User talk:Ineuw

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Adding empty pages[edit]

Hi. I am not sure about the advantage of founding empty pages, it seems really redundant. There could be some minor advantage if there was some useful OCR layer, but I rarely see such ones: the OCR button usually produces much better text than the original OCR layers. However, the quality of such text is still too poor, and so I personally prefer adding the text only after it has been proofread. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 16:42, 30 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jan.Kamenicek: Having the text itself is not the issue, but the TOC Style used may not work if one references a non existent page. See my comments on your Scriptorium/Help post.— Ineuw talk 16:46, 30 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, I see, sorry. Unfortunately, it seems it did not help :-( --Jan Kameníček (talk) 16:56, 30 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

crosswiki vandalism[edit]

Please delete User talk:WikiBayer and User talk:Rodhullandemu and protect for a long time See enwikinews commons, Wikiversity, Wikispecies anod other projects.(SWMT)--WikiBayer (talk) 23:31, 24 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This should be posted at the Wikisource:Administrators' noticeboard.Ineuw (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NopInserter tweaks[edit]

In trying to figure out where that error message in your console might come from I went a little overboard…

I've taken your custom version of NopInserter and re-sync'ed with changes to the site-wide version. And in the process I added support for a few user-configurable behaviours. The defaults are as for the site-wide version, but when you load it you can set options as follows to get the behaviour in your custom version:

mw.config.set('userjs-nopinserter', {
	dontConfirmNopAddition: true,
	notificationStyle: "highlight",
	notificationTimeout: 1000


It also fixes the bug that prevented the site-wide gadget from actually showing the outline based highlight it was supposed to. And for good measure I added support for a notificationStyle using mediawiki's bubble notifications (set notificationStyle: "message" to try it out). The weird double-negative construction of "dontConfirmNopAddition" is just because I've preserved the default behaviour of the site-wide gadget.

It probably won't fix the issues you were having (but it actually might, due to the re-sync), but if this works for you then we can update the site-wide gadget and you won't have to maintain a custom version any more. Give it a try when you have a chance? --Xover (talk) 18:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Xover: Apologize for the late reply, but had to understand the modifications, because I am

very weak with javascript and it's been a long time since I studied the scripts.

Also, I've have no problem with the edit layout any more. I suspect it was messed up because of my attempts to force the CharInsert "User" to be on top of the dropdown list. Again my thanks for you inestimable help. Ineuw (talk) 16:14, 14 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good to hear your problems cleared up! And never worry about response time: my own is highly unpredictable at times, so I never have any particular expectations of others'. Please let me know whether the modified version works ok for you (no hurry, whenever you get a feel for it), and I'll flag down an interface admin somewhere to update the site-wide gadget. --Xover (talk) 17:14, 14 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have you had a chance to develop a feel for this? Any problems or issues? If you're happy with it I'll go ahead and request someone update the site-wide gadget so everyne can use it (and enable/disable it with a nice interface in the Preferences). --Xover (talk) 06:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Xover: Sorry for not looking after this earlier. Tested it now and it works well. — Ineuw (talk) 06:53, 25 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vol 1 History of Mexico by H H Bancroft your naming[edit]

I cannot seriously believe that this is a name that you have given to a main namespace work. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:33, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Believe it. — Ineuw (talk) 05:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please tell me how that reflects the name of the work as published. Please tell me how it matches the work as cited. Please tell me how it matches the work as catalogued by institutes. Please tell me how that will be found by our search engines. I think that you are deviating from a standard approach, and I again implore you to not utilise this individualistic approach. Please have respect for the work as published and put it under its published name. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:11, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Researched the titles on Wikisource which already included the words in the selected titles and wanted to distinguish it from the existing ones. Then, spent a lot of time time sorting out the idiosyncratic organization of the author's works, and that is why I named it accordingly. — Ineuw (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We have quite clear guidance on this, and multiple examples of works done that need to be disambiguated, and the name should be "History of Mexico (Bancroft)". Starting a work with the name "Vol ..." is utterly hopeless, going outside of our disambiguation guidance is troublesome for someone who has been here so long. I don't even know why this conversation has to be had. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:32, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's the best I could do at the time. Is a redirect sufficient to correct it? — Ineuw (talk) 21:59, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I cannot seriously believe that we're having discussions about titles that start with "I cannot seriously believe..." :) And in my humble opinion, "it was the best I could do at the time" is always a perfectly acceptable reason for doing something a little odd on a wiki, where things are easy to fix or adjust.
I brought this up a while back on the Scriptorium, and while I failed to ping you, I thought Slowking took care of that. I agree with Billinghurst that it should be changed (just not with the urgency). My suggestion would be: History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 1 etc. If that's an acceptable approach, and if I can be of assistance in the logistics, I'm happy to help out. -Pete (talk) 06:48, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, I totally agree -- Bancroft's works, and the various forms in which they were published, absolutely do not lend themselves to easy titling on Wikisource! -Pete (talk) 06:50, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I had several issues with the naming before I assigned the names.
  1. Locating the volumes. IA has a number of copies of the various volumes, but most of them are destroyed by Google.
  2. The idiosyncratic nesting of volumes without indicating the title of the parent volume.
  3. Could not find his bibliography which would indicate the organization of his volumes with the sub-volumes and titles.
  4. The lack or records have been because the publishing house, was his or his family's?
  5. Wanted to separate from all the other Mexico History books. — Ineuw (talk) 10:13, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes. I think a volume could something be, simultaneously:
  • Volume 1 of the History of Mexico (5 volumes)
  • Volume 2 of the History of the Pacific Slope of North America (34 volumes)
  • Volume 6 of the Works of H. H. Bancroft (39 volumes)
Then on top of that, in some editions it's the History of Mexico while in others it's The Conquest of Mexico, and in some editions the numbering is different because two volumes were published as one, etc. It's maddening, and that's without even getting into the controversy around how few of the "works of Bancroft" were actually authored by Bancroft! Pete (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


