Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2010-08

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in August 2010, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Announcements[edit]

Canadian Wikilivres and final notice to fully abolish PD-manifesto[edit]

Canadian Wikilivres recently reported the cost to operate there to be 75 United States dollars per month. Though the traffic volume there is not increasing so fast, much heavier traffic will increase the cost. Donation is welcome but voluntary. Meanwhile, as Wikisource:Possible copyright violations/Special discussion for pages tagged as PD-manifesto has been open for months, I would like to suggest that if no one has convincing reasons to keep anything or to transfer to Canadian Wikilivres, I would like to delete the remainders without transferring by the end of this month, then PD-manifesto will be fully abolished here to stop widespread abuses.--Jusjih (talk) 03:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Gadget : Lightweight scans[edit]

This new gadget sets a max width of 1024 pixels for the scans in edit mode (instead of 2048). You will find it useful if you have a slow connection. While 1024 pixels are enough for most books, this is not sufficient for some multicolumn books. Maybe we should make this setting dependent on the djvu ? ThomasV (talk) 21:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Text donation[edit]

Portion of Full Disclosure released under free license

Hi all, back in January I brought up the possibility that the authors of the book Full Disclosure would release the appendix from the book, which is composed of 18 case studies of government transparency initiatives, under a free license.

This has now been done; the PDF file is at commons:File:Full Disclosure Appendix, Eighteen Major Cases.pdf. It's about 50 pages, about a third of which is citations. Hopefully it will be possible to convert this to wiki text, and include it here on Wikisource; maybe as a step toward using some of the content on Wikipedia, or other projects.

Let me know if you have any thoughts. -Pete Forsyth (WMF) (talk) 18:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I've created a DJVU version and uploaded it to commons (commons:File:Full Disclosure Appendix, Eighteen Major Cases.djvu), and I've created the corresponding Wikisource index page. —Spangineerwp (háblame) 18:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
That's great -- thanks for the conversion! You have inspired me to track down Help:DjVu files -- I will be reading up on how to do this. -Pete (talk) 21:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposals[edit]

add edits to watchlist as default[edit]

The proposal is to have "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" as the default Special:Preference for Users. If anyone sees a problem, open a discussion here, but it seems preferable. Cygnis insignis (talk) 10:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

My personal inclination is that this should be off by default, so that a user only adds pages that he has an interest in to his watchlist. --Eliyak T·C 22:37, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
If we do this would we also want to make "Hide my edits from the watchlist" checked by default? I like the idea of encouraging users to put all the pages they edit on the watchlist for vandalism purposes, but doing so without changing the other setting would make many watchlists unmanageable. That said, we'll be making the behavior of our watchlists quite different from Wikipedia, which might confuse new users. —Spangineerwp (háblame) 22:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
My inclination is that this should be off by default, I don't want to watch PROM pages and I don't want to have to remember to unwatch them. ( JeepdaySock (talk) 17:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The amended proposal is: to have "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" and "Hide my edits from the watchlist" preferences checked as 'on' by default. Clarification: The proposal is not to remove that preference, but to change 'off' as the default preference.

Discussion,
  • This is for new users, who would want to know what happens to their edits. The information is useful, and helps with a situation where a user is doing something incorrectly. A newer user would need to know and remember to watchlist the every page they edit, they will miss the changes. I assumed that users had their edits watchlisted, an edit summary is better than personal mesages. The best way to learn is to follow live examples. Subsequent contributions to pages are more informative here than wikipedia and so on. Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:49, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Established users know about preferences, and how to personalise them. The proposal should have no effect on those users, they are free to keep or change their watchlist settings. Watchlists are generally considered to be a good thing, why is the user being alerted to changes a problem? If their watchlist becomes flooded with changes to things they must have been interested in, if they edited it, they can change that or switch it off - with a single click?! Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:49, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I support this. New users should start off with their watchlists being populated with whatever they edit. This maximises their engagement with the site. If they visit the scriptorium, they will see discussions on their watchlist. If they ask someone a question they will start seeing talk page discussions on their watchlist. If they edit a page, they will see their mistakes corrected and their efforts improved. This should be their initial experience. The need to manage a cumbersome watchlist comes much, much later. Hesperian 07:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Opposed (add or remove your oppose below, and discuss above).
  • I have made minor edits to a large number of pages, mainly to do things like move them from "Poems" to "Early modern poetry" or add PD notices. I wouldn't want hundreds of pages in my watchlist.--Longfellow (talk) 10:58, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
You can add or remove what you like, and adjust the preference to suit yourself. This has no effect on how control your watchlist, so how is this relevant to the proposal? Cygnis insignis (talk) 12:24, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Others can also adjust their preferences, so why are we bothering to discuss this?--Longfellow (talk) 20:29, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Indeed?! The current problem is the new users, or regulars from the sisters, will neglect to check the preference, or remember, or even know they need to do switch it on. The benefits have been explained, no objection has raised. A new account doesn't have their watchlist monitoring their contributions, they should.

