User talk:Hazmat2

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Hello, Hazmat2, 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:

Carl Spitzweg 021-detail.jpg

You may be interested in participating in

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) 06:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


Do you think Wikipedia/Wikisource should have a Kindle (.mobi) putout?[edit]

(also posted on Wikipedia)

Hi! I am a Kindle user. I use Kindle in any my free time available because of its convince and feel. It uses e-ink, the look of which is very close to ordinary ink on paper. Sometimes, I use it to read some long Wikipedia article, but I have to convert it manually because the clumsy PDF format works poorly on my kindle, and I believe it's also works badly on other portable devices when compared to .mobi. If Wikimedia projects support this format natively, I think it will be very continent for Kindle and other e-readers users like me, and promote wiki content to be read by users in a further depth. What is your opinion?--The Master (talk) 15:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I would be for it but what about other devices that are not like "Kindle"? Kindle just came out with a superior version of its former self. BTW, I happen to like .PDF files a lot as well as .djvu files. —Maury (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

First, sorry my post is lengthy. I just got out of my ACLS certification class and am a little amped. I agree with the Kindle format idea and had just posted something about this yesterday. I definitely prefer my e-ink Kindle over any computer or tablet for most of my books, so I am a bit biased. With that said, the Kindle is very popular and is rather easy to output pages to. Compared to formatting for PDF it's a cinch. First, the Kindle can handle HTML directly with a simple renaming of the file extension to .txt (strange, I know). I'm pretty sure mine handles HTML files without changing the extension. More importantly, the mobi/azw file format is in XHTML. It's not some proprietary format that requires licensing or crazy conversion. It's why there are scripts to convert pages to it readily available. With that said, having an output option would be helpful as it would be used to only format the book content, such as the EPUB button does now. Kindle Format 8 is also out now which supports HTML5 and CSS, and is in use on the Fire and on the newer e-ink Kindles.
Of course, any of these formats can also be opened on any iOS or Android device as well; many of my classmates use the Kindle app despite not actually owning one because they like the app layout, library, store, etc. I'm rambling a bit here, but would like to say that while this fact is not a reason pro-Kindle it no longer goes against it. I read through some of the old pages going against Kindle formatting, but they were written some time ago and many things have changed.
The most difficult thing I can think of would be how the conversion script handles CSS and whether we separate out mobi and azw files (which have drifted apart in spec). I can put a little time each day into finding a good script and editing/testing it, if it's something we would be allowed to implement. My thought is that with Kindle being a market leader, Wikisource should eventually support it directly. The point is to get these books out there, so why tell a good number of users that they have to convert the files themselves beforehand? (This is exactly what the help pages currently say to do). Just my two cents... plus a few shillings. The Haz talk 20:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
My personal thoughts on Kindle or any other portable e-reader is that I don't care about any of them. I have worked here on for several years and I read and transcribe the books I want to read right here. It's a reading/transcription hobby and preserves books for the future generations rather than just reading for ones own self. Too, the .PDF Reader is free but I never use it since I have Adobe Acrobat Pro, newest version but that is for any work here too. It could, however, be used to read .PDF files. There are many options with this program. One can extract all image files if desired, or any number of pages, especially the garbage pages in some .PDF files and all watermarks. I once considered Kindle and others and concluded, "what for" -- just because others are buying the latest gadgets -- the newest tech stuff, that really is not needed? So why is it that you purchased Kindle? Isn't there enough to read here? Besides, it will be out-dated soon enough. Why waste money? —Maury (talk) 22:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
To respond to some of your comments/questions: I purchased a Kindle a few years ago specifically to read e-texts without the strain from backlit screens. I also find reading on screens to be annoying and distracting and e-ink didn't have the same effect. You use the phrase "latest gadgets" but the Kindle has been around almost seven years now—the mobi format, almost fourteen.
I stated, "my personal thoughts", so that all I have typed is what *I* like or dislike.

I certainly do understand the point of "strain" as in eyestrain. I requested an eyestrain background and text colors for our editors here which was done in .js. I am using it now. Regarding how long Kindle has been around my statement about the "latest gadgets" refers to "upgrades" for Kindle (which recently came out) and any other e-reader that comes out in the near future and we all know technology moves fast. There are constant "upgrades". As you yourself state, Kindle has been around almost seven years. How many "upgrades" is that? There is a constant cost. How much money has Kindle made with each "upgrade" totaled. Upgrading is often constant, perhaps every new "upgrade" for some people. I believe that is a lot of money spent for Kindle's constant growth. This is natural in the world of technology. "Personally, during all of that time I have not spent even a penny here on en.wikisource and have covered a lot of book reading.-wmm2

eReaders have become widely used and Kindle held a 55% market share (Publishers Weekly).

