From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
The Scriptorium is Wikisource's community discussion page. Feel free to ask questions or leave comments. You may join any current discussion or start a new one. Project members can often be found in the #wikisource IRC channel webclient. For discussion related to the entire project (not just the English chapter), please discuss at the multilingual Wikisource.



This section can be used by any person to communicate Wikisource-related and relevant information; it is not restricted. Generally announcements won't have discussion, or it will be minimal, so if a discussion is relevant, often add another section to Other with a link in the announcement to that section.


Charinsert modification proposal[edit]

The only reason for this proposal is to shorten the dropdown list. I propose that the three character sets, Bengali, IPA, and IPA (English) be omitted from the general Charinsert dropdown list, but facilitate their addition in the users' personal.js 'User' list.— Ineuw talk 21:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support at the minimum. If possible, I'd like to whittle the list down even further to a community reached consensus "default" selection of sets and keep the sets that didn't make that cut optional on a per User basis instead. At best, somebody figure out a way to make all the sets beyond the primary Wiki-markup one User selectable right underneath the main Charinsert gadget's entry in User: prefs. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

    Without resorting to javascript/DOM node removal tricks (see below) I really cannot see how this (last) is feasible without changing MediaWiki:Gadget-charinsert-core.js. As this gadget currently stands the window.charinsertCustom trick can only add to the basic insertion list but can never remove existing items or character sets. If however something like modifying the existing gadget code near

                            // append user-defined sets
                            if ( window.charinsertCustom ) {
                                    for ( id in charinsertCustom ) {
                                            if ( !EditTools.charinsert[id] ) {
                                                    EditTools.charinsert[id] = '';

                            // apply user-defined override set
                            if ( window.charOverrideCustom ) {
                                    EditTools.charinsert = charOverrideCustom;

                            // create "recall" switch
    were acceptable then the entire symbol set could be fed in in one hit allowing constructions like
            window.charOverrideCustom = {
                    'Insert': '  –  —  {\{+}}  {\{\{+|}}}  |  [+]  [\[+|]]  "+"  =  [\[Category:+]]  #REDIRECT.[\[+]]  &nb'+'sp;  <nowiki>+</nowiki>  ␥Sign_your_posts: ␥~~\~~ ',
                    'Wiki markup': '  –  —  {\{+}}  {\{\{+|}}}  |  [+]  [\[+|]]  "+"  =  [\[Category:+]]  #REDIRECT.[\[+]]  &nb'+'sp;  &#1'+'60;  <nowiki>+</nowiki>  ␥~~\~~  <span.class="plainlinks">+</span>  <s>+</s>  <sub>+</sub>  <sup>+</sup>  <ref>+</ref>  <"+"_/>  {\{smallrefs}}  {\{reflist}}  <references./>  <includeonly>+</includeonly>  <noinclude>+</noinclude>  <onlyinclude>+</onlyinclude>  <poem>+</poem>  <blockquote>+</blockquote>  <pre>+</pre>  <code>+</code>  <tt>+</tt>  {\{DEFAULTSORT:+}}  <!--.+_-->  {\{sc|+}}  {\{center|+}}  [\[Author:+|]]  {\{fs90/s}}+{\{fs90/e}}  {\{gap}}  {\{nop}}  {\{hws|+|}}  {\{hwe|+|}}  <section.begin="+"_/>  <section.end="+"_/>',
                    User: '“+”  ‘+’  {\{centre|+}}  {\{small-caps|+}}  {\{larger|+}}  {\{smaller|+}}  {\{rh|+}}  '+
                            '<section.begin="+"/>  <section.end="+"/>  <math>\\\\scriptstyle{+}</math> {\{nowrap|+}}'

            if(window.updateEditTools) {
    to be specified. (This example would eliminate all language-specific sets which might be rather too severe?) AuFCL (talk) 05:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

    To address Ineuw's specific request at the head of this topic the following code fragment may be useful to remove Bengali, IPA, and IPA (English):

        var charSet = ['Bengali','IPA (English)','IPA'];
        for(var s=0;s<charSet.length;s++){
          var charinsertRemove = document.evaluate(
           document, null, XPathResult.UNORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE, null
    I have tested this and it works; however I am undecided as to the best strategy for launching it (private common.js code runs too early to be useful: the gadget code simply puts the deleted items back straight afterwards.) AuFCL (talk) 01:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
In the past two or three weeks -- completely by chance on the development side of things -- there has been movement addressing such oddities in the load priorities of both extensions and gadgets when there was little beforehand. If I understand this initiative correctly, this means we can set entities such as gadgets or personal scripts to something other than the current priority = top; so it might be possible to achieve something like the above in near future believe it or not. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I do not understand why specific items are being targeted, without providing justification and without formulating a policy. The charinsert gadget is for items not found in the keyboard. So it should contain letters with diacritical marks, symbols, m-dash and the like. IPA sets qualify as special glyphs. These and musical notations should be present. Sometimes, in English books, words/sentences of other languages/scripts are present; but if we want to include all those scripts, the list will approach infinity. So, as a matter of fair policy, all full-language sets should be removed. If someone wants Bengali or Hebrew or Japanese, he/she should have access to some mechanism by which that specific set is present when that user is logged in. Alternatively, if a language set is not available in WikiEditor, like Oriya, that language may have user-specific option for inclusion in charinsert. If the language is present in WikiEditor, then why to include it in charinsert? Hrishikes (talk) 03:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm of like mind Hrishikes but the timing of most of what has been laid out or discussed largely depends on the "final" version of Visual Editor being rolled-out as the "new" standard editing interface. Only then will we know for sure if WikiEditor will be kept & co-exist with Visual Editor in some fashion and/or if the CharInsert gadget and/or extension becomes obsolete in light of that change (or not?). So even though this proposal makes "sense" at the moment, it still might be a moot point & out of our hands as VE development nears "completion" soon afterwards. -- 01:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

BOT approval requests[edit]


hyphenated word start when the word contains a template[edit]

At Page:Thoughts_on_the_Education_of_Daughters.djvu/29 I'm using the hws template on a word containing a long s. When I insert the {{ls}} template inside the hws template, the html breaks. Thanks in advance for any help getting this to work. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Well spotted. Some templates are just too "clever" for their own good.

Note for future: if anyone tries to address this issue in the template itself [maybe a genuine separate title or popup parameter; or maybe even parameter content filtering (yuck)?], remember all of {{hyphenated word end}}, {{linkable phrase start}} and {{linkable phrase end}} will have the exactly the same issues as well. AuFCL (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Or just not bother with the template and just stick the hyphenated text in the footer. The 'start' template is an artefact of an early time when footers were not well-functioning and really serves little purpose these days, cf. the close template which has functionality. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Technically @Billinghurst is correct but culturally insensitive. Nobody likes to see the magic trampled upon, and this suggestion is completely at odds with the Help recommendations. However nominally you're the boss… AuFCL (talk) 11:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks all. I didn't realise there was this asymmetry between the templates. So I can ignore the hws template, but I still have the problem that the next page, Page:Thoughts_on_the_Education_of_Daughters.djvu/30, starts with "destly", the second part of the hyphenated word "modestly". The hwe template has the same problem, so what do you recommend? Avoid templates and just move the whole word to the top of the second page? MartinPoulter (talk) 12:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC) Now both pages are fixed. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 12:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
That was a reflection AuFCL, not a direction; we have no boss, just contributors and opinions. I am aware of the culture which is why I haven't amended the help page. It is a kludge, though one that may have nice balance, though something of its time, and adds some prettiness to the Page: ns though at this point of time no demonstrated value to the main namespace. @MartinPoulter: it is a display thing, in circumstances where we have problems like that don't be afraid to have judicious use of <includeonly> tags as ultimately that is what it does, eg. on the second page have
just wrapping the hyphenation component from the previous page in the tag so it doesn't display in the transcription, though will show when we transclude. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:53, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Looking for a better font family / style[edit]

THIS HEADER uses the {{Pfos}} title template with the {{Blackletter}} font where the letter "S" looks more like a "G". Does anyone know of a similar free font, more like the original print (Old English)? — Ineuw talk 01:41, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