@Billinghurst, @Peteforsyth:I would rather change the titles to the style of History of Mexico Vol nnn by H H Bancroft . . . etc. The questions are:

  1. . I would request in the quarry, (since this cannot be done by me), if it's possible to replace the old titles in all namespaces to the agreed on new titles?
  2. . Depending on the answer to the above, I have volumes 5 and 6 to upload, but will wait until the titles are resolved. — Ineuw (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To address one point of yours, I think it is actually quite rare that the filename matches Wikisource's title for the work. Wikisource has its policy, and Commons has its own naming policies (which are very loose, and not at all systematic). I don't think there's any practical problem at all with having a filename that's almost entirely unrelated to the work name (and if it is a problem, it's a problem shared by, I think, the vast majority of transcribed works on Wikisource). So with that in mind, my suggestion of History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume X stands...even for the volumes with slightly different titles, like "Conquest of Mexico". We could always make The Conquest of Mexico (Bancroft) as a redirect to History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 1. I think Wikisource guidelines on this are fairly clear, and fairly sensible; I don't see any need to go back and rename the files (which would be a big hassle for anybody, including any users of the site who have bookmarked or linked existing locations). -Pete (talk) 23:52, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We can't mix "Conquest of Mexico" with the "History of Mexico". "Conquest of Mexico" is a distinct title outside the "History of Mexico" series. The same applies to "Native Races" which also contains Maya and Aztec info. What HHB did is that he republished portions of his works with some additions with different titles. I read somewhere that at times 40 researchers worked for him. — Ineuw (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think you are incorrect on this point -- the one @Billinghurst: linked in the section header here is called "Conquest of Mexico" on its title page, and identifies itself as Volume 1. According to its TOC, it runs through the year 1521. 1521 is also where "History of Mexico" Volume 2 picks up. I think they are the same series, even if they have different titles on their title pages. Is there a "History of Mexico" Volume 1 that is distinct from "Conquest of Mexico" Volume 1? I think not, but of course I could be mistaken. (I agree with you regarding the Native Races series, though.) -Pete (talk) 21:24, 11 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Peteforsyth: Sorry for the late reply. I was not in error since they are the exactly same, page for page. At the time of the upload, I selected the cleaner looking version and should have noted it on the Index and the main namespace title page. But then promptly forgot about it. Here are the links to the two versions:
History of Mexico Volume 1
Conquest of Mexico Volume 1

— Ineuw (talk) 03:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm, I am confused. Above, you said " "Conquest of Mexico" is a distinct title outside the "History of Mexico" series." But I don't think that's accurate. Now, I think you are saying something different -- and I agree with what you are saying now: that the same work was called "Conquest of Mexico Volume 1" in one edition, and "History of Mexico Volume 1" in another. Correct?
If that's the case, I would say the best way to approach it is to title the pages like this:
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 1
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 2
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 3
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 4
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 5
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 6
... and then create redirects where necessary, such as Conquest of Mexico and Conquest of Mexico/Volume 1. I don't know what's a better alternative, except maybe to make the Vol. 1 into Conquest of Mexico/Volume 1 and then making a redirect in the other direction. -Pete (talk) 04:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes I confused you because of the list Hubert Howe Bancroft copied from Wikipedia (where it appears listed both ways). My assumption is that the "History of Mexico Volume 1" was published first in 1883, and then reprinted and republished under the "Conquest of Mexico Volume 1" title in 1886 for commercial reasons. — Ineuw (talk)
OK. So, is the naming scheme I described above OK with you? -Pete (talk) 19:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Peteforsyth: Sorry for the delay. Life needed attending to.
Many thanks for your help. Please go ahead with any name you think is right, as long as it meets WS naming conventions for the main namespace. Please note the volumes' status following each title.
* History of Mexico (Bancroft) only as the disambiguation page
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 1 will consider my options regarding the 1883 or the 1886 copy.
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 2 index being proofread
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 3 index proofread
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 4 index proofread
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 5 not yet uploaded
* History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 6 not yet uploaded
As for the Categories on the commons, I will change them according to your volume names. — Ineuw (talk) 23:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, I thought you were talking about file names on Commons. Category names, that makes more sense. I tried to start this, but I ran into trouble -- for some reason, when I move the base page, it doesn't give me a checkbox offering to move the subpages. So, the project is only partially complete. Maybe @Billinghurst: can help? I moved the base page and the top page for Volume 1. History of Mexico (Bancroft) and History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 1. -Pete (talk) 00:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I create a category by the title + the word (book) or (books). Then upload the djvu and images into that "container". The current categories are wrong because they are named Vol 1, 2 etc..., but cannot change them until you create the djvu file name.

Are the Index .djvu name, the page names and the main namespace pages going to be modified by SQL? — Ineuw (talk) 00:56, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of relevant works of H H Bancroft[edit]

Extracted this list from Internet Archive but the titles do not identify contents, or the wrong contents. — Ineuw (talk) 23:40, 8 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Changes required for the four History of Mexico (Bancroft) volumes[edit]

@Peteforsyth: Just to keep you updated. These are the changes need to be made.

I can manage the necessary changes on the Commons which should be the first step. The .djvu file names as the sources for the link to Wikisource and then their "container" categories.