I stated, "Personally" which means I don't care what Kindle's market shares are.-wmm2

(It's also interesting to note that only 6% of people read books on a computer at that time.)

I've made my statement on what I personally use and I have spent nothing. For every "upgrade" or new e-reader, I therefore have saved that much money that e-readers cost others. I never stated that Kindle and other e-readers are not nice to have. *I* just have never had a need for any of them because of working here since about 2006.-wmm2

In the end, I'm not saying we should expend loads of energy on this, or that anyone disinterested should expend any. What I am suggesting is that we incorporate a small conversion script the same as is done for ePub.

I am not opposed to that but I "personally" have no need for it.-wmm2

The file would be created on demand the same way it is now. For now I'll probably look into adding this as a gadget or edit my own js file to call a script to convert just to see how well it could work.

Go for it, I would welcome it.-wmm2

On another note, one of your comments seems to imply that people shouldn't come to WS just to read books.

No, wrong, don't assume. Your key words of assumption are, "seems to imply".-wmm2

You wrote that what you do "preserves books for the future generations" and I agree wholeheartedly and do the same.

I made that personal statement because many of my youthful years I wanted certain books and could not get them other than Interlibrary loan and that often did not work as I desired. I take a deep happiness and a pride that WP & WS exist so that old and rare books can be replicated and archived digitally and in that I helped with a tiny portion of creating and saving for born and unborn generations who will not have to experience what I have experienced in my youth before Internet.--wmm2

Nonetheless, why shouldn't current generations be allowed to enjoy the texts found on here in any way they see fit, without a requirement to transcribe or edit?

Hey, I am all for it. I never stated otherwise. My statements were my "personal thoughts" and in no way am I opposed to what you have stated. If I were rest assured I would say so.-wmm2

Someone even wrote on the Help page

Not me. -wmm2

that "[r]eading is the main point of Wikisource."

Well, I will state that all technology is constantly being upgraded and refined and that includes statements made here, on wikipedia, and elsewhere. is constantly being refined and I do not refer just to reading or editing books here.-wmm2

To this end, offering more on-the-fly formats could be great for capturing new readers and contributors in the future.

I agree with that. Can you work it out? If so then I ask that you please do so. It would be a part of upgrading and refining.-wmm2

Anyway, I understand all too well the, ahem, addiction, of transcribing texts as you do and I would like to thank you for all the work you've done here.

addiction? What in life is there where masses of people love that is not and "addiction"? It is not so much of an addiction for me as it is an appreciation of being allowed to work here to make the world a little bit better. I further will state an assumption and that is that you drink coffee or tea and probably for the caffeine. Do you not consider that to be an "addiction"? I do not like coffee nor smoking, nor drinking any form of alcohol. Been there, done that decades ago, didn't like it, am not addicted to any of it. Are not any of those an "ahem", an addiction for you? I don't think that the love of things is necessarily an "addiction". --wmm2

It definitely doesn't go unnoticed. Without people that enjoy doing this work, Wikisource simply wouldn't exist.

I cannot speak for others here but I will state for myself that working here creating and refining and changing history itself is doing something worthy for myself and for others. I love books and always have loved the knowledge within them. They teach, they explain, the explore which I love to do both in the real and virtual world. I am retired and well off so I have the time to do what I like to do and I do. Any WP or WS is just a part of what I love to do with my life. It is peaceful here unlike what it was in combat in Vietnam. Construction is the opposite of destruction and I like that.

I would just like to expand the accessibility of the site a little.

Understood and I would like for you to be able to do that as well but not think of any of as an "addiction" in thought nor reality. Like I stated, "Go for it and keep on going for it. What do you have to lose in trying and to keep trying? I think it would make the world a better place. I really do. If I knew how I would join in with you. So I would like to ask questions and they are, "Now what are you going to do? Are you going to quit your ideas and dreams and leave with your head hanging low or are you going to keep on until either you or someone else succeeds with your present thoughts? More, I challenge you to do as you dream, and I say this with the hope that you will and that you succeed. Kindest regards, (wmm2) —Maury (talk) 06:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

