Wikisource:Scriptorium

← Community pages

Scriptorium

Archives→

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.

Announcements

Articles of interest and relevance from the web

I often find on the web, articles of interest, relevance, and somewhat related to our work. So, for a long while, I've been toying with the idea of creating this section and post the links. Well, today I took the "plunge" and decided to post the link to the following article in the New York Times for the enjoyment of anyone interested.

The paper maker, from the New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/timothy-barrett-papermaker.html?_r=1&hpw
By MARK LEVINE
Retrieved from The New York Times: February 17, 2012

Picture library captures Royal Society's rich history, from the Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/gallery/2012/apr/19/picture-library-royal-society-history?newsfeed=true
Retrieved from the London Guardian: April 19, 2012

New York City image archives now online

This message was also posted on the Commons Village pump, and I want to share this link for those who are interested and don't read the Commons message board. The New York City image archives were placed online recently Enjoy — User talk:Ineuw 18:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC) Retrieved from the New York Daily News. April 24, 2012.

FDR library image archives online

Many, if not all, of these images can be found on the Commons dispersed by category, but here they are accessible in one gallery. for those who are interested in images of Roosevelt's presidential era, covering 1933 to 1946.. — Ineuw talk 18:44, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

New Wikimedia Shop feedback/help requested

Hey all,

Some of you may already know that we've opened a shop at http://shop.wikimedia.org to sell Wikimedia Merchandise. We're now entering our "Community Launch" allowing us to hopefully get as much feedback from the community about the store, it's products and everything else involved. For those that are interested we've set up an FAQ/information page, feedback page and design page. We also have a 10% discount up for at least the next 2 weeks (CLAUNCH or 'Wikimedia Community Launch' in the discount box at checkout) and a $10 maximum shipping fee world wide for most orders.

However the big thing I wanted to ask you about was Wikisource gear. Right now everything on there is Wikipedia related but we want to make sure we have merch from all of the projects as well. So far we have a couple things on order:

• Stickers from all of the projects
• 1" buttons (or 'badges' ) from all of the projects
• Are in the design and digital mockup phase of lapel pins for all of the projects to both go independently and as a set. Right now we're getting mockups to see how they look and to see if we want to go with the Pewter look that we have right now for the globe (this new set will have an interlocked v W for the wikipedia piece) or the full color enamel look like This Strike Command pin.

We want to have more though both soon and in the future and I wanted to know what you thought. One of my thoughts for something early on was a series similar to the I Edit Wikipedia shirts (we have two versions right now) on the shop for each project. If we did something like that should we just use Edit or adjust the verb? " I proofread? other ideas for this or other products?. Jalexander (talk) 00:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad to see things are finally moving on this front. I first asked for Wikisource merch way back in 2008. Hesperian 05:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to events in June and July: bot, script, template, and Gadget makers wanted

I invite people who work on Wikisource's technical infrastructure to the yearly Berlin hackathon, 1-3 June. Registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, then please register by May 1st and mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, teaching, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

This is one of several upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing. Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumanah (talk) 22:07, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Mediawiki upgrade to 1.20wmf1

Wikimedia Foundation hackers have updated the operating application to v. 1.20wmf Special:Version. Please report any identified issues to the general discussion area … #Issues with upgrade to 1.20wmf1 — billinghurst sDrewth 10:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

New features in ProofreadPage

The new version of Mediawiki that will be deployed on April 28th 18th (more info) will bring new features to the ProofreadPage: extension. The tag <pages> will get new options in order to improve the method of transclusion for multi-page works (both .djvu & .pdf files) that may have skipped ranges, individual range gaps or trailing pages. The new parameters are:

step

Transclude only one page on n. By example : <pages from=1 to=10 step="2" /> show the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th and 9th pages.

exclude

Don't include following pages. By example : <pages from=1 to=10 exclude="2-5,9" /> show the 1st, 6th, 7th, 8th and 10th pages.

include

Include following pages. By example : <pages include="2-5,9" /> show the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 9th pages.

We can, of course, use all the attributes on the same tag. By example <pages from=1 to=10 include="31" exclude="2-4" step="2" /> will show 1st, 5th, 7th, 9th and 31st pages. —unsigned comment by Tpt (talk) 09:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC).

We would want to update Help:Proofread also. Jeepday (talk) 23:48, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

All I heard is "Someone has taken over maintenance of ProofreadPage." Fantastic! Hesperian 01:37, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad for these changes, notably the exclusion option as it will make transclusion much easier when you have batches of pages that don't need to be included. I'm also so happy someone is still working on this extension!—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 17:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Well I took a stab at adding some of the info on using these three (plus the subsequent "sectiononly") parameters to the Help:Proofread page. I urge other folks to review my drafts, fix my spelling and make any other changes / additions to it that I almost certainly have left out. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm puzzled by (at least) one thing. There is a glitch in transclusion that comes up when a page boundary interacts with format, and can be seen in the endnotes of Drake, Francis (1540?-1596) (DNB00): a newline is forced. There is a known but less-than-ideal workaround. I thought for a time this problem/bug had been fixed by the upgrade, but assuming the Francis Drake page isn't showing something cached the problem is still with us. Would someone who understands why the issue arises care to comment? Charles Matthews (talk) 06:32, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

It looks like you're not getting all the original line feeds, etc., from when the page was first created using its OCR'd text. See the diff view first & now you can see all the errant or forced lines are gone in the mainspace as well.

I found that my edit window width was too narrow and kept making similar oversights thanks to it so I went to the horizontal layout in Page: editing view instead of side-by-side to catch more of these. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:06, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Mediawiki upgrade to 1.20wmf2

Wikimedia Foundation hackers will be updating the operating application to v. 1.20wmf2 Special:Version starting April 30th on thru the expected completion date, May 9th (the wikisource family likely to begin to undergo the update(s) some time during May 2nd). Please report any issues likely to materialize as a result of these changes to the general discussion area … #Issues with upgrade to 1.20wmf2 — George Orwell III (talk) 00:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Changes to ProofreadPage expected with 1.20wmf2 upgrade

Hi! New version of ProofreadPage extension is available for testing on test2. List of some changes [expected with the deployment of version 1.20wmf2]:

• 34732 The scan does not appear on Opera.
• 35757 Add 'onlysection' parameter to <pages/>.
• 36070 <pagelist/> should show localized page numbers
• 36115 Anonymous users cannot change page status
• 36125 Position of quality buttons should not change
• 36158 <pages> transclusions allow for infinite loop - This change disables nested <pages> transclusion completely.

If you find any errors please file a bug on bugzilla, so we can fix the issues before the upcoming deployment. Beau (talk) 07:29, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

This is done now. See mw:MediaWiki 1.20/wmf2 for notes. Thanks Beau for providing the notice! -- RobLa-WMF (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposals

Wikisource:Alternate accounts

I would like to propose that Wikisource:Alternate accounts be formally recognized as a policy or guideline (one or the other). It has been in draft form since 2009. I believe it accurately expresses the expectations of the community in regards to multiple accounts, as has been seen in several discussions. Giving formal status to WS:ALT offers clarify for those editors who are accidentally coming in conflict with these expectations of the community. Please indicate your desire to elevate to Policy, Guideline or other disposition. JeepdaySock (talk) 16:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Policy

• The third paragraph has the explicit "do not sock" and described potential blocking/banning. If it is going to be strong enough to be the basis for blocking, I think it should be considered a policy. Perhaps the softer, guidance elements can be spun off into a separate page or the wording in this one can be hardened? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Guideline

• guidance the document has should in the first line, which automatically makes it procedural or guidance. I have no issue with the overarching premise or the text. That said, the pertinentn guidance seems to be para 1 and 3, with the remainder information about how to comply. My question then becomes can para 1 and 3 be extracted and put elsewhere to keep the clear guidance separate, either as a lead in to this document, or separating guidelines from the instruction. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
• Concur with billinghurst, the bits about verboten behavior can be lifted and reinserted into blocking policy, with a reference, and the remainder promoted to guideline. Prosody (talk) 02:08, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
• Agree with the above. Things that lead to blocking belong on the blocking policy page (but should be mentioned here too). Things which are merely best practice belong here. Being made into a guideline offers clear information to readers on the expectation that they follow at least the spirit, but doesn't rise to introducing a new set of hard policy rules. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 06:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
• Assuming the elements regarding blocking are moved (or summarised here with reference to the blocking policy), I change my choice to guideline in line with the above. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
• I support making this a guideline. I'm a bit reluctant to make it a policy (I think users should have more freedom for account usage than making it a policy would grant), and with the fact we've got checkusers we can catch many of the devious uses of alternate accounts. But I do think making it a guideline would express our opinion that it's generally best practice to use one account, etc.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 21:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
• I have moved paragraph 1 and 3 to WS:BP, I also move paragraph 4 to the top position as it seemed to make a better opening with the other two gone. Support for making this a guideline. Jeepday (talk) 21:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
• Support guideline status. --Aplomb (talk) 16:31, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Other

• unnecessary - I don't think our editor base is large enough to make any level of formality necessary. Make it a help page, we ought to have one on user accounts anyway, we currently don't have a page on creating an account that I know of and {{welcomeip}} links to en.wp.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Moments ago I was looking at a welcome page and it states that there are many benefits to having an account. I am aware of the IP addres showing but really, what difference does that make if someone uses a traceroute? It seems as though someone fears something. What would that something be? An IPS has many accounts on it and several IP addresses. What are the other "benefits"? I saw no other benefits aside from one's IP address not showing with an account. My take on it is that a person gets credit for the work they do with an account although that would probably only matter if the person's real name is used on the account. I do understand that some may fear for their job but what would they be doing that is wrong of them to cause a fear of their job? I think the people who just use IP addresses as opposed to accounts are the ones hiding behind the IP address. A question; is not Wikisource like the old Bulletin Board Systems, like I used to run, whereby people typing can be seen by the system administrator when logging in, watched where they go, and what they do? I expect WS does work that way. --Maury, (—William Maury Morris II ^Talk 19:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, with an account, you can sign your name easily, be recognizable and social with other users. You can be nominated for adminship. You can adjust various preferences such as appearance of pages and the time zone shown on "history" pages. Noone should be able to trace your actual identity, unless they have access to the actual website logs, or tools which are reserved for "checkusers". You don't seem to feel that's an issue, but many people like to remain anonymous, for one to avoid random people harassing them at their phone number or personal email address. I have been harrassed onwiki when I reverted vandalism, and if that user could have, they might have harassed me otherwise. --Eliyak T·C 20:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Good points all, Eliyak. I was just curious as to what the author/s of that article considered as what constituted "benefits" plural. I have rarely had any problem with anyone harrassing me in that manner but then I have never reverted any vandalism that I can recall. I have seen Billinghurst and Beeswaxcandle having problems with vandalism and I wonder to myself why the heck would anyone want to destroy anything on wikisource. Apparently there is a lot of that destructiveness. My entire concept is to create and build and not to destroy. I've used my real name since about 1992. I have a book on internet now that has been there 19 years and that still shows my real name, the university I attended and the state that university is located in. Emails are easily changed and I personally use sub-accounts so I never get junk mails through my ISP. Too, I suppose some crazy person would stalk someone in real life but good luck to them with me. These works on wikipedia and wikisource are to be archived for future generations. Since I have brought no fame to my family names I make sure that those who did great deeds are known again so therefore I use my real name. My descendants may, or may not care. If they care then information is there. This is a genealogical aspect but it is also like the caveman leaving his mark (handprint actually) on cave walls. The benefits I see are friendships and preserving books. I have always loved reading all kinds of books. History is basically 20 years new to me because science was always my turf. Genealogies have been with me since I was a little boy with my grand-mother teaching me family in history -- old Virginia families and she talked as though they were still living. There is a lot of history in any state's First Families and all states do have First Families. Much of it is amusing, some boring, some fascinating and all in all it comes down to, "What did you do with your life, was it worth anything"? People come, people go, what did they do for others and what did the leave behind to benefit others whether family or not. Kind regards, Maury (—William Maury Morris II ^Talk 05:13, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

One significant benefit to the Wikisource community when a person registers and contributes under a user name, is recognition. This recognition benefit, allows the community to identify that a given contributor who will begin to build a reputation for quality of edits. There are significant resources (volunteer hours) spent monitoring the edits of contributors without a known familiarity with Wikisource expectations. User who contributes under static (unchanging) IP will soon be recognized, but will always be subject to a higher level of review by default as IPs are never promoted off the "need a higher level of review" list. Contributors who have IPs that change, edit with some experience that is obvious to those who monitor contributions, and usually consume a larger percentage of scarce volunteer hours until they are recognized by all involved as returning experienced and trusted contributor. So in short; registration benefits the project and the community by decreases volunteer hours required for the monitoring and training of new editors, which increases the availability of those volunteer hours to contribute value added edits to the project. Jeepday (talk) 11:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikisource:Portal

I would like to propose that Wikisource:Portal be formally recognized as a policy or guideline (one or the other). It has been in draft form since 2006 with a significant upgrade in Feb 2011 to reflect current expectations. Please indicate your desire to elevate to Policy, Guideline or other disposition. JeepdaySock (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Policy

policy level with guidance, at this point in time I feel it should be split as it extends from policy to guidance. Policy = principle, guidance = implementation and instruction — billinghurst sDrewth 06:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I've moved the guidance elements to Help:Portals for now. The remainder should all be policy. - AdamBMorgan (talk)

• When I re-wrote this page I intended it to eventually be policy. (It needs to be reviewed by others, of course. Otherwise it's just an essay I made up.) I've amended the page as described above. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
• Policy (mostly) The purpose of the namespace is definitely policy, and the top-level classification schema could be counted too. I'm unsure the explicit "there are five levels" belongs in policy, as that could easily stretch over time for large portals. Perhaps this could be moved to the help page to keep the policy light? Everything else, I would call policy-level expectations of how it is done correctly. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 06:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

  I've amended the Wikisource:Portal. Is this better? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

• Policy or Guideline, It is a given that Portals are the most appropriate way to provide entrance to group of items in a subject, and it has been clear that WS supports this as the preferred method (over categories). Jeepday (talk) 21:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Other

• I'm not too sure what making this a policy would do. I view policies as prescriptive documents telling readers some of the basic mores of this site which must be followed. Some pertain to users, some to admins, some to bureaucrats, etc. But they express clear behavior for some group of users. (E.g., our inclusion policy, blocking policy). I don't get that kind of vibe with this document. A document about portals (especially with the way in which it is written currently) seems like it would be best as a general process page: it gives background information, explains what the definition of a portal is (and so what things go into it). I'd support making it a process page, but not a policy.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 21:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose a policy and ambivalent at best about a Guideline. I don't see the point. We don't need policies for things like this. Help page is just fine. --Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 11:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposal concerning pagequality class

alpha - pagequality class

Ok ok ok. Let's wipe the slate clean and restart from scratch.

My proposal is:

to add a css class so that every wiki-link to an individual page in the Page: namespace reflect the current pagequality level (color status) of that individual page. This class must have a name that is not currently used by any element of Proofreadpage extension. Every subdomain will decide if they want to use this class. If they do, they have to change their common.css as appropriate. If they don't, they get the same situation as before.

Can we agree on this proposal? Candalua (talk) 21:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Some initial questions/thoughts....

• Why every wikilink within every namespace? For arguments sake, let's put aside the notion that works not completely proofread are not typically desired in the mainspace by transclusion with a handful of exceptions.

  I cannot come up with any logical reason, save maybe the User's namespace/sandbox for testing purposes, etc., where colored links are useful or a positive addition to the current frame work. From what I can gather, the only possible place where this feature may have some added value is when the <pages> command line is used in the mainspace to transclude a range of pages into one body of text from the Page: namespace. Other than that, reflecting the color status ProofReading level for every instance in every namespace is just annoying (imho). In addition, I imagine that such an across the board behavior would be confusing & hard to explain to the unfamilar newbie too. What other reasons are there to activate colored status across all namespaces besides the obvious main namespace? -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Activating classes is not the same thing as enabling colours, so: why not? As shown above, CSS can be used to ignore it except where it is explicitly desired. This is (IMO) how it should work. The classes are merely markers to say which links have which status. The local CSS rules "choose" when to express this as colours. Having the classes does not means having the colours (unless the CSS says so). Furthermore, you can do all sorts of interesting things, such as colour-on-mouseover, statused-pagenumbers, in-order status-bars or list the number of validated pages divided by the proofread ones times by the number of words if you have this info to hand. All of that can be gadgetised, separately. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 02:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't know about activating vs. enabling. All I'm asking is if the <pagequality level="#" ...> translates to a class name of quality# in the <pagelist> on the Index: page when assigned by the level of proofreading accomplished on a particular page in the Page: namespace why can't that class-name come along with pagenumber offset to the main namespace? I understand there is corresponding lines in the CSS that translate the quality# class name to a background color & it would be a matter of adding ns-0 those lines to achieve the same in the main IF that class name came along from the Index:'s <pagelist> with the manually assigned page number. You seem to be saying that's impossible; I just don't understand why. If I understood recent advances correctly - its possible to pull attributes and their values such as "name", "img" or "title" from things like full expanded external URLs so I just don't get why we need to fiddle with enabling or activating things across every namespace when it seems we should take advantage of the class-name already in the Index:'s <pagelist> or duplicate the conversion to a class name from the <pagequality level="#" ...> set in the Page: namespace. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:03, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll go though it very slowly, it's not that hard:

1. The server constructs the HTML for a page on this wiki out of wikitext
2. When it comes across a link to the page namespace, it currently goes "hmm, a pagespace link! what fun! Is the page I am rendering in the Index space? If yes, I shall add information about the proofread status. If no, I won't."
3. You get the index page, and all the pagelinks have the classes applied
4. The CSS, which is local to each wiki says "Ooh, status classes! That one goes red, this one goes green, and these are all yellow!"
5. In the other namespaces, the CSS goes "Oh, no status classes, better move on then"

What Candalua is proposing is that the second step is skipped, all pages get the data, and the CSS makes the decision about when and where it applies the the colours. Currently it slaps colour everywhere, and that is not good. The change that would stop that has already been presented and ignored.

If you want that data elsewhere currently, you currently have to troll off, load up all relevant index pages and parse out the data with regular expressions, or construct a big API call and interpret the returned data. Either one is a complex hack when you can just get the data handed to you, in place, for free, by the server, which has all this data sitting in a vast, fast, efficient database. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 03:45, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

What elsewhere??? Where else would having the color status be useful?? Sorry I just don't buy that the intent is anything but for the pagenumbering alongside/inline with transcluded content in the mainspace. I get that to achieve this, every page namespace based link must inherit the class name indicating quality level from the server and then canceled out via CSS locally if need be. What I don't get is the argument to set the possibilities free so any and all can manipulate this feature when it boils down to doing the same thing pagenum does now plus indicating the PR staus by color. Can't we add the pagenum class along with the quality class at the server level and modify things so that the span actually formats the way it currently does via the same css namespace specific inclusions/exclusions? -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

The proposal is to add the quality class at the server level. The CSS doesn't cancel out anything, it just ignores the class except when it is told to colour it (index space). Classes and colours are not the same thing. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 15:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

• If the above holds true, why add a new class for this? Forgive me if I botch things here - I am not an expert coder.

  The pagenum span class already handles the transclusion of the Index: assigned page number and a given range of Pages:. The <pagelist> command found on every main Index: template not only handles the conversion of individual .DjVu positions to assigned scanned page numbers but also inherits the Proofreading status' quality class & associated color from each of those pages as well. So if the <pagelist> command in one namespace can inherit the color status of individual pages in the Page: namespace why is it so hard to mimic the behavior <pagelist> normally exhibits but in the mainspace somehow?

  The previous implementation prior to the correction (if I'm not mistaken) required something up to 4 or 5 spans to achieve what currently takes two at the most; one of them being the existing pagenum class. Is this because some domains are stuck on dynamic layouts while others no longer use it? -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

The code that was damaged was the code which applied these classes, at the server end, only to the index namespace. With that code damaged, it was applied to all pages, which the CSS wasn't written to handle, hence colours everywhere. The information is now simply not given for the other namespaces. Because this info is very easy for the sever to give, and very hard to do at the client end without at least a complex API call (which gets a bit problematic when the number of links exceeds the API call limit, which happens, especially in index pages), it makes more sense (again IMO) to add the data to all pages, and let the client side (your brower) figure out what to do with the information. In many cases, the answer would be "nothing", but people on all Wikisources have the option to use it as they see fit, both at a site level (for example, IIRC, noWS and svWS used it to colour the pagenumbers), and at a personal level (gadgets that use the information). Without it, all you can do is not have it.

Pagenumbers are a different matter. I previously proposed splitting the pagenumber and dynamic layout code, as it is not the same thing, and either or both could theoretically be gadgetised. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 02:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I beg to differ - nobody has shown any useful example of anything this color coding could or would provide other than possibly having pagenums behave the same way as found on sister domains but with text-progress boxes instead of colors once transcluded into the main namespace. Describe it however one wishes to - THE issue at hand here is the tiny embedded page number(s) along the margin of a body of transcluded text in the mainspace linking back to their base Page: in the Page: namespace. To say otherwise feels disengenous.

If you say its easier for the server to "dump" this info everywhere rather than selectively envoke it when need or selected via a preference option, then I don't think this is worth it. Again, how many pages are being transclused max. under one mainspace title? 100? 200? Our POS 'pooter can't handle ~200 pages at a time? -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:03, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

What is the negative that you consider to be "not worth it" from adding more information to the served data, given that the data is invisible unless you ask to see it? Plus, consider that some sister domains seem to like having the option, and stripping the classes removes that, for all subdomains.

