This user is an administrator and checkuser.
This user has a bot.
Email this user.

User talk:Billinghurst

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search


Je suis Charlie inversée.jpg
A damaged farm building is unstable
System-users.svg This user has alternate accounts named SDrewthbot & SDrewth.
billinghurst (talk page)

(Archives index, Last archive) IRC cloak request: I confirm that my freenode nick is sDrewth
Note: Please use informative section titles that give some indication of the message.

1911 Britannica logo.png

Wikisource has a number of active Wikiprojects that could use
your help in tackling these large additions to our library.


Encyclopædia Britannica Project
Work: Encyclopædia Britannica



TO DO — DNB footer initials[edit]

Support request with team editing experiment project[edit]

Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Research_team_editing), I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.

Tech News: 2015-28[edit]

15:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Index:Chesterton - The Wisdom of Father Brown.djvu[edit]

Good progress is being made. However I found a possible problem. namely the illustrator was still alive in the early 1950's meaning that whilst the work is US PD (pre 1923) the illustrations might not be out of copyright in life+70 countries, The illustrators entry didn't give a nationality. Given certain attitudes at Commons, you may wish to consider if the underlying file and others that have the same illustrator, need to be localised. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Illustrations are part of the publication and will presumably be contracted through the publisher, rather than independently sourced. If you are concerned, we can probably put the illustrations local, and leave the work. I will continue to put my trust in Commons to do the right thing, and point out to them when they did not. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:48, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Author:A. Claude Campbell[edit]

Hi, there! What's the source for expanding A. to Arthur for the subject? Also, the second viaf=4088698 added to wdata is clearly a different person (born in 1903)! Cheers, Captain Nemo (talk) 23:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC).

I was working off the title for the first, but if you think that it is in doubt, then we can tidy that up. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
@Captain Nemo: See the reader's comment by his descendant on this page. It is mentioned that the full name was Arthur Claude Campbell, birth year 1852, birth place probably Scotland, father's name Henry Charles Campbell, marriage in 1886 in India, death in 1929 in India. Hrishikes (talk) 01:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Sorry, I am very slow-witted today; what do you mean by "working off the title for the first"? @Hrishikes:'s source is interesting but I don't know the prevailing view on Wsource what's "reliable" source for author's data is. Cheers and thank you for quick response, Captain Nemo (talk) 01:51, 9 July 2015 (UTC).
There is no standard for reliability. For me, I will use family history if it is documented and sourced, ie. some evidence of credibility. I will plug these into my available resources when I have a chance. The dates look credible, author in 40-50s for a subject that would be experience-based. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:24, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
As for family history, the descendant's surname in the above-given source is Medland, same as that of the author's Calcutta-based publishing partner (they together published the Bengal book). So there might have been a family connection through marriage. Hrishikes (talk) 04:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-29[edit]

15:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Pages to delete[edit]

Hello, I changed chapter titles from Roman numerals to Arabic for the 20 done chapters of A History of the University of Pennsylvania from Its Foundation to A. D. 1770. The links have been fixed on all the pages and I would appreciate it if you could please delete:

Thank you, The Haz talk 00:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:36, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! The Haz talk 02:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Indian constitution and copyright law[edit]

There are two sets for both: one set are scans, the other is Wikisource creation of latest updated version. Template:Constitution of India and Portal:Copyright law/Copyright law of India show the scans: originals as well as amendments. Constitution of India and Indian Copyright Law are Wikisource creations, i.e., not digital re-creations of published documents, but in-house creations based on multiple documents. I am aware of your stand that these in-house creations are not in scope here. But these documents are important, at least the copyright law, for cross-wiki purposes. The copyright document is of critical importance for Indic language Wikisources, where PD-India documents can be hosted even if not PD-US. In Commons, c:Template:PD-India-Gov refers to this document (the template can hardly refer to the 1957 document, that being long outdated). If one of these in-house creations is out-of-scope, then the other is too. So in that case, both should be deleted; else, the matter may be re-considered whether these two parallel sets for both documents can be accommodated side-by-side. With regards, Hrishikes (talk) 12:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Hrishikes: we don't do living documents, they are just too hard to maintain, and become stale at some point and do not represent a document at a point of time (it gets ugly). Also with legislation, the regulating authorities generally do a better job of maintaining it, so we can reference their living documents as required. As such we try to show a document at its point of time/publication, so we can have multiple documents of the legislation of the copyright of India through time, and that is how we disambiguate. So we can have a current form of a document, if it has been produced in the format. This is a better discussion for WS:S than here on a back-block user talk page. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:43, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I have not asked you to keep hosting them. I have said that the fate should be same for both of these "living" documents; either both should be kept, or else, both should be deleted. As for govt. maintenance, they are doing a poor job. The copyright act document being maintained by the Indian copyright office here is not updated with the 2012 amendment; the Wikisource creation here is possibly the one and only latest updated version of Indian copyright act available on the net. Hrishikes (talk) 02:20, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-30[edit]

