User talk:Jarnsax

Welcome to Wikisource

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

• Help pages, especially for proofreading
• Help:Beginner's guide to Wikisource
• Style guide
• Inclusion policy
• Wikisource:For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in

• Proofread of the Month
• Monthly Challenge
• Requested texts

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{Collaboration/MC}} to your page for current Wikisource projects.

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

Have questions? Then please ask them at either

• Wikisource:Scriptorium; or
• Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username if you're logged in (or IP address if you are not) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.

Again, welcome! --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:53, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Index:Bergey's manual of determinative bacteriology.djvu

Is this work in PD in the US? You have not added a license tag indicating whether this is so. Wikisource only hosts works that are in the public domain in the United states. Works published in the US in 1957 must have failed to renew their copyright to be in the public domain. See Help:Copyright renewals for more information. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:53, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: See https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/10728#/summary. My assumption is that the MBLWHOI Library specifically checked for a copyright renewal as part of the claimed 'due diligence', and did not find one. It's also on the Internet Archive (uploaded there by MBLWHOI) and has been on Commons for a while. Searching the USCO catalog online, it's renewal doesn't show up, and it should (it would have been due in 1985). It was probably not renewed because the 8th edition had come out in 1974. Jarnsax (talk) 20:12, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

That assumption is not always a good one. For example, some works on the Internet Archive were scanned and uploaded from the University of Toronto, so that Canadian copyright law applies instead of US law. As a result, we always ask that due diligence be done for works hosted here, and Commons will require a suitable license to be added. The 70-year rule applies only outside of the US, so a US-specific license needs to be added on Commons. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:16, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

This is a US work.. see the copyright page. I checked the USCO catalog for a renewal, and it didn't show up. The only way to check it further would be to find the original registration in the CCE, and check it by registration number. Do you want me to? Jarnsax (talk) 20:21, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

But you did not add a US-license on Commons. You must add a US license to the file on Commons regarding this work's copyright status precisely because it is a US work. The license you added is inadequate for a work published in the US. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I'll fix it... it's registration A313572 from 2 Dec 1957, registered to "Williams & Wilkins Co.", and it wasn't renewed. It's on page 976 of July-Dec 1957. Jarnsax (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Bergey%27s_manual_of_determinative_bacteriology.djvu&diff=303537916&oldid=303532116 Jarnsax (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Image pages

When a page consists of an image, instead of creating it completely blank, it is preferred to use {{raw image}}, which will allow a temporary image to appear on the page until a suitable one can be uploaded to Commons. You can see how I did this here. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Yeah, I was just leaving them alone for now because I think these already have extracted images on Commons. Jarnsax (talk) 17:41, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

That may be, but creating them as blank pages is far from best practices. You could simply wait to create them, if you find that using a template is troublesome. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:47, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

A more serious issue I notice, now that I've properly looked at the work, is that only a small portion of it seems to be in English. The policy on English Wikisource is against hosting such works here. Works that are primarily in one language are hosted at the Wikisource for that language, and works that are in multiple languages are hosted on the multilingual Wikisource. The Norwegian expedition report looks like it ought to be at the multilingual Wikisource instead of here. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Okay, good to know. I think about half the articles are in English, but still. Is there a way to port what I've done so far over there? A bunch of the pages have the OCR on the wrong page, that's why I was creating the pages, I was moving it. Jarnsax (talk) 17:59, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

There are some mul:WS admins here. I think @Billinghurst: is one, but am not certain. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Not me. Locals with dual list themselves at Wikisource:Administrators, best though to look at their list at mul:Wikisource:Administrators. They should be able to import. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:27, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Bindery marks

Wikisource generally does not transcribe the bindery marks in works. These are usually letters, number, or letter-number pairs that appear in the bottom corner of pages. Their purpose was to assist the binder in correct assembly of the printed pages into a book. We do not transcribe them in most cases because they are not part of the work any more than a library stamp would be. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:42, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

I had asked on the IRC channel what the practice was about 'signature marks' (that's what they are called, actually) and go no responses after quite a while.... I was left with the impression, after looking on the wiki, that there was no actual rule one way or the other, since I could literally find nowhere that it had been publicly discussed. My opinion is that transcribing the signature marks into the footer could not hurt anything, and I don't think library stamps are at all a good analogy, since those are added after the book has actually been sold, and are unique to the particular copy, while the signature marks are actually printed on the page at the same time as the text block. The same argument (that it's not actually part of the work itself) would also apply to printer's colophons, and it seems to be routine to transcribe them. Jarnsax (talk) 01:40, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