The Wikisource changes are best to be done with an SQL at the Quarry. Already posted a request if it can be done and if there is someone who would undertake it. SQL is very very fast. — Ineuw (talk) 05:26, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikimedia Commons
File:Vol_1_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO File:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_1.djvu
File:Vol_2_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO File:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_2.djvu
File:Vol_3_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO File:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_3.djvu
File:Vol_4_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO File:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_4.djvu

Category:Vol_1_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft_(book) TO Category:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_1_(book)
Category:Vol_2_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft_(book) TO Category:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_2_(book)
Category:Vol_3_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft_(book) TO Category:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_3_(book)
Category:Vol_4_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft_(book) TO Category:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_4_(book)

Index:Vol_1_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Index:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_1.djvu
Index:Vol_2_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Index:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_2.djvu
Index:Vol_3_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Index:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_3.djvu
Index:Vol_4_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Index:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_4.djvu

Page:Vol_1_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Page:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_1.djvu 830_pages_
Page:Vol_2_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Page:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_2.djvu 814_pages
Page:Vol_3_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Page:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_3.djvu 804_pages
Page:Vol_4_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu TO Page:History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_4.djvu 848_pages

Vol_1_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft TO History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)/Volume_1
Vol_2_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft TO History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)/Volume_2
Vol_3_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft TO History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)/Volume_3
Vol_4_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft TO History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)/Volume_4

Chapter_1 TO 34_change_<pages_index="Vol_1_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu" TO <pages_index="History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_1.djvu"
Chapter_1 TO 34_change_<pages_index="Vol_2_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu" TO <pages_index="History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_2.djvu"_
Chapter_1 TO 34_change_<pages_index="Vol_3_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu" TO <pages_index="History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_3.djvu"_
Chapter_1 TO 33_change_<pages_index="Vol_4_History_of_Mexico_by_H_H_Bancroft.djvu" TO <pages_index="History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)-Volume_4.djvu"

— Ineuw (talk) 05:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC) Updated list. — Ineuw (talk) 21:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for breaking this all down.
I agree with the changes you describe for Wikisource. I regret forging ahead with Volume 1 - from past experience, I thought it would be possible to make all sub-pages move along with the main History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 1 page, but for some reason I'm not sure of, that option wasn't there.
I do not understand the needs for Commons, or the related needs to change titles in the Wikisource Index: namespace. I have worked on numerous works with file titles on Commons that are entirely unrelated to the names in Wikisource main space. I don't see how that is a problem, and it's never really occurred to me to do anything to change it. I'd be interested to understand your thinking on this, but it's not critical that I understand. Feel free to explain if you like, though.
I will make sure to find somebody who can help me clean up the mess I created with Volume 1 in the coming days. -Pete (talk) 05:55, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Logic dictates that since the Wikisource .djvu file originates on the Commons, it should be the first change in the chain of changes. As I see it, I must rename the .djvu file, then change the commons Category name, and then change the image files' category using a bot which I hope exists. Done numerous moves/changes manually on the Commons, so I know what has to be done. — Ineuw (talk) 06:05, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Don't worry about the main namespace Volume 1. This gave me the name needed to start the move on the commons first. Main namespace pages should be left last. — Ineuw (talk) 07:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, I'm happy to let you work in whatever order you like. It seems to me like you're creating a lot of extra work for yourself by changing the filename, and I'm not sure what practical disadvantage there is in having the DJVU file and the Wikisource pages carry different names...but there's certainly no harm in aligning them, either, so carry on. Thanks for talking it through this far, I'm glad to find somebody else interested in Bancroft's work! -Pete (talk) 07:56, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Peteforsyth: I am glad that you are happy. :-) I am not so. The transfer failed because of my mistake of overlooking the forward slash in the .djvu filename. This was automatically replaced with a hyphen.
Then, the Wikisource bot failed as well. This also means that my rationale failed because of ignorance about the data structure hierarchy (in which direction the changes cascade and which don't). I don't believe that there is a single move process which replaces all the old relationships with new ones.
So, I requested advice and help at Quarry talk page. Your thoughts? I am in no hurry. For me, it's a learning experience and have plenty of other work to choose from, until this is resolved. — Ineuw (talk) 22:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2019-08-14 file move continued[edit]

Well, sorry you are not happy! I'm not familiar with Quarry, but it looks like an interesting initiative. Glad to learn more.
I'll keep making the same point, I suppose -- I think this all would work smoothly if we simply didn't bother with changing the files on Commons. I don't see a downside to that, but the brokenness you're dealing now seems like a pretty major downside. (I realize I complicated it with my initial move, but if we simply had an administrator make the page moves on Wikisource, they could use the "move all subpages as well" checkbox, and it would just be smooth and easy.) -Pete (talk) 22:15, 14 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Peteforsyth: You messed up nothing. The commons copy needed to be renamed to Conquest of Mexico and moved out of History folder. It is now in it's own Category in commons:Category:The_Conquest_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)_Volume_1_(book).
The new uploaded version is the real 1882 History copy with it's pages matching the Wikisource layout page by page. Before uploading this 1882 version file I made sure that the two were identical. And here is the list of the old & new pages to be, extracted using the Quarry User:Ineuw/Sandbox3. — Ineuw (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, I see -- you want to use the 1882 edition instead of the 1886. That's fine with me, but if they are identical (or even, close to identical) we would do well to move Page:Vol 1 History of Mexico by H H Bancroft.djvu/N to Page:History of Mexico (Bancroft)-Volume 1.djvu/N for all (existent) values of N. Otherwise, we will be throwing away hundreds of proofread pages, to start from scratch. @Beeswaxcandle: are you able to help with that? -Pete (talk) 00:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I didn't want someone to look at the word "Conquest" when the page name is "History". As for the old pages, I intend to move them with a bot or the quarry. The quarry prefers a bot. I plan to ask User:mpaa. Also, there are still some manual changes which is OK by me. — Ineuw (talk) 00:36, 15 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. Yes, that'll eliminate some possible confusion down the road. I will watch and learn, seems you have things under control. Sorry to call you in unnecessarily, @Beeswaxcandle:. -Pete (talk) 00:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problems. I would have advised a bot anyway because I'm not a bot user and would have been moving pages manually. I don't mind doing that for a few pages (< 30), but ... Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am still hoping to get someone to do it at the quarry. It would take 1-2 minutes. — Ineuw (talk) 08:47, 15 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not terminating tables with an additional table row[edit]