And no, actually, our dynamic page numbers would not get the classes, as they are added client-side, without the server feeding it the necessary information, hence no colours! That could be added if people wish, but it is in the pagenumbers.js code, and would not even notice the classes being added without someone writing a function into the code to take notice of the classes. Therefore: different matter. Plus, even if it was added, it could be, drumroll, made optional, as you are free to ignore the classes.

The API limit is large, but not as large as some of our books. Making AJAX call(s) for the data (over the API or by scraping the index pages) are more HTTP requests when you could just be handed the data for free along with the page. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 03:45, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

The "negative" seems to me is that this movement is forking the designated function of the pagenum span and its "class/settings" (i.e to display alongside/inline transcluded content linking back to to its orginator pagebreak in the Page: namespace) with some other span and its class that will do the same thing and bastardize the assigned page numbering along the way somehow (back to 4 or 5 spans, some of them hidden or with null values, that will function like the one or two max already in place. I get it, sites not forking the embedded page numbers-to-transcluded-content schem will not be hampered by the other fork (pagenums and its related .js's ) because those portions have been dumped for the new approach but sites stuck with old way of doing things will have the additional bloat of the original regime plus the option to hide most if not all of the new scheme. Either dump the existing convoluted setup for a single new way of displaying embedded page numbers along the margins of transcluded content or fix the existing setup & designations to re-use the already utilized portions. The only way I'd support the change would be for one fork (old pagenum scheme) or the other (new free for all mode for lack of a better term) not both being present or capable on en.WS at the same time. Of course it costs nothing if you're a domain lucky enough to be dealing with just one fork of a single embedded page linking function development, & then templatize or localize or gadgetize as desired without the burden of the still keeping current regime already in place. I don't get the sense we're one of the lucky domains given the current state of things. Would all that be a fair assesment regardless? -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Not really, no. At least it is not an assessment of this proposal. This proposal is about adding semantic information to links to the page namespace. Whatever people do with it, in this subdomain or others, from optional link-colouring to adding gadgets that feed on the hidden information, is a different matter. As I said, our pagenumbers won't even be affected, since they are not server-generated links and wouldn't get the classes anyway. If you don't like the pagenumber code, that is another matter. Entirely. The only connection is that page numbers happen to be links to the page namespace. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 15:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

• I think it could be useful to indicate to the user the status of a given page of text that has been transcluded to mainspace but not fully proofread. An alternative would be to get the background of the transcluded text itself to be slightly shaded (not proofread, proofread but not validated, etc.) Validated background would remain plain white. --Eliyak T·C 23:46, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

If the classes are present, that can probably be arranged using a gadget that uses them as an information source. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 02:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

• Support, as extra information can only be useful. If people don't want to see it, they can just not be used. You can't, however, get at what isn't there, so if people did want it, they are out of luck without it. This change affects all Wikisources, some of which already used the colours to their satisfaction, and no longer have them. However, I don't think we need to create new classes. Applying the old ones to all page NS links and enabling only in specific cases with CSS (example in the 1.19 bug section) is exactly the same, less complex, less breakable and more understandable. The code change is simple: remove two lines, and then every WS is free to implement whichever JS/CSS things they like at the site and personal level. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 02:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
• Comment - I am yet to understand the purpose of colouring links to the Page namespace from other namespaces (other than Index - of course). Until I can understand the benefits to WS and the community of doing so, I can't support this proposal. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

This isn't about colouring the links. It's about making the status information available to the browser (so CSS and JS can act on it). At present all this information does is provide a marker for the CSS to colour the links, but if available universally, could be used for client-side processing of the statuses. The colours do not necessarily follow the classes, that is up to the local CSS rules, which can easily be written to colour only in the index space (code has been given for this). This is a discussion about the classes, not the colours. They aren't the same thing at all. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 14:45, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

• comment well I am close to completely lost in all your battle with jargon, and when the conversation gets buried in technical detail. So let us bring this back to a principle, and then let the technical variations flow from there, or be discussed and proposed to the community. So please start again again, and talk in what is the principle of what you are proposing. My basic request is that the outcome of any changes is that the default look for our public-oriented namespaces is default normal text. Any customisation that flows from adding class to the links can then be implemented by gadgets or the applications in their respective namespace. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:25, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

• Exactly. The "classes" are an invisible source of information, nothing more. The proposal allows all page NS links to have an invisible little tag in their HTML which says "this link points to a proofread/validated/etc page". This can then be used for whatever people like. Subdomains can apply site-wide "CSS rules" (which are nothing more than a browser directive to say "hey, you see all those "classes"? If they are in this place in that situation, do something the user can see!") to, say, make their page-numbered coloured (svWS, noWS and itWS all had this system to my knowledge, enWS did not), or individual users can have "gadgets" (tiny, optional, browser-based programs which "feed" on the class information) to do things like Eliyak suggested above. I am not advocating having the status colours in any new places, least of all the mainspace. If the proposal is enacted and the Common.css tweaked to match, there would be no visible change to any page on enWS. I'm sorry if this is still too technical but I'm struggling to explain how it all plugs together without using the names. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 03:47, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
• The claim that this change will make for additional data or information to become available for further manipulation across a site on down to the individual contributor, with little to no difference in appearance, behavior or cost in resources, seems to be 100% accurate. Logic dictates the more the available choices the more the possibile outcomes - I can't argue with that (especially at the technical level). The factor not calculated in with that train of logic, however, is the fact that not all the WS domains are currently building upon the same measurable baseline or standardized frame-work. Yes, every domain should have some level or degree of normal differences from one to the next, but I'm talking about differences that go beyond what one would normally expect from site-to-site; ones that make any assesment of the pros & cons involved here skewed enough to invalidate the typical perception or assumption that a net benefit for us specifically as the result of implementation would be on parity with others generally. That chasm between the foundations from one sister-domain to the next is also the reason behind why nobody has presented any serious ideas or examples for what to do with this new found data in spite of fact that the logic behind supporting the proposal is spot-on overall. Sadly for us, the truth is many choices will never materialize in full, if in any way, shape or form at all.

  Here is briefly why: We still nurse on oldwiksource's teat for importing the supplemental scripts & junk to the "stuff" being used universally by everybody currently on the servers for some reason; other sites import only some of that supplemental stuff if any of it whatsoever. We have a standing policy that promotes proofreading be completed prior to mainspace transclusion with few exceptions; other sites beg to differ with us policy & practice wise on that same point. We wouldn't be able to color code our embedded Page: links with the PR status level even if it wasn't contrary to our local policy - couldn't do it even if the majority of our community demanded it; other sites, however, don't use the pagenum class and MediaWiki template as we are forced to & still more don't deal with full blown dynamic layouts the way we have to. Those sites falling into that kind of starting baseline, ones so different from our's currently, will of course be able instantly utilize the new data rather easily. End of story.

  That said, I'm more inclined to toss "principle" in the trash at this point and support the proposal even if it only serves to further drive a wedge into the notion that old wikisource is still some sort of community hub for overall positive development for all the Wikisource domains out there, big or small. Quite the opposite has been slowly taking place in my view and this particular conflict for or against implementation is just another unintended consequence born from its continued utilization (development wise that is). Anything universally salvagable that is currently hosted on old wikisource should be formally made part of the "stuff" already up on the servers whenever possible and any remaining bits & pieces folks are absolutely hooked on having should be made into gadgets for optional and/or local use only. Taking these few initial steps won't resolve the current divide between the sister domains and en.WS but it sure will lessen the gap from that point on. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:11, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• comment: sorry for not replying, but I just don't have the time to read all this. Thanks to Inductiveload for his constancy in replying to all comments. Candalua (talk) 20:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

(BTW, I see that my original message was slightly changed by someone else - look in the history to find who did it. Maybe it was done with the intent of clarifying things, but I think it's not polite to change other people's messages.) Candalua (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

• It appears to me that GO3 has lifted his opposition and that this discussion (which I rather think should've taken place at the multilingual wikisource) can be closed with a bugzilla to activate the class. The local css will be modified as necessary to maintain the status quo as far as the appearance of non-index space pages (i.e. en.ws will not enable the colors), as local enabling has not been directly discussed and there would be clear opposition. It has been less than 24 hours since the last post by GO3 on this matter and he's not currently active, so I will wait until a reasonable time after he is next active before filing the bugzilla, in case I've misinterpreted him.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 08:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

bug 36979. Candalua (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposal to modify the {{fsx}} template

Currently, this template is supposed to adjust the line heights of various font sizes, but it has no visual effect on the line height when font sizes are less than 100%.

I prepared samples with the current fsx template where the line height is set to 1.5em, and my proposed modifications based on the percentage of the 100% font size being equal to 140% line height.

The samples are here and the modifications are controlled from two Sandboxes: for 120% line height of font size of 93%-88% and for 115% line height of font size of 87%-83%, knowing that there is no difference in the font size of Arial from 93% to 88%, and from 87% to 83%.

It should be mentioned that experiments were also made with 'em' changes of 1.3em for the 90% and 1.25em for the 85% font size ranges.

If the community agrees to the change, it can be implemented with a series of 'if' statements - something that needs to be done by someone who knows programming.

Risking excessive verbosity - my reason for asking for this modification is that I use fsx 85% for thousands of PSM image captions, many of which are several lines long and they look poor and amateurish. Without line height adjustment, the 90% font size is indistinguishable from the 100% as can be seen in these poems. — Ineuw talk 05:02, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

P.S: Here is a perfect example of the description's current line height. — Ineuw talk 05:10, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Addendum: Here is a perfect example of the description's corrected line height by the application of the new template.— Ineuw talk 04:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Add WSexport to sidebar

Are there any objections to adding the WSexport tool to the sidebar so we can download in EPUB format? According to Oldwikisource:Wikisource:WSexport, we just need to add this to MediaWiki:Common.js:

//link "Download as EPUB"
 if (wgNamespaceNumber == 0) {
   $(document).ready( function () {
     mw.util.addPortletLink(
       'p-coll-print_export',
       '//toolserver.org/~tpt/wsexport/book.php?lang=en&format=epub&page=' + mw.config.get('wgPageName'),
       'Download as EPUB',
       'n-epubExport',
       'Download an EPUB version of this page',
       '',
       '#t-print'); 
   });
 }

I've used it a few times directly from the toolserver and once from my personal javascript; it seems to work. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Can we try it as a gadget? All working well, then we can have it as a default YES, and then later we can look at all our links and see how it fits within the kit of links. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:30, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Please please add this. Linnea (talk) 19:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I had to figure out how gadgets work but I've done that and the tool is now gadgetised. I've tested the new gadget a few times since going live and each test succeeded. The EPUBs are not perfect but I believe that's due to the tool itself and the difficulty in automatically generating files. Not that the EPUBs are bad; the worst I've noticed so far is that different text sizes do not seem to be supported. Anyway, it is currently the last gadget in the list, under "Development", in preferences. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Yay thanks! Different text sizes are no-no in ebooks because you want to change the font setting on the reader depending of the screen size and screen orientation and so on. There are some work left to do still. Left and right settings don't work on epub. I mean, it is not good when the image is forced to have text on it's side. All images should be "hanging free" because there is no page breaks. But it is ok. At least now we can read wikisource easily on ebook readers. :) Linnea (talk) 18:55, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Relative text sizes work fine in ebooks, and seem to be more or less a necessity--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Flood option that administrators can apply

I would like to put before the community an extra right that I believe would be beneficial to the community's toolkit. The right is the flood flag, and it would be used by any of our administrators and to be applied for a temporary period on themself or another user where there is the need for a series of edits to be obscured from the standard setting of RecentChanges; and instead to have them visible through the same filter for displaying bot edits; specifically this is to stop the flood of the standard RC setting so that patrolling of edits is not adversely affected. The sort of times that I would see that this option would be used would be situations similar to where I recently added {{authority control}} template to a few hundred author pages, or Hesperian's work on disambiguations. The former a situation where a standard bot could not be applied, the latter one where bot like actions required with some administrator guidance, both unnecessary for applying formal bot-type operations.

I would suggest that the management of the rights should be similar to how we are currently self-managing the options for Abuse Filter and Autopatrol in that a reasoned explanation in the summary line will suffice. All application of rights are logged at Special:Log/rights and visible via Special:ListUsers and if we look at the example at meta, through Special:Listusers/flood. The holding of the right would and should be applied for a short term period. If the community is in favour of requesting the right (done via bugzilla:), I would suggest that we look to review the application of the self-management of rights three and twelve months after adoption of the tool, to review the allocation of the right. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:23, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

No Objections. Jeepday (talk) 13:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Bugzilla:36863 — billinghurst sDrewth 14:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

BOT approval requests

PSM maintenance in Page:ns

Request to operate with User:MpaaBot in Page:ns on PSM in order to:

1. standardize font sizes to 85% and apply the new template {{fs85}}. This template modifies the line-height to 1.1em for image descriptions.
2. standardize font sizes for blocks of text to 90% and apply the new template {{fs90}}. This template modifies the line-height to 1.2em for blocks of text.

Bot will be semi-automated, launched in batches manually via python and supervised.
Expected number of pages affected: 8k.--Mpaa (talk) 19:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Help

• See Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help

Question on Copyright

I want to add the text for the Gregory Deal. For those not familiar with Irish Politicial History, the Gregory Deal was a confidence and supply agreement negotiated between the leader of Fianna Fail Charles Haughey and the T.D. for Dublin Central, Tony Gregory. The agreement was reached in the aftermath of the February 1982 Irish General election. In return for supporting Haughey as Taoiseach Gregory demanded a massive £100 million Punt cash injection for Gregory's Dublin Central constituency which at the time was the poorest in Ireland. The agreement was made public when Gregory entered it into the Dail record. I currently have a copy of the deal. It's in the form of an appendix in Gregory's biography. I'm just wondering would a document like that be subject to copyright rules or can I put it up on this site? Exiledone (talk) 20:42, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Tricky one, and one that I would need to think about. We cannot publish under fair use, so it is looking to see what is justifiable (Help:Copyright tags). My first question would be what is the copyright of the Dail record? How does Irish legislation deal with that and parliamentary records? — billinghurst sDrewth 22:06, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd assume there's no copyright on something said in parliament (Dail Eireann). I should add that the following was entered into the Dail record by Gregory. The actually copy of the deal which I have is much longer. Though there is a superscipt reference to it in the debates which I think means the entire document was entered into the Dail record. Ill forward you the link.

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1982/03/09/00004.asp Exiledone (talk) 23:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

We can't go on such an assumption. Statements made in Parliament may already be under copyright (e.g. reading a passage from a book) but exempt for purposes of using in Parliament or Parliament may hold the copyright to their records, or various other possibilities. We must know what the Irish copyright law is for such matters. An Act of Parliament would be a different matter altogether, as even if Irish law recognized a copyright to an Act, which would be unusual, it would not likely be recognized in the United States. Entering something on the record in Parliament is far different from Parliament passing a statute.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 08:08, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Tabular data OCR?

I just resumed work on Richard Nixon's 1969 Presidential Daily Diary. It's essentially a giant tabular appointment book, which we represent with some excellent templates made by T. Mazzei. However, between the repetitive nature of the text, the uselessness of the scanned by column OCR which has to be scrapped entirely, and the work one has to put into arranging everything into the templates, it's pretty slow going, and with around 2000 pages that's a problem. If it were possible to have it automatically formatted and populated with the OCRed text, the job would be substantially faster and less tedious. Does anyone have access to OCR software which could handle that? Not asking anyone to see it through to the end, rather any output which could potentially be transformed into the formatted end would be tremendously helpful. Prosody (talk) 00:21, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Adding documents to wikisource

Hi

I have two documents - or rather, I have typed out the text of two documents, word for word - that can be included on wikisource and linked to relevant pages on wikipedia.

I have no idea how to do this and I find the help pages confusing. Can you help please?

Thanks Mark —unsigned comment by 92.41.93.36 (talk) 03:47, 23 February 2012‎.

Hello. Thanks for your offer to contribute. Here's the short version of what you need to do if you'd like to contribute a text:

1. Check if we already have it. Go to the search box in the upper right hand corner and type in some possible titles and see if it comes up with anything.

2. Confirm that it's eligible. Basically we accept any published work which we're legally allowed to distribute (i.e. no copyright problems). This usually means that the work's copyright has to have expired. If it was published before 1923 it's good. If it isn't, it could still be public domain, just provide some details and someone will research it.

3. Open a new page for the work and make header that gives information about the work. Type the title for the work in the search box in the upper right again, then click the red link that says "Create the page [title] on this wiki!" Then copy and paste the contents of the gray box from {{Header}} (the part in betweeen the squiggly brackets) into the new page. Next, fill out what you can. For example, if I were uploading The Tempest, I would fill it out like this.

{{header
 | title      = The Tempest
 | author     = William Shakespeare
 | translator = 
 | section    = 
 | previous   = 
 | next       = 
 | year       = 1610-11
 | notes      = 
}}

The title, author, and year bits are the most important. If it isn't translated just leave translator blank. The rest are mostly for navigation in multi-page works, you don't have to worry about that yet.

4. Upload it. Copy and paste the work that you typed out into the new page after the header section. Then click save. You'll be redirected to the newly created page.

5. One last thing you should do is click "Talk" on the new page and then copy and paste the contents of the gray box from {{Textinfo}} (the part in betweeen the squiggly brackets) into that new page, then fill out what you can. This gives information about the edition you used so other editors can collaborate. For example, if I were uploading The Tempest, I would fill it out like this.

{{textinfo
| edition      = Oxford Shakespeare, 1914
| source       = [physical book]
| contributors = ~~~
| progress     = Proofread and corrected {{75%}}
| notes        = 
| proofreaders = ~~~
}}

The edition is the most important here, try to get down the publisher and date. The source is just a link to a website if it's from one or a mention that it's copied from a book otherwise. Writing three tidles in the contributors field just adds your username/IP so you're recorded as the editor. The progress thing is explained a little bit on the {{Textinfo}} page, basically if you've proofread something then just copy the "Proofread and corrected {{75%}}" bit. Proofreaders is same as contributors.

If you have any more questions feel free to ask. Thanks again. Prosody (talk) 19:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I would like to proofread

I was wanting to add The Intrigues, Amours, & Adventures of Rachel Cunningham (available http://www.archive.org/details/TheIntriguesAmoursAdventuresOfRachelCunninghamCalledFromHerMany ) and http://www.archive.org/details/rosettaproject_ixj_gen-1 for the Spanish wikisource, but it looks like you guys don't want plaintext and want me to proofread scans...can somebody upload the scans and get that page ready, for me to proofread it then? I guess one page would be on en. and one on es. if there is someone here who can do both? StillNotKing (talk) 16:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I've started the upload of the first file. With the second one, I can't tell what the licence should be. Why is this document in the public domain (or licenced)? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:12, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

No help on this I suppose? The first I still cannot find, the second I cannot find on es. ; I believe all archive.org books are public domain, I assume the Long Now Foundation put it that way. StillNotKing (talk) 06:47, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, the above did not work (I'm not sure why). Anyway, I've done the first one manually: Index:Adventures of Rachel Cunningham.djvu. For the second one, it might be better to ask on Spanish Wikisource. Even if the Long Fow Foundation have licensed it, I don't know what licence they have used. Without that, the file my be deleted on Wikimedia Commons for not having a licence. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:52, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

PDF scan of a book with two pages per PDF page

Hello. I have a PD book which I'd like to do in Wikisource with Proofread, but it is scanned with two real pages per one PDF page. What should I do? Wizardist (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You could transcribe everything from each PDF page into the Page: namespace, the same as if you had one page of text with two columns on it. Angr 15:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I can do that, but question concerned quite a different side. Anyway, the solution I've found is to use <section /> tag. Wizardist (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't recommend that. We've had a number of these, especially on la.ws and fr.ws too, I think. Simply convert to jpg or tiff and split it using the bot script that Inductiveload developed. Mattwj2002 also has the script, I've never used it but can probably dig it up and figure it out with some work. If it's OCRd you'll have to re-OCR it after the split of course, if you plan to use the OCR text as a starting point. Then either convert to DjVu or upload as jpegs to commons, depending on size and whether you can attach a usable text layer. Check with inductiveload for details.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 08:28, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Here it is: User:Inductiveload/Scripts/Image splitter.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 17:32, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I think using #lst for this is a profoundly bad idea.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 12:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Here is the file: File:Geografija Eŭropy. Pradmova Ahlad.pdf. Wizardist (talk) 12:39, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Yes, this is a classic case and can be split quite easily using ImageMagick and Inductiveload's script, I am fairly certain - I'll see if I can do it or get it done. So this is for posting on the Belarusian Wikisource, I take it.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 14:56, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I would make it myself, but I have Linux on the desktop at my job, my laptop is on Windows and I'm not aware of the ways to accomplish here, so your help would be very appreciated! Yes, this file is for the newly created Belarusian Wikipedia. Thanks :) Wizardist (talk) 15:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I encountered that two-page scan problem so I saved each scanned image as two pages and then cropped them in half creating two .jpg images. If any were skewed or messed up in any way I corrected that image before placing all images into a PDF file. For example, sometimes images are rotated too far to the right, or left, so I rotated them to vertical and re-saved the former bad image. If there were library stamps, or bookplates, I edited those out completely so that even the .PDF file I created looks clean and properly vertical.—William Maury Morris II ^Talk 12:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

login name - stupid question - sorry

I've got a wikipedia account, but the login doesn't work on wikisource. Is this because there is a problem with my login or is it that I need a separate account for wikisource?

