User talk:Ineuw/Archives/2011-06-30

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created on 30 June 2011, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.


good one [1] cygnis insignis 12:49, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

You need to add the source of image files, not a link to the djvu or back here; it is a circular reference. I wanted see if I could improve the image at study of mexico, after a series of clicks I discovered that info is not provided. cygnis insignis 09:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Recently, I was wondering about that as well, but this is how it was done since the beginning of my contributions. At the time, I had no idea that the sources were circular.

For "A Study of Mexico", I will change the image sources to: [2] which is the IA Identifier-access code.

The problem arises with my contribution of ~4,000 image uploads from the PSM project. They are all from IA (so far), but image uploads of the first 39 volumes are completed, and 136 of over 200 from 40th has already been uploaded. The remainder of the 40th volume will use Identifier-access: [3] as the document source. I can provide each URL for the first 39 volumes, but they must be replaced by a script.

Finally, please don’t waste your time with the Mexico cathedral image as several image experts tried and told me that there is no grayscale in the image. I don’t like it either, but used it temporarily as a place holder until I get a better copy of the same. I have several contacts at the National University of Mexico (UNAM), who will help me to locate another copy, either at their library, or at the National Library of Mexico, but it will take some time since it’s not a priority.

Your response is appreciated. - Ineuw (talk) 16:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I imagine a script would do it, I just make it a habit to give attribution; linking the source of the data is useful. However, if the quality is similar to those I've seen, your conversions from the same source, then there is probably less need to view the jpeg again; the PSM stuff seemed fine. I thought one of these might have got messed up somewhere (the cathedral?), prompting the library to rescan a page is pretty diligent. cygnis insignis 18:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Did you find this alternative, I'll upload another version, but it seems to suffer the same problems. cygnis insignis 18:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I overwrote your file, here, still looks spooky at some resolutions. cygnis insignis 18:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

This is great! 1000% better than what I uploaded. Thank you. - Regarding the correct sources for the Popular Science Monthly illustrations, I also believe that the info should be accurate. So, I created a list of all the IA URL’s and placed it HERE. One of the admins on the toolserver has helped me helped me in the past to delete the old yellow images. I will ask him/her again for help, if it’s OK with you. Please let me know. - Ineuw (talk) 21:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't follow, but if you mean you are linking the source, I'm sure that is okay with everyone.

Sorry, I didn’t see this reply. I was considering to replace the PSM images’ |Source = from a circular reference (which they all are), and point them to the IA, as I did with in the A Study of Mexico. To this end, I was going to approach an admin at the commons to write a script using the data for each volume I placed on the talk page of the commons PSM illustrations project category.Ineuw 20:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

You may have noticed a problem with A Study of Mexico/Index, the alphabetical order is not working out :( After wrestling with indices for a while, I came to the conclusion that I should ignore the columns and so on. I just use a single column, because it is simple, works, much easier, and there is no loss of meaning - it is probably an improvement as far as the reader is concerned. After actually using the ones I created, I now prefer them too. cygnis insignis 20:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Are you referring to Page:A Study of Mexico.djvu/265 and Page:A Study of Mexico.djvu/266? I re-did them exactly as they are in the original. Should I stop doing that? Please let me know, and I will wait for your answer.Ineuw 20:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Don't be constrained by the printed page, there is a difference between type transcription and a photo-facsimile. I don't think it can easily work, and it is not worth the effort trying. cygnis insignis 20:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I don’t mind re-doing them, but can you please point to a page as an example to follow? Ineuw 20:58, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Page:The prophetic books of William Blake, Milton.djvu/78.

While I'm here, why are you putting the header inside noinclude tags? And do you think it needs that PSM wrapper, with the thin yellow line? cygnis insignis 21:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the example. :-) I already completed 3 of the 7 index pages. Let me finish it as I started, since neither style are very useful.
[4] I'm glad you see what I mean, but it pains me to see users taking a difficult path for an outcome that may be counter-productive. I have spent a lot of time trying to develop simplified work-flows. I didn't always understand why things were done a certain way, only realising with the benefit of hindsight and deep reflection. I didn't invent these approaches, I selected them because they clear the way to focusing on the producing usable content. I'm trying to give you the benefit of my experience, not telling you to replace your personal taste with my own.
Your responses seem reactive to assertions of authority, while challenging authorities is the original virtue in my book, I think this presents a barrier to you receiving advice from me. Try assuming I have a good reason for making suggestions, not another arrogant user who thinks being an admin is a big deal, and see if my comments are easier to understand. I love the site and think it has great potential, I do my best to identify barriers to its development. cygnis insignis 06:19, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I was shown when doing the PSM index pages, that the 'noinclude’ tags are required for the main namespace display, where the separate tables of the scan pages should look like a single table. Page 1 header, the and page 7 footer are included.Ineuw 21:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

If you let me who that was, they may be able to explain why this should be done. Regarding layout, PSM and so on, you would be better off adding or changing one of the layout styles linked from the sidebar - "layout 1, 2 and 3". I'll help with that where I can. cygnis insignis 06:19, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Cygnis_insignis,

  1. I appreciate your guidance and please don't worry about the time I "wasted" on formatting the index pages. Although they were useless for this particular purpose, for me it was an important learning experience which will resolve other time consuming wiki table designs in PSM. Also, I still need the practice and I look at it as a learning exercise.
  2. I honestly don't remember who helped me with using the <noinclude> tags to properly join the Index pages in the main namespace, but you can see them starting here HERE and in the subsequent pages, and all volumes between 1 and 25.
  3. I've redone the first four index pages of the "A Study of Mexico" and placed them in my sandboxes waiting for approval. I also transcluded them temporarily in the main namespace page A Study of Mexico/Index to see how they look. For some inexplicable reason, the contents of starting with "Food, imported, high prices of, 146." doesn't line up with the rest of my transcluded pages.
  4. Regarding the infamous PSMLayoutTop/Bottom wrapper: I only care about the text being justified for the benefit of readers whom I directed to the articles. This was commented upon and it's important to me. Otherwise, the yellow border is meaningless and regret introducing it. It can be removed.
  5. When you were referring to "layout 1, 2 and 3", where would I find this?