Hi. Would you mind updating your practice to not terminate tables on a page with a table row |-, it is unnecessary coding to insert an extra table row, and when done on a continuing table actually breaks the page numbering display. I have mentioned this numerous times in Scriptorium, and have long updated the help pages, so it would be really helpful to get you to change your practice. Thanks.

An example of your coding and my fix in the succeeding edit.

billinghurst sDrewth 04:46, 16 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Billinghurst: I assume that this message is to me and not User:Peteforsyth. If you are referring the last row |- above the footer? if so, consider it done. Also, that by "breaking the page numbering," are you referring to the page numbers along the transclusion in the main namespace? Please confirm.

Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit summary[edit]

Hi. Thank you for updating the Validation of the Month page. I just want to ask if you could fill the edit summary properly when editting a page. Looking at the list of changes, I am not able to find out what was changed and when unless I open each individual edit. Summaries like "minor change", "minor" or even "m" are not very helpful. Thanks very much. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 18:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jan.Kamenicek:No problem. — Ineuw (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi, I noticed you were bilingual and hoped you could spend a bit of time helping to trim down the 38 entries at Category:Pages with missing Hebrew characters, thanks! Lemuritus (talk) 05:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help me[edit]

Thank you for helping in the creation of Index pages of this book: A History of the Military Transactions of the British Nation in Indostan, Volume 2. Now the First Volume of this book is also completed. Can you again help me in the creation of the Index: A History of the Military Transactions of the British Nation in Indostan, Volume 1--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:24, 27 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rajasekhar1961: Inserted the volume 1 title page, and there is no reason for you to email me eight times. We don't live in the same time zone. So please practice some self control. — Ineuw (talk) 16:08, 27 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, if I have troubled you frequently. I have not mailed you at all. I have only requested you in your Wiki talk page here. The mails might be system generated. Once again feeling sorry, if I have disturbed you.--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem, something went wrong with the email system and repeated sending your message eight times. Just forget it. I will post the issue in phabricator. — Ineuw (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


...on completing yet another volume of Bancroft's massive History of Mexico series. Just two more to go until they're all proofread! I'll keep pitching in from time to time. -Pete (talk) 22:05, 21 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Peteforsyth: Thanks. I will keep at it, with some side trips for an odd proofread or two. — Ineuw (talk) 23:51, 21 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Recently a new editor, Ernst76 (talkcontribs) has been pitching in quite a bit on History of Oregon (Bancroft). Still an uphill battle to get all thirty-something volumes done, but nice to have several of these underway at once! -Pete (talk) 00:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow another 800 page document. Already downloaded from AI History of the Pacific states but must check it first. — Ineuw (talk) 00:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, it's amazing the volume that came out of Bancroft's project. This one was written by a different author, but even so. This one goes a little more quickly...not as many accents and Spanish words to deal with (which slow down this mostly-not-a-Spanish-speaker). -Pete (talk) 19:10, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He had dozens of researchers working for him, nevertheless he a great job. — Ineuw (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
P.S: Just noticed that she also wrote the book I downloaded. — Ineuw (talk) 20:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
According to what I've read she was the most accomplished historian and author of his researchers, and probably had the strongest claim of authorship, over half dozen or so of the volumes. Which one have you downloaded? There are now three of us working on History of Oregon Vol. 1, and we're about halfway done: Index:History of Oregon volume 1.djvu It would be great if you're able to proofread a few pages too! I work on the Hist. of Mexico pages from time to time, but I'm not very good with Spanish, so it's very slow going, what with the accents and unfamiliar spellings. -Pete (talk) 18:58, 21 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I use the Google OCR which has some quirks but is excellent for accented characters. It reproduces every accent of the Latin languages, and this saves a lot of time. The labour is the italicizing of the references. — Ineuw (talk) 01:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You mention OCR. In your edit summary you mention OCR. I think the 'correction' thingy is not operating correctly, as in that edit I already see:
"form" -> "formn"
"—" -> "-" many many times
"many" -> "nmany"
"Its introduction in Mexican" disappears
" 41 " -> ' " ' (that is, a footnote number was replaced by a double-quote
and all the footnote numbers are getting smashed
"come" -> "cone"
"pamphlet" -> "painphlet"
"commended" -> "comniended"
"He became an old man in exile. " disappears
and the footnotes themselves are smashed up
Whatever you are doing, stop, revert, and write up the procedure as a warning *not* to trust it! Grossly distorting the text to get a few accented characters is not worth it. How many pages have been smashed like this? Shenme (talk) 03:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh dear, "flights" to "fliglits"? There's a lot of inspection and cleanup to do for you because of 'ocr'. Shenme (talk) 03:42, 10 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Ineuw, I’m back after a bit of a hiatus and am working on a table. I frequently refer to the above page. I noticed you worked on it last year and am hoping you can help me: I see no reference to the font shortcuts. Have these been edited out? I’ve forgotten the italics shortcut. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 05:29, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Zoeannl: Hi, and welcome back. Gladly help. Nothing was removed, jut added. Are you looking for font-sizes? font-styles? font-family? — Ineuw (talk) 18:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zoeannl: Did you find what you needed? — Ineuw (talk) 18:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was looking for the shortcuts for italics and normal (for when the table is set to italics). I remember sc for small caps but couldn’t see it. So font-styles? Having finally got a new computer, I’m working long hours during the lockdown so my attendance at WS is still occasional atm. Proofreading is a nice break. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 04:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Everything is there and I am working on an additional table to display all the existing style codes. Some styles have several codes.Ineuw (talk) 08:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Could you tell me the italics code and normal code to use for this page, please? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 00:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zoeannl: Apologies, I left the the descriptions out the last time I worked on the table.— Ineuw (talk) 02:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Site style[edit]