If there is a reason why it is better that users should not have this as default then put that objection, otherwise this can be moved up to discussion. Cygnis insignis (talk) 20:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Is there some analysis or statistics somewhere that may help justify WS deviating from the "standard" default settings imposed as the defaults by our sister sites maybe? I too am having a bit of trouble understanding where exactly this percieved influx of 'newbies' who happen to re-visit WS enough to care either way is being based on. George Orwell III (talk) 21:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Is this an objection? The reasons have been given, I could add some more, are you disputing them? The rest seems speculative, is any indication this would cause any problems? Cygnis insignis (talk) 21:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeYou may consider it an objection if there is no tangible justification other than your points (well taken here btw) to deviate from a baseline in place and one reasonably expected to be a constant -- otherwise why offer global account creation? George Orwell III (talk) 17:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I can't see where that is described as a purpose, and Unified login: What it doesn't change states it is not constant, "... You can continue to have different preferences on different sites." The other reasons are given at that page. Cygnis insignis (talk) 14:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't see the basis for objections, only advantages, but not sure this proposal will be easily accepted. Maybe there is a good reason not to, perhaps others are interested in debating it. I've given things like this a lot of thought, its interesting, but I'll focus on finding other ways of providing users with things that "maximises their engagement with the site". I don't suppose that moving the Opposed subheading below this part of the discussion will be possible, so my preference is that it is closed as no consensus or continued elsewhere. Cygnis insignis (talk) 14:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Auto creation of Page:*[edit]

When creating Page:* clicking the next link is boring because we go in view mode whatsoever the page exist or not. Adding importScript('User:Phe/Auto create page.js'); in your Special:MyPage/monobook.js, or vector.js etc., solve this problem by changing the next link if the next page doesn't exist (changing the prev link is not supported). See User:Phe/Auto create page.js. -- Phe (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Other discussions[edit]

Questions[edit]

Bot flag request for BenchBot[edit]

I would like to request a flag for BenchBot. It is it a pywikipediabot that will add U.S. Supreme Court cases downloaded from http://bulk.resource.org/. The pages are formatted according to the guidelines on Wikisource:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, and added through the pagefromfile.py script. More details are available on BenchBot's userpage. Cheers, stephen (talk) 00:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Gday Slaporte. Generally we follow the text at Wikisource:Bots, get the questions asked to be addressed, and to seek approval to the idea to run some trials (and we don't set high hurdles for good ideas); first approval granted, do your runs, a report back that all went well and continuing, then when we know that the bot is running fine after some tens of repetitions over the variety of operating conditions available, the 'crats will make the determination and they prod the rest of us where they wish for assistance. A few steps to go through, though we are not high-handed in our approach. I am for your idea, seen your demonstrated competence elsewhere, though would like to have the generic questions attended to for the purposes of the exercise. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good. In general, BenchBot's purpose is to add judicial decisions to wikisource. The programming language is python, it is a pywikipedia bot, and it will be doing most its work through pagefromfile.py. It will create content and talk pages for each case's syllabus, opinion of the court, and any dissents or concurrences. It will also create redirects for the citation (e.g., 300 U.S. 1 redirects to Taber v. Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co) for each case it adds. The first task for BenchBot is to add all the supreme court cases available (I currently have volumes 1-544, which has cases through 2005). If you have any other questions, I will gladly answer. stephen (talk) 01:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Has my support for some test runs. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:52, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Sounds great. It would be better if it was uploading PDFs and aligned text, but just having the text will move the project forward quickly. How does the bot handle cases that already exist on Wikisource? Also, {{TextQuality}} is being deprecated. John Vandenberg (chat) 10:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
BenchBot will just skip any pages that already exist--I can post a log of that info in case anyone else is interested. Thanks for pointing that out about TextQuality. Is there a preferred method for indicating that a page is non-proofread if the page is not transcluded from the ProofreadPage extension? stephen (talk) 21:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
It used to be a button, now deprecated [discussion, no consensus], you can manually add {{TextQuality}}. Cygnis insignis (talk) 21:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I've reviewed the bots work so far, and can see a bit of room for improvement.