Again thanks for your help.Ineuw 22:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I have seen, and used, noinclude in the Page:ns, I can't see what the purpose of adding it to the main page, around the header and PSM template. If you go to any page with transclusion, like A Study of Mexico, you will notice a link to layouts under "Display options" in the 'sidebar' (where the options "toolbox" and "navigation" appear). This has an option to justify text, it should be optional because modern layouts, including the sister sites, do not use justification; it is more complex and interferes with access. cygnis insignis 06:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

THANKS: The display options are great!!!! I didn’t know about it. I already removed the parameters of the PSMLayoutTop, with just the

so that the main namespace is normally aligned. Also, please advise if I can use the Indexes from my sandboxes to complete the book. Thanks again.Ineuw 06:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Index, links to page[edit]

I noticed you are working on the index to A Study of Mexico. You may be interested to know that I made two templates a little while back which simplify creating page links within a work. The page links would go to the main space page link (for example: 78). The idea is that you first use {{subst:TOCIndex}} to generate a machine-readable list of chapter titles and their first pages at A Study of Mexico/TOCIndex. Then, you create all the page links you need at their proper location using {{subst:pg}}. Finally, you mark the now useless TOCIndex page for deletion. In my opinion this adds a great deal of value to the index, really taking advantage of the wiki medium. If you would like to do this and need help, just ask me and I will get things going. --Eliyak T·C 21:44, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I used those templates to make The Jewish Manual/Index. The problem is that you need to constantly check which chapter contains which pages, and the templates take care of that for you. --Eliyak T·C 00:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Dotted lines into summaries rows[edit]

Much time ago, I came here and I got the help of Jayvdb to introduce my first source work: Index:The Modern Art of Taming Wild Horses.djvu. One of the most complex, and confusing codes where the trick to procuce dotted lines into summary entries! Now, I found by myself a different, easy, plain trick to produce such dotted lines: see it:Indice:Dialogo della salute.pdf. Is there into en.source some new, simpler trick to produce such dottet lines? If it isn't, I'd be happy to explain in detail my "discovery"! --Alex brollo (talk) 11:07, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Forgive me, my good Ineuw, for intruding upon your sacred user page. Alex Brollo: I would very much like to know that trick! Please explain here, on the Scriptorium or on my talk page. I've been wondering how to do that for ages, and it looks like you have it sorted out! We don't have a method of how to do that on en.WS, the best I could do was a dotted border of the cell. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:51, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Forgive me as well, but I'll second that request!!! A working template (as your's appears to be) would be most welcomed here too. George Orwell III (talk) 02:03, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

You’re all welcome and have a cup of java. I looked at Alex’s initial solution and that in itself is impressive, His 2nd solution HERE I haven’t had the time to examine.Ineuw 02:22, 18 December 2010 (UTC)’

Can I put details here? Then you'll use them as you like.
Here the steps of the solution.
# I created a simple image: File:Dots.png to be used as a background.
# I created two css classes:
/* classes for dotted summary rows */
.dotted {
     background-position:left bottom;
.opaque {
That's all! now, if you apply the class "dotted" to a table cell, then apply a span class "opaque" to the text of the cell, the whole bottom of the cell (but some space on the left: just to allow left indent...) would be dotted, but "opaque" white background of the text will mask dots under the text.
Here an example:
Test row for an index 45
Another test row for an index; but this row is much longer, just to let you see what happens with a normally wrapped text 55
I added the "magic code" into my vector.css just to see if it runs...--Alex brollo (talk) 16:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
yes it runs. Obviously you can implement such simple code into a template, that's all.
Just to do a test of a fastly built (and... simple!) template Template:Dotted summary row:
Introduction    5
The Three Fundamental Principles of my Theory, founded on the leading Characteristics of the Horse     13

@Ineuw (about tl|RigaIndice): happy to know that you like it. Really I'm working about it: the python script to add it automatically is running, but needs some refining. It runs applying a "directive" to the bot, hidden into Index page; see for example the code of it:Indice:Abramo Lincoln.djvu, the code it the html comment named "direttive bot". I apologyze, it's simply nonsense... this is related to a different template, RigaIntestazione, and not to RigaIndice.--Alex brollo (talk) 16:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining - it worked OK but it works better after I tweaked the template into a pure table-row span with 2 table-column cells that now needs an independent opening & closing "table" value(s) as depicted below.
<table width="50%" align="center">               <--- or  {| width="50%" align="center"
{{Dotted summary row| {{{chap. title}}} | {{{page}}} }}
{{Dotted summary row| "title" in a column cell of a table row | the "page" in the same row}}
{{Dotted summary row| {{{1}}} | {{{2}}} }}
</table>                                        <--- or  |}
@Alex - are my changes to {{Dotted summary row}} acceptable to you? George Orwell III (talk) 08:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm happy from your interest. I guess, that I'll import back into it.source some great idea. In the meantime: pre-existing it.source template it:Template:RigaIndice (better, "family" of templates) uses a differently built table row using 3 customable cells for vertical alignment; I simply added the dotted trick so far to first and second column, but I'll actively searching for good suggestions to rob. :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 08:55, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Well I think the .png itself is more the issue now than any template style/values might be. Not that it is likely but users who have "moved" their browser, etc. settings too "far" away from the defaults relating to font (display) size may see this solution differently than us. Depended on your setup/settings, you may see the same as I did when testing this at the different simple browser-font settings I have here ('Largest, Larger, Medium, Smaller & Smallest' of IE basically).
Not that 'Smaller & Smallest' are likely to be used but many older folks do use 'Larger and Largest' (which pretty much ruins the displayed fix). It seems the .png could use some "padding below the dots" or maybe a combination of settings producing the effect of additional "padding" - I don't really know how best to approach a fix for this.

Changing my CSS from background-position: left bottom; --to-- background-position: 0% 101%; helped to better "display" the fix at some of the font settings, but that just made the other remaining values display worse at the same time.

