User talk:Ineuw

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search


Archive prior to December 7, 2010[edit]

Archive prior to June 30, 2011[edit]

Archive prior to January 01, 2012[edit]

Archive prior to July 01, 2012[edit]

Archive prior to January 01, 2013[edit]

Archive prior to July 01, 2013[edit]

Archive prior to January 01, 2014[edit]

Source for photo of John Trowbridge?[edit]

Do you know the source for the oval photo you posted of John Townsend Trowbridge, at age 45? It has a caption and appears to have come from a book, but I can't find it anywhere. I'd like to try to purchase the original source for the photograph.

Thanks,

User:24.168.228.227

 


 
Think that I forgot to save my reply. I don't know where the image came from, I only transferred it from Wikipedia to the Commons. Also, it's best if you don't leave your email address in posts. If you wish to contact me personally, you can do that through the Tools left side menu. — Ineuw talk 18:20, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Alternative to toolbars[edit]

...especially for single characters, would have been the Character Insert gadget. If (as I had hoped) everybody would agree to free up the "Insert" menu set (which has everything included in the Wiki markup menu already) to be used for custom characters instead, each User can load their own custom set of whatever they like to that menu without too much effort.

I just loaded ' ‽ ' at the end of your Insert menu for example. -- George Orwell III (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

First, thanks for the toolbar stabilizing and the sample code. The � I store there for whenever I edit the toolbar text in the external TextPad editor which is not yet fully Unicode compliant. It's used to insert '/�/g' in the 'Custom regex search and replace' directly from my "custom" toolbar (2nd to last button). Face-smile.svg
I believe that prior to the above, you mentioned the 'Wiki markup' some time ago. In my defense, being slow, it took awhile to notice that the combo box position and appearance changed, and understand what you were referring to, but now it's perfectly clear. I will assemble my list of characters and create the additions.
One last question: Is it possible to hide all the current basic markups (when Insert is displayed) and use only my chars? These already exist in my Autohotkey macros.— Ineuw talk 17:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
I can't do that without some sort of community agreement first and I caught so much heat for basically "fixing" EditTools by killing it with CharaInsert, I was reluctant to bring it up. What I hoped to do was "blank" the Insert menu in the Gadget and make that the default. At the same time all that you see now on the Insert menu would be / could be added also by default but via a similar addition as I've exampled for you in a User's common.js instead. Those who have no idea what they are doing still have the basics while the rest of us have a blank canvas to add to that way (and like I said - everything on the Insert menu is already found in the Wiki markup menu ). Only the will to do this is needed - but folks are too preoccupied with this thing or that to bother to even familiarize themselves with new Gadget & its possibilities. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
No problem. I can still add my characters.— Ineuw talk 18:13, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Note one other nifty thing I hope I can get somebody like Eliyak to help me with... right now, here in the "talk" namespace, you should see sign your posts and the 4 tildes on the Insert menu. Same 4 tildes on the wiki markup menu along with hyphenated word start end and section begin & end. Go over to the main namespace and open any article in edit mode - those same talkspace & Page namespace selections are gone!!! CharaInsert can be configured not only to have customized User sets but work specific sets when set to detect that specific work (or Project in your case). CharaInsert is way smart!! (old edit tools was dumb and a waste of resources for everybody) I'm just too stupid to pull all that off by myself :( -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:34, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I take that back - only slow not stupid. See the new User menu (last on the list for now). ta-da! scratch all my belly-aching from before. Once you select any menu in edit mode, it should be the same menu shown by default the next time you enter edit mode in case you haven't noticed btw. And the up down arrow heads to the left of the menu list allows you to toggle between the last two menus you used in a single edit session with a single click. Smart :) -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

February PotM[edit]