What's the purpose of replicating the fraktur style font here? Is it integral to the work, or is it just a "pretty"? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
@Beeswaxcandle:I guess 'just pretty', or just to be closer to the original - Please remember that I am only imitating other editors, and we all have done so at one time or another.
Can't comment on his motivations but maybe Ineuw was yearning for the 'old' Blackletter font family (I think it was "Cloister Black" or maybe that was a local "fix" for "Fraktur"?) which was ditched way back in the never-never for the current 'free licence' UnifrakturMaguntia? As best I recall this situation dates back to at least January last year. That discussion suggests Google fonts was somehow involved. AuFCL (talk) 05:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Beeswaxcandle, pretty is good. I too like some of the old fonts instead of the bland text we use here. It is somewhat like having an illustrated book instead of a non-illustrated book. Art is beautiful to the eye of the beholder. —Maury (talk) 06:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
UnifrakturMaguntia is the first and only server-side blackletter/fraktur font on Wikisource. The previous system suggested a font family on the user-side but that depended on the user having such a font available (the back-up option was bold text in the normal font). If an additional free font can be found, it should be possible to add it to the system in the same way UnifrakturMaguntia is supported, but it needs to be free in the same way everything else here is free (ie. open, distributable, modifiable etc, not just "costs nothing"). In UnifrakturMaguntia's case it was with the SIL Open Font License (OFL). I don't know that much about fonts or the licensing thereof and I couldn't find much via Google; although the PiratePower on seems OK at a quick glance. NB: Even if an acceptable alternative font can be found, it might take a while to be implemented; this could be a lot of work for just one glyph in one work. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:33, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
AuFCL and Maury got it right, and thanks to AdamBMorgan for clarifying what and how fonts are implemented. — Ineuw talk 12:01, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I've been looking at the original Sourceforge page and it does have an option for a alternative modern-S glyph. In raw CSS, it could be implemented with this: <span style="font-family:'UnifrakturMaguntia'; font-feature-settings:'cv08'; -moz-font-feature-settings:'cv08'; -webkit-font-feature-settings:'cv08'; -ms-font-feature-settings:'cv08';">Fragments of Science</span> which gives Fragments of Science. I don't think this is standard CSS (presumably the reason for the repetition with prefixes), nor compatible with all web browsers, but it should work on most. I am not sure how, or if, this could be done with the {{Blackletter}} and {{ULS}} templates at the moment but the feature is at least available. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:16, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
@AdamBMorgan:, Thanks for your help. I checked the four different browsers in Windows 7 (IE11, Chrome, Opera and FF.) and it works with all. — Ineuw talk 13:33, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: I haven't touched {{Pfos}} but I've made changes to both {{Blackletter}} and {{ULS}} to alter the default appearance of "S" and "k". This affects all instances of the template across Wikisource but I think this was a longstanding complaint anyway. (If this has caused a problem for anyone, please just revert my recent edits to both templates.) With {{Pfos}}, the letter-spacing element might be conflicting with this function in some way. For example: {{blackletter|Snakes!}} = Snakes!, but {{sp|{{blackletter|Snakes!}}}} = Snakes!. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, it looks great. In addition, thanks for introducing me to {{ULS}}. Just goes to show you how little I know about the availble templates.— Ineuw talk 19:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Another font related question, please.[edit]

In THIS PSM title template, I tried to make it look closer to THIS ORIGINAL using "style=font-family:Arial narrow, sans-serif;" but without any luck. Can I assume that the problem is related to Arial not being used because it's not an open style font. Can someone point to the error of my ways? — Ineuw talk 14:10, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

For starters - shouldn't that be style="font-family:'Arial narrow', sans-serif;" ?

Note the double and single quote marks; if a font name has any spaces in it, the name needs to be wrapped in the a set of quote marks itself ( ' ) -- the "opposite" of what is wrapping the style string ( " ). -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks GO3. Irregardless, there is no such a thing as 'Arial Narrow' in my computer's or browser's font choices so I selected 'Liberation Sans Narrow', which is just as good.— Ineuw talk 02:14, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I still have Arial, Arial Black, Arial Narrow, Arial Unicode MS, French Script MT, Vivaldi, Old English, ShelleyVolante and about 100 other fonts. I once used some of them in webpages and MSWORD. N.B. Happy Birthday to me @68 in many fonts except comic. I have lived longer than you fellows (except perhaps Ineuw) and you all may not make it this far. —Maury (talk) 05:59, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Fonts I have, and are not the problem for me. I am concerned about visiting readers who don't have the fonts for full effect, or other browser problems. I am trying to cover everyone.— Ineuw talk 06:34, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Calligraphic font[edit]

Need some guidance about what font to use in Index:The Constitution of India (Original Calligraphed and Illuminated Version).djvu. The work is handwritten, so a suitable font would be nice. Initially I tried Edwardian Script ITC, with ULS template, which looked nice in my laptop. Then I checked with other devices and found font unsupported, so reverted the uls thing. Can anyone suggest a font compatible across browsers and devices, at least the modern ones? There is another problem. The work has illustrations on almost every page, done by India's master artists. Inline drawings are no problem, but the pages have intricately illustrated frames. If these frames are kept (I have kept them for now), the pages cannot combine on transclusion. Will such non-combination due to framed pages be OK? Hrishikes (talk) 02:13, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

This is only an adjunct note as I do not believe any portable "written" font is available universally (i.e. served out via the wiki and related systems.) However if one is decided upon may I recommend {{cursive}} be at least tested or updated accordingly? AuFCL (talk) 07:21, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I have applied the template to page 9. This template does not work in android. Hrishikes (talk) 08:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I did not mean to imply this would necessarily solve your issue. On the contrary I wanted to note that this template would need to be updated in line with whatever solution you chose as it has been used in the past to indicate similar situations.

Apologies if you took my earlier comment otherwise. Back to the more immediately usable suggestions. AuFCL (talk) 22:25, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you consider treating this work along the lines of Zodiac Killer letters where both the transcribed text and the page images are available in parallel. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:22, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. The zodiac images are small and sidelined, not good for appreciating intricate illustrations. I have just thought up another solution. Index:The Constitution of India 1949 (Gazette Notification Version).djvu may be used as the text version for proper transclusion. This calligraphic version may be transcluded as images. There is no major difference between the two except calligraphy & illustrations in one and Gazette masthead and publisher/printer etc. in the other. So these two may be parallel image and text versions. Is the idea any good? Although I don't know how to run them concurrently. Hrishikes (talk) 08:43, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Yep, the Zodiac images are thumbnail versions, which isn't what you want. It was more the idea of running both text and images. To run the two sets concurrently, you'll probably need to use a two-column table with the text on the left and the image on the right. It will mean transcluding by page rather than as a series of pages. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Beeswaxcandle: Pagewise length of text is not same in the two sets, so the table method will require slicing up the text version into artificial sections. For the time being, I have let go of the calligraphy and gone for framed page (as opposed to full image) transclusion. But the framed pages are curiously getting right-aligned.
@AuFCL: At present there are two problems with the cursive template. It has to be repeated if another template comes in between, which is very cumbersome. Secondly, it is not supported across devices like the black letter template. But this template has the potential of becoming very useful for heritage texts (where it is desirable to maintain cursiveness, e.g., manuscripts, as the work under discussion technically is.) if it is updated suitably. Hrishikes (talk) 01:18, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

St. Patrick's Breastplate[edit]

The St. Patrick's Breastplate page has the text of the victorian hymn based on St Patrick's Breastplate. As this hymn is better known as "I bind unto myself to-day" I think the page should be renamed as that. Can someone do that?

According to The Telegraph Book of Hymns on Google books (chapter 54, page 185) C F Alexander didn't do the translation. she wrote the hymn based on translations by others - see wikipedia:Saint Patrick's Breastplate which I have also rewritten to match the reference.

The original Saint Patrick's Breastplate in Old Irish is on oldwikisource, together with a translation. unsigned comment by Filceolaire (talk) 02:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC).

