User talk:Ineuw/Archives/2012-01-01

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created on 01 January 2012, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.


Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 37.djvu/49[edit]

Why is the above page Problematic, I can see nothing wrong with it. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 02:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

It's a duplicate of Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 37.djvu/51 - inserted in the middle of the article. Without too much elaboration, there is more of this in later volumes. :-).— Ineuw talk 02:56, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Pardon - as we discussed some time ago, I'd be more than happy to swap the missing pages into the existing .djvu if somebody can get me the two pages in question as a .jpg, .tif, etc. with dimensions matching those found existing in the current bundled .djvu's layout ( 2540 x 4075, 300 dpi [gamma=2.2] ) — George Orwell III (talk) 21:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi GO III. Many thanks for your kind offer. I managed to track down the correct version on IA (it's from the Harry Houdini collection). I created the .jpg images for the missing pages, and hope that they are acceptable. The .dpi is as you specified, but couldn't modify the size to your exact dimensions. The file are:

File:PSM V37 D038 Djvu replacement page.jpg,
File:PSM V37 D039 Djvu replacement page.jpg and
File:PSM V37 D040 Djvu replacement page.jpg
in this category. — Ineuw talk 00:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Well after kicking those around a bit, I could not get a decent rendering that matches the current Indexed djvu pages' dimensions. The problem with "colored" backgrounds and plain-text is that one or the other "bleeds" into its mate, making for really bad djvu pages upon conversion. The various shades leading up to true black (for text which is considered the foreground normally) bleed into the background, which could be cleaned-up if the background was true white but thats not the case here, so everything came out blotchy ontop of an ugly background with the Houdini files above.
Still, I got the GoogleBook ones to go somewhat smoother but the text is too dark no matter which way I approached combining the text w/ a background. See temp test upload HERE to see what my tinkering has produced so far.
Curious - if the Houdini version is from, can you point me too it? Sometimes they create a B&W pdf and maybe that can lead me to a not-so-dark replacement. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:54, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Your sample image Index:PSMv37 rpl test 5.djvu is great. The fact that it's a little bit dark doesn't detract from its readability. This is the link to the Houdini copy, and this is my saved search results link on IA for everything that contains the words "Popular Science Monthly". The list is messy - there were multiple editions for some volumes, so you have to check. — Ineuw talk 06:04, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I did all that based on the last adventures in PSM.... but did not find anything other what we already have laid out for vol. 37. I tried the worse GoogleBooks black and white version with similar "dark" results (but a horrible text-layer so I opted keeping the test version for now). I'll keep refining this process as additional problems, etc., come to light but without a better base image to work from, the text file is the best I can muster for now. I've applied it and uploaded the new djvu already. I also added the text to the dupe pages so I can delete that temp test file and its index. Again, drop me note if the need arises or if something new turns up along the lines of resolving the "darkness" on those two pages. George Orwell III (talk) 10:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Scientific Culture[edit]


Popular Science Monthly/Volume 7/September 1875/Scientific Culture I and Popular Science Monthly/Volume 25/September 1884/Scientific Culture II and not two parts of a multi-part article. They are standalone articles, with the same title, on the same subject, by the same author, summarising addresses made by the author nine years apart. I've already fixed this once, and now you've unfixed it again.

Hesperian 23:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I am really sorry about that. This occurred because I had no way of marking the articles (until now) accordingly. It's only after screwing it up this afternoon, that I realized my error, but since I still wasn't sure, I waited for you to show up and tell me. Now that you did, please let me correct these mistakes and add the articles to this list. — Ineuw talk 00:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Sorry I was narky there. Hesperian 00:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I didn't think so. :D.— Ineuw talk 00:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

not proofread[edit]

I thought it was agreed that you would stop transcluding content that is not proofread. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 15:56, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you please be specific?— Ineuw talk 16:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

This one, and every other article I noticed with the summary PSM Main namespace article CYGNIS INSIGNIS 16:18, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cygnis. Correct me if I am wrong but based on our discussion of over a year ago, I committed not to mark pages as proofread (until I do a proper job). I also committed to link the volumes' Index entries to the paragraphs where it is warranted, but postponed doing so because this requires exclusive attention and the strategy of approach is still incomplete.
My overall strategy is first to proofread all pages which require special attention. These include the article title pages, pages with images, tables, music sheets, and math formulas. Article title page information provide the Table of contents and accurate page links to the index at the end of each volume.
This leaves me with the uninterrupted proofreading of text pages and speed up the completion of the PSM project by at least one year. To test, I applied this strategy to PSM Volume 2 and found it to be sound as I was able to proofread 35 to 50 pages a day with fair degree of accuracy.
All pages with images and tables between volumes 1 and 25 have been proofread, and image uploads up to volume 59 are about to be completed as well. - Uploading images have the following advantages: diversion from proofreading, advance information on upcoming articles and preparing for required categories in Wikisource.
My plan is to complete volumes 26 to 50 - 51 to 75 - 76 to 92, in the same manner as outlined above because without Table of contents it's impossible to know what's in the project.
It's true that only the first page of the main namespace article is proofread, but I find it odd that after building 37 Tables of contents in the above outlined manner, you find this strategy unacceptable.
Table of content data I collect generates the Main namespace page headers automatically and include all pages from article to article and I have no other way to accomplish all that has been done so far. — Ineuw talk 19:27, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
You have have undertaken a mammoth task, and your progress is astonishing, but there are ways of achieving this without placing content that is 'not proofread' into main space. The page namespace allows the development of the transcription, the project pages could contain the TOCs, lists of categories and works by author, and so on. In essence, all these matters are ancillary, or secondary concerns: all sandwich and no meat, many roads and no destination, process without proper content. The primary task is surely the presentation of the articles themselves, assisting the reader to find that content can come after. Again, I'm not trying to diminish what you have achieved, and how helpful that will be after the content is proofread, I'm just trying to emphasize that these other tasks are not the primary goal. The purpose of the site is to provide clean text. I hope you take these comments in good faith, and attempt to step back from your tasks to consider how the reader will view this, I won't be posting here again. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 06:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 6b47d244df45a4ec73f0657a5cde22c8[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

TUSC token needs to be at the receiving site, ie. for transfers to Commons the token needs to be 'at' Commons. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


could u proofread this? --Skylark92 (talk) 04:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

2 new PSM articles[edit]

Hi. I have created two articles in PSM vol. 42. One is Number Forms, the other is Eurasia. When I saw you name in Page histories, I recalled that we talked about PSM TOC before and I went to dig a bit. In a talk we had (which I forgot probably because I was too new to understand the full implications of what you said) you gave me this warning: Also one cannot skip and process volumes randomly because there are serial articles with identical titles which appear throughout the project.
This is to notify you what I did, hoping that I did't mess up things creating new articles. In case I apologise. And I guess I should stop working in the Main namespace, right?

