User talk:EncycloPetey/Archives/2022
|
Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in , although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index. |
How we will see unregistered users
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. /Johan (WMF)
18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry about that and glad you caught the issue! I'm learning so much about the edge cases of transclusion lately. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 06:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- I'm learning new things about it all the time, too. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
RE:Heracleidae
Yes, I screwed up. Sorry. —Genesis Bustamante (talk) 20:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- I'm glad to help. Thank you for correcting me about wikilinks. By (bad) memory I thought it was fine. I must make an habit of re-reading the conventions. —Genesis Bustamante (talk) 21:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
North and South
Don't want to edit war over North and South (First Edition), but the export does work when you list the TOC by volumes. I think this is a better approach because it more closely reproduces the way that these books were printed. Otherwise, we'll have to pile all the front matter of the books on one page. It's also the way that many other multi-volume works are presented. Thoughts? Languageseeker (talk) 01:51, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- With multi-volume novels, this has never been the way we've done this, and it confuses (and discourages) people who wish to download the work. If the work was multi-volume containing independent works, then your method might be acceptable, but for a multi-volume novel, we've put the full contents on the first page. Where did you get the idea that they had to be listed separately? --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:54, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- If you download the base page of a multi-volume work, then it does download volume 1 and volume 2 without a problem. (Checked with Calibre) If we are to put all the TOC for both volumes on one page, should the front matter be lumped together or the the TOC split into two? Languageseeker (talk) 01:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Downloading with EPUB for such a work does not produce a full download; it requires the full contents to be listed on the main page. There is more than one way to list the contents; I have seen the individual TOC pages transcluded from each volume, or an AuxToC template used, or a combination of the two. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:03, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- I just tried it with Calibre and it does produce the full epub. Which software do you use? File:NS temp.png Languageseeker (talk) 02:24, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- I click the Download button in the top right of the page. The ToC issue is a known issue with downloads and comes up regularly in the Scriptorium. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:50, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- I just tried it with Calibre and it does produce the full epub. Which software do you use? File:NS temp.png Languageseeker (talk) 02:24, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Downloading with EPUB for such a work does not produce a full download; it requires the full contents to be listed on the main page. There is more than one way to list the contents; I have seen the individual TOC pages transcluded from each volume, or an AuxToC template used, or a combination of the two. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:03, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- If you download the base page of a multi-volume work, then it does download volume 1 and volume 2 without a problem. (Checked with Calibre) If we are to put all the TOC for both volumes on one page, should the front matter be lumped together or the the TOC split into two? Languageseeker (talk) 01:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Knickerbocker's History of New York (1809)
I write to you because User talk:P64 shows that you welcomed me here, where I have not become active (as at en.wikipedia).
See Knickerbocker's History of New York. I wonder whether there is some mistake in the page header, and listing at Author:Washington Irving).
The Wikisource text must be a later edition of A History of New York by Diedrich Knickerbocker (December 1809). It may be the same as Project Gutenberg provides PG #13042, whose edition begins with a title page transcript (no date).
The first section, "Introduction", contains at one point (quote a few lines):
- Sunnyside, 1848.
- W.I.
- Notices.
- WHICH APPEARED IN THE NEWSPAPERS PREVIOUS TO THE PUBLICATION OF THIS WORK.
(end quote) --P64 (talk) 21:34, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, can you give me examples of which pages I broke Module:Authority control on? Your reversion said there were error messages everywhere, but my attempt at testing found none. Specifically I tested by previewing the module on Author:Edward Ashley Walrond Clarke (WORLDCATID not on wikidata, but VIAF is there), Author:Henry James (WORLDCATID on wikidata, and lots of IDs), and Author:Charles Russell Morse (only has WORLDCATID, no VIAF) (and I tested both while working by using {{Authority control/sandbox}} and previewing the page, and right before putting it onto the main module (by using the "show page preview with template draft" function). Was it broken on an author page, or a different page? --Pokechu22 (talk) 21:21, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- It sounds as though you only checked the Author namespace. The errors were in the Main namespace, for works and versions. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've now looked at a few works, and it seems like Divine Comedy is affected (though Divine Comedy (Longfellow 1867) isn't). The specific error is "Lua error in Module:Authority_control/sandbox at line 756: attempt to index global 'parts' (a nil value)." It looks like I made a typo with the LCCN version of the fallback; I've fixed that. This theoretically could also have applied to an author page, but I haven't found any examples where there is a library of congress authority ID but not a worldcat ID on wikidata.
