User talk:Ineuw/Archives/2010-11-29

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created on 29 November 2010, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.


ready made templates[edit]

Do see {{Under construction}} and {{inuse}}. -- billinghurst (talk) 01:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The editor verifying the proofread changes the radio button. So if you proofread it, you change it, up the scale. Anyone can redo someone else's work, so a multiple validation, or if you see a problem with a read, then you can move it back, with commentary. -- billinghurst (talk) 23:21, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the Popular Science Monthly Wikiproject[edit]

Ineuw, I would like to personally welcome you to the Popular Science Monthly Wikiproject. Right now we only have 3 participants, but we are growing fast! We have a ton of proofreading to do, a lot of organizing, and transcluding. Both Sherurcij and I hang out on IRC a lot so join that if you need talk. Anyways, welcome and thanks for joining! --Mattwj2002 (talk) 01:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Just a quick note, as I see you proofreading an awesome number of pages, that you can/should nix the "POPULAR SCIENCE - PAGE 48" at the top of each page while proofreading - and make a quick glance to ensure there are no words that lo-
ok like this. :) Much thanks for your work! Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:David Livingstone. 20:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Checklist for proofreading[edit]

This list was moved and merged in the Proofreading guide for The Popular Science Monthly Project.

Header and Templates {{hws}} and {{hwe}}[edit]

Not sure whether we did bring your attention to H:SIDE#Formatting conventions. If not, I would like to point to you the bits about the header [+] toggle button, and the part about hyphenation at the end of a page, and correspondingly at the start of the next. Thx. -- billinghurst (talk) 09:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and in older texts, be on the look out for em dashes — or alt-0151.billinghurst (talk)

Thought you might be amused[edit]

As a contributor to the PSM project, and seeing you point out the inked-in character - I thought you might be amused to notice, as I did, that Author:Edward Livingston Youmans, the publisher of PSM, had his sister translate the article The Unity of the Human Species (seen here at Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 1.djvu/71, and included an article by her to fill out his publication (seen here at Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 1.djvu/130) Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. 16:19, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I had to check Google to see if it was his sister or daughter, it's definitely his sister - she did a biographic "sketch" of him after he died entitled "by his sister". :) Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. 16:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

He was Professor of Anthropology at the Museum of Natural History in Paris, so I'd be surprised if they were entangled; a quick search yielded a letter by her brother, saying "Eliza's translation of Quatrefages will be the first". He also seems to have died in 1892 according to w:Jean Louis Armand de Quatrefages de Bréau. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. 04:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

A Gold Star for All Your Efforts![edit]

Ineuw, I hear by grant you a gold star for all your efforts with Popular Science Monthly! Star*.svg Keep up the great work! --Mattwj2002 (talk) 04:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC)



Can you upload images to Commons instead of here please? If you upload them to Commons you can use them here exactly as if you uploaded them to here, but they will also be accessible to all other projects e.g. to illustrate Wikipedia article; and the Commoners will work to organise them into a nice media-oriented structure.

Hesperian 00:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand how moving them from here is easier than uploading them to Commons. What is your process for moving them? Hesperian 02:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Greek Unicode[edit]

Have a look at -- billinghurst (talk) 13:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

This might also be of use {{User annotation}}

The Popular Science Monthly page structure and TOC[edit]

This first attempt was deleted and superceded by this entry.

Ineuw could you join IRC when you get a chance?[edit]

Hi Ineuw, Could you join IRC when you get a chance? Thanks. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 17:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Ineuw, can you pop on I really need to chat with you quick. Thanks. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 01:16, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The Popular Science Monthly page and TOC structure No.2[edit]

This second attempt was deleted and superceded by this entry.

Trying the deep end first[edit]

Gday Ineuw. I love your enthusiasm, though I am a little concerned that you are trying to do a whole lot of wiki from the deep end of the pool. WS is reasonably poor at tight rules and guidelines, and that is both good and bad. Good that we are not so anal-retentive, bad in that it makes it a little harder to get the gist of what we are doing.

It hasn't been demonstrated that you have a handle on our concoction of namespaces, and how we pull text between them. Not sure where you are in the story, so I will start from first principles. And if you are not adverse to the concept we could look to expand and clarify parts and take it out somewhere as a guidance map.

Wikisource domain structure re: Works[edit]

The Index: and Page: namespace is a newer environment and one that we are more rapidly developing and maturing.

  •  :Commons: wiki ← where files are uploaded (as preference)
  • Index: namespace ← the tie between Commons and Wikisource. It enables us to view a multi-image file and show the structure of the document, and the Published context of the work
  • Page: namespace ← the page by page display of a multi-image files. If the pages of a .djvu file have a text layer (either by OCR or from creation) then at first editing of a Page: the text layer will be imported from Commons and applied to the Page. The text layer is imported and a new version saved at WikiSource, separate from the copy on the :Commons: file
Note: the text import only undertaken when the Page: space is created
  • Main namespace ← the display space of works, they can either by typed in directly, or transcluded from the Page: namespace. (the latter is now our preferred methodology where an image is available for proofreading).
  • Author: namespace ← compiling lists of works by author
  • Wikisource: namespace ← where we compile information about enWS

Std wiki

  • Template: namespace
  • User: namespace
  • Category: namespace
  • Mediawiki: namespace
  • Help: namespace
  • File: namespace (storing at Commons preferred)
  • Portal: namespace (not really used here)

I would like to pause there for questions and the like. Before starting discussing which text goes which way billinghurst (talk) 10:20, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Version 3 of the PSM Table of Contents structure[edit]

Contents were moved to my documentation page for proofreading.

Use {{gap}}[edit]

No need to create create {{ts}}. {{Gap}} should do the job. -- billinghurst (talk) 16:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually {{text-indent}} is more relevant here; but you'll be sorry. Hesperian 04:56, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Have a look at {{rule}}[edit]

Have a look at {{rule}} it should do what you are after. There is also discussion at User talk:Hesperian#right about a similar thing they have looked at. billinghurst (talk) 04:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

No need to answer on my talk page, as if I start a conversation here, I will watch your page, also for me it helps to keep a conversation in context. If you want to do notify me of an answer, then you can use {{talkback|Ineuw}} and that should be enough.
Got it. Everyday something new to learn. :) Ineuw (talk) 22:05, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely. Often it is worthwhile looking through the categories, or clicking search, and then ticking category for that namespace only search for a keyword. We have been less than optimal in our documentation. billinghurst (talk) 22:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
I have no complaints. I have a lot to get used to. Ineuw (talk) 02:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

js for {{gap}}[edit]

Not the best example of something that does well in the toolbar unless you are planning on having a consistent value within it. This is because it sometimes it has a default value, and other times it has a value, none of which wrap text.

  • The big bad fox takes ugly chunks out of the nice unassuming chicken.
  • The big bad fox takes ugly chunks out of the nice unassuming chicken.
 The big bad {{gap}}fox takes {{gap|2em}}ugly chunks {{gap|}}out of the {{gap|em}}nice unassuming chicken.

Generally one would code it with a pipe(|) to add value, however, this is one that has a reasonable default value. So the option become code as {{gap}} or {{gap|2em}} and you would manually amend for a value, or amend the value contained.

