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.

Popular Science Monthly 1916 Ad.jpg

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

Popular Science Monthly Project
Work: Popular Science Monthly

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:, 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: 2015-51[edit]

17:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[edit]

abusefilter for required

Tech News: 2016-30[edit]

19:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


In case of this, you could have corrected the incoming links instead of declining the delete request, because the page-name in question is nothing but a typo. Hrishikes (talk) 07:05, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Absolutely not, that would be editorialising, and I do not know how many other pages in the work may have similar. Either way it is a longstanding page, and one where we should retain the redirect. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:08, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
So, in your view, long-standing mistakes should be retained because of their "longstanding-ness"? I am asking because it is always better to understand the policy properly. Hrishikes (talk) 07:29, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
It is an existing link Special:WhatLinksHere/1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Vidyasagar, Ismar Chandra, and so it in itself does not create a mistake, it shows what is there. Redirects are cheap (systemwise) and it is reasonable to retain it, and there is no value in deleting it. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:17, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Delinking of Gitanjali[edit]

This is about your delinking of WS pages from WD page of Gitanjali. In such a scenario, you should have locally linked the concerned wikisources with one other, so that the interwiki menu could be displayed in each. But you made an incomplete effort in bnWS and did not put the links in other wikisources. Thereby this work virtually stands delinked from other language versions (fully in Chinese and Telugu; partially in English and French wikisources). This is disruptive editing, is it not? Hrishikes (talk) 13:03, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Only if it is left that way forever, if you fill them all up you cannot see the alternatives/or the problems when the links are there. Temporary delinks of interwikis is inconsequential when exploring the issue that you raised. Plus please don't pick fights with inflammatory language. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:10, 31 July 2016 (UTC)


for the recent suggestion of the jewellery work on POTM. May I suggest that we try to identify works on the following topics:

  • Fragrance and cosmetics making
  • Leather, Textile, Wood, Glass, Ceramic
  • Shoemaking
  • Gloves, hats, hosiery, and scarves making

This can be grouped together under, say, Portal:Fashion to enhance visibility. Portal:Furniture can be a related portal with q:Eyewear#See also as its contents. Solomon7968 (talk) 13:45, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

If you find works, then do feel welcome to add them as text names on the portals, and then use {{ext scan link}} to point to the available scans. They can also be added to WS:RT though we are not that good at taking works from there. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:50, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-31[edit]

21:48, 1 August 2016 (UTC)


This discussion had been stalled since March, I added some additional details, Does Wikisource have checkusers, because based on the additional comments I've added just now, I strongly suspect that one of the IP editors might be a logged out user, or someone that forgot a password. I am still of the view that given the somewhat convoluted history (including the userspace version uncovered, that the effort should go, and that if any future attempt is made it's with a known attributed version of the source document. I've said as much in the comments I've added. Something that doesn't seem right, but can't put my finger on it. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:27, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Dissociation of ideas[edit]

Hey, you know you are always having a go at me for putting ideas together you don't think fit?

Well you recently posted Wikisource:Scriptorium#WMF_announcement:_Stripping_Question_Marks_From_Wiki_Searches and today I cannot get the page links (i.e. main-to-Page: space) for What is technology? to work today. Coincidence?

For what it is worth links like (page 1): [[Page:What_is_technology%3F_(Wilson).djvu/3]] are being presented to my browser (Firefox) as [[Page%3AWhat_is_technology%253F_(Wilson).djvu/3]]. In other words it appears an unnecessary hex-encoding is taking place: "%253F" is "%3F" which curiously if decoded again would be the missing trailing "?"

Thoughts? AuFCL (talk) 10:05, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

