end of discussion?). That behaviour "should" be possible in the Author namespace as well if desired.
The problem now becomes how to also (re)move the header template from the Dynamic Layout DIV container/text-wrapping scheme. I messed around with the various .js entries/MW-files I thought might be involved with that portion of DLs to no avail yesterday so I'm stuck again.
What I believe is required now is somebody who knows what they are doing when it comes to ThomasV's approach to all this - and I think that person is Phe. I was hopping to catch him/her again on the relevant talk page discussion we briefly had previously but I guess OldWS coverage is spotty at best. Would you be willing to intervene on my behalf and point Phe to all this plus that talk page section? -- George Orwell III (talk) 19:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Page:All quiet along the Potomac and other poems.djvu/47[edit]

Hi, would you be able to help me on this ? I can't remove the extra "4*" below the image. Thanks. --Aplomb (talk) 13:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I understand now ! --Aplomb (talk) 13:26, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
smileybillinghurst sDrewth 13:28, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Bot Requests[edit]

I was wondering who approves bot requests on wikisource Harryjamespotter1980 (talk) 21:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

In all these things they are community decisions, see Wikisource:Bots and Wikisource:Bot requestsbillinghurst sDrewth 09:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

How long does it usually take to get a bot approved? Harryjamespotter1980 (talk) 05:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Depends on for what you are asking, who is around, who is paying attention, maybe who has time ... There is no specific timeframe. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I left the link to the example on the bot request page Harryjamespotter1980 (talk) 03:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I left a message on the bot request page Harryjamespotter1980 (talk) 06:21, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Watermarks throughout on djvu's and treatment of marginalia[edit]

Hi Billinghurst, I have two quick questions for you:

1. I'm working on some djvu's for a new author page, and I've been removing the Google scanning credit pages before upload, but I've noticed that both Google and Microsoft have begun including small watermarks on the bottom right of each page to the effect of "This work digitized by..." Short of much tedious photoshop work, I don't see any good way to get rid of these. So do I just remove the credit page, leave the watermarks, and upload the djvu to Commons? Or what is your suggestion?

Firstly, the Google scans are my least favourite scans as usually of the poorest quality, and I am more likely to dig through the archive.org texts for the least worst version. I usually don't change them at all, and just upload them, noting though that I utilise a direct upload process through toolserver that uploads directly, rather than download to my PC and then upload. Too slow, too cumbersome, too inconvenient and in the end for the reproduction at enWS it hardly matters. Note: where we can get the issue of the text being scanned and OCR'd, I have a little script that removes that sort of text as part of a clean up script.

2. One of the djvu's with which I am working contains some marginalia—an inscription before the title page. Is there any established policy on the treatment and transcription of such items? I was thinking I'd go ahead and transcribe it but hide it with the heading "marginalia." What do you think?

Presume that the marginalia to which you are addressing are handwritten notes. This being the case it is not part of the work per se so one then has to put the note in a context of a historical or authoritative note. If it is a note by the author or other there are means to add it by way of {{user annotation}} otherwise it may be just something that we add to the talk page of the work, or just ignore. There is not set "rule" as there are too many variables, and it is something where we come back to the principle and scope of the site.

Thanks! Polyglottalstop (talk) 08:19, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

billinghurst sDrewth 04:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Polyglottalstop (talk) 19:25, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Portal:English_Statutes/Titles_(Ruffhead)_Hen3._to_Hen6.[edit]

Can you move this somewhere the formatting doesn't break EVERY Single time? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:04, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

oh I did this Yes check.svg Donebillinghurst sDrewth 08:39, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Merry Muses[edit]

Can you, in a nutshell, explain the Robert Burns/Merry Muses work to me? Or maybe even point me to a good description aside from front/end matter (unless they explain things best, in which case I'll read them)? Just curious as usual; and also as usual, you don't have to explain a thing to me. And Happy Easter. AKA Londonjackbooks 02:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

It is a scanned book. <shrug> Not sure what else to say. I only suggested it at a time, and BWC chose it. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:16, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
That'll do, thanks :) AKA Londonjackbooks 15:09, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
You are apparently the only person on WS that uses 'BWC' for Beeswaxcandle's 'handle'. As my husband says, "It's just an observation" ;) AKA Londonjackbooks 03:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Wen yuo typp lyke I do, bwc is good ljb. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:55, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
You're not that bad... Close, but no cigar... :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible oops: Can you (not you personally) do this, or is that a no-no? It was an accident anyway, and I don't try to do it... Thanks, AKA Londonjackbooks 02:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Nothing to fret, the guidance is clearly to prevent people validating work that they have proofread. You haven't done that, so, no issue. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Berlin hackathon invitation[edit]

Just a reminder for you & for anyone who reads your talk page:

I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon, 1-3 June. Registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, then please register by May 1st and mention it in the registration form.

Also check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page at mediawiki.org. Sumanah (talk) 00:37, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

TUSC Numbers[edit]

Hi. How are you? I have this two interrelated questions to clarify my (mis)understanding.

The first is about the TUSC number: If I remember correctly, you once posted me a message that a TUSC number for image transfer must reside on my commons account. I now noticed that Mpaa placed his TUSC account on WS. Does the TUSC have any use, other than the transfer of images?

It is a little vague, however, it is my understanding is that TUSC needs to reside on the the receiving server. So generally you are sending to Commons, so it needs to be on the talk page there. Mpaa may be sending files to enWS, hence has a version here.
I found it out after having done one for WS. I thought it was a TUSC unified account. I did another one at Commons … --Mpaa (talk) 19:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
(Expand) The TUSC is a verification, one generates the code with a password, and then one adds it to your talk page, and it verifies the editor with the number. Thereafter it knows who is the editor and it has a TUSC password, hence, it will allow you to direct it. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:07, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The second question relates to images' transfer from WS to the commons using CommonsHelper, or CommonsHelper2: Unfortunately these tools never worked for me. JIRA bug report. However, I've seen a comment on one of the JIRA bugs by Jan Luca (who took over the management of these tools from Magnus), that he never released CommonsHelper2 for general use and it's restricted to Administrators only. Have you ever used this tool in the past few months to transfer images to the Commons? Thanks in advance. — Ineuw talk 08:52, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Cannot help you here, my I don't think that I have been through the process recently. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:05, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarifications.— Ineuw talk 19:31, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
FWIW I looked at your JIRA and with the example given it failed not due CommonsHelper but due the file that you were trying to transfer. From my experience CommonsHelper has internal checking and it looks for needed and rejectable components, if it doesn't find the first, and/or it finds the second, then the move will not occur. I don't know the exact checking, however, I believe it checks requisite/banned templates and also for licences. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Usurp request[edit]

Hi Billinghurst. You archived my usurpation request on AN, but it hasn't been done yet. Hesperian said that the request would be fulfilled on 6 April unless there was a response from the target username. Has there been an objection or can the usurpation go ahead? Osiris (temp) (talk) 16:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

