Index talk:David Baron – The History of the Ten "Lost" Tribes.djvu
 | This work has the following individual page scan talk pages: |
Other editions[edit]
Second Edition, instead o fourth, is available as djvu with text at http://archive.org/details/historyoftenlost00barouoft. Might be an option to swap.--Mpaa (talk) 22:36, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Migration[edit]
The History of the Ten "Lost" Tribes is proposed for migration here, but considering the low quality of the OCR, is there a better way to do this than just proofreading and replacing? --xensyriaT 12:52, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
- "Migration" means over-writing the OCR with the mainspace text. This is something that can be done semi-automatically, but we need to be sure that the two texts are the same edition otherwise it has the potential to get messy. I've had a look, but can't establish which edition wikijeff used. Because it's the British Library copy it is most likely to be the first edition, so not a direct match. Personally, I think the best thing to do is to ignore this set of page images in png format and get the DjVu set that Mpaa refers to above. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
- I see; it looks like the scans used here were uploaded by wikijeff though (with the British Library metadata), and they were linked to as pagescans on the talk page, so it looks to me like he was using this edition, but I agree we can't be sure. All other things being equal, I'd generally prefer a first edition, but, failing that, the later an edition the better, and in this case (which to be honest I came across through Category:Index - Text Layer Requested rather than out of interest), it would be a shame to start yet another completely new version of the same thing from scratch (I for one wouldn't really have the interest), so I've made the scans into a DJVU document, uploaded to the internet archive, and from there to Commons. All the pages in there now have OCR (except perhaps the cover), and I'd be happy to copy over the pages we've proofed here if that's ok, gradually work through it, and use text comparison with wikijeff's version as a final check before transcluding it into main. Does that sound alright? --xensyriaT 18:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- That sounds absolutely fine to me. Thank you for doing that extra work. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:47, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- Glad to help :D --xensyriaT 19:03, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- That sounds absolutely fine to me. Thank you for doing that extra work. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:47, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- I see; it looks like the scans used here were uploaded by wikijeff though (with the British Library metadata), and they were linked to as pagescans on the talk page, so it looks to me like he was using this edition, but I agree we can't be sure. All other things being equal, I'd generally prefer a first edition, but, failing that, the later an edition the better, and in this case (which to be honest I came across through Category:Index - Text Layer Requested rather than out of interest), it would be a shame to start yet another completely new version of the same thing from scratch (I for one wouldn't really have the interest), so I've made the scans into a DJVU document, uploaded to the internet archive, and from there to Commons. All the pages in there now have OCR (except perhaps the cover), and I'd be happy to copy over the pages we've proofed here if that's ok, gradually work through it, and use text comparison with wikijeff's version as a final check before transcluding it into main. Does that sound alright? --xensyriaT 18:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Migrated[edit]
Finally migrated to The History of the Ten "Lost" Tribes after comparing and correcting the two versions (in plain text, there might be some formatting differences, e.g. italics). The original text is still in the page histories, and I didn't include any of the (quite extensive) links (both wiki and external). The non-transcluded adverts (originally called "Appendix II"), are still at The History of the Ten "Lost" Tribes/Chapter XVI, now orphaned, and could be deleted. --xensyriaT 00:09, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
- I've now compared the italics with the original non-transcluded version (no changes) and also checked text and italics against the Project Gutenberg version, making a few corrections from that and sending them a few more. Also, with the preface transcluded on the main page, The History of the Ten "Lost" Tribes/Preface is orphaned too. --xensyriaT 01:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)