However, the strange thing that triggered me is that Eurasia does not appear when I seach for Eurasia in the Search tab. Can you check why? The other article, instead, is found correctly. --Mpaa (talk) 22:55, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi. The two new articles are fine and the only reason I think that Eurasia is not yet found is because the databases have not yet been re-indexed. Your first article was created on the 11th and the Eurasia was created today on the 13th. It would be interesting to know if I am correct, as well as the indexing schedule, which I assume is done every day. (or even more frequently.???).
About my duplicate article titles' "warning" . . . I really didn't mean to sound severe and for this I apologize. My concern was about readers visiting the site and looking for an article, the title of which changed with an appended Roman numeral because it was part of a serial. If you haven't before, then please look at this list. However, since the beginning of the summer, Hesperian has done a lot of corrections in this area, as well as created disambiguation pages for articles of the same name but no relation. Also, this issue was more prevalent at the early years of the publication where there was a break of a year before a successive part was published. If you look at the list sorted by volume number, you will notice that multi-part articles appear one month after another.— Ineuw talk 23:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I feel relieved. BTW, I forgot to mention also this , The Secret of Those Curly Locks, where I also didn't know how to put an image belonging to the first article of a month but placed in the page before. So is it OK if I continue creating new articles in the main space as long as I check the list above? Or is this creating more confusion than benefit? --Mpaa (talk) 00:01, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Don't worry about the images. Generally, they are uploaded in sequence but Vol 92, I already have and will add the missing image. Otherwise, completed Volumes are: 1-63, 84 & 86, with V64 is in the process of being uploaded. — Ineuw talk 00:17, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 37.djvu/402[edit]

Hi. I added the images to the article but this page is difficult to render as in the original (look at the whole article to see the real effect) how the. As you are expert of PSM, I leave it up to you to decide how to proceed. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 22:11, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. . . . and I am not the expert :-). For the time being, don't worry about the image display in the main namespace. The important matter is achieving accuracy in the Page: namespace. - I am aware of this problem wherever there are two images on the same page, and we got hundreds of them. Later, I will easily locate and correct them when a commonly agreed solution is proposed by the community.
I will validate all your work on that article, but only you can validate the above mentioned page, as I made some minor adjustment and proofread it.— Ineuw talk 22:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Getting typeset[edit]

When you have a moment (no screaming urgency), would you be so kind to transclude the obits at Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 44.djvu/882 into the main ns. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The Glass Industry[edit]

Hi. In you last modification of this list, I saw you removed The Glass Industry I and The Glass Industry II but I was not able to find the entries anywhere else. Just to know if it was done by purpose, so I understand how it works. And if so, how am I supposed to rename these 2 article pages in Vol. 42 TOC? --Mpaa (talk) 09:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The list is computer generated and is automatically updated after completion of each volume title 'harvest', having just completed Volume 38. I wasn't aware of all manually added titles, save one which was noticed and re-added manually. Sorry about that and will I extract it from the previous version by adding it to a separate table above the generated list.
I am also curious about which OS and browser you are using? — Ineuw talk 17:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
No problem. It was just to know if what I did was wrong. I am on Firefox 3.6.22/Vista. --Mpaa (talk) 17:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Redirect for PSM articles[edit]

Hi. What is the policy for REDIRECT with PSM articles? Do you create a redirect everytime you create a new PSM atrticle?
E.g. I did this Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_42/January_1893/A_Captive_Comet. Do I need to do a REDIRECT as well?. Thanks. --Mpaa (talk) 08:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

You can certainly create the redirect once the article is in the main ns. Myself wasn't aware of this until I noticed that Hesperian created some ~1,100 redirects for the existing articles. Now I prepare the required info for the redirects ahead of time HERE. Duplicate names are managed by disambiguation pages. So, if you create A Captive Comet, and it already exists, then the title is resolved by a disambiguation page.— Ineuw talk 16:55, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I think I will manage the redirects as soon as I create the article, as well as adding info in the Author page, etc. The reason is that I do not know how much effort or time I can invest in this, so I prefer to do small but complete WPs. BTW, no need of talkback in my talk page, I usually monitor talks on my watchlist :-) --Mpaa (talk) 17:08, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Great. I really appreciate your help. Please feel free to ask for any info. Since you are using Windows and Firefox, I would recommend use of AutoHotkey and the .js customized toolbar. They really cut down on constant re-typing. I can help with both.— Ineuw talk 17:14, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Re your questions[edit]

  • PotM award recovered. Participating on the works gets an award (whether you realised or not).
  • Re Cyg. I am not aware of an issue, or the matter of concern. I would think that the matter would be appropriate for WS:S. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:20, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks for the reply. It really helps with one's sense of direction.— Ineuw talk 17:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Page talk:Popular Science Monthly Volume 89.djvu/601[edit]

to note. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Got it, interesting.

PSM index and TOC link[edit]

Hi. Some thoughts after working on PSM for while. I noticed that in Volume's TOC and Index, pgane number links are directly to page name space. Is there any reason not to use {{TOC link}}? For TOCs I agree there is little added value as one usually click the Article title rather than the page. But in the Index it is probably the contrary and then reader is thrown into the Page namespace, which is a bit confusing if he is not familiar with the difference. --Mpaa (talk) 09:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mpaa. The intent is to get readers to the Page level in case of an omission, in the hope that an appreciation for the effort may spark an interest to get additional proofreaders on board. Additionally, the index links are incomplete. Many entries require anchoring to paragraphs. — Ineuw talk 16:01, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

PSM Index Proofreading[edit]

Hi. Do you have a suggestion on how to profread Idx pages? I remeber having read somewhere on Users' talk pages that you can generate them almost in an automatic way. I have Vol. 40 to tackle, waiting there ... Thanks. --Mpaa (talk) 17:35, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

It requires abundant manual corrections because of:
  • Original publisher typesetter errors (dyslexia and attention deficit)
  • Scanning errors
  • Errors made by your truly (dyslexia and attention deficit) :-)
The first step is to proofread & correct the text, the numbers and separating the last word from the number by a tab or at least a space. If it's a space, I convert that into a tab with a macro using the text editor TextPad, which I find to be superior to all 32 bit Windows text editors, after trying them all.
I can email you the results of a completed volume (in a series of text files zipped and number the files in sequence), so that you can see the step by step process. I can also send you the whole system, but you need to have & know some MS Access. (2003)
I just started proofreading the article titles for volume 40 where I collect the .djvu and page numbers in an MS Access database. So we have about ~5 days before I get to the Idx pages.
If something is not understood, just keep on asking how and why I've gone about doing things, as well as problems that have cropped up in various volumes. I have access to the Wikisource chat on freenode as well, and if you want to chat with me there, just let me know and I will log on. - I hope this helps. — Ineuw talk 19:43, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks. Are you planning to work on Idx of Vol. 40 (so we do not do it offline twice in parallel)? I was planning to follow more or less what you described (I made my own excel db of title and page-if you find it helpful I can send the list to you, even if an independent sanity check is nice to have). Fix the text first, export to excel and then build the wikilinks to article titles using page# as key. Is the table generation automatic at the end of your process? No need of MSAccess thanks, it would mean yet another tool ... Do you use wikipedia-en-help or is there a chat for WS?--Mpaa (talk) 20:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I won't get to the Idx pages for another 4-5 days. If you want to proofread the Idx pages & numbers, that's fine. Then, I won't work on Idx 40 if you will. Excel is just as good, or just clean the text & numbers and leave it there. Each Idx page must have a page end marker like Page<tab>1, Page<tab>2, to know where each begins and ends when I paste it back, since the order must remain the same.

Remember that multiple page numbers on the same line must be separated to individual lines:

Correspondence 125, 275, 425 . . . . is formatted to:

Correspondence 125
Correspondence 275
Correspondence 425

After linking the Index to the Article title pages, the text export process automatically formats the table cells, rows and columns and places table 'style' codes of hanging indents, (wherever needed for long wrapped entries, text align bottom codes, and alpha breaks for each change in the 1st letter of the Idx description column. There is some minimal manual editing after pasting to conform to the original 100%.