  1. The bot is making up new words! see "wikifified" on Talk:Cotton Petroleum Corporation v. New Mexico.
  2. When it creates a redirect such as 104 L.Ed.2d 139, it would be helpful to use a different edit summary, indicating that it is a redirect, and identify the target.
  3. Finally, American Foreign Service Association v. Garfinkel links to Wikipedia, however there is no wikipedia article. This looks like it is a problem with {{USSCcase}} rather than with the import process, however it would be good to fix the template first so that the imported pages can tell the template whether a Wikipedia article exists or not.

All said, it is lovely to watch. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an eye on him, I appreciate the feedback.
  1. Fixed. Either the bot was stuttering with excitement, or I just can't spell.
  2. Hmm... I will look into that. It is a little more complicated because the bot doesn't know the difference between uploading a full case and a redirect. I will mess around with pywikipedia and see what I can do.
  3. Partially fixed. That was bothering me, too. In fact, the problem is bigger than just {{USSCcase}}--interwiki links do not have existence detection in general. I like your idea, so I added an option (wikipedia = no) to {{USSCcase}} and {{USSCcase2}} to disable WP links if I don't detect a corresponding page on WP at the time of import. (On a side note, I also noticed an issue with interwiki links in {{USSCcase2}}). For the moment, both templates default to including the WP link so I don't sort through the 150+ transclusions already out there.
Cheers, stephen (talk) 06:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Seems to be working fine from the bits that I have been watching and slaporte seems happy with its progress. Probably okay for a bot flag now.— billinghurst sDrewth 06:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

User preferences[edit]

Two things I have been meaning to ask.

  • Why is the preference "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" off by default?
  • Where is the default image size defined, is it the same as other sisters, and do most users think it is too small? There is some earlier discussion on this, somewhere in the archives. Cygnis insignis (talk) 02:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, at least two questions on the second part. There are two preferences, "Image size limit: (for file description pages)" and "Thumbnail size:" under the heading "Files" at the 'appearance' tab of Special:Preferences. How are the default settings defined for these. Cygnis insignis (talk) 06:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
    • I believe these settings are defined in DefaultSettings.php, and possibly overruled in LocalSettings.php. Probably we are using the "factory defaults", because we've never had a reason to overrule them. I think we don't have access to LocalSettings.php Changes would have to be made by a developer. Hesperian 07:09, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
      • Indeed; mw:LocalSettings.php changes are performed by a techie once there is community consensus and a bug is raised.
        I think it would be good to enable "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" by default, and an increased image size wouldn't bother me.
        I would also like "E-mail me when my user talk page is changed" enabled by default; I think it is enabled by default on Commons. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:58, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
        Suggested default settings sound reasonable — billinghurst sDrewth 09:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
The default for a thumb at wikipedia is 220px, I think, and the closest we have is 200px. Can someone determine whether this is what readers, and logged in users, are getting; or is it some other size. Cygnis insignis (talk) 10:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Four files, one of them correct, three wrong ones[edit]

Hi all,

I don't understand what went wrong for three of these four files:

Volume 1 - Volume 2 - Volume 3 - Volume 4

I had proceded in the same way for the four. Does anyone know how to fix the three defective ones? Here are the Commons corresponding files:

Volume 1 - Volume 2 - Volume 3 - Volume 4

and the source files on Internet Archive:

Volume 1 Internet Archive - Volume 2 Internet Archive - Volume 3 Internet Archive - Volume 4 Internet Archive

Thanks for your help! --Zyephyrus (talk) 12:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm guessing, but they seem to be compressed. You could open it on your disk and upload them again, or get the file from the source. I use the links from the "All Files: HTTP" page at archive.org, that used to make a difference to some browsers. Cygnis insignis (talk) 13:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I have used the "All Files: HTTP" page at archive.org too, it has worked for Volume 3, it hasn't worked for the other three volumes. The four djvu files open normally in the djvu viewer on my disk, so I can't understand what the difference is. --Zyephyrus (talk) 14:08, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
For me, the files display as icons and with no dimensions when I look at them on WS and Commons, so it sounds like something to do with the files. There was a previous occasion where this had happened, and ThomasV knew some of the background, and put a solution in place, which is the extent of my knowledge on that matter. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:26, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Volume two's file description says nearly 14 MB, the IA page claims 19MB. If my first guess is close, try 'save as' a new file and pay attention to the options. My second guess is that this is that quirky threshold at commons, it used to affect files over 10 MB - a work around here would be to split the files. Cygnis insignis (talk) 14:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much both of you. I will try and save them as new files and try again, and if it fails I'll ask ThomasV for a solution if he has one. --Zyephyrus (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
It has worked very well. Thank you again. --Zyephyrus (talk) 09:26, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

missing text[edit]