True, bindery marks are printed on the page before the book is sold, but they may be cut off when the pages are trimmed. They are not part of the work. It doesn't hurt to transclude them, but general practice here doesn't include them. Many Wikisource standard practices are not documented in a central location because we tend to focus more on content than documenting and doing paperwork. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:43, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Proofreading

I'm confused by recent edit like this one. I don't see any difference. Are you "proofreading" them a second time? If so, you should mark the page as "Validated". That designation indicates that the page has been proofread by a second set of eyes. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:40, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: They are 'broken', apparently after being edited with the visual editor. It won't let me 'validate' them, even if I've never edited them before, and from asking other people on IRC they see the same issue. Once they have had the null edit (with whatever invisible change it makes to the status) they work fine (I still can't validate them, since it thinks I 'proofread' them, but other people can). Jarnsax (talk) 03:43, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

My guess is that the visual editor is inserting some kind of non-printing character into that text. Jarnsax (talk) 03:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Ah, we're going through that again. We get annoying software issues like this from time to time. Thanks for explaining. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: You're seeing the recent changes spam (which is what I guess you are looking at) because I'm running through the rest of that book and doing null edits to all the broken pages. Jarnsax (talk) 03:47, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Figure spaces

Hi, I didn't know about the {{0}} template until seeing your comment. I've been using {{fsp}} (e.g. in pages like Page:A Voyage of Discovery and Research in the Southern and Antarctic Regions Vol 2.djvu/205), which at least has a logical name and is using a real figure space character. The only advantage I can see of the 0 template is the ability to change to using a different character or string. A disadvantage of it is that search strings that go across the template won't work as the character is present in the text. However, given the extensive use of the 0 template, I think deprecating it in favour of the other is unlikely to happen. If you wanted to try, I would give support. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:01, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: Glancing around at some of the places where it's used, yeah, that actually is a 'legitimate' use for it... see The American Journal of Science/Series 3, Volume 22/Note on the Observations of Comet b, 1881, made at the United States Naval Observatory, where it's being used to make tables of astronomical coords line up correctly...

TBH, my opinion at this point is more that it's documentation (and name) are kinda bad, and should just explicitly tell people to use {{fsp}} instead if replacing numbers. Jarnsax (talk) 20:48, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Page:Catalog of Title Entries of Books Etc. July 1-July 11 1891 1, Nos. 1-26 (IA catalogoftitleen11118libr).pdf/64

If you find yourself adding {{hi}} on eveyr entry, perhaps you should add that formatting to the TemplateStyle? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:51, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Probably would make sense, just not really sure about the whole CSS thing. I'm about to where you had stopped, tho, so I'll be cut-pasting in the table formatting anyhow... won't really make much difference at that point. Jarnsax (talk) 08:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

New work

I wondered "who is Robert Carter?" People will have to come here to find out! Is it not ready for main space? A nice choice to include little histories here, there are all sorts of lines of research that these are useful for.

I don't know what to say about the table rendering, and you seem well informed, but as you may know the behaviour of the Page was noticed to be troublesome with paragraphs, thus the nop. With tables I found a way to stitch them in transclusion, many [cough] years ago, but the behaviour of Pages and their transclusion has continued to change (better or worse I don't know) and affect some solutions. So just a caution on what works now, but it is probably fine. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 07:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis: Other than the image, it probably is ready, but I've been messing with other things since I finished the first run through. Actually, though, I had no idea who he was, either... I transcribed that book because of it's listing at Catalog_of_Copyright_Entries/Original_Series/Number_1 (which I have been working on a bit).

And yeah, it's actually surprisingly interesting... was a New York religious publisher for 50 years, and interacted with many well known people. Jarnsax (talk) 09:16, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Been and fiddled

Hi. To enable downloads of our reproductions to work properly, we put the ToC on the root page and wikilink them. So I have done that. Our guidance also is that we prefer arabic numbers rather than roman numerals for chapter titles. I have moved the subpages and updated links on the respective pages. As a mote, numbers of us break down and separate our root pages with {{page break}} to represent the non-contiguous nature of these pages, though there is no requirement for that either way. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh, you beat me back to the root page. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 23:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I noticed you working, and had tried to avoid conflicting while you finished that up. I definitely appreciate it... I had waited a bit after finishing the first run through, hoping that someone else would hop onto the transclusion (since I wasn't certain about the exact style points you hopped on), but figured that poking at it was the best way to get attention. :) I am certainly fine with any common tweaks that make the layout better.