Anyway, this text when part of your monobook.js (as per instructions should give this default ; then if you type and then wrap a number like 4, it should create

if (mwCustomEditButtons) {
 mwCustomEditButtons[mwCustomEditButtons.length] = {
     "imageFile": "",
     "speedTip": "gap",
     "tagOpen": '{{gap|',
     "tagClose": 'em}}',
     "sampleText": "2"};

Note that I chose the icon (from a quick look), and it can be replaced with whatever takes your fancy at Commons. billinghurst (talk) 22:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I intend to use {{gap}}with the default value, whatever is. I jumped randomly several years ahead in the PSM and the style is the same for decades to come, in fact, probably early in the 20th century. So, it will be useful. Ineuw (talk) 23:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
PS: The gap is not for spanning, just to indent the first line, and it works fine. Ineuw (talk) 02:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Billinghurst. I am awed! This morning (a clear head), I figured it out and thank you. You made a javascript addict out of me. The {{gap}} button on the editing toolbar shows only the word "gap" on the button, and not the image. The image link is correct, so I don't know what I did wrong.
Could you point the way to reading material on javascript that would be usefule here? Would like to add some feature and learn how to send keystrokes, assign it keys if possible, etc? — Ineuw (talk) 16:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Popular Science Monthly Update![edit]

Hi Ineuw, I just wanted to share some good news with you! Internet Archive has agreed to scanned the 5 volumes I have purchased. You have been so involved with the project, I just thought I would share with you. Once again thanks for all of your efforts! --Mattwj2002 (talk) 23:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

On my talk page please! That way I see them and get the message! :) --Mattwj2002 (talk) 02:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

1st Image in Volume 2[edit]

Hi Ineuw, I just had an idea. I am not sure if this would work, but would the name of the person be in the credits anywhere? Otherwise, I am not sure either. I hope that helps. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 01:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Feedback solicited for introductory documentation at Help:Side_by_side_image_view_for_proofreading[edit]

Ineuw, I just made some major revisions to Help:Side_by_side_image_view_for_proofreading, to try to improve it's readability for new proofreaders. I think I remember seeing somewhere that you were looking at putting something like that together too. Can you please look at that page, & let me know what you'd want to see changed? (Or just change it?) I'd really like a second pair of eyes that has an interest in improving introductory documentation. Thanks!! -- SoftlySaid (talk) 20:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi SoftlySaid, Forgive my lateness in replying. Only now I had the chance to pay serious attention to your post, having been distracted by numerous issues these past weeks. Your document is superb! I am very interested in promoting quick and easy answers to beginners with an interest in proofreading and yours is #1.
The difficulty, from my perspective, is that the first time visitor is dismayed by the profusion of information presented on an equal rank. Thus, it's impossible to find your article because there is no simple, step by step screen system which would lead first time visitors and aspiring proofreaders to it. By simple, I mean that a prominently displayed option (which can be turned off in the Preferences), with multiple choice answers, while everything else becomes hidden to prevent distraction. Yesterday, I came across a very neat feature through Gutenberg, on a Distributed Proofreading wiki, which tests the proofreader's attention to detail. I was impressed. Unfortunately, it's also buried so deep, that one looses a lot of precious time finding it. — Ineuw (talk) 16:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Proofreading example[edit]

Hello, This is a good idea, but it would be better if we have the example on Wikisource, instead of sending people on PGDP. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

My sentiments exactly, and admit to deliberately omitting this point because saving time is everything. Every volunteer here is busy with their project, so, perhaps we can ask DP for a copy of the code (with an attribution for their cooperation)? After all, they would also indirectly benefit from it. Then, we can fine tune it for our needs. — Ineuw (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Ineuw I fell asleep![edit]

Hey Ineuw! I didn't mean to ignore you, but I fell asleep. I am awake now if you want to talk. Sorry about that. Regards. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 02:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

The elusive Volume 75[edit]

Hey Ineuw! Right now we have 5 volumes of Popular Science Monthly being scanned by the Internet Archive. I sent it in a few weeks ago. They are taking their time and so far they haven't shown up on the website. I'll keep you informed. Volume 75 was one of those volumes. They will scan it for free all I had to was pay for shipping, but they keep the book. :) I hope to talk to you soon. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 19:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)


hi, im new here so i need help, can i ask you something?

You can ask me anything, but please sign in or register. — Ineuw (talk) 18:49, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Another gold star for Volume 1 of PSM![edit]

Ineuw, you deserve this, another gold star for Volume 1 of Popular Science Monthly. Star*.svg Enjoy!!! --Mattwj2002 (talk) 01:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

It looks great, but we should not be transcluding pages from the USER: namespace, and we should have a copy of the magazine in the MAIN namespace rather than simply as an INDEX. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Thomas Carlyle. 06:26, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

ip deletion request[edit]

Was this you? Hesperian 12:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

You asked in IRC[edit]

[13:58] <ineuw> Exalted admins, greetings, I am wrote a proofreading guide for the PSM project. Which namespace to place it? It's sort of related to the Wikisource:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly page.
[14:08] <ineuw>  Wikisource:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly/Proofreading guide - is this advisable?
[14:09] <ineuw> or Page:Popular Science Monthly/Proofreading guide?
[14:09] <ineuw> or Page: Popular Science Monthly/Proofreading guide?

Not the Page: namespace. That is solely for pages that have images and for transcription. Nothing else belongs there.

Wikisource: ns is the place for documentation for all to read. If it is project specific, then it belongs as a subpage to your project. If it is a general page, then it belongs somewhere up the top. So most likely option at 14:08 billinghurst (talk) 03:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks — Ineuw (talk) 03:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

PSM stuff[edit]

Mate, you seem to be creating a new means to how we have been laying out work, and not one that aligns with how other work has been done, nor how it utilises headers. I am playing with what is there to align with how we have been doing other works. You will probably want to hit me. <shrug> billinghurst (talk) 06:04, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

You're correct. I follow you. Live and learn. — Ineuw (talk) 07:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
You want to hit me? ;-) I have finished fiddling, and I have seen that you have been doing things too. So a quick note before I take a break.
  • Have a look, and see if what I have done to the hierarchy makes sense. I thought that Matt might have given you that guidance, so I hadn't been paying too much attention. You picked a complex beast to start upon!
  • With templates like that they are going to break due to somewhere a rampant | will upset the apple cart somewhere. Basically when coding like that a bar needs to represented as {{!}} and I still falter with its use correctly. Hence a top and tail approach is less breakable.
  • Lots of relative links
  • I have cheated a little moving the author into the section tag, however, in this scenario I think that it works better, can change it back if wanted, very bot'able
  • The community has probably dropped the ball in giving the support to you that is required, and that is one of the downsides of a smaller community, and one that is doing lots of things. So a light apology in that regard.
  • Umm, I have forgotten the next one. <shrug>
Arm and brain rest time. billinghurst (talk) 09:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Hanging indent[edit]

Dear Ineuw,

Your sandbox now has a working template for hanging indent. here it is. It took a conditional workaround to convince the template that, if {{{1}}} is absent, then {{{2}}} is the new "1". I must thank Alex Brollo for his great intuition, I'm only the postman :D .- εΔω 15:00, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Ineuw for thanks. I'm always happy to contribute... but the "personal appeal" from Jimmy Wales reminds me that another kind of contribution too will be welcome. ;-).
Happy new year!--Alex brollo (talk) 08:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm producing a large mess of new templates, most of them completely unuseful (they run but they can't find a good place/problem to solve or interested user needing them ...). If you are template-addicted, I'll be happy to share with you some from the best (IMHO) of them! If you aren't... I don't want to cause any headache to you. ;-) --Alex brollo (talk) 10:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)


Dear Ineuw, I'm going to post (and to develop) Ruler code, I'll work into a personal sandbox: User:Alex brollo/Ruler. Feel free to test and edit into it.

The idea is, to have two gif files (a straight line and a central graph) and to use it with two parameters: , the second, for height/strenght of the line (default 5, try 3,4,5,6,7); the first, for lenght of the ruler (1 default; use 1,2,3) Consider that you can post new central graphs, but edit bit by bit with care (it is important that the height is 15 pixels and that orizontal line is saved to "join" with straight line)

Well, the parametrized template is into my head only now... but I hope it will come into life.--Alex brollo (talk) 18:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Let's we try:
  • no parameters:
Ruler side.gifRuler center.gifRuler side.gif
  • double length:
Ruler side.gifRuler side.gifRuler center.gifRuler side.gifRuler side.gif
  • triple lenght:
Ruler side.gifRuler side.gifRuler side.gifRuler center.gifRuler side.gifRuler side.gifRuler side.gif
  • triple lenght, and 4/5 heigth:
Ruler side.gifRuler side.gifRuler side.gifRuler center.gifRuler side.gifRuler side.gifRuler side.gif

--Alex brollo (talk) 19:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


I don't know if you use #titleparts ParserFunction, but it's great as a "small indexed array".