Ideas? -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:42, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I did some work on {{Dotted TOC page listing}} a little while ago. It is pretty flexible; the 3rd parameter takes the number of spaces between the dots, and the parameter "hi" takes a measure for an optional hanging indent (e.g. |hi=3em). It works slightly differently from the above: it uses actual period-dots. --Eliyak T·C 05:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

That looping dot-creation part is an interesting approach alright. While the "block-o-divs" table works just fine for the 'ol Index:- & Page:-space TOCs here too, I was hoping to find a solution to this "dot" thing that can also work with rather long (and at times) overly-complex tables and list-items, spanning several printed pages, brackets, etc. (primarily older works by the US Federal Government in short) in the process. The 'dotted lead-ins' would make for easier navigation and comprehension of such material while at the same time, staying somewhat "true" to the original publications.
As with most things around here, the looping dots work fine in Firefox, etc. but not so much on versions of IE (ex. the hidden & overflow parameters don't work correctly and the dots go on for 4 or 5 screens to the right before you can see the last cell). I'll keep looking though and sincerly appreciate any & all suggestions anyone might have on this. George Orwell III (talk) 07:45, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
According to, I have fixed that IE6 bug. --Eliyak T·C 15:18, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Eliyak, I take a first look to {{Dotted TOC page listing}}, it's terribly complex for me :-( ! I can't understand it as deeply as I would like. Nevertheless, I found inside the {{Loop}}, I didn't know it: thanks! --Alex brollo (talk) 09:49, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
The {{loop}} just repeats whatever you put into it, up to 150 times. I used it to repeat the period ('.'). Then, "overflow:hidden" hides whatever extends outide the div box, so any extra periods are invisible. Finally, I used the same white background trick to hide the periods that would be under the text on both the left and right columns. --Eliyak T·C 17:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Eliyak - indeed, I just ran through IE21 (IE6 IE7 & IE8) and the bug seems to have gone away with your 12/20 edit. Thanks alot!
Now I can look to making a pure, non-djvu page converting, list-item/table-row template based on this looping scheme sometime this week. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:22, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

{{gr}} -> {{PSM rule}}[edit]

Hi Ineuw, I just thought I'd let your know that the template {{gr}} (a redirect to {{PSM rule}}) has now been replaced and will shortly be deleted to reduce confusion as to which template does what, since "gr" isn't very descriptive. In future, you should use {{PSM rule}} directly. Just a head's up as to why any new {{gr}}'s will be red links. See you round, maybe in IRC! Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


Hi Inductiveload, Nice to see you. I don’t mind changing to PSM rule, but what are you doing about the approx 2,500 {{gr}} rules already in use in PSM?

Also . . . .

  1. While you’re changing to {{PSM rule}}, - Some time ago, I was looking at some new laptops for clarity and naturally, I looked at my proofread pages on a Mac Pro. The heart sank at the clarity of the display, and because the horizontal line across the {{PSM rule}}template is offset by some minute amount (I think it was below the center diamond) can this be adjusted for a perfectionist? :-D.
  2. Also, Can you please tell me how can I specify a cursor movement in a toolbar button - other than the newline? \n? e.g: I would like to specify the left arrow #40 keyboard code to move the cursor to the left?

Thanks.Ineuw 02:37, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, as you can see,the 2500 uses of "gr" have been botted, but in actual fact, there were half than number as each usage counts twice - one on the Page: and once in the mainspace. As for your questions:
  1. You'd have to give me a screenshot and tell me more about the environment on that machine. Which browser was it? I suspect it's a browser rendering matter, and beyond the ability of Wiki markup to anticipate.
  2. As for the sending of keystrokes, this isn't possible with "normal" Javascript as far as I know. Standard text-editing functions don't send keystrokes back to the browser, they just alter text in some HTML document. Having the browser pick up an arrow key is an whole different matter. I believe it is possible, but it isn't very secure, and may or may not work with your browser's security settings. If you consider than anyone could write a Javascript to navigate to the Start->Shutdown button using only Windows button, Up arrow and Enter, you can see why it is a security risk. More than that, I couldn't say as I'm not much good at Javascript. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 03:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick replies.
  1. The browser was definitely Safari, - the computer I looked at was in the Apple store.
  2. It slowly becomes clearer the {security} issues involved with javascript and browsers. Guess, I have no option but buckle down and learn AutoHotKey. I’ve been avoiding learning programming ever since I retired, but I see it’s not possible to get anything done quickly without it. :-)Ineuw 03:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I don't have Safari, and I'm not likely to any time soon either. If at some point you can get a screenshot, I'll definitely take a look.
Yep AutoHotKey is the way forward. I used to have a lot of scripts back when I was on Windows, and I miss it dreadfully. It's so useful! I'm looking forward to the IronAHK project providing a cross-platform implementation. If you need help, don't hesitate to come an have a word in IRC, as I can help with some of the more simple AHK stuff (and I have a nice script for inserting Unicode). It's actually very simple. I'm off now, see you around soon, I hope. Goodnight Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 04:05, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

About splitted start/end templates[edit]

Can I use you again as beta-tester and human inter-project link? :-)

I went a little deeper into the exoteric issue of "splitted templates" with a start and a end part. They solve two different problems:

  1. they avoid the need of passing "content" (text) as a parameter; this has been the first reason of my interest;
  2. they solve the hard problem of formatting "across different pages"; this, IMHO, has been the reason of en.source and fr.source interest about the trick.

Now, I imported your Template:Block center into it.source, then I edit its code as you see here:

<table align="center" {{#if:{{{larghezza|}}}|width="{{{larghezza}}}"}}><tr><td>{{#if:{{{1|}}}

Pay attention to two points:

  1. I used html tags table, tr, td;
  2. I added an interesting #if (the latter one); if there is NO parameter 1 (the content of the block), the temnplate doesn't "close" the table, it only opens it.