Hi, would you have time to grab this file, remove the Google first page and then upload to Commons? I don't have the software to remove pages from djvu files. I'm happy to deal with it once it's on Commons. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:34, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Lo, is there a missing signature above? Regardless, once that file (The Voyage Out by Virginia Woolf, 375 pps.) has the 1st page of Google extracted the rest of the pages still have the Google watermark on them. It would be better to remove all of "Google" watermarks by finding a .PDF version, removing all Google marks (on every page) and then uploading the PDF file to Internet Archives (aka Archives.org) and let it derive multiple cleaned formats including a cleaned .djvu file. —Maury (talk) 07:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I see removal of the watermark as a nice-to-have rather than an essential—particularly this close to needing the Index to be up and ready in two days's time. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:52, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Cannot remove page by page watermarks at this time but hope to do so in the future. Will upload the file as requested ASAP.— Ineuw talk 15:47, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
I meant that I can and am willing to remove those Google watermarks. (1) for you, (2)for the community here, (3) because I find Google very annoying with it's markings and (4) I am tired of seeing Google on every page as if it owned every "public domain" book. (5) Every time we don't remove those watermarks we advertise for Google all over again. I could do it in one day. —Maury (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page removed and the file is uploaded HERE,— Ineuw talk 17:11, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Well done, Ineuw. How was it done? —Maury (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
I use DjVuLibre from Sourceforge which has a suite of command line tools (very easy to use) and a GUI viewer named "djview.exe". In this particular case I used the command line "djvm -d[elete] doc.djvu pagenum" and deleted the Google page and a couple of the numerous blank pages at the beginning of the packaged file and monitoring the results through the viewer. If you need help, let me know.— Ineuw talk 22:49, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. You've done far more than I was expecting by looking after the pagelist as well. Much appreciated. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:16, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Most welcome — Ineuw talk 05:20, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
I thank you both. This is what I like about en.WikiSource, working together with caring about others here and that is why I so often sign with sincerity, "Respectfully", —Maury (talk) 12:59, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Talking past each other[edit]

Obviously I can't seem to make you understand what you should be "trying" in hopes of resolving your issues.

  1. Pretty blue toolbar buttons should be dead by now. All of 'em. Even the ones for newbies. You need to...
    1. remove all those old custom button calls from your .js (you just restored them?)
    2. remove all the attempts to "hide" buttons from your .css (this too was just restored??)
    3. GO TO YOUR PREFERENCES, EDITING TAB, EDITOR SECTION
      1. DESELECT Show edit toolbar
      2. SELECT Enable enhanced editing toolbar
    4. save changes

Now go see if CharInsert behaves any different in the mainspace. Then go see how CharInsert behaves in the Page: namespace. Finally, does the new toolbar (WikiEditor) screw up/alter editing/rendering in the Page: namespace in any way?

Please report back as soon as you're sure you've given it "the old college try" so I'm not hanging around doing "nothing". -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:59, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I think you saw me implement your instructions and this is the result Face-smile.svg File:New setting no longer show the scan or text in edit mode.jpg. Windows no longer appear.— Ineuw talk 02:13, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
OK - I should have added to check a mainspace work in addition to the Page: namespace. Please verify the same "vanishing" does not happen there (or any other namespace but Page: for that matter). -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Main namespace pages are fine, but all Page namespace pages of other volumes (checked 31 + 60) are gone just like V17.— Ineuw talk 02:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

P.S: CharInsert shows up here OK. but not in the Page namespace. Will keep on testing. Face-smile.svg.— Ineuw talk 02:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The Page: namespace vanishing is ProofreadPage extension exclusive and just a matter of time before the developers have to cut the ties to the old toolbar scheme there as well. At that point, the option can be removed or re-tasked properly.
At this point - go back to your prefs and re-enable the option to show edit toolbar. Leave the other option enabled as well. This should restore Page namespace functions as before BUT WikiEditor now overrrides the old toolbar scheme by the time you enter an edit mode (well... at least that's what happens here). Cruise around, do your normal work, etc. with those settings for awhile and then report back how CharInsert behaved (& anything else you might come across at the same time). -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:31, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, it's perfectly clear. I was aware of the old/new toolbar relationship anomaly.— Ineuw talk 02:35, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
GO3, it works fine. I have to get used to it, as there are some features I could access faster with the old system but I hope that with practice, my editing speed will be improved. Unfortunately, the CharInsert is still not working properly it's hidden more often than appearing. I will add some comments - perhaps tomorrow, after I got used to the system better. Now I must take a break. Thanks for everything.— Ineuw talk 03:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I'd be a shlub if I didn't mention one other WikiEditor feature. If you you enable the last checkbox under the same section as the other two, you enable the built-in RegEx 'search & replace' feature. Once enable, you should find an new icon at the extreme right of a selected 'Advanced' menu-tab in WikiEditor.

