User talk:GreyHead

Welcome

Welcome

Hello, Greyhead, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for joining the project. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Help pages
• Style guide
• Inclusion policy
• Wikisource:For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in

• Proofread of the Month
• Community collaboration
• Requested texts

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{CotW}} to your page for current wikisource projects.

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.

Again, welcome! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:51, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

M.A., P.C., B.A., etc.

Typically, a space should not be included in the middle of these abbreviations, so "M.A." rather than "M. A.", etc. It will also make lists of these abbreviations after names much easier to read. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem, I wasn't sure so followed the style of the original. What about the stops? Is the modern MA better than M.A. Greyhead (talk) 20:06, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

We follow the punctuation markings in the original; it's only spacing around the punctuation that usually is modernized. So a printed passage like:

" What kind of man is he ? "

would become:

"What kind of man is he?"

But on rare occasions there is cause to preserve aspects of the original spacing, but usually not. Spacing is typically just a printer's decision, not an author's, except in poetical works. But back to your question: we do keep the periods and any other punctuation in the original. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks --Greyhead (talk) 21:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Just as a further note to this. If we leave the spaces in there's always the risk of the line dividing partway through the abbreviation as different browsers on different devices manage line length in their own way. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:33, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

We also have {{SIC}} to use, rather than adding [sic.] We do this as some works have it in their text, rather than our annotation. I usually only add the first parameter, though sometimes the second can have an advantage. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:13, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I would like to comment that you are doing a wonderful job with that work, it has fiddly formatting and some quirks that you are managing fine. If I get some time and have some energy this week, I will try and transclude some pages to the main namespace. I will need to acquaint myself in how I was building a ToC first. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Indian Biographical Dictionary

A note to say that I so love your work. Steady, methodical, precise and accurate. The IndianBio is looking marvellous from your TLC. Congrats. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I think that I am now finished with this work. I transcluded the last entry today. There are many pages that still require validation which I can't complete. I am though reasonably happy that the transcluded pages are don't have too many errors in them. GreyHead (talk) 14:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm now completely finished, I found that a little loophole allowed me to validate a few more pages and those are now all done. Mostly punctuation and the odd typo updated. There are about 384pp still requiring validation. I've added the work to Proofread of the Month/validation works queue. Maybe it should also be advised to the Indian Community here - except that I can’t find them :-( GreyHead (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

One more joyous task to do then. Please can you add/announce this through {{new texts}} which will then put this onto the front page of the wiki. Congratulations on your achievement, you can have a virtual badge of achievement, and walk around with a smile on your face which no one will comprehend. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 05:06, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I know of only two (reasonably active) editors who are from India--@Solomon7968 and me (maybe they'll know a few more). To my knowledge, more Indian editors edit Wikipedia than Wikisource, though, so it would be great if it were possible to announce this on Wikipedia somehow. —Clockery Fairfeld ^[t·c] 05:55, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I believe Indian editors aren't that active in this site largely because most of the public domain sources regarding India are unreliable junk and POV-y. (Sitush may be a better person to tell you why, he is Brit but knows way more about Indian sources than I can think of) Generally they are used by editors affiliated to a particular social group etc. to promote their own agenda etc. Solomon7968 (talk) 06:54, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Moving pages

Hi. I came across your request to speedy The_Indian_Biographical_Dictionary_(1915)/Visram,_Fazulbhov, after relocating it toThe_Indian_Biographical_Dictionary_(1915)/Visram,_Fazulbhoy. Just to let you know that you can do the "relocating" by moving the page; see "Move" in the dropdown menu near History, in the top right of a page. It is up to you to decide if leaving the redirect or not behind it (make a judgement call if you feel it is needed or not). In this way, the "history" of the page is not lost. If not clear, just let me know. Bye--Mpaa (talk) 22:23, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

I deleted the page you created and moved the old one instead. You can see that also all other previous changes are in the history now.--Mpaa (talk) 22:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you - I had no idea that was possible.--GreyHead (talk) 11:15, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

/*A Naval Biographical Dictionary*/

GreyHead, part of your statement to me is, "I don't know about alt+x as a way to format pages"

Smart Quotes are not supposed to be used on wikisource. The use of the keys alt+x removes them plus formats the entire page. All pages are supposed to be formatted. These are not my preferences, I had to learn these rules too. Having stated this, people still do use smart quotes, and perhaps those in authority just let them pass. If you ask an administrator like Beeswaxcandle, or another administrator, they will tell you. I do not know the "whys" of the rules I encounter but I follow as many of the strange rules and codes as possible. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 23:01, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

 

---

quote:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Style_guide#Formatting

6.Punctuation:

Remove extra spaces around punctuation, eg. colons, semicolons, periods (full stops), parentheses or commas, as well as incremental spacing found within justified text.