The good news are that server closes by default open tables! So:

  1. the same template can be used both as "complete" template, and as "start" template, simply passoing, or not passing, a parameter 1;
  2. when the template is used to format text splitted into more pages, there's no need of adding a {{Block center/e}} into the footer! The server will add closing code by itself. It is only needed into the last page transcluded text.--Alex brollo (talk) 09:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
This is very interesting! I believe that you’re referring to the issue of {{nodent}}. Am I correct? Ineuw 19:01, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
No, I don't know anything of {{nodent}}; but, yes, I presume that it could be applied to it too. I never tried templates who use p tag. I tested it on templates which use table and div html tags. --Alex brollo (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

My greatest challenge (so far) in the PSM project, is not to span split paragraphs that are not indented. The initial approach was the reverse: Using the {{Gap}} to indent, and omit the un-indented paragraphs. Unfortunately, that was not an acceptable solution because it would have required at least 100,000 calls to the template. So, User:Inductiveload implemented the {{nodent}} template and added text-indent:2em; to the {{PSMLayoutTop}} wrapper. Unfortunately, this would span the pages, so currently is not used, and text-indent:2em; is removed from the wrapper until a non-spanning solution is found.Ineuw 19:44, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

My solution would imply a change into main css. Imagine to define an attribute p {text-indent:inherit; } to generic tag p; now, the inherit attribute will be inherited from the containing block (usually, a div block). So, simply stating a div style="text-indent:0em" at the beginning of a text, as long as you like, all conteined p tags would inherit such attribute. This is theory, but I was just faced to a similar issue, and I'll test it into it.source. where I have sysop privileges. --Alex brollo (talk) 08:07, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Alex, Thanks for the reply but why aren’t you asleep??? - Let’s see if it works on and then I’ll present it here. Take care and thanks for all your efforts.Ineuw 08:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Thinking better and browsing it:MediaWiki:Common.css I found a very similar setting. Sometimes you found "inverse indenting texts", mainly into summaries: see it:Canti di Castelvecchio/Note alla seconda edizione. It has been the quiz text forcing me to find a solution. Now, I wrote these css rows:
div.indent {}
.indent p {
        margin-top:0em ! important; 
        margin-bottom:0em ! important; 

that state: any p contained into a div class="indent", have a left margin of 2.5em and a text-indent of -2.5em (in other words, the first row has a margin of 0em). My problem was the usual one: how can I avoid a broken row, when transcluding it:Pagina:Canti di Castelvecchio.djvu/241? I remember so well that page.... I almost went mad about. This has been precisely the beginning of my trip into "splitted start/end templates" :-), re-discovering by myself, once more, "the warm water". Then you addressed me to Billhurst thought, and I refined the whole thing. --Alex brollo (talk) 08:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The sample Italian page is very sophisticated!!! I am very impressed. This should be introduced to Inductiveload, or better, linked to the Wikisource:Scriptorium discussion.Ineuw 08:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
That page is not sophisticated... is a mess. Please use this one as a better example, I just fixed it: it:Il corsaro/Note and its source Pages: there it:template:Indent/Inizio and it:template:Indent/Fine are used in a plain way. In the meantime I'll fix Canti di Castelvecchio. Please feel free to develop the idea by yourself, with the help of your en.source friends... I saw, posting into Scriptorium a note on "dotted rows", that it has almost ignored, while here in your user page it got much interest. :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 08:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Your interest is both rewarding, and useful! I fixed Canti di Castelvecchio. :-)
Please, can you give me the link to a problematic page containing an example of your indent quiz? While solving Canti di Castelvecchio issue, perhaps... --Alex brollo (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Problem solved?[edit]

I tried it using my vector.css, now I moved the code into Common.css and I'm waiting for some exotic cache to be purged.

This is the very complex code I testet successfully into my vector.css:

.noindent p {text-indent:0em}

If you write simply <div class="noindent"> at the beginning of a text, long as you like, any internal p tag gets its text-align=0em attribute. If you put the div code once only without closing it at page 1 of a section transcluding pages 1-100, you'll see text indent into pages 2, 3... but they will disappear into the whole transclusion (since, as you know, they are rendered as a whole large div block). If you want to suppress indents into pages 2, 3... simply put the div code into the header of pages. If you need to stop noindent text, then close the div. Try please and let me know! I'll try into it.source, where indent is the default both into ns0 and nsPage. My test page is: it:L'insegnamento politico-amministrativo/Proemio. --Alex brollo (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes it runs, default indenting has been "killed" into that test page! --Alex brollo (talk) 11:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


Please give a good, deep look to the last paragraph of Page:The duties of masters and slaves respectively (1845).djvu/18 and to the first one of Page:The duties of masters and slaves respectively (1845).djvu/19. You'll find a broken paragraph, splitted into two pages, that merges into one. Observe italic too, and note - from html source of transcuded paragraph in ns0 - that there is a par only of p and of i tags. My conclusion is: the problem of splitted paragraph is solved. Test it adding some style to the p tag of page 18: I guess that such style will extend to all the paragraph into Ns0.

YES! IT DOES! --Alex brollo (talk) 11:54, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


Just to let you know that since Inductiveload has built the {{ts}} series, I have been removing {{t/ar}} and will soon be deleting the template. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the note. I used it a few times before I discovered {{ts}}. Are they being/will be replaced in the tables?Ineuw 15:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Already done. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy new year![edit]

Thanks Ineuw, but consider... really I got here, as usual, much more that I shared! :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 20:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

A paranoid... but necessary formatting :-)[edit]

Take a look to this:

O la luna, la luna era una mesta
Languida Dea!
Il dimon cui rodea
Bestial ferocia, prese un dì la scure
Abbominata, e le tagliò la testa.

Such a strange formatting is necessary, since it's an original and relevant trick by the author: it:Pagina:Il libro dei versi (1902).djvu/140. Next verses mention explicitely the vague "echo" of the word "Oliba" into the text:

giacchè par che si senta
Molto in sue note: Oliba.

Sometimes poets are mad; often wiki people is as mad as poets! :-)

Techno note: the text can be copied and pasted correctly. --Alex brollo (talk) 14:42, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

About indent[edit]

I just found a fuzzy behavior of indenting new paragraphs. As you know,it.source uses indented paragraphs as default both into div class="pagetext" (Page: namespace) and div class="testi" (the most common style for ns0 texts). From this, an innumerable list of strange bugs and "magic recipes" to avoid them :-).