I know a little about RegEx but not enough to utilize the current gadget/Pathoschild script with any comfort so maybe you can tell me if its worth promoting as an alternative to/supplement for the gadget/browser plug-ins/etc. that folks might be using out there. Again, if even the gadget can somehow be superseded with the WikiEditor variant, its just another thing that can't get in the way of new advances & one less thing that needs oversight to stay functional. TIA for any thoughts/comments on this. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

{{Border}}[edit]

Not sure if you saw my reply on the Scriptorium page but I did want to post the link to my sandbox page here for you to check out as well as I redid your page with text rather than as an entire image. I wasn't sure if the entire image was just a test of the template or if you had planned on leaving it as an image. The explanation for the border template is back on the Scriptorium if you would like to read it. The Haz talk 22:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I wanted it as a complete image using the border template. Thanks for the instruction.

Early Chinese Jades[edit]

Hi Ineuw, Early Chinese Jades is the PotM work for March. Unfortunately, a couple of hand photographs have snuck into the scan at the very end (before the back-cover). Would you have time to grab the file and delete those two pages before uploading to Commons? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Strike that, the work isn't PD. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: No problem, but just for my knowledge, how did you find out about its status, just so that I should know for the future when I select something to upload ? — Ineuw talk 17:10, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

It was a matter of deduction. Book was published in 1923 in UK only, so it falls under the 1996 rule which requires it to be PD in home country in 1996. However, author didn't die until 1949 and UK is death + 70, which means work isn't PD in the UK until 2019. This means that we can't host it under the URAA until then (unfortunately, as it would be a good addition to both our East Asian and fine arts collections). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: What's interesting is that IA hosts it. I should inquire.— Ineuw talk 18:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Test[edit]

Thank you for that test. It is a curiosity that the frame is designed to remain there. Why? Please delete it from wikisource as soon as possible. I enjoyed our conversation very much. —Maury (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

@William Maury Morris II:Hi. Please let me know if you got an answer to the problem. As for the images, I will tag them for deletion in 72 hours. This would give others the chance to see it and comment.— Ineuw talk 20:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

CharInsert and templates[edit]

Hi,

In one of our previous discussions, you mentioned the loss of certain custom buttons that applied templates like {{PSM link}}. In case you didn't realize it, CharInsert can handle templates as well as characters - I just added PSM link to the end of your User-bar though I could not find your old implementation to mirror exactly what it did in days of old. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:08, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

@George Orwell III: You've done it again. To clarify, I am using this template on Wikipedia (named there as wsPSM) to link PSM articles to Wikisource. Many thanks.— Ineuw talk 02:28, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

P.S: WsPSMIneuw talk 02:31, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

wikiEditor custom toolbar[edit]

Hey,

Made actual progress on this front!!!

Finally realized that Enable wizards for... in User: Prefs, Editing tab overrides the "normal" button formatting or insertions with idiot-proof executable dialogs instead. Once I disabled that option (the downside being the loss of the built in RegEx 'search & replace' feature) I was able to add and/or remove WikiEditor toolbar buttons as needed.

In addition, I found a way to at least hide some of lang character sets via a Users: Common.css file. I say 'at least' only because I haven't found the proper way to prune those unwanted languages from loading in the "background' just yet.

I took the liberty of applying updates/changes to your common.js & common.css files in hopes of someone else verifying my struggles (remember to check your preference settings per the above).

If all goes well, we can move on to addressing what exactly should make-up a WikiEditor's toolbar when under en.wikisource. — George Orwell III (talk) 15:39, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

@George Orwell III: Read your instructions and everything is clear. I am testing now and will get back to you. — Ineuw talk 17:19, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

TOC formatting, etc.[edit]

First, thank you so much for formatting all the TOC pages... much appreciated! Second, I have left some comments about formatting at Central discussion if you could take a look and possibly give some feedback. Thanks again! Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:11, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Follow-up to Section begin and end codes[edit]

Hello.

You may remember recently posing me the above question; a further thought has crept upon me: I have been in the habit of marking sections using the /^##/ notation. As I understand the operation of the section-handling gadget (the logic which converts back and forth between this and the [stored] <section> forms) it always inserts quotes around the markers. Would you happen to have this option (Preferences/Gadgets/"Editing tools for Page: namespace"/"Use the old syntax in the Page namespace") enabled (whereas I have it turned off, which means [via magic of double negation] it is operational…er…hmm)?