Page Checker gadget - page is not directing properly . . . again[edit]

Please try itIneuw talk 21:08, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Still not working and tried with Firefox for Mac and Safari --kathleen wright5 (talk) 14:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Not working in Firefox on Windows 7 for me either. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Who "fixed" it the last time it was not working? Certainly nobody here on WS can/did; all we have control over is the icon and the URL it automatically generates & executes when clicked on. Everything else takes place via the tool's host over on WMF Labs --but-- I'm not exactly sure where or who to poke to draw attention to our issue @ Phabricator? Tool's Owner? anyone? Beuler? -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Polytonic template[edit]

I noticed that the polytonic template used on wikipedia is deprecated. Should we avoid it also? I noticed that on one of the computers I have the font becomes pixelated when the template is used whereas if it isn't used it looks better with the native font.Jpez (talk) 05:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any problems, but it really depends on which fonts you've got installed. The {{polytonic}} template is looking for "Athena, Gentium, 'Palatino Linotype', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', 'Lucida Grande', Code2000". I usually use the {{greek}} template, which adds DejaVu Sans to the beginning of the list. The templated characters are preferable to the raw Greek characters because a) the template automatically assigns the gr language tag; b) the glyphs are more easily distinguished as Greek from the Roman glyphs around them, which follows the usual foreign language convention. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:27, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok thanks Beeswaxcandle, will do. Thanks for the explanation and clarification. Jpez (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
fwiw @Jpez: I'm fairly sure the reason that and similar templates are already deprecated or are about to be deprecated is the not-too-long-ago [re]acceptance & restoration of ULS WebFonts foundation wide after some of the previous "kinks" with having it as a standard were addressed.

To see if you have the WebFont/ULS feature enabled, click the Gear icon next to the Languages navigation side-bar menu, select the Fonts tab and make sure the option to Download fonts when needed.... is checked (make sure to save/apply any changes you may make!). -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Index:UK Traffic Signs Manual - Chapter 5 Road Markings. 2003 (Sixth Impression 2009).pdf[edit]

Loads OK in a PDF viewer, but for some reason Wikimedias own viewer and Proofread page hate it's format, and the OCR text layer is weired.

Is someone willing to check the PDF for something obvious? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Popular Science offer of Sovereign of the Seas blueprint/pan[edit]

In maybe 1937 Popular Science would send an original plan of the Clipper Ship 'Sovereign of The Seas' to anyone who wrote in and asked.

My father, long since deceased, send for that plan - I still have it

My father used it to build a 12/th of an inch to the foot model of the Sovereign

which I also still have.

Whatd I would dearly like to know: What was the year/month of the magazine that printed that offer of that plan?

Arnold H Nelson

5056 North Marine Drive Chicago IL 60640

I found it being sold in a November 1937 copy of Popular Science Monthly, but it looks as though it was offered in other issues as well through the years ('26-'37)... Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Repairs (and moves)[edit]

Other discussions[edit]

New Gadget[edit]

For those of you using the Vector skin, you might to try out a new gadget Sidebar Flat-list (mid-way down the Interface section). It takes the group of sidebar menus on the left and makes them series of collapsible flat-lists along the top instead. Please report any problems & feedback welcomed. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Sidebar flat-list gadget (Vector only).png

  • I'm using this and it's a keeper for me. It's nice to have more space to the left when editing or reading. On one of my computers which has a more square screen the three menus get cluttered and because of lack of space 'Language' goes on top of my user name is not selectable. On my laptop which has a wider screen everything is fine. Jpez (talk) 10:32, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
There's not much I can do about that - the damn Language portlet is structurally different at the core compared to the other groupings. If I had it my way, it would not be part of the flat-list but in the attempt to keep it "simple", that's the way it works out for some layouts. Suggestions welcome. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:48, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Nice! That area was a mess but now it is clean allowing more room for editing. Looks like the garbage was taken out. :0) Thanks George Orwell III, in haste for grocery shopping, —Maury (talk) 16:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Glad you like it (& hope it works for you headache free:) -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:48, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Not bad! I like it, though of course I wish it loaded before the sidebar to avoid the hiccup. The Haz talk 03:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I wish I knew how to resolve that too (though its not all that bad imho)!!

The standard, un-collapsed sidebar of "portals" (bullet lists with the bullet hidden) are part of the Vector skin itself. And Vector is relentless; it is determined to render the sidebar and load all the damn .css & caching that normally comes with it no matter what I tried (you'll note that even with the flat-list gadget enabled, the sidebar is still remains 'King' on your User: preferences and similar Special: pages). The best I could do was let it do its thing and then disassociate the lists from all that 'built-in routine' afterward (thus the occasional twitchiness depending on what you are doing/clicking).

Again, suggestions welcome! -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:28, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

By not bad, I meant it's good. ;-) And yes, I understand that it's not possible. The "Language" choice in the "header" is now cut off by the gear icon, but it's also not something I care about. I'm still trying it out. I had some tools in the sidebar I used, but not regularly. The biggest difference I noticed is that the editing screen is larger so the scan image is larger, leading to having to scroll down farther to save the page. (Interestingly, the edit box is shorter than the preview pane.) I'll probably end up sticking with it. At this point I don't miss the sidebar and I really like the cleaner look. The Haz talk 04:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
That damn Language menu wasn't part of the original SideBar so of course its slightly different than the grand-fathered ones. I'm not sure what you mean by the 'Language [heading] being cut-off by the gear icon' however. Its always been to the right of the heading (Language) and all I did was try to mirror that in the associated css. Please throw up a pic if you have the time. If not; no worries. -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
It does this for me as well, and it seems to only be on pages that don't have any links to other languages. If there are links, it says "In other languages", but if there are no links it says "Langua". Here is a picture. (Firefox 37, Chrome 41; Windows 7 x64; works fine in IE 11)—Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Image The Haz talk 12:27, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to AuFCL, an adjustment to the .css has been applied and should resolve that heading-icon overlap. Please let me know if it did the trick for you folks too. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:24, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Great for me. Thanks! The Haz talk 22:27, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
works for me in firefox & chrome, chapeau. (love the sidebar disappearing hiccup);-> Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 01:04, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

This is what mine looks like using firefox and Linux. I'm not bothered by it though. JpezScreenshot.png

I Just noticed it's only on the main pages, Scriptorium, Main page, Community portal etc. Jpez (talk) 04:54, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

AFAICT, something like that has/had to do with the Vector typography refresh, certain monitor/screen DPI's and your browser's 'window width' behavior. In case you haven't discovered it yet; if you manually shrink your browser's window width, it will should eventually trigger the point where the Vector skin has some sort of boundary where the main margins shrinks by .5em (or so) all around. Unfortunately, that is where the skin determines the gadget's line of menus (should) jump to its 'reserve' (a .css padding trick) and fit right in between the personal menus it just encroached upon on the right and the top of the vector tabs & search box beneath it. Normally -- one would think -- as soon as the left content begins to overlap the right content, the overflow attribute and whatever it is set to would determine the point where the gadget line on the left can no longer co-exist with the personal menu on the right. I can't figure out how to get around that oddity or if it is even possible given the skin's design. Of course, I would love the trigger to be when the gear icon on the left touches the user icon on the right so the overflow setting could kick in and "move" the gadget line out of the other line's space. If anybody knows any better or how to rectify this, please speak up:)

On top of that, if you're stuck with a display screen optimally rendering/set at ~768 to ~860 DPI (approx.), you are more likely to see stuff like that being the @media rules in the core wiki software is now primarily geared for over ~968 DPI view-screens under standard desktop view (I don't exactly know what the "story" is with this under Mobile Mode). -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I know what the problem is (but I don't currently have any good ideas how to fix it.)

Please bear with me; the following is likely to be boring to those in the know; and pretty incomprehensible to anybody else. I am only listing it all out in hopes it might ring somebody's bells.

All of the page "editing header" (from "WikiSource" down to the "Search" box) lies within an HTML DIV with id "mw-head". The "mw-head" <div> further encapsulates four subordinate <div>s respectively with ids:

from "Navigation" to the "language-gear" icon
from "User-id" to "Log out"
from "Page-type" to "Talk"
from "Read" to "Search" box
In an ideal world these four inner <div>s lie at the four outer corners of "mw-head" but when the screen-width is too narrow for them to do so the effect Jpez observed results.