I am using Pidgin and connect to as into the #wikisource chat room. One can access this with Firefox chat as well. — Ineuw talk 20:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Just realised I meant vol. 42. You are better equipped than I am. I'll start doing my best looking at what you did in the past and when you will catch up with me at Vol. 42 you can fill the gap in vol. 42. Still have one issue to fix: how to understand from page number, if the entry is referred to the article ending in that page or the starting one? Talk to you on IRC sooner or later. Bye. --Mpaa (talk) 21:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
One of the columns in the collected data table indicates if the article starts in the middle of the page. In that case the procedure generates the approprate fromsection/tosection codes for the main namespace. Let's use Volume 31 (a randomly selected prime number) as the example for future discussions. Samples will be from that volume as well. This will help me explain things precisely and in their proper order.— Ineuw talk 21:52, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Djvu number to Page number relation[edit]

THIS PAGE shows how the .Djvu and Page numbers are related. Rows with Cvr, Img, etc. are deleted.— Ineuw talk 21:19, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Multi-page articles[edit]

Hi (I guess you are becoming alergic to my posts ...) I was proofreading the ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE LOGIC OF SCIENCE multi-article. To facilitate the reader in finding easily the next article in the series, I have added the one before/after in notes, see e.g. Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_12/January_1878/Illustrations_of_the_Logic_of_Science_II. I found it useful to follow the chain without passing by the author page, an alternative way which might not be obvious to the reader. I hope you agree this is OK and if so this could be extended to all the other multi articles in your list. --Mpaa (talk) 19:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I welcome your posts and ideas and think that the multi part addition looks great. Please add them as you wish and there certainly no need to ask. :-) Is the list a sufficient source? or do you need a different layout? Please let me know. In the meantime, I will keep adding them to that central list, just because the list is generated at the click of a mouse.— Ineuw talk 21:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

About your ideas[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, Ineuw. You have new messages at Mpaa's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 30.djvu/22  ?[edit]

Could you please tell me why the original of this page is blank, and why there is a map on the copy page? --kathleen wright5 (talk) 13:41, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Someone at IA scanned the wrong side of the page of another copy of the same book.Here is the Internet archive copy Whenever, I have a problem, I check the online IA copy to see what happened.— Ineuw talk 15:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

You have new messages
Hello, Ineuw. You have new messages at George Orwell III's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 39.djvu/743[edit]

Hi. I have fixed the upper table. For the lower one, vertical text is tricky. See a discussion on this topic on suggested way to in these cases. --Mpaa (talk) 14:22, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. For the 2nd table, the best result would be an image of the vertical text & borders created in Excel. Even though I can make a high resolution image from the online IA copy, it will never be as clear as that.— Ineuw talk 16:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
I can do that and upload to Commons. I will use Times New Roman, Feel free to change it if something is not up to your expectations.

Did you miss this in the first table or you left it on purpose in first col (do not need an answer, if it stays like this it means yes :-) ? |{{ts|sm85}} width=15% --Mpaa (talk) 17:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 18:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I checked out table, and to be honest, I really know what I did some hours earlier and if it looks good to you, it's perfect for me.— Ineuw talk 21:53, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

PSM Maintenance & PSM contributors[edit]

Hi. Two questions.

1. What is the purpose of Category:PSM maintenance? So that I an help in cleaning up if needed or tag accordingly, depending on the case.

2. What do you think about creating a Category: PSM contributors for those Authors who have a PSM work mentioned in the Author page? Is there one already? That would help, cross-checked with your dB. --Mpaa (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

1. Back in May, User:StateOfAvon transcluded numerous partial articles from PSM to the main namespace. Billinghurst tagged them with a hidden category for inclusion into the regular pages when I generate the proper main namespace title pages. It serves a similar purpose as the {{PSMTable}} but for the main namespace.
2. It is another good idea, as my author list is really meant for me to track who contributed to the volume I am working on currently. There is no such Category yet, and if you create one then please let me know and I will include the Category line in the code with the exported record of contribution when creating a new author page. For the existing 1,258 authors (until volume 40), I would provide a list and make a job request to the admins to run an update query to add the category to the author page. — Ineuw talk 21:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Not sure I will not be able to take care of this shortly. If you feel/have time, pls go ahead. --Mpaa (talk) 07:35, 17 October 2011 (UTC) I created Category:PSM contributors. --Mpaa (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Toolbar buttons[edit]

Hi! In the 1.18 upgrade, the method to add buttons appears to have changed.

I have recently changed my toolbar buttons over to the "new" style, and I know you have some old style buttons. If they have stopped working, the fix is to convert to the following format, with the parameters in the order imageFile, speedTip, tagOpen, tagClose, sampleText (the same as the "normal" order that you have already):

  "Small caps",

Is this in any way related to your scriptorium post, or is it another issue that should be separately reported? Cheers, Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the new instructions and the new code order is perfectly clear. I will convert a particular button before replying about any problems. — Ineuw talk 04:22, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
The test results: Both the old and new styles work for me, except none work in the header for the running headers, (or the footer where I need it for {{smallrefs}} ). This most important feature was lost with the upgrade.
Inserted the new custom button code of my vector.js, as the first button in the list named rhOdd for odd numbered page headers, but it appears before the few standard toolbar buttons I still use - like Bold, Italics and nowiki. The rest show up after.
As you may know, a \newline aka CRLF, is inserted in the footer each time the page is saved in the Page: namespace, pushing the <reference /> further and further down and displaying a series of ¶ below the text. I hope this helps. — Ineuw talk 05:01, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
That's interesting that the old style still works for you, perhaps it is dependent on load order and speeds. The phenomenon whereby the new style code button ends up before the normal buttons supports this, as your code appears to run before the standard buttons are loaded (which is why the old method works), but on my computer/browser/JS combo, it loads after and my buttons are all on the right (and the old method doesn't work). If it upsets you to have the buttons on the left, you can also put it all in a function and use addOnloadHook to fire it all once everything is loaded:
addOnloadHook( function(){
  //button code here
The issue with the failure to apply to the header/footer box is not related to this code, but it caused by something "upstream", in the code called when you press the button, and Billinghurst's bug request should address it.
The newline thing is probably caused by a stray "\n" somewhere in the ProofreadPage extension, and I'll take a look today or tomorrow.
Thanks for checking it all out, Cheers, Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 06:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
It was my pleasure. I just received a Scriptorium notification that the "\n" insertion is reported by a number of other editors HERE. — Ineuw talk 15:26, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

My Sandbox[edit]

Hi. I saw your changes. I still need to code some logic to sort that way. When list is sorted in current script, Vols with one digits are not sorted as you did (and as I would like to). Even if you re-order, next time I'll run the script we will be back again :-( Any comments on the idea? --Mpaa (talk) 17:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I am aware of the issue wherever the links are referenced and I don't mind to re-order them manually until a solution is found. I just hope you didn't mind my tinkering with it.— Ineuw talk 17:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Logic implemented. Reports are temporarily stored in User:Mpaa/Sandbox1, User:Mpaa/Sandbox2, User:Mpaa/Sandbox3. Not completely debug yet but just a script. Template is needed if we port them in Project ns. --Mpaa (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2011 (UTC) --Mpaa (talk) 21:46, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Just had a quick look at the three pages and they are great!!! I think that we should keep collecting additional ideas in whichever namespace it's convenient for you, and until we agree that they are completed. Then, move them to their final "resting place" to a main ns page(s) for universal access.
I am also composing a statement to clarify my continuing efforts, (which are subject to your plans, and to which I will adhere to), so that you can plan your work & schedule as you wish since I am more flexible. This is to provide ancillary support that you wish to have because of lack of time, and/or, the inclination to deal with. I will follow up later tonight with the above mentioned strategy.— Ineuw talk 22:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[edit]

See my answer in the scriptorium over there. --enomil (talk) 21:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC) Thanks.!!!