There is a bug somehwhere, perhaps elsewhere, that causes part of the text to disappear. This happens after the characters "), perhaps rendered as some combination of "} or ') or ' '), appear in the text. A recent example is this one, where the text should have appeared as

"... compilation entitled Katha Sarit Sahara ("Ocean of the Stream of Stories"). Of this work, [text cont.]

the text suddenly ends at "… Stream of Stories [rest missing]" I've added the rest of the text using the local OCR gizmo, but the text layer that arrives with the file is usually very accurate. This File only has a couple of pages with these error, other texts that use quotes inside parentheses are more affected by this bug. This happens often enough for me to know what prompts the behaviour, my guess is that it is being interpreted as a code. It doesn't happen in the text display at Internet Archive, so it seems there is a bug here, maybe in Page, maybe the Index, maybe Commons. Any ideas? Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

This is Bug 21526. Hesperian 05:37, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Can I say that this is a fairly major bug from our point, and it is one that we probably should have, and still should, more widely promoted to our community as it explains why numbers of our scans go AWOL and become a show stopper for a scan. To me it would seem to be a priority for our community to get this resolved. Are either of our developers able to get this addressed. I am presuming that this lies outside of Proofread Page. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I asked at #wikimedia-tech and they said that the bug was part of ProofreadPage and asked that the bug be pointed to ThomasV, which I have done, and I will take the conversation about the fix to oldwikisource:Wikisource:ProofreadPagebillinghurst sDrewth 01:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm not convinced this is Thomas's error. The ProofreadPage extension code obtains the page text by calling DjVuHandler.getPageText(), which is part of core MediaWiki. DjVuHandler.getPageText() calls DjVuHandler.getMetaTree() calls DjVuHandler.getMetadata() calls DjVuImage.retrieveMetadata(), which is where the actual text gets extracted. This last function is very complicated, and contains some vicious regular expressions. Anyone searching for a bug would be well-advised to start there. Hesperian 02:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Rereading the bug report, it looks like the reporter traced the problem to a regular expression in DjVuHandler.retrieveMetadata, just as I've suggested here, and fixed it in their local installation. We simply need a developer to patch the Wikimedia servers. Hesperian 02:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
As an update, ThomasV has committed a fix for the bug, and now we wait for the process of WMF to put the update into place. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:25, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Quality icon[edit]

Anybody know why the quality icon (75%.svg) stopped appearing on the article tab when the {{TextQuality}} template is applied??? George Orwell III (talk) 21:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I can see the icons, with and without Vector skin. Any specific example? -Aleator (talk) 21:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I just applied it a couple of Executive Orders - Executive Order 13274 for example. I still see the auto-CAT with the percentage though. Maybe it's just me & my cache? George Orwell III (talk) 21:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I can see the icon on that executive order, so I would imagine it is indeed your (or your ISP's) cache. - Htonl (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Visible in monobook. Tried reloading your underlying css files in case it is within your cache. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:46, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Tried that. Must be just me and my cludge of a setup. Wouldn't be the first time. Thanks all. George Orwell III (talk) 04:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Help needed: Image of the original text when editing is not displayed[edit]

I have noticed that the image of the original text is no longer displayed in pages like Page:A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism - Volume 2.djvu/82 in edit mode. This makes proofreading very very difficult. I have tried different browsers and different computers. This change happened about two days ago.

Strangely enough I can still see the image of the page when editing in the current proofread of the month, see Page:Federalist,_Dawson_edition,_1863.djvu/197.

Any explanation?