I hate asking entry-level questions like this and feel stupid as it's so basic, but there is no guidance on this in either the home or help pages.

Most likely you need to unify your wiki account info in order to use the same name and password as you've already setup in Wikipedia for accessing the other wiki sites. Go back to Wikipedia and login, open your user preferences and then open unify accounts (manage global accounts) then try again back here. Its been a long time but I'm pretty sure that's all you need to do nowadays. -- George Orwell III (talk)

Thank you, I found it on the WP user profile tab and it worked as you said. Asnac (talk) 08:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Help Please

Portal talk:Southern Historical Society Jump to: navigation, search

I found a few books on Archive.org that have chapters on John Pelham I would like to help proofread - if somebody could upload them and set them up here?

http://www23.us.archive.org/details/waritsheroes00ayre

http://archive.org/details/wearinggray00cookrich

GallantPelhams (talk) 23:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I would not know how to place them on Wikisource but you are correct in they both are good books. However, neither of those two books are a part of the 52 volumes of the Southern Historical Society Papers so I suppose they would have to be placed elsewhere. They also have good illustrations. I am wondering if you are you planning to do only two John Pelham articles, one in each book, or other entries in those two books as well? Perhaps you would fare better if you re-post your message on 1 "Scriptorium" where abundant help exists. Everything I have stated is just a suggestion by a worker on the 52 SHSP volumes. Kindest regards, —William Maury Morris II Talk 01:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I would personally only do the parts on Pelham, but I assume with time other people would find other sections they found interesting, and in a few months or years we'd have the books complete. GallantPelhams (talk) 05:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I understand. There are unfinished books including some I intend to finish because I asked for them. But the two books that you mention are not a part of the volumes of the Southern Historical Society "Papers" which are all in volumes. What you need is for someone to set-up the books for you in a different area away from these 52 volumes. The books you mention are not a part of the 52 volumes. There are many excellent Southern books and they are in many places but none are a part of the 52 volumes of the Southern Historical Society "Papers" which are unique in their own right. I do not presently have the knowledge to set up books or I would do that for both you and myself. There are good books and I am a Southerner by birth and I love "Deart 'Ole Dixie" and these United States that I served in the military for in the late 1960s. You need to ask an administrator who knows how to set up your chosen books. Again, Scriptorium, is the place to ask for that and some good-hearted person with the know-how would help. The parts only on the Gallent Pelham would just be articles. Personally, I would try to get the books set up and if that did not work I would just find an area, give it a proper title, and then type in the articles. The administrators would notice if they are in a wrong area and probably just move your work to a proper area. I have done this with several books and as a few articles a few years back. I do not know what rules about that method would be at this time. I did those books a couple of years ago. Everyone is always busy helping others and trying to do works they themselves want to do but after you place a request in Wikisource Scriptorium someone will help you in some manner. It sometimes takes a couple of days from what I have seen for that help. If after placing your request in Scriptorium, I myself would just start writing articles but please don't try to blend them into the Southern Historical Society's "Papers" consisting of 52 established volumes. Okay? Kind regards, —William Maury Morris II Talk 18:28, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

---

I have copied all of the above in an attempt to ask for help with this situation. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 18:58, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

---

---

If you wish to upload IA material to the commons it's not a problem.

1. From Internet archive, download the djvu file of the book to your computer:
   1. Access the download copy through the HTML page on the left panel of the book page: waritsheroes00ayre.djvu
2. You need an account on the commons.
3. Search for and save the category for later: Commons categories
4. Use the Upload Wizard to upload to the commons.
5. The Upload Wizard requires the following parameters:

• Page 2 of the upload process

1. 1. The source URL specified as http://www23.us.archive.org/details/waritsheroes00ayre Internet Archive
   2. Specify the author: Ayres & Wade (Richmond, Va.)
   3. Specify the license by selecting: Published in the USA prior to 1923.

• Page 3 of the upload process

1. 1. Specify a description for the book.
   2. Specify the year of publication: 1864?
   3. Specify the selected category.
2. Click Finish.

I hope this helps. — Ineuw talk 20:17, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

ProofreadPage number/range limitation?

I'm trying to create Richard Nixon Presidential Daily Diary/1969/November with content <pages index="Richard Nixon's presidential daily calendar - 1969.djvu" from=1697 to=1849 /> and getting the Wikimedia error page. Is this a known problem? I wouldn't think 150 pages would be that bad, but maybe the high page numbers are doing something odd? Prosody (talk) 20:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

To be specific, it's a timeout. Prosody (talk) 20:09, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, so it went through and this happened. What do? Prosody (talk) 20:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't know too much about it but it appears we've exceeded the internal limits per page. Somewhere near the end of HTML code, we find:

NewPP limit report
Preprocessor node count: 1002402/1000000
Post-expand include size: 2048000/2048000 bytes
Template argument size: 654154/2048000 bytes
Expensive parser function count: 2/500

I believe this means we have too many templates in play. See here for more info. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense. I've split it up to accommodate that. Much obliged. Prosody (talk) 22:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Well the other option would have been to cut down on the number of "lazy" templates in use for their HTML counterparts. For example - embedding the {{Center}} template just to align a short phrase or chapter heading dozens of times within another even more complex template that can be called hundreds of times throughout a body of work can defeat the purpose and intent of wikicoding in the first place. Its easier to remove all chance of overkill in those cases by going with simple HTML tags & styling instead for simple formatting tasks. Of course, finding the balance between the two approaches is always the best practice. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:41, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

There are other advantages to replacing templates with html/css and I fully concur with GO3 on this. Overuse of templates hinders our ability to work with the other language subdomains effectively and removes formatting control from the editor/proofreader/typesetter/whatever you want to call yourself. Although this isn't a multilingual work, the general use of html/css is preferable in my opinion - broadly speaking, there are many places where it would be too complex or simply non-functional but centering text is not one of those. {{center}} also contains class="tiInherit" and places the divs on different lines causing padding of the centered text vertically, which isn't always desirable and anybody messing with the template will change your formatting. I have switched to always using <div style="text-align:center"> text </div>.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 08:21, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Quite true - when we wikify a typical HTML div block through a template such as {{center}} that has them opening & closing on their own "lines", we wind up inserting paragraph tags (also a block) containing the input text without even realizing it thanks to the wikicoding. This makes the div's class dealing with indentation pretty much pointless and the div's style subject to the paragraph tag's defaults at the same time (thus, your messed up vertical padding). A block wrapping another block containing just a word or two is the typical example of overkill around here. -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Spurious Sidenote

IN : The_Statutes_at_Large_(Ruffhead)/Volume1/Magna_Carta around CAP I. There is a sidenoted that is rendering twice.

It should only be rendering once.

Can someone please explain where I've made a typo, or is this a knwon bug that needs to be flagged up?

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

NOTABUG - This turned out to be a typo in the markup which meant a section got included twice :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Index:Southern Life in Southern Literature.djvu

Hi. I need help in fixing this djvu file. Two pages are missing, luckily there are two "free" pages soon after, as two other pages have been scanned twice.
What (I think) is needed to fix the problem is:

djvu page 340 -> to replace djvu page 342 (can be done as this page is repeated later)

djvu page 341 -> to replace djvu page 343 (can be done as this page is repeated later)

File:Southern_Life_in_Southern_Literature_text_page_322.jpg in commons to be inserted in djvu page 340

File:Southern_Life_in_Southern_Literature_text_page_323.jpg in commons to be inserted in djvu page 341

and upload of the update djvu. I hope I can the care of the rest. Thanks in advance.--Mpaa (talk) 16:31, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I've created a new DjVu but I'm getting Wikimedia's "Our servers are currently experiencing a technical problem" error message. I'll try again later but if anyone else has better luck, go ahead and try yourself. Incidentally, the two new pages are noticeably different than the others (as well as larger, I didn't want to alter them too much at this stage) and have no OCR layer. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks a lot! After posting I finally decided to give a try with djvu processing myself. It was about time to learn … I also noticed that the 2 pages were much bigger compared to the rest of the file but I did not dare to do anything at my first trial. I was happy enough I could insert/delete the pages. I just saw you have beaten me by 15 min. Any way/purpose to delete an unneeded (mine) and definitely less reliable version from commons now?--Mpaa (talk) 20:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I think a Commons admin will need to do that. However, if it works, I'd leave it alone. I got an error message right at the end of the upload (around 99%) so I'm not entirely sure how successful it was. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

OK. BTW what did you do to get a smaller size? What I did was: 1. remove pages with djvm -d … 2. create djvu image for each page with c44 page-n.jpg, which generated page-n.djvu 3. insert pages back with djvm -i. But I ended up with 2Mb more than your file … --Mpaa (talk) 20:50, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

The method I used was: 1) Split the main DjVu file into individual pages with DjVuToy, 2) Converted the Jpegs to DjVu with DjVuSolo, 3) Deleted and renamed pages in the split version manually, 4) Copied the pages from step two into the folder full of split pages, 5) Recombined the DjVu file with DjVuToy. I prefer GUI-based software but DjVuSolo is no longer supported and I found DjVuToy somewhere on the internet once (it seems OK but I can't really guarantee that it's safe to run); I don't even know much about the latter's origin although the website listed in its About window is here. However, my file actually appears to be slightly smaller than the original so maybe there was an error somewhere during the upload. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Floating image in center help needed

Of all the thousands of picture pages proofread, this is the first time I came across such a problem, and I am stumped. I am trying to position center image ON THIS PAGE, so that the text surrounds it. For some reason, I can't even position the image in the center when it's placed in a table. My thanks in advance. — Ineuw talk 07:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The documentation for {{Img float}} simply says "Text does not wrap around centre-aligned images." I don't recall seeing it successfully done in any wikimedia article. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:20, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe it can be achieved in this case. I will give it a go. --Eliyak T·C 18:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

On second thought, it's not worth the trouble. The page will look very different with the wider line width after transclusion. I will just put all 3 images on a line. --Eliyak T·C 18:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Out of topic but I see the link posted (ON THIS PAGE) as problematic, while the page is proofread. Wonder why.--Mpaa (talk) 19:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)In spite of all my previous page refresh, CTRL-F5, etc. After saving it turned yellow …--Mpaa (talk) 19:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Because I accepted Eliyak's solution and the text was already proofread. It's no longer problematic. My reply and your comment were made at the same time. :-)— Ineuw talk 19:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

No, it was not that, there was a delay in the system in refreshing status. I checked just before editing. My saving probably triggered a refresh somewhere.--Mpaa (talk) 21:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Elyak. I learned something useful and important. I am referring to the image size preceded by the "x" (as in x225px) to control the length. I am taking advantage of this post to ask another, somewhat related question with the following subtitle.

When to enclose values in double quotes?

What's the best universal practice with parameter values of numbers or letters, as in width="300" or width=300, or section begin=ineuw, or section begin="ineuw"? So far there were no errors with or without quotations, but I am not sure if this is so in all situations. — Ineuw talk 19:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know (and that's not very far), it only matters if there are spaces, so section begin=james is fine but either section begin=james_johnson or section begin="james johnson". Somebody with more experience should comment though.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. — Ineuw talk 17:07, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I beg to differ - though some standards allow for the ommission of quotes encasing the values of certain attributes, including "wikicode", they are almost always automatically added and present when inspecting the underlying source HTML being viewed in the end anyway. The W3 specs, as old as they may be in today's terms, still recommends using them even if only for "possible future backward compatibility" reasons (whatever that means). -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:18, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Table overflowing to next page

Could someone please take a look at these pages of Manual of the New Zealand Flora: page 150 and page 151. In the "final version" (Manual_of_the_New_Zealand_Flora/Leguminosæ) a part of the table is not on the right place.

Is there - by the way - a good introduction on these kind of "overflow"-problems, somewhere on a help page?

Dick Bos (talk) 11:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at Help:Page breaks#Tables across page breaks. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanx. I think I did it as described, but still the final edition doesn't show up right. Dick Bos (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. We need to amend that help page a little to deal with the nop issue. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I tried to change the help page. Please check it. And if anyone could explain what happens here, that might be interesting. I don't understand it. But apparently it works. - Dick Bos (talk) 17:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Copyright

I have a question about a work of Stith Thompson: Motif-Index of Folk-Literature, 2nd ed., 6 vols. There a two visible printings on HathiTrust, the first from 1955 to 1958 (missing vol. 2) and the second from 1966. Both have a copyright notice "All rights reserved" (valid?) and I dont have found any renewal entrys (Stanford, Rutgers, Copyright Office and the Google search of the Pennsylvania scans for Stith Thompson and Motif-Index). So I guess it is PD-US-no-renewal, but I dont knew if the second printing does effects the copyright of the first, so PD or not? --enomil (talk) 17:51, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Not having researched it myself and therefore trusting your research regarding the non-renewal, you would be correct: PD-US-no-renewal. The later printing has no effect on the copyright of earlier printings, or even of the later printed edition, except that any material that wasn't in an earlier printing will generally have a separate copyright. In other words, if it's printed 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1966, 1973, and all printings are identical except for the printing data page (and maybe the title page, etc.) the copyright remains 1951 and if not renewed the work is PD even if you happen to have the 1973 scans - this requires knowing it's identical though - which isn't easy. Although mere printing dates may imply that the works are the same you can't necessarily count on it and the other way round, copyright dates for subsequent printings are often copyfraud, as in the above example claiming copyright 1973 when there is no new material. Bottom line, if your research is good, the work is PD.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 16:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Help is asked for a sections problem of two consecutive PSM articles

The end and begin sections of THIS PAGE are properly defined but regardless, in the main namespace they overlap the two consecutive articles and I can't figure out what's wrong. If someone can take a look whenever it's possible, I would most appreciate it. — Ineuw talk 23:47, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think its you - it seems another ugrade of the goofreading page extension is causing this. I'm going to go look for other examples where one section ends and another begins on the same page to see if transclusion is broken there as well. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:37, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Pheew. Much thanks GOIII.— Ineuw talk 01:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Yup; something has changed in the coding alright. Previous examples based in similar situations are also broken now... see Haeckel's Moners for example. -- George Orwell III (talk)

OK. Here is a clue. I worked on both articles earlier todayreplacing poor images taken when I knew even less. I checked other articles with sections and they were fine. It seems that when the page is saved, it does that. I will test another.— Ineuw talk 01:14, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Every edited page changes the section.— Ineuw talk 01:31, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed - "touching" a page or pages that where previously OK when it came to splitting a page for partial transclusion no longer behave the way they did prior to today's upgrade. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:20, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I'm seeing pages that haven't been "touched" for weeks or months have their sectionalized transclusion portion break as well. I'd give this some time to see if there is any caching issue causing a lag in proper display or something. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for all your efforts. I am no longer concerned. This is normal for a new release which I forgot about, having seen it only on another wiki. We usually get a notice about it in the Scriptorium. So there will be a number of reports about the problems caused by the update. :-)— Ineuw talk 03:39, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Broken preference in gadgets: Show header and footer fields

This preference in the gadgets is also broken: Show header and footer fields when editing in the Page namespace won't show.— Ineuw talk 01:34, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

More prison-rape-upgrade antics.

Disable the gadget in your preferences then go to your editing tab and enable the line pertaining to show headers in Page: namespace etc. I guess the gadget is being phased out for a more permanent user option in the preferences/editing tab -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:49, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

What you're basically saying is that I have to operate it manually. Am I correct? :-D — Ineuw talk 02:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

No, the new option in your editing tab of your preferences needs to be checked off to mimic what the gadget did before today's upgrade. Disabling the gadget is only a precaution to avoid conflicts with the new option. I could be wrong but that's what I did and headers/footers display automatically in edit mode in the Page: namespace as they did before when enabling the gadget. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:15, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Missed the option in Edit preferences when I first looked. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 02:18, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Early modern and/or Modern cat

Case in point, if you have a poem that was published first in the late 1800's (satisfying the "Early modern poetry" Category), and then re-issued after the turn of the century ("Modern"?) in a collection, what category/ies would you use for my case-in-point? Would/could you use two cats? Would it depend on whether the poem was reissued in a periodical or merely republished in a collection? What are the variables at play? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, well my first question is how we came up with these demarcations (1631-1899). I would think the Early Modern Period would start at the end of the Late Middle Ages and end around 1800 (see w:Early modern period). The period described seems to start in the middle of the Early Modern period and runs almost until Contemporary times. We have crammed Category:Renaissance works in between the Late Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period and given it a range of 1421-1631. This appears to have made us push the Early Moderns to the right far beyond reason. Another problem of doing this is that the time of the Renaissance varies greatly by region and the whole thing is a Europe specific event, really continental Europe. If we want to use the Renaissance simply because English is a European language then why wouldn't we set the Renaissance as beginning in 1558 or at the earliest 1485? What historical or logical basis do we have for either 1421 (far too early for the Renaissance in England) or 1631 (during the middle of the Thirty Years' War but of no particular consequence in England that I can tell)?

As to the general question of categorization, I would categorize individual poems according to their period and collections I would probably put under all included periods and/or under Category:Collections of poetry.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 15:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Hmm-ing, etc., made me think we might look to the LoCC for some direction... which would be Adam's realm... I may knock on his door in a bit. Only at the computer but scarcely today... Taking all into consideration... Thanks Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:07, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Good idea. I also noted after my comment above that we have used a hard A.D. 600 for the break between the "Ancient" era and the "Medieval" era. I wonder too, where we are deriving this date. It looks like the template was created in 2006 but the 1421 date was added by inductiveload this past January(all inductiveload did was change a date by one year to eliminate a conflict).--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 19:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

It seems that a good idea would be to relax the dates for the era scheme and make sure to add an additional category to each work for the year or decade (or even century for uncertain works) in which the work was originally published. I would even think that two era categories could be appropriate for some borderline works. --Eliyak T·C 21:16, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the Library of Congress Classification system: it does not have a strict era-dating system. If you look at English Literature (PR, which is distinct from things like American Literature, PS, etc.) then the eras listed are "Anglo-Saxon" (pre-1066), "Medieval" (1066-1500) and "Modern" (post-1500). Literature (General), PN, doesn't give many dates but is still uses a similar Ancient/Medieval/Modern system (the only date is 1500 as the start of the Modern era, with the Renaissance as 1500-1700 under the Modern era). Most of the other set periods are by century or ranges of years relevant to the subject. This might be hard to really set in stone. Eras are pretty arbitrary concepts anyway and will probably vary between person and place. However, we need hard numbers for computational functions (for example, the automatic categorisation of authors) and for consistency across a project of disparate vounteers. Which means we need "official" eras by year, even if they are arbitrary points. As a Wikimedia project, we can probably decide on this by consensus, although changing it may mean altering some templates and recategorising a lot of pages by hand.

Regarding the initial point: I would categorise individual works by first publication. I would also categorise the collection itself (the base page) by its publication, rather than that of its contents; using the date that copy was printed if it isn't from a first edition. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:00, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that argues for keeping them the way they are though (and I'm not sure you intended it to) as 1) the cats are automagically applied to works as well as authors based on the date so only those where the cat is added directly would have to be fixed the rest would simply recategorize on their own and 2) the current system is not in line with any useful system. Picking dates at random for the Renaissance is not helpful but calling a work written in 1899 "Early Modern" is simply wrong.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 22:28, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm just saying we need precise years for the start and end of eras, even if those eras don't have precise start and end points. As a Wikimedia project, we should choose those years by discussion and consensus. I think I will start one in the main section. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:18, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

See Wikisource:Scriptorium#Selecting new eras. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Is there a quick way of seeing which proofread pages I am entitled to validate?

I am an irregular editor of Volume 33 of the US Statutes at Large. There are hundreds of pages in two volumes neatly displayed on the index pages, and I would love to be able to mouseover a yellow proofread page to discover that it was, say, George Orwell III who proofread it, not me - so entitling me to validate it. At present, I rather clunkily open the page and click on history (it loads more quickly than editing) to check if I'm the last editor or not. Is there a quicker way to check which pages I should be looking at, or if not, would it be easy to implement? Thanks CharlesSpencer (talk) 11:00, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

We should be able to pull the information from the API, though I would have to think through the query. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:27, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Mr. B. Look forward to it! CharlesSpencer (talk) 13:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Suddenly occurs to me that my initial question suggests that the name of the previous editor should be displayed. There is no need at all to display the name of the last editor (unless that would be the easiest way to code it) - George's name got in there only because he's another sometime editor of Volume 33! I am entirely agnostic as to how the result should be displayed, and defer to more experienced users - maybe a mouseover message giving the existing path information in green instead of the default black could work, since it would not deprive the user of any existing info. CharlesSpencer (talk) 13:23, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Some of the query is here, however, my brain is too knackered to get past that query. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

A question from a noob

Hi, I think there are many errors here, what can I do for resolve the problems?--Italo da b (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, you'll need to ask this question on the Italian Wikisource. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:53, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Table formating

Portal:Acts_of_the_Parliament_of_England/Edward_III

I've tried various approaches to try and get this to format with rowspans, and it still wont' format correctly.

Can someone please tell me WHY it seems to be impossible to set up rowspans with templates, please? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure I see the problem. What are you trying to achieve that isn't working? --Eliyak T·C 01:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Three page reference includes table

This reference Page:A Study of Mexico.djvu/188, Page:A Study of Mexico.djvu/189 and Page:A Study of Mexico.djvu/190 spans three pages. The main namespace problem begins with page two, where the reference indent of table row #9 is lost. Is there a way to correct this? IneuwPublic (talk) 00:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

The only way to get both tables to follow one set of widths is if they were properly split the usual way with the starts and ends falling into the noinclude sections. Being a ref follow case and not the usual table headache, there is no way to get that to work (apparently) even with additional noinclude tags being used to mimic the same premise.