PSM vol 68[edit]

Hi. Wanted to inform you that I started to work on Vol. 68 as I did with 42, building TOC etc. Main reason is that a lot of it is proofread but not really formatted. It is also quite ahead so we will not clash. If you mind, just let me know. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 20:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

You're funny. :-) Just go ahead and enjoy yourself. FYI, this is not "my" project. We will never clash, there is so much to do. If you need anything, just let me know. I really appreciate your efforts.
I am now working on the index of V42. The TOC is checked with which I can generate the headers, but my process requires to match the Index Page numbers to the .djvu numbers. On occasion the original type setters made omissions, or number reversions like 623 was really 263, etc. I prefer to fix this earlier and not later. This has become especially important because I no longer see all the elements because of the lack of the headers in the main ns. — Ineuw talk 20:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
One thing that just struck me. I have always started articles in TOC, and then transclusion, from the page where the Article title is. I forgot to bother about possible Img in the page before the article title. Have you checked this? I am also a bit uncertain on what to do with Img that are apparently stand-alone and not related either to the article before of after. E.g. Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 42.djvu/450. --Mpaa (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Now I got it :-( And updated articles in Main ns, where articles exist, with proper transclusion of page with sketch's subject. --Mpaa (talk) 22:40, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Missing Authors[edit]

Hi. Sometimes I cannot find Authors and do not dare to create them if I am uncertain about homonymous persons. I will tag such pages in Main ns as PSM maintenance so it is easy to see what is left behind. --Mpaa (talk) 22:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

That's fine. I do extensive searches for authors, and because of the uploaded images I often remember them as being the subject of an earlier article. — Ineuw talk 23:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Vol 42[edit]

Hi. I saw that you changed some names of already created articles in Main ns. What happens to the old name pages now? Will you move/rename them to the new name or create new ones and request deletion? Just to know the process. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 14:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I kept your old TOC which I will paste into a sandbox after completion, see which are duplicates and then ask for deletions. The template is {{Sdelete}} "Speedy delete" or rather {{db}} meaning "delete because", followed by the reason for the request.
When decided to proofread PSM, I copied the Volume 1 TOC titles out of the Index, (which was a very BIG mistake!). Based on that, I wrote a procedure which standardizes the capitalization and the exceptions accordingly. There are rules which can be extracted from the original, (verbs in image captions are never capitalized), but then, the original typesetters were not always faithful to the rules.
I encourage you to please keep asking because, I pretty much thought out, and reasoned about, - if not everything - then most issues that arise.— Ineuw talk 18:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Images on WS[edit]

Hi. I saw that there are still PSM images on WS. See File:Popular Science MonthlyV68p57.jpg. Should they be there or shall they be deleted as moved to Commons? Just to know what to do in case I come across them. --Mpaa (talk) 13:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I just uploaded this File:PSM_V68_D061_Progressive_development_of_the_corn_cob.png last week. Since I am uploading images regularly, it would be best just let me know. It's much easier to have something deleted on WS than on the Commons. In this case just use the info in this post as the reason for the deletion.— Ineuw talk 17:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
PS. FYI, commons images require a descriptive name. I use a close wording of the image caption of PSM as both the image name and its description. This way, it saves me time and avoid any hassles with some overzealous admin.— Ineuw talk 17:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, a bit slow today ... Not sure I got you right. My understanding: #1 I request deletion for this image, #2 in future, I'll just let you know which images are affected. Or? --Mpaa (talk) 21:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
One more thing since I am writing. One ing missing in page 64 (djvu). Just in case you missed it. No hurry otherwise. --Mpaa (talk) 22:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the constant confusion. This will abate once we are in tune and dealt with all old issues. About the images found on WS, (there are a few) just please let me know and I will deal with them. It's best if we don't transfer because I would still have to clean them, trim them, and rename them. Also don't think that we can run a dual system of image preparation and uploading on an image by image basis. However, if you wish to undertake a whole volume, am most happy to help. Admin commons:User:Martin H. on the commons has uploaded volume 84 by himself.— Ineuw talk 22:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
I uploaded and inserted the image and validated this page.— Ineuw talk 23:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Vol 75[edit]

This conversation was moved to Wikisource talk:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly#PSM Volume 75 conversation moved from User talk:IneuwIneuw talk 00:51, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Progress of Science[edit]

Hi. Is there a template for Progress of Science? See Page:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_68.djvu/92? --Mpaa (talk) 21:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. No, you're way ahead of me. Use the same template as {{Pt}} (PSM Title) because we are not sure for how many volumes this title will be used. They often changed their plans.

Ineuw talk 21:19, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Category PSM maintenance[edit]

Hi. I noticed that you have removed Category:PSM maintenance from some articles in Main ns. That is the tag I use to indicate mainly that Author links are not in place. Pls make sure the author is OK before you remove that. Or it will be difficult to find later on what needs to be fixed. See e.g. Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_42/November_1892/Modern_Nervousness_and_Its_Cure. Thanks --Mpaa (talk) 21:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Forgot to say that I reverted the edits. Only not lose track until this is sorted. --Mpaa (talk) 21:50, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I found the info awhile ago it's Author:Eugen Bilfinger - PSM mispelled his name. Also, your original copy incorrectly capitalized the word "its", so there is a corrected duplicate which also include the author.:Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_42/November_1892/Modern_Nervousness_and_its_Cure. Just ask for a deletion and put the new name as the reason.— Ineuw talk 21:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I was looking for this do ask for the deletion some days ago, but today, when I removed the maintenance tag, I didn't notice - sorry.!!! That's why I don't like hidden tags. :-)
Furthermore, you may have noticed that I moved most of User:StateOfAvon's work to his namespace, but it will need additional work which I'll take care of because this is old stuff that I am familiar with and know what he wanted to do. I'll occasionally work to correct them.— Ineuw talk 22:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

StateOfAvon moves[edit]

I've deleted those redirects and will let the page moves stand. StateOfAvon has left us, those pages were all (or mostly?) excerpts, and I'm confident that you'll post the full articles at some point, so it seems fair enough to give you latitude to clear these out of the way for now.

However, if I may offer you some gentle guidance, I don't think it was good form for you to unilaterally userfy these pages, considering you had already done so once and been reverted "pending community consensus". I'm all in favour of acting boldly the first time around, but the second time around I feel the proper course would have been to start a discussion at Wikisource:Proposed deletions and await consensus to act. Just some food for thought.