03:05, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-31[edit]

15:05, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Death year check[edit]

Can you do a death year check on Author:Harihar Das? He was living in England, so probably died there. His biography in his posthumously published Norris embassy work (starting page link given in description part of author page) gives the death year with a query. With thanks, Hrishikes (talk) 01:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Donebillinghurst sDrewth 11:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks very much. But now what is to be taken as final? Your sources give the range as 1895-1950. I did get 1895-?1952 in my earlier searches (1, 2), but the biography in his own posthumous book is very detailed and gives birth data as:

DOB: November 2, 1892
Place: Sidhipasa, Jessore district, Bengal
Father's name: J. C. Das, lawyer

It details his visit to England as:

Went to England in July 1919, joined the Faculty of Arts, Univ. Coll., London, attended course for two years at School of Librarianship. Simultaneously, was on the staff of India Office Library on voluntary basis. Was elected fellow of Royal Historical Society in 1920, and after high acclaim (Yeats, Princess Victoria, others) of the Toru Dutt bio, was made a fellow of Royal Society of Literature. In 1921, he got admitted in New College, Oxford, and got B. Litt. in 1923. Then he went on to publish articles in plenty of journals as well as Encyclopædia Britannica, the details of which are given in the bio.

In view of such exhaustive bio, should we consider 1895 or 1892 as birth year? I do not have specific knowledge about the reliability of the sources, I am just asking for your opinion. And should we now show 1950 as the death year in author page? I'll go along with your opinion. With regards, Hrishikes (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

The point of death would seem accurate, ie. he is dead, not long dead, all known. Years of birth can always be approximate depending on the information that the person lodging the death knows. So I would be happy with what you stated. I also see a shipping record for a family (H. M. Das mother, 41 and children from 18 to 4 — 3 girls, 2 boys)

Name: Mr. H Das
Arrival Date: 9 Sep 1895
Birth Date: abt 1891
Age: 4
Gender: Male
Ethnicity/ Nationality: Dutch
Place of Origin: Holland, Netherlands
Port of Departure: Rotterdam
Port of Arrival: New York, New York
Ship Name: Amsterdam

which looks aligned, though nothing confirmed. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-32[edit]

15:51, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

hws template[edit]

Is there a reason for which pages in Index:Admiral Phillip.djvu are placing the beginning portion of hyphenated words in the footer rather than using {{hws}} (for example here)? BD2412 T 16:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

There is no value in {{hws}}, so I don't use it (page displays as printed, and there is no need to know what is the full word). {{hwe}} is required to display the pages correctly.
I was not aware of that - I've never seen one used without the other. So the beginning of the word is in the footnote so it shows up on the index page but not in the final display? BD2412 T 02:34, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
It's better to be consistent and include it in the body. There are situations where placing {{hws}} in the footer may not display properly, such as when the word appears in a multi-page table. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
@BD2412: {{hws}} shows the partial $1, and has a hover of the whole word $2 in page namespace, and is completely concealed when transcluded. {{hwe}} shows does the same in page namespace, though the $2 function handles the display when transcluded. So the end result is the same by putting it inside the footer <noinclude> section for showing in page namespace.
@EncycloPetey: I don't use the "hws" template at all, let alone put it in the footer. It is only a display attribute, and one that pretty well came about due to the difficulties in using the footer section in the early days, which was resolved by this template hide approach (it was a little more complicated discussion, but that is the nutshell). The improvement of the interface by ThomasV took place but the practice of both templates continued, AND it is easier to explain that way to newbies, BUT it is not a requirement of a transcription. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Template or not, putting the first part of a hyphenated word in the footer can lead to display problems under certain conditions, such as I mentioned. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:54, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
How? Where? What? That is going to need an example to be believed that we have a real issue

A <noinclude> versus an #if statement "non-display" should be making no difference, and if it is not to show in a transclusion, it isn't to show in either case. So, if you are telling me that putting it into the footer is displaying it in a transclusion, then we have a very weird situation. If you are saying that it needs to be formatted around a close of a table inside the footer, then that is no different from any other table closure, so is just about appropriate coding, and not the use of the template or not. Further, it would only be a namespace issue in itself. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:09, 4 August 2015 (UTC)