As of this moment I do not understand the logic which lays them out and assume the fault lies somewhere therein. AuFCL (talk) 06:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

In short, the "logic" gets hosed because of the Wikisource logo. Look to reveal the currently hidden div#mw-page-base & div#mw-head-base and you'll start to see how "odd" the layout really is. In short, the first 10 or 11 ems of the left hand side "should" be part of left-navigation at some point in the original design but the proper accounting for those 10/11 ems (e.g. be a true child of some layout-logical parent element) never seems to take place. The same is basically also true when it comes to the footer area (div#footer) but with an extra spoiler; a H2 meant (I guess) to serve as the 'heading' of the entire sidebar of "navigation" menus resides down there instead of where one would think it should go -- up top; between the bottom of the logo and the first menu (navigation) itself -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Apart from dazedly agreeing I cannot offer much. div#mw-head-base just /looks/ wrong but my brain has really shut down about two steps before this. My feeling is that one or the other of these two hidden divs /possibly/ ought to be expunged from the DOM altogether but all my experiments to date have really dire side effects and are not really worth pursuing. AuFCL (talk) 07:17, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I can save you some time; don't bother tinkering with stuff like those two as they are too embedded in the skin itself. The problem -- the way I see it -- "starts & ends" with the div holding the logo stuff; it not only being completely unique compared to the divs that come after it but it also happens to be the first sub-division of the sidebar in the skin by design. Just delete or hide div#mw-navigation (with no gadget applied) and you'll see the expected "snap left" of the main body recovering that initial 10/11 ems on the left does not happen -- not without further manual manipulation/intervention. Even that could easily be overcome if the logo and it's div containment (the reason for the 10/11ems) was factored out of the equation so to speak.

Conversion of all the sidebar menus into a single horizontal flat-list was not all that hard to do once the div dealing with the logo was pruned from the rest first. So unless there is a way to make that logo div fall inline (without the need for any "pruning") as the left most (1st) flat-list menu while retaining the originally intended logo-like links & properties found in the skin, I wouldn't begin to speculate where or how to address these lingering quirks in the final-rendering/expected-behavior; that would be the true waste of time here imo.

Of course, User:s can whack the logo and recover the space for use by the gadget on their own via their own customizations of the "base" css but for me, I know if I don't resolve this "the right way" (if at all), things will just get worse later on down the development road somehow. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:14, 9 April 2015 (UTC)


UPDATE (fwiw): Even though the above discussion(s) re: the "Overlapping of menus across the top" issue began to tapered off & eventually went quiet a good time ago, I've been "quietly" trying to find an acceptable solution in that time regardless to no avail. No matter which approach I thought to try, the Vector skin itself and/or the Wiki Mark-up always managed to make a mockery of my attempts.

The "best" that I could come up with is an option on a per-User basis to augment the Sidebar-to-FlatList Gadget with additional modifications that simply amount to replacing the current default naming &/or labeling used by the Personal menu bar along the top-right with something "shorter". Preferences becomes Prefs; Contributions becomes Contribs; even changing Log out to LogOut recovers the width of a space.

You can use the following "as is" or just as a guide to come up with your own...

/* Based on  Compact Vector Tabs
 * by w:User:Edokter/CompactTabs.js

$( document ).ready( function() {
        $( 'a', '#ca-special' ).text( 'Special' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-nstab-user' ).text( 'User' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-talk' ).text( 'Talk' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-addsection' ).text( 'Add' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-viewsource' ).text( 'Source' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-history' ).text( 'History' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-unprotect' ).text( 'Unprotect' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-edit' ).text( 'Edit' );
        $( 'a', '#ca-view-foreign' ).text( 'Commons' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-userpage' ).text( 'Home' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-mytalk' ).text( 'Talk' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-mysandbox' ).text( 'Sandbox' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-preferences' ).text( 'Prefs' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-betafeatures' ).text( 'Beta' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-watchlist' ).text( 'Watched' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-mycontris' ).text( 'Contribs' );
        $( 'a', '#pt-logout' ).text( 'LogOut' );
} );

I kept the ones that deal with Vector Tab & Vector Menu labeling ( #ca-... ) in with the ones dealing with the Personal bar ( #pt-... ) just in case -- use what you want and leave out what you don't. I recommend you copy & paste the above from edit mode (everything between the source tags) to your local vector.js file, change or remove as you wish and then save it -- any problems just reach out under this section or leave a note on my talk page. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

It uncluttered everything for me. Thanks George! Jpez (talk) 03:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Checking a .djvu for missing pages[edit]

How does one check if a selected book is missing pages, aside from paginating manually? — Ineuw talk 21:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

If the djvu is uploaded what you can do is when you label the numbers in the pages section you can see if the last page matches the correct number. So lets say if a book is 200 pages and its "1to200" and page 200 matches than you have all the pages. Or is that considered "paginating manually?"--Rochefoucauld (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
@Rochefoucauld: No, it's not "manual", it's brilliant. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 04:19, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
With the caution that occasionally duplicate page scans cover over missing pages within the range. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. It did happen.— Ineuw talk 13:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Formatting a sidenote[edit]

I have prepared a cute bar to match the text sidenote but I can't get it into the page space. The page is Page:Treatise_of_Human_Nature_(1888).djvu/47, I've put a copy of the bar template on the Discussion page. Can someone fix this for me? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 02:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Please do not consider this a "fix." Although it "works" at one level it might break transclusion later. Can anybody better this? AuFCL (talk) 05:47, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
In previous discussions regarding sidenotes, I understood that sidenots don't work well regardless and it's best to work on something else until sidenote handling is (eventually) improved on Wikisource. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:31, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
don’t know if i like the use of tables. there is another solution here Page:Compendium_of_US_Copyright_Office_Practices,_II_(1984).pdf/323 and also Template:Right sidenote - this is a perennial problem for United States Statutes at Large and many government documents. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 23:27, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
We suffer in that we don't have enough highly competent css people to derive the right solutions for sidenotes. While books go left and right, we need to push to the left, then play around with the issue where we are managing page width variability then trying to replicate the work. I recommend that you do templating and at some stage the templates will be perfected. I use {{outside L}} and {{outside RL}} which works okay with the first page layout, though fails with the second and third. Someday! — billinghurst sDrewth 09:33, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Here is my most recent work with sidenotes The Canal System of Englandbillinghurst sDrewth 09:37, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I have used {{Right sidenote}} which was fine for the contents of the sidenote. My problem is that each sidenote has a header and a bar above the content and the bar 'breaks' the sidenote so it ends up in the text. For now I've put a note in the Discussion page that I'm not proofreadng the sidenotes. They are in effect like running headers in this book, repeats of the Chapter title so easily put in later. My husband grimaced when I mentioned sidenotes-apparently they are perennial digital headaches and we need geniuses to deal with them? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
So is the standard procedure to move sidenotes to the left if they alternate in the book? That makes sense... Zoeannl (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I have finished proofreading the Introduction and first book of Hume's Treatise of Human Nature. Can I transclude them as requested at Treatise_of_Human_Nature? Or shall I finish the second book as well. I just thought it might get attention sooner from Validators if I transcluded it now. Also, as regards sidenotes, and for general readability, I think the Books should be transcluded as successive Sections-the sidenotes are reiterations of the Section headers so would be redundant and could be abandoned if we did this. Headers and link to Contents are at my work page. Any thoughts? Zoeannl (talk) 11:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

@Zoeannl: While completed books are definitely preferable, the entire site is under construction at all times. If you can transclude a portion now, then there's no harm in that. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Personal preference. If incomplete please place {{incomplete}} in the notes section of the header. We would prefer complete chapters rather than seeing red links for transcluded non-existing pages. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Renaissance/Early modern categories[edit]

The era categories Category:Renaissance works (1420–1630) and Category:Early modern works (1631-1899) are dated in a manner that is inconsistent with common definitions of these terms. The seems fairly arbitrary and inconsistent with modern historical research.

The term "Renaissance" is today primarily used to signify the artistic movement c. 1400-1600 or the (now outdated) notion of how the shackles of the "dark" Middle Ages were thrown off some time around 1500. "Early modern" is the periodization that is actually used today and includes everything between the Middle Ages and the modern period (c. 1500-1800). I've never heard of anyone date the modern period up to c. 1900.

Unless there are very good arguments to the contrary, I will fix these errors toot suite.