Now, if you don't mind, take a look at my annotation of the first page at Catalog of Copyright Entries/Original Series/Number 1 (in particular, the second entry is the book in question, now (YAY) using {{wdl}}) and tell me what I'm breaking over there. :) Jarnsax (talk) 00:07, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

If it's not apparent, the info in the tooltip is off the scanned card in the Catalog, i.e., actual registrant as indexed in the card header, and registration number. Jarnsax (talk) 00:09, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

LOL. Am I or the community that predictable??? I don't see any issue at the referred page. I have pushed it to {{default layout|Layout 2}} as the full screen is VERY full. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:16, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I think it's more a lack of confidence on my part that someone has not already created a better way of doing it, and that I'm not hacking together something problematic. It was finding {{tooltip}} and {{wdl}} earlier that prompted me to start.... I had been trying to figure out a way to shove an extra column in with {{annotation switch}}, and that was really broken.

I've been waiting for 'a while now' for WD to develop to the point where stuff like this is possible, as it seems a step toward the eventual goal of using WD to directly reference PD editions hosted here (as well as sourced copyright clearances). Jarnsax (talk) 00:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Placement of License templates and inconsistency in quote marks

Hi, License templates are only meant to be the rootpage of a work and don't go on subpages—unless the subpage has a different license to the rootpage. In The Relentless City the chapters should not have license templates.

I also see that you've changed some of the quote marks in this work to curly when you were validating. Consistency is important and it looks strange when there is a mixture on a page. I never use curly quotes on enWS, which is why in this work they were all straight at the time of proofreading. This needs resolving. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:37, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: As far as the license templates, I'd seen it both ways, and assumed that it was an oversight when people didn't put it on each page....never seen a 'rule' one way or the other.

As far as the typewriter quotes, yeah, I tend to use curly quotes, and didn't mean to break it.... I'd actually noticed when looking at it again last night that you had used the templates, thought 'crap I probably broke some of those', and already put scanning back through it on my to-do list for today. Personally, I prefer the curly quotes, but what bothers me more is when punctuation is run together....I noticed you are particular about hair and thin spaces when needed, and that helps readability a lot. Jarnsax (talk) 17:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

In case it was not clear, the reason I was messing with the 'white space' at the top of chapters is that, for some reason, when the double line break is in the target page instead of a {{dhr}} at the top of the page itself, the rendered page gets an extra half-em or so of space on top, just enough to look weird without really being obvious, since it's 'a bit wider' than the space between the title and the text. Jarnsax (talk) 17:51, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: Should be sorted, I went back through the whole work and ran a search on each page's markup for explicit quote marks, and changed everything to either a typewriter apostrophe, or to use the templates. Also found a couple more typos while at it, "Charhe" is easy to miss. Sorry for the hassle, and thanks for catching it.... suspect it came from switching between different projects. Jarnsax (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

"lint" and anchors

Your "lint" edit to The Reminiscences of Carl Schurz/Volume One/Chapter 01 and the other chapters removed some valuable functionality since the "center" tags set their "id" values to an anchor label. I expect you were just applying a utility of some sort, and I appreciate the need to remove deprecated material, but the utility didn't work completely well. In this case, the deleted functionality (which I use in The Reminiscences of Carl Schurz/Volume One/List of Illustrations to locate particular illustrations in a file) can be duplicated with an {{anchor}} using the label value. For example, {{anchor|gracht}} can be added to the first illustration in the file above. I am in the process of doing this, but I think you should refrain from using the utility in these cases until it is fixed. This was an early work of mine, and I doubt you will find such code often. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 15:06, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bob Burkhardt: Not a utility, just a failure on my part to realize that the anchors were actually being used (I have seen id used just 'because it was in the example' a lot). I apologize, and will go back through the chapters of that work again specifically, instead of hitting them off a bug list. The point wasn't to actually 'change anything' about how those works display, but just to shovel away a bit at the use of 'deprecated' html (semantics.... HTML is for 'content', CSS is for 'presentation').