Regards, AuFCL (talk) 17:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)


Ha ha. A little digging answered my own question. Your own query from four years ago: Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2010-11#Reverting_to_the_old_standard. I shall hazard a guess you still have this option turned on (i.e. off—see above)? AuFCL (talk) 18:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Good guess. It's checked and it's on, as I couldn't get used to the new style. I also agree that, while it's best practice to advise enclosing in double quotes. Like you, everyone have their ingrained habits. Face-smile.svg and if there is no space, the code works just as well. — Ineuw talk 18:37, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
fwiw... the "double negation" is just another waste of resources (via MediaWiki:Base.js; code towards the bottom). The extension itself, fed through wiki-markup, uses tags with begin & end and THAT is the default.

Sooner or later, this crime against the extension will catch up to the illuminati that originally implemented it through push-upgrade rather than common sense & community approval. You just keep on doing it the right way, Ineuw; vengence will be ours.

Obviously, the right way to to have accomplished this would have been to move the double negation thing into a site-wide enabled gadget by default and let people "de-select" it to return to the default, resource drain-free section tags instead. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:33, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

It's nice to see you GO3 and thanks for the encouragement. At least I am doing something right. :-) — Ineuw talk 00:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, thanks also from me GO3. Please tell, how in hell did you find that code was in Base.js? I was looking for where the trigger value proofreadpage_raw_lst was processed (which is how I stumbled over Ineuw's old enquiry) but simply never found this one and gave up. Did you happen to already know it was there, or is there a logical chain I could (should?) have followed from the insanely lean MediaWiki:Gadget-old LST.js to find this? AuFCL (talk) 05:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Its just by chance that I imported Base.js to stop it from being loaded from old.wikisource (illuminati) a day or two ago. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Every single time I kid myself I have finally got a grip on how mediawiki works something like this crops up and I realise there is yet another ocean of (my) ignorance to navigate afresh. Thanks for the pointer. AuFCL (talk) 04:41, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Table help here[edit]

Hi, Ineuw. Any chance of creating a 'simple' two-column table with the second column sporting a hanging indent? I tried it myself with {{hi}}, but the table didn't like it, and I got a <div> result instead of the desired result. My skills are limited. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:16, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem at all.— Ineuw talk 21:38, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
At your leisure, by the way... There is no hurry! Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:41, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
@Londonjackbooks: A busman's holiday. Please check if the first page is OK before I "mass produce" the rest. I'll wait for your reply.Face-smile.svgIneuw talk 22:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
That looks perfect! Thank you again for taking this on. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
The poem, "East London" (p. 172) is missing from the TOC table in the Main. Any insight while you're still on 'holiday'? It appears appropriately on the Index page TOC... just not in the Mainspace. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Sorry. the {{nop}} was missing on the 1st line of the page.— Ineuw talk 23:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
No apologies! Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
You mean no excuses. :-)— Ineuw talk 23:36, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
If you say so, but not what I meant :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I know. I was only joking.— Ineuw talk 23:59, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I know... That's why I ended with a smiley face... So you'd know I knew... Ya know? :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:18, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Begin blather: I fail at attempts at humor, but I appreciate it in others; so my responses to humor are often dry and misunderstood. End blather. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:27, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
It was my fault. With my usual inattention, didn't notice the smiley. But now, I bring good news. The pages are done and you can see the results how it would look in the Main namespace User:Ineuw/Sandbox6. Enjoy.— Ineuw talk 00:32, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, you certainly pay attention to detail when editing, and I appreciate your help! The output looks great, thank you! Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:39, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────┘
You're most welcome. Actually, working for an editor with a discerning eye like yours makes me pay attention. . . . . After 4+ years, I still find an odd overlooked something on a page that was already proofread, looked over, and validated. Very embarrassing. Face-smile.svg.— Ineuw talk 00:48, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

You're not alone! Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:10, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
That statement is probably accurate for everyone. —Maury (talk) 04:48, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Not sure I'm going to finish the article, but just wondering how you format smaller text for PSM as seen on this page. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:08, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi. We (Mpaa and I) standardized the smaller print using {{fs90/s}}{{fs90/e}} regardless of how the originals were because they never kept a standard from article to article. I changed the font size and validated that page just now.— Ineuw talk 18:51, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Chamberlain q/a[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, Ineuw. You have new messages at [[User talk: Tar-ba-gan (talk) 06:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC) |User talk: Tar-ba-gan (talk) 06:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC)]].
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 :) (talk) 06:27, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

PSM main namespace headers[edit]

Hi, thank you very much for writing me! Probably I've been too bold with my changes, but I just tried to follow the general guidelines. I imagined there were some guidelines specifically concerning the PSM project, but I couldn't find them, so I'll take the chance to ask you some questions about my changes that you reverted.