Hesperian 00:47, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Your guidance is much appreciated, but I really am very confused. First, I don't know what you mean by "you had already done so once and been reverted", and forgive me if memory failed me.
There must be a misunderstanding and thought that I was doing the right thing as an interim measure. They were all marked as Category:PSM maintenance and I asked Billinghurst before doing the moves, as I thought that moving incomplete works from the main ns was a preferable thing to do. I also examined his work very carefully, and they will end up proofread as part of PSM proofreading. Finally, I kept a copy of his original menu and more than happy to return everything the way it was. I am being most sincere when I ask - please enlighten me.— Ineuw talk 04:26, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I see, you've just forgotten. You previously userfied many of these titles. StateOfAvon objected. I reverted, pending the outcome of the discussion now archived at Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2011-08#What the heck. You've now userfied them again. Hesperian 04:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
I owe you apologies on many fronts. To predate the above mentioned issue, you once mentioned that I don't look at my watchlist - and I thought how right you were - and yet I neglected to learn better management of the tools and resources offered. mea culpa . . . .
Now, I've done it again by not reading the rest of the posts in the above archive, past my post of professing ignorance of rules. Not only that I forgot the original details, but omitted re-visiting the subject - I wasn't aware of subsequent posts because I no longer received email notices that the conversation continued.
First, I ask if there is a way to receive email notices of all conversations in the scriptorium, or must I refresh something on a regular basis? I am unclear about if there is a relationship between the watchlist and emails. At times, I missed important posts in the Scriptorium because I was counting on email notices and never checked the page itself. The only reason for the avoiding to visiting, is that I didn't want to be distracted from my work, as I am very easily distracted.
Regarding StateOfAvon's work, I value his collection and took the time to study it before moving them. The intention was to re-present his work in the main namespace in a more prominent and better organized way. The idea just began to germinate last night, and I mentioned it on User_talk:Mpaa#Re:_Conflicting_PSM_pages_by_StateOfAvon, but since I haven't thought it through, it is not yet ready for presentation in the Scriptorium. — Ineuw talk 06:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Category: Immunology[edit]

Hi. Saw that you are using Category: Immunology. That is OK with me, I have no opinion, I just wanted to make you aware that it was already deleted once, see [1]. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 18:55, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the message. I just assigned it as a possibility, provided that there are at least 4 or more articles with a reasonable possibility of later additions. Nonexistent items in the PSM category list are for "notes" to remind myself. There is a lot more to this but you may consider my additional comments as TMI. :-). If you feel that my category assignments are incorrect, I would be most grateful if you change them.— Ineuw talk 19:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Volume 43 update[edit]

<groan> I see you "touched" volume 43 - Now the bulk move script might be worthless - what exactly have you changed since I updated the Index: pagelist? PLEASE put it all back the way it was. I already deleted 901 & 902 so we have space to actually move something by 2. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I am so sorry! I saved your pagelist and put it back exactly as it was since I made a copy. None of the other changes are relevant - changed the 1st 2 page colors to problematic. It's when I saw the two new pages at the end, realized my mistake. Again my apologies.— Ineuw talk 08:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Well I tried leaving note on InductiveLoad's talk page for a couple of days with no response so I moved the request to the "Bot-Request" page a day or two ago with the same non-results. Maybe you should approach him - I might have pizzed him off or something just as trivial.
If still nothing happens- I'll just move them manually over the weekend I guess. Bummer -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Really thanks for all your efforts. I'll get in touch with him either later tonight (where I am) or tomorrow. In the meantime, I can work around the issue.— Ineuw talk 03:25, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


Hi. Wanted to remove the PSMTable but could only add the table. Image is missing in Commons (or at least I could not find it ...). No hurry. Just to notify you. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 23:27, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Missed uploading the image. I completed the page.— Ineuw talk 00:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)


Please check out my Sandbox. In there, I have a table I'm beginning to construct which is a project I've wanted to do for a long time. Mpaa sent me here to talk to you about it. - Tannertsf (talk) 23:29, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

With pleasure. Just give me a few minutes to settle, just came online.23:35, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Should I add anything to my list? Or any oddities I should know about? - Tannertsf (talk) 00:36, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I only dealt with the table format. I thought that's what you wanted. I don't know what you want regarding the data. The only thing I remembered is that the main namespace article titles no longer need the path & month. If the spelling and capitalization is accurate, there are existing redirects. I am now returning to to your sandbox to demonstrate it. Please check it out in 2 minutes. — Ineuw talk 01:02, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm just trying to make a list of all articles (including miscellany and editor stuff) of all PSM volumes. I also want to include their progress, and provide links where links can be used. - Tannertsf (talk) 01:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I think that the main ns. titles are sufficient to link because the page numbers are accessible from the main ns.— Ineuw talk 01:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok. And you can give me the info. My plan was to surf through the issues of it on google books, but I will use your stuff also. - Tannertsf (talk) 01:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Of course. There are 4,941 lines of titles and give me a couple of hours to prepare it as I am in the midst of completing vol 46 titles. I will place it in another sandbox in your namespace. — Ineuw talk 01:16, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Great! Thank you. - Tannertsf (talk) 01:19, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Section breaking?[edit]

Ineuw, I have an idea. To make the article lists easier to navigate, what if we do something like this?

Month, Year[edit]

The table of links and status would go here.

My thinking was that instead of scrolling down a very long list, we can just have each issue be 1 table. Much easier to edit.

Let me know what you think, and i'll have you edit them since you created the tables. - Tannertsf (talk) 03:57, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean one 3rd level heading per article, so that you can use the automatic TOC feature to find an article, and a separate table for the rest of the details? How many volumes in a subpage? There are about 112 titles per volume. Can you create me a sample in your sandbox, so that I may be clear about this?— Ineuw talk 04:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes I will create a sample, but not tonight as I need to get the body some rest. - Tannertsf (talk) 04:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok. The sample is in my sandbox. - Tannertsf (talk) 15:04, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

PSM Monthly sections question[edit]

Ok, I do have a question on the monthly sections.

I created the 1st table, and all was good, but can't seem to get the 2nd to work for me. Do you mind putting in back in line? - Tannertsf (talk) 23:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

PSM Monthly sections question[edit]

Ok, I do have a question on the monthly sections.

I created the 1st table, and all was good, but can't seem to get the 2nd to work for me. Do you mind putting in back in line? (User:Tannertsf/1872)- Tannertsf (talk) 23:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Before I do anything, let's sort what you want because I am a bit confused.
  1. I see 2 folders. One is called PSM 1872 and another at the bottom, 1872.
  2. Altogether, using the year will be confusing because volumes span 2 dates. LOOK AT THIS TABLE.— Ineuw talk 00:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
  3. Before you continue, calculate and create all the folders until volume 42 and stop because 43,and 47 are being currently worked on. I would consider sub page names as [[/1872-1873 Volume 1]] . . . [[/1873 Volume 2]] etc.
  4. Copy the contents of the User:Tannertsf/Sandbox into a text editor and leave the contents of the sandbox alone. The page is way too large and it's not impossible to crash the Wikisource server temporarily when there is a very high traffic - I've done it once. (don't tell anyone). :-)
  5. Remove the begin and end <pre> codes.
  6. Copy the range of dates & tables to the sub pages created. Just make sure that complete tables are copied.
Now I will fix the contents of User:Tannertsf/1872. — Ineuw talk 00:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about the confusion. I like the one volume per page idea, and I will put the Sandbox contents in an editor. But clarification: I intend on adding in the tables and content manually. For me, this is fun and how I want to do it. I just asked you how to format something little. I know thats harsh, but I will get everything organized soon. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Sandbox is now blank, Put info into 5 word files of 100-150 pages each. Definitely right about crashing the server - thats a lot of info. I plan to use it as only a guide, so no reason it should be on here anyway. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:41, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I will place a fresh copy into the sandbox, but it must be enclosed with <pre></pre>. Then it won't crash because it's plain text.
Also . . . .
Are breaking the table into article row by article row and pasting as such? If you are doing that, then look at the repeated elements. |- . . . . the next is again |- . . . . BUT, the table closing bracket |} must exist and the row must be pasted above it.
Must leave house for at least an hour so I won't be answering for a while. Also, you should experiment and practice with the contents of the PSM 1872 subfolder. That's what it's for. Anytime it's messed up you can get fresh copy from User:Ineuw/Sandbox8. — Ineuw talk 00:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes I am doing row after row. I will look at the elements you suggested. - Tannertsf (talk) 01:03, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Issue or Month/Yr in article titling?[edit]