FYI, in case you are curious, Special:LintErrors/obsolete-tag is the 'bug list' I was using. Jarnsax (talk) 19:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bob Burkhardt:The pages I had touched, and the rest of the chapters in those three volumes, should be fixed and/or done now, as far as restoring/keeping the anchors and what I was doing. Please let me know if I need to do anything else. Jarnsax (talk) 21:49, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring these. The anchors were my only concern. Originally the anchors were at the top of the illustration so the illustration and the caption shows. Your anchors are right at the caption. I am going through these files for other reasons and it will be easy enough for me to move the anchors. The hard part was having the label at hand, and you have taken care of that. So don't bother doing anything more. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 22:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Lint -

Any chance of looking at these high and mid priority issues:? https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:LintErrors/html5-misnesting?namespace=104 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:LintErrors/misc-tidy-replacement-issues?namespace=104 https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LintErrors/misnested-tag&namespace=104

If you are serious about doing repairs also get hold of AutoWikiBrowser.. In some of my efforts in repairs it's been very useful :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:25, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh and please note {{c}} has to sit-outside {{larger}} etc... due to HTML nesting rules ( see also H:DIVSPAN}} ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:46, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Lint (Some thoughts)

@Jarnsax:, Thanks for the efforts in cleaning stuff up, much appreciated.

I would however make some suggestions.

First, add:-

// create a user defined object
var myLintHints = { };

// specify some object component
myLintHints.rooms = "*";

// communicate user defined object
mw.hook( "lintHint.config" ).fire( myLintHints );

// finally, load gadget
mw.loader.load( "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:PerfektesChaos/js/lintHint/r.js&action=raw&bcache=1&maxage=86400&ctype=text/javascript" );

to your common.js - This will provide a partial lint analysis tool, as a button in the top-left of the edit view. ( You will still need to check pages manually as well though as it doesn't necessarily analyse header/footer generated content.)

Second: When having linted a page for a single error, using the tool mentioned above , a page should also be linted for other minor lint errors if possible ( Such as repairing mismatched italics at the same time as replacing obselete center tags for example.)

Third, When you find a single page within a grouped run that has a lint-error, it's advisable to look at other pages in the same group/work/Index.

Fourth, if you change {{smaller}} to {{smaller block}} etc. then you will need to do this consistently across a whole work (or grup of pages). Auto Wiki Browser can assist with this. The same goes for converting other templates, or changing deprecated formatting to use current equivalaents.

Fifth: H:DIVSPAN - Some templates have to be nested in a specific order due to HTML rules.

Fifth: If removing old/deprecated formatting, make sure you remove/replace both the opening and closing tags with the correct equivalents. This one has caught me out recently. ( I omitted to remove the opening or closing tag, or managed to swap /s and /e tags leading to expected but tiresome unintended lint-errors.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: Yeah, doing it completely manually, it's easy to not catch everything... I'd looked for some tool to do it, but the one I had found (WPCleaner, I think) isn't enabled here. TBH, part of why I wasn't attacking some of the 'higher priority' things is they looked like they could get involved.. if it's something like <center>, I'm generally assuming other instances of the same error will be near it in the list, since it's apparently chronological (though just now I was fixing the indexes on the old Popular Science volumes for misused/missing {{nopt}}, which is a dozen or so pages each).

I think I am probably going to give up and install AWB again....hopefully it's less of a buggy pain in the butt these days, but the 'edit this list of pages in a row' thing is just too useful.

I will definitely give that linting tool a try, probably quite useful for regular proofing as well. Thank you for that.

And yeah, for some reason I had it fixed in my head that {{center}} is inline, probably because if it needs to span multiple lines I tend to use the /s /e version for markup readability. Jarnsax (talk) 08:27, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jarnsax: I also use - https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/PAWS -

The following command line to pywikibot in a "bash" shell notebook:-

 pwb.py listpages -ns:104 -linter:"stripped-tag"  -lang:en -family:wikisource -format:" * [[{page.loc_title}]]" | sort

Generates a sorted list of all the stripped tag. It can take a while to generate though. ( Other lists can be generated, by getting the relevant report name from Special:LintErrors to feed to the linter options.).

