User talk:Monedula
Hi. I just wanted to say thanks for all your great work on the New Student's Reference Work. You really reinvigorated this project, and I am grateful for that. Danny 12:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. BTW, today the number of extracted NSRW articles exceeded 1000 (currently there are 1002). — Monedula 18:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi! Nice work again, this time on the "North American Review." You may want to see how we have been doing Littell's Living Age, for an idea of how to integrate the magazine in its entirety into Wikisource. Danny 14:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I am working on the B's, and there is this out-of-place insert in the middle of Balfour. Just wondering how you think we should handle it. Danny 11:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- You mean THE BALKANS AND THE PEACE OF EUROPE? It should be made into a separate article between Balkan Peninsula and Ball, Sir Robert Stawell. See The Dairy Industry for an example. — Monedula 12:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi again. Sorry about all the questions, but I just wanted to coordinate. In "A", page 21, the Aviation images. Where should we put them. Danny 12:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Put them in Aeronautics after the main text, just as it is done in Dog. — Monedula 12:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi, to promote the NSRW, I would like to nominate The New Student's Reference Work/Australia as Featured Text this month. Danny 04:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello. Could you please take a quick look at the Algebra NSRW article and see if the fractions seem okay. Danny 12:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] email notifications
Hi, after a proposal to enable email notification, Wikisource is now able to notify you of any changes to pages on your watchlist and/or changes to your talk page. In order to take advantage of these features, you need to enabled them in your preferences. --John Vandenberg (chat) 11:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] reverts
It would be courteous for you to offer a reason why you performed reverts such as this one, rather than simply reverting without comment as though I were a vandal. Hesperian 23:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Wikilinks do not change the original text, there is no reason to see them as "misrepresentation". Why not remove the "see" and "q.v." links, too — they are no different. Those people who are very anxious with "original look" should use the scanned images directly. Electronic text readers are lazier than paper book readers — they need one-click reference, or they will not look any further at all. — Monedula (talk) 04:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)