Peter Isotalo (talk) 02:09, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

These are English-specific dates. The general dates used by historians are for the artistic and intellectual movement you describe. However, these dates are generalize for all of Europe, and are of little value on the English Wikisource, or even for literature. The dates used here are those specific for the history of the English language. 1420 to 1630 corresponds roughly with the period of "Early Modern English". And yes, the "Early" Modern period in many American library cataloging systems cuts off arbitrarily at 1899/1900, to correspond with the end of the Victorian period.
That's not to say that these dates couldn't be improved upon or refined, but there is a logic behind them, and that logic is tied to the history of the English language and the publication of English literature. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:41, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
I would think that you can still create your additional categories and then collect the years into them as an alternative plan. We are not limited to having the years in multiple categorisation schemes. Or there is nothing wrong with us having a look at seeing what it looks like. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Noting that you can display works differently using existing data using Extension:DynamicPageList. It is something that we have, though don't utilise well. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:56, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
EncycloPetey, following periodizations of the English language makes sense, but if they are language-specific dates, they should refer to existing periodizations used by language historians. What exactly is the current scheme based on? Because quite frankly, the notion of "Renaissance English" sounds a bit like nonsense to me. The terms I've heard of are the traditional "Old", "Middle" and "Modern English", with or without an "Early Modern English" between Middle and Modern.
billinghurst, agreed. More than categorization can hardly be detrimental to readers.
Peter Isotalo (talk) 09:58, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
This is not about Old, Middle or Modern English. Any division is going to be arbitrary, and unless there's very good arguments to the contrary, I will oppose any changing of these "errors", especially without discussing of what the changes might be.
I get continually frustrated on various Wikis by a stream of changes by people who couldn't leave well-enough alone, meaning that trying to watch a large watchlist is futile. The real value in something like this is in letting people search for works from 1770-1776 or 1642-1651 or 1789-1799, or whatever period they need, not trying to fine-tune some arbitrary large-scale categories.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, I get continually frustrated by uses of terms like "Renaissance" and "early modern" that have nothing to do with modern academic standards. Any division like this should follow periodizations recognized by modern experts. That's not arbitrary, even if it might be rough around the edges.
However, if anyone wants to create categories defined by calender years, then just make categories based on calender years and use names that include those calender years. You don't need to "borrow" names of historical periods merely because they sound good.
Peter Isotalo (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Funds Dissemination Committee elections 2015[edit]

Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson. Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson will continue during the voting. Nominations for the Board of Trustees will be accepted until 23:59 UTC May 5.

The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about how to allocate Wikimedia movement funds to eligible entities. There are five positions on the committee being filled.

The FDC Ombudsperson receives complaints and feedback about the FDC process, investigates complaints at the request of the Board of Trustees, and summarizes the investigations and feedback for the Board of Trustees on an annual basis. One position is being filled.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 3 to 23:59 UTC May 10. Click here to vote. Questions and discussion with the candidates will continue during that time. Click here to ask the FDC candidates a question. Click here to ask the FDC Ombudsperson candidates a question. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 FDC election page, the 2015 FDC Ombudsperson election page, and the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 03:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help

OCR not showing[edit]

Has anyone been having issues with OCR in the past couple days? I uploaded two works with an OCR layer from Internet Archive and found that one literally "lost" pages. The images were still there, and the OCR layer was still there (verified by me), but the engine couldn't read the OCR. So, the OCR on Wikisource would come out page 14, 15, 17, etc. (missing 16, and the OCR for 17 showed up with the image for 16). I tried a few different methods of layering the OCR text and finally one worked, though there was no good reason. Today I uploaded Index:Transactions of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia (ser 03 vol 05).djvu to get some articles and the OCR isn't showing at all, despite it having a complete and working OCR text layer, again verified by me. Any assistance or hints would be appreciated. Thanks, The Haz talk 15:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

over at EB1911, some volumes had the ocr layer corrupted. had to copy volume 25 from Gutenberg. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 21:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
In this case, it never showed, or showed incorrectly from the beginning, so I had to copy the OCR from the DjVu file by hand. The Haz talk 00:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Hazmat2: I may be showing my ignorance, but filling the pages of that document with the OCR button works fine for me. Have you tried that? Or am I asking an insulting question? One never knows. — Ineuw talk 03:37, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: I haven't had an OCR button in months, despite it being enabled in my preferences, so I assumed we got rid of it. However, that's not the complete issue. In one of the instances I mentioned (and in some more since) I noticed that single OCR pages were missing from Wikisource, despite them being in source DjVu. Therefore, the OCR for page 17 would end up with the scan for page 16, etc. (ie. img 14>ocr 14, img 15>ocr 15, img 16>ocr 7, img 17>ocr 18. That's a bigger issue than just no OCR to me. I don't know if it's just the engine not processing the text layer correctly. The Haz talk 14:38, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Of course now I see that I can get the OCR button back by disabling the wizards (which I'd rather not do), but that still doesn't fix the issue of OCR text showing up on the wrong pages. The Haz talk 14:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Hazmat2: My suggestion would be to download the text file FROM HERE and paste the missing text. I had to do it a couple of times. If you were to create the pages before proofreading and mark the missing as problematic, I can try to fill in the missing text, and create the images from JP2, unless this interferes with your plans. Just let me know. — Ineuw talk 19:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: For this text it's not a big deal as I may only use a few articles from it. I'll keep your offer in mind for the future though. Thanks, The Haz talk 19:23, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I can't see the issue of wrong alignment with OCR. Can you point at a specific page? As the OCR pages are regenerated once n a while, the problem might be fxed now.
I have nothing to show because the two examples I had I fixed by hand. The Haz talk 22:43, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-19[edit]

15:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Sources of free books[edit]

See here This could be useful for us finding free texts. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:05, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

User: Koavf | Justin, Their copyright; " The full-text ebooks in our collection are protected by copyright laws, subject to the terms and conditions of fair use in the same way as printed works. It is your responsibility to make sure you stay within them; for example you may only copy up to 5% or one whole chapter (whichever is greater) from a book.

Before copying or printing please refer to the information given on the suppliers' websites or at the eresources@cambridge Copyright and Licensing page. Publishers will withdraw access if evidence of copyright abuse is detected." —Maury (talk) 04:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@William Maury Morris II: What are you talking about? The page I referenced above has links to other sources (e.g. Project Gutenberg and Wikibooks). —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
[Ping] Justin, when I look over a site about books I look at the copyright terms first. When I went to your link, which has many links, I looked at the Masthead which shows "Copyright". I copied that (see quotation marks above) and pasted it here . —Maury (talk) 05:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@William Maury Morris II: Okay but I don't know why. This is a directory, so it's not like you're going to be quoting it at length or reproducing any original content. It's just a place where we can find similar online libraries is all. —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Justin, I was hasty and made a simple mistake. No harm done and none intended. —Maury (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Has anyone noticed that wikisource isn't listed? We're not very popular are we. Jpez (talk) 06:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Jpez, I don't think Wikisource is popular either except to those here who like it and work on building it. Someone stated that wikisource is "too convuluted". Also, many people do not know about wikisource. I know because I am always asking. Wikipedia overwhelms us. People do know about wikipedia. It is a very unique dictionary whereas wikisource, regardless of format, is just another free book site. —Maury (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I think You're right Maury; but this is so sad! Because there is really only us and Project Gutenberg who are aiming at digitising texts in a decent fashion! And PG is much faster than we are — but they don't provide the original scans! Wikisource is better! I'm convinced of it. This is why it's jolly important to do things like make our catalogue available in ways that libraries and whatnot can access (e.g.), because then maybe we'll become more popular.

As for being convoluted, I think the closed thing we can be compared to is PGDP, and I hope we're more or less the same, as far as difficulty of contributing goes? What do you think?

Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 09:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I think the main problem is that we're not known. I can't exactly remember how I found wikisource but I do remember it was from pure chance, I think the more books we add the more we will be known. We are also overshadowed by Project Gutenburg, and I just remembered how I found wikisource. I was looking into joining Project Gutenburg, and while I was doing some searching on Google to see how I could contribute wikisource came up in the search. So Project Gutenburg led me to wikisource, which is ironic because I also think wikisource is much better in so many ways, in fact I think Project Gutenburg should just drop what they're doing and come and join us. Wishful thinking?
The reason I chose wikisource was that it was far more easier to sign up and access. Project Gutenburg seemed far more closed and inaccessible. Also the layout of the texts is much more pleasing to the eye in my opinion.
I think something that can make wikisource much more popular is if we can get the links to wikisource which are on wikipedia higher up. At this time they are all the way at the bottom in the external links section, which I highly doubt anyone ever looks at, I know I didn't until I found wikisource. For example if someone was to look up The Iliad on wikipedia, if we could get the links to wikisource somewhere in the main box on the top right or under it, somewhere where it can be seen. I think this will bring many people over here, after all if someone was to look up the Iliad for example I think they would be very interested to also see the source text transcluded as we do here. Is there anyway this can be proposed to wikipedia? unsigned comment by Jpez (talk) 2015-05-06 10:12:34.
  • I have been on wikisource for many years. I came over from wikisource where an administrator and I had a conflict so to heck with them at that time. I had done or started many articles and had been there about a year. I think I found wikisource by seeing the "sister" areas on wikipedia. But whereas I have always been a physical person roughing life I have always loved books since comics as a kid -- and illustrated encyclopedias mom purchased at one volume/month. (We were kinda poor). The gist of this is that I just love books so I seek them. As I got older I wanted hard-to-get books and had to use interlibrary loan programs. Somewhere I wanted to start my own library but I didn't have the money. I would go up to the University of Virginia (around age 14) and copy rare books. This is how I got my very own Library with books that were hard for anyone except special people. I copied page by page with pencil and paper and was watched over in a special room. When computers came out I typed some books into my Commodore 64. I didn't have money for a fancy computer but I got the text onto disks. It is very similar here on wikisource for me. We have all kinds of books and even very old books which I love! We have books of all kinds and typically I look for books on adventure. You know how it is if you love books -- you can place them on flash drives and carry a lot of them in your pocket to a friend's house. I prefer illustrated books but these places where we get files have some funky messed up pages and I know that does not have to be. I have experience with that though because the first book I placed on Internet, before web pages and before browsers, and before any "wiki" was a family book I placed on Internet when Internet was young. They had to be all plain text (ascii) and that book is still on Internet after 29 years! It is a family book about a kinsman who was in the Indian, Mexican, and Civil War. It was the 1st true book on Internet about the civil war. It came from our family attic trunk and due to time and heat the pages were very brittle and they came apart easily. I typed that book into computer and learned to type by doing it. I did not know how to type before that. I absolutely love saving books. The autobiographies and others of science and history still thrill me and I will be age 68 on this May 12th. Books are my friends in many ways such as entertainment and learning and I usually like just about any subject. Also, I believe in a Creator so when I look at rocks in a creek then I am looking at a Creator's work and I typically will seek out more knowledge such as mineralogy. I have had years of French and Spanish and there are books that are absolutely in those languages that were not often encountered in schools unless you study those languages and learn to read. They often seem strange because the history is often written in a different manner than what us "Anglos" write and read. I love learning from books -- the people once lived -- the "dead" still speak -- and of their lives and time era. Books are a time traveling machine about people and life for the mind. So, wikisource is a wonderful place for me and a way to give to people of the future. When I die thanks to wikipedia and wikisource, I will have left more things behind that has my life worthy of living. Some people take all of their knowledge to grave with them. Think about it. I have beat that situation and have left behind life from other eras to be learned from by others like us book lovers. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 17:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Promoting Wikisource & Wikisource books: Here are my two attempts on YouTube two years ago. The Windows program came with this old computer. The images came from the book we worked on here.

The following is a lot more professional than mine. It is in Italian but look and see how much can be done. I like the effect of the pages turning. :0)

—Maury (talk) 18:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Yet another idea (I use Firefox newest) is to create a button like they have for Wikipedia on their site. I have also seen it as a search engine. But there is none for Wikisource. —Maury (talk) 18:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Wow Maury, it was very nice to read about your love of books and knowledge in general. Even though I am half your age and we come from different generations I see we have so much in common which I think is amazing. I can relate to so much of what you wrote. Thanks for sharing.
Ps Sorry I always seem to forget to sign my posts. Jpez (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

delete Author page[edit]

Author:R. S. Calvin is actually Author:Samuel Calvin. The only work attributed to "R. S. Calvin"—"A Piece of Coal"—was written by "Samuel Calvin" (reference). I've not been able to find what the "R." stands for. I cant find any reference to a middle name or any other mention of given names starting with R. (Anyone else wants to try finding that?) I request that Author:R. S. Calvin be deleted and merged with Author:Samuel Calvin. (I wonder, what happens to the Wikisource Authority Control number 637779 assigned to R. S. Calvin. Will it be reused? Or permanently retired?) --Siddhant (talk) 20:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Siddhant: You can redirect the page if you think they are the same person. The fact that there is authority control info is actually interesting: do you know of any authority control libraries that have these two names as the same person? —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:09, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
@Koavf: Out of curiosity, what authority control info are you referring to? I only see our internal Wikisource number. Thanks, The Haz talk 22:30, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
@Hazmat2: I'm guess I wasn't clear. I was asking if any other authority control databases (e.g. VIAF or LOC) have a record of these two names referring to the same individual. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:44, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
@Koavf: Sorry, I understood that part. I was referring to your writing, "The fact that there is authority control info is actually interesting". I can only find authority control for Samuel Calvin, not for R.S. Calvin so I was wondering what AC you found interesting. The Haz talk 22:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
here is the viaf for Calvin, S. - no sign of Calvin, R. S. without evidence they are the same, i would keep them separate with a note. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 03:33, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
From the work cited:

Professor S. Calvin, of the University of Iowa, not R. S. Calvin, as it was erroneously printed, is the author of the article entitled "A Piece of Coal," published in the March number of the "Monthly."

I am going to merge them. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Sounds good The Haz talk 17:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
@Beleg Tâl: Nice find! Thanks. (Come to think of it, why didn't I search for the string "R. S. Calvin" in the first place!) --Siddhant (talk) 17:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I would delete "R. S. Calvin", not keep it as redirect. He looks like the son of a typo ...— Mpaa (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree. Can an admin please delete Author:R. S. Calvin? Thanks. --Siddhant (talk) 19:37, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-20[edit]

15:34, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata and arbitrary access[edit]

Just to point the community to d:Wikidata:Arbitrary access the next evolution of Wikidata for the communities. With WD there is currently a limitation in place that hinders some use cases: data can only be accessed from the corresponding item. We may have cases where we want to pull data directly, eg. works listings for an author. For those with an interest in the development, please follow the page linked, and also look to utilise d:Wikidata:Wikisource for questions and discussions about how we might use it. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata: Access to data from arbitrary items is coming[edit]

(Sorry for writing in English)

When using data from Wikidata on Wikipedia and other sister projects, there is currently a limitation in place that hinders some use cases: data can only be accessed from the corresponding item. So, for example, the Wikipedia article about Berlin can only get data from the Wikidata item about Berlin but not from the item about Germany. This had technical reasons. We are now removing this limitation. It is already done for French Wikisource and Dutch Wikipedia. Your project is one of the next ones:

  • 18. May: Farsi Wikipedia, English Wikivoyage, Hebrew Wikipedia
  • 1. June: Italian Wikipedia, all remaining Wikisource

We hope to have it rolled out nearly everywhere by the end of June 2015.

We invite you to play around with this new feature if you are one of the people who have been waiting for this for a long time. If you have technical issues/questions with this you can come to d:Wikidata:Contact the development team.

A note of caution: Please be careful with how many items you use for a single page. If it is too many pages, loading might get slow. We will have to see how the feature behaves in production to see where we need to tweak and how.