pywikibot can also generate lists from other reports, so I would suggest reading the documentation if you need to do that for other cleanup efforts. ( I'm not sure if it is yet possible to tie up PAWS and AWB though.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:50, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jarnsax: in Page: namespace, a proportion of the Stripped tag errors can be resolved by looking at the footer, and inserting a blank line at the start of it when the last item of the body is a list item , or a tag on it's own line. It can't be automated as there are situations where the blank line isn't needed.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:12, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Just sounds obnoxious to learn when to use it. Yay. Jarnsax (talk) 09:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

migration of The Reminiscences of Carl Schurz

I notice your revision of a poster pertaining to this project. I am currently migrating this. I have started with Volume One. See Index:The Reminiscences of Carl Schurz (Volume One).djvu for what I've accomplished so far. Very little, but I hope to persist for awhile. This is the main reason this old project has attracted my attention once again. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 21:03, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Nice! I was updating it because I noticed you had posted sources, but it looks like an interesting work. Jarnsax (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Bob Burkhardt FYI, my null edits were just to note that (after your work) I scanned over the page (just using find-replace) to double-check that all of the quotes were turned the correct way. Jarnsax (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I do the edits using a macro, but I check them individually also. Once or twice there has been a problem when a quote stretches over multiple paragraphs, but this is easily fixed. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 20:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

lint with rule or smallrefs?

Hi, I was wondering if you could let me know what is the specific issue with code like you removed here? I use this frequently in footers, would like to know what I should use instead. (I don't personally have a problem with just leaving it blank like you did, and letting the software figure out on its own that it needs to place references at the bottom...but it had been my understanding that a bit more formatting, i.e. making the reference text smaller to match the original, was desirable. -Pete (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pete TBH, it's not that there was specifically an issue with that code, but that I was paging through the entire book fixing references (that were using <p> instead of {{pbr}} inside references, without closing it, which is broken) and had noticed that the vast majority of pages in the work weren't done that way, so I tried to make it consistent while flipping through. "Lint" probably wasn't the best edit summary for those, but I was making a 'lot' of edits, mostly purely lint errors.

If you want to do it that way, I have no problems (it does look better) just please make sure it gets consistently done one way or the other over the whole book. :) Jarnsax (talk) 19:59, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

OK, thanks for explaining. I had not encountered {{pbr}} and I'll look into that. I've generally used {{nop}} for that purpose, I know that's not its main purpose, hopefully I haven't caused problems.

As for ensuring that kind of consistency, I hear you, but I'm probably not your guy. I do my best to be consistent, but my interests lie much more in making text accessible to the masses, than in ensuring that every "i" is dotted. I'll do my best, but can't offer big assurances. -Pete (talk) 20:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pete Normally I won't have messed with it, I only noticed because I'd been specifically going through the references. {{nop}} should be fine, it won't throw an error in references... it does almost exactly the same thing as {{pbr}} (insert an empty div) pbr just adds a half-em on padding on the top, so it looks more like the regular paragraph breaks.

It's less that I care about 'invisible' HTML bugs like that, then that the more important bugs on that list (like, broken multi-page tables) are buried in an immense pile of stuff like unclosed italics. Jarnsax (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Great, I really appreciate the explanation, and I'll standardize on the pbr template for that purpose going forward. -Pete (talk) 21:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pete FYI, I'm flipping back through it, and changing it to {{rule}}{{smallrefs}} like you had done (the rule isn't in the original, but particularly in this book with all the continued footnotes I think the visual break is needed, which was probably your reasoning) Jarnsax (talk) 22:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks. I don't remember for sure, I might have decided like you suggest, or it might just be habit after having worked on similar works that did have a rule. It's something I don't usually put a lot of thought into, since the footer doesn't show up for most readers anyway. I can be a lazy Wikisourcer that way :) But I do agree, it's a formatting choice that I think is better than trying to be 100% faithful to the original formatting. -Pete (talk) 23:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pete I try to think about it as 'how would the typographer have laid this out if he wasn't cramped for room', usually...if the book is physically hard to read, with references shoved into the right side of the text block, or (like in Ruffhead) actually floated around the side and bottom of the text block, it's better to just not bother...don't duplicate unreadability. Same idea, if there is a continued footnote it's doesn't have that arrow at the start to visually separate it from the running text, so it kinda needs a rule to prevent people from having a wth moment every time they track from the last line to the middle of a footnote, lol. Jarnsax (talk) 00:04, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Seems sensible! -Pete (talk) 02:08, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Federal Register documents

Great work: I'm really happy to have you helping. I would like to encourage you to do a few things that I think will make these transcriptions stronger and which I'm basically doing anyway when I validate.