I don't understand your lack of aligning to site style. We have been recommending against using roman numerals for chapters for years, asking people to align to arabic numerals; we have left old works in place, though still have a plan to migrate them. We similarly have been saying that tables of contents need to be in the root page of the work so that they are able to be print exported. What is wrong with site style, or what is wrong with our instructions? — billinghurst sDrewth 15:32, 20 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, please do not link ToC page numbers through to the Page: namespace. If you have to link the numbers, please put them through to the chapters in the main namespace, we don't want people clicking through to that namespace unless they purposefully are wanting to. Left hand marginal numbers are meant to be the links through to the Page: ns. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:40, 20 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Index:A Prisoner of the Khaleefa[edit]

Hi, Just gone into Special:LonelyPages and found a large number of pages in the form Page:A Prisoner of the Khalifa.djvu/xx. These got left behind when you moved the File and Index to the correct spelling. What is your intention with the old pages? Can we nuke them? Also, why on earth are you forcing the serif font on the reader? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:11, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beeswaxcandle: Please delete them, and thanks for the help.— Ineuw (talk) 07:46, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Came here to point to the same work, which I stumbled across while playing with Inductive's new toy. I proofed the introduction today, but would certainly welcome somebody (say, the original uploader) working back from the end and we meet in the middle :P Peace.salam.shalom (talk) 22:09, 27 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Table of contents needs to be on root page[edit]

Hi. Please would you be able to move the ToC from a subpage to the root page of An Index of Prohibited Books (1840). For our works to be able to be successfully exported to other digital formats, the ToC needs to be on the root page. We also need to remember that we are not in paper format, and typeset our works for the digital world. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:35, 17 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Billinghurst: Finally found and understood your comment about the TOC on the root page. I pasted it on this page but didn't use it in the main namespace. Is it acceptable to use a blank page for the TOC? Never asked before, but did it on previous occasion.— Ineuw (talk) 15:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Broken redirect[edit]

Hey Ineuw,

The broken redirect at User:Ineuw/common.js/Gadget-NopInserter.js is showing up in maintenance reports, but since it's CSS/JS in User:-space I can't delete it. Can you take care of it? --Xover (talk) 14:15, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted.— Ineuw (talk) 14:50, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Non-standard pagelists causing problems[edit]

Hi, I fixed the pagelist for Index:History of Woman Suffrage Volume 5.djvu, which I believe was causing your display problem. I then got curious. I see that from about August 2020 you started using non-standard pagelists. By "non-standard" I mean that numbered pages have been assigned codes that are not the page number. The statements at Help:Index pages#Page are clear on this and have been in place since December 2012. By using a code that is not the page number you are preventing standardised wikilinking to those pages. Remember that what is entered in the pagelist becomes an anchor once transcluded into the mainspace. Please desist from this novel practice. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for clearing it up. My thoughts on the subject are posted in the related Help page post. — Ineuw (talk) 19:11, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Index:The despatches of Hernando Cortes.djvu[edit]

Hi, your deletion of this Index has left all the pages in the Page: namespace orphaned (over 400). Please sort out their deletion. This will complete the process of deleting the Index that you started. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beeswaxcandle: Hi. Apologize for my scanty knowledge. No idea how to delete them en masse but will gladly do it once I learnt how. — Ineuw (talk) 02:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I usually put a request in at WS:BOTR. But, if your SQL is up to it, then (as an admin) you can use Special:Nuke/Mass delete. Make sure to turn your bot flag on beforehand so that you don't flood Recent Changes (and turn it off again afterwards). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:52, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That sounds pretty scary unless you really really know what you're doing. I would suggest turning on "MassDelete" in your Gadget preferences (at the very bottom) and then use Special:MassDelete instead. It lets you paste in a list of pages to delete so you have much better control over what happens. You can make such a list by constructing a link like Special:PrefixIndex/Page:The despatches of Hernando Cortes.djvu/. You'll also have to use a text editor to add "Page:" in front of each page name since MW hides that for some reason.
In any case, I've deleted these pages for you now. --Xover (talk) 09:38, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Xover: Thanks for the additional links and the warning. — Ineuw (talk) 10:46, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, I was looking for them. :-) — Ineuw (talk) 10:50, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hebrew in Champollion[edit]


Précis Champollion - p. 204 - detail.jpg

Thanks for checking the Hebrew text in the French Wikisource! I have just one question: at the beginning of the text, you replaced ויהי with ויחי , but I actually took that word (ויהי) from the Hebrew Wikisource. I don't know Hebrew at all but I just checked a high-resolution of that book (see image, or source) and it seems to me that the character is ה and not ח . Sorry if I'm wrong. What do you think? Seudo (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Seudo: I don't have to think. ויחי is definitely wrong and you are right it should have been ויהי.— Ineuw (talk) 06:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I'll fix it. Seudo (talk) 07:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The History of Slavery and the Slave Trade[edit]