I had to guesstimate and set a total with size for both tables to get them to display somewhat the same for Layout 1. Of course the other Layouts won't be so pretty (Dynamic Layouts never liked fix table widths, in short) -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:38, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I have cheated in the past by putting an entire table on one page (in cases where it was spread horizontally over two pages). When I did that, I left {{ambox}} messages in the noinclude sections of all the effected pages to make it clear what I had done. It isn't perfect from a Pagespace point of view but it worked in the mainspace. You could try something similar. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 09:41, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

To my esteemed colleagues, thanks for the solution. Have a nice weekend. IneuwPublic (talk) 01:13, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Deprecated use of the gap template uncovered by the thought police!

George_Orwell_III has kindly modified one of my templates which used the gap template in a deprecated way... only in my innocence, that's the only way I've ever used gap! Is there any automated way to replace every instance of gap on pages I have edited with the correct CSS formatting code, before the thought police get me? (thanks George - I'd never have spotted it without you!) CharlesSpencer (talk) 20:35, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Who, what, whe...? Which template did I break now? :( George Orwell III (talk) 22:35, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Not answering the above, but speaking about gap … why is {{gap}} deprecated for indentation and at the same time suggested for indentation in Help:Editing_poetry#Line indentation and linebreaks?--Mpaa (talk) 21:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Poetry is a different matter. The use of the poem tag almost begs for something like gap to offset lines. I don't think the DNB Project has to deal with poems; only poets. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:35, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I can't really see why it is different to indent prose or poems. Both cases are a just a sequence of letters … And in the help page above, gap is suggested even without the poem tag. Also the reference to DNB is obscure.--Mpaa (talk) 19:35, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm with you but we weren't here in the early days when the poem tag was invented and applied. Its safe to say most folks since those early days do use the poem for poetry more often than not. Now I know every other application for indentation uses the styling paramater text-indent:xx to achieve indentation,, but that was not the way found to be best here when it comes to poetry is all. The DNB is a compilation of biographies not poetry so its recommended that gap be avoided and the standard text-indent be used is all. The same holds true for most other non-poetical works. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

This thread caught my attention in Recent changes... I almost had to turn my music down to concentrate on what you all were talking about and perhaps prepare for the worst... Do let me know (please) if anything with the {{gap}} template changes; {{nop}} issues with poetry has been irritating enough! :P Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:51, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Yet another copyright question

I'm considering typing in Baden-Powell's Scouting for Boys (ISBN 0 85165 247 6) which was originally published in 1932. As more than 70 years have passed since then it seems that no copyright problems should occur. However, the copy I'm holding has had an introduction added by the author, written in 1963; also, my copy is the thirty-fifth edition, printed in 1991. Now I'm confused as to which date applies here? If anyone could help me be certain that copyright issues won't arise I'll start working; otherwise I'll simply settle for enjoying the reading experience. Thanks in advance, --Medic (talk) 19:57, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The book was first published in 1932, and the author died in 1941. Due to those aspects, the work is still in copyright in the United States until 2027, so we cannot host the work. The 1963 introduction by another author would have a separate copyright that would require its own research. Fun, eh? — billinghurst sDrewth 07:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

A shame. However, just to be certain that I understand correctly: The book doesn't enter into public domain until 86 years after the author's death - and subsequent re-prints are of no consequence with regards to copyright. Correct? --Medic (talk) 15:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Not so simple. We basically work off US copyright restrictions alone, rather than the pairing (home country and US) that is done at Commons, and more information is available at Cornell copyright. For this work, for that period, for UK-only publications where the author died after 1938 the work is under copyright from 95 years of the original publication.— billinghurst sDrewth 15:12, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I see. Thank you for your replies - it's been most helpful. --Medic (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Book scan not showing

The book scans are not showing up for side y side editing. What do I do? Daytrivia (talk) 20:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Which book? — Ineuw talk 23:14, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks much Ineuw. Ihad a problem with any book but seems to be better today. Perhaps my connection is too slow. Daytrivia (talk) 13:43, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Processing "New Texts"

Would someone be kind enough to tell me what processes books go through after they are placed in the "New Text" area? What happens to each of them? Are they again proofed? Are they placed back on wikisource? AdamBMorgan and I have worked on several projects and one that I saw him place in the new text area was Southern Historical Society Papers volume I. The original is still in the same place before placing a copy in the new text area. So, what processes (all steps) do the new works go through — step-by-step, each and every step? I have often wondered but never asked here. I thank one and all who do help in answering this question. Have a wonderful life everyone, —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 06:43, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

New texts is a place that announces the work on a list on the front page, nothing more. The proofread status of a work is indicated by the setting of the Index: page status, which places a work into the respective categories of Category:Index. We have some other lists around the place where people can add works if they are wanting further proofreading to be undertaken. Nothing systematic, though I do refer to those lists when we have validation month in November. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Billinghurst, I thank you for the answer shown above. Beeswaxcandle, I also thank you for your answer on "no text". I did not know and do not believe a person should just write "thank you" to an answer as this area is to valuable to waste space. When all is archived we would not want to encounter a mass of nothing but "thank you" notes or does that really matter? I do not know and thus the question. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 18:33, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

To anyone who is willing to teach. The book, http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:Homes_of_the_London_Poor.djvu, has just been totally verified but there were and are other mistakes including a simple spelling mistake which all of us can make. I am wondering though about this. When a book is fully verified and goes to "New Texts", as mentioned above, it actually goes nowhere else. So, is it okay to correct it as it remains in the same area and has been through "New Texts"? I am trying to learn some details here with questions I have never asked before now. I am highly reluctant to correct another person's work but yet I invite one and all to correct any work I edit because I want the book to be correct as possible regardless of what stage it is in. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 18:33, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

If there is an error, it can be corrected at any time by anyone (unless it is an error in the original, of course, in which case {{SIC}} should be used). "New Texts" just advertises new texts as they are added to the library, it isn't technically a special mark of quality. (NB: I keep forgetting to add texts to "New Texts" or I would have added more SHSP articles as I transcluded them.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

"No Text" pages

Is there a way to eliminate the process of clicking on "No Text" pages where there is no text? I ask this only because it really messes up the "watchlist" that so many of us use. When there are volumes, there are may pages of "no text" at the beginning and end. I feel a tad guilty of filling up the "watchlist" with "no text", "no text, no text" but at the same time I like to know where these are and eliminate them asap. I believe I have seen marks like _ _ on some pages and I don't recall others placing a lot of "no text" pages on the watchlist where those underscores are colored grey. I do not want to annoy others by placing "no text" on the watchlist — that is what I am trying to avoid. I thank whomever may answer. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 08:52, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

While these do turn up on Special:RecentChanges, it's fine. They need to be marked as "no text" so that the various tools that look for missed pages will pick them up as "OK", and they have to be done manually as a bot can't tell if a page is genuinely blank or if the OCR was missed. wrt to the various hyphens and dashes used in the page lists in the Index namespace, this is more about page numbering. If hyphen/dash has been used it means that there is no print page number (as opposed to the djvu/pdf page number). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

creation of Smithson will

could someone please create the side by side pages, for James Smithson's will? i've linked to the commons images at Author:James Smithson. Slowking4 (talk) 14:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Done Click the "scan index" after each wikilink. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually, having looked at this again, the draft will be better as a DjVu file. I'll create one later today and replace the second scan index. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:21, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, now I'm done. The original scans were not of the best quality but the DjVu file appears to be serviceable. All the links are correct and ready to go now. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:28, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Online Training for Wikisource

My name is Scott Robarge Another8 founder and talent consultant. Does Wikisource offer any online training on how companies can use the open source architecture? http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/User:Scott_robarge

No. JeepdaySock (talk) 10:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

If you are interested in the MediaWiki software, the site for that is http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki. --Eliyak T·C 21:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Copyright

Here is the article of Armenian Ex-president Levon Ter-Petrossyan, published in washingtonpost.

Do this article belong to public domain, or not? Thanks in advance HAKmasnakic (talk) 20:28, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

It belongs to the Washington Post. :) — Ineuw talk 23:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Kindly let us know list of those gentlemen who contributed by studying various Hindu Texts of ancient culture of India

Team,

We are looking for references on people who worked on Hindu scriptures; the contributions that have come from Christian scholars

Thanks

Regards —unsigned comment by 135.245.168.33 (talk) .

I am uncertain that any of us are able to provide that sort of assistance. If there are specific works that have been added to English Wikisource, if you click on the history of the works you will see who contributed them to the site. If you are looking for Hindu texts, then the multilanguage Wikisource may be a better place to start, and go to the Hindi section. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Fonts for Wikisource Text

Is there any way that we can change any lettering by selecting a different font? For example, if I wanted the first letter in Old English, or any other font, is there a way to do that in the text itself so it won't just "appear" to be a changed font on my machine but rather really will change the font—as one would do in Microsoft Word—but yet within wikisource text. There are so grand wizards here and "anti-eyestrain" InductiveLoad comes to mind as definately one of them. Have a grand day everyone and be happy in your work. --Maury (—William Maury Morris II ^Talk 12:41, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

There are a few font options with the {{lang}} template (which is normally used to mark a section of text with the correct language code, if not English). These are:

Perizia: {{lang|font=Perizia|text=Add text here}}

Rufscript: {{lang|font=Rufscript|text=Add text here}}

Ubuntu: {{lang|font=Ubuntu|text=Add text here}}

I don't see much difference in them. In theory Old English script should be rendered by the {{blackletter}} template but this does not work (at least not for me). I have requested a new webfont, bugzilla:36666, to which I need to respond (my recent ISP problems got in the way). If/when we get that it will work through the lang template and, if there are no objections, I'll probably change blackletter to match. I should also point out TeX; I've tried it and it works but I don't think it works very well for our needs. Nevertheless, it can do $\mathfrak{This}$ (<math>\mathfrak{This}</math>). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Adam! Perhaps it's my imagination but you always seem to be ahead of everyone on innovations — and most certainly with helping me. I love that blackletter font and will give it a try later. Thanks again! Most respectfully, $\mathfrak{Maury}$ —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 19:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

To get {{blackletter}} to work for Old English or the Fraktur fonts, you need to have the fonts already on your computer. And then put the following on your "css" page for the skin you use [e.g. User:Beeswaxcandle/monobook.css]

.Fraktur {
   font-family: 'Cloister Black', 'Linotext', 'Old English Text MT', 'Blackmoor LET', serif;
   font-size: 110%;
}

Replace the font names I've used with whichever fonts you have installed. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Is it possible to display a multi-character sub heading in categories?

Created a new Category:New publications announced in Popular Science Monthly where the article names are all the same. So, I would like to show the publication year, like 1889 ... 1990 etc., as applicable, as opposed to just the no. 1. Is this possible? — Ineuw talk 23:20, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

P.S: This help question is the continuation of this Scriptorium post

If this is not possible, perhaps should move the list to a portal where the link would indicate the Month and year of the title and abandon categorizing? Ideas would be most welcome. — Ineuw talk 23:25, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Other discussions

List of author page hits

I noticed Project Gutenberg had a top 100 authors list. Of course we have author pages so I wondered how often they were frequented. So without further ado, here is a list of the top 96 author pages visited at Wikisource on January 1st, 2011 (UTC), followed by the number of hits.

1. Author:H._P._Lovecraft, 101	---------------------	47.Author:Herman_Melville, 11
2. Author:Robert_Ervin_Howard, 78		47.Author:Jonathan_Swift, 11
3. Author:Edgar_Allan_Poe, 52		47.Author:Leo_Tolstoy, 11
4. Author:William_Topaz_McGonagall, 36		47.Author:Lyndon_Baines_Johnson, 11
5. Author:Arthur_Conan_Doyle, 35		47.Author:Plato, 11
5. Author:Emily_Dickinson, 35		47.Author:Jane_Austen, 11
7. Author:William_Shakespeare, 33		57.Author:Benjamin_Franklin, 10
8. Author:Alfred_Tennyson, 27		57.Author:Charles_Darwin, 10
9. Author:John_Donne, 26		57.Author:Charles_Wesley, 10
10.Author:Bret_Harte, 25		57.Author:Florence_Earle_Coates, 10
10.Author:John_Keats, 25		57.Author:Herodotus, 10
12.Author:Ambrose_Bierce, 22		57.Author:Theodore_Kaczynski, 10
13.Author:Gilbert_Keith_Chesterton, 21		57.Author:Theodore_Roosevelt, 10
14.Author:Oscar_Wilde, 20		57.Author:William_Butler_Yeats, 10
15.Author:Jack_London, 17		57.Author:Woodrow_Wilson, 10
15.Author:Robert_Louis_Stevenson, 17		57.Author:Abraham_Lincoln, 10
17.Author:Charles_Dickens, 16		67.Author:Arthur_Schopenhauer, 9
17.Author:O._Henry, 16		67.Author:Bertrand_Russell, 9
17.Author:Mark_Twain, 16		67.Author:Michael_Faraday, 9
20.Author:Aristotle, 15		67.Author:Fyodor_Dostoevsky, 9
20.Author:Herbert_George_Wells, 15		67.Author:George_Gordon_Byron, 9
20.Author:Mahatma_Gandhi, 15		67.Author:Henry_David_Thoreau, 9
20.Author:William_Blake, 15		67.Author:John_Milton, 9
24.Author:Agatha_Christie, 14		67.Author:Montague_Rhodes_James, 9
24.Author:Honoré_de_Balzac, 14		67.Author:René_Descartes, 9
24.Author:Lewis_Carroll, 14		67.Author:Robert_Browning, 9
24.Author:Robert_Burns, 14		67.Author:Sax_Rohmer, 9
24.Author:Voltaire, 14		67.Author:Sigmund_Freud, 9
29.Author:Emily_Brontë, 13		67.Author:Thomas_Frederick_Tout, 9
29.Author:Friedrich_Nietzsche, 13		67.Author:Thomas_Hardy, 9
29.Author:Guy_Wetmore_Carryl, 13		67.Author:Thomas_Hobbes, 9
29.Author:Percy_Bysshe_Shelley, 13		67.Author:Walter_de_la_Mare, 9
29.Author:Rabindranath_Tagore, 13		67.Author:Adolf_Hitler, 9
29.Author:Robert_Frost, 13		84.Author:Bram_Stoker, 8
29.Author:Saki, 13		84.Author:Elizabeth_I, 8
36.Author:Alexander_Pope, 12		84.Author:Gottfried_Leibniz, 8
36.Author:Barack_Obama, 12		84.Author:Beatrix_Potter, 8
36.Author:Dante_Alighieri, 12		84.Author:Guy_de_Maupassant, 8
36.Author:Francis_Scott_Fitzgerald, 12		84.Author:Immanuel_Kant, 8
36.Author:George_W._Bush, 12		84.Author:Napoleon_Bonaparte, 8
36.Author:James_Joyce, 12		84.Author:Polycarp, 8
36.Author:Lysander_Spooner, 12		84.Author:Thomas_More, 8
36.Author:Rudyard_Kipling, 12		84.Author:Victor_Hugo, 8
36.Author:Samuel_Taylor_Coleridge, 12		84.Author:William_Henry_Davies, 8
36.Author:Thomas_Gray, 12		84.Author:William_Prideaux_Courtney, 8
36.Author:Virginia_Woolf, 12		84.Author:Xenophon, 8
47.Author:Clark_Ashton_Smith, 11
47.Author:Edgar_Rice_Burroughs, 11
47.Author:Edna_St._Vincent_Millay, 11
47.Author:Henry_Wadsworth_Longfellow, 11

More statistics

On that same day users visited 122,000 different pages and 2.09 gigabytes of text were returned to users. ResScholar (talk) 11:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC) updated 11:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Thoughts on Authors list

Excellent! I thank you for placing this information here. It is very interesting to see which are the most interesting. But here is something else to consider and that is many, if not most, of these authors are well-known. There are other authors that are not so well-known but yet were once famous or are now totally unknown. I think that part of what we need to do, and I do, is make the unknowns known again. How to do that is anyone's guess but I have done it with two people of the past. Just making WikiSource (WS) known is important. I meet and talk with too many people that know nothing about WikiSource. Most have heard of WikiPedia (WP) but not WikiSource. I am writing about educated people that have been through a university. So, while I applaud the task of all of these known authors it also causes me to think about the need to make others known as well as how to promote WS itself. Kind Regards, —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 14:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The first three on your list are powerful in their own right as plain text and more so as codes are used in better formatting. But they are more powerful because they connect to speech files. Perhaps WikiSource source itself should work more towards creating files like Librovox does. I feel sure we have people here that are also good readers. It would be a matter of how to create files similar to Librovox and having volunteers read text -- or on a lesser idea to use computer-read files to generate the speech files and then add in the coded works. Apparently this is what it takes to bring in people who are weary of so much text on Internet and prefer audible books. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 18:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't see that it's within our scope to promote unknown authors over known authors. Nor do I see any reason that Wikisource should move into Librivox's territory; they create audio files from public domain material just fine, with more manpower then I believe we have, and certainly more experience and training in the fine details of audio production from consumer level equipment. (In fact, they are probably the world's authorities on the subject of producing audiobooks using consumer level equipment in home settings.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Of course you are correct but, Bro, I would have an area aside from a static WS dancing and singing in 3-D if I could. Better yet, I would have animated people long dead talking out what they have written and especialy where it may be a letter written to another person and a reply to that letter. Way back in high school we had readers of classics taking parts and reading to the audience. Librarians read to children. Sound is just one of our senses. One of my sons is deep into this kind of (animated) technology. I myself have explored sound files and different voices including USA, France, and Britain, male and female, young and elderly. I wrote about things that can be done not about what I know what will not be done on WS. Still, look at the "top 3" and you will encounter those Librivox files with the coded text. Those three are what, according to the list, people have come to WS to learn from. I myself just prefer to edit old books on WSource. I also would not try to promote the famous over the forgotten people or worse--over unknowns. As enough time passes WS will seek out the lesser known people in world history and inculcate them into WS. My point was that the list shows those at the Top 10+ (shades of Dick Clark)whom many people know about and that sound files accompany those at the top. I think that the combination of coded text with the sound is what attracts people. Some just get tired of reading but with sound they may miss a word but with the combination of Librivox and text they can step back and catch whatever they missed. I do hope that there is no problem in just stating some thoughts. I have always had a tendency to explore possibilities and ideas regardless of who or where or how they came to be. Oh, by the way (BTW), Librivox has a limited territory. I own two grand books from "audible.com" company (which Amazon.com purchased.) There are many professional readers. My wife went blind and listens to audiobooks (me too) for free (for the Dept. of the Blind) and those are done by serious professionals. Kind regards, —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 00:06, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Final Interview (Solzhenitsyn)

Is this article in the public domain?— Ineuw talk 08:12, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't see why it would be.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion. --Aplomb (talk) 21:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Issues log for mediawiki update to 1.19wmf1

Starting a place to record any issues that have arisen in the upgrade to #Mediawiki 1.19. We should look to add an action item against items to determine where the resolution may lie. Hopefully there will be none. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:27, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

As there have been some purging from the central system, it would be useful for people to annotate their reports whether still existing or resolved. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Side by side broken

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

• I am not sure if it's due to the software update, or a server issue at this time of the day, but the scan of the page alongside the text is missing. It does appear after several minutes of browser refresh. However, in edit mode, the page scan does not appear, only the text. — Ineuw talk 20:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Annotation: This is working now, just slowly.— Ineuw talk 05:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
• Page scan alongside text is missing for me too; same when editing. I am using Chrome. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)Working in Chrome now - Theornamentalist (talk) 23:55, 24 February 2012 (UTC) Not working again... - Theornamentalist (talk) 22:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
• side-by-side OK in both view and edit mode under IE 6 & 8, though there is some slight overlap (overflow) of text appearing on the thumbnail on certain pages that I don't recall ever observing in the past. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
• This is OK on FireFox 10.0.2 Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
• I have IE8, so even if it's working for George, I am having the problem as Ineuw. ResScholar (talk) 02:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Annotation: It's working now "after several minutes of browser refresh". Note to all: Be warned that "priming the pump" may be necessary no matter what the browser. ResScholar (talk) 03:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

comment it seems to be quite specifically broken in vector, try using monobook skin until this is fixed. I can get it to work in monobook in Chrome.