No, just my oversight. I will prompt Hesperian. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, just a sec... done. Sorry for not following through earlier. Hesperian 23:40, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
No problem! Thank you very much! :) Osiris (talk) 04:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambig[edit]

FYI edit, Jeepday (talk) 12:33, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The Complete Poems of Emily Brontë[edit]

I think I'm starting to get somewhat of a handle on things (criticism always welcomed). I have opted for "chapter" sectioning, and I figure all those individual poem pages can be turned into redirects (I've already done so for the first two poems) much like what was done (is still being done) with the TWP. Any other comments about Brontë's Vol. I can be made on the work's Talk page, I figure. I still plan on tweaking it a bit... Still not up to my standard, and then perhaps someone else with an even higher standard (or knowledge of the material or formatting) can take over from there! :) It's been a good mental exercise, thanks for throwing it my way, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
If you think it needs more work in any areas—or changes in existing areas—let me know. I think I'll let it set for a bit and get back to some of my other goings-on. I have left some suggestions/recommendations for general Users here if you want to take a look. Lots of loose pieces still, but not too difficult to weave together eventually. Not very knowledgeable about the sisters myself, or I might dive in with more gusto, but hopefully it's a start. Still not averse to helping out with it in the future, though. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:11, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Redirects are indeed how I would handle moving works to subpages. My reasoning has been that with numbers of poems as they are normally named simply, and reflecting emotions that we often have to disambiguate, which is how I found the work in the first place. I will have a look-see tonight when the house is quiet. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:19, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to bug you again... I'm not in any hurry for an answer; but as you have your look-see, could you also take a look at my "hmmm" question-of-sorts posed on the work's Index:Talk page (Re: "Anticipation" and other like Mainspace pages)... I'm hoping you'll understand my question, 'cause I didn't really explain it very well. Again, no hurry. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:45, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Just strollin' along with Emily's poems... I think I've adopted it at this point. No issues on my end as of right now that need addressing, unless you see something I don't. Good luck with the quiet house thing ;) If that implies kids, enjoy them to the full! (I actually stumbled across an Emily B. poem entitled "All hushed and still within the house"!) One thing I've discovered about some of her poetry, however, is that the first lines are often "deceiving" as to how the poem actually takes a "turn". Have a good one! Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:19, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Completed reformatting/reworking of Not Proofread (yet treated as proofread) pages, and added some formatting suggestions on the Index Talk page. Turned out not to have much that needed disambiguation but for some "Lines" and "Song[s]" and a couple more to boot—but that's not for lack of "reflected emotion" begging such titles... Most (I think) titles are first lines anyway, which makes things a bit easier. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done

page problem[edit]

Hi Billinghurst,

For some reason some of my articles that I completed are running together, e.g. John (d.1147) (DNB00) and subsequent articles. Theywere good when I created them and I have double checked the beginng and ending sections. I am at awit's end. Thanks much. Daytrivia (talk) 18:42, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I think I found the problem thanks anyway. Daytrivia (talk) 18:52, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

"Sorting out pages that I can validate per project" gadget[edit]

Hi. I was reading oldwikisource:Wikisource talk:ProofreadPage and saw your request. I wrote a gadget for that last November. It is pretty slow, because it needs to make as many api requests as there is pages. Its code is available on pl:MediaWiki:Gadget-mark-proofread.js‎ and pl:MediaWiki:Gadget-mark-proofread.css. If you want to test it on pl-wikisource just enable Oznaczaj skorygowane przeze mnie strony. in gadget preferences. Red border means page can be proofread, green means that there is nothing to do, orange means checking in progress. Beau (talk) 18:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I had a quick try at Beau's suggestion, but of course I'm not that big an editor on polish wiki source, so I'm not seeing much! Can we just copy Beau's work onto en: to test it out? Thanks CharlesSpencer (talk) 20:24, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks to Beau for making some mods at plWS, and I have now made it available in the gadgets. There is scope for modifying the help text (probably link to a help page somewhere), and we may wish to look at the formatting, or whatever. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:39, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Export request[edit]

Hi there, since you have advanced rights both locally and globally, I thought you would be a good person to ask. Could you please export either Template:Cite_web or w:Template:Cite_web to the Latin Wikisource? It would be useful for primary source talk pages. Thank you! It Is Me Here t / c 17:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

laWS has the ability to import directly from enWS, so I would recommend that you start with a request to la:Vicifons:Scriptoriumbillinghurst sDrewth 17:19, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I've posted it there, although no-one has replied yet. It Is Me Here t / c 23:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
My understanding is that this has been done. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I believe that some of the templates on which that one depends also need to be imported (i.e. the "core" templates). It Is Me Here t / c 23:40, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
I think I've fixed it now. John Vandenberg (chat) 22:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Babel[edit]

Did you want to contribute to discussion; Wikisource:Proposed_deletions#Category:Babel_-_Users_by_language?. Jeepday (talk) 10:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

one whole cent expended. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

May POTM[edit]

Hi, the PotM is going so well, that I think we might as well see if we can get some of the Letters/Memoir book done as well. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:10, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant, I will get it in place. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Done and linked to from PotM talk page. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:45, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Index:A_Set_of_Six.djvu[edit]

Hi. I started proofreading this existing Index:A_Set_of_Six.djvu, edition 1924. I now realize that according to en:wp, the first US edition was published in 1915. I found a 1915 edition on IA ([5]). Problem is that pagination is different, so a simple swap of djvu would cause text to be misaligned. The work done so far could probably be reused if saved somewhere and then copied back manually according to new pagelist.
What would you recommend?

1. don't care and go on with current index?
2. swap djvu in the same index (and then what? delete all existing pages and regenerate them from scratch? move them and readjust where possible? other …?)
3. create a completely new index and start from scratch?
4. other options?

Advice welcome :-) Bye--Mpaa (talk) 21:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Clarification: problem is not only that page numbering is not aligned, but also content er page. In general no. of pages per chapter is higher in the 1915 edition.--Mpaa (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Being republished in 1924 won't put the works back into copyright, just any new content would be under copyright if the required provisions have been met; so that is still able to be continued. What are you looking to achieve? What is your desired final outcome? If there is no alignment of pages from work to work, then you have a decision to make on which is your preferred edition, whether there were changes in the work/editions, etc. To me it sounds like a "desire" result and all about opinion, not on which someone can advise you. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:53, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I just thought it would be nice to have the first edition. But if we are not so strict about it, I will continue with this then. Thanks--Mpaa (talk) 09:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Default is first ed., however, there are always reasons that we may not. Poor editing, typeset, scan, ... It should be a mindful act to determine the copy that we have. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Admin closures[edit]

G'day mate,

It's the first of June, and time for action on admin confirmations. Since I was up for admin confirmation in May, it might be better if someone other than myself were to close the May discussions and declare the results. BirgetteSB is in the May boat too, and Zhaladshar isn't around. If you would close the discussions for me, I am happy to take it from there and archive May and initiate June.