While fixing indenting into it:Indice:Confessioni d'un scettico.djvu, as you see the first letters of new chapters are both enlarged and indented. Well, sometimes the paragraph were indented, sometimes they are not. Why? simply because indenting follows a curiuos rule "yes... no... yes... no..."; so, if no indent appears, it's sufficient to add one more empty row (or remove one) before the paragraph, and indent appears automagically.... --Alex brollo (talk) 08:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

links to wikipedia, PSM authors[edit]

I noticed you have created a lot of author pages with links to wikipedia articles that do not exist. A routine based on what PSM supplies as the author has lots of value, especially for redirects from abbreviations, but problems like duplication means someone may need to check those again. cygnis insignis 06:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cygnis insignis. Sorry for the delayed reply. I understand that the links to non-existing WP pages should not have been made, But the rest of your message is not clear. If you wish the links to non existent pages be removed, would it be possible to extract such a list from the database? My other thought would be is somehow to change the color of the links to red to show that they don’t exist, rather than removing them since articles are constantly being added. Another problem I was facing at the time of the authors’ page creation was, that the WP page names are not always identical to the authors’ full name, something which I was very careful to be accurate with. — Ineuw talk 20:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I created a stub for the one I found, Mrs S. B. Herrick. Redirects from abbreviations are rare at en.wp, and searching on them doesn't help much. One trick is to search on the surname and a subject or title using google, you can usually discover the birth or death date then search again using that. The software doesn't show redlinks at the sister sites, the simple way to check as you do it.
I had the idea you were generating a list of authors in PSM, perhaps someone can think of a way to generate a list to help you fix this. If they don't exist, don't create the link, it is simple to add when it does. I'm sure you appreciate that it is better to ask a couple of questions before going ahead and doing something many times, it saves a lot of trouble for other users. cygnis insignis 21:36, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Most author names were found in the US Library Library of Congress, and then I googled additional references. The list of reference places used are listed on the PSM page. However, when they didn’t exist in WP, (which I also checked in the exact manner that you mentioned), I left them as is, in the hope that the articles will eventually be added. Since I completed the list I didn’t look in WP to further update the authors, simply because of lack of time. I am aware that they have to be re-checked, but first, I would like complete what I set out to do in volumes 1 to 25. — Ineuw talk 22:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Author pages without WP links are now collected into a category [check a preview] so it would seem best to leave them empty, and look to run a bot across them at a later time. Also, for those regularly creating author pages phe (talkcontribs) has a nice script that you can run that does some lookups and attempts to complete data from some of the metadata at enWP. Phe also maintains a listing of missing author pages, and a check of those can also be useful looking for potential matches. As a further thought, I think that there would be benefit in collecting authors with initials only into a separate category as they often can lead to duplicates here at enWS, so it is another place that we could look to run some diagnostics looking for matches. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I really thank you for this info, as I was in the midst of composing a reply to Cygnis about the missing authors - that I have my eye on this issue and didn’t forget or ignore it, as with all other minor issues to be dealt with (I have many). It’s only my reluctance at interrupting the proofreading process until I feel a measure of advancement/accomplishment.

Already checked in my offline compilation of the PSM authors, and I estimate that there may be as many as 300 that are linked improperly (no Wp pages yet) and I can remove their links, as I just did on Eugène Aubrey-Vitet. I pretty well know which is incorrect by initials instead of their full first names. — Ineuw talk 09:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

If you have a list, and turn it into a wikilist, or come to that, even a bulleted list, then I can get the bot to run through and do that as a boring manual task better to be botted, than wasting good editing time upon it. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I am most grateful. I will prepare the list later today. Thanks again. — Ineuw talk 18:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Here is the list: List of authors with links to non-existent Wikipedia pages. There rest are questionable and I want to check them manually. Thanks again. — Ineuw talk 19:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

The funny separators[edit]

Gday Ineuw, I usually settle for plain markers/separators, however, for a bit of frippery I am doing a non-serious work. It has need of those funny/dapper separators, one at Page:Manners and customs of ye Englyshe.djvu/17 and I was wondering whether you would mind having a play there. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:13, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, with pleasure. let me recollect where I’ve seen them. — Ineuw talk 09:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Not very pleased with the variety of graphic elements and their size. Can you live with my selection? — Ineuw talk 10:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
It does my grade of work. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:39, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Poem formatting[edit]

Please Ineuw, can you take a look to this: Page:Horse shoes and horse shoeing.djvu/42? I applied the "state of art" of poem formatting into it.source, using left margin template coupled with a span tag to move single verses; but perhaps I didn't follow en.source habits and conventions. Can you fix the "formatting style" so that I can learn from? Thanks! --Alex brollo (talk) 15:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


I had forgotten that we had this template. So when you cannot fully expand the author's names, then please stick this template in the description field, and on occasions people can go past and update one or two. Also with regard to duplicates, I have checked and at this point there is no ready means to duplicate check, so we would just have to manually run our eye down lists like at Category:Authors-Ba. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the template. After your reply on the Admins board, I remembered why my initial approach of last summer was wrong; namely, I didn’t check the alphabetic Author listings and instead just searched. Now, I am began to re-check my Author contributions. — Ineuw talk 22:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Helpme about the login problem and image transfer[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, Ineuw. You have new messages at Chzz's talk page.
File:Ico specie.png
Chzz (talk) 19:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Re. renaming files on enwiki - I'm sorry, but there is no way to do that. We do not have a 'file mover' user group right (as some wikis do). The only people who can move files are administrators (SysOp).
I might be able to help get the moves done quickly though; if you could list the old/new names. Let me know if I can assist. (Back over on enwiki please!) Cheers, Chzz (talk) 21:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)


Oops, thanks!. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 07:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

yw :-)

New PSMer[edit]