- There is a second issue; the generated WorldCat link on Divine Comedy is invalid. But that's actually not a new problem; the old link was http://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n81-066212 and the new one is https://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n81066212 but both result in a 404. I think WorldCat identities doesn't cover non-human entities. (Regarding the formatting difference: both https://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no92-030904/ and https://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no92030904/ show the same content, but I think the new form is preferred; it's at least used by VIAF (in the About section). --Pokechu22 (talk) 22:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- I have spot checked several pages for works / editions and am not seeing any errors either. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, to clarify, I only applied it to the sandbox version. I've pushed it to the main version now (as well as a second HTTPS change); if you see anything broken let me know. (The two changes should be independently revertible, and I'd be surprised if the HTTPS change caused lua errors since it's just editing strings. So hopefully everything should be good now.) --Pokechu22 (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Spot checked again, and I see no issues. All looks good with the new revision. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, to clarify, I only applied it to the sandbox version. I've pushed it to the main version now (as well as a second HTTPS change); if you see anything broken let me know. (The two changes should be independently revertible, and I'd be surprised if the HTTPS change caused lua errors since it's just editing strings. So hopefully everything should be good now.) --Pokechu22 (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- I have spot checked several pages for works / editions and am not seeing any errors either. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you EncycloPetey
Thank you i am very new at this. Just trying.
Wikitionary
I see that you have done significant contributions in wikitonary. I am not able to understand how to edit those pages, can you help me with a sample page? If feasible a guide to how to edit in wikitonary. Thanks Cyarenkatnikh (talk)
TB
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Meqabyan/Ethiopian Maccabees
Yes, I am the translator. I have various reasons for permitting its partial public use.
Meqabyan/Ethiopian Maccabees
I'd be glad to provide that, but I have little to no knowledge of how wikipedia operates.
There you go -> https://web.archive.org/web/20100730075612/http://www.law.yale.edu/rcw/rcw/jurisdictions/asw/quatar/qatar_constitution.pdf
Re: fonts
(Sorry for missing your message.) I have been indexing and proofreading many of these old broadsides, which include a number of unusual fonts. For this, and a few others, the font wasn’t quite blackletter, but it was similar, so I used it as such. See also “The Song of the Rebel”, “Manassas”, “Beauregard at Manassas”, and “Battle Song of the ‘Black Horsemen’”. There may be a few more in the future, though. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Deprecated templates
So in what way should the template be fixed then?
- 99% of what you're doing is correct. The template shouldn't appear in categories. And for short bits of factual text, the template isn't needed. But when large chunks of text are quoted from Wikipedia, we do not have an alternative. For that use, the template is still functional and should be left in place. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ok I see Ffffrr (talk) 05:11, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Index:As a Man Thinketh
Hi there. Just wondering why you reverted my changes to the index page. I went through every single page to check for defects, plus the Chapter transclusions and am unsure what is still wrong. Regards, Chrisguise (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Chrisguise: I have not edited that Index page. An IP edited the Index; I have not. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:00, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is that the chapter pages do not have a {{Header}} template as required by our Style Guide. It says this in the clean up template that I added. You can look for yourself; the chapter pages have no header templates. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:05, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: It says “header="1"” in the screenshot; each chapter has a header template, though not called through the template directly, but through the “pages” tag. There is clearly a header; why are you saying there is not? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- No, each page has a tag-generated header. The do not have header templates. There must be a header template, for multiple reasons. The pages tag is a quick-fix, but is not considered best practice, nor does its use satisfy Style Guide requirements. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: I do not use the “pages” tag-generated header, as I want greater flexibility, but your claim is absurd. In the first place, the style guide only states that pages “should” use {{header}}, not that they must. In addition, why would the “header” function of the “pages” tag exist, if not to provide a header? That is what the various bibliographical fields on the “index” page are for: to load the parameters of the automatically generated header. If you wish to change the policy, and disallow the use of the tag-generated header, do so; but do not claim that it is out of order, when it is not. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The pages-header implementation exists so that bots have the means to auto-generate a "quick-and-dirty" work once the table of contents is completed. I am not seeking to change policy, but am alerting you to the policy. I did not make this policy. It is possible to use the pages tag generated headers, but only as a stop-gap. A completed work should not have them. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:16, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: I have created a thread on the Scriptorium here on the topic. As bots can create pages using the normal “header” template, as I have seen the match-and-split bot do, I do not believe that claim; and I have seen on numerous occasions non-bot users using the “header” function of the “pages” tag. Again, you are not calling to any policy, but merely your claim of policy; you are not seeking to change it, but creating it out of whole cloth; and you certainly have made the so-called “policy.” TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- It is the first item under "Formatting" on the Style Guide, as I pointed out to you both on your Talk page and in the Scriptorium thread. Above, you referred to this policy, so I know you read it, so you cannot claim I am "creating it out of whole cloth" when clearly it exists and you have read it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: I have read the policy; I read it before you even pointed it out to me. My claim is that your claim, that the use of the “header” template is required, is not what the policy states, and that the “header” function of the “pages” tag is an acceptable alternative to the use of the template. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:28, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Then you understand neither the meaning of "should" nor "wikt:out of whole cloth". --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: From English Wiktionary: “ought to;” and in the usage notes, the word “must,” indicating requirement, is contrasted. And as for “whole cloth”: “Something made completely new, with no history, and not based on anything else.” This is an accurate representation of your claim that the “header” template is required, to the exclusion of the “header” function of the “pages” tag. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- At this point I have to conclude you are arguing for arguing's sake, since I showed you the basis for my claims, yet you persist in asserting that there is no basis. Please limit further discussion to the Scriptorium. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: I am arguing with you, yes; I am countering your claims, and claiming that your claimed basis is no basis. But I will limit my discussion, as you wish. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:40, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- At this point I have to conclude you are arguing for arguing's sake, since I showed you the basis for my claims, yet you persist in asserting that there is no basis. Please limit further discussion to the Scriptorium. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: From English Wiktionary: “ought to;” and in the usage notes, the word “must,” indicating requirement, is contrasted. And as for “whole cloth”: “Something made completely new, with no history, and not based on anything else.” This is an accurate representation of your claim that the “header” template is required, to the exclusion of the “header” function of the “pages” tag. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Then you understand neither the meaning of "should" nor "wikt:out of whole cloth". --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: I have read the policy; I read it before you even pointed it out to me. My claim is that your claim, that the use of the “header” template is required, is not what the policy states, and that the “header” function of the “pages” tag is an acceptable alternative to the use of the template. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:28, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- It is the first item under "Formatting" on the Style Guide, as I pointed out to you both on your Talk page and in the Scriptorium thread. Above, you referred to this policy, so I know you read it, so you cannot claim I am "creating it out of whole cloth" when clearly it exists and you have read it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: I have created a thread on the Scriptorium here on the topic. As bots can create pages using the normal “header” template, as I have seen the match-and-split bot do, I do not believe that claim; and I have seen on numerous occasions non-bot users using the “header” function of the “pages” tag. Again, you are not calling to any policy, but merely your claim of policy; you are not seeking to change it, but creating it out of whole cloth; and you certainly have made the so-called “policy.” TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The pages-header implementation exists so that bots have the means to auto-generate a "quick-and-dirty" work once the table of contents is completed. I am not seeking to change policy, but am alerting you to the policy. I did not make this policy. It is possible to use the pages tag generated headers, but only as a stop-gap. A completed work should not have them. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:16, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: I do not use the “pages” tag-generated header, as I want greater flexibility, but your claim is absurd. In the first place, the style guide only states that pages “should” use {{header}}, not that they must. In addition, why would the “header” function of the “pages” tag exist, if not to provide a header? That is what the various bibliographical fields on the “index” page are for: to load the parameters of the automatically generated header. If you wish to change the policy, and disallow the use of the tag-generated header, do so; but do not claim that it is out of order, when it is not. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- No, each page has a tag-generated header. The do not have header templates. There must be a header template, for multiple reasons. The pages tag is a quick-fix, but is not considered best practice, nor does its use satisfy Style Guide requirements. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- EncycloPetey: It says “header="1"” in the screenshot; each chapter has a header template, though not called through the template directly, but through the “pages” tag. There is clearly a header; why are you saying there is not? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
TE(æ)A,ea.,EncycloPetey I have come across many works that use the type of header that is causing the problem but this is the first time I have seen it flagged up this way. I have fixed the chapter transclusions and removed the maintenance tag. Chrisguise (talk) 00:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- It used to be an occasional issue, but I've noticed it becoming common of late. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:25, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
I want to upload a book, but I need information.
I wish I could host a book here. I have it photocopied. I'm thinking of scanning your pages and uploading them here to host the book. I don't know if it can. The book is titled: "The Military Campaigns of Dominican Independence." I would like to upload it to share it..
I would like to know what procedure I should follow???
please help. Risantana (talk) 10:56, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- The Wikisource:Scriptorium is the best place to ask for help. We would need to know when the book was published, who wrote it, who published it, and similar information. It must not be under copyright and we would use the information to determine whether or not it is under copyright. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2022 (UTC)