• edit monobook
• display monobook

— billinghurst sDrewth 12:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks to be a javascript error ... bugzilla:34706

Clock gadget missing

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived: delay in codes updating

• The clock gadget disappeared, so I unchecked it. Just thought I should mention these. — Ineuw talk 20:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Annotation: This gadget is still not visible after re-enabling and repeatedly clearing the cache. Using Win XP SP 3 FF. 10.0.2 US English.— Ineuw talk 05:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

• Works for me in Firefox/3.6.27--Mpaa (talk) 21:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
• The gadget came back after a full cache cleaning and a reboot under IE 6. Could not duplicate for IE 8. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
• The clock gadget is also missing in Mac OS X lion using Firefox 10.0.2 and also the proofreading tools sometimes show up on the right hand side on the scanned image of an index page. I used to use Vista till I escaped it, I call it the operating system from Hell --kathleen wright5 (talk) 12:50, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
• Working for me in Firefox 10.0.2, Linux. I just had a system restart, in case it had needed that. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 00:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Javascript toolbars gone

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived: see above

• Both the standard legacy and the custom javascripts toolbars are gone. Interestingly, my commons setup, which is identical to WS, and which was the first to update to 1.19 - there are no editor problems. Should mentioned that I am using Firefox 10.0.2 in Win XP SP3. — Ineuw talk 21:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Annotation: Both toolbars are visible and working. — Ineuw talk 05:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

• Working for me, Firefox 10.0.2, Linux, after a system restart. Wasn't working before, so probably a cache issue? Inductiveload—talk/contribs 00:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikilinks show PR status

[[Page:United_States_Statutes_at_Large_Volume_86.djvu/154|sec. 717]] produces sec. 717

• Linking to a page in the Page: namespace brings the page's proofreading status color along with the link as the background color (ex. TOC ). -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Was this intentional? I kind of don't like how it looks. - Theornamentalist (talk) 23:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd think not; what possible purpose would it serve as the default? AFAICT, the PR quality class sec. 717 is being added somehow. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:04, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure, I think that I remember some people tossing around the idea of using the proofread color status for page links to indicate which pages were validated or proofread, but I may be remembering incorrectly. - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

It's clearly intentional, it's useful in particular to show page quality near page numbers on the left of the transcluded text. Here on en.source this is not working because you're using MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js, which doesn't support it (yet). You can see it in action on it.source. I find it very useful to see which pages have to be validated, etc. On it.source we had this page quality indicator since last year (using a special trick), but now it comes automatically on all wikisources, you just need to set the proper css styles, and either abandon PageNumber.js or ask someone to fix it (I can try to fix it, but you need to modify MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template to include a direct link to the page). Candalua (talk) 10:43, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Whatever. I'd vote to please limit it to embedded page numbers on the left of transcluded pages (if it all). Having every other kind of link pointing back to the Page: namespace reflect its status seems a bit extraneous, extravagant even, in lieu of the PR status bar. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

This can easily be altered with a tiny scrap of Javascript or a default-on gadget. Perhaps it could be made visible by a button in the side bar, or by holding down "ctrl", oe by mouseover, or by "ctrl" and mouseover, etc. Preferences? Inductiveload—talk/contribs 22:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

On/off option in gadget is preferred. --Mpaa (talk) 22:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

If we must have this "feature", then definitely a gadget that defaults as Off. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Screw "If..." I never saw any proposal, discussion or trial-run on this matter. If I am mistaken, please point me to it. If none of that took place, then I suggest restoring the previous behavior until it takes place.

Again, if current policy/guideline/practice/put-your-own-cosmically-assigned-axe-to-grind-interpretation-here is one where transcluding less-than-optimal PR'd pages from the Page: namespace to the mainspace, to the best of my knowledge, is, was & has been explicitly "frowned upon" by the community over and over again for some time now, how do "we" justify a rationale for adopting this? "....please don't transclude garbage or unproofed content the mainspace unless its Class A garbage or is almost nearly approaching unproofed content?" Please - let's take a step back and examine the implications here first. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm with you George. The uglification of pages for the sake of bit of information that only a few users will understand does not seem to me to be a good thing. My "if" was simply meant to mean "turn the damn thing off for everyone except for the few editors who (will) find it useful." I have a very easy way of finding out which pages haven't been validated yet—I look at the index page of the work. Like George, I don't expect to find un-proofread pages in Mainspace. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

On closer inspection, it's easier than I thought. All that's happened is that a class has been added to the links, such as "quality1" for "unproofread". This are the same classes that have always been used to provide the colours in the index page and the status bar. Some new development (or even an old one that has just managed to get out of code review) has added them to all page links, not just the index page ones. They are classes like any other and can be styled as such, and, in fact, are beneficial as they add machine-readable semantic information to the page - you can now automatically process page links based on that class. However, the addition means the old CSS rules need tweaking to expect to see a quality class outside the index namespace and status bars. Add something like the code below (fill in bits I have missed) to MediaWiki:common.css (replacing the existing quality stylings). This will cause the links to be coloured when your mouse is over them, not coloured the rest of the time, except in the Index: namespace, when they are always coloured. If the mouseover part is not wanted, just remove the ", .qualityX:hover" from the first 5 lines.

/*Add page link colouring where we want it (index pages, progress bars, on hover) */
.ns-104 .quality0, .ns-106 .quality0, .pr_quality .quality0, .quality0:hover{ background-color: #ddd }
.ns-104 .quality1, .ns-106 .quality1, .pr_quality .quality1, .quality1:hover{ background-color: #ffa0a0 }
.ns-104 .quality2, .ns-106 .quality2, .pr_quality .quality2, .quality2:hover{ background-color: #b0b0ff }
.ns-104 .quality3, .ns-106 .quality3, .pr_quality .quality3, .quality3:hover{ background-color: #ffe867 }
.ns-104 .quality4, .ns-106 .quality4, .pr_quality .quality4, .quality4:hover{ background-color: #90ff90 }
 
/*Disable elsewhere else*/
.quality0, .quality1, .quality2, .quality3, .quality4{ background-color: transparent }

If people wish to be able to turn all-namespace colours on, then they can have a (default-off) gadget to dynamically restyle quality classes, overriding the above JS. If there is demand, I can provide this based on what people want. If you do it this way around, we can avoid having some JS fiddle that will run on every page load and confuse the styling system. Keeping primary stylings in the CSS file will make it clear what is going on (hopefully).

Edit: add .ns-104 .quality1, to the first 5 lines, so you get styling in the page namespace (page header, edit buttons) too. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 02:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Respectfully, Huh? I don't know what you are seeing but every namespace I checked already has the PR color status of the Page: linked as the background color now - including (forehead smack) the Index: namespace. If your TOC isn't showing colors along the right, its because of the template(s) being used either on the Page: itself or for the single transclusion to the Index: page are breaking the behaviour.

Only the embeded pagenum spans created in transclusion do not have their parent Page:'s status color, so I think you've got it backwards. As Candalua mentioned, the quality class is getting pulled from the HTML a href "link" line after the <pagelist /> creates them. What you want is to be able to "inherit" that href quality class and have it added to whatever classes that already exist (ex. <span class="pagenum" id=".... becomes <span class="pagenum quality4" id="....). There seems to be a way now to extract those and other arguments from traditional html forms, frames, href, img, etc., lines and that is what, I believe, Candalua is driving at by pointing out a change to "direct link" (a href based) is needed to get pagenums to display color status. I also noted that 1.19 incorporated alot of typical common.css "stuff" to the per-skin default(s), making the need for a good refresh of our Common.css almost a must. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I know they are coloured everywhere, which is why that CSS removes colours. The qualityX classes are added (as far as I can tell, but I haven't taken apart the ProofreadPage extension to find the exact code yet) on the server side. Currently qualityX means coloured, and the CSS above modifies this to mean not coloured except where you want them (or at least an approximation: index, pages, status bar, on hover if desirable). If you disable Javascript, you still see the colours, so it is not a client-side script that is doing it. Tags using <angle brackets> are parsed by the MW software, not by the browser (hence changed behaviour at a MW upgrade).

The numbers on the side of the page don't get coloured, because they don't have the qualityX classes, because the client-side PageNumbers.js (which is how we put them in) doesn't add them. I'm not talking about these, they are a totally different issue, and are generated by client-side JS. Altering the JS in anyway doesn't affect what the code above does. At most, we'd add the qualityX classes to the page numbers. Start a new section if you want them to have quality indication. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 04:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Regardless of how one tries to frame this, my previous statement remains valid (and on point since pagenum coloring was cited as the intentional reasoning behind it). I clearly don't want that mainspace pagenum "feature" enabled as a default - it seems contrary to our best practices. Enabling it in every namespace by default was over-reach on top of over-kill - they should have made it specific to the Page: and Index: namespaces if at all (though its obvious that would only affect, at best, a handful of links in both namespaces combined per work so I don't buy that one bit as any sound reasoning for pushing this into reality). It could have just as easily been optional for the rest of the namespaces I suppose - to what end? I can't imagine one. I'm open to finding ways to resolve this to the best interests for the greatest amount of editors possible but for now I consider this a bug that needs to be reverted/redesigned; not furthered. -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

If you look at the code I pointed to below, it is more likely a bug that was put in for testing and was never removed. Before jumping to conclusions of "feature-creep", I asked the author of change whether he knows that is what is happening. It's not like the comment reads "turn on in all namespaces to frustrate enWS users", the comment explicitly says the behaviour we used to have is what is intended. Even if it were deliberate, the CSS above fixes it, and allows flexibility for us to render page links however we like anywhere on wiki, without having to beg for a code review at bugzilla. A class just adds semantic information to an HTML element (that's why it is called a class, not a stylegroup or something), and we can choose locally to interpret that how we please, including not at all. Anyway, let's see what the dev who changed it says before anyone gets too worked up. I am more concerned that we don't know what is intended now, so can't respond properly to it, rather than the possibility that some evil dev dared to add semantic content to our wiki.

Page numbers are still not related. You always have been able to add the qualityX styles to them to get the colours (as you know, the styles work in all namespaces, hence your grievance against adding them to all links). This would be done in PageNumbers.js (or local equivalent, as at it.source). The things we have here is in ProofreadPage_body.php, which is the core of the server-side PP extension. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 12:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Just because I prefer to be a skeptic, even paranoid, does not mean I'm not right (only crazy). see here. The only reason "our" results were so "goofy looking" this time around is because we are somewhat behind the curve on many developmental aspects in comparison with some of the other WS sites. Providing "life support" to dead-end or boutique endeavors isn't helping the situation imo either -- George Orwell III (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Right about what? I have no idea what the problem is now other than it is a "dead-end boutique endeavour," whatever that means. What is it you want to happen? You don't like the colours on all page links. Right, good. I've gone to see if that was supposed to happen (I'd say probably not, it's a stray "#" in the PHP), and also provided an easy, customisable, site-wide way to remove the colours in the meantime. If you want coloured pagelinks, that is another issue, like I said over and over. I can make them jump up and down, flash and sing a song if you like, but it's still not to do with that bit of PHP. Our wiki is affected the same as any other (frWS has the same) because it is a central issue with the extension code on the server, and clarification has been sought at MW.org. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 18:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

OK. I get you don't see a problem. I realize you've built a workaround that makes this change easier to swallow in spite of what I percieve to be problem. You continue to point out how trivial my concern is and I accept the fact I do not know all the ins and outs of coding as well as you do. I do however believe my own eyes and, until I'm shown differently, will continue to believe the "goal" in implementing this was to make that PR-colored page number a reality for some without any process & at the possible expense of others. You don't believe that. I get that too, so I guess there is little else to say on this until something new comes up - I don't want this to spiral into something unintentionally in the meantime (plus there is plenty of other stuff that needs attention besides this). Prost. -- George Orwell III (talk) 19:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Looking at ProofreadPage_body.php (line 445), it would seem that this is not the commented functionality (that return never fires, and so if the NS is not Index, it doesn't break out the of the link colouring stage like you might expect). This is only from a cursory reading of the code, so I might be miles out. The diff where it happened is here, but the code has been updated since then, and I am not sure if this is what happened why we didn't see the effects before, though it may be a component was missing until the 1.19 upgrade and it is now working as written (though perhaps not as intended, unless it really is a conspiracy?). Inductiveload—talk/contribs 04:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Candalua, may I ask what it.source uses instead of the central Pagenumbers.js at oldwikisource? I'd like to know more about the alternative systems that you have over there, as they seem quite advanced. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 01:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Here, here - I left rant over on oldwikisource's talk page awhile back pointing out why recent upgrades make dynamic layouts problematic in its current form, so if there is a way to scrap it, I'd like to hear it too. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

When using lists of pages to be proofread as is done HERE, the PR color would be very helpful if the page status update would be faster. Unfortunately, this seems to be affected by the server, so I must still rely on the Firefox' Wired-marker Add-on to indicate proofread pages. Thus, this is not a very helpful addition.— Ineuw talk 18:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

If you mean the lag between saving a page and the page being shaded a different colour, then purging the page should refresh them if the servers are under pressure. However, if what caused the site-wide colouring is reversed (as it was very likely not changed deliberately) this colouring (and particularly the classes that add the status information to the HTML) will disappear again, leaving you with no easy way to get the proofread status of pages from outside the page/index namespaces. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 22:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Inductiveload, I know what you mean and am aware that if this feature is gone, I will have to return using Wired-Marker. Interestingly, the Wire-Marker method also slows FF down after an hour or so of editing because the SQLlite tables used by FF balloon when data is appended. Thus, I compact the FF tables using CCleaner which offers this feature externally. I have not yet tried to use SQLite manager extension which also compacts the tables.— Ineuw talk 22:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Annotation: Clearing the server cache had no effect on THIS PAGE The first 4 links were proofread hours ago and they still show Not proofread on my screen. If anyone sees this differently at the time of this signing, please let me know.— Ineuw talk 05:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I did a purge on your page and now the 4 links are yellow. (BTW, on it.source we have a gadget for adding the "purge" button, maybe you want to import it, sometimes it's very useful :-) Candalua (talk) 08:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

InductiveLoad: currently on it.source we use just a very basic version of pagenum template coupled with the css styles ".quality1", ".quality2"... in our common.css (but I'm going to change them, it will not be ".quality1" but something like "span.pagenumber a.quality1" and so on, so that we use the "qualityX" classes only in certain places). Before this update, we were using a script that runs in Page namespace and adds an invisible span containing the pagequality value, and then in ns0 there's another script that extracts all these spans from the transcluded pages and shows the corresponding icon near page numbers. But it was really "a terrible hack", so we're going to dismiss it now that the pagequality class comes automatically with the link. Candalua (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, I see. You have the pagenumbers generated directly by the pagenum template system message, and the styles come from the extension with this new development, no extra processing. If the extension code were to be changed back, you will lose that styling and be in the same boat as Ineuw: no proofread status information in the mainspace.

For anyone interested in comparison, here is how it works at enWS: the pagenums are generated by MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template, just as at itWS. However, they are spans with no text (so not rendered) and the pagenum in the attributes. They exist embedded in the text at the start of every page. oldwikisource:MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js then runs, and extracts the information from these spans' attributes. Using this data, the locations of the page numbers are calculated and a new div is constructed, outside the text-wrap container, which hold the page numbers, as well as the highlighting which you can see when you run your mouse over a pagenumber. We have no styling on our page numbers as we don't get the server to generate a link, so the class is never applied. However, we do have the mouseover page range highlighting. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 10:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, not exactly: if the extension code is changed, we will revive our script and we will still have proofread status informations. But why should it be changed back? It's just a css class that every subdomain is free to use or not, I see no need to remove it. Candalua (talk) 10:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

First, the entire pupose of the Page: and Index: namespaces is to perform Proofreading away from the mainspace & prior to any transclusion. The argument, in a nutshell & moving forward, has always been not have users landing in mainspace welcomed by sub-standard works nor tie up the mainspace with dozens and dozens of edits in hopes of reaching the quality on par with something that could of been uploaded and proofread page by page. All this does is blur the distinction laid out in our practices/policies, encourage slightly familar users to deviate from these practices & policies and confuse new users to the point where thay don't bother learning the policy or adhering to the practice.

Second, nobody here proposed, discussed or tested such a change. Its a happy bug or welcomed mistake if anything. This needs to be fix/reverted back to the status quo then redesigned so only the Index & Page namespaces have this feature by default with other namespaces available as the community sees fit once hashed out. Ineuw & the PSM folks don't have any list in any mainspace - he has them on User: or project-related spaces (is this time to enable Project: space?) - so that is not contrary to the before mentioned principle/policy either. Fortunately I haven't seen any background colors in the Category: space (yet) but its definately on in the Template: space (bad). Its a toss-up whether or not Portal:, Author: and anything I may have left out should have this as well. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe I don't have the gift of clarity. If you don't want to show pagequality, you just need to set in your Common.css something like this:

.ns-0 .quality0, 
.ns-0 .quality1, 
.ns-0 .quality2,
.ns-0 .quality3,
.ns-0 .quality4 { background-color: transparent; }

Candalua (talk) 11:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. Classes do not equal colouring, they just permit it to be set when you want. You can unset it wherever you like. For example, you could hide in mainspace, have on hover in userspace, show in page/index space, flash on and off in template space and spin around in Portal space, but only when in a certain place. If you have the classes, you can do whatever you like, at a site-level, gadget-level and user-level. If you don't have them, you have no choice. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 11:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the page range highlighting is cute: but sometimes it seems to have problems, for example here the last page number doesn't appear, and here on fr.source it shows the first page break at the wrong place (I don't know if it happens only on fr or elsewhere too). Anyway, if you want to keep PageNumbers.js and have pagequality, you can add a link to the page in the pagenum template (and maybe make it invisible by putting display:none in the sorrounding span), and then I can try to edit PageNumbers.js to reuse the pagequality class generated by the link. Candalua (talk) 10:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The highlight is not useful, imo, because it is rarely exact over page-breaks across paragraphs, when the remnant lands across a wikilink, it breaks it (frequently in the category bar) and, as mentioned, it frequently adds to the disappearance of the last embedded page link. The highlight feature should be completely removed at best, gadgetized at worst. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I personally see nothing wrong with allowing the classes into all namespaces, as we can style them to show only where wanted, and then they are there for the taking, even if they don't change anything visually. Adding semantic hints to links can only help. At worst, we just ignore them. Others disagree very strongly (see the big thread above). However, the code revision (part of a large overhaul) that allowed them into all namespaces may not have been deliberate, so we could do with cleaning that up and documenting it. You can talk to the person who did it here. I'm just saying that as an undocumented and probably unintended (but not necessarily detrimental) change, it could change again. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 11:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Of course "allowing" it only to turn it on and off here and there makes technical sense but again that only after the fact. I don't think the .css solution is unreasonable - just another sad result of piss poor planning and due to another instance of what I call pushed feature creep. Its laughable to stress one practice for others in general then find ways to subvert it - even on a personal level imo - but this is for the community to decide (I personally don't think we should support this but I'm accustomed to being in the minority - have at it). Nevertheless, there should be consensus here, not just corrections that mask an issue by making folks ignorant of knowing that an issue exists with those corrections.

For the same reasons we are currently stuck with one butt-ugly and two so-so dynamic layouts, quirky jerky highlights and no inline pagenums is that someone thought not to check with the community here first in comming up with proposed changes, made the changes based on their own home site's (if not just) personal opinion then eventually moved on in life - leaving further development retarded by his absence. Inductiveload's concern that this change was not deliberate seems to be well warranted given the history of "sloppy" developement practices when it comes to the red-headed step-child around here called Wikisource. I wish to avoid such pitfalls and hope to work in reasolving both matters sooner rather than later. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

As for the adding the styles, I was thinking about that - if we added a link to the MediaWiki message, pagenumbers would work without JS enabled too (good to have as much functionality without JS, for visitors who don't activate JS), and then we can make PageNumber.js optional so those who don't like it can get rid of it. I do see the last link (20) on that enWS page, by the way. It used to be missing in some cases (multiple ranges per page), but that was fixed a while ago. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 11:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I propose modularisation of page numbers. Comment at Wikisource:Scriptorium#Page_numbers, to keep this issue separate. Styling and pagenumbers are not the same thing, though one can use the other. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 12:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

A commit was submitted to Gerrit to revert the behavior to the previous behavior (no color for links outside of the Index namespace) as it is obvious that this change was due to a programming mistake. The discussion above shows that this question is difficult and should be discussed with other Wikisources as well as with people from the tech staff. If we all agree to have colors in all namespaces, a ticket should be created in Bugzilla. As mentioned above, even in this case, it will still be possible to "hide" the colors in specific contextes by tweaking the css. Zaran (talk) 22:47, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

{{nop}} not working

• At least in Chrome; see here. - Theornamentalist (talk) 01:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

This page is broken in FireFox 10.0.2 as well. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Same here under IE. I do note that nop seems to be working fine when no block, table, center, etc., wrapping is in play (via a template) at the same time. When used at the end of a simple last paragraph on one page to separate the next paragraph on the following page - it produces the same effect it always did when the range of pages are transcluded to the mainspace. Can anyone verify the same? -- 01:31, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey wait a second - that poem was doubled up with single non-wrapping lines acting as paragraphs. I don't think Nop ever produced a break as well as line feed under that scenario. Check it again now with the doubled-up spacing. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Well that sure did change for the worse.... Nop does not appear to be working in both complex and simple applications (both IE6 & 8; monobook & vector). -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:54, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Confirm, partially. Nop is not not working to sepatate paragraphs for me. For example: Buttered_Side_Down/What_She_Wore#47 doesn't have a line break after "indignation in his voice". Firefox 10.0.2, Linux. Working as expected in Chromium 16.0.912.77. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 22:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

It can be fixed by adding an extra blank line above {{nop}} like so. Not that we want to do this ... John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

As a temporary measure I have added an empty DIV element to {{nop}}. I don't know whether this will break something else.. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

AS a note, I also tried an alternate means (successfully) to hack this. For testing, I think that we need to be on the lookout for where may have been used in tables, or where we have used a combination terminating template /s /e pair to specially format the end and the next start of a page. I know that I have seen issues with spanning <div> that break tables, whereas a spanning <p> didn't. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Still seeing issues: Love's mystery in Chrome; also broken in Safari. - Theornamentalist (talk) 23:44, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

You had a space after the {{nop}}, removal has fixed that issue. Consequences of a hack versus consequences of a different hack.<shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 04:08, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the change to {{nop}} (or maybe it's the original update?) is making it produce an extra newlines when it shouldn't. I've detailed the problem with an example here; but basically if you have a {{nop}} on a line on its own between two paragraphs of text it produces an extra <br /> between the paragraphs. - Htonl (talk) 00:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I changed it back to the first div solution. It seems to satisfy the wikicode in more instances/applications than the line-feed include-only fix. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Pretty much stinks for poetry (see here where the page breaks)... I fixed a whole section ("The Fallen") of the TWP the other day as a result. The issue with poetry arises when a stanza breaks between two pages. Normally, all you have to do is:

But as I climbed on high,<br />
Toward the forbidding sky<br />
Perfection seemed to fly;

{{nop}}

Now what is required is:

But as I climbed on high,<br />
Toward the forbidding sky<br />
Perfection seemed to fly;


{{nop}}

I hesitate to "fix" the hundreds of pages it would be necessary to "fix"... Should I just let the error be for now until the issue is resolved? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I would leave it alone for now, else you might have to go back and "un-fix". JeepdaySock (talk) 16:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Right you are. Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

In pages with transclusions, the links to the transcluded pages are missing on my IE8

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Also the three standard formatting options for displaying transcluded text in the typical consecutive page presentation format that were in the commands margin (the one that shows on every page) are gone in my IE8.