Use typewriter quotation marks (straight not curly).

end quote

—Maury (talk) 23:09, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Maury, Thanks for the note, I am aware of the Style Guide - also that it says at the head of the guide "These are not hard rules, and can be ignored where necessary." I did hunt around there looking for a reference to Alt-x or a requirement to format when validating but didn't find one. GreyHead (talk) 07:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you proofread a 200-500 page book and make no mistakes? Specifically without extra spaces on words such as example ; ? The use of the keys Alt+X removes all, or most all spaces. When a person uses smart quotes then the keys Alt and X cannot be employed because it turns smart quotes to typewriter quotes. So how would you format all pages properly with no extra spaces? This is why the alt and X keys are used. I do not know for positive but I think all smart quotes are changed to typewriter quotes at some point which is why it states, These are not hard rules, and can be ignored where necessary. I think it is merely a way not to offend those who use the smart quotes. Whether or not, what would you do to remove all unnecessary spaces on all pages through validations using Alt plus X ? However you do your book is fine with me. I was just validating for you and all works have to be validated. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 07:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

alt-x

"Well, actually the answer to is: Yes I can remove all the unnecessary spaces - I have some macros that do all that, plus correcting a whole lot of other OCR errors that I have noticed. I am just curious about what alt-x is and what it does, it would be helpful if you could point me to some place it is documented.GreyHead (talk) 08:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)"

It is a script written by user Hesperian. It was placed in my common.js As for documentation I do not know and never had to know. You can ask user Hesperian for the details of it. —Maury (talk) 05:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome regarding Hesperian's script. I should have remembered you had asked for documentation sooner but I didn't. I have also been validating many of your pages on the Poison Tree book. Question, are you interested in working on a book about India? I think I saw somewhere on your work an interest in India. I validate many books so it may have been elsewhere. —Maury (talk) 08:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

New Proposal Notification - Replacement of common main-space header template

Announcing the listing of a new formal proposal recently added to the Scriptorium community-discussion page, Proposals section, titled:

• Switch header template foundation from table-based to division-based

The proposal entails the replacement of the current Header template familiar to most with a structurally redesigned new Header template. Replacement is a needed first step in series of steps needed to properly address the long time deficiencies behind several issues as well as enhance our mobile device presence.

There should be no significant operational or visual differences between the existing and proposed Header templates under normal usage (i.e. Desktop view). The change is entirely structural -- moving away from the existing HTML all Table make-up to an all Div[ision] based one.

Please examine the testcases where the current template is compared to the proposed replacement. Don't forget to also check Mobile Mode from the testcases page -- which is where the differences between current header template & proposed header template will be hard to miss.

For those who are concerned over the possible impact replacement might have on specific works, you can test the replacement on your own by entering edit mode, substituting the header tag {{header with {{header/sandbox and then previewing the work with the change in place. Saving the page with the change in place should not be needed but if you opt to save the page instead of just previewing it, please remember to revert the change soon after your done inspecting the results.

Your questions or comments are welcomed. At the same time I personally urge participants to support this proposed change. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:04, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Please review: regarding reference errors

Hello. I happened to note your recent edit caused Page:A Naval Biographical Dictionary.djvu/224 (and consequently all of: A Naval Biographical Dictionary/Coghill, Josiah, A Naval Biographical Dictionary/Coghlan, Francis Rogers, A Naval Biographical Dictionary/Coham, Lewis Heysett and A Naval Biographical Dictionary/Colby, Thomas) to enter Category:Pages_with_reference_errors. I believe I have addressed this by means of these two edits but as you may note by the change comment on the latter I have grave doubts as to the basic technique.