Hesperian 00:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

All done, surprisingly looking at the vote, you passed.winkbillinghurst sDrewth 01:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Oh well, there's always next year. Hesperian 03:19, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Re admin noticeboard ... just a fubar, it was meant to be an addition, not a substitution. As one spaceman said to the other after the mid-space bump on another otherwise quiet mission ... Apogees!


Bot Requests[edit]

I wasn't sure if the message i left early was showing up as a new message but i left a message link on the bot request page about bolding words Harryjamespotter1980 (talk) 03:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

m:Talk:Interwiki map#Wikimedia_wikis[edit]

Hi, I have made several proposals. Just letting you know. :) -- Cat chi? 16:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

database bug?[edit]

Any idea what to do about Page:Dictionary of National Biography. Sup. Vol I (1901).djvu/374? Hesperian 01:36, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Deleted and created. Bingo. Akin to percussion mechanics ;-) — billinghurst sDrewth 14:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Running Headers[edit]

Billinghurst, I am finding many pages in several different areas with no running headers whether the pages are validated or not. Is this something that is okay to do now? Things do change around here so I really don't know but I wouldn't think so. Also, is it important to validate the Popular Science articles, especially the first ones, or not? I am aware it is more important to get them proofread. I work on a book and have started taking a break from editing by reading another work and validating as I go. Most respectfully, William Maury Morris II 06:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

It is disencouraged to omit {{RunningHeader}}, though we don't beat up anyone who does. If we can do it easily, we can run a bot through to do headers. Re proofreading vs validation. The acts are equally important, and some people prefer to do one, and not the other, and that is okay, we are thankful for whatever contribution are given. We do find with works that getting them validated can be a drawn out task as someone has a passion with a work to get it proofread, and others may not share that passion so the validation is elongated, so in November of each year we have taken to validating as our proofread of the month. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:22, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


In-page Footnotes[edit]

Hello.

I have run into problems attempting to proof Page:Blaise_Pascal_works.djvu/309; in the sense that I do not know how to preserve the original text's footnote reference numbers; and am currently lacking the intelligence to find a suitable example to follow.

Perhaps I am trying to do something regarded as unnecessary? Needless to say, the standard help... is not so helpful in this instance!

Please point me in the right direction and I shall try very hard not to annoy you further!

Thank you, MODCHK (talk) 01:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

You don't need to do this as, when the pages are transcluded into the mainspace, the sequence will be continuous across all the pages. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:15, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I was clearly suffering from a bad case of attempting to gild the lily! I shall fix the page. MODCHK (talk) 01:35, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
It is one of the (our?) compromises of progressing from individual footnotes of the original works, to endnotes. Having them as individual in situ footnotes just doesn't work. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Inter-page Footnote References[edit]

So much for my not being annoying!

A further question - but first an issue which cropped up whilst I was trying to find the solution by myself:

  • In Page:The Life of Michael Angelo.djvu/228, there appears to be a syntactic issue, in that there is a missing '<' from the 'ref follow="page227">' tag at the page top. However, as both the page itself, and its overarching index have already been validated; will correcting this in any way upset an ongoing process?
    Fixed (thanks), though there is never a problem intervening, so in such a case, if you cannot fix then you can always just return the work to a problematic marker.
  • As to why I was looking: in Page:Blaise Pascal works.djvu/311, there is a footnote reference whose anchor is on the previous page (i.e. Page:Blaise Pascal works.djvu/310.) I was hoping the <ref follow=...> construction might handle this case, but now realise this is incorrect. May I have a hint as to a more correct way of handling this?
    • A reuse of a ref (this case), so as at WP we would just do <ref name="blah" /> though it will generate an error … Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named "blah" … which we just ignore as an artefact of Page: ns. An example at ref 5 on how it presents. Whereas …
    • A follow is where the ref itself is split over multiple pages as per your first example.

Thank you for your continuing indulgence. Your patience is really appreciated! MODCHK (talk) 00:01, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Politely being asked reasonable questions is never annoying, especially where we are poor on the help files :-( (for which I apologise for my component of that part) — billinghurst sDrewth 03:04, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


Deletion Requests?[edit]

Hi. I see you added discussed, sstatic deletion requests along with speedy deletion requests on the watchlist dashboard. I think this was a less than optimal addition because a discussion to delete those tags are needed, requires its own own cat to properly reflect the number of items in question (11 pages not 15 currently) and, because of the lack of its own cat, will always show 4 items (15 minus 11) marked for discussion in error.

Would you mind terribly if we kept it simple and left it to speedy deletions only? -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:03, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Nope, don't mind at all. Issue is that {{delete}} is the standard across WMF and how the GR/GS will mark a page. I was going to add a formula to smudge the calculation however was distracted by RL. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:07, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
GR/GS ? -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:44, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Global rollbacker and global sysop. Apologies. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:01, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

No accident[edit]

No accident, please do not revert them, the page should be perfect with all the special characters accordingly, like ă,ǎ, or ĕ, ė, it seems like user: bennylin just add spaces to it and didn't compare them correctly and mark them as proofread. I revert to not proofread, seems like he didn't bother reading, much more proofing *peace* Siska.Doviana (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Though I have been trailing along behind patrolling these edits and moving some to validated. I did speak to John in IRC, so he did explain what was happening.smileybillinghurst sDrewth 10:29, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Alright, glad it is clear up. Thank you :-) Siska.Doviana (talk)

Patterns[edit]

I'm sure you will see them but there are a couple of pattern account creations I think letter number combis ~4 hours ago). --Herby talk thyme 07:17, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

{{smaller block}} Achilles heel[edit]

I have just added nowiki in puzzling circumstances (diff) because {{smaller block}} was rendering as {{{1}}}} without it. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:38, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, it was looking for a parameter of that name, didn't it, so pumped out that it was missing positional parameter 1, a mandatory field. {{=}} can be used too. I obviously didn't check that one well, not expecting an equals sign in the footer. :-( — billinghurst sDrewth 01:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

{{nominate}}[edit]

I don't think your changes to the SUL link are functioning as expected. Can you take a second look? --Eliyak T·C 00:41, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

No, they didn't. Apologies for that. Fixed. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:41, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Hi. I just wanted to say thanks for fixing my talk page! I appreciate it.Omirocksthisworld (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

PageTriage[edit]

Have you looked over the new patrolling feature I proposed us enabling at the Scriptorium? It does not interfere with the current method of patrolling so no one would be forced to switch if it were brought in. --BirgitteSB 01:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Numbered List[edit]

Hi. I was wondering how a numbered list can be continued on this page and this page. I've tried using # and <ol> but I havn't been able to do it. Thank you.--Angelprincess72 (talk) 11:40, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

You need to do <ol start="n"> on the subsequent page. On the first page you can use either ol or # to start the list. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
alternatively just use hard numbering (1) (2) (3) and not worry about auto-numbering. We aren't going to be adding lines, so autonumbering is not required. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:31, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


Author:Thomas Kennedy[edit]

Can you dig up more about him? The Catholic Encyclopedia handbook has only B.A. R.U.I., i.e. Royal University of Ireland. The title page of the book I found has the same plus barrister-at-law, so presumably called to the Irish bar. He was married to Author:Moira K. Coyle. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you link to the work, so I have a time and place. Evidence for the marriage of Kennedy and Coyle? It is possible that there are two Thomas Kennedy.