The Haz talk 00:05, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the comments; it appears both of ours might have been taken at a slant to what was written but I won't delve into that other than to say I apologize for my incorrect assumption. But just so you know, I was not using addiction in a negative connotation. Quite the opposite. And I do drink coffee, but I mostly drink decaf, with fake creamer. I also just finished off my non-alcoholic beer. I wish I was joking. Feel free to laugh. ;-) I originally found Wikisource a couple years ago because I was looking for a good place to get some books for my new Kindle. And, I did. Anyway, thank you for the kind wishes and I'm sure I'll see you around.The Haz talk 07:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I have no problems with anything either of us have written. Besides, I have a thick skin ever since I helped create Internet decades ago at U.Va. and their unix system before webpages and browsers. I still have material on an ftp site after all of these decades. I do think it is important to make those initial comments you made because someone (me) replied. It is terrible to have good ideas and no feedback! I was not going to let that happen.

"Cause and effect" - that created somewhat of a brainstorming conversation that others will see and perhaps think seriously about. That can lead to what you suggested and perhaps a creation by someone of what you desire for Kindle. Not to do as you did and not to reply as I did, good or bad, misconceptions or not, would not spread those ideas of yours regarding Kindle. I would love for your ideas to come to fruition. My comments above this are a copy of what I posted openly. The idea is to let people keep seeing and hopefully reading our conversation. Perhaps it will bring what you and I both hope for which is much the same except I would like to have your idea applicable to all e-readers. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 07:52, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello again Hazmat2/ The saga continues. Look back at Wikisource Scriptorium where you asked your question and I replied.

Administrator Billinghurst has made a reply that I think you will like and he includes links. The following is a copy without the links:

quote: The matter of .mobi files has been discussed here a few times WS:S search. @Jeepday, JeepdaySock: has commented upon this before, and maybe they can bring us up to speed on their playtime. I wouldn't have thought that the issue was insurmountable as a file format for the book tool it is presumably something has to be done though I think that it was also an area of change. Note that Amazon has developed an .epub to .mobi converter called KindleGen (supports IDPF 1.0 and IDPF 2.0 epub format, according to the company). Should have been clearer. We do have an .epub version available for all our works, and that is manipulable. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:05, 4 February 2014 (UTC) End quote: Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Far from a saga, but thanks for posting this here. I'll look into that more later then. Thank you again, The Haz talk 20:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


Hey there, Haz. I've removed the Move to Commons template on this page for two reasons:

  1. The file cannot be moved to Commons until 2022, as the creator (Author:Alice Bolingbroke Woodward) died only in 1951, and
  2. The file is used on WS here: Page:The Pinafore Picture Book.djvu/70.

Hope you don't mind. Thanks,—Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 12:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Not at all! I had seen that and didn't realize I still posted it on one of the Pinafore pages. My apologies. Maybe next time I'll find all the images from Peter Pan and do the same. ;-) The Haz talk 20:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
That would be great. Not only would it be easier to do than Pinafore, which (as no doubt you'd have noticed) contains plenty of sheet music, it would also be interesting. If you decide to do it sometime, let me know as well. Regards,—Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 08:37, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
I was being a tad sarcastic as she had illustrated that as well. And sheet music doesn't scare me. Before medical school I went to conservatory and performed and taught for a few years. I just don't necessarily like the way it's notated on Wiki. I would rather see a separate MuseScore or LilyPond file with a plugin on the page than the inline Lilypond coding. We separate out images from books and then call them from the book so it makes sense to me to do the same for sheet music. Just a very off-topic opinion though. The Haz talk 14:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Well then, nevermind. But if you change your mind, let me know all the same. ;-P Regards,—Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 14:37, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Which Peter Pan edition did you have in mind? If I can find it, I'll gladly start it, getting all the images prepped and all. The Haz talk 14:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Also, not sure if you saw the discussion page, but the text is also available proofread without breaks at This should speed things along here. Anyway, I have to get back to studying for licensing exams. The Haz talk 18:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
I can only find one clean copy, and that one's (presumably) the 1915 edition: On the other hand, if you can't, then never(never) mind. ;-) And I was wrong: this one also has sheet music... Thanks,—Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 14:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Good scan. The zip file is 62MB so I should be able to easily get good images from that The Haz talk 15:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Uploaded the file and made a pagelist for it: Index:The Story of Peter Pan.djvu
I go for about 12 hours and when I come back, you, AuFCL and Kathleen have just about gobbled up the whole book among yourselves. Thanks a lot, and good luck from my side as well for your exams. Best regards,—Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 08:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Moving files to Commons[edit]