Subsequent experimentation reveals that the value "cite" I used in {{smallrefs|group="cite"}} is in fact quite arbitrary, just so long as it is not a group name actually used on the page (so for example "errata" is self-evidently counter-productive). Using group="" simply re-establishes the error state; and removing {{smallrefs}} altogether—though the result is apparently error free—loses the "smaller" rendering of footnotes.

Are you able to throw any further light upon this situation? If so I'd appreciate it. On the other hand do you think my "fix" is a bit too piratic to leave as it currently stands? Your thoughts equally valued. AuFCL (talk) 02:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for picking this up - I hadn't noticed that there was any problem. I guess that a footnote to a footnote is always going to be tricky. I think your solution is fine. It's a shame that the main footnote loses the smallrefs styling but that's probably OK for this case.

I explored a bit more and found {{refn}} Template:Refn#Footnotes_with_citations, that seems to have worked OK, I also switched the order of the smallrefs so that the erratum comes after the footnote. Fingers crossed but I don't see the pages on the Reference Errors list. GreyHead (talk) 09:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Well you know the work best so I shall abide by your choices. As a quirk of history I wrote much of {{errata}} and thought (yes, overconfidence!) that it was immune to causing this sort of hang-up. Ha! It would appear that {{#tag:ref|…}} (as used in {{errata}} and {{refn}} can engulf <ref>s but not the other way around. It would have been nice if there was some way of making a {{smallrefs}} construct which excludes a group—but that would probably be even more confusing still. Thanks for your patience.

Oh and your solution did not disturb the Reference Errors list at all. AuFCL (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - I claim no expertise in templates, I just grope around in the dark on the help pages until I find something that appears to work. This morning I was just trying to get the appearance consistent. GreyHead (talk) 13:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

A Naval Biographical Dictionary — congrats

Congratulations on finishing this work. I feel that you should be adding it to Template:New texts. Job well done. @Charles Matthews: this might be something of interest to you with its completion. We should also be looking to get it into Wikidata. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:45, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I've added the NBD to Template:New texts; and I've posted a query on WikiData to see if there is an easy way to enter some of the data from a spreadsheet I have with all of the names and some related data. GreyHead (talk) 13:07, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi GreyHead,

I left you a note on d:User talk:GreyHead. Not sure if you get notified here about it. Please have look and comment there (or here or ..). Jura1 (talk) 09:33, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Adding the category is not particularly desirable for local effect, however, if it is needed, then let me do it with a bot, rather than you manually doing it. Botting is easy for such a task. Let me know. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:21, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

@Billinghurst:If it can be done by bot that is great, I've done a couple of hundred by hand - but that leaves a lot. The bot task would be to check all the pages on Special:WhatLinksHere/Index:A_Naval_Biographical_Dictionary.djvu and, if there is no "[[Category:" present to add [[Category:A Naval Biographical Dictionary]] [[Category:Royal Navy officers]]. Should I post that as a bot request?

I have now added this as a bot request. GreyHead (talk) 08:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Jura1 tells me that he has imported a first batch into WikiData but I'm not clear how . . . I'm very confused by the linkage between WikiSource and WikiData at the moment - a case of beginners bemusement. GreyHead (talk)

Wikidata parameter — all done automatically

Hi. There should be no requirement to manually add a wikidata parameter to the {{header}} template. Add interwiki link from an article's WD page should be sufficient to link back. We would not normally offlink to a different WD entry at this stage just linking directly to enWP. Hopefully we will have a better means to do these arbitary links into the future. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:16, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Hi, if it doesn't do any harm then it's simple enough to do - when I look for the WikiPedia page I click the WD link and copy the ID into my spreadsheet. The rest is automatic. I'm assuming that a bot can pick these up at some time in the future. I'm not sure what it takes to add an interwiki link :-( but would guess that takes more to do. GreyHead (talk) 09:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Looking more closely I can see that you've removed the links I had in the {{header}} so I will stop adding them; I've also edited my macro to use the {{default layout}} template. GreyHead (talk) 12:07, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Need to disambiguate John Marshall

Hi. We have two John Marshalls, so please for the naval biography could you adapt the header to

 | author = | override_author = by [[Author:John Marshall (1784-1837)|]]

Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:46, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Done, I've updated my header macro so that new pages have the override. GreyHead (talk) 19:51, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall sp2.djvu/8

I noticed that this page is not transcluded. While the names are reproducible by other means, I think that the errata has value to transcluded, even if we do it as a section. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:40, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: OK - I have transcluded all(?) the Contents and Errata. Still some formatting problems that I've failed to fix this morning. GreyHead (talk) 09:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

HON. HENRY JOHN ROUS. missing?