1930 United States Federal Census
Name: Moira K Kennedy [Moira K Coyle]
Spouse: Thomas J Kennedy
Birth: abt 1889 - Ireland
Arrival: 1906
Residence: 1930 - Queens, Queens, New York

Here Thomas was born c.1885, occupation recorded as magazine editor. From there I see a Thomas J. Kennedy born 1884, Portumna, Galway. The census index indicates that marriage was c.1916, though I can see nothing evident in the NYT. Also in NY in 1940, in which occupation was editor of "Monthly Review" (presumably something like The United States Catholic Magazine and Monthly Review if it is the same T.K.), and I followed the daughter to death in 2005, which would indicate to me that we are probably talking a different person to the barrister. Didn't find a death date, though somewhat painful to dig through that sort of stuff.
Thoughts on how that fits with what you have seen elsewhere. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, sad when it is me that records that they were married, and to which I have no memory of where I pulled that data. That said it would have been surely TOTALLY FACTUAL!!! — billinghurst sDrewth 12:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I am guessing that I made that conclusion from the same 1930 census record quoted above, there being no other Moira Coyle. In a little further digging, 1915 census shows her as Mary K Coyle, living with her mother. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
1910 census shows Moira (Mary K), aged 23, a stenographer in a magazine office, father alive, clerk in insurance. So that looks pretty good with a little cribbing on the age.
Probably ... Mary Kate Coyle, Ireland, Civil Registration Indexes, 1845-1958, birth: Jan - Mar 1887 Dundalk

Cartoon[edit]

Hi,

I'm tying to clear out my work folders for last week and was wondering if you can address one of your earlier works that I patched a day or two ago. All that is needed is to pull the image from the 2nd page of this short PDF, upload & categorize it along with the other images over on commons and finally add it to the missing page reserved for it in Index:Cartoon portraits and biographical sketches of men of the day.djvu here. TIA. -- George Orwell III (talk) 14:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Wow. Extracted the image, and proofed the text, and added the image to the page. I have fixed the ToC to reinclude an active link to the page. Did you want me to delete the pdf? — billinghurst sDrewth 15:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Up to you if you feel keeping it would secure integrity or something. Early on in that work, is a note-page stating that all the bios & pics except one came from Once a Week of that same year or earlier. I hunted it down and made it into an excerpt that could be easily manipulated. Being an excerpt - its not worth keeping unless it serves as proof of the missing content or something (... and believe me that guy is missing in every remotely accessible online edition/scan of the original book of cartoonish bios I could find).

... and validate that one last page! -- George Orwell III (talk) 16:00, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I had had run through the versions of the original work at IA, and had just found the image missing. So well done. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:11, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Thank you for the message! :D --RexRowan (talk) 18:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Need Help Proofreading[edit]

Hi Billinghurst,

I am needing someone to complete the proofreading for this upload - I did the best I could do but it now needs a 2nd proofreader. Can you help me out? Thank you! http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:US_District_Court_Jury_Verdict_SRF_v_Ananda_2002.pdf Red Rose 13 (talk) 04:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, no time at the moment. Better off to ask at Wikisource:Scriptoriumbillinghurst sDrewth 10:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Book on Australia[edit]

Billinghurst, I saw your request for the book, The Coming Colony. Practical Notes On Western Australia. I have upload the entire book to http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:The_Coming_Colony.pdf I *think* George Orwell III is going to work on it and take the text trash out. When he is through it should be ready to edit and validate. Most respectfully, William Maury Morris II (talk) 14:38, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks WMM. Apologies for tardy response. Internet issues. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:44, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Crash[edit]



http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:The_Coming_Colony.pdf

George, on Billinghurst's talk page he thanks us for this book on Australia that he wanted. But where is the Index final version ready to be edited, proofread, validated? Respectfully, —William Maury Morris IITalk 07:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't have the time to hold hands. Fish or cut bait already. Tell him to make a decision - I gave him 2 options - a PDF or a DjVu. Review each and pick one (or none). This is getting ridiculous. The inability to obtain the work due to location is one thing. The inability to make that work once provided into something workable is NOT MY PROBLEM it his or yours. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't want to hold your hands and I don't like to fish. My only interest is hopefully to see that what we both have worked on and what Billinghurst asked for gets completed. It is not a "problem" for anyone. It might just sit there but that's okay with me. I hope that you feel better soon. Cheers, —William Maury Morris IITalk 12:47, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


Base Facilities Report[edit]

Hey, at last someone noticed the funny little project of Base Facilities Report! Thanks.  :-)

Little works can be added to Wikisource:Proofread of the Month/little works and bigger works to Wikisource:Proofread of the Month/validation works and we will pick them up for validation. At the moment that work is at Template:PotM. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Ah! That explains it!  :-) I am glad. — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 12:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Author talk page in French, should it be deleted or translated.[edit]

This page -- Author talk:Héli Chatelain is in French, should it be deleted or translated. It was written by an anon IP. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 13:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Yep. I think that we can just be moved to frWS; and leave a redirect; and if someone wants to translate it, they can. I would think that we could alert Phe or Zephyrus and get their opinion of whether they want it, or can use it. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

OTRS[edit]

Does that mean we can act those [false] claims of an OTRS being filed or is there still a reason not to delete these just yet? -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

At this moment, I can just see that there is nothing open in the queue, I am still working out where the hell the closed and any auto-archived are located. OTRS is butt ugly! I shall try to run a username and a filename search through the posts to ensure that there is nothing that has just been left. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:14, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Commons question[edit]

What is the "best way" to overwrite (or update?) an existing file on Commons with one of the same name uploaded locally here on en.WS? File:Statesman's Year-Book 1899 American Edition.djvu. I feel 'bad' asking other folks to handle these rather straightforward tasks and figure you are well expierenced in both Commons as well as WS to provide me with some sort of insight on how to do this on my own.

Two options, both using Commonshelper. Option 1) Delete the Commons file, and migrate, then undelete, to maintain history. Option 2) Migrate to Commons with a new name, move it over the top, and then undelete for the history. Both options will require the {{information}} or {{book}} template and suitable licence in place prior to migration (it fails if not both not present and acceptable). Both options require a Commons admin somewhere, option 1) pretty well requires admin to do it, option 2) just for the merging. Happy to follow your instruction on how to progress, and yes, working with a WS accredited admin will just make it happen.
Jesus H. Christ - is there anything in the Wikisphere that does not require you to jump through flaming hoops while holding a shot of fine whiskey naked?