You are an administrator here and expected to lead, and to understand the system that has been reach by consensus, and to lead on its use. I have explained that works such as this will not produce suitable downloadable copy unless the ToC is on the root page of the work. Would you please amend the work so it complies with the standard that the community has set with the contents on the root page. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:00, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Plus for the author for the work, can you please provide the source for "W. O. Blake" => "William O. Blake" as that will hunt in my search to provide fuller information about the author, and to get that data into Wikidata. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I didn't forget, except "root page" is ambiguous, and if you want me to do it correctly, please clarify what you mean by "root" and point me to an example, because all my previous works merited no criticism. Is this download issue recent?
As for the author page, I saved it as "under construction", for being incomplete. The source of the information is the US Library of Congress, which seems to be the source of his birth & death dates in other online discussions. But, I didn't know how to specify it, and needed additional time to study various author pages.— Ineuw (talk) 10:12, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, the issue with the root page is not new. We have been hammering on about it in WS:S more recently as we have been improving downloads. Root page is not ambiguous, and it definitely isn't a subpage, which also isn't ambiguous. See mw:Help:Moving a page and mw:Help:Magic words#Page names. I fixed the previous work that I mentioned, and probably others over time. Did you look at An Index of Prohibited Books (1840) and see what I did on the root page? It seemed reasonably overt what was happening. To why no one fixed what you are doing is that as an administrator people expect you to know what is going on and most of us don't double-check a fellow administrator's work. @Inductiveload: do we have good clarity in the help: and transclusion pages on this, we may need to review if admins are missing it.
The long held practice used by some of us is for snippets of information about an author to be recorded on the author talk page. Links or rough copy and pastes of the information are useful so that we can share in that understanding rather than having it unsupported in source. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
TOCs on the root page are required for export. This is not quite true, there are ways to indirect the metadata, but that adds maintenance overhead and is hardly ever a good idea. Multi-level TOCs are possible: the root page needs a list of links to subpages, and any links on the subpages, which must be inside a container marked ws-summary, will be used too. {{AuxTOC}} and {{TOC begin}} apply this class automatically. If you need to manually wrap a TOC, {{export TOC}} is for you, and if you want the TOC to be invisible but still read by the exporter, {{hidden export TOC}} (this is pretty rare and kind of a last ditch thing).
There are details at Help:Preparing_for_export#Listing_pages_for_export, which I just expanded a little. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 08:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A Prisoner of the Khaleefa would have been a far better example. I am assuming that it's OK to have the Contents' pages exist twice? Does this mean that all "main namespace" root pages are to be modified as well? Any mention about the root page of multi-volume works? — Ineuw (talk) 12:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Was the addition of the {{helpme}} template here a mistake or are you actually looking for help with something? Xover (talk) 05:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Xover: No, :-) it wasn't a mistake, I don't have experience in properly formatting the author's page. Aside from the fact that info is unavailable. I knew of no other author page to compare to and learn.— Ineuw (talk) 06:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
P.S: Pls leave it for later. I must end today's session.— Ineuw (talk) 06:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok. The template isn't designed to be used in mainspace so I have moved it to the talk page. If you add some details about what you'd like help with I'd be happy to assist (and I know Billinghurst patrols new author pages too). Xover (talk) 07:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Xover:Much thanks for the reminder about the template use. Don't remember ever using it here on WS, and a few times in WP or the Commons. It was an act of desperation because I found no comparable records to learn from. Limited my search to the LOC which was the source of the other info I found. I knew that others have a more in-depth knowledge of adding the info, I pasted whatever I thought was relevant, helpful and on the wrong page. Hey, at least we got a response.— Ineuw (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Author data[edit]

Hi. If you don't know author data, please don't add junk data, it just stuffs up categorisation for where unknowns should be. Leaving it empty is perfectly fine. Plus all the metadata will be delivered from Wikidata when it is known, so having junk overrides isn't helpful from that perspective either. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Billinghurst:, This goes contrary to your previous comments to me about the author's page, in one of your previous posts.
This is a web site based on the contributions of volunteers, about whom your stated maxim was, "any contribution is welcome". So, the question is, do you want to be a janitor, (a concierge where I come from), and slam the door in the face of others every time things don't go your way, or be respected as a valuable contributor to Wikimedia in general and Wikisource in particular?
If I lag in technology, that should be no surprise, since there is an ocean of change from the computing world I knew, and from the time I joined Wikisource.
I came to this site for the love of the written word, and not be a programmer. Nominated myself for adminship for the sole purpose of being able to delete errors I created, and help some users with features that I managed to learn sufficiently to be able to explain. There is record of my question about the deletion of self-created pages in the archive, going back to 2009-2010.
But, if it's rank and position is what you value, I will be happy to resign my commission as an administrator, accept exile to a warm place where the sun does shine, as long as it doesn't entail a Wikisource ceremony in which my user page is defaced, and my ceremonial keyboard is snapped in half. Just ask.
Your ever increasing impatience and aggressive stance with the community is displayed in your posts, and I publicly ask you to take a step back and get some rest.
Your comment here is unnecessary, unhelpful and aggressive. Your contribution to this conversation is unwelcome.
PS: Please do not delete this message, per your usual habit. — Ineuw (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey what? I will take reasonable criticism of my personal approach, and it is noted. However, as another adult in this room, you need to be taking responsibilities too. There was zero aggression in my short note, and the expression "junk data" has no intention of being aggressive, just descriptive of its use in the field.