• Link the title on the index page to the work itself.
• Use non-breaking spaces and alt text and structured lists (via a template or HTML) for semantics
• Let me know if I can help.

If you disagree or just don't feel like it, NBD but those are a few things that I see that can make your work a little better and I hope you don't take this as talking down or dictating (sometimes I come across as way more rude than I intend). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@User:Koavf Didn't take it that way, I'd noticed some of the stuff you had done and stole it. :) As far as linking the index pages, I mostly hadn't bothered yet because I suspected some might get their pagetitles tweaked (I think the source you were using lacked the actual 'titles' and took some liberties with the formatting). Part of the reason I went looking for the Register to get the correct 'page layout' instead of a web version.

And yeah, non-break spaces, I used to have a page from an actual 'typographic manual' that had a whole list of places not to wrap lines, but it's something I tend to not think about unless it's in a table or something.

Regarding the lists, yes, being properly semantic is mucho better, I've just yet to figure out (I'm sure someone has templated the code) how to override the default appearance of the 'ordinals' without trying to write dumb CSS into the page. Easier on Wikipedia when you don't really care what it looks like, lol.

I'd actually wondered if you were going to be annoyed that I had hijacked your 'project'.. I'd actually run across these because the linting mentioned above... a bunch of the old ones (Bush II to Reagan, so far) were uploaded by a bot and were full of buggy HTML. I'm "fixing" them for now, (like, 20%-ish of the lint errors list) but they could probably be scan backed as well at some point. Jarnsax (talk) 04:11, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Not at all: this is not a personality-based project, so hijack away. As you can see, I was super-active for awhile but between an injury to my finger and a death in my family, I've been seriously limited in wiki-editing and only now getting back into the swing of it. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Poet Lore formatting...

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Poet_Lore,_volume_31,_1920.djvu/51

Dent here is not going to apply as you think it will.

It's set on the DIV not on the indvidual paragraphs.

I think the intent here was to set indentation for the paragraphs, which isn't necessarily done on English Wikisource.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:40, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00 Yeah, IIRC was trying to figure out how to get it to look right in page space, and figured 'oh well, it looks right transcluded' and gave up. Jarnsax (talk) 09:46, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

In this instance there's also a CSS rule somewhere that overrides the text-indentation set by the DIV, for the first-paragraph on the page. @Inductiveload: Is there a reason why a rule for the text-indentation for the first paragraph is being set somewhere? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:54, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

LOL. I guess 'it's specifically programmed not to do that' is a great excuse for why I couldn't get it to work. Jarnsax (talk) 10:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Ruufhead...

https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Index_talk%3ARuffhead_-_The_Statutes_at_Large%2C_1763.djvu&type=revision&diff=11579811&oldid=11520868

The style guide was updated. The reason for the change, is so that an appropriate rendering on mobile (where the side-noted approach might not be appropriate) can be provided. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Nice, and thanks for letting me know. I wasn't real happy with the appearance (it was awkward looking) and figured someone would find a better approach. Jarnsax (talk) 20:44, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Lint removal..

You may find the following useful:- https://public.paws.wmcloud.org/User:ShakespeareFan00/linthints.ipynb

As it provides a sorted (and grouped by work) list of pages with remaining missing or stripped HTML markup. As you were doing lint removals you might want to use it to periodically figure out which pages remain.

If you need more information on PAWS ask. Unfortunately PAWS and AWB are not yet integrated, but I assume you know enough to use the list responsibly. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:18, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Portal:National Union Catalog

Just for you ^_^. Also:

Any one paying good bucks for the crap in this catalogue has been royally screwed by us.

—v.671, p565, top right

Inductiveload—talk/contribs 08:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

{{wdl}}

Template {{wdl}} is the problem. Please don't pester the help. I didn't write that one. My templates are stupid compared to that one.

If you want to see it in use, see: Portal:Aesop's Fables.