Forget It I'll keep bothering people with faster connections to do this. (Your connection still has gremlins right? [tongue in cheek]) -- George Orwell III (talk) 09:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm forced to work this way under the flood-flag bit here on en.WS ever since a recent upgrade in wmf curtailed an hour or so of inactivity as reason to time-out the connection. Given my local connection speed I can't upload files larger than 55Mb or so without the upload failing before completion. The floood-flag, however, allows for the pre-updated wmf time-out limit which I never did manage to trip given the 100Mb max file-size before it. TIA -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

It will require a bugzilla to progress, and do mention your sneaky means as that sounds like some solutions there already, especially as the only difference in permissions that you don't have is Be treated as an automated process (bot) which must have longer timeout values. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:43, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
This is why I can't bother with the sister sites in general. You'd figure transwiki importer or something would be extended to admins if not crats of sister sites to cut down on this kind of nonsense over there. Again, thanks for your time. -- George Orwell III (talk) 09:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Transwiki importer works for the text element (the envelope) but cannot migrate the actual files no matter your permission, hence the bot approach.<shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 10:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Rambles in NZ[edit]

Hi, Thanks for validating Rambles so quickly. The Director of RBG Sydney needed a searchable copy. Having it double-checked is a bonus and he's very grateful. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Nice! Double checking your work is pretty easy. Now if only we had a better search engine! — billinghurst sDrewth 07:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


Acronym redirects[edit]

Hi, Billinghurst! I notice NTSB was deleted as a redirect to Portal:National Transportation Safety Board, but National Transportation Safety Board was kept as a redirect. But "NTSB" is incredibly common as shorthand for the "National Transportation Safety Board" and I would find such a redirect to be immensely useful. Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 14:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

We don't have cross namespace redirects, except for short term after a page has been moved cross namespace. They are all meant to be speedied. The abbreviation exists as a redirect within the Portal: ns. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:27, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I see. Thanks for the clarification! WhisperToMe (talk) 22:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

OTRS[edit]

If you get a chance can you take a look at Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Daany_Be.C3.A9dxe & Wikisource:Proposed_deletions#Daany_Be.C3.A9dxe ? Jeepday (talk) 20:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I cannot see it, though I know that there is something in the system, due to its number. I have asked for assistance (again) and will see how go. OTRS is a PITA system. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Please follow up[edit]

Hi,

Per your request to scrape HathiTrust for a work in WS:S - can you please select one format or the other for PRing, move the file to Commons and finish setting up the Index:? Its been laying around on my to-do list for over 2 weeks now.

George Orwell III (talk) 22:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Ouch, sorry about that. I had been trying to get into proxies that might let me see what may be the issue with the frontispiece, and had been failing to find a way through, and then forgot when I was away. Finally found a proxy not blocked, and the image simply hasn't scanned properly. Thanks I will fix from here. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Next time - just ask. I could have told you straight off the image was botched in the original scans. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Question about repository of links for possible books to put on Wikisource[edit]

Is there a repository for suggestions for books to put on Wikisource? I just found an entire collection from the Houston Public Library: http://archive.org/details/houstonlibrary WhisperToMe (talk) 09:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikisource:Requested texts is closest, there are other pages around that do similar things, but it is not where we spend much time. We are more likely to assist others, or work with others with works of mutual interest, or in projects. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:06, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Whisper, thank you for the information and link! For me, that area is a treasure in many ways. One is that I immediately spotted a book on Lewis Meriwether Dabney, a distant kinsman, related to Maj Gen Dabney Herndon Maury. The Dabney family of very early Virginia were Huguenots (French Protestants) who came to America for religious freedom from Catholicism. There is a book there on "Lewis Meriwether Dabney" who was born in Virginia just after the American Civil War (1865) and his father was the Rev. Robert Lewis Dabney who served in that war as a minister to General Thomas Johnathan "Stonewall" Jackson also of Virginia. Many Virginians left the ruins of Virginia and came here to Texas. Books on that area you show a link to cover that as well as other things about Texas and Mexico. Texas was an independent Republic for 10 years. I too am a Virginian moved to Texas by marriage to a Texan. But the gist of all this history is to put the flesh of history; books, photos, sketches on the mere boring dates and dry bones of family found in genealogical research. It is fascinating to know of ancestry and collateral kin and the deeds of each life throughout time. It is, in fact, a form of time travel. Too, those books do not have "Google" watermarks and many other fUnKy Google problems. Thanks again and kind regards, —William Maury Morris IITalk 20:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
You are very much welcome :) - I enjoy improving coverage on the Lone Star State, as I was born and raised there. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Good, Maverick (Tx. family), you can transcribe some history books from the link you have provided for both Texas and Wikisource. winkWilliam Maury Morris IITalk 21:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Author:Truman W. Williams aka True Williams[edit]

Hello.

Thank you for expanding upon my (necessarily) rather sketchy entry for this illustrator. Two issues:

  1. Should I be creating the {{authority control}} entry up-front? (In which case please point me to some kind of how-to...?)
  2. I was never able to establish with certainty what the standalone "W." stood for, and apparently neither of your two new references know either... (frustrating!)

Cheers, MODCHK (talk) 00:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

There is a gadget to make authority control a lot easier, and we are looking to add these where possible, alternatively, you can search viâ http://viaf.org. I will put on my research hat and see what I can find for the author/illustrator. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
In the old days sometimes a newborn was not given a middle name. I know of an elderly minister who gave himself a middle name because it was required for his driver's license and for various documents. —William Maury Morris IITalk 15:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Oops[edit]

Didn't realize I deleted The Coming Colony at New Texts... I must have pasted over. Sorry about that, Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Meh! Guessed that; fixed. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Why Proofreading before transclusion[edit]

Totally bemused that you are supposed to proofread before transclusion. How is an inexperienced user supposed to know if a template across a page break is correct and works without first transcluding it to see what the result is and if its incorrect hopefully the necessary corrections. Bohun (talk) 23:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that we do expect a new user to know about formatting spilling from one page to the next, and how to manage it. It is some of the reading matter, it doesn't occur in many works, and if we need to gently introduce it to a new user we do. Hopefully, someone will always come past and assist a new user, and gently guide the way. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:32, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


"File:US District Court Jury Verdict SRF v Ananda 2002.pdf"[edit]

Hello Billinghurst, (1) I uploaded this file to Wikisource and transferred the pdf to this page = US District Court Jury Verdict SRF v Ananda 2002 at US_District_Court_Jury_Verdict_SRF_v_Ananda_2002 - (2) there is another document that is a companion to this one called - Self Realization v. Ananda Church - at Self_Realization_v._Ananda_Church which was an earlier verdict. I request that both of these documents stay in wikisource....thank you Red Rose 13 (talk) 22:11, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

The pdfs or the transcripts? If the pdfs are in the public domain in the US then they will be moved to Commons, with no effect locally. The transcriptions will be situated here, as we are the library and that is where they should be situated. — billinghurst sDrewth
Ok thanks...so the transcripts that I worked on and edited will stay in Wikisource but the pdf will be in commons, correct?Red Rose 13 (talk) 07:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
yes, Wikisource:Image_guidelines. Commons is a centralised resource for all the wikis, so that any file uploaded to Commons can be used by all WMF wikis. If it is just stored at a local wiki, like enWS, then it is only available at that local wiki. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:30, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Sdrewthbot and sidenotes[edit]

Your bot is changing comments in the Talk namespace [6], and it probably shouldn't be. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Correct, I filtered out all but Page:, so that is a bit of goof. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Author talk:John Michael Taylor[edit]

Hello Billinghurst.

