User talk:Wylve

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search

talk.

ARCHIVES: 2012

Thank you[edit]

RE: diff, Great job on this thanks :) JeepdaySock (talk) 15:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


This is pretty darn awesome too. Hesperian 14:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

And thanks from me too![edit]

What a pleasant surprise to find you validating A Basic Guide to Open Educational Resources. Thank you, you've inspired me to get back to completing this text! -Pete (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Index:Memory (1913).djvu and use of paragraph tags.[edit]

Hello.

I notice you recently carefully removed all of the <p> tags from this and similar pages within this work. Please don't take this as a criticism as I quite agree with your changes. In fact I was attempting a little experiment in page formatting in hopes that it might prompt a bit of discussion as to the pros and cons.

The experiment came about as a result of my thinking about a number of George Orwell III's commentaries regarding how the wiki generates HTML. I think you will agree that the <p>-tagged version:

  • displays and transcludes correctly, but
  • is probably more of a pain to edit (and view in the editor panel), as well as
  • being less "current common WikiSource practice."

Would you mind letting me know what you think (and perhaps even what prompted you to make your changes in the first place)? I am particularly interested if I have missed a reason (either for or against) from my little list above.

Regards, MODCHK (talk) 01:46, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi MODCHK. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that the <p> tags are redundant. When I visit a transcribed page that has no <p> tags inserted when proofreading, through inspecting its HTML code, I noticed that <p> are inserted automatically. To a newcomer, having HTML tags all over the place might be overwhelming and might discourage editing. I think it is important to understand that the wiki is using the same HTML tags to format pages, but we just use different codes to insert the tags, like ''Lorem Ipsum'' instead of <i>''Lorem Ipsum''</i>. Thanks for the query. --Wylve (talk) 05:56, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Fair comment. I gather the wiki software is fairly aggressive in its handling of <p>s, and I gather from George's remarks referred to earlier, maybe even little dim as well (misplacing a </p> can sometimes cause strange hiccups.) I have found myself on other pages adding simply ridiculous numbers of <div>s simply to stop unwanted <p>s being generated where I don't want them. This experiment may have just been a sort of perverse, reverse case. (Not entirely sure if that will make much sense, but thanks for your response in any case.) Regards, MODCHK (talk) 10:56, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Things Japanese[edit]

Hi Wylve, I’m wondering what your intentions are wrt to Page:Things Japanese (1905).djvu/565. I’d be perfectly happy to revert to an image, but if you think think you may be able to finish it off then thats fine too. Moondyne (talk) 06:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

PS. and thank you so much for finding all those kanas for the other pages also. Moondyne (talk) 06:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Moondyne. For Page:Things Japanese (1905).djvu/565, I am trying to have actual text on top of the scroll background, so that they can be copy-and-pasted/indexed. But the vertical text template isn't working for me just yet. I'll have a stab at it later. Thanks for the notice. -Wylve (talk) 07:01, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Much appreciated. Moondyne (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Pardon my interference with this page, but I spotted a couple of usage issues with the width/width(n) parameters of {{overfloat image}} which may have been confusing things (of course I missed one, didn't I?)
Anyway, may I add my congratulations on a brilliant effort with the glyphs!
However, my system refuses to display this particular character: (區) (Appears in context: | item5 = {{larger block|{{vertical text|  東京市牛込區市ヶ谷加賀町一丁目十二番地}}{{vertical text|{{larger|'''印刷所'''}}  株式會社秀英舍第一工塲}}}}, as the glyph between (込) and (市). Is this a genuine error, or am I somehow missing this particular code point from my font set? Regards, MODCHK (talk) 22:40, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi MODCHK, please don't label it as "interference", but "contribution". The character in question appears twice (as item5 and item7) and it displays fine on my machine. Does it not show in both instances for you? Cheers. --Wylve (talk) 13:33, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. The second instance misbehaves for me also, so the problem must be with my local fonts. Shame, because as far as I am concerned every other character looks correct, and the only changes I might be inclined to make are minor positional ones (which I would not insist upon):
  • consider changing (x9=150) to (x9=180);
  • consider removing one single space from item8 just before "ケリ|、ウオルシ商會" (effect is a little crude; you may not like it at all!)
If you want I would be happy to validate the page, as although I can't interpret the calligraphy, I am satisfied it matches the scanned page (my d***d glyph/glitch aside!) Regards, MODCHK (talk) 00:35, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I've fixed the positional problems. Just be bold, go ahead and change them next time; no permission needed. :) --Wylve (talk) 06:04, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Windsor[edit]