There is a new user doing PSM (Special:Contributions/StateOfAvon), and many of the works are at the top of the hierarchy, not layered. Looks like those works will need to be moved to the proper place in the hierarchy, which I will leave with you as it is your speciality. Billinghurst (talk) 23:02, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I suspected something like this by a glance at the (Scriptorium) discussion, and filed it to be dealt with later. Since I have your attention, I might as well pose several questions in regard to the PSM main namespace.
  1. Made sure that every article title is unique, with the exception of the monthly recurring features which are not categorized. This was done to address User:Ingram’s first concern about the complete path appearing in the Categories.
  2. Tested this idea once to see how long it would take for Google to list the title in a web search. — Waited several weeks, but the redirect page never showed up in a search.
  3. However, if this idea is feasible, then the current titles with the path will have to be masked somehow from appearing in a web search.
  4. This would mean that creating a list of title redirects and move the current article categories to the redirect. I have the means to create the page name and the corresponding redirect, but some kind of a bot would be needed to read the list for the pages’ creation.
  5. Another bot would be needed to move the categories to the redirects.
  6. If this has merit, I would repeat the proposals wherever you suggest, either on the project talk page, or in the Scriptorium for input by the community. — Ineuw talk 01:44, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
P.S: Will continue creating unique main namespace article titles, regardless.


First of all, it makes sense to me to make the PSM redirect to the mainspace, not vice versa - I would gladly be vocal on the subject if required ;) In the meantime, just wanted to ask about this edit, does the Portal parameter not work on PSM articles? It seems like Portal should definitely be linked. StateOfAvon (talk) 19:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Never seen a portal on this wiki, or should say that I am ignorant of its existence. This is a small community, and cannot to be compared to Wikipedia, but relevant ideas get implemented gradually, and they are only a matter of time and human resources. My above proposal falls into the same category as well, as there are unknowns (to me) and am sure that the idea was explored previously by others. Also, I am very reluctant to make commitments until the time to implement them is available.— Ineuw talk 22:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
There are many portals on the wiki, Portal:Marriage, Portal:Poetry, Portal:Christian fiction, many, many portals... StateOfAvon (talk) 22:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

It goes to show you that I am a poor choice for information, as my Wikisource knowledge is quite limited, and narrow in the sense of my commitment to the PSM project. But, I also know that the possibilities are endless. For example, just glancing at your marriage portal entries, reminds me to strongly recommend the use of this {{PSM link}} template by User:billinghurst, first created for listing of PSM authors’ works, but is usable anywhere where a PSM article is referenced. For students of social history, it provides the time frame when the article was published. — Ineuw talk 23:52, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Category:Academic_discourse is an excellent argument for why we should be using mainspace when we can :) StateOfAvon (talk) 02:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
If you referring to all the "Popular Science Monthly/Volume/Month/" prefixes, I agree, but there are technical issues that may negate the effort and I believe they were looked at by the admins and programmers before I came on the scene. There is a long history of PSM related issues and you would have to look at archived postings, and that’s not worth your time which is precious. You’ll see that the issues will eventually be solved to everyone’s satisfaction.— Ineuw talk 02:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Yup, that's my view of it - in the longterm they "should" be in mainspace, but I'm hardly arguing that we should debate it all night on Tuesday and make a decision..."it'll work out" works for me ;) StateOfAvon (talk) 03:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
-) The "all night" debates is what I get lost in, because I feel that many issues remain in the nether world (unresolved). There is a (renewed) discussion in the Scriptorium about the main namespace article layout, about which I stated my opinion a year ago, but without a proposal because I was a newbie. Though, I mentioned then — that the document layout issue in the main namespace will be brought up by others. I am reluctant to get involved because of the endless discussion, as well as because I am not the one who will be expending time on implementing it.— Ineuw talk 03:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 39.djvu/231 - whenever you can finish this, it'd be great! :) StateOfAvon (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done

Excellent, one more article I can move to "completed" in my userpage :) StateOfAvon (talk) 23:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Offset value in {{right}}[edit]

Gday, with something like {{right}} rather than doing {{right|text text {{gap}}}} you can do {{right|text text|2em}}. Hesperian built an offset value into the template.

PS. Your talk page is getting some length to it, and may be worth while your considering whether it is time to archive all or parts of it. Billinghurst (talk) 00:41, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for both matters. Putting the {{gap}} seemed a silly way to do it. I will slowly replace the ones I’ve done previously, because I know where they are.

How could I archive the posts ending at the note I just made at Matt’s post Mattwj2002 (talk) 11:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC) as:


Ineuw talk 01:04, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I apologize if I misunderstood your comment on my talk page. I would like to read up on how I can archive my old talk - by myself - and not have someone else do it. I certainly don’t need, or wish others to do what I am authorized to do as a user. My misunderstanding is based on my attempt to archive about a year ago, and my final assumption then was that it can only be done by admins. — Ineuw talk 14:34, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't get too fussed about those that have been done, they are what they are and the next person to proof the page can amend them if they so choose.

Archiving? Two ways, just move this page to a subpage and (re)name to indicate that is now an archive, as Hesperian has done with his, or move the components. I would suggest the first, and with the redirect that is created, just edit the text to be your new talk page. On the archive page you may wish to poke {{Archive header}} at the top. An archive is all up to what you want to do, it just seems that most people now don't want to see a couple of years of talk history nor, want to edit a page that is about 160k in size. Billinghurst (talk) 14:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.— Ineuw talk 14:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Missing section in v.2[edit]

Here I have added a section link that a user has indicated was missed. I will leave it to you to add the pages. Billinghurst (talk) 14:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

"The Manifesto of the Communists"[edit]

Haha, it's what I love about PSM - the rare gems you stumble across. StateOfAvon (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Conventional Lies looked cool enough I was going to start parsing it into chapters and stuff if that's cool with you? I just created an author page, I'll try to flesh it out a little as well. StateOfAvon (talk) 21:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Listing in new texts[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, Ineuw. You have new messages at Htonl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Htonl (talk) 20:18, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Obit at Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 45.djvu/302[edit]

Would you mind helping get the obit for Ellis transcluded to the right spot in the main namespace, so I can link to the right spot from the author page. If that requires for me to proofread further obituary pages then please just add that as a comment. I would also think that for Ellis it would be worth adding template wikilinks for the articles that he wrote for PSM if possible without a lot of fuss. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:57, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