Thank you for splitting up my attempt at an entry for this author. I included the link to in fact highlight the fact that I do not quite trust the entry I came up with; the man comes up blank in most of the "usual places" I have tried. Which is strange if he is as famous in so many fields as that article suggested. No reference I have found records when he died; so any of the automated-timeline style sites credit him with active-life events 100 years apart. (Conflating the 19th century man with the 20th/21st one of the same name?) Thus my reliance on the genealogy site, which is the only one I have found giving a birth-year: 1861.

Do you start to see my frustration? How do I politely indicate the result of my research is only my best effort, and without much more verification can only be used to prove the fellow wrote two tangible books on geology/geography; even though he appears to have a teacher/insurance/law background? Maybe I should have added a {{TextQuality}}/50% tag?

Funnily enough I only found the VIAF record afterwards; it appears that their database has links only from the direction "John Michael Taylor" back to "J. M. Taylor", but not the other way around. Similar problem with his books (Title->Author doesn't work; but the reverse does?) MODCHK (talk) 01:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Praise[edit]

You genius. I see you found his obituary. I take my hat off (oops, not wearing one! Anyway, figuratively-) to you. Embarrassed I did not find that myself. MODCHK (talk) 06:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

[This answer was long in preparation, through many interruptions] I find that biographical information from genealogies is usually quite accurate for a person, though some of the joins have to be tested. For me, I have plenty of experience in that digging, and have really good access to suitable and sufficient records. For Taylor, I have found the obit and linked to it at Trove, so all your data and supposition looks correct. [And don't feel embarrassed, this is an area of interest and plenty of practice. I have done many many author pages, and have many many many years of people research.

After a number of bits of trial and error in the researching space (discovery), I have been compiling research on the talk pages of the author, and proper referencing. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Does OTRS permission exist for User:Krantmlverma's translations?[edit]

Hi, Krantmlverma has removed the {{no license}} and {{delete}} tags on his poems and translations that are supposedly under discussion on WS:DEL. The edit reason is "Tags removed after providing the license information.as per advise of Beeswaxcandle". Has the OTRS process for these completed? And if so, what's the tag number for putting on the Talk page? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:16, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I will find out. If that is where they are, we should be looking to tag with {{OTRS pending}}. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:58, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Later point.
  • If they are NOT published translations, then we don't need OTRS pending as they are slightly more dynamic and why we label with Translator = Wikisource
  • If they are published translations, then we do need OTRS pending, they are referenced and are then static, and we would use the translator's name
billinghurst sDrewth 08:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

November PotM and Signpost[edit]

I was wondering about putting a note in Signpost about Validation month. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan, though would also think that we may wish to think a little holistically. Introduce WS more generally, the WS for WPns, and then maybe both PotM and validation, and then something for the aspirational. Would think that we would want to capture those who were in the "wishing for" space. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:57, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
OK. I'll do an initial draft over the next few days, then invite you to comment. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for moving that announcement[edit]

Sorry that I missed the subsectioning there (re the 1.21wmf2 announcement). Sharihareswara (WMF) (talk) 13:02, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Section transcluded when it shouldn't be[edit]

Hi Tpt. Wondering whether you can explain Dudley, Robert (1532?-1588) where the "Dudley, Lettice" section is included, though it is not within the transclusion component and is wrapped with its own tag. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi ! The problem is that you have transclude from the page 118 and not 119 where the section begin. This solve the problem. Tpt (talk) 18:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. The things that we don't check when we stumble across things late at night! <sigh> — billinghurst sDrewth 10:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Re:Spambot blocks@s:sv[edit]

I was not suprised when I saw the blocks, they were expected. I have also been watching the behavior of this group of accounts. The result of a five-year block or a indef-block is more or less the same. They will not come back. Since we had nothing in the block-list earlier, I wanted to keep it that way, as long as it is possible to do that. Regards! -- Lavallen (talk) 13:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Your block list; your community is welcome to manage it as they see fit. I will endeavour to remember that, though make no promises. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 13:48, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
The sysop-community today contains two active users. If you bring two global-sysop-friends, then You will have the majority and take over! :D -- Lavallen (talk) 14:11, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, that would be a conspiracy, and you presume that I have friends! In short, "na-ah" all yours. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:19, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
These useraccounts had in common, that they looked like: Name+Number.
Since then a new set of accounts has been registred, with the syntax: Name+uppercase-letter+lowercase-letter(s)
Names like: "MandyHi", "RaulPK", "FlorenceU", "AntoineCrt", "RodrigoB", "FrankieKtt".
These names are not typical Swedish or Finish, even if they exist in these countries. (Swedish is spoken mainly in Sweden and Finland.)
On a minor Swedish project I expect more often more typical Swedish or Finish names to be registred like: "Nadia2", "EEmily", "Samsonaten". etc
Have You seen any pattern of this kind on other projects? -- Lavallen (talk) 19:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
All typical spambot patterns. I will dig out their underlying details and see if I can block the IP addresses. Numbers of these are coming from webhosts and VPN accounts — billinghurst sDrewth 10:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


references & SIC[edit]

Billinghurst, in your project, Sea and River-side, I notice that the bottom does not show references which I normally do see on other's works. Have you left this out on purpose?

In the Page: namespace if it is used less often in the work, then I will just omit it from the footer. It is neither here nor there, and it is not required to be there as it just displays citations in page namespace.

Also, this page has a spelling mistake and you added SIC which is fine but are you not supposed to also add a correct spelling which shows when the mouse is close to that? I believe AdamBMorgan adds the correct spelling when he knows it. I did see the smallrefs on one page so I think you are aware of not using the references and I don't know if they have to be added. I am just asking and learning as I ask. Respectfully, Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk 01:20, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

With {{SIC}} it is not obligatory to have the second component, some will, some will not. Generally sic is used to indicate that a word appears as in the original text. So for me, my current feeling is that I generally indicate that is how the text appears in this version, and it is not my typing; and more than that is presumption on what would be the word, and usually I do not see that as necessary. If I feel brave and find that it does add value, then I may add it.