Hi. Quick question about Page:United States v. Windsor.pdf/16 – I've been linking the citations, not the case names, since it seemed that's how all the other legal works here do it. However, I see you've done the opposite; was I mistaken? Thanks. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 23:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I've fixed the link. However I'm not so sure how to link the Zivotofsky v. Clinton case, since its citations are filled in with underscores. Regards, Wylve (talk) 13:42, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure if there's a standardized way to do it, but what I've been doing is just ''So-and-so'' v. ''So-and-so'', [[So-and-so v. So-and-so|5xx U.S. ___]]. The link will need to be changed once there's a proper citation available anyways, so, the way I see it, there's no harm in doing something slightly awkward like this for the sake of stylistic conformity. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 14:26, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Canton as disambig?[edit]

Hello Wylve,

Thanks for your help with Flora of Kwangtung and Hongkong.

I have just found that the mainspace name of Canton found its use not long ago because of the book you uploaded, about the old U.S. city of Canton (it does not seem to say specifically in which state). Apparently it has several other meanings, including that of the old European name of the city of Guangzhou (third biggest city of China, with official population of 16,000,000). I only found it because I was thinking of a disambiguation page for the 2 recently uploaded books,

P. S. On a somehow related note, my Index:Ports of the world - Canton (1920).djvu needs renaming, so I will be reuploading the file shortly.

Hi. I've changed Canton to a disambiguation page. Please add the Canton text from Ports of the World to the disambiguation page after renaming. --Wylve (talk) 20:34, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello Wylve, thanks for creating disambig. I changed the page quite a bit since, but I do not think this change of mine is ideal solution. Best regards, Tar-ba-gan (talk) 03:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I think the disambiguation page is fine. Which part of it, is it not ideal in your opinion? --Wylve (talk) 14:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, this is an unexpected compliment. Great, then I can leave this behind for a while. And, I am envious about the section just under this message. I was never using the tag Chinese Missing, but I sure will. Can you please pay attention to missing Chinese characters here?
Page:Chinese Life in the Tibetan Foothills.djvu/11
Page:Chinese Life in the Tibetan Foothills.djvu/12
and further on? I am not comfortable with "traditional" characters at all, and the typeface is too terrible for my level of Chinese. Tar-ba-gan (talk) 04:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
I've proofread the two pages. --Wylve (talk) 14:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! It is so much easier to move on with this book now! Tar-ba-gan (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

{{Chinese missing}}[edit]

Total genius. Thank you. MODCHK (talk) 20:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Just doing my job :). If you have any more Chinese/Japanese characters to be transcribed, don't be afraid to drop me a notice. --Wylve (talk) 14:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

TOC formatting[edit]

A huge thanks for formatting the TOC pages for Meynell's work. Not one of my favorite things to do! Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Chinese Life in the Tibetan Foothills[edit]

Hi Wylve, Thank you for all the Chinese characters! This is some superb job, and I wish I could share more of it. Right now, I cannot but wonder why, creating that beautiful chapter listing, you killed page numbers. I mean, I know logic behind that, but how do you establish starting and final pages to make a chapter page? Not knowing page numbers results in a time-consuming going through every page, and when this was already done before while proofreading, and pages put in the chapter listing, it can be used further without going through every page again, or so was my logic. Do I really need to use sandbox more for such records? Or is there some other way that I do not know of, that is used to establish starting and ending page for chapters? Tar-ba-gan (talk) 19:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I've restored the page numbers. --Wylve (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
I am sorry, I do not quite understand these edits. How does it help to remove the SIC template and Maudgalyayana wikilink? As to the latter, I understand that I could point to wikipedia pages directly from the text, but I do not like to not show what kind of link it is, since some books, like Enciclopaedia Britannica, are quite consistent if I do interlinking between the articles that are in it, and not somewhere else. BR, Tar-ba-gan (talk) 16:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Tar-ba-gan. I have restored the SIC template. I removed them because I was not sure if the error was in the romanization or the Chinese character. Regarding the use of {{Wikipedia}}, the template was deprecated and is no longer used (see the template documentation). When you look at the template's mainspace usage, this template is only used three times. Hope this helps. —Wylve (talk) 17:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation! Can you recommend other way(s) to link to relevant wikipedia texts? Tar-ba-gan (talk) 06:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
From what I believe Wikisource is about (I might be wrong), WS is not to provide additional information to the transcribed text, unless they are annotations. I think an unobtrusive to link to Wikipedia is to use interwiki links on texts. I have edited the page in question to demonstrate. Cheers. —Wylve (talk) 06:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Halloween Book[edit]