Look at this:

The code: The English name for number 5 is '''{{#titleparts:One/Two/Three/Four/Five/Six/Seven/Eight/Nine/Ten|1|5}}''', the Italian one is '''{{#titleparts:Uno/Due/Tre/Quattro/Cinque/Sei/Sette/Otto/Nove/Dieci|1|5}}

The result: The English name for number 5 is Five, the Italian one is Cinque. Isn't it nice? --Alex brollo (talk) 11:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


The redirect that you were looking to do is coded like this

#redirect[[Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1#September 1872]]

Heading lines ===Heading=== have inbuilt anchors, so any of them can be assigned within a redirect. If you wish to add a specific anchor aside from a header, then you can use {{anchor}}. billinghurst (talk) 01:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year and thanks again. Did you read the 'wish list'? Did you read my mind? Otherwise, how did you know what I was looking for? Signed Al Zheimer. — Ineuw (talk) 02:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

¿ Like this?[edit]

There's the ¿ caracter: is good for you? It's a common caracter in Spanish. I hope I understood your question: I can't find the caracter into the page you linked.... but I'm a little tired, and I'm going to bed!  :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Indent template again[edit]

Hi Ineuw, just to tell you that I implemented a different version of indent template into it.wikisource. As you know, templates are usually "not well formed", from good tagged languages point of view, since into their code are contained both "codes" and "text content". But there's a trick, that can be used in templates like indent, that mainly "open a html tag" (as div): you can split the template in two, the first working as "tag opener", the second as "tag closer".

So, Italian version of indent does'n close div tag, and has to be coupled with a second template, which closes the div tag; there are some advantages:

  1. the "closer template" can be simply replaced with a html close tag, </div> in this case;
  2. the "closer template" or the html closing tag can be recycled to be used into a large variety of different templates;
  3. the wiki text is no more passed to the template as a parameter, it's simply a plain text among two templates, and this is very important since the text included into a parameter is very difficult to manage by bots and scripts: and this comes directly from the fact that templates usually are not "well formed".

So, the code of Italian version of indent is really simple:

<div style="margin-left:{{{1|2em}}}; text-indent:-{{{1|2em}}}">

then comes the text to indent, then a closing </div> tag or - if you like - a template exploding the same tag only. --Alex brollo (talk) 09:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Indent: reply[edit]

Thanks very much for your points about indents. I'm too testing the implications of the "well formed" templates, just now I'm dragging into our it:Template:Centrato which encloses a text into the page. I see that your version uses a a class=tiInherit too, this is very confusing for me, we haven't a similar class into our Common.css.

Nevertheless, let's try here:

{{center|<font style="font-size:1.2pc">Centered text font size 1.2pc</font>}}


yes, the same bug. :-)

The code I'm testing for our Centrato is:

<div style="text-align: center;text-indent:0em;">

As you see, the div tag is open always, but it is closed only if a parameter is passed, so if you can use the two alternatives:

  • {{Centrato|<font style="font-size:1.2pc">Centered text font size 1.2pc</font>}} (doesn't run)
  • {{Centrato}}<font style="font-size:1.2pc">Centered text font size 1.2pc</font></div> (runs!)

As you see, the second syntax of the same template converts it from a "not well formed" to a "well formed" tag, since no text is included into the template tag. I'm just working in our sandbox. :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 09:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

PS: An user who doesn't know html tags and templates could be confused by the </div> tag, but if you write a Template:CenterEnd with a </div> only content, such an user could understand it. And... as you imagine you have to build only one template closing an open div tag, and many centerEnd, indentEnd ... templates, that all are simply redirects to that one ;-) --Alex brollo (talk) 14:54, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Can I....?[edit]

Well, it's really rewarding for me to have such an opportunity to share some exotic ideas.... I like horsemanship - I came into wikipedia,then here into en.source, to share something about horses - and I feel on myself the astonishing power of rewards. :-)

Can I share with you my thoughts and tries? Sometimes I feel a little an alien .... and can be that some ideas are useful into a wider community, but I can't go deep enough into en.source to understand it settings as it deserves. But .... feel free to tell me that I'd wasting your time. So, if you like, I could open a subpage on my user page (something like User:Alex brollo/WIP) and I could post there, as the name of the page suggests, my own WIPs ;-) --Alex brollo (talk) 06:55, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok Ineuw - I update a little bit my user page to link presently empty User:Alex brollo/WIP and a User:Alex brollo/Data pages, yust take a look sometimes when you like and you'll find that the best I can share. Use it as you like obviously - I'll be honoured from your interest. --Alex brollo (talk) 16:15, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

WIPs and new ROOTPAGENAME template[edit]

dear Ineuw, as I told you I'm writing some exotics into User:Alex brollo/WIP and I felt the need to create a new template: Template:ROOTPAGENAME. I uppercased the name to make it obvious that it runs exactly as normal variables. Please can you take a look and see if I violate any of en.source rules/habits? Thanks! --Alex brollo (talk) 09:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Peace and pace[edit]

Thanks Ineuw! Yes I'm interested both about pace (that in Italians means "peace") and peace! If you like to take a look to relationships between horsemanship and peace keeping, I've a link to a work by an unwnown american woman, Marjorie Smith; I saved it into my website with a front English/Italian translation (with author's permission), a very lucky idea, since some months after Marjorie deleted her wensite.... what's a pity... here the link (the most interesting subpage is "Sensibilita' equestre", original title "Horse Sense for Peacemakers"), feel free to delete it if the link to a personal website breaks any en.source rule. --Alex brollo (talk) 08:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Missing pages![edit]

Hey Ineuw my friend! Boy, it has been ages. :) I got a new job that is why I have been hard to get a hold of. It is going well. The best time to reach me is 6 PM to 8 PM Central US Time. (I probably won't be on tomorrow night). Anyways, as far as the missing pages for Volume 3, one option is we could purchase Volume 3. I could scan the page in with my home scanner. I could do all the work myself if you like and pay for the book. :) Please leave me a message my talk page with what you think. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 00:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds great my friend! Always a pleasure to hear from you. Take care and hope to talk to you soon! --Mattwj2002 (talk) 01:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)



I see you have created many categories for the PSM project. Two things:

  1. Firstly, when you create generic categories, could you abstain from tagging them with the PSM project template? I just put a text on a fossil fruit into Category:Paleontology, and was surprised to see it tagged as a PSM category, as though non-PSM works are unwelcome there.
  2. Secondly, where are these categories coming from? Does the PSM have some kind of topic index that you are following, or are you making them up out of your own head? If the latter, then I would like to make some changes, such as merging Category:Plant biology into Category:Botany, merging Category:Entomology into Category:Insects, merging Category:Physicist into Category:Physicists.