Page:Sea_and_River-side_Rambles_in_Victoria.djvu/32

I found it and applied it. LivnigstoneWilliam Maury Morris IITalk 05:56, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

<shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 12:12, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Petition[edit]

Hi, could you do the honours in the mainspace for Kavebear's Petition? I'm still quite unsure when it comes to categorisation (no excuse really), and also when it comes to just putting up extracts... I was interested when you said "We generally don't excerpts, hence why I did the whole news article. - what are the conventions about this? Also sorry if I've jumped in here or seemed unhelpful; I thought his request wasn't going to be answered to begin with, but also wanted to encourage him to learn how to do it for himself. Cheers. --xensyriaT 11:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I had no issues with what you were saying. If I did, I would try to give you the courtesy of a direct communication. Re excerpts it is from Wikisource:What Wikisource includes. There are rare occasions where we have allowed excerpts, and it has usually been where it has been supporting information for author's lives, as part of our purpose is to add information in support of authors. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

 —  vs m-dash[edit]

Billingsworth, read in edit mode: I recall seeing this  —  used a fair amount by someone that is no longer on en.ws I recall that sometime before he left that you, Billinghurst, stated these  —  should not be used because of (I think it leaves a blank space before and after-not sure) I think it had something to do with transclusion. In some way it was a problem in transcluding. It was stated that we should use the m-dash on our editor. Does this sound correct and/or familiar to you? I am presently seeing some use these Template:Hyphen now. I wonder if it is okay or if the m-dash should be used or if it makes any difference. Kindest regards, Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk 19:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I am a simple person and just use em dashes in the works that I transclude, however if someone in a work that they are bringing uses the template that puts thin spaces as they believe that is what is the style of the work, so be it. Consistency on a work is more important than an opinion. So if someone starts a work and has doing that on a work, continue it. If there is inconsistency in a work , then the polite discussion is always a nice place to start. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


Authority control[edit]

FYI. --Magnus Manske (talk) 13:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Illustrated History of England * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *[edit]

Billinghurst, please start up all that you have stated you will/can do. I have had a nap (I am up at nights) and am ready for the volumes. I will start on the images while all else is being set up. They are very dynamic images. Please let me know one way or another if we can do this. I will start with volume one and am ready to work on it now. I will start with the dynamic images while the project is being set up. I am anxious to do this project whether alone or with others. The history is absolutely fascinating! Please do let me know something asap. Respectfully, Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk 17:29, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

WMM2. Umm, I think that you have misread what I have typed. I answered with my understanding of the community point of view, not my specific comments about what I can do, and definitely not what I can do for you at this point of time. Unfortunately at this point of time I don't have time to be able to assist you, I am committed at the moment, and my small amount of time here is more for my achievement, and general tasks. To note that I generally haven't had success getting access to the HathiTrust copies of texts, so I don't know that I can do anything anyway. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I did misunderstand what you typed. I had been up all night and into the day and was quite sleepy. The excitement of those beautiful illustrated volumes of a fascinating history caused me to keep awake and keep pushing myself on that subject which lead to my misunderstanding. I offer my sincere apologies for that and it is sometimes typical of me. I will push myself more than I should and partly because I cannot sleep at night. I sleep about 4-5 hours average/day. HathiTrust is a matter of collecting page-by-page, one page at a time and that itself is a long process but do-able when one has the tenacity. Thank you for your manners and understanding. Respectfully, WMM2 (Maury) [P.S. "Will B Back" on this another day] ( —William Maury Morris IITalk 21:54, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


Billinghurst, I desire to place volume I of the "Illustrated History of England" in the same format as I placed earlier volumes such as earlier works I have done like this and others: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Exploration_of_the_Valley_of_the_Amazon,_Vol.I/1


I can get all images placed on Commons and work from them but I cannot, or rather do not count on, a proper "text layer" being created. Therefore I deem that I will have to type the text which presents no problem for me. There are many excellent illustrations. Once I get volume I on en.ws I hope to do the other 8 volumes. May I please do this in this format? All text will be verifiable from the images with text on Commons. The usual process of having a "text layer" most likely will not work because I downloaded all images from HathiTrust one-by-one and images have no "text layer". Respectfully, Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk 05:14, 11 November 2012 (UTC)


Thank you for deleting Author:Michael Roland Shaw Moore[edit]

Hello.

Thank you for removing this entry. I am ashamed to admit I created it yesterday in error (barring everything else he is too young/wrong background, see below), and was debating whether to ask for it to be expunged again. You got the reasons exactly right (i.e. "no works in the public domain, and unlikely to be.")

I really want to find a Michael Moore; invertebrate collector, who would have been mature enough to have loaned a unique item to the Chicago Natural History Museum around 1963 ... why am I writing this―again? I've put exactly these comments here!

What little I have been able to locate is completely swamped in diatribe regarding the activist/film-maker Michael Moore; and I am pretty much stuck, as all the possibilities I have found so far are too young or too old to be right. I am inclined to think I've got myself a hopeless cause.

Please don't go out of your way on this one on my behalf; but if you have any suggestions what to search for I'd really appreciate any pointers. Regards, MODCHK (talk) 00:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Meh, no fuss. We discussed it in that forum ages ago, and it is no issue whatsoever. Hmm, I am presuming that you have checked VIAF to see if there is anything there for the author, alternately you have checked the museum's catalogue (?online) to see what information they may have about benefactors. Otherwise, with a name like that it is going to be a bit of a needle in a haystack, well more that you are not really going to know that you have found them. I would suggest checking obituaries if you can dig a little more info. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:58, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyright 1963[edit]

By a supreme irony you stripped the um-researched Author: links from the page prior to the "Michael Moore" one which we just discussed above. As a reminder your change tags were: "(remove wikilinks, not sure that the people are authors, and if they were that they would have work in the public domain. All seems post 1923.)"

I know I'm going to regret raising this, but is the non-post 1923 point even relevant, considering the work itself was dated 1963; its author died 1979 (and presumably the referred authors similar...), and yet the presence of the DJVU file is apparently justified under something called the U.S. "rule of the shorter term?"

I am bringing all this up because I am genuinely confused; how can this work be acceptable, if any possible link out of it may be blanket-ruled unacceptable? Or looking at it another way, if the authors (if indeed authors they be―I certainly concede that point unproven yet!) are so easily dismissed, how is it that this work is not subject to suspicion as well? Part of the justification in the File: narrative actually states it was published without copyright notice.