How to use it, once it is enabled:

Cheers Lydia Pintscher 15:19, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

@Zyephyrus, Phe, Tpt: can you tell us how you have been using this feature at frWS? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

No File - Index:Life of Emanuel Swedenborg, with Some Account of His Writings.Djvu[edit]

Didn't want to speedy in case it could be rescued. 10:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Moved; file renamed at Commons from .Djvu to .djvu. Hrishikes (talk) 11:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Authority control VIAF[edit]

I noticed that when VIAF is entered, it shows up also as a WorldCat link in the AC template. However, the link doesn't seem to be working for works. (ie. doesn't work, although the VIAF number is correct). The Haz talk 16:40, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@Hazmat2: presumably there is some configuration issue with our template. What is the work, and can you find it at WorldCat? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:04, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
@Billinghurts: See The Rover Boys at School. The OCLC is there which of course also links to WorldCat. My assumption is the same but I didn't want to attempt any changes for that in case someone had a better idea. The Haz talk 03:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
fwiw... a VIAF designation without an ISNI number associated with it ain't worth a hill of beans (more often than not). In my experience, if an entity doesn't have an ISNI associated with it, it typically means the VIAF record is in flux, in doubt or incomplete... and that happens to be the status of the Rover series apparently. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
If we were talking about VIAF for contributors, I can understand where you're coming from, though I can't agree as I've seen VIAF with 5 or 6 library authority records linked (not "sparse" or "undifferentiated") that don't have an ISNI yet. Nonetheless, I'm fairly confident that ISNI are for contributors only and we're talking about a VIAF work record which shouldn't have an ISNI. I'm not saying that the VIAF record shouldn't be linked (it can always be deleted from Wikidata later). I'm just wondering why it leads to a search on Worldcat using VIAF when there's already an OCLC there. The Haz talk 04:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
it may also be for work without an isbn number, the viaf/worldcat won’t work. isbn use tends to predominate, maybe we need to add oclc numbers for bibliographies of works before 1960, and promote their use. Slowking4 18:45, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Index:The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996 (uksi 19960341 en).pdf[edit]

Another UK secondary item transcribed... Anyone want to do the image extraction? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done except pages with images--kathleen wright5 (talk) 09:44, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
If someone else hasn't done it by Tuesday I'll work on it next week. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:50, 17 May 2015 (UTC)


I out of interest did a search to see if had a pre 1921 set of Halsbury's Laws of England ([]=Halsbury) - Looks like they have a complete set. Does anyone want to do an evaluation of which volumes/editions has.

Getting this transcribed could be a major multicontribuotr/multi-year project though :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Veracity of Constitution of India as 1949 document[edit]

I have reverted edits by someone adding 2015 amendments to the 1949 constitutional document, and I see some evidence of previous additions, though hard to tell the provenance of such changes. I have semi-protected the pages with an overt comment. I hope others can eep an eye on the document, and to note that it would be worthwhile looking for a scan of the original published constitution and moving our text to something that is evidence-based. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

This work is Wikisource creation (i.e., latest updated version) and should be prefixed with Wikisource:. Original scans available at {{Constitution of India}}. Hrishikes (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Ideally Constitution of India should be a versions page with links to each of the published revisions, which are based on scans. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)


Embroidered wikisource logo.jpg
The British Library has media related to Magna Carta.

I thought people might enjoy this embroidered version of the Wikisource logo, taken from Magna Carta (An Embroidery), a 40-foot long recreation in needlework of the en-wiki article Magna Carta as it stood in May 2014, that was unveiled at the British Library on Thursday.

Further images at c:Category:Magna Carta (An Embroidery). Jheald (Talk) 14:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jheald: I love that. Thanks for sharing. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Place a border on it, place beneath, have a batch made and send me one to place on my jacket or shirt. —Maury (talk) 15:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I'll buy one too! Sounds great :) The magna carta tapestry looks brilliant; can't imagine what it looks like in real life! — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 10:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Is it a logo that as well as being hand-stiched, is it possible to make it in a machine-stiched version? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
you can machine stitch from a scan (for a little set-up fee normally) [20]; [21] Slowking4 03:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

How is "Provincial Geographies of India: Burma" in the public domain?[edit]

Our current Proofread of the Month is Provincial Geographies of India (Volume 4): Burma. This would appear to have been published in 1923, but the public domain status of works by age alone only covers works published before January 1, 1923. BD2412 T 16:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Does not seem PD to me even by author's death criterion. Author died in 1931, so this became PD after 2001 in UK. So it was not PD on URAA date. But the work had simultaneous US publication by Macmillan as shown in the colophon; so may be PD under copyright-not renewal clause, if copyright was actually not renewed. Hrishikes (talk) 02:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I can't find any evidence that the copyright was renewed in the US. The Haz talk 03:06, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Not renewed basd on the PG transcriptions of the Renewal lists for 1950 and 1951. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Is that sufficient for our inclusion of the work here? BD2412 T 15:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Is what sufficient? We're worried about PD in the US, and if there's no renewal, then it is PD. If you want to check the images, you're welcome to, but the PG transcriptions are reliable enough if searched under multiple keywords. I did my own checks, and surely one of Herbert, Thrikell, Burma, India or Provincial would have hit, even if one or two typos hit our renewal.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The question came up for me because I wanted to upload the images to Commons, but the PD rationale there requires the work to be pre-1923. Although I appreciate the desire to put this through as a proofread of the month, I am also wondering why we are starting with Volume IV of a four-volume work, when the three earlier volumes (covering different parts of India) were published earlier. BD2412 T 02:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
In Commons licensing, put {{PD-URAA-Simul}}, going for the any other reason option. As for your second question, Burma (Myanmar) is under-represented in this site, the Indian subcontinent is not, and the other volumes of the work deal with the subcontinent. That is not to say that the others should not be done; but a coloured scan of vol 2 is required for doing justice to the images; the links I have put in the volume listing are all B&W except Google, the Google version is not PD and not downloadable. Hrishikes (talk) 02:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
you can upload images to commons as "PD-not renewed"; there is however the cultural problem that people do not believe you can prove a negative. Slowking4 03:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
As Slowking4 noted, you can upload as {{PD-US-not renewed}}. A few of us have looked through to confirm that it indeed was not renewed (in the time frame it needed to be to be legal). Therefore, it is proven legally, which is good enough for me. The Haz talk 21:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I think PD-URAA-Simul is better in this case than the not-renewed template. It informs the reader that the work is a US work due to simultaneous publication as the overseas version and that the US copyright was not renewed. This work's primary version was British, not US; non-British versions were "simultaneous" ones. So the simul template is more appropriate. You cannot just claim it simply as a US work, disregarding the Cambridge edition. Hrishikes (talk) 01:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
As an IP lawyer, I am always wary of edge cases. Then again, the chances of anyone asserting a copyright in this work are fairly remote. BD2412 T 03:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)


Recently created and I'm us sign to mark headings that should be rendered as sans-serif regardless of overall page style, feel free to criticise, and the font choices could probably do with tweaking.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Unless I missed something, I think that's no different from {{Sans-serif}}. Perhaps it can be a redirect/alias? My only criticism of either is that I don't quite understand its intended use beyond the title page or if something contextually depends on a sans-serif font. If that's what you mean, then disregard. The Haz talk 05:07, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections 2015[edit]

Wmf logo vert pms.svg

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Board will continue during the voting.

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is the ultimate governing authority of the Wikimedia Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization registered in the United States. The Wikimedia Foundation manages many diverse projects such as Wikipedia and Commons.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 17 to 23:59 UTC May 31. Click here to vote. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 17:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help

Jennifer Baptiste Primus - a female trade union leader from Trinidad and Tobgo[edit]

Hi I am new to Wikisource. But already I fee as though I love this facility. I will like to find information on this subject. 10:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

We have nothing on her but I checked for you and found information on Facebook and Google search engine. —Maury (talk) 11:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-21[edit]

15:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Another major item done[edit]

Traffic Signs Manual : Chapter 5

Now before I start adding the other chapters, can someone advise on how best to name the images? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Are you uploading them to Commons? I would go with a scheme like File:UK Traffic Signs Manual, Ch. 5, Fig. 2-3, and so on. That way the images will show in order in the Commons category. BD2412 T 16:25, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I've done the ones for Heading-3 - Mostly a case of cleaning up an imported PDF page in Inkscape.. If someone wants to do the other headings (and or chapters, see: commons:Category:Traffic Signs Manual (UK) Which is where I was putting them.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Page:UK Traffic Signs Manual - Chapter 3 Regulatory Signs. 2008 (Second Impression 2008).pdf/24[edit]

Simple formatting issue. The diagrams should be in a block on the left. Mediawiki seems not to won't to do this in a consistent way. I've tried {{float-left}} and Template:Tl-block left. Neither worked effectively.