If you want to see the bibliography, you have permission to review my edits.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh jeez. At this point I have about zero interest in putting any more effort into figuring out what your problem is. You clearly don't know what you are doing editing WD, and I'm done arguing with you. Jarnsax (talk) 02:39, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian: In Module:Wikidata link, after the "look through the site hierarchy" bit, the modules needs to check for P910 (and should probably look for P2354 and P1455 as well), and if they exist, rerun the "look through the site hierarchy" test on the entities they are linked to. You will need someone who actually knows Lua. Jarnsax (talk) 02:58, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

commons:Category:Books with redirected Wikidata link

Talk about categories that fill up!! Get to it, dude!!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Lol. Actually, I think most of those are just one scan, but that's still 400-odd files, yeah. I've actually been working over on enwiki, changing references to various websites with "amateur" transcriptions of bits of "New York" to use wikipedia:Template:Cite Q and have the actual page and volume number (about 30 or so, I think). While glancing at the docs for it, I noticed (in the notes at the bottom) that making Wikisource transcriptions be the "preferred" place to get linked automagically is actually in the to-do list, as well as linking WS author pages if a Wikipedia article doesn't exist. For that to work, tho, people need to see Cite Q as an improvement.... which needs legit bibliographic data, really specifically sorting out different editions. Fun times. Jarnsax (talk) 15:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Maybe you could start with mine then....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:39, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Once I finish fuzting with "New York", it's my plan to start working up my list of Hathi IDs again. I saw some titles that I think are probably the rest of the Haddon Hall books nearby. Glad to get the impression you see the reasons behind what I'm trying to do, now, and that I'm not just randomly messing with your stuff. One of the (kinda random) pages I've subbed it into is wikipedia:Ovid (town), New York... the way it looked before (including the dead link, half the time) is not uncommon... there is much crap referencing on wp. The way that article sits right now, once Cite Q supports wikisource, and wikisource has a transcription, it will automagically correct the link.

If, as seems likely for this work (since it is paginated continuously, and has 'parts' and 'chapters' that span volumes) it'll get divided up that way when it goes to mainspace on wikisource. That will probably need a second set of WD entities to work right, we'll have to wait to see how the code works for citations, but they will be "parts of" the work, and "published in" the volumes. Citing those and overriding "volume" in the citation for the bits that span them seems likely. It'll be pretty damn nice if the chapter names and page numbers in citations become links to the exact spot in the transcription.

I'm actually thinking about, for anything I come across that is actually "done" on wikisource before they finish, just using the overrides in Cite Q to "make it work" and leaving a note in the markup to please not fix it until they finish the coding.

I've actually found another bug, lol. 'Cite Q' understands "editor-in-chief" as a property, and provides them to en:Template:Citation as the first editor, but commons:Template:Wikidata Infobox on Commons completely ignores it, and just shows the "editors". I'll have to nag someone over there too. Jarnsax (talk) 18:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

author parameter is for people

Hi. In the {{header}} template, the author field is only for people, not for organisations. If you wish to reference a wrok is undertaken by an organisation, we suggest to use | override_author = (organisation), we then encourage the addition of | portal = (organisation) and list the pages on the portal page. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:45, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Also noting that the pages of the Dakota works seem to be their own work if I look at the scan from which they are drawn. I have moved those pages to 1862 Territory of Dakota Session Laws and set the previous root page as a disambiguation page. It is possible that it may be a {{versions}} page. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Fair enough... TBH, what ended up the the 'author' location was just what got autofilled from the index page, I hadn't really looked into it that closely. Several of the pages (the TOC, and a couple of the chapters) had been created by someone else years ago... I somewhat figured that they would end up moved somewhere better, I just wanted to get them out from under "Session Laws" as a top level name (since that was incredibly vague) and check that the sidenotes were working (they hadn't been transcribed at all). Thanks for sorting it out. Jarnsax (talk) 08:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Autofill cannot predict everything, especially when not set to avoid the problem. I saw that it wasn't your work initially, just wanted to be open in my actions. None of us like ugly surprises. After looking a little more deeply they are definitely disambig. I have also created a Dakota Territory portal. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: No problem at all, I definitely appreciate it getting in the right place before I get further into it. Jarnsax (talk) 08:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: FYI I'll fix the ToC right now, to point at where you moved it. Jarnsax (talk) 08:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

.. or you'll beat me to it, lol. Jarnsax (talk) 08:20, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Ah! :-) The value of using the regex editor gadget m:TemplateScript and its ability to save a regex. — billinghurst sDrewth

@Billinghurst: Since you were looking at this... does this look sensible to you? 1862 Territory of Dakota Session Laws/Chapter 8 The chapter is the "Code of Criminal Procedure" and is a bit over a hundred pages long, so I think it definitely needs split up, just not sure if this is the best way. Thanks. Jarnsax (talk) 11:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

