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
Police were called to a childcare center where they found a three-year-old resisting a rest.
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.

Executive Order 6102.jpg

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


United States Executive Orders Project
Work: Portal:Executive Orders of the President of the United States


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.

Suspicious user[edit]

Hello, Billinghurst! (I know that you are an admin and that you are active here, so I write to you). Please take a notice on this user (I have noticed today while being not at my own computer): User:NellOKeeffe01, it seems to me that this is just a spam concealed under fake introducing. --Nigmont (talk) 20:47, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry for disturbance, because now EncycloPetey has already blocked it and deleted the spam. --Nigmont (talk) 20:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

@Nigmont: Yep, typical spambot. Thanks for the early notification. We do have triggers to react, though eyes on pages are truly the best. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Billinghurst! Let me report of some more wrong users (I've noticed today): spamers: User:Toiturepolaire (spam on the talkpage), User:JoesphSchonell1 (Russian spam), User:ArronMcCarty73; and one seemingly is just a vandal: User:ISLAMIST BARRACK OBAMA. --Nigmont (talk) 19:33, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Thx. All managed, and the urls are now being tracked or blacklisted. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:26, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Index:Armistice Day.djvu[edit]

The pages marked in blue, were marked as such because they were sections of the work that couldn't be transcribed for copyright reasons. Ideally someone should also blank the relevant scan pages. ShakespeareFan00 09:49, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. @ShakespeareFan00: I have marked the pages as empty which hides them away. Can you please make the appropriate notes on the Index talk page. I would suggest as a cheat that we can use {{do not move to Commons}} with expiry=20xx in each pertinent section. That will allow us to unwrap each at the appropriate time. If unknown just use 95 years post publication. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:47, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Should be cleaned up now, If you want to review and oversight/revdel past revisions of the pages which contained the problem material, feel free. I can't as not admin. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:51, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
The remaining issue is actual redaction of the scans. Know anyone with djvu tools to do this quickly? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:54, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
I've also put in a request for the file to be "localised" - Commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Armistice_Day.djvu. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:16, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
I really don't understand you and your actions at times. No ability for a reality check. I think that you would cause waves in a kiddies' pool. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
My apologies for being over-cautious. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:31, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
File "cleaned", and re-uploaded. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:27, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

A Plea for Atheism[edit]

You asked for me to tell you when I finished proofreading it, so: I have! Unfortunately there are a couple of pages marked problematic because Hebrew and Greek letters are missing. BethNaught (talk) 20:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Mein Kampf[edit]

Please unprotect Mein Kampf. There is a public domain English translation of Author:James Vincent Murphy. See this. United Kingdom is now in 2017. [1] --Abelium (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Undeletion requests should be made to WS:PD. Unprotection requests belong at WS:ANbillinghurst sDrewth 01:09, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Moves[edit]

Thanks I have all of them in my browser and am doing them now. Feel free to do them if you want but I'm mostly done anyway. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Soft redirect for titles referring to persons[edit]

Hi, Billinghurst. "Edmund Clarence Stedman" is a title with several versions. Considering the reference (link) to the poem in this letter (see the word "sonnet"), it would seem that a direct link to a versions page (rather than searching for a reference at an author page which—considering the length of some author pages—would be daunting) would be more logical in such cases. See also: What links here. Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

It is an interesting conundrum as we have many works about authors, looking for consistency, and in how many places should we be linking them. And then it needs to be considered with all other works that we have about people. I have started a conversation earlier today at WS:S#Disambiguation: merge these? and its subpart as I am stepping through maintenance, your input into that would be great. Re links, they will be fixed, and we can tighten the redirect to a specific anchor on the author page. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:48, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll think through this. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikisource:Works[edit]

Me again. For changes/updates to titles, do we manually change Wikisource:Works pages? I am not familiar with their nature. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:08, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@Londonjackbooks: At this point of time, yes, manual it is. You could try to speaking to Sanbeg to see what he did way back in 2013 and doing it again, though his activity is not high anymore. I also note that we only have A-C, so maybe there is no point and it was a big task. Special:PrefixIndex/Wikisource:Works

Page views doesn't show much viewing of the A-C, though shows light viewing of the 2016 page. So maybe it is a rethink that is required before putting lots of effort into manual pages.

