Talk:The New Student's Reference Work

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Information about this edition
Edition: 1914
Source: The scanned copy was bought in an antiquarian bookstore in Norrköping, Sweden. According to a blue stamp on the title page, and some other places throughout the work, it once belonged to the Seamen’s Church Institute in San Francisco. The five volumes were scanned by LA2 in October 2005.


Source images for
  • Front Matter (20/20) — complete
  • A (169/169) — complete
  • B (33/160)
  • C (6/211)
  • D (20/83)
  • E (17/79)
  • F (8/88)
  • G (9/96)
  • H (1/105)
  • I (7/49)
  • J (34/34) — complete
  • K (10/29)
  • L (0/119)
  • M (13/185)
  • N (29/75)
  • O (2/41)
  • P (6/180)
  • Q (9/9) — complete
  • R (17/77)
  • S (8/283)
  • T (5/107)
  • U (0/37)
  • V (9/35)
  • W (15/93)
  • X (2/2) — complete
  • Y (9/9) — complete
  • Z (11/11) — complete
  • Arithmetic (0/76)
  • Outlines (0/82)
  • Questions (0/114)
  • Index (0/107)
Contributor(s):
Level of progress: Largely incomplete. 25%.png
Notes:
Covers of the five volumes of the The New Student's Reference Work.

The New Student's Reference Work was published annually in the 1910s by F. E. Compton and Company in Chicago, Illinois. Presented here is the 1914 edition in 5 volumes. This work is now in the public domain, because it was published in the United States before 1923. See also the Wikipedia articles on the main editor Chandler B. Beach, his colleague Frank Elbert Compton, and the follow-up product Compton’s Encyclopedia. The digitization of this work was announced on wikipedia-l on October 19, 2005.

Each page has been scanned as a high contrast JPEG color image in 300 dpi resolution, and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Images are presented 700 pixels wide, corresponding to a screen resolution of approximately 120 dpi. To see them in full resolution, click twice on the scanned images. The included OCR text has yet to be proofread. This is done by editing the wiki text while comparing it to the scanned images, in two separate browser windows.

A combination of templates and categories constitute the backbone of the presentation on Wikisource, following the same pattern as was used on the German Wikisource for the digitization of Meyers Blitz-Lexikon, a one volume encyclopedic dictionary from 1932. These are the first two examples of how to combine Wikisource with scanned (facsimile) images of book pages. See also the suggestions for software improvements on meta: Digitizing books with MediaWiki.

Page numbers run from 1 to 2516 through all volumes. Each volume contains an average of 570 pages, including unpaginated illustration plates and maps. The first volume is introduced by 16 unpaginated pages of acknowledgements, a preface and portraits of the editors. The alphabetic encyclopedia ends at page 2138. The remainder of the fifth volume contains a 75 page long treatise on Arithmetic, 80 pages of Lesson Outlines, also known as “Student’s Manual”, 114 pages or Classified Questions on alphabetically arranged topics ranging from Agriculture to Zoology, and finally a 116 pages long Analytical Index.

The pagination shows a few pecularities. In volume 2, page 552 is followed by two illustration plates and pages 552a and 552b. On the opening where page 590 is the verso (left-hand side page), the recto (right-hand) is a page of illustrations without pagination. On the next opening, the verso is 591, and odd pagination for the verso continues until page 885, where the same trick is repeated to restore the order. In volume 4, page 1702 is followed by 1702a, 1702b, 1702c, and 1702d.

Wikisource templates (for Wikisource editors):

Wikipedia templates (for Wikipedia editors):

Wikimedia Commons templates (for image uploaders):

Article examples using different styles of transclusion (for Wikisource editors):

Article example which doesn't use transclusion (for Wikisource editors):

Key to Pronunciation (for copying special characters)

Proofreaders:

Linking page numbers[edit]

The Outlines, Questions, and Index sections of volume V make reference to page numbers. It would be nice to be able to link these directly to the right page. But how? As a result of the scanning process, page numbers cannot trivially be mapped to page URLs. The mapping requires a lookup in the large table of contents. For example, page 1570 on URL 4-0074 is followed by an unpaginated illustration plate on 4-0075, its blank backside on 4-0076 before page 1571 on URL 4-0077. To be able to link to page 1570, one has to write [[The New Student's Reference Work/4-0074|p. 1570]]. Do we need a robot to do this linking? How can it be achieved with a reasonable effort? --LA2 10:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Or [[/4-0074|p. 1570]]. I don't know; most works are not page based. --Benn Newman 00:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Have completed a template Template:NSRW-pg that maps the page numbers to the URLs, i.e. {{NSRW-pg|1000}}: 1000. The template code is ugly, but it works. --T. Mazzei 02:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization[edit]