Hesperian 14:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Humble pie[edit]

One last piece of humble pie. My frustration was with Wikisource as a collective and not any individual member and especially not you personally. In retrospect I see how bad this looks. Really, I saw this as man versus mob and not man versus man. Please experiment with background colors for your project. I think a cream color would really make the text pop. And if you like #F9EACD;—believe me—I will welcome its return.Ingram (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Mate, too harsh on the drill down categories[edit]

Ineuw, we aren't wikipedia, nor commons, there is no need to drill down so hard on the categories. Beneficial insects is not only a little POV, it is overkill. At this point of time, it would be quite sufficient to stop at insects. When the category turns into a plague of locusts/swarm of flies/... ;-) then we can do some splitting, and get a bot to help. We should hasten leisurely in the category space, and nobody will fuss. Thanks. billinghurst sDrewth 11:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I see your point.— Ineuw (talk) 14:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Reply: Pixer ruler[edit]

Thank you Ineuw for the interesting tool! In the meantime I'm working into pt.source: a terribly difficult work, since I'm working on an old (XV century) horsemanship book in ancient portuguese... and I can't speak portuguese, both modern and ancient! But wiki software is so good, that it's turned out possible.... ;-) --Alex brollo (talk) 10:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Your sense of humor is unimpeachable, I was just the last to understand the joke.Ingram (talk) 05:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


Somebody said something when we were starting a wikiproject that I found very helpful: what we were doing was making a sub-project of the wikipedia project. This allowed me to grasp what we should be focusing on, and what we should not. One issue that emerged at that place is that projects overlap and none have a greater claim to their articles than the overall project - creating an encyclopedia. There will be problems and aspects of larger works hosted by Wikisource (the project) that require coordination and discussion of things that are especially relevant to those texts, like what you are doing with the PSM project (subproject). It is not necessary to duplicate existing practices of the larger project, maintenance issues are the example that prompted this post. Before implementing a series of edits, it may save you some trouble if you try to discover whether there is another means of achieving the result.

I don't see why PSM needs its own maintenance tag, for things such as a missing image, or to labelled by the subproject. We do have at least one template for this purpose, {{Use page image}}, and probably more. I suppose the idea is that this allows someone to track these pages and provide the image. I don't bother myself with typing that, I just click 'problematic' when the content needs to be uploaded to commons; it is very likely that this will be the only problem left in an Index. I strongly recommend that you seek a solution from those who would have encountered the same problems, this saves you a lot of work, that may be changed or deleted, and avoids having people like me filling your page with their long-winded blather. I want to emphasise what I see as a key concept because I don't think it is obvious without the benefit of hindsight. BTW, the only things that get signed ~~~~ by users is posts on talk pages, the edit history of the Page:namespace shows a link to the contributor. Regards, Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I would agree. That unless there is going to be an absolute plethora of pages in a maintenance category, that there would seem little reason to create a new one or to have sub-categories to it. One could see that having so many works requiring maintenance may be an indication that the maintenance should be undertaken, rather than left for a totally rainy day. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)


Hi Ineuw: a few users are discussing the use of {{gap}} on Index_talk:Mars_-_Lowell.djvu. It looks like you included this template in the PSM guidelines, so if you could give us your thoughts that'd be great—thanks! —Spangineerwp (háblame) 22:44, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey Ineuw![edit]

Sorry, I didn't get to your request in time! :( If your online, why not pop on IRC. Long time no talk. Anyways, take care my friend. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 02:07, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


You have new messages
Hello, Ineuw. You have new messages at Billinghurst's talk page.
Message added 01:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

billinghurst sDrewth 01:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

international talkpage template[edit]


See here : for an example of a easy to use copy-paste thing for talkpages on other wikiprojects.

Please keep in mind that I hard-coded my nickname Krinkle, and the languages in the {{Babel-template may differ. And last but not least, the SUL-box and clear-template may not exist on some wiki's so always preview before saving smiley. Krinkle (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

PS:I took the liberty to make a start on wikipedia:User:Ineuw/int. Krinkle (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


This is not the way to go about things, explain how this page is not problematic. It is pretty obviously not what is in the scan, apart from the other problems I saw. Cygnis insignis (talk) 04:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Totally with Cygnis insignis here, the page displayed is not a rendition of the page and is either problematic and marked so, or should be addressed to the community as misuse of the Page: namespace. The displayed page is not the work, it is a rework of the original, and such data would be inappropriate to either Page: or main namespace, such contructs would only be managed in the Wikisource: namespace. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
I would prefer that you restore my edits, that you removed without an edit summary, before you give a response. This account has a long history at wikipedia, I'm taking that into consideration. Cygnis insignis (talk) 11:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Cygnis insignis, I will reset the changed edits, and we must take time to reflect on the sequence of events of how this came about. History is so important to the context. I would like to point out that this is the second time unexpected and arbitrary changes were committed by the administrators without warning and without the chance of elaboration. Rules should apply to both.— Ineuw (talk) 15:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
PS: It's only fair to warn you that regarding the veiled threats and my long history on Wikipedia, I have the support of the Klingon Empire. — Ineuw (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Ineuw, we only have 330 active users here, and as far as I can tell 329 of them are pulling in roughly the same direction. There are a few differences in how editors approach things, but almost all of the time we manage to accommodate those differences, because they can still be reconciled with our mission. But some of the things you are doing here are irreconcilable with what the rest of us think this site is for. Creating putative page transcriptions that are completely different from the original text is unacceptable. Creating vast numbers of empty, orphan, super-specific categories is unacceptable.

If you look back over the past few months, I think you will see a pattern, starting with people largely ignoring what you have been doing, then progressing to the offering of friendly advice, then firmer guidance, and finally taking matters into their own hands. You don't seem to have noticed how much patience and effort has been extended to you before we reached this point where you feel that people are making "unexpected and arbitrary changes... without warning". Hesperian 10:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I hardly think that my edit is an arbitrary change in the common use of the term. I look at the page image and I look at the text, and it doesn't correspond, that would seem to be a clear and distinct objective judgement, and what I think what we would term problematic (or the wide net that the term supposedly covers). Unexpected? I am not sure what is unexpected about any edit change in the Page: namespace when it doesn't correspond with the text. I would say that if you have an expectation that it shouldn't be so marked is highly irregular and doesn't correspond with how I have seen this site operate. When three people make the same judgment, the "arbitrary and unexpected claim" beggars belief.
I have no issue at all with a compiled index for a work, in fact it is meritorious and demonstrates far more patience than I ever had or will have. I just have an issue with it in the Page namespace. As I stated it clearly belongs in the Wikisource: namespace, as it is a person's own work, and not of the original work. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Every point here is important and I haven't ignored your posts, it's just that I am tied up with a temporary commitment and this discussion merits serious attention. I intend to reply to all issues raised and try to resolve them. — Ineuw (talk) 14:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

In reply[edit]

Excuse for the delay in responding. As a "newbie", several faux pas were committed, and the only one I feel contrite about is publicly embarrassing another editor with my so called humour. That was completely thoughtless and irreparable. The rest of the issues will gradually disappear, as one gets more up to speed. My years of Wikipedia experience is not at all related to the work here.


As I see it, there are fundamental facts of life which affect our relationship and propose to use them as a basis for the suggestions.

The most important is that when admins living in the Southern Hemisphere wake up, I go to sleep, and vice versa. This puts a completely different perspective on the same issue.

Another is the quantity of changes, most of which are OK, and some are not because of ignorance or oversight. By now, I realize the implications of monitoring all the data changes.

The simple solution would be is to allow some time (24-48 hours) to clean up because my work is continuously being revisited to correct, while studying other editors' work in the project. There is an audit trail to prove that. I aim for 100%, settle for a realistic 95%-97%, and that takes several tries. The gradual reduction of page deletion requests should be considered a sign of improved knowledge and better focus on detail.


As for the particulars mentioned in your posts, we can easily resolve them. The first is that I don't mark anything as proofread but would like to continue to clean up and check the accuracy of page number references as I have until now, and leave the proofreading for later. I can't focus on both, and marking the indexes as proofread was an honest mistake.

The second is that I will not categorize, and will list my initial choices, most of which exist, as plain text AS DONE HERE. This fulfills my need of initially identifying articles, which are somewhat different and very far from being final.