I am not seeing Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v3p1.djvu/8 transcluded, and on double checking the previous page I am not seeing this biographical article. Would you mind double checking and adding if required. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:55, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I fixed Henry John Rous and have tidied up the contents page to make that clearer which section is referred to. GreyHead (talk) 15:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

pages to be transcluded?

Just running some maintenance checks and I see that some proofread pages are not transcluded

• Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v4p1.djvu/150
• Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v4p1.djvu/151
• Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v4p1.djvu/152

Would you mind having a look at remedying as required,. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:41, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Fixed, thanks for the heads up.

Different vol. some more pages that need your love.

• Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v3p2.djvu/464
• Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v3p2.djvu/465
• Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v3p2.djvu/466
• Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v3p2.djvu/479

Thanks for looking. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:21, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: All fixed I think.

Index:Royal Naval Biography Marshall sp4.djvu

Hi, just checking the transclusions and see that pages /458 through /480 are not transcluded. They are appendix, and corrigenda. Am I able to leave that with you for your "sometime I can get back to it" list? Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:24, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I've now got to the end of Vol 4 Part 2 and am working my way back though slowly fixing cross-references and footnote links. I'll pickup the Addenda and Corrigenda on the way.

Congrats, another magnificent effort. Be generous with creating redirects in my opinion. You will have seen that I have plumped the index pages with the indices, and created redirects for the redlinks there, and done some tidying.

Working solo on an extensive work like that is hard yakka, and you should be incredibly proud of the achievement. Do a little strut around your lounge room at your achievement. [If you do strut and you do record it, please send me a copy of the link to it in Youtube ]. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Done I think - bar the strut, I may get to that over Xmas. GreyHead (talk) 09:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Index:Royal Naval Biography Marshall sp3.djvu

has the one page Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall sp3.djvu/436 needing a home. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:09, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Done GreyHead (talk) 09:23, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Royal Naval Biography volume and part numbers

I was looking at Belcher, Edward as I was developing the long form link template {{RNBio link}}

• "Belcher, Edward," in Royal Naval Biography, by John Marshall, London: John Marshall (1823–35)

and when I look at the biography and thought if we wanted to cite the volume/part of the biography that we had to dig down into the Index/Page: ns links to find that information. What would you think to using the notes section to adding that data? Noting that sometimes we can amend header templates to show that information as active wikilinks, though in this case, I don't think that is necessary.

If you are inclined to that, then I can look to run my bot through to add that detail. I was thinking something like: vol. N, part N (YYYY). Though happy for your suggestions.

Please {{ping}} me when you reply. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I've got to the end of my footnotes and am just doing bit os clean=up before moving on (to Protestant Exiles from France). I've added a note to the Edward Belcher page you linked to and that looks fine to me. If you can run a robot, please do - the info is all in the <pages> tag(s). GreyHead (talk) 09:14, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

anchors in RNBio lkpl

I See in special:diff/7490479 for {{RNBio lkpl}} usage that you have been adding links with hard anchors. Weirdly I had just amended that template, so you can now use page = ppp parameter if you choose. It had been set empty in that version. I will see if I can add some documentation. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:11, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I saw this when you posted and took a quick look but wasn't sure that it would help as I wanted to link to the 'People' articles e.g. Belcher, Edward rather than the page in the original text. Apologies if I misunderstood what it does. GreyHead (talk) 09:14, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi GreyHead,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikisource and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi GreyHead,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Page:Protestant Exiles from France Agnew vol 2.djvu/8

Hi. This page didn't get transcluded into the work. As it is a two volume work, I hesitate to just poke the work, so here flagging for your review. If it is not to be transcluded, would you be so kind to tag the body of that page with [[Category:not transcluded]]. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

A Naval Biographical Dictionary: typo

Hello, there is a typo "Pheonix" should b "Phoenix" in the section sourcing A Naval Biographical Dictionary/De Lisle, Henry, but I don't know how to correct it. --Mirokado (talk) 22:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

@Mirokado: Fixed, thank you GreyHead (talk) 11:04, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

We sent you an e-mail

Hello GreyHead,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)