In recent years I have not worried if it is a longer page as long as I am not pushing the transclusion or the template limits. No problem with the break up, any sensible subdiv is always fine. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:18, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Em-dash template and other bits

The em-dash template is documented to be "a convenience template" for those who don't know how to or are unable to type an em-dash directly. It should never be used to replace em-dashes that have been entered directly. From time to time a bot is run over all the uses of {{--}} and replaces them with a proper em-dash anyway. Thus it is pointless making a retrograde edit. As far as changing text to {{asc}} is concerned, this is only of any value when the typed text is in lower case or mixed case. When its in all-caps, all it does is make the text tiny. There is no indication in The Prince and the Pauper that the publisher meant the captions or chapter headings to be in small caps, and thus this template is inappropriate for this book. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 10:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle The only reason why I type the template in is because people tend to type the wrong dash, constantly, and it's a pain in the butt to use the toolbar to retype them, or repeatedly scroll to the preview in order to see which one it is (it's almost impossible to tell the difference in the edit window font, for me at least). I'm aware they get replaced, and I don't edit a page just to do that (since I can tell if it's the right one when looking at the actual "page" easily).

As far as the image captions, they pretty obviously are in smallcaps in the original... you can explicitly tell because the punctuation marks are taller than the letters, which would not be the case with 'capital letters'. The only reason they look "tiny" is because someone specifically made them smaller when adding the images. You can also tell because the full-width letters (M, N, B, etc.) are "square" instead of "rectangular", which is also the case with the chapter headings.

Using smallcaps for headers (not "capital letters") is actually standard typography... unless it's in a "display font" they were set in smallcaps (as the ones in that book are) in nearly all books in the "hand typesetting" era. It's typically only in Linotype or Monotype books where you see "all caps' (because they didn't want to switch typefaces). Jarnsax (talk) 10:20, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually, after coming across a chapter heading that actually has punctuation in it, those are in a display font (the letters aren't shorter). The captions are smallcaps, though.. like I said, they are shorter than the punctuation. Jarnsax (talk) 11:10, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Three points: I never enter the wrong dash, so replacing my em-dashes with an em-dash template is a waste of time.
Wrapping text in all-caps in a small-caps template doesn't make it small-caps. Small-caps only works on lower case text. e.g. rabbits vs. RABBITS. [I've used the {{sc}} template on both.] The work-around of fiddling with the font-size is simply that, a fiddle.
We are focussed on reproducing the text rather than replicating the exact page layout. Is the text readable in the mainspace? Does it look okay at various screen-sizes (including mobile)? Was a special typeface used for emphasis, or was it just the house-style? The former are reproduced here, the latter are not with our house-style overriding. The image captions in The Prince and the Pauper are house-style and thus it is a waste of time to back over the work just to change them. They were just fine in the state I first set them when I proofread this work. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:09, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle Since you pointed out that you object to using the template for dashes, I have not done so since, and have instead been checking them by looking at the rendered text. So, should no longer be an issue, and you can drop it.

Wrapping text in {{asc}}, which is what I have been doing to the captions (not {{sc}}) does indeed style the uppercase text into smallcaps, as you can tell (if you look) from the template documentation, or by that the text where I have used it has letters shorter than the punctuation marks. If you look at the original, that is exactly how the text in the original captions is styled... with smallcaps letters that are shorter than the punctuation.

You were right that the chapter headings are not in smallcaps (as I realized once I came across one with punctuation) but instead a display font, and I changed back the places where I had changed it. I would actually have done so even without you mentioning it, once I saw one with a apostrophe in it and realized they are in a display font instead of smallcaps.

What the style guide actually says is "Basic formatting to retain includes italic, bold, Small Caps, relative font size, and footnotes..." It is not the "house style" to render text in allcaps when it is in smallcaps in the original, which is (again, if you look at the quote marks in nearly every one) the case with the captions. The style guide specifically says to retain smallcaps.

I am not "going back over the work," as you put it, just to change the styling. I'm actually validating it, and have fixed a fair number of typos and missing punctuation marks in the process. Jarnsax (talk) 00:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

If you look at changes I have made is should be apparent that I'm not just editing it to change the style, but instead double-checking (validating) the transcription. Jarnsax (talk) 00:56, 28 May 2023 (UTC)