TomyDuby (talk) 04:49, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

The page that you directed us to loads fine for me, both image and the text down to the weird three unicode at the end. If you go to another page and get the same image, that sounds like a caching issue, either in your browser or at your ISP. If you are using firefox, then Ctrl-F5 will reload the page with a fresh cache. If that fails, close and restart the browser. If it still exists, it might be a discussion with your ISP if you cannot get the cache to clear. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:27, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
fwiw... that image goes to all black here too when viewed in that page's edit mode only. Every other mode, it displays normally. George Orwell III (talk) 05:58, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, the black screen is what I see on two different browsers and two different computers: a black screen. TomyDuby (talk) 09:36, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
The image is available at the file, I don't see it in Page; it may be caused by many pages and a large file size. It sometimes happens that the page refuses to load, but the problem disappears later. You could use the online viewer as a workaround, or fix it later. I vaguely recall a bug report, didn't check that. Cygnis insignis (talk) 10:06, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh that (apologies for not getting the nuance) is when the thumbnail image from the work fails to be created (first), yet if you cheat and manually change the size of the thumbnail (second), then it works fine
I know of no magical way to correct it, beyond wait a couple of days and it seems to be able to be regenerated. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Recent changes in Real Time[edit]

Firefox 4 beta is out, and it has support for Websockets. I wrote a tool that displays the recent changes dynamically. Here are some examples:

I also wrote a script that turns the RC page of any wiki into a self-updating page :

importScriptURI('http://wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:DynamicRC.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript'); 

Note : this script requires Firefox 4 or Google Chome 6.

ThomasV (talk) 14:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow they are cool! Victuallers (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

New statistics[edit]

As of today, en.ws has the largest number of texts using ProofreadPage (see http://toolserver.org/~thomasv/Wikisource_-_pr_texts.png ). Congratulations ! Note that new graphs are available here and here ThomasV (talk) 14:57, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

and raw numbers at Wikisource:ProofreadPage Statisticsbillinghurst sDrewth 16:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Having quotation marks at the start of each line[edit]

I have just validated the proofreading of this DJVU. There is a long quotation that has, in conformity with 19th century typographic conventions, quotation marks at the start of each line. Is there an easy way to reproduce this effect without having to insert marks at each appropriate point in the text?--Longfellow (talk) 14:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Not sure why we would want to do it, the modern typographic methodologies no longer require it. Though I do make sure that when we start the page, I do noinclude a starting quote mark. … This does seem like our regular argument of we reproducing the work, or trying to replicate it. As this is Spangineer's recommendation for PotM, I would think that it would be a worthwhile discussion for the index_talk page, or directly to him. We don't want to start something in one part of the work, and not in the remainder. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I've been ignoring these marks, because I don't see them as useful. If others disagree and want to come up with a solution for getting them to appear in the page namespace, I willing to discuss it (but not particularly interested in putting in much effort). —Spangineerwp (háblame) 03:24, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Occasionally, when in a fussy mood, I have marked these up as
blah blah blah <noinclude><br/>
"</noinclude>blah blah blah
The result is of course to preserve the breaks and leading quotes in page namespace, but remove them in the mainspace transclusion. Hesperian 03:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Little help[edit]

I could use a little help with John Pickard - Thomas Eakins correspondence. Specifically, I need help with formatting the letter and reading Eakins's handwriting. Raul654 (talk) 21:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I finished with the handwriting. Now all I need is help with formatting. Raul654 (talk) 23:16, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Anyone? Raul654 (talk) 17:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

My 2cents ... We don't have a convention for showing where transcript is hand-written annotations. You could try giving a note to describe what is transcribed, and where, assume the image is unavailable. You could use a table to display the listing, but I think it is insignificant, maybe add {{right}} and {{center}} for the typed format? You might try compressing the image too, I didn't load the 20MB to verify the work. Does this help? Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
The image doesn't compress well because of its graininess (a result of scanning old microfiche at high resolution), and it's is hard enough to read as it is. I don't want to lose any image clarity due to compression artifacts or lost resolution.
Eakins's responded on the same letter Picakrd sent him, with half his response at the top above Pickard's writing and the other half below. . I don't want to mess with fancy formatting trying to replicate Eakins's choice. All I need help with is getting the list of paintings to show up in three neat columns. I like your idea of using an invisible table. Raul654 (talk) 18:27, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
You could transcribe the texts separately, two pages backed by the same scan, I think it will simplify their description and indexing. Saving the jpg to greyscale and PNG may reduce the file size, might be worth trying anyway, some compression in jpg format would probably not affect the image quality; microfiche scans are noisy so keeping the high-res image is a good idea. Retain the columns if you think it's significant, I assumed it was a simple list. Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:06, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Multiple wiki translations[edit]