  • First of all, despite the fact that the header standard for PSM articles was set four years ago, the header template has evolved since and now includes features that weren't present at the time (I'm referring specifically to the contributor field, that was added much later). So, although it'll be a massive work, why not try to conform to the new general Wikisource standard? (Of course, this should be discussed before with the other members of the project.)
  • Why did you remove the project links? In particular, there already is the link to the article on the physiology portal: why shouldn't the link go both ways?
  • You used the FIS template on this page. Why didn't you leave the Img float template I used? I can't see the difference.
  • On the same page, you took away the numbered list and restored the single numbers. Why?

There are other questions I'd like to ask, but I think answering these ones will be enough time-consuming for the moment. Sorry for disturbing and thanks in advance! Ryokuhi (talk) 16:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

@Ryokuhi:. Hi. First of all please accept my apologies for some of the changes made, as they were uncalled for. My only excuse is that this was your first time visit, without a home or a talk page, and I am wary because many editors changed something in the project once and never returned. I try to strive for consistency (in a crazily orderly fashion). Here are my answers to your questions.
I can't implement every new idea that comes along, since no editor goes and changes 4+ year old works just because there are new ideas were added to templates and the wiki software. If I were to do that (and I did some important and necessary changes, returning to Volume 1), I would be still be playing and testing new features and getting nowhere. My object is to hopefully proofread and complete all volumes between 1 to 87 in an identical manner as possible, in this lifetime. These volumes contain "popularly" written academic articles for the better educated and interested public (the emerging middle class).
I am well aware that many active WS editors are (eventually) more interested in programming rather than editing because Wikimedia offers an excellent programming environment, and is an incubator to thousands of web programmers. I am not against this, it's just that I am not one of them. I am retired and a former programmer, I love history, literature and dedicated most of my free time these past four+ years to studying 19th century life. PSM is as good a source as any.
I did begin with a "Proofreading guide" and laid out the initial format, but there were so many changes as my wiki programming and proofreading knowledge grew, that I just gave up rewriting the guide. There were many weeks when I was the only editor on the project. To this end, the admins provided me with a very useful "PSM filter" which lets me see others' contributions and that's how I saw your work.
The only other person who has an in depth knowledge of the layout is Mpaa. He helped me to re-formulate and standardize the original concepts as they became more complex and sophisticated. Mpaa gives me invaluable help in "watching my back". He is both an excellent proofreader and a technical support provider, extracting data for my analysis. Also, every other admin has given me excellent support in various areas.
The physiology portal link was removed by half a mistake and I reverted this . . . . but please bear with me regarding categories, and hence the portals. This is a separate part of my proofreading approach from the beginning, and it's my turn to say that it's too long a topis to be covered in this post.
The template {{FIS}} is a long evolving effort by George Orwell III to address the numerous variations of image & caption. I wanted to use this as another example of an issue (the caption) to be dealt with. Otherwise, your template is better. If you wish, please revert it to your template and I will create a sample for GO3 in one of my sandboxes.
We never use the wiki auto numbering in PSM because of occasional typesetting errors in the original. Also, we eliminated indenting paragraphs. This would have to be explored in the scriptorium.
Please go ahead and ask any question you wish. I may not reply immediately but will definitely do so. — Ineuw talk 01:39, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your quick and exhaustive answers, they are really useful. I won't ask you any other questions for the moment, I think you lost enough time in answering me. As for the image template, I simply used the one suggested in the guidelines for an image with caption and without frame. At the moment, I can't state which of the two templates is the best, so for now I'll simply leave the page unchanged. Finally, I just want to apologize for the tone of my first message (it wasn't particularly polite): it wasn't meant to offend you, but in any case it seems you didn't take it out on me. Thanks again, I'll ask for your help if I need. Ryokuhi (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Declaring Interest[edit]

Hi both Ryokuhi and Ineuw.

Just declaring my interest in both questions and answers. I have long been tempted to make minor changes to PSM articles but have resisted on the basis of realising I don't quite "get" the ethos and standards. In fact I've been guilty of thinking "Hands off: this is Ineuw's baby!"