My category assignments are an initial and temporary impression on the article's contents. By the end of my day, after reading a pile of hooey, I categorized them as such, planning to correct them the next day, while studying the existing category structure. What was lost is the use of wiki software's categorization ability to tie up all my work under a single title, because it's impossible to remember every page visited. The other solution would have been is to tag them with a template, as is done with images and tables. In the context of the project's size, and being barred from temporary categorization, I see no other solution to tracking matters needing attention. But then, I discerned objection to that practice as well.

Placing a coloured background and a border was an attempt to elicit opinions and it succeeded. I have no problem with eliminating the border and using the existing <div class="prose"></div>, which is essentially the same. I am aware of all the personal links to the PSMLayout template.

However, resemblance to the width of a printed page width is crucial for the simple reason that it's not pleasant to look at, difficult to focus on and read, and the absence of it makes the claim of adhering to originality a joke. There is no book, journal, newspaper, or any published paper text known to me that consists of 850 pixel wide columns AS THIS PAGE. This may be a generational issue, as someone told me that reading such a wide page is comfortable and normal.

This fact, which a first time reader confronts when visiting Wikisource, is a major limiting factor in the number of active users. I compared the ratio of active editors to the number of registered users, and it's very low compared to Wikipedia.

Clarification of intent[edit]

The intent is to generate accurate article titles of all 92 volumes and create all TOC's before focusing on proofreading. The indexes are the natural extension of this work and I link the original page numbers to the main namespace article titles, but they will not be anchored to a specific article line at that time. Based on realistic estimates of the first 10 volumes, the estimated completion of all 92 TOC's and indexes would be by the end of 2010. The largest concern by far is the greatly underestimated number of illustrations needed to be processed and uploaded. Under current processing, this can't be achieved in the above mentioned time frame, and will be looking into a faster alternative.

The data collection is done by checking every page of every volume, cleaning up the article titles, author, and pasting this into a data table along with the .djvu page number, the printed page number, and whether the article begins on top of the page or requires section code. There are several tools which verify accuracy and indicate an omission by either the 19th or 21th century editors. Along with this process, I would tag pages with images, using the {{tl|PSMImage}} template, but then this would generate thousands of template links and many months before they are processed.

The first 10 volumes were used to learn and refine a system to yield a standardized and accurate result, while at the same time compartmentalize the page contents that distracted me from proofreading. These were the article titles and the idiosyncratic mixed case style used in the index. Results and methods are gradually being posted on my user pages, and any info is available upon request.

I hope that this strategy receives acceptance. — Ineuw (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Have you moved your content from the Page: namespace? Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cygnis insignis. I will now connect to the IRC because I don't know what you mean.— Ineuw (talk) 17:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
You wont find me there. You need to remove the content you created in the Page:ns, similar to that identified at this link, as discussed by several users at the start of section. Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I think we should keep the content, by moving it to the project space, is that okay with you? I had another look at the page I did for V. 7, but I'm not sure that is the solution either. Perhaps it should be a link to the page, which wouldn't require anchors, but the title links work just as well. Let me know your thoughts on that if like. Cygnis insignis (talk) 18:35, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
While waiting for clarification, I changed all Idx pages to problematic. Then, when I reached vol 7, I realized what is wanted and I just removed the line <pages= from every Volume index page and left with just an empty page like HERE I think this is OK.
It's NOT necessary to move the contents of the Idx pages, I think they just need rearranging in the original order and further proofread. My work can be regenerated instantly, by Volume, and/or in a 10 volume merged alphabetic order. The data exists in MS Access data bases, one for each volume and linked to a common database that manages merged lists. The output is wikified, ready to paste.— Ineuw (talk) 18:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
It seems to me that you have done a lot of work on organising that content, others may find that useful. The Vol. 7 page was left problematic because I thought it offered two or three alternatives, have you thought about which might be best? Cygnis insignis (talk) 19:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
My suggestions would be to leave all main namespace Index pages without content, but with the header & navigation links for continuity. The index (Idx) pages of the scans need to be proofread properly. I just can't undertake it at the moment, as I am correcting/updating numerous past issues here and on Wikimedia commons relating to image organization. I am concurrently posting about that in the project talk page.— Ineuw (talk) 19:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

pages needing images[edit]

Can you please stop putting pages with image redlinks into Category:Proofread? That category is not for incomplete pages. Wait until you've uploaded the images and the page actually looks like it should. Hesperian 01:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I am uploading them tomorrow morning. Good night.— Ineuw (talk) 01:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

DJVU images[edit]

Hi! Well done on your huge efforts with the PSM! I noticed you've been uploading a lot of images torn straight from the DJVU files. While this is better that nothing in the absence of original scans, DJVUs are heavily compressed, and, moreover, not optimised for images at all, which means that pictures are terribly and irreparably damaged from being put in a DJVU. has full quality jpgs derived from the original scans, just go the page linked to by the DJVU file source field on Commons and click "Read Online".

Compare, for example, this image from a DJVU, and the same image from the IA (zoom in to 100% to see the full-resolution image). Notice how the text is blocky and the image looks like it has been run under water after the DJVU'ification.

In addition, the IA method lets you save a full-size and pre-cropped jpg to your hard-drive rather than cropping bits out of a screenshot of a DJVU, which is hard to do when the picture is larger than the screen. Easier, and hugely better quality! Just though you'd like to know. Regards, and keep up the good work! Inductiveload (talk) 04:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


Do you want User:Ineuw/INote deleted or are you doing testing there? Jeepday (talk) 00:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Please delete it. I finally found a public template so there is no need for it.— Ineuw (talk) 00:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Little request[edit]

Notice modeled after [1]

As Template:New texts is monitored in IRC, and many users have it in their Watchlists, I was wondering whether you would consider adding the name of the text being added to the edit summary, rather than solely +1,-1. Even if it is just have +Name of work, -1 that would be most helpful. Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 20:38, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Message understood and thanks for the clarification. Will do so from now on.— Ineuw (talk) 11:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Resolving previously raised issues[edit]

This is the first of a series of posts, each dealing with issues raised in the past, and I wish to resolve them all sequentially.

Here, it's primarily addressed to billinghurst, Hesperian and Cygnis insignis, all of whom raised important issues in previous posts HERE and elsewhere relating to my contributions.

First consideration is the reduction of the maintenance and supervisory time administrators must expend on monitoring my contributions and suspicious :-) activities, which unnecessarily takes away from their limited time and interests, something I have no intent to do.

Secondary is the aesthetics of presentation. The changes decided upon will be re-applied to all my previous contributions in the PSM project. This would set the fundamental style for the evolutionary stylistic type-setting changes which I am already aware of because they are noticeable as one progresses over the span of the first 11 volumes. The proofreading guide is being updated accordingly.

Digging holes and then falling into them is not an unknown phenomena, and this is where one finds oneself here. The deepest hole is the infamous yellow border line because this issue relates to maintenance and aesthetics and which drew the most reactions, and yet it was never resolved. This holds up the creation main namespace pages for Volume 11 HERE, the data for which is ready to be pasted, and subsequent volumes.

Since the issue of broken templates concern me, and I don't exactly know what this means, I prepared several pages displaying the various possibilities and elicit comments:

  1. Current is the {{PSMLayoutTop}} template set, consisting of <prose> and the border which is easily removed TO LOOK LIKE THIS.
  2. HTML code to replace the {{PSMLayoutTop}}{{PSMLayoutBottom}} to avoid broken template issues AS WAS DONE HERE or without a border AS SHOWN HERE.
  3. The only thing I ask in the name of merciful aesthetics (and the pleasure of reading), is not to change the PSM project pages TO THIS.