This is not a problem at all. Consider it done - let’s say within an hour or so. I created such a template if this is what you mean, in Wikipedia but so far I didn’t organize myself to use it.— Ineuw talk 21:27, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The main namespace page was created here Popular Science Monthly/Volume 45/July 1894/Notes, including its link from the Popular Science Monthly/Volume 45 TOC. I now realize that eventually all entries ought to be linked to Wikipedia and thus each paragraph will have to have an anchor and a section label. Hmmmmmmmmm. :)— Ineuw talk 23:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that; appreciated. I only put section tags in, just in case, and if they go unused, it isn't a problem, and in response to your question, I don't think that it is necessary to put proactively put them into all articles, and similarly with anchors. All the transcluded pages are anchored to the page number, so it is not necessary unless you want the very direct route. Also, anchors and sections are something that can be added on a as needed basis, and like wikilinks are fine retrospectively. The important thing is getting the text right (proofread). We can also link to Wikipedia in other ways, easiest is simply to wikilink a name, again that can be retrospective. Then you can look at separately expanding items on a case by case basis, and if they need to be dug out to a separate page, it is easy to step into that space as it is just a variation to the transclusion process. Well, that is my 20c opinion. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:48, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
To note that I have added two additional parameters to {{PSM link}} and updated the documentation accordingly. The example given is the output that I wished to generate for that author page. To note that for these extra two parameters there is no positional usage as they are the exception to the normal, and getting five positional parameters is just ugly. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

This great, thanks.— Ineuw talk 05:32, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Popular Science Monthly[edit]

Hi. Might be interested in helping in creating TOCs as you did for Popular Science Monthly/Volume 26. Can you advice where to find info on how to do it? Is it automated or manually done? Thanks Mpaa (talk) 22:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi. THE PSM TOC are generated using VBA from a network of MSAccess databases (one for each volume linked to a central database. I "collect" the required info and the programs format it, and I generate the lists as needed. It also matches the index page numbers to the TOC .djvu number and generates the Volume Index, an Author list and a few other things. If you wish to do a TOC, work in Windows and familiar with MSAccess, I gladly email you the databases.— Ineuw talk 23:02, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
OK, thank you. I'll take a look and give it a try if not too complex. Mpaa (talk) 20:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

After thinking of why (and how) I got to do it, you are most welcome to the databases yet, if you are referring to generating the PSM TOC, index pages, main namespace article headers and author-article lists, it would be an unfair waste of your time because there are only 92 volumes. Other projects would require modification of the database.

The PSM database must evolve along with the changes in the publication over the years. As of now, I made a cursory check of up to Volume 50, but based on prior experience, I expect to find changes within these volumes. Currently, I am in the process of assembling Volume 27 and know nothing of the titles of subsequent volumes.

The process begins with assigning accurate page numbers and if you look at Volume 48 scans, the page number order is messed up twice. I coloured them purple and will have to deal with it when time comes.

Also one cannot skip and process volumes randomly because there are serial articles with identical titles which appear throughout the project. In almost all cases, it was I who added the Roman numerals for the main namespace article names like HERE.

So, let me know what you have in mind and will gladly help, in the least, keeping you informed as to what you can expect and make your plans accordingly. — Ineuw talk 22:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I am willing to contribute to tasks limited to a few days per task, as it is difficult for me to guarantee continuity. I realise this work is quite complex and requires continous attention and follow-up in time, and probably I still do not have yet enough knowledge on how to perform the maintenance work needed that you mentioned. So probably is not a good idea. Maybe I can start with TOC of smaller books in smaller projects. But if you see some tasks in this area that fit my time availability and knowledge, glad to help. Mpaa (talk) 08:37, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it’s not worth your time to waste on the PSM TOC’s. I recommend that you get used to tables and design them with "abandon." :-). It’s pretty much required for most TOC’s — they are versatile, flexible and reliable. Once you learn how define them, you will use them naturally and here I can readily help, just ask away.— Ineuw talk 14:17, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Pages to relocate[edit]

When you get the chance, it would be great if you could move

and keeping a watch at Special:Contributions/StateOfAvon for further works that haven't been located appropriately. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Got it. Will do so.— Ineuw talk 19:44, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Not sure why this is being done - they are all published articles that fit What We Include guidelines...why move them to my userspace? That makes no sense. StateOfAvon (talk) 20:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
They shouldn't be moved to a user space, it would be appropriate for main namespace articles to be moved to their appropriate final resting place in the hierarchy as shown in Wikisource:WikiProject Popular Science Monthly. There is good guidance there also to get them created in the appropriate place so there is no requirement to move them. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
  1. I looked at User:StateOfAvon’s work. He only wanted specific segments (sections) of articles to be published in the main namespace and not the complete articles. This, I wasn’t sure if is acceptable in Wikisource. If this is not so, then I was wrong.
  2. To expand his selection and completely proofread an article and then manually create the main namespace header takes almost an hour because of article length, month of publication needs to be located, the author’s name must be checked, TOC the entry, etc. This is done from the database once the relevant data has been entered.
  3. At a single sitting, he generated eight short main namespace articles which would have required at least a day to properly format for the main namespace — something I wasn’t ready to do in the middle of my work and under the circumstances and in hindsight, my offer to proofread requested articles was optimistic and unrealistic. — Ineuw talk 02:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I think that the style manual generated should be the overarching guidance document, and in the course of time, you will probably find that the smaller segments of text will be subsumed into the larger parts of those works. If parts are being displayed, one has to test whether they can standalone, or whether they are completely parts of a larger work. If they are standing alone, it would be worthwhile annotating in the notes section that they are parts of a whole and whence they originated. At that time a decision can be made whether to add anchors to the parts, and create redirects that point to those parts or to leave as is. As these works are transcluded, it is not duplicating the original source. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I got it. It was the space concern, and then the proofreading quality was my concern.— Ineuw talk 03:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Leaving aside the PSM project on which we seem to disagree, but turning to more agreeable topics; do you know who I would speak to about having Author:William Matthew Flinders Petrie become one of the "let's all cooperate" authors on the front page? He seems fascinating - to whom would I speak? Thank you. StateOfAvon (talk) 18:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I am really not sure who handles this, since I never participated - please ask in the scriptorium. As for PSM, I thought we resolved the issues to your satisfaction. Am I wrong?— Ineuw talk 02:11, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
I apologise, I am satisfied right now - I only worry that you are not, this is all I mean. But I want to put the unpleasentness behind us and focus on new things on which we agree to improve the library! StateOfAvon (talk) 19:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Not at all, I am happy that you are getting what you want and there was no unpleasantness. I didn’t know that transclusions don’t take up page space. When I began some 18 months ago there were several unpleasant exchanges until I understood what was desired. I didn’t want you to have a similar experience.