I thought the first one was such an obvious omission that it had to be one of my preferences that was reset. But I looked, and unless I missed something, both those features are missing in IE8. ResScholar (talk) 02:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I Saw the same w/IE6 before but not under Vector skin (& after that full clleaning w/reboot). In fact, Display Options and everything else with an arrow are now collapsed and need a click to open to view the choices. The embedded page numbers (from the pagelist on the Index: page) still display as before; the stupid highlight thingy is always out-of-whack w/ the actual content and toggling hide or show page-numbers still doesn't work like always. IE8 is a different story now - I'm having trouble fulling loading any type of page under it. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC) Just started working again for no apparent reason - all skins and versions. Jinx. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I immediately rebooted and crossed my fingers. It didn't come back. I closed and opened the browser twice. Then the second transcluded page I went to, the transclusion links appeared but without page numbers. I went to another transcluded page. The transclusion links showed page numbers and the |> Display options returned! Good thing I crossed my fingers, huh?! (There is obviously some kind of learning curve involved in the interfacing of browser and website (or squid).) ResScholar (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Messed up author's name with header=1

Transcluded chapters that use <pages ... header=1 /> have a malformed author's name, e.g. Eskimo Life/Chapter 3. This looked fine a year ago, and still looks fine in the Swedish and Norwegian Wikisource (see interwiki links for that chapter), but is messed up now in en.wikisource. I'm not sure if it changed in 1.19 or earlier. --LA2 (talk) 01:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Not 1.19 related - we didn't follow the all-div-based header scheme and all its bells & whistles like some other language WS sites did so our Proofreadpage header template, among others, only features a single author name for the author field input value. Sorry. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Confirm. This is something to do with the parser for the "pages" tag. It is trying to read the author from the index page and somehow, the whole text including both author links (working) are placed inside another author link. It could be that this is a general problem with multiple authors on the indexes of works using header=1? So single author links work, Do you know of a work with single author links using header=1? This could be a parser error that has always existed, but somehow previous MW versions managed to digest it. I'll take a look at the code that does this if the problem persists. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 22:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Some observations...

• More than one name for the author field on the index page never worked when calling the Mediawiki header version to the mainspace (This don't work in the plain-old header template either - that's why we have an override_author parameter for multiple authors, etc., No?)

  Override_author is also not "given" in the Mediawiki header. I think using header=1 author="new piped input" in the Pages command line should be the recommended way to deviate from the 1 {{{author}}} to 1 author normal usage in the absence of {{{override_author}}}. Regardless, mo matter what I tried to get around this, it always injected either the value and/or the behaviour from whatever is present on the Index: page.

• all the parameters in the Index: template use capital first-letters while the Mediawiki template's parameters are all lower-cased. Not sure why but better to point that out.
• imho, sub-pages that are not stand-alone works should look to the basepage to extract most of these repetative header values rather than pulling them from the Index: namespace over and over again.

-- George Orwell III (talk) 01:54, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I have realised what it (probably) is. If you put a wikilink into the author field, you used to get a repeatable error that was used to trigger a "link hack" to detect the situation and avoid wrapping in [[Author:....]], which gives the same result as using override_author. Pages doing this are in Category:Pages using the author field hack. It seems this detection no longer works in MW 1.19, and any page with a link in an author/translator field will have the nested link mis-parsed.

I have adjusted MediaWiki:Proofreadpage header template to insert the fields into the override parameters to avoid this. There are still many pages which need manually fixing in that cat, but that can probably be done by bot.

This problem might actually be a benefit, because if link hacks no longer work, we can fix them all and remove the convoluted detection-and-workaround code from the header template, which will greatly simplify it, as well as enforcing the "no wikilinks in the normal author field" idea, which has not so far been obvious, as a link hack was coerced into working through dirty tricks in the template, rather than good practice by editors. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 02:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It's very simple and works very fine in the Norwegian and Swedish Wikisource. --LA2 (talk) 10:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. The workarounnd will have to do until we revamp our header template(s) to mirror those being used on WS sister-sites. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:19, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

All the pages with "link hacks" have been fixed, and the header template amended to no longer cater to this case, since there are no pages that use it, and a link hack should never be used except for legacy pages. If you want to use your own link in author or translator, use the override field, otherwise you'll get the same junk this issue was reported with. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 17:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Authors look great now, thanks! --LA2 (talk) 23:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Can you trim it out of header/sandbox & header/dyn as well? -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Missing <reflist> missing

• I noticed it on a page I was working on earlier, here's an example of a transcluded page without the the reflist; no notice is begin given that it is missing. [1] - Theornamentalist (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
• Confirm. I would expect to see a big red "references detected but no reflist!" warning. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 00:28, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
• Confirm. (though I haven't seen that bang long before this latest upgrade to be clear. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

We have never had that. We would need to import the warning from enWP. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

From a quick look at enWp, we might have an interest in w:MediaWiki:Cite error refs without references and w:MediaWiki:Cite error group refs without references among others. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Special:IndexPages

I noticed that the bar graphs for my works in Special:IndexPages were out of date, and so I purged the Index pages (by adding ?action=purge to the URL), but to my surprise this made the bar graphs blank. See here. This is reported as bug 34821. I'm not sure if this is related to 1.19, but it is broken now, and used to work a year ago. Apparently, ThomasV, who was the only developer of the ProofreadPage extension and hard to reach before, has now completely left the project. What can we do? --LA2 (talk) 23:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• Confirmed. I can't get the status bars to (re)appear no matter how I refreshed/purged the list. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

It occurs when there is a comma in the title. Zaran will try to fix this bug. Pyb (talk) 23:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Problem solved. Purging the Index page again will force a re-computation of the number of pages in each category and will fix the bar graphs for the broken index pages. Zaran (talk) 23:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know about that - still no status bars on the previously linked search. I'm betting you meant apostrophe and not comma earlier based on similar findings.

I also noticed the transclusion checker tool suffers from something similar if not the same issue. Compare the first link's generated URL when clicked on using the TSDT icon at the top of the Index: page vs. a manually modified URL:

• Direct link
• Edited URL

scratch the above - was able to fix this by dropping the urlencode wrapped on the magic FULLPAGENAME word and just used FULLPAGENAMEE by itself instead.

The encoding of a simple apostrophe character certainly seems to play a role in all this. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

User defined toolbar messed up by the latest mw software update

This was posted earlier at the end of this section and moved here. After editing in Wikipedia and the Commons, I noticed that this problem is not unique to Wikisource, which means that that it's related to the software update.— Ineuw talk 07:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Clock-purge works fine, but I ended up with another strange occurrence where the WS toolbar is split by my custom Vector.js in the editor. Half the standard buttons are on the left and half on the right with my custom bar in the middle. If someone can fix this I would be most grateful. Earlier, I created an empty Common.js. Could this be the cause? — Ineuw talk 05:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I uploaded two images here to demonstrate the problem. File:WS custom toolbar position.jpg and File:V1.19 Edit buttons source code in FF 10.png which shows how the standard buttons code is split by the custom toolbar code. If anyone can fix it, I would show my gratitude by shipping them fresh Canadian snow. Why fix it? Well, I am an old dog and and very slow to learn new tricks and this new trick slows my editing.— Ineuw talk 21:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Your toolbar code is executing as soon as it loads, which could be what is causing it to insert itself into the middle of the bar. I suggest wrapping it all like this to prevent it running before the page load is completed:

$(document).ready( function(){
 
//your code here
});

This should load the toolbars only after the normal page elements are complete. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 13:26, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Inductiveload. I've implemented the addition, and I am sure that I've made no mistake as it's perfectly clear. Unfortunately there is no change.— Ineuw talk 00:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Here is the solution for the new toolbar Tpt (talk) 18:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

if($.inArray(mw.config.get('wgAction'), ['edit', 'submit']) !== -1 && mw.user.options.get('usebetatoolbar')) {
  mw.loader.using('ext.wikiEditor.toolbar', function() {
    $(function() {
      //You add your buttons here
    });
  });
}

Thanks. I tried this as well but it eliminated all my custom buttons. :(.— Ineuw talk 23:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Still not working

Returning to this unsolved issue, for the first edit of the day the toolbar displays properly, but subsequently it reverts to the old problem. I think that Inductiveload's analysis is correct, as his solution is implemented but without any effect, so I was wondering if there is a way to increase the delay before my custom toolbar loads?— Ineuw talk 23:36, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

---

Paragraph ignore

Normally OCR paragraphs automatically ignore (follow the preceding line without a line break). Which was the case on Page:Latin_for_beginners_(1911).djvu/330 until I did some formatting. Now the preexisting paragraphs are having impact. It is translating to the Latin for beginners (1911)/Latin-English vocabulary also, so not limited to page scan. for reason unknown, the pages I have not touched don't have the issue. JeepdaySock (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I think there's a difference between LF and CR characters. Both look the same in the editing box, but there are different behaviours in transclusion. I find it easiest to remove them all in paragraphs and just keep the double CR for paragraph endings. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

My guess is that you're using a colon to indent individual lines because that appears to be the same as a paragraph tag with a indent style of some value. Actually, using the colon in wikicode creates a defined list in the underlying html with definitions as a sub-division of that tags (sub-divisions that happen to be hard-coded with an even greater left-margin than its parent plus the parent inserts an automatic closing tag when it detects a variation from one sub division to the next). So what you're getting in the HTML is:

<p>colō</p>
<dl>
<dd>COlo, -ere, colui, cultus, cultivate., till;honor., worship ; devote one^s self to</dd>
<dd>columna, -ae, f . column, pillar</dd>
<dd>com- (col-, con-, cor-, co-), a prefix,</dd>
</dl>
<p>together, with, or intensifying the meaning of the root word</p>
<dl>
<dd>coma, -ae, f. hair</dd>
<dd>comes, -itis, m. and f. [com-, together,</dd>
</dl>

colō

COlo, -ere, colui, cultus, cultivate., till;honor., worship ; devote one^s self to

columna, -ae, f . column, pillar

com- (col-, con-, cor-, co-), a prefix,

together, with, or intensifying the meaning of the root word

coma, -ae, f. hair

comes, -itis, m. and f. [com-, together,

When what you really want is...

<p>colō</p>
<dl>
<dt>Colo,</dt><dd>-ere, colui, cultus, cultivate, till; honor, worship; devote one's self to</dd>
<dt>columns,</dt><dd>-ae, f. column, pillar,</dd>
<dt>com-</dt><dd>(col-, con-, cor-, co-), a prefix, together, with, or intensifying the meaning of the root word</dd>
<dt>coma,</dt><dd>-ae, f. hair</dd>
<dt>comes,</dt><dd>-itis, m. and f. [com-, together,</dd>
</dl>

colō

Colo,

-ere, colui, cultus, cultivate, till; honor, worship; devote one's self to

columns,

-ae, f. column, pillar,

com-

(col-, con-, cor-, co-), a prefix, together, with, or intensifying the meaning of the root word

coma,

-ae, f. hair

comes,

-itis, m. and f. [com-, together,

... or this...

<p>colō</p>
<dl>
<dd><b>Colo</b>, -ere, colui, cultus, cultivate, till; honor, worship; devote one's self to</dd>
<dd><b>columns</b>, -ae, f. column, pillar,</dd>
<dd><b>com-</b> (col-, con-, cor-, co-), a prefix, together, with, or intensifying the meaning of the root word</dd>
<dd><b>coma</b>, -ae, f. hair</dd>
<dd><b>comes</b>, -itis, m. and f. [com-, together,</dd>
</dl>

colō

Colo, -ere, colui, cultus, cultivate, till; honor, worship; devote one's self to

columns, -ae, f. column, pillar,

com- (col-, con-, cor-, co-), a prefix, together, with, or intensifying the meaning of the root word

coma, -ae, f. hair

comes, -itis, m. and f. [com-, together,

→You will never get smooth line heights and uniformity using the wiki-code's colon shortcut because the opening and closing <dl> tags are auto-added at page start or end. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:18, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if it is related to what you describe here, but the other day, when I tried the Chrome browser, some pages that I proofread suddenly had doubled every newline. So I went back to Firefox, where I have never seen that problem. For dictionaries like this one, I use normal paragraphs with a blank line before each headword (no colon, no <dt>, no <dd>). --LA2 (talk) 00:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Proof reading this is hard enough without trying to insert HTML markup on top of it. As I move through the proofread, I will be removing the print line returns. Just pointing out that what used to happen is different then what happens now. JeepdaySock (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't saying switch to HTML markup - I was just using it to illustrate the nuances now seen as a result of (?) recent changes. It seems now all block elements, including [additional] noinclude tags, force an end tag to be assumed & added and thus, an errant paragraph tag is opened for the next line instead of being auto-wrapped with the previous line. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Cuneiform

Take a look here: w:Cuneiform#Syllabary. This is the English Wikipedia article about Cuneiform.

Now take a look here: User:Amire80/Cuneiform. This is a page here in the English Wikisource. Its contents is the same as of that Wikipedia page.

If you are like most people, then you will see squares or some other garbage instead of Cuneiform in the first link, and if you use a reasonably modern browser, then you'll see a Cuneiform characters in the second link.

That's because a few minutes ago, the Wikimedia Localization Team deployed Cuneiform WebFonts here on Wikisource.

We hope to deploy them in the English Wikipedia in not-too-distant future.

Now if only someone who knows Cuneiform could transcribe this book, which has pages like this... --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Or who wants to learn one of the earliest known forms of written expression, You don't need to know the language to start the transcription. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

That's absolutely right, I transcribe Latin, French, and German, even though my German is not good, my French is worse, and I've never learned any Latin and I've played around with transcribing some others.

BTW, there is a problem with the DjVu, there may be missing pages because the text layer on the above linked page (451) does not match the scan.

Also, I do wonder if the work really belongs here or shouldn't be on mul.ws as it contains multiple languages and is going to be far from easy to use interwiki transclusion on (which is a poor work around to messy problem to begin with). I understand that the introduction is in English but that doesn't change anything. I'm starting to think all multilingual works belong at mul.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 07:57, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

In this case, it is an English book about Cuneiform, with the latter limted to some examples, so en.ws is probably appropriate here. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:23, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

New logo for (Marathi) Wikisource

Marathi Wikisource logo

I've just noticed this in the Wikipedia Signpost. Marathi Wikisource might be getting their own logo. Apparently there is some dissatisfaction with the iceberg that I've never noticed before. Gerard Meijssen has a blog post about it. It doesn't really affect English Wikisource but it is intersting to make note of it. Personally, I don't think a pot of water (or punctured globe) really evokes a library or Wikisource, although the similarity to the Wikipedia logo might help create the association in people's minds. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

An interpretation: With using the Wikipedia logo and recognizing their scope, the puzzle is only the surface of the sources within? Or, something with water being a source of life and with respect to the project scopes, Wikisource is the source of Wikipedia? I don't know; it looks nice. Not a very important matter, but I would support a change. - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I find it far more attractive than an iceberg which always reminds me of the sinking of the Titanic. I certainly support its use. — Ineuw talk 19:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

That logo is an interesting concept. If I could conjure up a new Wikisource logo by sheer force of will, it would somehow illustrate the digitization process. For example, a book with the left half physical, the right half stylized, with a lightning bolt dividing the two halves. The lighting bolt of course representing the primal force of nature that is the Wikisourcerer. --Eliyak T·C 05:43, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I would be shocked if the Wikimedia Foundation were to allow this kind of language-level fragmentation of visual identity. Hesperian 10:25, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Voltage source symbol

The multitude of names is already confusing. Latin Wikisource is called Vicifons and the Russian is called Wikiteka. And have you ever tried to explain the difference between Wikipedia and Wikimedia to people outside of our core community? If it were me, all names except Wikipedia would be scrapped. I'd turn WMF into Wikipedia Foundation, Wikisource into Wikipedia Library, Wikibooks into Wikipedia Manuals, Wiktionary into Wikipedia Dictionary, and so on. --LA2 (talk) 23:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I like it... Reminds me of the woman at the well (drawing water, so to speak, from the Source of "living water") & John 4:13, etc.... But that might be too religious a connotation for most, I dunno!? Hesperian, what does "language-level fragmentation of visual identity" even mean? Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, the logo of Marathi Wikisource suggests that we have enormous knowledge and information available in the history (and which is copy right free), with the Marathi Wikisource project, we are pouring and giving this knowledge to all the world which is completely FREE. This design has been finalized after exploring lot many options by the Marathi community people and the graphic design is been made by members from IIT, Bombay. We had also discussion of this topic in various forums and they have happily supported for this logo. I can share that conversation on email if required. This design is been appreciated by many experts in including Amol Palekar the famous producer, director and actor in Hindi and Marathi Cinema and theater....Mvkulkarni23 (talk) 09:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with most of the comments above, especially LA2's. I will note the first thing I thought of was Vicifons, which refers to a spring or fountain - a (mental) symbol that I like far better than the strange iceberg which many newcomers don't recognize as an iceberg at all and always requires a lot of historical "Gutenberg" -> "Sourceberg" -> ("Wikisource" + iceberg symbol) explanation that is completely irrelevant to what we are and begs the question, but why? What exactly does an iceberg have to do with a source anyway.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 14:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

As I said years ago when we were deciding on the current logo, Wikisource is basically a library - I think we should stay away from any water-based logo (whether an iceberg or a water pitcher) as the last thing you want in a library is a bunch of water damaging the books. Angr 18:54, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Lol, that is true; I guess the ideal logo would be one which requires little or no explanation. I guess the question becomes "what would best represent a library?" We go past printed works, but I guess an image of someone reading or writing is at least familiar enough. I've always liked this image as a concept for wikisource. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I like that one too, as do la.ws, fr.ws, and br.ws - they all have it on their mainpages. WMF might not like it though, it's far from copyrightable, which itself is a good thing - but I have found in the outside world of the greater WMF we are considered extremists about free, especially about liberating sources - maybe we need a symbol with a source that someone is trying to restrict through yet another data copyright or access license to represent our concept of free. ;-) I really do like this one though.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 16:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Hesperian's comment of March 8 above, that any language or regional specific logo should not be considered. This includes File:Accueil scribe.png because it is occidental, eurocentric and religious. If we consider changing the logo, we must look for a logo that's universally accepted by all Wikisource communities. — Ineuw talk 21:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

That logo looks like a chamber pot. Whatever they are dumping out is obviously not wanted. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 06:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Portal:English Statutes

This could do with considerable cleanup.

Eventually it's hoped that every single English Statute that suitable scans exist for could be included. It's noted some of those already transcribed are NOT on legislation.gov.uk as that site only appears to hold material still 'in force' in relation to the older Statutes concerned.