Also, finding a change has been tagged "PSM watch" (whatever…) tends to make one think they have committed some minor act of vandalism. None of this is intended to indicate my personal dissension—on the contrary, if I had a better grasp of the rules this might be a project I would love to assist with in any fashion I might be capable…

And yes, I might just be one of those "programmer types" Ineuw is so disparaging about above… (I used to speak base 26 when necessary. Figure that out. Two hints: my userid and ttrr[s].) AuFCL (talk) 03:04, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Housekeeping[edit]

Hello again,

When you have the time, can you please update the status of Bugzilla: 61220 as "Fixed" (or whatever) so the chances of something still "broken" might move up the list of open tickets. TIA -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Yes check.svg Done and thanks for the reminder. — Ineuw talk 22:12, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Admin[edit]

Hi Ineuw,

I have closed your admin nomination as successful and added you to the administrator group. Enjoy.

Many thanks and will do my best to serve (and protect). Face-smile.svgIneuw talk

Hesperian 01:02, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Congrats, great work and happy admining. wink Best regards,—Clockery Fairfeld (ƒ=ma) 13:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your support and good wishes. Will strive to do my best to administrate.— Ineuw talk 15:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Big Congratulations, this is good news. No doubt more people like you is urgently required across the media. All the best— Raúl Gutiérrez (talk) 21:52, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Herbert Hall Turner[edit]

Dear Ineuw, I'm contacting you about the image that you uploaded to Wikipedia of Herbert Hall Turner some years ago, File:Herbert_Hall_Turner.jpg. The Royal Astronomical Society still owns the copyright of this image. We granted permission to the BBC to use it in a news article, which you have cited as the source, but it cannot be used elsewhere without permission. I respectfully request that you remove it from Wikipedia. Many thanks in advance,

RAS LibrarianRASLib (talk) 13:20, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Your comment request is noted.— Ineuw talk 16:14, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
@RASLib: Can you please provide proof of copyright ownership? As far as we can ascertain, the image is in the public domain, based on its age.— Ineuw talk 17:21, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Note the w:Oxford Dictionary of National Biography lists some portraits of Turner, but none of them are dated 1915 (1916, 1918, 1921, 1923–7). Solomon7968 (talk) 14:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
@Solomon7968: Thanks for your comment but years are no longer relevant. I uploaded the image over two years ago and can't recall the details. I also posted about this in the commons about the image's status. If the image is really under copyright, (which I am sure it isn't), then User:RASLib can contact the Commons directly. At this point it's best to wait and see his/her reply since I have had my share of experiences with Commons crusaders.— Ineuw talk 14:55, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

@Ineuw: The RAS makes the image available via Science Photo Library http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/228908/view
RASLib (talk) 14:22, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

@RASLib: It is not relevant who is selling an image which is in the public domain according to the copyright laws of the UK and the US. For any further clarification and discussion, please contact the Wikimedia commons.— Ineuw talk 14:33, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I am grateful[edit]

Muchas gracias por toda tu ayuda y tu paciencia.— Raúl Gutiérrez (talk) 21:49, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

smart quotes vs straight quotes[edit]

Copied here from my talk page for an administrator I believe knows the answer. Smart quotes were changed to straight quotes when I formatted this person's pages of Sherlock Holmes using shift+alt+x Please contact the editor directly so s/he will not have to rely solely upon my talk page statements to her/him. —Maury (talk) 03:42, 30 May 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for helping validate The Return of Sherlock Holmes. You said: "smart quotes are automatically changed to straight quotes when a page is formatted." Is it some tool you're using that does that? I am only using the web interface and those quotes survives multiple edits.

I've put the smart quotes back for now. Please understand I'm not trying to be argumentative, it is just because I've formatted the rest of the book that way.

Juxtap (talk) 01:32, 30 May 2014 (UTC)


—Maury (talk) 03:42, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Missing image[edit]

Gday. At this edit you added {{FI}}, and it hasn't worked. Could you give it a poke to fix it, or revert it back to the previous version. Thx. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:09, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Automated import of openly licensed scholarly articles[edit]

Hello Ineuw,

We are putting together a proposal about the automated import of openly licensed scholarly articles, and since you are an active Wikisourceror, we'd appreciate yourcomments on the Scriptorium. For convenience, I'm copying our proposal here:

The idea of systematically importing openly licensed scholarly articles into Wikisource has popped up from time to time. For instance, it formed the core of WikiProject Academic Papers and is mentioned in the Wikisource vision. However, the Wikiproject relied on human power, never reached its full potential, and eventually became inactive. The vision has yet to materialise.
We plan to bridge the gap through automation. We are a subset of WikiProject Open Access (user:Daniel Mietchen, user:Maximilanklein, user:MattSenate), and we have funding from the Open Society Foundations via Wikimedia Deutschland to demo suitable workflows at Wikimania (see project page).
Specifically, we plan to import Open Access journal articles into Wikisource when they are cited on Wikipedia. The import would be performed by a group of bots intended to make reference handling more interoperable across Wikimedia sites. Their main tasks are:
  • (on Wikipedia) signalling which references are openly licensed, and link them to the full text on Wikisource, the media on Commons and the metadata on Wikidata;
  • (on Commons) importing images and other media associated with the source article;
  • (on Wikisource) importing the full text of the source article and embedding the media in there;
  • (on Wikidata) handling the metadata associated with the source article, and signalling that the full text is on Wikisource and the media on Commons.
These Open Access imports on Wikisource will be linked to and from other Wikimedia sister sites. Our first priority though will be linking from English Wikipedia, focusing on the most cited Open Access papers, and the top-100 medical articles.
In order to move forward with this, we need
  • General community approval
  • Community feedback on workflows and scrutiny on our test imports in specific.
  • Bot permission. For more technical information read our bot spec on Github.

Maximilianklein (talk) 18:14, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia links[edit]

I don't believe that we should be adding Wikipedia links to articles unless we know that they exist (Author:H. E. Jordan), as it throws out the linking via the categorisation checks in place. We don't really need to add them at all as Wikidata now exists, and that is the home for such links, though GOIII wishes to maintain those WP links until we have the data migrated to WD. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:06, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: My apologies for that error, and others that may exist from the same day, due to my oversight. Will re-check the author pages I created that day. Always checked before saving, except on that day I forgot. Also, I will remove the "assumed" WP link from my VB script that generates the Author headers. Ineuw (talk) 01:19, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Not a specific issue, and no need for any apology. More about what is the next step in our practice. Phe wrote a better script that does a live WP lookup, and I utilise that, though for guidance only. It is in my common.js. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:38, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks

{{nop}} vs <section end=…/> placement[edit]

As this is the second time I have seen this kind of edit I thought I'd better make sure we are thinking alike before proceeding. To my way of seeing the matter, nop should always fall within the section block, as eventual transclusion usage needs to include the paragraph end marker. Alternately are you assuming transclusion will always make use of the <pages> tag, as it introduces an extra paragraph ending itself?

I have just realised I may be defending an anachronism which may not in fact matter (vipers to both the left and right?) Anyway, was swapping nop and section/end deliberate and if so why? (My curiosity alone. No, I don't think I've been sniffing thinners again!) AuFCL (talk) 04:50, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

@AuFCL:. Sorry again, I was too tired to respond last night. If one analyses the two, (nop & section tags) it really doesn't matter in what order it is placed. {{nop}} is an empty <div></div> and from experience, anything inserted after nop ends up on the following page, which is not important for a section tag. It's only my tight a**ed neatness that demanded this order. Ineuw (talk) 23:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
No problem. (Well there is in fact: but normal people who only use the outside-nop-and-<pages> case will never see it. If they were transcluding using the rather more rarely-[Hah! ~10,000!]-used and unfixable-by-edict {{page}} they would find all the paragraph ends swallowed. This is what I get for being a sad little student of useless esoterica.) AuFCL (talk) 04:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

I want to thank you for all your hard work validating Notes on Osteology of Baptanodon. With a Description of a New Species! This feels selfish of me to ask, but one page is still left invalidated, and I was wondering if you could do me a solid and check that one too. I owe you one. I'll try and proofread/validate some of your own contributions but it'll be a few days before I can get to it. Thanks again! Abyssal (talk) 11:51, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

@Abyssal: I appreciate your kind offer but there is really no need to validate anything I do. That's not why I did it. It was a small project of a few pages. I didn't do the page with the table because I wanted your permission to redo it. So please let me know if it's OK. --Ineuw (talk) 15:12, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Sure. You can redo the table if you'd like. What's wrong with it? Abyssal (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
@Abyssal: I thought that I can make it look closer to the original but on 2nd look it wouldn't be. So I will check and validate it.Ineuw (talk) 15:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! You're really helpful! Abyssal (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Gadgets[edit]

These 2 gadgets can be deselected in your prefs. I added the lines they would have added/set straight to your common.js.

<script src="/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-ocr.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&1172795"></script>
<script src="/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-old_LST.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&2147806"></script>

These 3 are outdated when compared to the current wiki-code (thank you Inductiveload). I'd turn them off.