@AuFCL: Neither of my PCs' firefox browser is showing the %253F link, internal to the work or from the places that I added links. I am not sure where else to check. Searches with What is technology? and Index:What is technology? (Wilson).djvu both drop me where I expect to be. Aaaah! From the page numbers on the work. Yep broken for me with Firefox and Chrome. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:25, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
One would have to guess that it is coincidence that I mention it. The github link in that notice shows that the change is made to the cirrussearch function. I will hazard a guess that we need to whack away at Mediawiki:PageNumbers.js and do something to delimit the question mark. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:41, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
@Tpt, @Phe: are one of you able to look at this issue? From What is technology? the page links are broken with their url encoding of the question mark. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:46, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
I am not suggesting the idea of looking at PageNumbers.js is wrong but it might be worthwhile checking interaction with the urlencode operation buried within MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template as well. PageNumbers.js already has special-case handling for "%26"="&" so perhaps "%3F" needs a bit of similar treatment? AuFCL (talk) 11:13, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
PageNumbers.js seems the place to start, and I was hoping for someone to competently re-code rather than me having to experiment — billinghurst sDrewth 11:26, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Once more I have not made myself clear. Must be over-tired. The hint was aimed at your pingees, Tpt and Phe. Going to sleep. AuFCL (talk) 11:31, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, on fr.wp we use old wikisource mul:Mediawiki:PageNumbers.js, it seems there is no problem with it fr:Qu’est ce que la propriété ?/Chapitre 1, it's unclear if the problem is in your pagenumber.js or your MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum templatePhe 12:19, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
@Hesperian: Looks like you did the urlencode edit. Care to have a look at this problem? — billinghurst sDrewth 12:33, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Very busy for the next little while. If I get a chance I will have a look. FWIW, my edit was a fix for Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2013-05#Seems that quotations in File/Page name screw up page numbering display in main ns. Hesperian 01:28, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Seems to be fixed with [13]; hopefully I haven't broken some other use cases elsewhere.... Hesperian 02:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
That looks fixed for me too. I will put a notice to the community to look for quirks. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Hesperian patched the very line I had in mind, not quite the way I was thinking (but to be fair: probably in a better fashion.) I have tried out various page linkages containing each of "&", "-", "(", ")", "'" and Unicode values (and obviously "?") all successful. I would love for somebody to verify one containing a percent sign but (thus far) have not found any "in the wild." AuFCL (talk) 06:15, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
@Phe: "Qu’est ce que la propriété ?" is not a good example, as the Page: names contain no embedded "?"s eligible for encoding. However fr:Êtes-vous_fous_?/01 does—and proves the French implementation works correctly. AuFCL (talk) 21:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Deceased Fellows, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 1854[edit]

Hi, I tried to move Index:Obituary Notices of Deceased Fellows Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 1854 vol 7 pages 263–288.djvu to a name that I thought mirrored other articles on Wikisource that were published in other volumes of the same journal. Error messages are now appearing and I couldn't undo the move, so I probably should ask if anyone can help, also perhaps explain what has gone wrong? Drchriswilliams (talk) 15:34, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

  • I have the same request... here. Thanks in advance, Wieralee (talk) 16:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
@Drchriswilliams, @Wieralee: Okay, I have been in and tidied up.
Drchriswilliams: There is no exacting requirement to have the djvu file named into any particular pattern, though it is one that we try to get right on upload, and you have seen why. We can transclude pages wherever to our main namespace irrespective of the file: name.
Wieralee: There is a direct relationship from File: > Index: > Page: and this is why the WSes ask Commons admins to not delete djvu or pdf files that are transcribed (have subsidiary Page: ns) without consultation. If it is really considered necessary to move djvu/pdf files then you please engage local admins in that conversation beforehand. Bigger files with hundreds of pages can be a nightmare, and as an example the renaming of Alumni Oxoniensis files at Commons was stopped due to the difficulties. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:44, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
It appears we had the whole volume, so the pages have subsequently been moved there. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:28, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting that out. Drchriswilliams (talk) 07:50, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
No probs. That's why I get paid the big bucks. <eyeroll> — billinghurst sDrewth 07:56, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-32[edit]

15:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

My struggle[edit]

i agree with your Houghton Miflin determination. however there is also w:James Vincent Murphy (died 1946) translation at IA here [22] Gutenberg so get ready for another round on January 1. Slowking4RAN's revenge 02:57, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Slowking4: I tried to base my wording around the translator's edition. I don't know sufficient around all the available edition, though would have thought that the original itself would have received 95 years from time of German publication. It seems that through notoriety, or no one suitably cares about what Hitler's distant relatives may wish to do to challenge those rights. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:13, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-33[edit]

19:37, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-34[edit]

21:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


Nominally taking a break (for the reasons see my talk page), but was keeping on eye on things. I note you changed the name on this. I was thinking it was â but you removed the accent. I thought it might have been a dotted a (per some other romanisation but wasn't sure.) Do we have an expert on these things? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:09, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Looks like s spot on the page to me. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
In comparison : Page:Zodiac stories by Blanche Mary Channing.pdf/273, Given concerns I wanted to be sure it was at least consistent. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Donebillinghurst sDrewth 13:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Overlapping side notes[edit]

I think I am going to go off to a small room and start manically laughing... Nominally on a break from editing, but I thought I'd look over something on a hunch.

And came up with:

Which is effectively an extract of the first paragraph of : with {{Outside R}} which you wrote, substituted for {{Right sidenote}}

This had an issue with overlapping 'sidenotes'. Only eleven (Ha Ha Ha!) additional characters in the span style namely "clear:right;" and it rendered as I was trying to get all along. I didn't seemingly even need to chanhe the span to be a block!! (No need for the monster that is {{sn-paragraph}} at all, no need for the endless disputes I had, and asperations cast.)

That it actually worked suprised me, other differences such as line-height can probably be converged between {{sn-note}} and {{Outside RL}}{{Outside L}} etc.

I am not asking for an update to {{Outside}} just yet as IIRC there were some other unresolved issues with it, you were still in the process of resolving. But I would strongly recommend cl-act-paragraph and related that I spent hours trying to fix aren't recommended for future use.

(Sounds of Insane laughter as user is taken off to the the funny farm.....) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)