I was wondering whether you thought it preferable to use Month/Year for article titles (like the PSM articles, e.g., Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1/May 1872) instead of Issue number (Century Magazine/Volume 1/Issue 1)? I am also coming across instances of The Atlantic Monthly/Volume 1/No. 1. What thinks you? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:28, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi LJB. You are absolutely correct. Interestingly, when discussions over the naming issue took place exactly two years ago, no one proposed this and we were influenced by the packaging of a complete volume. Now that you mention it, it's embarrassing because I look at (academic) publications on an almost daily basis. Unfortunately, every page, effort and procedure created since, is based on this naming structure.— Ineuw talk 20:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Some of the magazines we have hosted here don't have all that many articles yet associated with them, so I could go ahead and 'move' them to M/Y format like PSM articles... But that would mean some deleting of original titles when all is said and done. I'm willing to do the moves & correct links to 'old' titles... But I wouldn't be able to delete the original titles (which would become redirects)... Should I place speedy delete requests on titles I 'overwrite', or would there be a more efficient way of doing things? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:33, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Using month/year is a lot more people friendly than volume and issue numbers. Readers can better correlate historically significant articles from a date ordered format. I would leave original titles as redirects. One never knows how someone is searching the web. P.S: Are you referring to Atlantic Monthly? — Ineuw talk 22:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
PPS. Also, there is nothing wrong in using Volume 1/Issue 1/November 1857 (referring to the Atlantic Monthly's first issue.)— Ineuw talk 22:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
By "original titles" I mean, for example, The Atlantic Monthly/Volume 1/No. 1/The Round Table (the title that would have to be deleted onced 'moved')
which would become The Atlantic Monthly/Volume 1/Issue 1/November 1857/The Round Table... If I wanted to create a redirect page entitled "The Round Table", how would I "disambiguate" the title? Would I title it The Round Table (Atlantic Monthly)? Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
  1. Exactly!!! The Atlantic Monthly/Volume 1/No. 1/The Round Table would become The Atlantic Monthly/Volume 1/Issue 1/November 1857/The Round Table and then The Atlantic Monthly/Volume 1/No. 1/The Round Table can be deleted.
  2. Also, please omit the period {.) from titles. Its nefarious disposition from old operating systems can still cause problems. Also, consider omitting non-English characters from titles, like ligature and accented characters etc.
  3. If you are the first to create a page named The Round Table, then disambiguation is left for others to worry about. If it already exists with an article, then you have to move the existing contents to another unique name and the page would become a disambiguation page for yours and the moved article - like this: A voyage to Abyssinia. You can look at the Category:Mainspace disambiguation pages to familiarize yourself. — Ineuw talk 02:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Quick question for clarity... Re: omitting periods from titles (#2 above)... Any period? Like in "Mr." or "Jr." or even if there are initials? Just want to be clear. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes. For titles in the main namespace we have that latitude, but not in the Page: namespace. Here is an example: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 39/May 1891/Sketch of Niels H C Hoffmeyer.

If you look at the the URL, it's also neat and clean: talk 02:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I find myself suffering from 'Editor's Block'... If I had mind to ever work on a publication such as EB1911 or PSM or magazine issues (one or all), where would it be most beneficial to start—keeping in mind I would still like to finish cleaning up the Coates works...? But it wouldn't be the first time I've worked on two projects at once... I'd love some direction if you have any! Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi LJB. Having the block may be the symptom of the season. If it's of any help, you're not the only one affected. I needed some time to respond to be as objective as possible. Unfortunately, I know very little of your range of interests, so it's difficult to be specific, hence this reply deals with generalities.

The better choice would be a selection of several topics of interest, of which you would like to know more about. This approach allows changing topics when one becomes tired, while remaining productive and accomplishing something. Coates' works would be one of the alternate choices.

I've never worked on EB1911, but the concept of shorter works appeal to me as a layman of diverse interests. The contents of PSM are not literary, if prose is your preference. I would think that the Atlantic Monthly, Harper's Bazaar, or the New Yorker would be more along those lines. In any case, I will gladly continue the conversation until we reach a point of interest. :-) — Ineuw talk 01:13, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Candidate for multi-article?[edit]

Hi. Do you think these 3 (Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_19/August_1881/Origin_and_History_of_Life_Insurance|, Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_19/September_1881/Modern_Basis_of_Life_Insurance and Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_19/October_1881/The_Practical_Business_of_Life_Insurance are actually a multi-article? They have different titles but reading them, it looks like they were one and only (e.g. first para of last of them starts with '..., having been explained, ...', which was actually done in the previous ones). --Mpaa (talk) 22:40, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for pointing them out. I will include them in the multiple part list. Allow some hours before I get to it. In volume 48 I came across an inexplicable mess which I am trying to sort out. It's total headache, and I have no choice but sort it out manually.— Ineuw talk 23:03, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
No hurry at all from my side. --Mpaa (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Author:A. K. Gardner[edit]

I want to bring this to your notice. As I was working on my table, I noticed that the author page linked to a W.H. Gardner. My guess is just bad original setup?

Not sure though - so I wanted to let you know. - Tannertsf (talk) 10:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the error. I fixed it immediately,— Ineuw talk 10:59, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


Thought I'll keep you clued in on whenever I have finished a volume - Volume 1 is done now!

I don't know what you plan to do for the future with my project, but I'm sure it would belong somewhere in the Wikiproject?

User:Tannertsf/1872 is Volume 1 .... is there a way to move this page to a title of Tannertsf/Volume 1 or something? - Tannertsf (talk) 07:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I can move it for you if you want. Also, I would like to make a copy and incorporate it into a subpage as part of the Wikisource:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly. Have you seen Mpaa's work there? Here is the link: Wikisource:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly/Statistics.— Ineuw talk 08:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
PS: If you are keeping each volume in a separate subpage, then maybe I should remove the volume number from the table? This would give you more width for the titles. What do you think? — Ineuw talk 08:07, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

That would be great. I have seen Mpaa's work and like it. I think for now we will keep volume # in the table in case we want to organize differently later on. - Tannertsf (talk) 08:17, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

PSM vol 22[edit]

Hi. I saw that some pges of Vol 22 have bad scanned pages(e.g. page 527) (they are now marked as problematic). This scanin archive have readable pages. Might it be possible to swap them in the djvu file? I leave this up to you as you are familiar with way-forward and what is possibly needed. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 18:27, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for reminding me. I will look after it within the hour. :-) How are you???— Ineuw talk 18:38, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Later volumes of PSM[edit]

How should I go about proofreading this page - Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 92.djvu/55 - as I know its a lot different than early volumes? - Tannertsf (talk) 15:30, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Proofread the text as a regular page. In general, leave me a note as to which pages you plan to proofread, and need the images. If you need help with inserting offset images, I will gladly show how to do them and provide you with the templates.
I already have the images stored on my computer but I am still at Volume 70. At this point in time, for volumes past 87, I will upload the images as needed. The problem being is that volumes past 86 contain 1,000 to 1,500 images compared to earlier volumes which have around 125-175. In any case, I will clean and upload the images for this pane in the next hour or so, and will let you know.