Suggestions ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

How about putting the page in columns, with the width of the left column set to the image width? BD2412 T 15:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Well I used {{left block}}{{right block}} and everything worked nicely :), added some tweaks to those tempaltes in the process. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

ODNI release[edit]

Thought this might be of interest to some archivists here. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Signatory property on Wikidata[edit]

There is a new property, signatory (P1891), on Wikidata. The name is probably self-explanatory, but for anyone adding official documents to Wikisource, when you create the Wikidata entry for it you can now add signatories (ie. the 56 signers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence). The Haz talk 19:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


Can someone review this so it's line with Commons? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:34, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

  • It makes more sense to me to copy the license template as completely as possible, at least until the day we all use interwiki license templates. Plus, I think the additional does not cover section is useful here as well. For now I copied it over and categorized it. The Haz talk

DjVu file okay at Commons but looks faulty from here[edit]

When I look at File:United States Statutes at Large Volume 123.djvu here on Wikisource, it looks to be corrupt — it ‎doesn't thumb, and it shows "(0 × 0 pixels, file size: 33.8 MB, MIME type: image/vnd.djvu)". But it looks just fine at Commons:File:United States Statutes at Large Volume 123.djvu. And no, there isn't a local file eclipsing the Commons file. Has anybody come across this before and does anyone know how to fix it? Hesperian 01:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I think you will find this is yet another manifestation of the already archived but not yet resolved issue discussed here and supposedly tracked as (currently open/low priority) task T23526? AuFCL (talk) 02:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


I haven't read all of the linked discussion, but I note George's comment "I haven't found the trigger point -- when exceeded -- that causes this "failure" we are all seeing." To assist with that, I can tell you how this file was brought to my attention.

In my API scripting I have for a little while been regularly encountering a warning when requesting very large lists such as a list of every Page: namespace page on the English Wikisource: "This result was truncated because it would otherwise be larger than the limit of 12582912 bytes". The limit referred to is $wgAPIMaxResultSize. Last night I was running a different script that pulls image information from DjVu files in order to extract a page count. The script ran happily until it reached File:United States Statutes at Large Volume 123.djvu, at which point it issued that warning "This result was truncated because it would otherwise be larger than the limit of 12582912 bytes" and then crashed on the next line of code when I tried to access a page count that wasn't there.

Therefore I speculate that the root cause of all this that is the ProofreadPage extension makes an API request for image metadata, and, in cases where the image metadata is larger than $wgAPIMaxResultSize, receives a truncated result.

Hesperian 02:47, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes that falls inline with developments prior, during & since the archived discussion linked by AuFCL but the steps taken in response have proven ineffective at best if not outright "anti" proofread extension itself at worst. See task T96360 and task T32906 for additional background.

Plus there's been quite a bit of related discussions regarding this phenomenon (both on User: Talk pages and in open discussions like here & /Help) but most seem to have been archived since their last comments (Note: the 2014 & 2015 /Help archives are now in their proper place & order fwiw). -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikisource in print[edit]

[[29]] ?

Glad to see Wikisource is getting reprinted. :) Shame that Google's treating it as Copyright material and blocking the full scans, despite the original being PD and the Wikisource effort being CC-BY-SA ;) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

are they scraping the printable version? why are they not using the epub version? do they need a word? Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 17:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
If you ever find a PD book on Google that is "snippet" view only, just notify them via the link on the bottom. It takes time for the corrections to kick in but they've always been responsive when I've marked them in the past. The Haz talk 17:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
i see they don’t have a DNB e-book yet. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 18:18, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
It's not Google Books that put it up there. It's Kreactiva Editorial according the page so they probably said they own the copyright to the edited version and Google let them sell it. The Haz talk 18:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: I forgot to add that even our transcription would still be PD in the U.S. If we add new material, such as in the "notes" section (that meets the threshold), only the new material could be licensed CC-BY-SA, but not the original text, even if made into electronic format with only editorial decisions. It's more like a digital reprint, which can only use the copyright of the original. The Haz talk 18:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
DNB - LOL .... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
As much as a joke it seems it wouldn't be surprising, the rate they are producing digital editions is incredible. Example --Rochefoucauld (talk) 01:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
On another note I've been doing some research on "Kreactiva Editorial"....Notice anything suspicious in there work? Oh wait the incredible similarities of our hard work being used for profit! The similarities like red text as a substitution for our internal links, or the missing indentations...They could atleast have the common courtesy to follow creative commons. --Rochefoucauld (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Despite the fact that they don't have to (since we can't license PD material as CC-BY-SA) they actually do include licenses and attributions. See this page for an example. The Haz talk 03:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: Just to be clear, are saying that the publications by Kreactiva Editorial are downloads from Wikisource??? — Ineuw talk 04:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
What I was saying was that Kreactiva Editorial printing is possibly re-using Wikisource material, it's attributed and has a note about the license, so I'm not that concerned. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

There are a very many print-on-demand "publishers" who do this. They scrape free content from wherever they can find it on the Web, and offer it for sale. Search Amazon or Abebooks or Alibris or Google Books or any of the other popular book stores for any popular public domain text, and you'll find most of the search results are for cheap print-on-demand scrapes. Usually these days they scrape the Internet Archive scans, but they sometimes take our texts, or Project Gutenberg's, or even (shock horror) uncorrected OCR. I regard it as unethical because they are selling mutton dressed up as lamb, and I believe a large proportion of buyers will feel like dupes when their purchase arrives. I also regard it as unethical leaching on our efforts, but it is certainly legal on that score. Furthermore we all know what we are getting into, or ought to. The decision to work to make public domains accessible to readers implies making them accessible to unscrupulous scrapers as well. Hesperian 13:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

the way to preempt them, is produce an e-reader ready "product". there are attempts in this direction, but the package needs to be more reader friendly. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 01:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-22[edit]

16:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Page blanking activity[edit]

Noticed some page blanking activity here. I took care of Billinghurst and Treasury of War Poetry. Might want to look over "Kepler" though; I can only undo, and can't revert back to appropriate edit. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

There's no difference there, but all of the user's "contributions" can be reverted and deleted from histories by an admin. The Haz talk 17:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

OCR broken[edit]

As with Hazmat2 in this discussion above, several of the volumes of the 9th edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica (as Volume II) are missing their OCR layers. I wouldn't mind fixing that by hand as I go, but despite having the OCR button enabled in my preferences, there isn't one.

A) If someone has the time to go through and fix the currently OCRless EB9 volumes, that'd be great;
B) If someone could explain to me what Hazmat2 meant when he said he "g[o]t the OCR button back by disabling the wizards", that'd be helpful;
C) If one of the code monkeys could repair whatever damage ruined the OCR button in the first place, that'd be even better.

It's amazingly pointless and frustrating to have every single index page load with a header saying "just use the OCR button" when it doesn't exist and cannot be enabled. — LlywelynII 00:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

B. Go to Preferences, then Editing. Under the Editor heading, uncheck Enable wizards for inserting links, tables as well as the search and replace function. I can't help with the rest and I'm not sure what happened in the first place as it's pretty much always been this way since I joined Wikisource. The Haz talk 01:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I may be off the mark, but to those who don't have an OCR button on their toolbar, it just might depend on which toolbar you are using, and/OR check your common.js if the OCR button isn't disabled. Also check the "enable OCR button" in your Preferences\Gadgets. — Ineuw talk 18:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
i have also hand copied ocr’s from gutenberg, but the lack of support is discouraging. Slowking4 18:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Dawn Over India source[edit]

I think we have Dawn Over India but had no source here. Someone at Google Books just got back to me and they now made the entire book viewable as it is in the public domain now. It's uploaded to Internet Archive. The Haz talk 22:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Need a simple request to be fulfilled[edit]

Can anyone who is on line and reads this post in any country, I ask if they would try to log on to (Duck Duck Go search engine) to see if it's available because I haven't been able to do so? — Ineuw talk 20:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Ineuw, the search itself works for me. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, now it works for me me as well. — Ineuw talk 22:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)