I'd paused because of an out of order page in the scans. It's minor and can be overlooked if you agree. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:31, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't really mind that page. --Wylve (talk) 16:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Re:Question on footers[edit]

The number on the footer is a folio number and is not absolutely necessary. This definition is from my Copyediting and Proofreading course that I did a few years ago. "This is a temporary page number used as a safety net in case the writer of the document has not numbered the pages. It bears no relation to the eventual page numbers after layout but is purely a working device in case pages are seperated" --kathleen wright5 (talk) 22:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

more of my babbling about search[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, Wylve. You have new messages at [[User talk: Tar-ba-gan (talk) 07:23, 10 May 2014 (UTC) |User talk: Tar-ba-gan (talk) 07:23, 10 May 2014 (UTC)]].
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks![edit]

Hi, I'm glad to see you working on Assessing the accuracy and quality of Wikipedia entries compared to popular online encyclopaedias! It's great to see that moving forward..I lost momentum with it long ago :) I have a couple questions:

  • The report was published as submitted for peer review; it was my understanding that a more final version would be forthcoming. I wonder if @DarTar: can shed any light on whether this has happened? If so, we might want to put future efforts into the final/published version.
  • I see you combined references, with an inline comment <!-- ref from previous pages -->. But won't this change the numbering scheme, so that reference numbers are different from those published in the PDF? -Pete (talk) 20:33, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
@Peteforsyth: Hi, I don't think it would be much effort to maintain both versions of the report, since it is already a digital report and we can just copy and paste raw text from the PDF directly. I think there's a way to retain the formatting too, but I'm not sure. Regarding the combination of references, I am trying to retain that numbering from the original PDF. Without combining the references, the reference would appear twice in the transcribed page, which would mess up the original numbering. Although an error would be shown on the djvu subpage, the referencing would be fine on the page in mainspace. —Wylve (talk) 20:40, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
OK, cool. I was able to get a MS Word doc from @DarTar: for transcribing the first time around, which was easier to work with than the PDF. And it sounds like you've thought through the issues that concerned me about ref numbering...good work! I hadn't looked at it in detail. And no, I'm not worried about the errors on the individual pages. (Actually, seeing one of those errors is the thing that alerted me to the issue...but I agree, in the grand scheme of things those errors don't really matter.) -Pete (talk) 20:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
@Peteforsyth: Good, count me in for transcribing when the final report is uploaded. Another minor issue that we might not be able to solve is the Oxford logo on the front page, which I think is copyrighted. This means that we will never be able to put that logo up until whenever its copyright expires. —Wylve (talk) 20:48, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Great, I will ping you if I learn of a new version! Regarding the logo copyright, I agree that's an important issue, for this and similar cases. One way to address it would be to establish an Exemption Doctrine Policy; I proposed that here but there wasn't much support for the idea. -Pete (talk) 20:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
p.s. I'd be happy to forward the Word doc to you, if you can provide an email address. (Or I could put it on Dropbox.) -Pete (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Better put it on Dropbox — I rarely touch my email inbox anymore. —Wylve (talk) 20:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

404 page not found[edit]

http://www.justice.gov/ovw/teen_dating_violence.htm = 404 page not found. —Maury (talk) 07:30, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

@William Maury Morris II: I have removed the 404 links. —Wylve (talk) 07:34, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Whatever you think is best is fine with me. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 07:37, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

A Hundred and Seventy Chinese Poems[edit]

Incredible, great work! ~ DanielTom (talk) 10:36, 3 October 2014 (UTC)