P.S: You can also place the {{PSMTable}} template on the page for later image insertion. — Ineuw talk 18:25, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

My plan was to do pages 55-100. I will need you to tell me how to use those templates. Thanks so far! - Tannertsf (talk) 22:20, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Image insertion is done after the text is proofread. When you completed the page, I will work with you. The above mentioned range of 44 pages add up to another 73 images and I can't take on cleaning, trimming, and uploading as am in the middle of a number of old incomplete tasks. Also, some pages in the range are images without proofreading. — Ineuw talk 01:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Minor Problematic pages[edit]

Hi. Second opinion appreciated on the following. I proofread some pages (I have a few examples) where only minor details were not readable. See e.g. this page and search for "are found to cool" in the bottom part. As you can see, the t is not readable. I proofread against another scan and I have kept track in the discussion page, as I thought it is not worth while doing the whole process of swapping pages in djvu for minor things as such. If you do not agree let me know, so I will know what is the right trade-off in deciding to swap a page or mark it as problematic or just proceed. Thanks and bye. --Mpaa (talk) 19:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Don't bother to replace the page when coming across such minor errors. What I do is check on IA if they have more than one copy. Sure enough, they had two copies of volume 46. One was the same as we have, but the 2nd is a clear copy of the page: HERE.
There are two links I use for verification or copying a missing image:
This is an old list issued by online books and is riddled with errors. I also use this search string on AI to see if there are any new or duplicate editions. — Ineuw talk 20:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Then we are in line :-) BTW, good that you updated ts. I was using padding-right but updating of template was still waiting in my 'to-do-list' ... --Mpaa (talk) 16:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

"Leaving" of current work[edit]

I am sorry to pronounce this, but I can not work any further on the titles, and I hope it won't hurt anyone since it was my topic to start anyway. I still plan o heavily going through the volumes of PSM, and also going through the Federal Reporter. In all honesty, I assumed the FR would be impossible to edit, but it is actually easy. So along with those I will work on 2 of my own personal books on here.

Thanks for all the past help, and the help to come. - Tannertsf (talk) 02:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Typo in title[edit]

Hi. This article has a typo in the link in the TOC: An Old Naturalist-Conrad Gesner(1516-11565). I do not fix it directly. Just for you to know, so you can keep your DB and TOCs aligned. Bye. --Mpaa (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. :). But, what's 10,000 years between friends? — Ineuw talk 22:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Multi article Lessons from the Census[edit]

Hi. I created this page Lessons from the Census V according to index link, but when inserting header (IMO correct) from your list of headers, I found a mismatch. It should be "Lessons from the Census IV". Can you please double-check the whole series and involved TOCs? I feel there is a mistake from the start. I do not want to fix it myself as Multi-article handling is quite tricky. Unfortunately I pressed 'Save' too fast and realized it only after. Most probably the article in main ns needs to be moved. Bye. --Mpaa (talk) 16:24, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I now remember why the numbers don't match. If you look at the first article, that's the introduction. If you think it's wrong, please let me know and I will renumber them.— Ineuw talk 17:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I suspected there should have been a reason. That's why I asked instead of acting :-) I fear might be a bit confusing for the reader, but you are in a better position to choose the best solution, as have you have dealt with many multi-articles before. A suggestion could be to use _0 for the first, but that might be equally confusing. --Mpaa (talk) 19:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I could change the procedure code, rename the first article to Preface or Introduction and renumber the rest. But, before I do that, We better check some of the other multiple part articles with similar issues. Something like this has happened recently but don't remember at the moment which and what was different about them.— Ineuw talk 22:57, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Blackletter font[edit]

Hi. I noticed that font was changed for Editor's table and others after a certain volume, see e.g. Page:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_51.djvu/276. Ii was wondering if you were aware of this. And, if not, if you would consider doing a variation of the corresponding templates with the right font. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 21:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. This is a mystery to me. Don't think that I changed anything. Regarding this and your previous note, I must think. Will be home by Thursday, and at this time, I am having the greatest time of my life. Please bear with me, and will think tonight what could have happened and will try to get back tomorrow. Find it a bit strange working on a Mac. — Ineuw talk 00:55, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Take all the time you need, no hurry on any issue I raise to you, still 59000 pages to play with while waiting ... :-) Just one comment on the font: you did not change anything, it is original PSM book that changed font, see the original image. Was wondering if it is worth while adapting to it or not. --Mpaa (talk) 12:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Now I got it. The short answer is no. The long answer is that this concept was extensively discussed on WS on several occasions, the last time that I remember was ~12-15 months ago and the general consensus was to stick to the basics because of different browsers and because we'll never get the precise font & spacings to match. — Ineuw talk 17:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


Can you please explain to me—in layman's terms—what the above template does (practically speaking; i.e., how it renders differently than using your every-day emdash once transcluded)? I couldn't figure it out from the template or corresponding talk page (too much tech-speak for me). Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. The template surrounds the emdash with a hair spaces. I use it because without this separation between the emdash and a subsequent word, my spell check doesn't accept it. Otherwise, there is no difference.— Ineuw talk 16:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


Footer space: to delete or not to delete the pesky line spaces in Index footers (and some headers, apparently... unless that was user error)? Not sure what the outcome of all that was, and I don't want to waste my time bothering if it won't affect outcome. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Please don't bother or waste your time with them. It will eventually be cleaned up. So far, I haven't seen any ill effects in the PSM project. — Ineuw talk 02:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank goodness! Although I'm glad it has no ill effects in projects, I'm more glad that I don't need to waste my time with them! :) While I'm here, what sort of text sizing should be used for the "BOSTON, MASS." portion of this PSM page? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
I always use 75% {{c|{{fsx|75%|BOSTON, MASS.}}}} x-xmaller is 69%.— Ineuw talk 03:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it. Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Yw.— Ineuw talk 03:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Mainspace article:

  1. I do not know what the purpose of the noinclude formatting is for the PSM Mainspace pages (I copied formatting from one of the pages you recently created)
  2. Use quotation marks in "next" title ("Freewill") or no?

At your leisure, & thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Lastly, I realize issue month linking is anchored, but I couldn't figure out why it (October 1908) is still red. Done for today, Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

  • First my hat's is off to you, and thanks for your help and interest.
  • To make a long story short, Billinghurst helped in designing the first header which included the noincludes because of the (currently unused) PSMLayoutTop & PSMLayoutBottom frame around the text. I kept the original design undisturbed just in case we'll do something in the future.
  • The placement of the Author: is also unusual to allow navigation to the user defined Table of contents, which doesn't exist in the original.
  • I never use quotes or any symbols if possible, to simplify web searches. I would leave them out.
  • Also, don't worry about the previous/next navigation. You may have noticed/heard/read that I collect the article titles to create the TOC asap, and then proofread the same as I work my way from the top down.
  • The programs I wrote on my home computer, format and generate the TOC, the article headers, and the indexes at the back of the volumes, etc. Unfortunately, I only completed the title collection until Volume 50, and now I am in the midst of proofreading the title pages of Volume 41. So, it will be awhile before I get to the 70's. In time I will provide the full info for the headers.
  • The 'October 1908' is a redirect that is editor defined and leads the reader back to the October section of the TOC. I created it for you to see what it does. This was also part of B's original design. — Ineuw talk 05:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


Hi. Just wanted to you to be aware that this page was moved to a one with "L.". I guess you had good reasons not to put the dot. Just for you to know. Bye. --Mpaa (talk) 19:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Numbering of PSM contributions[edit]

Hi. I am quite busybody in these days, spending some time watching what is happening in PSM ... :-) What is the rule for numbering PSM contributions? E.g. in Author:Eliza Ann Youmans it has been removed. I think a common approach should be kept. No preference for which but it should be consistent. It should also be described somewhere so that proofreaders can be directed to guidelines when deviating. Bye again --Mpaa (talk) 21:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

