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
"Da mihi basium"
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: 2017-09[edit]

19:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I blew it :([edit]

Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help#Aligned_table_can.27t_be_spanned_over_pages... for the background.

I managed to ask about something which I am sure based on the response WAS previously raised (and most likely by myself.) The logic of the solution is obvious, and I am considering adding a note to the relevant templates documentation, unless you can think of a better location, for helpful approaches like that suggested.

I think that as I've been working rather hard on one specific item recently, I've blown a fuse, or forgotten certain techniques I used elsewhere. This is not a good sign given that I have something of maverick reputation on English Wikisource.

I'm considering scaling back on my involvement, if I am not able to meet the exacting standards, I'd like to think people here would support. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:41, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I personally find your solutions bigger than the problem. The amount of effort to work how a template like that would work is harder than doing tables, and if one gets something wrong it is just next to impossible to identify where is the problem. You get into trouble as your proofreading can lack thoroughness and go off on tangents to create things like these templates which no one understands or thinks that they should have to fix. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:36, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Are there any performance comparisons for {{aligned table}} vs multiple {{ts}} calls? The performance concerns were the only reason I was using aligned table recently anyway. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
I also appreciate English Wikisource doesn't have the same resources as million dollar paid projects do, but it would sometimes be nice to see progress towards long-term rectification of some of the shortcomings as opposed to the "bigger problem in the solution" approaches you've specfically called me out on. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
User:ShakespeareFan00/Sandbox/tables2, In the process of trying to simplify something down properly, I'm using the DOCUMENTED approach here Help:Page_breaks#Tables_across_page_breaks if this is incorrect then the documentation needs someone else to update it, as at this point my wikistress is very high, and I don't want to break even more pages, unintentionallyShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
To look at the differences in how the system manages the transclusions, you will need to look at a produced page through the show code of your browser, there is a html remarked summary towards the bottom of each page.

I didn't call you out on anything. You asked and I commented on what I saw, and how I don't wish to spend my time here sorting through your issues (philosophical difference on approach). BTDT, it caused a ruckus, I now leave it alone. I do a whole lot of onwiki work across numerous wikis, I don't particularly have the time and patience to resolve issues where I do not agree with the approach. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:26, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I got a little heated. If you didn't call me out on anything then I am (as is typical) over-reacting. I will note that in simplifying down one of the templates I found a LOT of logic errors, which meant it would NEVER have worked quite the way it was intended to, I also found quite a few issues with the pages I thought I'd proofread (sigh). I a agree with you about not having the time to "defuse exploding users", sometimes the best approach is stand well back and wait for the fireworks to stop :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:06, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

An email sent[edit]

An email sent to your email ID through talk page.

Warm Regards

Mahitgar (talk) 11:55, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I have forwarded your email to the provided email address with an explanation of the easier choices and will see what their advice will be. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:30, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
@Mahitgar: FYI I have yet to receive a response. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:54, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Sorry I missed your response. Temporarilly problem got sorted out after few phone calls students got used to the situation and managed it; When their next new batch will come up then a support may be required. Besides I reuest is forwarded to User:Titodutta who is working with CIS and is an admin on en:wp too for support in this regards.
Thanks for your prompt support. and warm regards
Mahitgar (talk) 14:06, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Archaic spelling in titles...[edit]

In giving something a second look I thought it might be worth noting some things in regard to older titles. - Page:Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/34

However {{SIC}} to me would seem to be more for printer errors, which isn't what's happening here. There did not seem to be an {{archaic}} to mark titles/spellings which whilst correct are not necessarily modern usage.

Would it be reasonable to consider forking {{SIC}} so that an additional note can be added in the popup?

The thought was to write some like {{oldspell}} or something. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:38, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

These are matters that you should submit to the community rather than posed here. — billinghurst sDrewth 19:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikisource:Requested texts and SpBot[edit]

Looks like SpBot's inaugural run on Wikisource:Requested texts didn't go so well. Are you familiar enough with the template that summons it to debug it? Prosody (talk) 04:06, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Prosody. I have reverted that and will look at it prior to SpBot's next run. It will probably be my error. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:11, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done btw and now working — billinghurst sDrewth 22:00, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Public Domain[edit]