I simply haven't the background to make this sort of call, so let me put the question to you differently: Am I embarking on a fool's errand trying to follow up on references like this? Maybe I should stick to my knitting? Please be blunt; I value your viewpoint. MODCHK (talk) 08:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

The work Pennsylvanian invertebrates of the Mazon Creek Area, Illinois: Eurypterida is labelled as being published without a copyright notice, which was a US requirement to maintain copyright., and presuming that is a true statement then the work is not in copyright. Peek at http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfmbillinghurst sDrewth 09:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Useful reference; though unfortunately that is the bit I did understand (well, reasonably!) The other question I note you diplomatically sidestepped, and that was perhaps my philosophy of treating all "hanging" references in a work to be potential authors until proven otherwise... was in itself unwise. Perhaps we are agreed upon the unstated answer; which is that my efforts to date have been well-intentioned but entirely misguided. I'll remove the other links. MODCHK (talk) 10:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Not sidestepped, missed ... "men multitasking!" With regard to author redlinks, I am a terrier on hunting down the people behind them. The answer to my internal question with those mentioned redlinks is that I didn't think that they were published authors and likely to have works we could host or someone else is hosting and to which we can link and therefore needing author pages. So maybe my bar is a little higher. Doesn't stop you doing and recording the research for the people, just means that you maybe want to wait before the redlinks For those who are authors, I hunt and hunt to identify those who are authors and have done (tooooooo) many hours of research, none of which regretted. It is probably not fully evident in our author page guidance in that we will link to any published work on the web from an author page, not just to our internal page. Our requisite is that we link to a freely viewable work, not something behind a subscription wall. If that is not clear, that will be my fault ... tired. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:18, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I have reservations about the 'published without copyright notice' claim as well. How can we be sure unless the volume front matter is provided as well? (i.e. where is page 1?) None of those Fieldiana works start with page one. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I am not advocating that the work is or it isn't in copyright, as per my earlier statement, I was referencing the claim against the licence and time of publishing.

BOT Confirmation[edit]

So far only positive response to the suggestion. I moved the discussion, [7] just in case it got missed by anyone who only reads the BOT section. Would you be willing to draft the proposed policy page? JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:46, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Image added[edit]

Hi Billingerhurst, the layout of the image I added here [8] does not look the same. Will it do or should it be adjusted for integrity sake? Thanks. Daytrivia (talk) 19:47, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Hiya. There is no ability, of which I am aware, to float an image at a certain point of text using html. I would think that you just float it left, center or right, and let the text wrap. You may need to kill the float at the end of the paragraph using {{-}}. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:56, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Or maybe just the following (or other centering formatting)?:

"...whether you have laid off streets round the squares thus {{float center|[[Image:Town layout.jpg]]}} or only the diagonal streets therein marked. The former was my idea, and is, I imagine, more convenient..."

"...whether you have laid off streets round the squares thus

Town layout.jpg

or only the diagonal streets therein marked. The former was my idea, and is, I imagine, more convenient..."

Text doesn't wrap aroung the image, but it's simpler, and still gets the point across... Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:33, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

LJB. You can float center an image easier than wrapping it in a table ... [[Image:Town layout.jpg|center]]. Images set left or right wrap text (unless told not to), images centrally floated, clear text. mw:Help:Imagesbillinghurst sDrewth
I know. But not in some layouts (I forget which one(s))...and not in Mobile view apparently. Just trying to cover all bases. [Hmm... I guess it's a draw: .pdf format has the opposite effect... <shrug>, as you might say] :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:55, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
But then there's

"...whether you have laid off streets round the squares thus Town layout.jpg or only the diagonal streets therein marked. The former was my idea, and is, I imagine, more convenient..."

...which isn't much worse than in the original. Sorry... I'm in sandbox mode. Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:13, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
The media file shown above is uncategorized. —Maury (talk) 11:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, and? All Commons file are uncategorised here, they are categorised at Commons. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Billinghurst, I was only trying to help. I was reading the material and learning. I looked at the image and in exploring I saw the following. "This media file is uncategorized. Please help improve this media file by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related media files (how?), and so that it can be more easily found." Okay, so that statement in quotes is not true.. —Maury (talk) 14:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, did I sound snippy? Apologies if I did. Feel free to pop over to Commons and categorise it, probably something like "town planning". — billinghurst sDrewth 14:55, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Nope, you didn't sound snippy, or at least not to me you didn't. I marked "please help" in bold above so you could focus upon what I was focused on. BTW, something I have wanted to know for a long time -- why do the English so often say "Bloody" before other words. i.e. "That's bloody good tea! or that's a bloody good idea, Billing Hurts / Hearse." smiley—Maury (talk) 19:20, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Emphasis, some things just need some adjectival addition, and it is more a verbal thing. Like last night between us Moondyne and I finished a 400+pp work in just over two weeks. Fan-bloody-tastic!!! Otherwise it is just a cultural usage and familiarity for a word. To the initial matter, have a poke at Commons:Categorisationbillinghurst sDrewth 22:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
That is a bloody good artsy-fartsy coloured image at the beginning. Good show on the work you two blokes did last night. Interesting too is the small Egyptian cartouche in the endeavour to raise the letter "c" in Mckinley. Sometimes it does show as a raised letter as in here: "1793.—Introduction of the fine-woolled Merino sheep by Mr. John McArthur, a step of unsurpassed importance to the whole of Australia." but other areas it shows as a rectangle containing 4 small numbers as in this: "TO JOHN MᶜKINLAY, ESQ." and does not look like a raised letter. I do know about adding a category or six. If it is a book I use the book title and place the images within that title used as a category. I learned long ago how to do that and I have this on Commons. Plus, recently AdamBMorgan showed me and more recently another administrator showed me. I think the Bloody British in ye olde days when wearing their coloured red coats so that they would get used to the colour red as with blood on themselves also developed the expression of "bloody" in many things. They also made better targets. An American would be more inclined to say, "damned" in speech so the Brits use "bloody" as a substitute. They are very familiar with that word "bloody" from long ago and it appears as a substitute for the use of "damned" since they are so familiar with the use of "bloody". Brit: "This is a bloody good drink!, Bartender, pour me another Bloody Mary". "Colonial", This is a "damned" good drink! Pour me another "Bloody Mary". Britain is the "Mother Country" of the USA and many other former colonies such as Australia. Canada and Australia still sing Hail to the Queen. The USA does not due to the American Revolutionary war that the British lost twice, one being in 1814. Twice Britain has tried to retain the Americans by war against her and twice the British lost. Yet Britain needed and got the help of the USA in two World Wars, I and II, which was bloody kind of the Colonials to save what was left of the British Empire and their Queen. Bonnie Prince Charles cannot wait for his mother, the Queen to step down but she refuses even at age 86. Charles fears he may die before becoming King, the poor lad needs his mother dead first. It was on the news (CNN).It is an amazing lineage and one of my favourites is Henry VIII. who opened, due to his own desires, England to Protestants and got rid of the Catholics dominated by an Italian pope in Rome. Then England was a safe haven from Catholic France from whence some of my ancestors fled and later sailed to America, land of the free. It's all a bloody good show and damnned fantastic history that I enjoy learning about. However, I am pleased that the Queen or any future King does not have total power any longer. Can we say Parliament? I also admire Winston Churchill, he was a damned good, uh...."bloody" good, and wise man who gave impressive speeches. —Maury (talk) 23:49, 2 December 2012 (UTC)