Please, I would like to know is there any multiple wiki translations at this WS? --StjepanG (talk) 18:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes there are. For example, there are currently four Wikisource translations of The Internationale:
All Wikisource translations can be found at Category:Wikisource translations. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
From memory, there is also some of Author:Anton Chekhov's work that appears with multiple translations. If we have the same work, we hopefully have {{versions}} in place with it. If not, we should.— billinghurst sDrewth 00:45, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Sometimes we can be so blond. Have a look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Translations. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Newbie needing help[edit]

I don't know if this is the right place to ask this, but Love and Friendship (Jane Austen) has some problems with section headers, probably due to clumsiness with templates and thinking there are new lines when there weren't, or forgetting to close nowiki tags. When i clicked on the edit tab I'm just, well, confused, so I'd appreciate if an experienced contributor can fix that. thanks Kayau (talk) 01:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Gosh, section editing doesn't work with transcluded pages at all! You are quite right to be confused! We will have to figure out how to resolve this.

Meanwhile, I suggest that you click instead on the page number in the left hand margin. That will take you to the page of the scan that contains the text that you want to edit. Click on the 'edit' tab at the top of the page, and you ought to get something not so confusing. Hesperian 02:10, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I've implemented for page 1 what is probably a better solution for handling sections. I've moved section headers to the main namespace, and transclude pages based on the section names I've added in the page namespace. If you like, you can give copying my example a try in order to apply it to the whole work. —Spangineerwp (háblame) 03:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Personally, I don't like wiki section/sub-headings in the Page namespace, they create icky ToC, and often they don't transclude well, especially if at the top of a page. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Wiki headings and much other wiki markup was invented to allow presentation with a consistent look and feel. What we want is to represent the original document, and consistency be damned. Therefore much of the wiki markup that is critical to other wikis is worse than useless to us. Hesperian 12:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
And to that, I feel that the toolbar, with tweaks, can carry the bulk of the standard formatting templates required, even a simple {{larger}} is able to be modified for x-larger, xx-larger, ... — billinghurst sDrewth 12:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Print template[edit]

Is there a print version template? Or, better yet, a book template? Arlen22 (talk) 12:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Narrated books tracing a family[edit]

Terence Kearey Publishing a dozen linked books. 'Trying the first four as your starter for ten!' [see:<openwindows learning.co.uk>] I have a series of narrated books tracing a family - from pre-Christian times to modern. The saga has taken ten years to get together. They can all be downloaded as pdfs - in bookform, or listened to. The site is not fully complete but I intend that it should be. Through Thenub314, Adrignola and Billinghurst I have wiped my downloads from Wikibooks to upload into Wikisource, as requested-this is what I am attempting to do. Wiki Editor say's,'Do not keep on submitting the same text'. OK, but please say why it is not being accepted - don't just remove the text from the page - which is to be sub edited. I fully understand that I have not got the submission fomula off pat. Sorry if I sound a little peeved but its hopeless submitting scripts that are rejected, there is a tendancy for beginners to think they have the uploadiong sequence screwed up, or that, just one more go will clinch it! At least this works. Terence

It is not clear to me what you were trying to do or what went wrong. Your contributions page lists only edits here and to User talk:Bookofjude, and you have no deleted contributions.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I went browsing Terence Kearey's website to find the books he lists. It seems like it is self-published work. No hard copies, no peer review process. I'm not sure what went wrong on Wikibooks, but it seems as if the books are beyond our scope as well.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 23:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Dear All, It would be impossible for me to be able to tell you with any amount of sense what I have been doing. To say I need a certain amount of hand holding would be putting it mildly. Still, today I'v been 'basic editing' in Bookofjude's sandbox. I actually had some success trying to resubmit, 'Ciardha Cemetery, Kilkeary'. If this goes according to plan I shall plough on with the rest - resubmitting them. However, I am grateful for your interest, its like knowing there is someone outside the submarine with a spanner. Holding my head a little higher, Terence.