I've noticed that in a lot of the pages, a different font is used to show a particular topic, or with names. Take this as an example. The "A-ABBOTT" is indeed capitalized, but at with the second topic, "Aachen," "Aix-La-Chapelle" is not capitalized but instead uses a different font (the 'A' and the 'C' are bigger than the rest, indicating capitalization in those two letters but not in the rest). The OCR records this as capitals, and I was wondering if this should be corrected into proper capitalization, or if something else should be done with them (for example, making it bold with correct capitalization, or leaving it as is). - Stoic, 22:06, 18-02-2006

It is "small capitals". You can do it with the small-caps template. E.g. {{small-caps|Aix-La-Chapelle}}Aix-La-Chapelle. — Monedula 11:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Missed page[edit]

The page 1241 (Mississippi — Missouri) is missing! — Monedula 07:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation Key and Special Characters[edit]

The key appearing at The_New_Student%27s_Reference_Work/1-0012 contains several rather unusual special characters. For example: and .

How possible might it be to incorporate these characters in the pull-down menu of special characters than appears at the bottom of the edit window? What would be required for that change? And in the meanwhile, what is an expedient means of simplifying the process of editing those entries that include pronunciation guidance? --Ebbixx 18:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The simplest thing is to copy characters from the above page. Open The_New_Student%27s_Reference_Work/1-0012 in one browser window and the page you are editing in another window. Select the character you need, press Ctrl-C, switch to the page you are editing and press Ctrl-V. — Monedula 07:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I suppose you're correct. Certainly it's what I've done for now. On a related note, there are a few errors on the key page itself -- at least they don't quite appear as shown in the facsimile. Most can be lived with, but a few, such as: "o͞o ___ fo͞od" (where a macron should have extended over both vowels) are just not right. I'm sure there's a readily findable source of these once I've spent the time to search for it. Will edit this (and the key page) to reflect these as I find them (unless someone beats me to it). Thanks! --Ebbixx 01:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The look of those characters depends on the browser. With my browser (Mozilla Firefox under Windows) o͞o looks OK. — Monedula 07:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't look OK to me on Firefox under an older version of Windows. I suggest using ŏŏ instead. I doubt there will ever be found a representation with a single breve over both o's. I think using single Unicode characters would be preferable to using these composed characters even though an exactly matching representation might not be commonly available. See The New International Encyclopædia/Key to pronunciation and Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Key to pronunciation for other approaches. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 23:04, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikifying[edit]

I'm torn whether we should wikilink to the WP article on "the Siege of Quebec" to offer the casual reader more knowledge about what they're reading in the NSRW, or if we should wikilink to the NSRW article on "Quebec" so they get the "novelty" of reading more of the NSRW. Obviously this is just a small example of the greater question of wikilinking. Sherurcij (talk) (λεμα σαβαχθανει) 04:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

"by page" vs "by article", page based index[edit]

At the end of the day, I assume the intention is for the content of this work to be formatted into individual articles only, and not two parallel systems, one by article, and one by page.

If the former, should we not be deleting the "by page" content when it is reformatted into individual articles? So as not to lose the scanned page images, We could add them to the relevent articles, either on the discussion tab, or as as links at the bottom of the relevent article.

Also, if it is to be formatted into individual articles only, I see no reason to convert the page number based index at the end of the article, since a page based index is irrelevant to a non-page based organizational structure, and since it will basically be a massive duplication of the completed "by article" navagation index. Where the page based index references more than one article (ex. Augustus, Caesar: 137, 9, 81, 105, 885, etc.; where 137 is the page of main article on Caesar Augustus, and the other pages are articles that mention Caesar Augustus), this information is effectively duplicated by going to the main article and checking "what links here" (assuming a properly cross-linked finished product). Alterrnately it could be duplicated either by incorporating this information somehow into the "by article" navagation index or as a "see also" section at the bottom of each article with multiple references.

Comments/preferences anyone?--T. Mazzei 05:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I prefer to keep the current page-by-page navigation, it looks quite natural. As to the Analytical Index, is makes part of the original work and should be kept as such. For possible formatting see 5-0478 and 5-0478. — Monedula 10:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Have formatted the Analytical Index pages for the letter A (ex. page 2420). Provided links to the pages, but not the individual articles. Links to individual articles will be provided in the "Navigation" index, links to pages will be provided by the "Analytical Index". This avoids the duplication of effort, but still allows both indexes to be fully useable.

