User talk:ShakespeareFan00

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search

Archives: I

Fingers off[edit]

It's not February yet. Leave it be until then. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:23, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, fair enough.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:25, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Apologies for hijacking Child-life in Japan[edit]

I got a bit carried away and in hindsight I realise that should have bounced it off you first. I hope you didn't mind. Moondyne (talk) 15:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

No worries at all, each has his specialisms. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Bradshaw's[edit]

Sorry, I think I can be of little help with these difficult tables, but I just wanted to congratulate you with the fantastic work you've done with this booklet! And of course I promise to help with validating! Dick Bos (talk) 20:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Allende's Chile[edit]

I just uploaded some pages: commons:Category:Allende's Chile (CIA report)

I don't think these pages are "problematic," so much as...some work remains to get them finished, and the images will of necessity be rather low quality. Right? I know there are varying opinions, but just to share my thinking -- I typically use the "problematic" label if there is a problem with the source document (e.g., the page was folded when scanned), or if there is a copyrighted/fair use image used in the middle of an otherwise free work. Thoughts? -Pete (talk) 19:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I meant to lead with this -- thanks, as always, for working on these! It's always a nice surprise to see somebody unexpectedly working on a text I've uploaded. -Pete (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I was told that if there was a missing image to flag the page as problematic, if you think it's not of the same severity as say a damaged page etc., then I think a further disscussion is needed.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:13, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Diacritics in Asoka[edit]

Friend, you are doing mistakes in rendering diacritics in Asoka; as in this page, which I have corrected. So you need to understand the principle used in this work. This work uses the circumflex, and not the acute accent, for rendering long vowels; and the macron for the same purpose when quoting others (if used there originally). The author has used circumflex in Rummindêî but macron in the transliteration of that inscription because that was a quotation from Führer's work. The acute accent has been used for long vowels in A History of Hindu Chemistry Vol 1, but not in this work. So you need not usually bother with it in this work. Additionally, this work uses underdot for rendering retroflex letters and overdotted m for rendering Anusvara. So basically you need to bother with four marks only: circumflex, macron, underdot and overdot. As for your question regarding unicode for this script, it was written in Brahmi script. Unicode is available, see Brahmi (Unicode block). But the work itself uses image, so you also have to use image. The unicode for this script will not be readable in most browsers. SVG and PNG formats found in c:Category:Brahmi letters can be used, however. Pictures of Asoka edicts available at c:Category:Brahmi script. Brahmi font available here and here. Best wishes, Hrishikes (talk) 03:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - Tyring to read the diacritics in this isn't easy so thanks for the hints.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:59, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Smallcaps template requires the text to be in small letters, otherwise it won't work. On rechecking, the work does use the acute accent, but only for rendering the velar s. The author exempts Asoka's name, which he spells without acute, although the sibilant is velar. Hrishikes (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

!![edit]

You have made me very happy today, with your efforts to proofread the final pages of Olmsted report on Portland, Oregon parks. This was one of my first projects on Wikisource, and I have been nibbling at it for years, with some excellent help in terms of guidance, but very little help in the actual labor. It's a very important document to Portland history, and I've often toyed with the idea of printing out a nice, readable copy of it and making a gift to the members of City Council and other interested folks -- who generally recognize its importance, but find it difficult to read blurry PDF scans!

Your help is unexpected, and much appreciated. The last mile is always the hardest! -Pete (talk) 23:22, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Lulu or PediaPress Edition? It still needs proper conversion to bureau quality though...ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with Lulu..? PediaPress, I have nearly given up on as viable for Wikisource texts (per a recent discussion with @George Orwell III:, a month or two back -- which I still need to loop back to). I'm not sure what "bureau quality" is -- do you mean the validation process? Yes, there's more work to be done, but...this is a big step regardless!
(The best idea I have is to copy-paste into a word processor and clean it up prior to printing. Which is..suboptimal, but far better than any other options I'm aware of. Curious about Lulu, though.) -Pete (talk) 00:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
I'll note...with some trepidation...that I just found a more complete scan of this document available on Google Books, including the ~10 pages before this appendix. (Must have become available since I started -- I searched high and low for it a few years ago!) Suppose I were to upload that to Commons: do you happen to know of a bot or script that could move these pages we have already transcribed over to the new index? -Pete (talk) 00:19, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Apply GO3, I don't do page move stuff... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Will do, thanks. ...Lulu...? -Pete (talk) 01:31, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
https://www.lulu.com/
Any by bureau quality I mean a finalized laid out document, with no typos... all the proper images and so on... I.e What you supply on disc to the publisher/printing firm. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I was thinking lulu was some MediaWiki integration...still, looks like a good thing to know about. -Pete (talk) 07:38, 27 February 2015 (UTC)