I also note the following :

• There are some anomalies between the dating/bbumbering given by Ruffhead (which I'm using currently) and other sources.
• Wikisources own lists of Parliamentry Acts give a Short title for some Chapters, (but these lists don't seem to record which of the numerous governmental or former HMSO/TSO documents they are taken from). I've tried to insert the appropriate short titles into the Table given at the front of the Ruffhead edition, but would appreciate someone with access to suitable sources checking my insertions in this area.
• Ideally (and to get the short titles) it may be worth asking appropriate Wikimedia UK or the GLAM contacts to ask the National Archives (or the Law Commission), to release the full Chronological Table of the Statutes (which was last revised around 2000) online, It would from the perspective of confiriming dates and titles for linking easier.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:51, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't this duplicate Portal:Acts of the Parliament of England/United Kingdom? I can't see any difference in definition between "Statute" and "Act". Anyway, that list of Acts appears to have originally come from Wikipedia and back in the old days before providing references or sources was the norm. Finding the source for the short titles may be difficult or even impossible. Someone could ask Wikimedia UK (I've met some of them, they might be able to do something but I don't know if they have any contacts at the Archives). This request should probably be made on the Wikimedia UK website. In the mean time, we should probably use the titles as given in whatever sources we use. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

There are some gaps in the page you link to.. At present what links from the page I created were the ones I couldn't find in your link. Also there are some nominaly Statutes of unclear date (temp incert.) which are NOT accessible from the portals.. (In other sources, these tend to be incldued after those of Edward the Second. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Statutes are Acts, like Statutory Rules are Regulations. If there are gaps, please feel welcome to fill the gaps, no need to recreate and duplicate portals. In fact, I would think that it would be bad to duplicate such. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I've reworked my portal so it redirects anything from Edward III onward to the existing Portal. I've also put in some Pre Parlimentary Charters and Measures , based on a list at English Wikipedia . Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:04, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Extemporaneous speech

Flight 93 Transcript with CARTC, September 11th FDNY Radio Transcripts, and 9/11 Dispatcher transcript is currently marked as no license. Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript is marked with the obviously wrong PD-USGov. I'm sure there are more similar transcripts around. Extemporaneous speech does not gather a copyright normally, but if we want to make that assertion, can someone whose comfortable with the law here make an appropriate license tag for these?--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:46, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The last I checked, these were all part of the evidence collected, examined & released by the 9/11 Commission in their Final Report (which is PD-USGov by nature). I recall (fairly well) both Flight 93 related transcripts among others as being part of the Notes to Chapter 1 (ref 160 something by the FAA/NTSB) and pretty sure the other 2 were also entered as evidence & cited as such in one of the other Notes sections (but its been a couple of years since I read the report so don't hold me to those other two for sure). Anyone still have a copy lying around? The abbreviated version only cites these whereas the bundle had the full text. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, just to clarify, PD-USGov does wash clean works that are incorporated. In other words, a copyrighted work may become evidence or otherwise incorporated into a report and would not lose its copyright. I'm not taking any position on the question itself, I haven't looked into it.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 08:34, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Flight voice/data recorders are FAA property; not the airline's. I've dealt with the FAA memos (the transcripts) previously in smacking down various wingnuts and their double-remote-controlled-Boeing-737-reouted-to-covert-airstrip-and-blah-blah 9/11 truther conspiracies more times than I care to remember, so I'm as close to positive as possible that PD-USGov applies to 2 if not 3 of the transcripts involving the FAA without being a lawyer. The FDNY stuff may be a different story but I doubt it - if the 9/11 Commission cites it, then I'd bet its been cleared of all names, etc. and released into PD via evidence or similar legal avenue during their investigation. -- George Orwell III (talk) 09:49, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't have any experience with cockpit voice/data recorders and will take your word for it. I only meant to clarify that simply putting it in a transcript that was a Gov't document wouldn't make an otherwise copyrightable work PD-Gov. I have no issues with your conclusion.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 20:03, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

• Tagged the articles Flight 93 Transcript with CARTC, September 11th FDNY Radio Transcripts, and 9/11 Dispatcher transcript with {{copyvio}} and copied above to Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Extemporaneous_speech. Scriptorium discusions are archived for inactivity, WS:CV are only archived on closure of copyright question. Jeepday (talk) 12:14, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Formatting of Stautes at Large

The_Statutes_at_Large_(Ruffhead)/Volume1/Magna_Carta

It would be much appreciated if someone could come up with a template (or dynamic layout) for doing the side-by-side approach , I'm currently doing with tables.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:57, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I haven't tried it yet, but have a look at Category:Column formatting templates. In particular {{Multicol}}. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Also consider {{side by side}}, which I mentioned on irc. That has been used by inductiveload in customized form for parallel poems here: Quatrains of Omar Khayyam (tr. Whinfield, 1883)/Quatrains 1-100.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 06:15, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I've also just found {{Translation table}}, which will even put the line down the middle for you. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:32, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure {{Translation table}} is the right idea here. That's intended for wikisource translations rather than multi-column works and it perpetuates the use of tables for formatting.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 07:16, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Bugzilla:35925 tracking bug

Doug has had a great idea and started up a tracking bug to link in all outstanding issues for the Wikisources. Nice job Doug. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you like it , I had been thinking about it for a while but got a nudge yesterday on IRC, so I finally made it happen.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 11:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Speeches

Started a conversation at Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Speeches_.26_manifesto, there is potential for this discussion to have a large impact on content across Wikisource. Jeepday (talk) 13:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Problem with {{scans}} template

Hello all,

I’ve created a template to show the indexes list of scans existing on Wikisource. The result is satisfactory with {{scans|Shakespeare}}: Scans or with {{scans|Dickinson}}: Scans. It gives an error answer with {{scans|Montaigne}}: Scans or {{scans|Rabelais}}: Scans or {{scans|Verne}}: Scans where I see an answer immediately replaced by an error message. Can somebody explain where the problem is (and solve it)? --Zyephyrus (talk) 15:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Here is the message:

Livre

Pages

NA

-

Pb

1

2

3

Total

Function arrayPrototypeUniq() { var result = []; for (var i = 0; i < this.length; ++i) { var current = this[i]; if (result.indexOf(current) == -1) { result.push(current); } } return result; }

Function arrayPrototypeUniq() { var uniques = []; var result = []; for (var i = 0; i < this.length; ++i) { var current = this[i]; if (uniques.indexOf(current) == -1) { uniques.push(current); } else { result.push(current); } } return result; }

Function arrayChunk(size) { if (typeof size != "number"

size <= 0) { return [this]; } var result = []; var current; for (var i = 0; i < this.length; ++i) { if (i % size == 0) { current = []; result.push(current); } current.push(this[i]); } return result; }

• I can't reproduce the error. I get valid results for all of the above links, including Montaigne, Rabelais, and Verne. With no change to Verne.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 16:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

It works now: I had to disable the index gadget in my preferences. Billinghurst and Doug, thanks! --Zyephyrus (talk) 16:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Issues with upgrade to 1.20wmf1

Proofread page related

New Interface problem Done

The "source" tab has disappeared from the top of mainspace pages that have transcluded pages from the Page namespace. For example, Great Expectations/Chapter XXVIII is fully transcluded and has the coloured bar to indicate progress, but where 24 hours ago there was a tab button in between "page" and "discussion" with the word "source" on it, it's not there anymore. I can find no alternative way to jump straight to the Index. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 10:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried purging your css & js files? — billinghurst sDrewth 10:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Double refresh got it for me. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:53, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Header/Footer Done

I have found that despite the header/footer gadget saying OPEN, that the header/footer flashes as open then displays as closed. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

It may be a problem with a script that use the self.proofreadpage_show_headers var. We solve this problem on fr by removing this var from scripts. Tpt (talk)

Disable the gadget in your preferences and enable the option also in your preferences, editing tab. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:34, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Amazing that we had that embedded into the pages. I have (re)customised the text to what was with the gadget. And I have addressed the issue of the default status of the headers. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

sections Done

On it.wikisource we got a problem with labeled sections. Go to it:Myricae/Finestra illuminata/III Dopo?. All ok. Now click edit and then preview. The text that appears is the result of the trasclusion switching "fromsection" with "tosection" and viceversa. Candalua (talk) 13:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. I have make a mistake with the implementation of "include", "exclude" and "step". I have submit a commit in order to solve this problem. We have only to wait for the next deployment (15 days). Tpt (talk) 13:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I have open a bug here : https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36093. Tpt (talk) 14:16, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks like the code was patched in response to the bugzilla a couple of hours ago. A cache-purge/hard-refresh may be needed on pages previously observed to have been affected by this. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:45, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

When I read 15 days I thought: What?!? :-) But then it was solved very quickly. Thank you very very much. Candalua (talk) 18:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Horizontal Layout

I have a problem when trying to use the "Horizontal layout when editing in Page: namespace" option in Gadgets, as the image of the source does not appear (reappears when I take this option off, but I find that makes editing harder)--George Burgess (talk) 13:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Other issues

pagequality class

From the previous MediaWiki update, every link to a Page used to have a css class associated with pagequality level. There had been some debate here on en.ws whether this was right or not, but anyway the class in itself didn't do any harm: the subdomains who liked it could use it, the subdomains who didn't like it could simply set their css rules to ignore it. But now it has disappeared. Did someone ask for its removal? It's really sad that useful features are added just to be dropped some months later. Candalua (talk) 13:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit: I see from the end of this discussion that the change was unintentional and it was reverted?!? But WHY, for God's sake???? Just because it's unintentional doesn't mean it's bad, on the contrary, I've shown in the above discussion that there was no need to revert, only to fix css styles! Candalua (talk) 13:18, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Gatgetize it locally if need be. Normal proofreading should be taking place in the Page: & Index namespaces anyway. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

You can't gadgetise it without the class information being present in the page. The server can easily give you this information, but it is almost impossible to get it after page serving, without some horribly slow and inefficient hack like AJAXing in all the linked Page: NS pages. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 15:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh well. Normal proofreading should be taking place in the Page: & Index namespaces anyway. -- George Orwell III (talk) 16:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

The colours are useful in contexts other than the proofreading in these namespaces, as shown by the presence of the status bar in the mainspace. Other Wikisources also found them useful for labelling individual page number links. If it were to be a documented effect, every Wikisource can respond as they please, including ignoring them. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 16:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Other wikisources, such as it., have also opted for no dynamic layouts - why not here? (rehtorical). Look I get what you're saying but you obviously don't gey what I'm saying - the problem, as it is in most of these cases, was the process here. No proposal, no authorization, no test-run & no consensus formed to make the change; end of story, Bugzilla or otherwise.

I don't want this "on" just to have to turn it off thru CSS because I don't see it being useful nor in the spirit of standing practices & policies; others might see it as you do. We won't know until en.WS established regulars are put the option in a formal proposal process. -- George Orwell III (talk) 17:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Process wasn't followed because it was a mistake. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 17:16, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

And mistakes are typically corrected. Why this section appears as part of the issues with the wmf1.20 upgrade when it was really a correction is the question. Should I consider it part of an effort to make a "happy" mistake, now corrected, reverted once again as if it were really a bug in wmf1.20. and easier than going through normal channels by some in spite of the community? Probably not but at least I've made that point clear and unmistakable. -- George Orwell III (talk) 17:33, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

It has been corrected, and the people who had built a useful system on the mistake without realising that it wasn't supposed to happen saw a regression in the 1.20 upgrade from their perspective. Hence the comment here. There is no conspiracy, honest. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 20:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Candalua: the code actually was defective, as it was a programming mistake caused by an accidental commented line and didn't do what it said it would, though as you say that doesn't mean the effect wasn't useful (mutations are not always harmful, it's not only Peppered moth evolution and E. coli that demonstrate that principle!). It does, however, make the code hard to maintain as the code isn't then documented correctly. If some sort of consensus could be reached, one could remove the code that aborts link-colouring if not in the Index: NS (i.e. remove lines 443 and 444 here) and use local gadgets and CSS to define when and where link-colouring is used. This would then be, as Zaran said above, a matter of a Bugzilla ticket. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 16:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Inductiveload, if I get it right, you're saying: if the comment does not match with the code, let's change the code... I would say: if the code is good, let's keep the code and change the comment! So the situation is: just because you don't want to do a simple fix on your common.css (I really don't understand why), you've made us lose a useful feature. Anyway. My next proposal is: re-add the class, but with some prefix, something like "linkcolor-qualityX", so that it doesn't interfere with your css rules and you still see everything like before without doing any change on your side. Please, can we reach consensus at least on this? Candalua (talk) 18:30, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, yes, but functional changes should be discussed, and the code was still not quite right, even for the new effect (there was at least one extra line that should have been removed in that case). I support the idea, but I am sick of fighting the paranoia that derails nearly every discussion that involves the words "layouts", "CSS", "JS" or "extension" into a rear-guard defence. All I'm doing is saying what happened to cause this and how you'd progress if you wanted to change it back. Start a proposal at here or at oldWS and I'll chime in, but I'm not doing more than that in this hostile climate. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 20:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit, sorry that was out of order. I'm willing to help on this if we can reach an agreement. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 02:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposal

Moved to established Proposals section above. See Proposal concerning pagequality class. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

User defined .js toolbar problem revisited

I reported this issue after the 1.19wmf1 update and posted about it on several occasions, once here, and with Inductiveload on his talk page. Unfortunately we found no working solution.

Now, it's carried over to v1.20wmf1 as well with a variation - that on rare occasion, the toolbar appears properly. I was able to catch this earlier today and uploaded a snapshot of how it is now, and how it should be. My problem is that the split confuses and slows me down, causing editing errors.

I understand that no one here can fix this and I am asking how to go about reporting this to the developers. From my understanding of the editing Source Document, this is not a bug but a design change after v1.18wmf1 which causes this issue. Thanks in advance — Ineuw talk 23:14, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Help:Editing poetry

I know you've all got your own stuff going on right now, but is there anyone out there who would like to help me revise/update the Help:Editing poetry page? I am reticent to make direct changes to the page myself, but if someone has more gumption than I do (you don't even have to like my way of formatting poetry), and is willing to take the heat from other steadfast Users who may argue over jots & tittles, I would be much obliged! For this purpose, I have created a temporary "sandbox" of sorts at Londonjackbooks/Editing poetry. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:12, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox or discussing and testing the edits on the talk page sounds quite appropriate. Alternatively make the changes on the page, and put some diffs up asking for opinions. You are one of our more diligent editors in that space, and you know what works. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:06, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I merely follow in some good footprints around here. Different sizes, shapes & depths... but good :) AKA Londonjackbooks 16:20, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

A single reference spanning 4 pages

Can someone please show me the error of my ways with the last 4 pages of Byron's The Corsair? 3.5 pages are a single footnote. I tried half-heartedly to use ref-follow (incorrectly), but feel a much more pressing need to slice up some watermelon right now... Thanks, AKA Londonjackbooks 17:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

You can use the normal name/follow system. Name the first ref and then they all follow that one, like so:

<ref name="p328">Foo</ref>
<ref follow="p328">Bar</ref>
<ref follow="p328">Baz</ref>
<ref follow="p328">Spam</ref>

Which results in a single ref reading "Foo Bar Baz Spam". I've transcluded your four pages to my sandbox for reference. Hope the watermelon lived up to your expectations! Inductiveload—talk/contribs 18:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Tasted like summer... but not sweet enough for the trouble of having to de-seed. As for the ref-name/ref-follow: Obliged, sir... I tried a couple things, but didn't try to ref back to the original page (328) on all three pages. Thought about it, but then gave up. AKA Londonjackbooks 19:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

To note that it is not specifically referencing back to the original name, it is creating of a consistent name so it knows which refs to concatenate. I started using page numbers ages ago as 1) it was easy, 2) it allowed me to remember which page I was joining together and 3) it was easy (see 1). — billinghurst sDrewth 02:38, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: User:Mattwj2002/temp2

Am I permitted to empty this page which lists ~1,800 links to pages in the PSM project Page namespace? The page was last updated on October 2009. — Ineuw talk 08:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

How about we just hide the list of links for the time being so you can keep working and ask the user directly if it is OK to permanently remove/delete all those links? -- George Orwell III (talk) 09:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I am in occasional contact with Matt and will ask him. Please don't waste time on hiding them. — Ineuw talk 17:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikisource in Hebrew is bombarding my site with 404 errors.

My site, www.tanach.us = www.tanakh.us has been hit by thousands of 404 errors from

<http://he.wikisource.org/w/index.php>

using a broken call:

/Fonts/SBL_Hbrw.ttf) format("truetype"

presumably from an erroneous font selection process. I have permission to use the SBL_Hbrw font under certain conditions.

Please fix your code and fix it to take the Hebrew font from someone else.

Chris Kimball Transcriber

This is not really something English Wikisource can remedy, so I have copied your post to Hebrew Wikisource. I don't know what is using SBL_Hbrw.ttf nor why. The Wikimedia fonts for Hebrew are Miriam_CLM.ttf and Taamey_Frank_CLM.ttf (see {{lang}}). He.ws should be able to help. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying us Adam. The problem was apparently rooted to a link that was added to our CSS page a couple of days ago. It's now been fixed. Dovi (talk) 18:06, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Statutes At Large

It's going well on a later volume so far :

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Statutes_at_Large_%28Ruffhead%29/Volume_9/Doncaster:_Small_Debts,_Lighting,_etc._Act_1763

What I'd like though is for someone to assist in tidying up headers, and adding a 'meta-data' law box (which gives additional data such as repeals not mentioned in the original and so forth)

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Terms of Use update

As you may be aware, given the banner notice, Wikimedia has updated its Terms of Use. This updated version will become effective on May 25, 2012, and can be reviewed here. To find out more, please visit wmf:New Terms of use/en. Thanks. :) --Mdennis (WMF) (talk) 23:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Standardizing the two most widely used font sizes of PSM

This is an explanation of two related posts in the Scriptorium, Proposal to modify the {{fsx}} template and PSM maintenance in Page:ns.

The basic concern of this editor was, that regardless of the font size specified in the {{fs}}, and {{{fsx}} templates, the line height remained the same, or nearly the same, and contrasted poorly with the normal text. Since the existing templates could not be modified, it was decided to create two new templates to resolve the issue of line heights for the two most used font size variations and employ a bot to replace the old references.

In the process of examining the text, Mpaa discovered numerous variations in the font sizes applied in the same context, and after some detailed discussion on the size variations, two sample pages were created to examine font size changes and line height relationships:

• This page lists the font sizes between 100% and 68% in descending order.
• This page demonstrates the line height differences between the old and new templates.
• Font size for PSM image descriptions is 85%. This was always the standard font size, but the new {{fs85}} template reduces the line height from 1.5em to 1.1em and it significantly improves the appearance of multi-line descriptions.
• Font size for blocks of text (apart from image descriptions), in the ranges between 83% to 93% are to be standardized to 90% by replacing old templates with {{fs90}}, which reduces the line height from 1.5em to 1.2em.
• Exceptions are poems which vary between 100%, 90% or 85%. In case of 90% and 85%, please use the corresponding templates.
• Font sizes less than 83%, or greater than 93% are not affected.

I hope this clarifies the issue. — Ineuw talk 03:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

---

• Addendum: The ongoing examination of the font size variations in PSM, necessitated the addition of a third template {{fs75}} for 75% font size and the line height of 1em. — Ineuw talk 20:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

English Statutes

This needs tidying up and Wikifying - Any takers?

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Portal:English_Statutes

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:18, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Correct placement of {{nop}}

In circumstances where the page text needs to end with <section end> and {{nop}}, what is the proper order of code placement? — Ineuw talk 01:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Based on a quick test, it seems to me that {{nop}} is in fact not necessary in this case, since the section tag performs the same function. If it is necessary, I think it should come after the section tag. --Eliyak T·C 03:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It didn't even occur to me to test if <section end> is an inline or paragraph style tag. This makes me ask if the section tags are HTML or part of the wiki language?

As for the position of {{nop}}, that's what I assumed as well. I will check the main ns if the two together have any adverse effect. — Ineuw talk 03:14, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

List of missing running headers

Would it be possible to get a list of pages in Volumes 1 to 4 of PSM which are missing the running headers, and paste it in User:Ineuw/Sandbox8? Thanks. — Ineuw talk 01:20, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Try now.--Mpaa (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, in a big way.— Ineuw talk 00:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Upload help please

I am reading Help:Beginner's guide to Index: files but I am having trouble getting a DjVu from http://archive.org/details/MN40077ucmf_0 to Commons. The work will be going to The Necessity of Atheism (Brooks) which will be licensed {{PD-US-no-renewal|1994|1933}}. It seems the only option is to upload from my computer to Commons (not directly from IA), but I can't figure out how to get the DjVu from Internet archive to my computer. It only wants to open it via a web page and I am not seeing a way to save it as DjVu. Jeepday (talk) 11:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

You don't see the .djvu file even when you follow the link from All files:HTTP [2]? I usually just right-click on the .djvu file from there and select "Save as..." from the drop-down menu to save the file locally. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:10, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I must have been having a braincramp. When the right mosue click said "save link as..." I was thinking it was referring to the link as in short cut, not the file the link was going to. I have it on my PC now, thanks again GO3 :) Jeepday (talk) 17:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Selecting new eras

It has been pointed out, in Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help, that the eras as used on Wikisource are incorrect. Currently they are:

Eras
Era	Period
Ancient	Before AD 600
Medieval	601–1420
Renaissance	1421–1630
Early modern	1631-1899
Modern	1900–present

According to Wikipedia, the Early modern period is roughly from the end of the Medieval period up to the Industrial Revolution; a time span that covers the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the Age of Discovery. The Late modern era roughly begins with the Industrial revolution and ends with the beginning of the cold war/end of World War 2. This is followed by the contemporary era (1945-present). (The ends of the ancient and medieval periods are also debatable).

These eras do not have strict dates but Wikisource needs them for categorisation. Authors are automatically categorised into these eras based on their birth and death years. We also need some central point of reference for a large group of disparate volunteers to co-ordinate in categorising works.

So, we need to decide if we are going to stick with our current eras or redefine them.

One easy approach would be to conflate the Renaissance and Early Modern eras into the Modern era. That would, however, have a lot of works and authors crowded into one period (Joan of Arc sharing the era with Steve Jobs). We could merge Renaissance and Early Modern. We can also a new era, Contemporary, adjusting the others to fit, although "contemporary" may not long mean post-WW2.