I still think the images should be moved/hidden/removed once the page hase been proofread. Having to scroll past the image to get to the fully proofed text is annoying. --T. Mazzei 02:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Why are you so anxious to remove images? Proofreading is a never-ending process, so the images must be kept somewhere nearby. The current page-by-page navigation is ideal for this.

I never said I wanted to remove the images completely, only to move them somewhere less conspicuous once the proofreading was (nominally) done.

However, normally readers will read only articles, so the pages with source images will contain only links to articles, not the OCR text. See Z pages, for instance.

Which was my point above: once the pages are separated into articles, add the images to the relevent articles, either on the discussion tab, or as as links at the bottom of the relevent article. Then, since the page-by-page navigation—"natural" as it may be—is no longer useful, lose it.

// And I think that linking Index to pages is a bad idea, because readers will have to find the right place in the page. It is much better to link directly to the article that mentions the concept in question. — Monedula

I agree completely: a "page-based" index is retarded when the articles are separated into their own individual URLs. That's why I've started on an article-based index. I provided links to pages since it's reletively quick and easy, and since you wanted to keep the page-by-page navigation. I see no reason to duplicate all of the effort to provide links to the individual articles (which is not especially quick or easy) when no one is ever going to use it, and practically no one is going to even view it. --T. Mazzei 18:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I am against adding source image links to extracted articles. Readers should not go to those images unless they are specifically seeking them.

I agree users should not see the images unless they are specifically seeking them. However, I see no reason to "hide" the images from the user by making it difficult/awkward for them to access the image when they do want to see it. Not having easy access to the image from the article page makes it awkward.

Most people do not need those images. They are the "raw material", and our articles are the "finished product". — Monedula 09:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of images, it appears that someone has deleted the image for the page containing the map of South America (Image:LA2-NSRW-1-0087.jpg).

This image was deleted by Danny on 22:36, 25 February 2007. — Monedula 09:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


Perhaps the page-to-page navigation should be moved from the main page to a separate page, but the whole structure should remain as is.

I'll move it to a sub-page with a link from the main page once I complete the preliminary article navigation pages, hopefully sometime this week.

// As to the Analytical Index, we are in no hurry with it. The first priority is to create the encyclopedic articles. Afterwards, when everything else is done, we can do the Analytical Index, too. — Monedula 11:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I realize that, but I thought I'd deal with both indexes at the same time. --T. Mazzei 04:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

There are also "Lesson Outlines" and "Classified Questions" which also link to pages. I think it is best to use links to relevant articles instead, too. — Monedula 09:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I can see I'm coming in a bit late on this discussion, but I will say I think there should be indexes both by page and by article. Currently I go to Page:LA2-NSRW-5-0153.jpg and find a list of article links. I think these should be at least copied to the appropriate "by article" index page. A further step would be to use the separate article texts to construct entire pages with section markers and use transclusion so that both "by page" and "by article" browsing is possible. Perhaps the transclusion approach has developed enough so this is more palatible now. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 23:14, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

This is the only work I have seen which has article links right on the Pages. It has some appeal to it for a page browser who wants to move quickly to an article. And proofing may not be too difficult since the article can be popped up in an adjacent tab or window. So I can see the whole-page text being developed in addition to article links. That could be a low-priority task, at least as far as I am concerned, if it is to be done at all, and maybe I should just get used to this approach with the links. I still think the links should be copied to the "by article" index pages, and I will try to do some of that myself. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 01:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually all the links for the letter Z are already in the "by article" index, except for the one for "Zouaves," the one I was looking for. It got overlooked somehow, but I have put it in place. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Errors in source text[edit]

Where we come across actual errors in the source text, are we correcting them, leaving them as is, or inserting a note with the correction. I ask because I am going through the Analytical Index, replacing the page links with article links as discussed, formatted:

When I got to Acacia, the source text has:

where the text should redirect to Locust on page 1107. Just wondering if I should put a redirect to the article (yet to be created) with the original text:

with the corrected text

or the original text with a note.

  • Acacia: 1109 [Note: article appears on pg. 1107]
My approach to source text errors is to indicate corrections using the HTML <ins></ins> and <del></del> tag pairs. This makes the correction clear as well as making it clear that there is an error in the source text and what the original source text was. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

The Student's Reference Work, Edited by Chandler B.Beach, A.M.,[edit]

I have 2 Volumes of the Student's Reference Work publ in Philadelpia and Chicago, 1905 cc. Volume 1 A - GRE and Volume 2 GRE-PHIL. Is anyone interested in them? I'll see if I can locate the other volumes. Irene D. Chrest idchrest@hotmail.com or chrestirene@yahoo.com