Hi, how can I find works in the public domain to add to Wikisource? I herd you liek mudkips (talk) 21:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@I herd you liek mudkips: Numbers of sites have works that are able to be imported, you can have a look from Wikisource:Sources, all depends on your interests. You will still need to work out whether they are definitely public domain and able to be uploaded. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:05, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. Just checked, and Project Gutenburg was listed. Can I then upload books from there? I herd you liek mudkips (talk) 22:08, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
@I herd you liek mudkips: (hesitantly) Yes. While books can be transferred from Project Gutenberg it is not our preference, as they cannot be further validated, and often they don't have edition information +++. As part of our aim is to broaden the range of works available most of us prefer to import a scanned version and work from there from first principles. If you are looking for something upon which to work which are already here, then look at Category:Index Not-Proofread for 6000+ from which to choose. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. And if you have time, check out my post at Author_talk:Jules_Verne, as I found another source for a work I would like to have on Wikisource. I herd you liek mudkips (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-10[edit]

23:23, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Unarmoured ships[edit]

Please see the Thomas Brassey page, which shows that Unarmoured Ships was his work, not that of his son, Thomas Allnutt Brassey, who was 12 at the time of publication. (Thomas Brassey, 1st Earl Brassey married Anna Allnutt, and her maiden name appeared as their son's middle name). - The Bounder (talk) 11:25, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. If you make changes like that you can see the importance of utilising the edit summary.
True, but it's a salutory lesson in not just knee-jerk reverting too. - The Bounder (talk) 11:32, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Considerations on the state of Ireland[edit]

I have validated this work, except that the overhanging footnote on pp. 18–19 is not fully transcluding. I'm not sure how to fix this; perhaps you could have a second look? Thanks, BethNaught (talk) 19:57, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

@BethNaught: Thanks, Yes check.svg Done forced it with html.

(long saga) For what it is worth there is a phabricator ticket in place as mw:Extension:Cite doesn't play well in the transclusions with <includeonly> and some other wiki-created tags, and when we wanted rows from a table even more problematic. I had prodded them again and had used it as an example, so I had left it unresolved. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:45, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Good job there, thanks. I've now finished the validation. BethNaught (talk) 22:01, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-11[edit]

15:25, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

WD error?[edit]

Something happened at WD (I think) to cause WD-linked image error messages on author pages (see Author:Florence Earle Coates). I only contacted you because you were last(?) to edit this page, which may be involved? 12:33, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Londonjackbooks (talk)

@Londonjackbooks: Thanks. The pages that I checked when it I updated the modules didn't have the right combinations of pulled image with trying to edit. Weirdly when I reverted it didn't return to normal. I have had to change the way that the author template works, so I am not sure what is happening there. (I dare not play more at this hour, and in fact would have preferred to not play now! <deskthunk>) @Samwilson: I had to change from getValue to getRawValue. <shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 13:50, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Friendly advice[edit]

Recently when looking over some of your proofreads, e.g. at POTM, I noticed a consistent error you make which I wish to politely point out: namely, that you often render "per cent." as "per cent,". This has happened in multiple works so I wanted to make you aware of it for the future. Thanks, BethNaught (talk) 12:03, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

On reconsideration I realise that might have sounded rather passive-aggressive. Sorry if so, it wasn't meant in that way. BethNaught (talk) 14:52, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Collaboration products newsletter: 2017-03[edit]

17:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-12[edit]

22:03, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Author:Gaius Valerius Flaccus[edit]

Hello Billinghurst, how're you? Two questions: 1) in Author:Gaius Valerius Flaccus, what category should I use for his "deathyear" ("c. 90 AD" doesn't exist)? 2) Is it okay to create pages for authors like that, i.e. of which Wikisource currently has no texts, except for "Works about" them (e.g. Encyclopædia Britannica articles)? Thanks ~ DanielTom (talk) 12:25, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

If they are authors, and they have works present or referenced at enWS, or one of the sisters, then by all means create an author page and add it to wikidata. Re death year, there is no requirement to do anything now, when you link it to WD it will import the death date from there. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:29, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Okay, I see. I've never edited Wikidata, but will look into it. Thanks again. ~ DanielTom (talk) 12:32, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

In regard to some recent issues...[edit]

A quick question, Do you have the ability to transwiki content to Commons?

Someone mentioned in the relevant Commons discussion, that some form of disclaimer template would be appropriate ( on a work that the rest of the world considers public domain..) about the quasi/non copyright distribution restriction in the UK.

There was already a template here {{PD-nonUK}} that I've boldly reworded earlier ( You are free to revert this editing!).

Having expressed my concerns at Commons and locally, I am not going to comment further, other than to possibly mention the local template in the relevant Commons discussion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:41, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Pages can be transwiki'd; files cannot, which is why we use the tools. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I said I would not comment further. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:57, 23 March 2017 (UTC)