Thanks for your message, but in fact the only files I have uploaded here are files which would not be acceptable on Commons, because of Commons' more strict copyright requirement that works be public domain in the source country as well as the US. As such, they are tagged {{Do not move to Commons}}. - Htonl (talk) 21:34, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. The tagging was somewhat automated so sorry for the bother. The Haz talk 21:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


I think when most people here think "br" they think "<br/>". Therefore I think it is a bad idea for {{br}} to be a redirect to {{block right}}, and I would like to nuke it before it starts being used. Any thoughts on this? Hesperian 08:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of that. I was just trying to match it with {{bc}}. I have no opinion either way, so feel free. Thanks, The Haz talk 08:39, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Ta. Hesperian 09:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Would {{bri}} be a solution? --Zyephyrus (talk) 09:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

The Story of Peter Pan[edit]

Hello. My turn to have perhaps made a ghastly mistake. Would you please be so kind as to sanity-check Page:The Story of Peter Pan.djvu/29 and make sure the text-wrapping-around-image works for you? I am none too sure the overlaid-spans approach I used here works in all browsers, and I'm pretty sure Clockery uses the same one I do (mozilla/firefox). If the technique does not repulse too much, maybe other pages might survive a similar abuse? AuFCL (talk) 04:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Not a mistake. If you prefer to hit the other images similarly then go for it. It looks good. Browsers will handle it fine as the CSS you used has been around for some time now. It's a question of whether the ePub renderer will work. I'm personally more worried that paragraphs are probably going to be broken the way I did it (and with big plates in between as well). For the next few weeks I will be off and on as I am studying all day for licensing exams right now so I won't really have the time to go back and do much. I can always fix the transclusion if it needs it. I was just about to log off so have a good night/day. Thanks! The Haz talk 05:03, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. All the best in the exams. AuFCL (talk) 05:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


Hello. I am posing this question to both yourself and Clockery, on the basis of being the more involved parties.

I believe I have worked out an acceptable <score> rendering for Page:The Story of Peter Pan.djvu/18 (in point of detail that is a lie: I eventually got stuck and had to involve the kind assistance of User:Beeswaxcandle.) However, as the page has already been validated in the state of using Hazmat2's direct image, I want to broach the matter of your preferred way of proceeding; bearing in mind one of the alternatives may well be "leave the page exactly as it currently stands."

May I have your vote or suggestion on:

  1. Leaving the page alone,
  2. Substituting the new score, demoting the Page: to "Proofread" and having another party (hint: one of you two?) formally re-validate or fix it,
  3. Just replace the page (maintaining "validated" state) and hope it is O.K.
  4. Any better idea(s)?

N.B. Options 1 and 3 are "easy" choices, but (3) I feel rather bends the spirit (if not the word) of the validation rules. AuFCL (talk) 23:47, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

"Delete the entire book and give up." Oh wait, was that the idiot response? Of course, 2.
1. I put in the music image as a temporary placeholder, so please don't let me hold you back. 2. WS is a collaborative project, so, again, please don't let me hold you back. I'm of the same mindset as seen on other wiki projects: If it's not too major, make your edit first. If someone has a problem with it they'll let you know. Otherwise, you may spend days to forever waiting for a response when you actually have something valuable to contribute (such as in this case). 3. (Exception to 2) No full blown annotations on a clean copy (which also goes against WS policy), and if I take the time to put curved quotes throughout a book, please don't change it. ;-) (Doesn't apply here!)
Simply put, you have this great idea. True, WS users express more ownership over their own uploads, but that shouldn't stop collaboration!
I'm not sure if you have Sibelius or Finale, but for longer musical works, using the scan function might save time. There are other programs that do this as well. If you get it into MusicXML or MuseScore format, you can use the converter from LilyPond and do your final touches after that. Just an idea. The Haz talk 14:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the cover design.[edit]

Better late than never. Finally got around to copy your work to HERE. It's definitely better looking. The recurrent problem is that after an initial post, notifications no longer issued for continuing conversations and it's only now I came across your reply. GO3 taught me to use {{ping}} template and this activates an email notice. Thanks again.— Ineuw talk 19:54, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

{{ping}} is something I use commonly now, though I'm more used to using {{talkback}} if I'm answering someone on my userpage because of me being used to the old notification system. hehe. The Haz talk 21:32, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the help[edit]

Thanks for the formatting help, at Securing Personal E-mail Accounts, much appreciated, -- Cirt (talk) 17:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for adding! The Haz talk 17:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Medicine as a Profession for Women[edit]

Thanks for adding this valuable text to Wikisource.