I hope to settle this issue once for all to everyone's satisfaction and perfectly willing to elicit opinions with a simple yes or no question. — Ineuw 16:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Configuring external editor[edit]

That's actually a scripting problem, not an image problem as such. I know a fair amount about certain aspects of computer images and actually editing computer images, but I really have no idea when it comes to that kind of scripting to invoke an editing program. It might actually be better to ask on a forum more devoted to aspects of Wikimedia software rather than only images (such as the English Wikipedia "Village pump (technical)" (assuming the problem is common to bothe Wikimedia Commons and English Wikipedia). AnonMoos (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Some help about Vector needed by Alex...[edit]

I'd like to understand much more js, presently I barely can understand the structure of the scripts. All my monobook-based js scripts are unuseful with Vector; can you give me a couple of suggestions/a couple of trick just to begin scripts customization? Is here into en.source someone acrtively using vector toolbar customization? While waiting, I'll take a look to your monobook.js. ;-) --Alex brollo (talk) 14:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Alex, nice to hear from you. I gladly help in whatever I know, which is quite limited. What is it that you have problem with. I pasted my monobook.js into vector.js and it works fine. So now, I switched to Vector. Please let me know. — Ineuw (talk) 14:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Ineuw. A long time (from informatics point of view..... one hour is a century...) from my previous message, and I found and, in brief, I imported some of my old buttons into the new scripts adding them to Advanced->Format group of toolbar, and into the new "customizable toolbar". The most difficult task turned out to add the second button. So, thaks for your help, but now I feel much more confortable; as we say in Italy I feel that "Il ghiaccio è rotto", "ice has been broken", so that I'll ask your help at my next crash. :-) Thanks, see you here or there!--Alex brollo (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
There was a broken link to this talk page into it:Discussioni utente:Ineuw page, I fixed it. --Alex brollo (talk) 11:18, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

A simple, VERY simple cooperative svg free editor[edit]

Cinesi scuola e matematica Pall 90 1.svg

Hi Ineuw, just to tell you that I use often Google Docs, and I found an excellent new tool: the vectorial drawing tool. It can't import svg files by now, but it can export svg files. Here on the left you can see a running example (I used many variants of it into it:Indice:Cinesi, scuola e matematica.pdf). Perhaps the "rulers" could be re-drawn by such a powerful tool! --Alex brollo (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

External image editor configuration attempt[edit]

I would like to change the background of many images from here and would like to use (Windows) IrfanView as the external image editor. Studied the Mediawiki installation instructions extensively, but something is missing.

Selected the default external editor on My Preferences, and added this to my commons monobook.js:

 addOnloadHook(function() {
    var editTab = document.getElementById("ca-edit");
    if (!editTab) return;
    var editURL = editTab.getElementsByTagName("a")[0].href;
    addPortletLink("p-cactions", editURL + "&externaledit=true", "EE", "ca-exted", "External editor", "");

Whenever I try to edit an image like this, I get the following (index.php) in my text editor and no image.

Type=Edit text
Special namespace=Special

I am using Firefox (3.6.3) where there is no .jpg extension to which to assign a default editor, only variations of .jp???

Frankly, I am lost. Can someone help me through this? — Ineuw (talk) 18:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Moving PSM index pages[edit]

Ineuw, I have no problem with that. Actually, if you want to add to it feel free to it. The original reason for creating that page was to use it to track the changes on PSM. I never completed it. :( Your welcome to work on it and do with it as you please. It is a wiki after all! :) --Mattwj2002 (talk) 05:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

New section into User:Alex brollo/WIP[edit]

If poem is an interesting, but tricky tag for you too, here something you'd like: User:Alex_brollo/WIP#Inside_poem_.22tag.22. Bye! --Alex brollo (talk) 08:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem with justified text[edit]

Gday. If you have at the drop initial and the adjoining text at Popular Science Monthly/Volume 8/April 1876/Caroline Lucretia Herschel I you will see what happens when we have fully justified text, and yet don't hyphenate. I would still think left justified text would be quite acceptable as per User:Billinghurst/2billinghurst sDrewth 16:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi. It can be fixed easily, I already did it. Inductiveload showed me how to do it. :-). - Ineuw (talk) 16:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Breaking the section joins by wrapping it in {{nodent}} is hardly a fix. Sure that can be fixed too by other means, which increasingly adds a level of complexity, which is not the means where a simple design fix would manage it all. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:46, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
I understand. I no longer hold to my original views on visual aesthetics relating to publications. Please do whatever simplifies the work for yourselves. At this point, I am only focusing on the TOC accuracy, and subsequently the published Index and its accuracy LIKE HERE. For proofreading, I will follow the pack. - Ineuw (talk) 16:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi billinghurst,

I didn't forget this post and consider it important. It's just that I've been mulling over several issues, and was sorting them out as to where to post them.

First, I absolutely agree that the {{nodent}} is not a solution to the justification, and as far as I am concerned, please change it. As mentioned earlier, I definitely not wish to add to anyone's workload.

Regarding the User:InductiveBot operations, my concerns were with: titles, hanging indents, original paragraphs without indent, and the "stitching" together of pages where the next page began with a new paragraph and the {{gap}} and the resultant spacing between paragraphs. These concerns no longer exist after examining the results on pages of PSM volume 1. I just hope that Inductiveload's sake that he doesn't have to do much manual editing because of the time factor.

Unrelated to the above and in general, my confusion was caused by receiving numerous instructions which turned out to be nothing more than other editors' personal preferences. To this, my response is simply that if someone wants to implement changes on my work, I have no objections. However, I am uncomfortable with personal preferences presented as required by Wikisource rules and regulations, since I consider my time as valuable as anyone else's. - Ineuw (talk) 20:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

All a bit cryptic, not sure whether you are having a dig at me or someone else. The base premises that I think that we are working to are
  1. The words and structure of the original work are king
  2. We have basic principles that we all follow
  3. We have conventions and rules that guide our actions, though they are not absolute, and it should not be expectation of such
  4. We look for compatibility (historically and in the future), efficiency and effectiveness in our coding (probably in that order)
  5. Coding is not king
  6. This is a wiki and a site, so ultimately we are working together
With presentation, here are the basic rules that I apply to myself
  • (all dot points above apply), and such personal preference is subsidiary
  • Presentation is important for readability, a facsimile may be attractive in some circumstances, however, it is no longer a book, it is the web and it is a wiki; it looks different to everybody due to technology, c'est la vie sur le web
  • While presentation on the visual level may work, it also needs to work for the validation; if one does too much, then others may not/cannot validate. Keeping it clearer and simpler is better.
  • Listen to others concerns, and seek out critical opinion.
  • The continual reflection — Am I being a pedant? Does the input improve the output?
With regard to Inductiveload, he his own his own master, and while we talk on occasions, we don't follow each other around unless we see something interesting. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely not a dig at anyone, especially you! It may have been unfortunate to include it in the post. But, then, so have others' comments. :-)

I am not talking about words and structure, I also believe that words and structure of the original must be faithful. Otherwise, this site's concept is meaningless. My comment was based on past experience about personal preferences regarding individual coding styles. It was confusing, that's all. I adamantly enforce a rule on myself not to vary my work, so as to make others' efforts who follow, easier. If there are changes in the style it's because the original changed. Also, I am happy about the bot standardizing the work. I was concerned that it would encounter problems further on where the paragraph style varied. It hasn't, so that's great. I hope this clarifies my seemingly unfortunate observation included in my post. - Ineuw (talk) 00:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


Why are you removing running headers, [2] Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I am standardizing the layout. Most pages 90% don't have them. Is there anything wrong? - Ineuw (talk) 06:59, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Cygnis insignis (talk) 08:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I stopped removing it. - Ineuw (talk) 13:46, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Popular Science 75 Among Other Volumes[edit]

Ineuw, it is always a pleasure to hear from you. Yeah, I found a few volumes of Popular Science Monthly on Google Books, which I uploaded to the IA. I just haven't had a chance to upload to the Commons for Wikisource. Sorry about that. I figured you probably had enough work as is! :) Anyways, I will get those uploaded as soon as possible. Also, great to hear from you as always. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 09:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Easy way to find which PSM month?[edit]