No one removed it. :-). I modified the procedure to number the contributions after Vol 30. You'll also notice that early contributions lack the PSM link in the section title. I will regenerate Ms Youmans' page.
The problem with the HotCat is that it doesn't add the last name of the author to the category as in [[Category:PSM contributors|Youmans]]. I think it's required for the proper sort. — Ineuw talk 23:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC) No sort key is necessary. :-):
When I look at the history of that page, numbering goes in and out. My fear is that you will have to re-add numbering many times to author pages, as someone who doesn't like numbering in author page will change them to bullets. --Mpaa (talk) 09:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
It seems that User:Bob Burkhardt is working on Appleton's Publishing house history and anything related to it, or at least to the Youmans family, he changed. I posted a note on his talk page.— Ineuw talk 18:21, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

PSM Sketch category & more[edit]

I moved this conversation to Wikisource talk:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly#PSM Sketch category & more. I am trying to concentrate future discussions on the project talk pages so that the history of suggestions is more centralized. — Ineuw talk 08:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Missing redirects in PSM[edit]

Hi. I made an analysis of redirects up to Vol. 50 and stored it in your Sandbox. Needs to be read with common sense :-) Maybe it is info you knew. For my curiosity, are these lists made based on your internal dB or querying WS directly? Let me know if you if you think this is useful to have and we can move it to PSM page. I wrote a script querying WS articles for redirects before I knew you had similar lists. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 19:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. PSM redirects history: :-)
  1. The majority were created by User:Hesperian, at least until volume 25?. This included disambiguation pages to resolve identical article titles. I continued Hesperian's work.
  2. I don't know how to query WS so everything comes from my dB, however when there is a discrepancy I correct one or the other, depending on what I already know but not apparent to others.
  3. Some of your results look "suspicious", but haven't examined them closely.
  4. We can only create redirects for existing main ns pages.

Ineuw talk 20:25, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Addendum: Just woke up to the fact that THIS LIST automatically requires disambiguation pages. One must add other articles of the same title outside of PSM. :-) — Ineuw talk 20:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
I checked the list and disambiguated existing pages (greater art. <= vol 39). I put a note on what is disambiguated on that specific page Notice so we will remember.
What my script does is: 1) get pages from PSM Vol. x category and, 2) for each pages it gets, check if a redirect is present.
I filter out missing redirects as 'Notes', etc. It is not too smart to check the content of the redirect page, which might be wrong. In cases where a disambiguation page exist, that is listed as it is not technically a "redirect" but a normal link from another page. Anyhow, I think it is useful to know what is a real redirect and what is not. And also red links give a good view. Being my work, I need to do some marketing :-) --Mpaa (talk) 20:57, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Absolutely! I am with you. As I said, I didn't have the chance yet to closely assess the results and the more views there are, the more perfect the final result is.
Also, after spending some time on categorizing articles in volumes 40 & 41, I realize a (my) big mistake, which I want to discuss with you later. - At the moment, I am waiting for visitors who might pop in at any moment and interrupt my thought process. — Ineuw talk 21:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Image help[edit]

What should I do for the images for PSM Volume 71? Could you place the images (without captions) into their respective pages and keep them marked as not-proofread? - Tannertsf (talk) 08:55, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, no worries. I'm doing them myself. - Tannertsf (talk) 09:57, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tannertsf. If you look for pages with titles and images proofread by Ineuw in previous volumes, you will realise that format for image captions is quite standard. Same goes for titles, where {{Pt}} is available. Also small text is usually formatted as 85% size. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 19:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Page creation[edit]

Hi. I tried on botwiki some experiments and looks OK. See [2] and [3]. Templates are not defined there but if you edit the page, it looks OK. That might save what you now doing by hand. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 22:26, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Vol 71[edit]

Hi. Just a heads-up on the title of this page. Something might be wrong either with capitalization or the title itself plus a mismatch with TOC title. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 22:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

When I created this page, I forgot to add the "To" in the title. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:36, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. We all check each other. Trust me that Mpaa finds plenty of my errors, and I am glad that he is so meticulous. If you look at my activities of the last few days, the numerous edits are all corrections and additions which I didn't know, or think of when I started. Also, my best holiday wishes to you & your loved ones. — Ineuw talk 00:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Pictures uploaded with wrong name[edit]

Hi. As expected ... :-( see history. Next time better ask for renaming :-) Bye --Mpaa (talk) 16:29, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

One more bit: [4] --Mpaa (talk) 16:44, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
I solved the issue byADDING A SUBCATEGORY FOR UNUSED IMAGES. This way, there is no reason to have them deleted, I just wanted them out of the gallery so that I can see the image order and track missing images. — Ineuw talk 21:44, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Asking for images to be deleted[edit]

It was a dark, cold, snowy and stormy night . . . and I blame these conditions for the following mess I created:

Earlier tonight I uploaded replacement images for damaged .djvu pages to the Commons, forgetting that I've done this before some time ago, and thus made a mess of things. Could an Admin delete ALL of these images listed below at Commons:Category:Popular_Science_Monthly_illustrations/Volume_22 and I will upload the correctly named replacements. Much thanks.— Ineuw talk 07:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

This has to be done at Commons by the administrators there. Please go there and on each image that is to be deleted use the template {{badname|the duplicate to be kept}}. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Please also note the means to link to a file. If you need to preface it you can do [[Commons:File:...]] though this is usually unnecessary. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Got it.— Ineuw talk 18:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Some of these had been deleted; I just deleted the rest (I hope that was still desired!). Let me know if you need anything else. --Spangineer (háblame) 18:26, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks. Now I can upload a corrected set of images. The only reason I asked here on WS, is because aside from two or three commons admins who are familiar with the PSM project, I always run into deletion issues.— Ineuw talk 19:18, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


Would you be interested in being nominated for Adminship? You are active in the conversations, not afraid to ask questions when you don't know the answer, and you having the extra buttons would be a benefit to the project. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:34, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for considering me, but I really don't consider myself qualified. Personally, I think that you should approach User:Mpaa. He is certainly qualified in all areas, and based on all my interactions, I know that he would make an excellent admin.
However, within the scope of my knowledge, I am interested in helping out wherever it's needed, especially providing positive encouragement and instructional support to beginners. I am aware that time, which most editors sorely lack, is something I have a bit more of, and gladly offer.— Ineuw talk 19:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
You undervalue your qualifications, "Currently, Wikisource grants administrator access to those members who are known in the community and whose edits and contributions have proven trustworthy". It seems the extra buttons would be helpful to you RE:this edit, and there is little doubt you would use them to benefit the community. I believe you have all the qualifications for admin on WS, and I would like to see you accept nomination. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
If you think User:Mpaa would be a good choice for admin, approach them about the subject, and consider nominating them. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
good edit, if you change your mind about being nominated let me know. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Page:PSM V03 D413 P399.djvu/1[edit]

Hi, I'm currently trawling through the Orphaned pages list and have come across this one. It's the only PSM page I can see in the list and I'm wondering what needs to happen to it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Were you reading my mind???? :-) I was about to compose a post asking if there is a way to know if there are any orphaned pages in the project. Thanks. — Ineuw talk 00:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Please delete it as I can no longer insert a deletion request since it was validated. This is a lost duplicate of an existing page Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 3.djvu/413. GO3 was replacing the damaged .djvu and the text was lost, but I reconstructed it, so this is no longer needed. — Ineuw talk 00:57, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I found another by looking at the Page source. Now that I know where to look.— Ineuw talk 01:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)