Much appreciated,

-- Cirt (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I have to admit that I was surprised to find that Elizabeth Blackwell didn't even have an author page but her (much less famous) sister did. Looks like I'll have my work cut out for me. She has a few seminal works. The Haz talk 00:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi, {{heading}} already exists and does what you're doing with ch plus adding anchors. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Ugh. I searched for a heading template and completely missed that so wrote my basic one. Well, I appreciate the heads up. I'll search more thoroughly next time. Thanks, The Haz talk 19:15, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Any way to get larger than 1em for the margins besides adding an extra space? Also, it seems that most of the margin and padding settings don't work (ie. mt05, mt10, etc.)
I'm not sure where George and Adam are at with the various settings. They're not something I've wanted to use, so I haven't run into problems. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:53, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Note in passing: the "keyword is mt1, not mt10. Perhaps that is part of your problem? This works O.K.:



Sorry, typo. I was using mt1. Also, as demonstrated below, I meant with regard to the current text scheme (which seems to already have margins). If that's the case, margins overlap which would cause this. The Haz talk 00:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC)





Err... the Heading template really isn't ready for prime-time plus I don't think you're looking for applying a heading if margins are involved; a heading is typically just centered. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:01, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Not a problem. Thanks for letting me know. Beeswaxcandle suggested that I take a look at it so I did. Of note, I was referring to top and bottom margins anyway. I've been reading older texts that have chapter "but not chapter" headings that aren't necessarily on their own pages. I'm not too worried about formatting in the page space as the transclusion matters more but the transclusion might end up having more than one heading on a page so I wanted the top margin of 2em to be there as a buffer. I used straight up divs at first but then decided to create a simple template with common features in case anyone else wanted to do something similar. The Haz talk 01:13, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Well Heading is suppose to be the first step in "recovering" the H1 thru H6 elements with a bit of pre-set attributes along with it but it is a long, long way from being remotely considered "finished". I'd go with whatever you had in mind originally... but in all honesty - something like what you're describing (spacing and not so much a margin or padding) is typically accomplished with {{Dhr}}. Another template just for spacing is a bit much, imho. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:20, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks again for the info. I'm trying to get away from using {{dhr}} as it adds a non-breaking space. Anyway, I'm off to bed. Goodnight, The Haz talk 03:16, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


Hi Hazmat!

thanx for your remark concerning the interwiki link at Author:Joseph Dalton Hooker. I made the edit in reaction to what user:Captain Nemo had done. He removed many empty links to commons, etc, but also a link that still had content. He left the link to wikipedia, that's were I misunderstood this. Now I understand that this is all handled via Wikidata. Does this mean that the wikipedia link can also be removed? Like for instance at Author:William_Irvine_(1840-1911)? .... Yes.... I tried it and it works. Then you should perhaps inform Captain Nemo about this. So that he can remove not only the empty links and the commons-links, but also the wikipedia-links. As you perhaps understand I'm not "technical" at all, but I'm really happy to learn these kind of things. Greetz, Dick Bos (talk) 10:25, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Not a problem. In all seriousness, there are bigger fish to fry. Captain Nemo doesn't often respond to messages so when I saw the vandalism and then what happened before I just wanted to drop a note. Wikidata was created for these interwiki links so I think it's great that we use them. For instance, {{Authority control}} pulls all its data from Wikidata now as well on multiple projects including Wikisource. Therefore, if we have the correct data in WD (which is relatively easy to use) then we don't need to copy the data to a bunch of places. Now if only authority control worked like this on Commons! Anyway, I'll drop Captain Nemo a message. The Haz talk 14:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

What is possible and what is not[edit]

Hope you don't mind I took this "private" rather than follow your last on Scriptorium...

For openers, the way I've come to accept things is that we here at Wikisource are "slaves" to three primary masters;

  1. to the Mediawiki 'mark-up', parser and Parsoid
  2. to development & focus geared towards Wikipedia's mission and goals first & foremost
  3. to our own history, policy and practices (or the lack thereof)

The first point is something all the wiki-family projects "deal with" (maybe "cope with"?) to one degree or another. It is something pretty much out of our control or influence. The second point is something that can be managed and/or manipulated as the need arises if enough contributors band together for those crucial instances to revolt/rejoice 'as one, clear and consistent voice.' The last point has become the biggest hurdle of them all and frequently gets little to no attention (if it ever did).