<script src="/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-markblocked.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&3642077"></script>
<script src="/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-NopInserter.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&3832640"></script>
<script src="/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-Fill_Index.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&4988218"></script>

These 2 will always load. They are not gadgets but part of the core Wikimedia software on the servers...

<script src="//bits.wikimedia.org/en.wikisource.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=site&only=scripts&skin=modern&*"></script>
<script src="//bits.wikimedia.org/en.wikisource.org/load.php?debug=false&…ly=scripts&skin=modern&user=Ineuw&version=20140815T232551Z&*"></script>

Clear yo cache

clear yo cache
clear yo cache -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:08, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thanks for your time and taking the trouble. — Ineuw talk 07:22, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

A you're welcome![edit]

For thanking me. :P Abyssal (talk) 07:44, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Index:Wisconsin Rapids directory (1921).djvu[edit]

Did a file patch ( now at commons)..

Question is there a bot task to up move the pages from 31 onwards to reflect the new layout? unsigned comment by ShakespeareFan00 (talk) .

@ShakespeareFan00: I believe that there is. Go to the bot requests and post a precise request for the move.— Ineuw talk 00:55, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Done, BTW Can we create a page somwehere for 'technical-fixes' so the Scriptorium isn't clutered?.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:22, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, Like minds think alike. I was thinking the same thing and the namespace would be Wikisource: like, Wikisource:Files need repair or something like that, but the actual name I leave up to you. Take the initiative and create it, with one caveat: search Wikisource first, there may already be such a page. — Ineuw talk 18:14, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Well there is a Category but this would be a more formal noticeboard/to-do list...ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't think anyone would object to a page as well. The difference is that a page must also be managed. — Ineuw talk 21:19, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Wikisource:Scriptorium/Rebinding‎ Currently I merely copied the header from Help and tweaked the wording.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:47, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

About your side note and my common.js: Please note my comments[edit]

self.layout_overrides_have_precedence = true; What the lofass is this?

Its that gadget that allows contributors to set a specific dynamic layout (override) for readers. I just assumed you had this enabled but upon a second look seems like assumed too much. you can rem this line if you don't want the equivalent of enabling this gadget,

self.proofreadpage_disable_ocr = false; I want this disabled. would this enable it???

If you don't want the OCR button to appear in the Page namespace toolbar, set to "true" instead.

self.proofreadpage_raw_lst = true; What the lofass is this? — Ineuw talk 01:16, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

This is the convoluted way section labeling is set up for us. raw (or old) LST uses <section begin.... & <section end... tags instead of ### character markers. Leave set to "true" if you want to use tags.

These settings in your .js file are not affected by what you have selected in your User prefs/gadgets tab BUT they can screw with resources if one (true) contradicts the other (false) or vise versa. Since these 3 "gadgets" are nothing more than a parameter and a true/false value, it was a waste to make them gadgets in the first place. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:29, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Now it clear to me. Again my gratitude for what it's worth.— Ineuw talk 02:01, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
See-ve-shen. Fwiw... when you've disabled the LST & OCR gadgets in your prefs, lines 324 & 325 in User:Ineuw/Sandbox2 should [eventually] disappear - indicating 2 less things loading "outside 'n willy-nilly" of the built in ResourceLoader. This leaves just the Index-fill gadget (line 326) - which InductiveLoad isn't around for anymore & can use a "refresh" - that lies outside of the "normal" module load scheme for you. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Removed code because of security issues[edit]

@Helder.wiki: Done as recommended. — Ineuw talk 03:04, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Reflective and helpful comments[edit]

Gday. I read one of your talk page comments to a user, and felt that while you were well-meaning, your words didn't come across that way. wm2014:Programme was interesting for some commentary about how the WPs are viewed, especially with regard to new editors finding things to do and to achieve. I encourage you to listen to the talk by Raph Koster, and reflect on how enWS can use the learnings of the WPs and be a place where newcomers feel that their efforts are worthwhile. I plan on putting some words together about WM2014 once I get out of backlog life. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:51, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Google Front pages[edit]

Index:Botanistsguidet00wauggoog.djvu for example has a Google front page. Would it be reasonable to replace this with a blank but otherwise keep the same layout? Plan on doing the 'patch' myself, but wanted a second opinion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: No problem, will try later today.— Ineuw talk 18:24, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: Yes check.svg DoneIneuw talk 22:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)