  • You put the text "unknown" in author date fields.
    Can you please point to me where our guidance says to do that?
    Can you point to where I said to do that?
    What does our guidance say?
    How is that addition in that form helpful?
  • The use of non-standard additions is problematic. It means that things do not categorise properly. This categorisation has been in place for years, and it is not mine. Is it your wish to be adding problematic data to our headers? Is it your wish to be causing unnecessary maintenance?
  • The expression "unknown" about a date of birth when used on an author page should not be based on personal knowledge. If you don't know a date just leave it empty. If you want to add commentary, please add it to the talk page. The broad addition of the word "unknown" has connotations and should be avoided in spaces like ours.
  • We have been using Wikidata for the provision of numbers of data fields for over five years. What more do we need to do for you to bring you up to speed on how the site works and supplies data, and why we are using it?

As a long term administrator here, you are meant to be a proponent of the style (per WS:Adminship), and you should be proficient in the use of our major templates, especially our header templates like author. If you put in wrong data or don't follow the style, then apart from the errors that introduces, it also gives any other person the opportunity for others to say, "but that is how they do it and they are an administrator".

I have expressed no requirement to do anything at Wikidata, nor any advanced knowledge of computers or computer systems or technology. I am asking you to follow the guidance, the styles, and not make problematic additions. As a long term user and administrator, I am hoping that you can progress, especially as the site evolves.

My advice will not be contradictory to previous advice. My advice is consistent. Though I will note that my advice will evolve as the site evolves.

So, how else are we going to keep you up to date? Tell us/me which is the way that this should happen. I am ONLY here talking to you about it as it is not right. If it was right I would be off doing other things. We all have responsibilities here.

P.S. Where do I delete messages? I don't. I have ZERO deletions on this page in the last 500 edits. Accusations like that are less than helpful, and rather inflammatory. And for what it is worth

Where is the problem? And if I undertake problematic any deletions or reversions, then please talk to me at the time, not throw it at me like this. I am never adverse to discussin such issues. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Kind request for white list[edit]

Respected Admin,

I am the owner of my website FreakToFit. Few days before I was citing few articles for information in your wikipedia site as there was less information. But on one day itself I put so much citation that you thought I was trying to promote my content. But its not the truth. I have a fitness and health website which is fully knowledge base and doesn't contains any promotional material. When I was surfing through few of the articles on your panel I saw few lacks of information, thereby I started to putting the info and doing citation. But since it was over doing you have thought I have misusing the panel and thereby promotion.

But its not that sir. I have enclosed a screenshot of my website so that you can have a look. My request to you sir it will be extremely grateful if you please unblock my page freaktofit. Looking for a positive response Uttamwiki23 (talk) 11:49, 2 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forum shopping, replied at User talk:Languageseeker#Kind request for white list. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:56, 2 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

morning chats includes an apology[edit]

I started messing with PSM, then I thought I should look to see whose project it is, then I talked to a very simple bot operator, then I figured out it was your project, then I lurked in embarrassment.

At least, if I remember right, I was respectful. Deeply respectful, as I am of the PSM collection and which I am not of just anything. I moved the indexes to an unused page so that they could be transcluded both in the Volume namespace and in the Issue namespace so that the issues could have wikidata and the issues can be downloaded individually for ereaders. has the same problem with their original version of Arabian Nights. Giving the Volume a data means giving one of the stories the whole volume data item. (putting it to words is awkward)

The PSM collection is a beautiful beautiful thing. I think I helped rather than harmed. I think I should have gone about it differently. And then, realizing that, I should have done the preceding differently. However, being a lurker has caused a great fondness in me for you. You seem to have a great deal of class.

So, in summary: sorry, sorry, very sorry, sorry, my very bad. What, where and why. Those darn French. My deepest respect.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:48, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You did the right thing and I thank you. So, "keep on trucking". The table of contents must be on the main page. It took me awhile to recall (started PSM in October 2009) that the table of contents was not part of the text, but was built chapter by chapter. All I am doing now is removing the dead links from the Index: namespace.— Ineuw (talk) 17:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2nd opinion on color[edit]

Hola! :) I'm uploading some color wood-block prints and thought of you when I decided to keep the background, instead of hacking out some other other extraction of the object. An other opinion on File:The headswoman - color plate facing page 32.jpg and so on is welcome. Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:55, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thanks for asking. I would keep it as is. It's very nice as it is.— Ineuw (talk) 19:17, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A drunken walk visits all points (eventually)[edit]

I'm currently interested in how people do TOCs and happened to see your edits to Page:Africa by Élisée Reclus, Volume 1.djvu/11. Since I'm also interested in {{table style}} - and having accidently precipitated Xover's nice rewrite - I'm looking how people use that. And having found a couple aliases missed...

I was thus mystified to see "p3.5" in your edits. Did you mean one of either "pl3.5" or "pr3.5"? Or is something still missing? Shenme (talk) 00:54, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Shenme: Don't be mystified, and thanks. It was a typo.— Ineuw (talk) 07:24, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Images for Index:The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club.djvu[edit]

Seeing how nice your images for The Count of Monte-Cristo look, I was wondering if you could also do the plates for Index:The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club.djvu when you have a chance. Fun fact, this particular copy has plates that no other copy in the world has. Languageseeker (talk) 00:46, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Languageseeker: I am downloading the files as we speak, but I must look at them if I can do a decent job, and get back to you.— Ineuw (talk) 04:12, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Languageseeker: uploaded 20 of the ~45 images to commons:Category:Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club (Book). But the rest will have to wait. Also,
Thank you! Languageseeker (talk) 00:47, 23 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes check.svg Done .Ineuw (talk) 08:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lost in Space Episode 1:Proofread page changes[edit]

@Inductiveload First, apologies for my comments on Phabricator. They were the result of the shock experienced by unexpected changes and being unprepared for them. Also, thanks for the corrections, which I assume, were made based on my comments in the scriptorium.