This is a small Wiki and by the very nature of the work, the normal state is quiet. One can work on a project for days, or even weeks, without seeing any public input or comment in the Scriptorium. Everyone peeks out of their "cubicle" and participates for a short interval and then everything returns to normal, very much like as it must have been in the days of old in a Scriptorium. — Ineuw talk 20:33, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Slow page loading[edit]

Here is where I read about the slow page loading issue. Mattisse (talk) 18:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. It confirms that my load-edit-save problem is not just on my side. Adjusting the antivirus and removal of advert cookies helped to improve, but I also observed that regardless of day or night, (as I work a little at all various times of the day), the problem is inconsistent with high traffic times: on the American continent, Europe, Asia, and Australia.— Ineuw talk 19:45, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

What American Zoologists Have Done for Evolution III[edit]

This is not the third part of an article series. In 1883 Morse wrote a two-part series entitled "What American Zoologists Have Done for Evolution". Eleven years later he wrote a presidential address in which he choose to revisit the topic; somewhat confusingly, he choose to use the same title. Nonetheless, despite having both the same authorship and the same title, the article is entirely distinct from the two-part series that he wrote eleven years earlier.

I'm guessing you don't use your watchlist much, and are unaware that last week I went through all of the putative multi-part PSM articles, and purged many that were distinct articles, often decades apart by different authors, but with the same title. This is one of those situations. except a little more confusing because the author is the same. I moved it to a title without the "III", because it is not part of the earlier series; and you have just reverted me.

Hesperian 23:41, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I see that you have created Popular Science Monthly/Volume 32/November 1887/What American Zoologists Have Done for Evolution IV. Well in that case we have two distinct multi-part articles, with the same title and by the same author, yet a decade apart. The fact that this putative "IV" page is numbered "II" in the text confirms what I am saying. The titles should be

And the disambiguation page at What American Zoologists Have Done for Evolution will need updating. Hesperian 23:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I now understand perfectly well that I can and must indicate differences in the titles and just numbering them consecutively is not sufficient. So, many thanks for your help in correcting the titles. To be honest — at the time of titling them, I only cared about duplications without thinking to check the differences because the duplicate title popped up as such in my offline database scheme. I already know that there is a fifth article of the same title coming up in volume 32, so I’ll be careful.
If I add to the article title "Speech" (or something appropriate) is this acceptable? By the way, did you find a lot to be corrected??? — Ineuw talk 00:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
No worries. I don't understand your "Speech" question. I made 19 corrections.[5] Hesperian 00:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Page moves and link updates done. Hesperian 01:08, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

By "speech" I meant to append the last two titles with the word "Speeches" but I now see that it’s not necessary. Thanks again.— Ineuw talk 02:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Author:Franklin Smith[edit]

If you're ever bored, I've just pulled Author:Franklin Smith's works out of PSM and am going to spend this week focusing on proofreading them - they seem quite interesting for a guy about whom nothing is known (the curse of common names, at least he isn't James Smith). If you're able to add any biographical details, or find other works by the same Franklin Smith, would love the help on his author page :) (Or if you were bored and wanted to proof some pages ;) ). Hope your day is going well. StateOfAvon (talk) 19:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

(He is a contemporary in agreement with Herbert Spencer, whose works I notice you enjoy adding, is why I chose you to annoy ;) ) StateOfAvon (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Just read your first message as you were posting the second. First of all, you never bother me! I may be late in composing a reply, something I must do to, to be coherent. Thanks for the link to Franklin Smith. Based on his writings, you may find the basic birth & death info on the US Library of Congress which has the best search engine, by author, topic and key word. You will also find it hard to believe that none of the Europe’s major national libraries can be searched by author. Here I am referring to the British Library, the French, and the German National libraries. Australia, I am not sure.
I logged on to complete a "show and tell" for you by uploading screen images to Wikisource to demo what I mean by end of line and end of page hyphenating, and finding errors easily when proofreading. Please bear with me and I will post you a message.— Ineuw talk 22:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Show and tell[edit]

I placed 5 images in this category Category:Proofreading help images for you to look at. I will write additional explanations if not later the tomorrow. In the meanwhile, please ask any questions you wish. — Ineuw talk 01:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Volume 1 validated[edit]

Index:Popular Science Monthly Volume 1.djvu has now been validated. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 09:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Authors with initials, convert to redirects[edit]

If you have moved an author name with initials, resulting in a redirect, I would say that we should keep them as redirects, rather than deleting them. They can be useful, or if there are multiple with the initials, they can become redirects, eg. Author:W. H. Larrabeebillinghurst sDrewth 14:44, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Got it. This did occur to me, but wasn't sure if it's OK to leave so many redirects in my wake. The focus of concern was/is that my additions to the PSM authors' list may have created some mess (duplicates) and it's on my list of tasks to contribute to its management in due course as I learn more about the rules regarding the Author namespace. Currently, I must catch up by updating PSM author contributions which I neglected and have grown to be nearly unmanageable.— Ineuw talk 16:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Author:Edward Smith[edit]

There needs to be a new author page for the PSM contribution, because that Edward Smith must be w:Edward Smith (physician) whose dates are 1819–1874. That seems clear enough because he was F.R.S. and M.D.; and w:List of Fellows of the Royal Society S,T,U,V which I take to be a pretty good list has just the one Edward Smith around at the right time in 1873. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:55, 30 June 2011 (UTC)