I would love to move to an automated system, however, our information push to wikidata is poor for works/main namespace, though good for authors. <shrug /> — billinghurst sDrewth 06:00, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Wikidata is also something I do not yet fully understand the workings of. Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
@Londonjackbooks: Wikisource:Wikidata It is basically a store of the metadata of our pages, and the same for other sites. So there is one page at wikidata that collects information on Coates. At this stage it is provides us interwiki links and image data, so if someone uploads an image about Coates then it will display here. due to how we set things up. If we move a (linked) page here, it updates the link so any site using wikidata to maintain links would get the updated url automatically, etc. Ultimately much of the metadata can be stored there in the one place, and we leverage that source. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-02[edit]

19:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Validation assistance[edit]

Note: I've also posted this request to Akme, who is usually fast, but has not been sround much the past few days.

Would you be able and willing to assist me by validating a work? I've just finished proofreading, and wouldn't normally be so rushed to have it validated, but I started this work in order to feature it this February.

The work is The Clandestine Marriage, and co-author David Garrick (the Laurence Olivier of his age) has his 300th birthday this February. It's also a comedy play on a topic suitable for Valentine's, so it seemed a good choice when I started it, but serious health issues have delayed my proofreading, and now only three weeks remain to have the work validated, nominated, and approved in order to feature it as originally planned.

Would you be able to assist? --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:32, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I am not the greatest fan of the long s character, and unfortunately at this moment I don't have the necessary patience to wade my way through such texts. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:34, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

works in portal namespace[edit]

Why move The West Australian times to portal namespace? It's a work, isn't it? If works now belong in portal namespace not main namespace, then I've missed a memo.... Hesperian 02:44, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

It is moribund, there is no project, nor evidence of any transcriptions, no scans, and that makes the alternatives to move it, or submit it for deletion. From the portal namespace we can do some more freestyle work to point to components. It also frees up the main namespace to only present the works that we (will) have, not put forward works we do not. It also allows for for presentation of parts of newspapers as we have done for many others. Any transcription, if they ever come, will clearly be in the main namespace, not the Portal: ns. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Import from Commons[edit]

Can you please import from Commons this file? It was deleted as per this discussion. Hrishikes (talk) 02:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

@Hrishikes: Yes check.svg Done please mark it with {{do not move to commons}} and with an expiry =; and any other maintenance it requires. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:08, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Done, and thanks. By the way, about this author. The birth year is not available in the usual authority control sites (Viaf, Lccn etc). So if you have got it from some special source, I think it should be mentioned in the author talk page. Regards, Hrishikes (talk) 04:58, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
My point was not about Bradley Birt. And there is no element of challenge. :-) Hrishikes (talk) 05:16, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh in the hidden text. Overt is so much better, or new headings or subheadings. FWIW I referenced it at Wikidata. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Index:FirstFolioInquiry.djvu[edit]

Another file deleted at Commons, the parallel discussions being:-

The issue here was an incompatible license on what appeared to be a 2005 work.

I've marked the pages here for speedy, if they should be blanked as per other suspected copyvios, let me know. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks you ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:18, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-03[edit]

23:24, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Index:Big Bend.djvu[edit]

I hope I'm being overly paranoid, but I found a number of the images in this work were attributed to third parties, (not the NPS.) I've thus put them on DR at Commons, and commented/removed them in the Index/Pages here

However, I wanted a second view before I do any more, because I might be being too agressive, or applying policy too literally. If you think I am being over cautious I will withdraw/revert immediately.

Some of them seem to be raw page scans in any event.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:13, 20 January 2017 (UTC)