Thoughts? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:45, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

• I think we need to ask ourselves, "what are we trying to do with these categories? What is our purpose in dividing authors and works by eras and how are users served?" I don't think the current system does anything of value. In fact, it's a net detriment as it places authors in works in the wrong periods altogether, so anyone familiar with such terms would not look for them in the categories they are in. The major historical eras have arbitrary but useable start and end points. The Renaissance does not and there is some argument that it never even occurred in England. If we're going to make a different era at that time, "Elizabethan" would make more sense (and benefits from being clearly defined). On the whole, though, it seems that simply making things available by year, decade, and century, is more useful - you don't have to know what arbitrary era something has been placed in. Is there an easy way to search by a date range?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the eras are a useful tool for finding an author. Birth and death categories are very specific and do not allow a reader to find an author in "roughly period X" or near contemporaries. I can't think of an easy way to search a variety of categories at once. We could make the era categories a two-layer system, with parent eras (Ancient/Medieval/Modern) and child eras (they all have about three sub-divisions). The Renaissance is apparently a sub-division of the Early Modern era, which is itself a sub-divison of the Modern era; so we could skip it in favour of Early Modern. On the other hand, the US Library of Congress appears to date the Renaissance as 1500-1700, if we need an external point of reference for a specific date range. The Renaissance is a recognised period and it would still apply to period translations, even if not to the works originally in English. If we keep it, it can either overlap with Early Modern (authors of the time being categorised into both) or be a child of it—making it a grandchild category of the Modern era. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

For reference, that would something like the following. It gets a bit vague in the older periods. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Era	Era	Period
Ancient	Bronze Age	Pre-600 BC?
	Early Iron Age	600 BC? - ?
	Classical antiquity	? - 400/600? AD
Medieval	Early medieval	401/601? - 1000
	High medieval	1001 - 1300
	Late medieval	1301 - 1500
Modern	Early modern	1501 - 1800
	Late modern	1801 - 1945
	Contemporary	1946 - present

• The problem I have with the Renaissance is that it is a recognized (though only in Continental Europe and even there disputed by some) period with no agreed beginning and end. The period 1500-1700 used by the LoC doesn't agree with any time period I find anywhere else and we haven't modeled on the LoC for other eras. And it varies widely by country. Also, using a period that has questionable relevance to English just because it has relevance to, say, Italian, would argue for using non-European periods as well. Part of the problem with the period "Renaissance" is the same problem with the cusp of late antiquity/early medieval once being called the "Dark Ages". Hardly anyone would refer to it as that now, yet that's exactly why there's a 200 year gray area around the end of late antiquity. The problem is clear in the version above, where the Early Iron Age begins after the beginning of Classical Antiquity which started in the 8th C. BCE according to the Wikipedia article linked for the latter, the former article indicates that the Iron Age ran from around 1200 BCE to 400 CE in Europe but was over by 600 BCE in the Near East.
• Contemporary is a moving target, 1946 is just its current point of reference accepted by some, others would say the 1930s, 1960s or even 1980s.
• Again, I ask "what are we trying to do?" finding a rough contemporaries only works if you are away from the cusps. If I want to find an author or a list of rough contemporaries of an author from AD 500, I'm never going to know which period to search. The same for knowing whether a 1930s or 1940s author is late modern or contemporary, though in about 20 years both will be clearly in the former category.
• On the other hand, anything that clarifies that the 1890s were not early modern is an improvement over what we have now.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 14:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Certainly if I'm looking for a 19th-century author I'm never going to look under "Early Modern authors". Probably not even if I'm looking for an 18th-century author, but that may be because I'm a linguist rather than a literature person and I would only look under "Early Modern authors" if the person wrote in Early Modern English, which is generally held to have ended about 1700. (For example, some people may consider Jonathan Swift Early Modern, but judging by linguistic criteria he isn't, he's Modern.) Angr 19:06, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

• It seems like there is a lot of variation in periods (years) that fit the "labels" what if you use the periods (i.e. 1301 - 1500) instead of the labels, there is less room for confusion that way, and it will never become outdated. Jeepday (talk) 19:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

  I think the labels help newer or casual readers. Words like "ancient", "medieval" and "modern" help there but the precise subdivisions is a problem. One approach would be to ignore the Ancient Era for now, remove Renaissance altogether (or, at least, not have it as an automatic addition; only applying it manually where appropriate) and use something other than "Contemporary" for the rolling Current Era. (For that: "Post-War" is correct but could be confusing, "Atomic" would also be accurate, and "Post-modern" is apparently used sometimes although I don't like it.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 23:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Periodization is never neat, and words like "Renaissance" and "Medieval" are more than just imprecise; they are also culturally relative. I always thought it was weird that our system makes 15th-century Indian mystics into "Renaissance authors" and 14th-century Chinese writers into "Medieval authors". These are terms based entirely on European historical trends and, if they are ever applied to other cultures, they are often used for different time spans (A "Chinese Renaissance" might very well refer to the Song Dynasty, centuries before the European sense of the word—but the dynasties already provide a good enough periodization of Chinese history in most cases). Even in Europe, these are largely cultural—rather than chronological—categories; much ink has been spilled about the "spread" of the Renaissance from Italy outward. Petrarch is considered to be a Renaissance author but most of his contemporaries are not, and our categories for him reflect that confusion. The same is true of "modernity" or "antiquity". In the ideal world, I think we would have categories based only by century, or other arbitrary time spans, and treat periods like "Renaissance" or "Early modern" as literary and artistic movements which are added by editors like other topical categories, rather than based on the years entered into the template. Dominic (talk) 14:57, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Any set of eras and any set of labels is arbitrary and disputable. Unlike Angr, I wouldn't look for Swift under modern authors and Shakespeare under early modern authors, and I'd be surprised if there were any consensus among any large enough group what early modern and modern means. In my personal cataloging, I have Medieval literature, 16th century lit ... 21st century literature, and an overlapping category Elizabethan (II) literature for post-1954 writings with no standardization on pre-medieval works. It may be overfine, but it works. In any case, I'd prefer a finely divided system with reasonably mnemonic labels even if it takes some learning to figure out what their Wikisource-specific meanings were.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Template Review

Moved to Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Template_Review, Jeepday (talk) 10:44, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion requested

I've been trying to get the following template and have despite various attempts failed Template:Statute_table_entry to get it to work properly or consistently.

As a result I'm going to go back to coding the tables which it was supposed to be used for manually because I know that works. I've already reverted (or in some cases blanked(because it's easier to start from a clean version of the relevant page) the usages of this template or the higher level ones on which it is dependent.

Also affected :-

• {{statute table chapter}}
• {{statute table chapter long}}
• {{statute table entry-ext}}

Can someone please delete these 4 templates, so that someone else can figure out the CORRECT way of making dynamic table using templates, please ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

• Done -- George Orwell III (talk) 17:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Well this a right little mess isn't it, After the above request was made the templates concerned were fixed, which means

the WRONG version got nuked.  :( Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

All 4 restored . The post did say 'these 4 templates', however. Lessons learned I guess (if you use sdelete to request a deletion ,you have the chance to stop it more so than using this avenue again). -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:17, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

What seems to have been restored is the 'broken' version, not the revisions that were the fix. Has something gone wrong in the restoration? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Yup, it seems the last dozen or so edits didn't happen. I might have accidently clicked them off or something before I sent the request to restore. Anyway, they should be restored now. Sorry about that. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the restorations. :) -- Cat ^chi? 19:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Indenting fields in a table

In a table on the following page: Page:Chronological_Table_and_Index_of_the_Statutes.djvu/31

some of the titles such as those begining with c. and cc. should be indented.

Having tried various approaches to indenting these BUT not those which have a definite year or Specfic Name, and failing to get something that worked consistently I've removed the indenting code from both {{Statute table/chapter}} and {{Statute table}}.

Having tried at least 3 different approaches, as evidenced by the revision history, and getting the point of violent frustration in the process, without success can someone else please come up with a working solution?

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. I've tried something in the sandbox, but I'm requesting someone to review my code :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:44, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Frankly, I've had a hard time trying figure out what you were up to for a day or two now partly because "I" see the chapter & Nos. in the left-most column as being centered while "you guys" kept tweaking the template(s) to produce an indent of some sort (and that was done with 'Gap' to boot) instead.

From the few pages that I've seen to date, only the instances where braces are used to capture the content in the right-most column, which typically spans down over two or more rows as well, do I see anything being remotely "indented" (and those are really bulleted lists without the bullet if one wants to be technical about it; otherwise the braces would be redundant).

So without more clarity, or at least some fixed example to use for reference, its tough to try and give you helpful advice here. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:45, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

The reference would be the scans of the Chronological Table, which I was trying to transcribe. Exmaple image: - [3] - With the addition of some kind of 'annotation' to indicate what 'short titles' had been assigned, that was format I was trying to reproduce in wiki-markup, and flailing. That is what the short Version of an entry should look like, a 'long' entry which was intended for use on the various portals, included addtional columns for the 'long' title, 'short' title and additional notes. It's currently an awful mess, so perhaps it's an idea to throw it all out and start again with a consistent approach.

I've had a go in my sandbox at something a lot closer to the original, which doesn't require messing with esoteric templates and simply looks better than the uglification produced by the excess boxing and shading of the "wikitable" class. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:39, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

The reason I was using 'wikitable' was because it makes it somewhat easier to figure out mangled entries and rowspan issues, The relevant templates don't have to use those indefinitly.

Damn... wish I saw that sooner - I could have squeezed in the padding and brace columns to contain the middle column here then just outdent each entry in the end. Still, the usage of gap there is nearly as insane as the indent thing earlier (1 "gap" at the top of a column will space that column cell in the rows that follow automatically until the next colspan breaks its isolation; more than a quarter of the post-expand & template argument size is gone already without all that additional table styling and gap repetition - I doubt the whole table will transclude to the mainpage if we keep going down this road). -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:38, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Feel free to 'fix' the template if you think it can be. I'm going to hold on converting , or adding more entries until a comprehensive solution to this exists. Ideally we need ONE set of templates that can be used for both the original work and the Portals. I agree with George Orwell III, that these templates are getting sufficiently complex that something will break. Part of the complexity is because I was wanting to add 'annotations' to the original 1878 or so Chronological table so that where the measures in question had a source text on Wikisource it could be hyperlinked (the easiest approach to do that was to have short titles, (In passing I will note that some of the short titles in use on Wikisource are not necessarily the 'offical' ones, This I suppose is a matter of redirects.) It would be nice though to have a master index table of all bits of English legislation, even if it is a BIG project. (I think the last 'official' Chronological Tables took a Govt Dept about 2 years to prepare XD ) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:12, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I've gotten used to copying styling from row to row that I forgot that gap isn't a style. I've amended my sandbox accordingly. Hmm, a 330 page table… This won't transclude to a single mainpage. Sfan00, you could maybe consider creating subpages for each monarch and break the table up into those chunks. You could then use lst to do the transclusions. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

If you can explain how to do lst sections within tables it would be greatly appreciated. With the standard markup I found that it's beyond my ability to do that, in that what I get is 'raw' unprocessed markup when I tried to work out something for this Chronological_Table_and_Index_of_the_Statutes/Table_of_Variances, hence the ugly layout which can be greatly improved upon.

(Outdent) OK Folks, it's clear that the current approach isn't going sustainable, Can we have a discussion about having a a consistent set of template for Formatting these entries, which will be suited to all general cases for 'lists' and 'tables' of English (and by extension Commonwealth legislation )?, I'd include ALL the templates under Statute table within this, as well as {{short-title}} the code of which is also getting rather complex. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:12, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Removing my own request, I've already reverted the Portals, and an 'attempt' is being made to tidy things up in the tables. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:22, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Trial of thumbnail regenerator — volunteer testers?

I have asked one of the gadget developers at Commons to assist adapt a tool for our use.

The current problem is that when in transcription mode with Proofread Page, there are occasions when the image is not generated properly, and it is difficult to purge the thumbnail. This application adds a PURGE tab to the top right in vector/monobook skins, which should then purges stubborn image file. To identify where and when is needed is a little sporadic as we don't know when the thumbnail generators for commons will play up, hence the call for vols, and to request your feedback. [Note: Only tested in monobook and vector skins]

To trial the application, add the following text to your file Special:MyPage/common.js

// test of thumbnail regenerator [[File:User:Rillke/forWikisource.js]]
mw.loader.load('//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rillke/forWikisource.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');

Please provide your feedback, so I can look to how we can update, preserve and manage the gadget. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:23, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Curious - how is this any different than having the clock-purge gadget installed? -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

The clock purge doesn't (well hasn't been, though I am not going to cross-my-heart) purge thumbnails, because of the different way that thumbnails are generated within djvu files within ProofreadPage. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:49, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Gotcha, Thanks. After loading it, I see it is mucho different alright. Still no joy however. Remember this one?

from this page on the scans are no longer visible in edit mode

Go down 1 page or more from the above, and the thumbnails are fine in edit mode. Reposting the previous comparison using "full" commons file path...

• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_44.djvu/page633-800px-Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_44.djvu.jpg 800px thumbnail
• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_44.djvu/page633-1000px-Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_44.djvu.jpg 1000px thumbnail

I still say its hardly ever the cache (save for those times when our servers are stretched to thier limits or when somebody's browser is in a funk) but some flaw in the interaction between the wikicode and the djvuLibre-type package used to generate these images for certain djvu files but not others.

We've discussed this before - the specific wikicoding related to this seems less than optimal to put it nicely and my bet the same is true for the DjvuLibre "package" currently in place too. All I know is at some point many months ago this kind of thing stopped happening on my local install after upgrading to latest build at the time. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:38, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

If you change the pixel size on the thumbnails above or below 1000 (997, 998, 999, 1001, 1002,...) you will see that they are generated fine, which says that there is something wrong with the generation of the thumbnail. This gadget basically takes that principle for regenerating a thumbnail one pixel larger and displaying such, so whether it the production, or a cache of a problem, this is a resolving process. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

So "Purge" is a bit inconsistent with what is actually taking place - I get it now. Well it works, for a instance at a time that is. Close and re-open the same page; same problem. Close and open the following page; same problem.

Thanks for the effort. I will stick to changing the resolution on the Index: page however. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The script does the following:

1. Send a purge request to Commons if your browser allows that (some browsers limit even sending cross-site XHRs while others send the request and discard the response if a special response-header is missing)
2. Request a new thumbnail, +-1px compared to the previous one
3. Append a random number parameter to the requested image (just in case your browser has cached an old version)

The script can't

1. Purge your browser's cache (if someone knows how to accomplish, let me know on Commons) If you encounter that after Shift-reload, you get the right image, I could build-in automated page-reloading window.location.reload(true) after clicking the purge-tab
2. Catch server errors. If the server refuses to purge the images, there will be no way

-- Rillke (talk) 14:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Crown Copyright Waiver (UK) - dead link in template etc

We need someone who knows about UK Copyright law to look at this:

Dead link in this template:

• Template:UK-Crown-waiver

Plus should we be using the Open Government Licence nowadays?

I mentioned a related issue a few days ago... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I took a stab at refreshing the template but I'm not a Subject so take it for what its worth. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:24, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Table inconsistencies

In trying to roll the braces into the Statute tables code I was sandboxing some code here:

Template:Statute_table/testcases#Testing_sandbox_version Template:Statute_table/sandbox

based on the example here - User:Beeswaxcandle/Sandbox

For some reason some obscure quirks of the way the parser and exact synatx are eluding me in that I am still unable to get the formatting to behave consistently.

Perhaps it's time someone suggested a more 'understandable' syntax for tables?

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Well that's 'fixed' for now but see below.

Multiline brace?

In adding brace support to Template:Statute_table/sandbox I've found a minor inconvenience, in that {{brace}} doesn't extend over more than a single line. Looking at the code it seems that {{brace}} is image based, Could someone work out a way of having mutli-line table bracing, because the line lengths affected by it are of variable length which changes depending on exact page layout? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:44, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

What about {{brace2}}?--Mpaa (talk) 19:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

That is a partial solution, but it's documentation says it might need some tweaking, see the current sandbox :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:40, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Ernest Hemingway and Toronto Star

Just a head up that the Toronto Star have started publishing Hemingway's work while working for the newspaper in the early 1920s (i.e. public domain) at http://ehto.thestar.com/ SYSS Mouse (talk) 21:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Request

List of Acts of the Northern Ireland Assembly - Shouldn't this be a Portal?

In any case isn't NI legislation now covered by the standard UK Crown Waiver or Open Government License? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

In this case, I have deleted it as it had no meaningful content and would never be expanded in its present form. I have to say that I do not understand the Open Government License. Its wording is not clear on whether it covers all legislation and I'm not sure how it works with Wikimedia (see also the Open Parliament License). A new portal can be started for the Northern Ireland Assembly if this is cleared up. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:07, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the problem with all this stems from the previous Crown Copyright Waiver. Instead of making a generalized disclaimer covering all the agencies, bodies, etc. of the UK government (something akin to the Federal level) and listing any excluded works or bodies afterwards, it seems the waiver had a companion listing of all the bodies / works it theoretically covered only. Of course that guidance eventually became dated and the lines of responsibility blured over time - making every unlisted entity's (or sub-division of) works a question that had to be put to OPSI officials to be sure of copyright status. There is no includes all works by caveat with the waiver and now the OGL; just an includes [works] with no indication for the limitations that carried over or are newly created.

The OGL merely extended coverage over the same spotty listings as the Crown Waiver did with little to no additional clarification on what waiver conditions meant inclusion & what conditions resulted in exclusion. [4]. At least thats the way it reads for me. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:35, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

A categorization question

If one category is the child category of another, should an article be categorized in the parent category as well? — Ineuw talk 15:45, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Going by Wikipedia standards: No. In fact, the opposite is the case, the article should only appear in the child category. I've kept to the same policy here (and Commons etc) but I can see a case for occasional exceptions where categorisation into both would be useful (if it would help a reader, for example; if they would normally expect it to be in both). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:18, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Another issue is the organization of medicine and health categories. For example, in my opinion, Category:Dentistry ought to be a child category of medicine (and not health). Using Wikipedia as a guide, it is a child category of Category:Health sciences. This may be a solution in the future as medicine related categories are being added. — Ineuw talk 17:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Medicine and health categorisation is part of my RL paradigm. Please feel free to touch base with me as issues arise. Dentistry real fits under both Medicine and Health depending on the aspect under focus (restoration or prevention). I'll give it some more thought and get back to you. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind offer. I completely agree that it fits under both. This is what makes decisions so difficult. :-). — Ineuw talk 16:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Guidance is asked on some pages' proper namespace

I moved this page: Wikisource:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly/Uncategorized recurring titles from the main NS to the project, which seemed to me the proper location. Consequently, I am not sure if the pages listed on the page should also be moved from the main NS to the project NS, since the final lists are all in the main NS.— Ineuw talk 18:29, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

To me the collected pieces either belong in the Portal: namespace, or categorised. Definitely not fodder for the main ns, and I would have only put them as subpages of the project pages if there is sense to have them identified with the project side of the transcription, and it is not evident to me that this is the case. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. After re-examining the list, I realize that re-organization is in order. I will re-visit this post later.— Ineuw talk 03:54, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Categorization is preferred

After studying the options, categorization is the most sensible and the simplest solution. Below are my general indications for the category names, but there are better qualified and experienced people here, to suggest more appropriate category names.

• The category groups indicate that the various section titles contain similar types of information, and only the section titles were changed over time by the publishers.
• The information in the sections don't follow strict organization and often cross over to the other sections. — Ineuw talk 02:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Sections	Category
Correspondence	Popular Science Monthly letters to the editor
Editor's Table	Popular Science Monthly editorials
Literary Notices	Popular Science Monthly literature reviews
Scientific Literature	Popular Science Monthly literature reviews
Publications Received	New publications announced in Popular Science Monthly
Fragments of Science	Popular Science Monthly Scientific and academic news
Miscellany	Popular Science Monthly scientific and academic news
Progress of Science	Popular Science Monthly scientific and academic news
Entertaining Varieties	Popular Science Monthly scientific and academic news
General Notices	Popular Science Monthly scientific and academic news
Shorter Articles	Popular Science Monthly scientific and academic news
Minor Paragraphs	Popular Science Monthly scientific and academic news
Notes	Popular Science Monthly scientific and academic news
Obituary Notes	Obituaries in Popular Science Monthly

Authors missing Wikipedia links

Hi. I had MZMcBride query the database for pages in the author namespace with exact matching titles (including redirects) on Wikipedia but lacking links to the that article in the author page. These require human checking to resolve, of course. I've been intending to go through it, but it looks like it will be a lot more laborious than I thought, and I've only done a few so far—some are obviously right or wrong, but a lot of the matches are disambiguation pages for common names (meaning you have to find the right one), and some matches are ambiguous due to lack of identifying information (mostly birth/death dates) in the author page or Wikipedia article that would allow corroboration. I could use some help! The list is at User:Dominic/Missing Wikipedia links if anyone is interested. You're welcome to move that page out of my userspace and make a regular project out of it, and to organize it better than a simple table. Dominic (talk) 16:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Schools of Charles the Great (1911)

Could someone upload this book? http://archive.org/details/schoolsofcharles00mulliala

I've been trying to upload it to Commons all day and it is not working.

- Lucyrocks=) (talk) 21:23, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Done at Commons:File:Schools of Charles the Great.djvu. I'll leave you to add appropriate categories and change it over to the {{Book}} template on Commons before creating the Index here. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to busy you more, but I don't know how to do that or put it on here, either. I have just proofread stuff only. - Lucyrocks=) (talk) 21:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:21, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikilivres

Hello,

Wikilivres has been taken over by Eclecticology, has a new domain (http://wikilivres.ca/), and is now hosted by Wikimedia Canada. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Purpose of soft redirects

Hi. I'll start by saying that I'm a very infrequent contributor here. I just came across the English Wikisource's practice of taking MediaWiki-generated automatic redirects (as the result of a page move) and turning them into "soft redirects" and then subsequently deleting the soft redirects. I searched the Scriptorium's archives and read previous discussion about this, but I'm still left wondering why in the hell anyone would ever do this. Can someone please explain this practice to me?

An example page would be: Author:James Graham, Marquess of Montrose. This page was moved and then "soft redirected" and eventually this page will be deleted (according to the top of Category:Soft redirects/March 2012). Why not just leave the redirect in place? This is baffling. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:06, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

In the example you give, the redirect should have been left in place.

Unlike Wikipedia, we have a great many works that are structured into subpages. e.g. War and Peace, War and Peace/Book One, War and Peace/Book Two, War and Peace/Book Three, and so on. When we have to move a work to a new title (e.g. to disambiguate), all of these subpages need to be moved. The root redirect should remain (or become a disambiguation page), but the subpage redirects are pointless and should be deleted. Our use of temporary soft redirects allows a period of grace for external sites to update their deeplinks before we break them.

Hesperian 00:38, 1 June 2012 (UTC)