Password[edit]

Hi, my name is User:Presidentman. Unfortunately, I have lost my password and did not put my e-mail in my preferences before doing so. Is there anyway you can help me get my password back? Thanks - 74.171.71.173 11:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I am not familiar with the policy in cases like this, but I would like to ask if you are the same as w:User:Presidentman. In that case, you maybe can demand to SUL the wikisource-account. -- Lavallen (talk)
  • We can't retrieve your password. The best I can do is move the existing contribution history to User:WasPresidentman (or a name of your choice); leaving the User:Presidentman account open for you to reattach by SUL. I can't make the old contributions available to you however. If you would like me to do this, leave a message at en.WP logged in as User:Presidentman so that I know the person in control of that account is truly making the request.--BirgitteSB 11:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I have asked the above user to do the SUL process using the account I am now using. Thanks. - Noddy1 (talk) 15:06, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

PDF Version[edit]

What are we doing with PDF versions? How are we using them? Where do we upload them? Do we upload them to Commons? Arlen22 (talk) 12:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

If you want a PDF version of Annals of the World, you go to Wikisource:Books/Annals_of_the_World and click on the PDF button. It's bad for us to keep the generated PDF around, since it won't contain any new changes to the Wikisource files.--Prosfilaes (talk) 16:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

PhD thesis on Wikisource (about Wikipedia)[edit]

Hi everybody, I am about to read a PhD thesis published last year (march 2009) about Wikipedia titled: "Wikipedia: A quantitative analysis" by José felipe Ortega Soto" of the "Universidad Rey Juan Carlos" in Madrid, Spain. I was wondering if this kind of text are appropriate to be uploaded on Wikisource. The thesis is released under CC-BY-SA-3.0. If this kind of text is accepted I think there will be no problems in asking the author to upload the source files (I think it's LaTeX) and then do some formatting work. What do you think about it? -- CristianCantoro (talk) 15:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure; any thesis accepted by an -- accredited I think would be the neutral standard, though I'm not quite comfortable being that broad -- university should pass our requirements for peer review.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree. I think we should give the benefit of the doubt for universities and assume it's peer reviewed (although I imagine most dissertations are more heavily peer reviewed than some of the books we've got on this site), and it's definitely verifiable. I say we accept it. It'd be nice if we could have an influx of doctoral dissertations on this site, anyway.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 18:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Formatting and inserting large pages that are not DJVU[edit]

I have the text of ICD-10-CM (2010) and only little formatting left to do on ICD-10-CM (2010)/CHAPTER 19, I have djvu transition in process at [djvu/100730/128.147.28.1/68892.100730112234.djvu] I am not exactly sure what the best next steps are (if anyone can help bring this in and connect it to ICD-10-CM (2010) please do). I have created each chapter as a stand alone page, but chapter 19 is huge, so I broke it down into sub sections, do to formatting issues (i.e ICD-10-CM (2010)/CHAPTER 19/T07) it would work best as a single page for the chapter. I tried to use Wikipedia Template:ICD-10-CM (2010)/CHAPTER 19/T07 type template inserting on chapter 19 below the current content to import the sub sections, but it does seem to work here. Any ideas? JeepdaySock (talk) 15:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Court case PDFs[edit]

I am new to Wikisource, but I would like to upload the documents from the court cases of some notable people who have articles on Wikipedia and were involved in legal troubles. I have a PACER account, and I have the PDFs. How should I proceed? Taric25 (talk) 04:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Excellent! Since you have a PDF of the source text, let's use the Proofread Page Extension. First, I would convert the PDF to DjVu, see Help:DjVu files. Next, follow the steps at Help:Beginner's guide to Index: files to set everything up. The final step is proofreading and validating. If you have any questions, feel free to stop by Wikisource:WikiProject Law--we would be glad to help out. Cheers, stephen (talk) 23:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Template for works public domain in the US, but not their source country[edit]

At least currently, we only follow US copyright law, so shouldn't we have some version of w:Template:PD-US-1923-abroad and oldwikisource:Template:PD-US-1923-abroad? This is especially important with files, to indicate that they can not be moved to Commons. —innotata 22:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

We might want to have w:Template:Do not move to Commons, but we do have a solid set of copyright tags that does a good job of reminding reusers of copyright law in life+x nations already. The responsibility for checking whether or not all the fiddly details are right for Commons should be on the person moving things to Commons, not us. We should always work to upload images to Commons first, but if someone can't cross the t's and dot the i's, they should upload them here and leave a note on the image talk about why they weren't uploaded to Commons.
In no case do I want the Commons obsession about the copyright in the source country to be something we have to deal with here.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
The tag is true and correct, no need IMNSHO to confuse the matter, though as it seems to be a concern, I have imported the template and its documentation for use with works that someone may try to export to Commons. I have done a quick tidy of the documentation, though it will need some fine-tuning around some of the words and the categories.— billinghurst sDrewth 01:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)