I suggest that, if over/under editing in the previous manner is no longer available, consider dropping it altogether because it is useless and visually confusing as it's implemented.

Over/under editing is true WYSWYG line by line without wrap edit, which is now lost (even without vector.js and .css). Comparing the scanned text to the original line by line without wrap, was logical. Ineuw (talk) 23:03, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ineuw I understand that you are frustrated, I am too. I'm not quite sure what you mean by corrections, but if you mean the scrolling stuff, then I hope the proposed patch is what you have in mind, and I hope that someone eventually merges it. I don't know if it's the ideal UX, but since you are the only person to even somewhat engage with the question, I guess that everyone else thinks it is fine.
As I have said many many times now, the H/V issue has been fixed and was actually fixed on the day that the issue was reported. The fix just wasn't merged for a week and change. To be clear, I did not write the fix, but I did +1 it ASAP to try to get it in so I could have it backported. I do not have (or want, actually) the ability to +2 it to actually merge it. The delay means it missed all the opportunities to deploy the change because there are no deployments at all scheduled this week or next, or even backport windows, due to the holidays.
if over/under editing in the previous manner is no longer available, no one is saying this and it is IMO unhelpful to act like that's what is happening. There was a bug, it was fixed on the day, and the fix is coming. In two more weeks: it is expected to deploy late on 5th Jan (n.b. every time I give a deploy date, the train ends up being blocked, or cancelled entirely). It could have been two weeks ago (the patch was available, substantially as eventually merged, exactly 14 days ago today), but it was not to be. If it had merged literally any day before last Friday, it would have been possible to deploy the fix as a backport. It did not, and now, it is not. Frustrating, yes, but that's what happens when there are no formal resources for these things. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 00:26, 23 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Inductiveload: Much thanks for this detailed explanation and your patience. Patience is something I am still learning.
@Inductiveload: What is interesting about the scrolling issue is that in Firefox, the cursor navigates the image as if I was scrolling. Unfortunately, this requires a change from mouse to keyboard. It is just an observation.Ineuw (talk) 12:52, 26 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Full keyboard navigation is another thing OSD has permitted. The full keymap is here mw:Extension:Proofread_Page/Page_viewer#Keyboard_navigation. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 22:16, 26 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How we will see unregistered users[edit]


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)

Lost in Space Episode 2:Proofread page changes[edit]

Episode 2:Proofread page changes this link to my post in the scriptorium Ineuw (talk) 04:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lost in Space Episode 3:Proofread page changes[edit]

@Inductiveload: The recent changes in the new Proofreading module seriously reduced my ability to contribute.

  • The inability to scroll the image during editing is the ultimate loss. It was a most valuable tool. Scrolling and comparing the generated text, while matching it to the original, row by row, character by character, was invaluable in over/under editing mode.
  • I tried side by side editing, but this also needs the image scroll to read the text. In addition, the text to be edited is also wrapped because the width of the editing window is narrower than the text.
  • The contributions log is a witness to my efforts to reconfigure vector.css. Starting with a blank slate, meaning wmf defaults, and then, rebuilding changed font sizes, margins, textbox and header and footer box sizes to conform to the current modes, but nothing helped.
  • The header/footer settings of Preferences/Edit is functioning in the French Wikisource. Are we not sharing the same Proofreading software? Perhaps, this setting was stored in cookies?Ineuw (talk) 04:48, 27 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think I have made it repeated clear enough why the scrolling isn't implemented yet: the code wasn't reviewed and therefore isn't merged. Actually, a comment has come along since then, but 1) actually doing what that comment suggests is now a lot of work because it should have been said months ago before more work was done on top of it and 2) the patch no longer applies anyway because it needs rebasing. I do not have time now to deal with that long and unreasonably painful process. Hopefully someone will, but it won't be me for quite some time, unless you wish to buy out my contract from my employer. I did not expect when I started trying to build on OSD back in about June that hardly any of it would get looked at until I ran out of time in the new year, but here we are.
Header/footer toggling is working as far as I know. In my reply to the link above, I specifically told you it's stored in user option settings (you can see the current value with mw.user.options.get("proofreadpage-showheaders") in your browser's JS console). Nothing has changed with this setting recently, other than its location in preferences is now in "Preferences → Editing → Proofreading interface options". You'd only have seen it in preferences at all if you turn the edit toolbar off, otherwise it's where it always was, a icon Header and footer toolbar button.svg in the "Proofread tools" sub-toolbar). Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 10:45, 27 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Inductiveload: Thanks for the update. I was expecting scrolling with the latest rollout. In any case, you have your work cut out.
I added mw.user.options.get("proofreadpage-showheaders") to my vector.js, and this works fine. This used to be controlled from the Preferences/Edit Menu, and is no longer there. I am using the sub-toolbar's manual header/footer control, but that is not what I was looking for. In any case, it is now resolved.
This is what my Profile/Edit Page looks like. Profile Edit options, I don't understand why there are two "Set a local Exception for this Global Preference" in the Proofreading Interface Options? What Options are being referenced? Ineuw (talk) 21:30, 27 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It sounds like you have somehow set a global preference, which you can change at Special:GlobalPreferences. "Normal" preferences look something like this: phab:F34936584. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 15:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]