For Index:Popular Science Monthly Volume 34.djvu I have just done one of the articles. Is there a ready reference or an easy means to find which month we are operating within to transclude the pages? — billinghurst sDrewth 04:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, I haven't reached volume 34 yet. Also there is no article listing except the TOC. - Ineuw (talk) 04:41, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

no need to edit User:Bookofjude/authorless[edit]

This is an auto-generated list that I get Jude to run his bot script occasionally. There is no need to update it (+/-) as where the author links are created then they become blue links then next time they won't be there; where the source page is change to remove the link, then they will disappear next run; if still red, then that will show what we want. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't sure, but being properly potty trained, I deleted it because it was linked to a page to be deleted. :-) - Ineuw (talk) 14:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Author input requested[edit]

Hi, Just wondering if you could help resolve an outstanding issue over at Wikisource:Proposed deletions#History of the Organization of the Armor and Cavalry. As far as I can tell there are some stand alone pages you created at first that are now redundant as they have been properly made sub-pages under a main article at some point afterwards. George Orwell III (talk) 21:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note and I also voted for deletion. - Ineuw (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks - it seemed easier just to touch base with you than trying to determine what the original intent was through second-hand guesswork by myself and others. George Orwell III (talk) 22:32, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I figured out the intent. :-) It was to be the sub-group header #3 of this page and abandoned it for not knowing enough at the time. Now, I noticed that it's missing navigation links to a main header, so I will fix it sometime. Thanks again for bringing to my attention. - Ineuw (talk) 22:40, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
fwiw... Armored Force does indeed exist - I fixed the typo in the original link and replaced it just now. George Orwell III (talk) 22:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:Can you please direct me to the page where you fixed the typo? - Ineuw (talk) 22:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


Please Ineuw, let that I review them by myself! I discovered that proofreading is a proof of the Latin sentence "quis scribit, bis legit" (do you understand Latin? it means: "who writes, reads twice"). The third one on barefoot horses is extraordinary. As you perhaps know, my "wiki adventure" began some year ago as a try to share barefoot horse knowledge...

In the meantime, I got sysop privileges into it.source, so I've to study more... about my scripts, the last trick is a python routine that builds anything into ns0 from nsPage basing on light, invisible signals seeded inside the text of Pages. Those signals are simply our it:Template:Ns0; the scripts adds needed section tags too! Then reads the sequence of pages, and collects anything needed (name and title of subpages, the four parameters of pages index tag from the location of templates into the text, and the prev and next ns0 page obviusly). It's really amazing to see the script at work... :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 22:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Little linguistic doubt[edit]

Dear Ineuw,

please read here about this page... Thanks in advance :) - εΔω 21:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I checked the original date of the document (1928) and it was the 19th century style to hyphenate words which were meaningful when separate. The word more-ever is out of use, and it means "moreover" or "furthermore" and it's proper to leave the word hyphenated. I hope this helps. - Ineuw (talk) 21:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
It helps. Thank you. - εΔω 06:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


I noticed your tests with images, I made another and gave a description of what I did. It took a minute or two, including finding the original, but is sure to be quicker than "Erased background - painfully long". I was, perhaps, heavy handed with the amount of black (ink), but this is the simplest method for good results: File:Popularscience test a.png Hope this saves you a lot of bother. Cygnis insignis (talk) 21:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh! I'll copy this to the scriptorium, so others can discuss and profit from the information. Regards, Cygnis insignis (talk) 21:53, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I put your proposal at WS:PD, opened here, if you want to comment. Cygnis insignis (talk) 03:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


Why the null Alfred Marshal link in en.wikipedia? 02:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

News about {{Ns0}} into it.source[edit]

Ijust added a experimental feature to {{Ns0}}. Now it show this icon: Writing Magnifying.PNG, which is linked to the Ns0 chapter/section pointed by template. The so-long-searched "back-link" from Page: pages and their text transclusion! Now, there are three uses of the {{Ns0}}:

  1. it can be used by a bot to seed section tags if/where needed, without any human work;
  2. it can be used by a bot to build almos perfect Ns0 sections/chapters, without any human work;
  3. it can be used to navigate from Page: namespace to Ns0 namespace.

I'm very excited about. --Alex brollo (talk) 23:04, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

new gadget[edit]

hello. since you reported page load slowness, I thought you might be interested in the new gadget I announed in the scriptorium ThomasV (talk) 21:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

A Study of Mexico[edit]

Ineuw, we generally don't bot text anymore. Why not grab the text when you edit each individual page? Please let me know if that answers your question. If you reply, please reply on my individual page. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 05:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any specific examples? By the way, I am doing very well. I am on IRC right now if you want to chat. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 05:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


You are claiming copyright of content that is in the Public Domain. You must remove the GFDL template from all the PSM images, which states "Ineuw at the Wikisource project, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license: ...". An example of this is found at Commons, File:TPSMV13P140 Hartt CF.jpg, please remove all false claims to ownership as soon as possible. Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:13, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I have no clue what you are talking about. I am using this form to upload the images to the Commons. It specifies there to use the following template:


- Ineuw (talk) 05:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

You also added the PD-US, that is correct. You claim to be the copyright holder, prove it or remove please. Cygnis insignis (talk) 05:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Cygnis. I now understand the issue and I will progressively remove them. Allow first the mass deletions of the original yellow images (which also contain the declaration). A mass deletion request is being prepared on the talk page of each of the volume. LIKE HERE. New images uploaded to the project will no longer have this declaration. I will list, on the PSM Project page, the corrections known to me to be attended to, prior to continuing with additional volumes and articles. - Ineuw (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Show me that I have made myself understood by clearing one category of the erroneous claim of ownership. Then proceed to do the rest. You have previously appeared to understand something, up to three people take time out from what they are actually interested in. This can be repeated on three separate occasions, and each time a sophisticated and coherent user - you - responds with a 'me understand'. And then you 'don't understand', do nothing to undo your actions and continue finding other ways to do much the same thing. You make a decision to do something testy, and it is takes an inordinate amount of good faith to suppose you are unaware of how it might be disruptive, and then repeat it hundreds of times. Then you start threatening users who point out there is a problem.
  • I am going to insist that you don't waste anyone else's time, do this as a matter of urgency. Cygnis insignis (talk) 18:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • And btw, if you check your browser preferences, you can suppress the image loading at commons - this will be the job (you have made for yourself) go much faster. Cygnis insignis (talk) 18:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Here is the FIRST IMAGE where I removed the GFDL declaration {{GFDL-user-w|en|Wikisource|Ineuw}}. - Ineuw (talk) 18:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

And then you 'don't understand', do nothing to undo your actions and continue finding other ways to do much the same thing. You make a decision to do something testy, and it is takes an inordinate amount of good faith to suppose you are unaware of how it might be disruptive, and then repeat it hundreds of times. - Can you be specific??? - Ineuw (talk) 18:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