So unless something really screws with point one, goes against point two or is deemed a 'sacred cow' in point three... almost anything is possible to accomplish or implement but doing so requires more expertise than I can muster on my own more often than not. ANYTHING that you might be able to add to this aim - even acting as soundboard - would help move things along. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:09, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I definitely don't mind, and thanks for the info. As an aside, I'm writing up a research paper right now and hitting a bunch of similar hurdles on data collection. Every hospital in the system has patient data go to one giant database, but every hospital uses different electronic medical records. Therefore, what should be easy (querying a single database) it quite the opposite when there can be multiple entries for a single event, and timestamps aren't even correct! Anyway, I'll have some time in the next few weeks but then will be quite busy again for a few years. I can definitely be a voice and am always willing to throw in CSS here and there. The Haz talk 02:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

A proposal for consistency[edit]

Thanks for your work on The Abbey of Bliss. However, for consistency, the title would conform to other two versions if renamed as given in the Anandamath page. If actual titles are to be followed, then the Aurobindo version needs to be named "Anandamath" only (it didn't have a separate English title) and then what would happen with the disambiguation/versions page? Keeping the original name as part of the title would quickly bring it up in Google search also. Being very famous under the original name, people would google it more under that name. I have seen that in the file description, you described the work as 5th edition. Lipner also mistook it as such, in the introduction of his 2005 translation, but it is not so. It is the 1st edition translation of the 5th edition original (the last edition published in the original author's lifetime). The various prefaces to different editions are from the original. Best, Hrishikes (talk) 07:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

'Twas done out of habit. Moved. The Haz talk 17:46, 19 April 2015 (UTC)


Hazmat2: My sincere apologies for not using SIC on that misspelling but at least I got your images and pages marked "validated". Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 21:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@William Maury Morris II: Please don't think twice about it! The Haz talk 21:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
And of course, thank you as well. The Haz talk 21:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hazmat2: Thank you for your validations today on "Memoirs of a Huguenot Family". As a return favor I validated many pages of your project today and I plan on getting back to the rest so we together can finish these projects. —Maury (talk) 19:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
No problem, though I can't promise much due to a change in my work schedule. The Haz talk 21:42, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done validating Index:Address on the Medical Education of Women (1864) - Blackwell.djvu. —Maury (talk) 20:46, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! The Haz talk 20:55, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

l ... l ... l ...[edit]

Index:American Medical Biographies - Kellly, Burrage.djvu Sounds like a "d'oh" that I would do!

I have just made an announcement to Scriptorium about my starting Wikisource:WikiProject Biographical dictionaries and this work would seem to sit within that scope. Feel free to add it, and other relevant works of which you are aware, as the project starts to take shape. As an another experienced user here, any feedback that you have would be welcomed. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good, though you've probably noticed that I'm off and on as my schedule allows at this moment. Also, I think your reference is to Wikisource:WikiProject Biographical dictionaries/A cyclopedia of American medical biography which is the 1912 version of American Medical Biographies. The 1920 version contains all the same entries, with some corrections, plus a boatload more.
Of note, America here refers to North America, not just USA, so I made a minor correction.
In the future, I might also start working on File:Physicians and Surgeons of America.djvu which has portraits associated with each entry, so might even be more within the lines of WS and WP. Haz talk 12:17, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Updated scripts[edit]

Hello Hazmat2. I updated your proofreading scripts to the latest version from Wikisource:TemplateScript. This adds a new Special:TemplateScript page to configure your scripts, and enables compatibility with upcoming features. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 03:21, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Great. Thanks! Haz talk 04:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

A History of the University of Pennsylvania from Its Foundation to A. D. 1770[edit]

Am happy to proofread or validate if you do the other, though it is annoying the line returns have been removed. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 00:42, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:AMB1920 link[edit]

Can we look to migrate this template to utilise Template:Authority/link? I am happy to migrate if that is easier. To also note that we have template:authority/lkpl for short links. I will also try to look at the others in use to see if we can consolidate. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:05, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

If it's not too much work, please feel free to forge ahead with the change. I had a few days off and did some work here but starting tomorrow I might be gone again for a few weeks. Haz talk 03:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Not an issue at all. Always happy to do them, though generally offer first as some like the opportunity. I will catch up with at some point about contributors as I am doing some thinking and work in that holistic space for our compiled works. Later though!!! — billinghurst sDrewth 06:26, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
First done. Note that parameters "link" and "$1" work for article name, and "contributor", "author" and "$2" for the writer. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

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

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

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey[edit]

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

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

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