And btw, if you check your browser preferences, you can suppress the image loading at commons - this will be the job (you have made for yourself) go much faster - This is very cryptic about suppressing??? I have no clue as to what you are referring to. - Ineuw (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Your browser has preferences, go to them. Find the checkbox that suppresses images when you load a web-page. The page loads much faster. When you need to load lots of pages, which you do, and you don't need to see the image, which you don't, the job should should be easier. You will be done faster.
  • To 'suppress the image' means to stop it loading.
  • If your intention when isolating 'suppressing' was to generate a contentious nuance, your effort was reasonably successful. If your intent was to make me feel foolish, by explaining something that you understand perfectly, then you were very successful! Cygnis insignis (talk) 19:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Not at all. I really don't know what you were referring to. I now searched the Options in FF (3.6.8) and the only thing I found was the checkbox to Load images automatically. I never explored what this referred to in the context of my general browser use, like reading a newspaper, etc., but now, I assume that this is what you meant. - I am always grateful when given an explanation and/or help, and I have no intent to make you feel uncomfortable. In the past, I reacted to your unpleasant mode of communications. I seek information, and not a fight, but your response to my last inquiry in the Central discussion forum was very unpleasant and threatening. That is not becoming for an administrator who is supposed to give guidance and explanation, instead unpleasant imperatives. Thus, I reacted in kind. - Ineuw (talk) 19:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
You reacted as you started, taking no time to digest the comments you receive and veering off into sardonic commentary and your admitted goal of drawing attention to your contributions. You have been editing wikis for years, yet posit questions like you just got here. If it is possible to take a wrong turn, like using a template to insert your signature into main-space, you have an uncanny ability to find and make that error. You then proceed to blithely roll this out in hundreds of microedits, ignoring the very clear advice not to do it. Someone else has to chase this up, like you they are unpaid and their time is valuable. I had to have an extended discussion with you to have your signature removed. I repeat that it is inconceivable to me that you were unaware that this would be deprecated, you have been editing wikis a long time. After stopping that practice here, you started laying claims to images at Commons. It is reasonable to suppose that given your demonstrated proficiency in written communication, better than mine I expect, you understood the requirements of uploads and templates perfectly. Another possibility is that you misinterpreted the form, that you suddenly thought you were the legal copyright holder of the images - I believe that is highly improbable.
If I am completely wrong then I apologise, a conditional apology is the best you can hope for at this stage. You need to find a user you can trust, and double check that what you are doing is a reasonable thing before doing it a thousand times. Cygnis insignis (talk) 20:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I believe that the files under discussion are derivatives of the original work, and you can utilise the tool [3]. When I have used it, the files become marked {{self|PD-1923}}, {{{{self|PD-old}} etc. and it is all automatic. I would encourage the consideration for the use of the tool. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:33, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Monday Aug 2, 2010[edit]

Hi billinghurst and thanks for the link. The use of the {{GFDL-user-w|en|Wikisource|Ineuw}} was entirely due to my original ignorance and misunderstanding of the instructions some 8 months ago when I began to upload images. Afterwards, I never even noticed the declaration of ownership. How is that for inattention, which is a big problem for me at times. - Ineuw (talk) 03:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Cygnis, I removed the GFDL notices from about 1,100 images which constitute all images to be used. An additional ~1,100 are the old yellow low resolution images which are to be deleted. I posted a message to an administrator dealing with mass deletions, HERE and am awaiting for his response. If the deletions take too long/problematic/etc., I will remove the GFDL notice from them as well.

I would like to continue the discussion started above yesterday, because I am keen to eliminate any discomfort and resolve the misunderstandings that involved my work here these past months. Everything you mentioned above, I am aware of, and we can resolve them in the coming days, but not tonight, as I am nearing the end of my day. In the next 30 minutes or so, I will complete the insertion of all the bio portraits to their proper places in the main name space articles, and will do each with a single save and avoid unnecessary microsaves. Good night. - Ineuw (talk) 03:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

yw. - Ineuw (talk) 03:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for attending to that so quickly. The images I saw look really good, I'm sure that others will appreciate the effort. Cygnis insignis (talk) 03:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Category corrections[edit]

Hi! I am not very knowledgeable about cnidarians and echinoderms, but if you put the name of the specie, I can categorize. I am particularly interested per the fishes and the cephalopods, if you have some, let me know! Best regards--Citron (talk) 20:22, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Greetings from Italy[edit]

Thanks for hello! Yes, you're true; I didn't forget - as an example - that there's a proofread about horses that is waiting for me! But ... I'm developing a couple of bold projects into it.source, and they need do much time to be built and tested, then fixed and tested again!

The first one is a try to put into nsPage all data needed to build automatically by bot the ns0 transcluded version. The key template, of course, is named Ns0. :-) The second one is to build a reference system, completely alternative and indipendent from Cite extension. The key template is called Nota. As soon as any of them will be deeply tested and widely used, I'll tell about their details here too, but if you are interested, I'll be happy to let you know about when you like!--Alex brollo (talk) 05:25, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I began to proofread that most interesting article about unshod horses. So I found a well known icon into Index page: Library-logo-blue-outline.png.... it comes from a talk between me and Magnus, so it's not true that I didn't contribute to en.source recently too! :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Index:Syria, the land of Lebanon (1914)[edit]

Talk:Syria, the Land of Lebanon has the info You need. It's from feydey (talk) 18:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the work! I added the images to the pages, I notice that only one is missing from page 204 -- File:SL 1914 D204 …. If You could add that also to commons. Thanks, feydey (talk) 12:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

IMO the US Army manual images are nothing special and not worth the effort. feydey (talk) 19:55, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


Las aventuras del buen soldado Svejk, Galaxia Gutemberg, Barcelona, 2008. Traducción de Monika Zgustova. ISBN 84-8109-771-3 y ISBN 978-84-8109-771-9 - as mentioned in w:es:El buen soldado Švejk, regards -jkb- (talk) 23:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

JSM in PSM[edit]

Hi, there,

The list of multi-part articles in PSM incorrectly lists this as a first part of series on JSM by Bain. The true first part of series is in fact this with misspelled title. I'm not too proficient in moving and renaming pages and not familiar with PSM project, so could you please help me fix this. Thanks! Captain Nemo (talk) 05:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I think I managed it. Thanks! Captain Nemo (talk) 05:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

PSM Volume 75[edit]

Hi Ineuw, yeah that is crazy! Good luck with They basically ignored me. :( If you want I can give you the tracking numbers. Google really annoys me sometimes, but I guess they are better than nothing. Anyways, thanks for all your help. -Mattwj2002 (talk) 10:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


Index:PhilipK.Hitti-SyriaAShortHistory.djvu has 5 images. Could You extract ( them to Commons? feydey (talk) 09:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! feydey (talk) 00:22, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Equestrian news from Italy[edit]

Thanks Ineuw for your link. Nevertheless, as you see, Horses and roads is not finished -I just came back here to work a little on anchor templates {{Anchor2}}. Add this code to both your vector.css and monobook.css if you use Firefox and you'd like to see "highlighting effect" of the anchor2 template:

span.InvisibleAnchor:target {background-color:#DEF;} /* highlights the "invisible anchor" obtained using Template:Anchor2 */

Then, I've another BIG book to add here: this one. Great to understand the istory of shoeing, and to search for the answer of a simple question: "Why are we shoeing horses, even if it's well known that shoes are an evil? Whis is the true significance of the telling "Shoe is a necessary evil"? Necessary... why? when? I'm not a "barefoot fundamentalist", I am searching for reasonable answers to these basic, but very important for horse welfare, questions. I can't believe that shoes are simply a mistake: the core of their advantage is all into that word, "necessary".

In the meantime, I'm very busy into a extremely bold project: to build a kind of SemanticMediaWiki without the SemanticMediaWiki extension... I did here the final tests, working around {{HAR}}. ;-) --Alex brollo (talk) 19:58, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Ornamental rules[edit]

Gday, from memory you had your head around ornamental rules. If that is the case, would you be so kind to add one into Page:WarnerBrosCoralineCorsets page10.png. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:33, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. It’s done. BTW. It’s sunny and warm in San Francisco. :-) - Ineuw (talk) 17:50, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

If You have time[edit]

… to convert the images in Index:The passing of Korea.djvu to commons (note 2 images per page) as the proofreading on that book is ready. feydey (talk) 23:40, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Also some images have been done already. feydey (talk) 23:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ineuw![edit]

Ineuw, I heard you were looking for me. :) How can I help? Sorry, I have been a stranger lately. Please leave a reply on my talk page. I hope to hear from you soon. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 11:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)