User talk:Jeepday

From Wikisource
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Dzyadyk in topic Charter 08
Jump to navigation Jump to search

To Do


Internet archive DjVu


Internet archive




Thanks for the warm welcome, your post helped a lot in pointing out a few ways for me to get involved in the project. I already feel like I get more fulfillment from contributing here than at Wikipedia where I mostly patrol, verify and add sources. Marjoleinkl (talk) 08:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Your welcome, glad to have you and hope you find lots of fun and interesting things to do. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:34, 8 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
You have new messages
You have new messages
Hello, Jeepday. You have new messages at Jafeluv's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Also, thanks


I was brought here by an external link and had no idea about the intent for replication of original text. The grammar shocked me, so I immediately went into "editor-mode" :D

Now I know better.

I'll be in touch for OCRing if need be - I quite enjoy transcribing.

Grahambutler (talk) 06:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Looking forward to seeing you again. If you like transcribing this is the place to be. Jeepday (talk) 12:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Highlight Bright -- Highlight Right


Hello, Jeepday!

Please tell me how to highlight this word on bright yellow and light blue-> gexius

Kindest regards and have a wonderful "Jeepday" wink Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk 17:39, 14 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Not sure but when you find the answer I think it should go here Help:Beginner's guide to typography. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 18:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

List of Jewish deportees from Norway during World War II


I see that you've moved the content back to Wikipedia, where it was already removed because we deemed it unencyclopedic for inclusion within a single article. This has for whatever reason angered Leifern who has some sort of vested interest in keeping the content hosted somewhere, mostly because he thinks it's important to save because of the 70th anniversary of the deportation (Leifern is as far as I'm aware a Jew residing in Norway or the descendent of a survivor). This content was originally excised from w:Jewish deportees from Norway during World War II and we decided that it was not encyclopedic and entirely too lengthy to be of any use there, so we moved it here but it seems that you made the same determination shortly after its transfer.

I would gladly be rid of this nonsense but I fear retaliation from Leifern.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

There is a related discussion on my talk page. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Response at User_talk:Beeswaxcandle#List_of_Jewish_deportees_from_Norway_that_you_deleted. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:49, 15 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Re: Gita


I have posted a reply. Please have a look. Thanks! --Tito Dutta (Talk) 12:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

New message! Same page! --Tito Dutta (Talk) 14:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Another message! Same page --Tito Dutta (Talk) 21:32, 22 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
The table and the other comments have been hidden somehow! Wikisource:Proposed_deletions#Gita --Tito Dutta (Talk) 17:33, 25 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Fixed, sorry forget about that. Jeepday (talk) 21:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

" Wikisource: EBook "


Good-day, Jeepday. I found this and thought you should take a look at it. It seems to be very important.

Too, there is an app for the PC (personal Computers) that can be used with Kindle. I use a PC and I use the app. I also have and use the EPUBReader of my Firefox Browser version 17.0.1 Have a wonderful day my friend and the best of Holidays to you and your family. —Maury (talk) 19:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)}}Reply

Thanks, I have a kindle keyboard, and have considered a kindle paper white. Looked into the fire, but decided not to get it. I use it to read books, and anything with a color screen is more for looking at pictures, playing games and watching movies. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:31, 7 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

and we need Ebooks for admins


Noting User talk:Tpt#Typo in About page of epub export, we probably want to have some adminny type notes for how we manage and configure. I haven't looked more globally to see what Tpt has been adding elsewhere, and my brain is bzzzzing cycles elsewhere so I am unable to at the moment. I will add a note on the Admin ToDo list when I find where ABM put it. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Do we have an "admin how to" library? I glanced around Wikisource:Adminship and nothing jumps out at me. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:30, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Reply
Don't be silly, what is wrong with blindfolds, spinning them around and arming them with the tail of the donkey?!? Good idea though. We have bits in lots of place, eg. patrolling and adminship; then probably rely on other wikis for the general stuff, and oldwikisource for ProofreadPage. What do you think, a directory type page, with sections for the varied components (sort of matching up with admin stats, enough detail to cover basics, and refer onwards to fuller detail, unless it is really specific to us? — billinghurst sDrewth 12:27, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply
LOL, sounds good. The volume of stuff I don’t know is huge. Maybe you and couple other of the more knowlegable could put something together? JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, that I need a scribe to take these random thoughts and make sense of them. More hours in the day too! I'll see what I can do about scrapping something, and hope that someone can convert it into something workable. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Re:Wikipedia excerpt


Maybe you should speak to Erasmo Barresi who is in charge of that particular section of the MoTM. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 23:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

The purpose of author pages is not to provide biographical information: the nationality and the profession are enough for disambiguation and categorization. The Wikipedia link is also a duplicate since it should be only in the box on the right.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 12:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Some people expect and desire biographical information. While Wikipedia may provide some biographical information it does not always provide all that is important. Importance is a variable dependent upon any given reader. It varies from person to person. Some people may desire genealogical & other information while others could care less. Biographical information can be placed on the opposite side of the author page under "Discussion" (I think that is the correct word) and as Erasmo states, a Wikipedia link should be placed at the top right on the author page as I learned several years ago from Billinghurst circa 2009. —Maury (talk) 13:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Seems like a discussion for Wikisource:Scriptorium, I will post it there. Jeepday (talk) 14:20, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
We all work towards Wikisource. Here some kind of pages accumulate until someone looks for a solution. {{plain sister}} seemed to be a commonly accepted solution to replace the old project-specific templates, so I thought that my propose was not controversial.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Yep, :) Jeepday (talk) 21:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Scientific research / Analytical works


Hello Jeepday, Thanks for the points you've raised earlier. Is it possible to save and keep my work as a draft in my Wikisourse User account? Any advice and guidence would be appreciated. Many thanks. Audrey

More latitude is given on the user account space then for the main space. The assumption is that work on the user space is a project to moved to the main space in the future. Wikisource is not an online work space for personal use, it is not completely clear what you are building. It has links to works on Wikisource, and it appears that it could be something that will eventually (but not definitely) find a home someplace in the wikifamily in the future. Rather then where you have it, a better location would be User:Audrey E Randles/Outlines of the Coresynthesis Model (2012). You can use the move button at the top of the page to move it, don’t leave a redirect, then use User:Audrey E Randles to define your Wikisource presence. Our sister site has a better description of the use of these pages at w:Wikipedia:User pages, we are a bit less formal then they are, so consider it more of perspective then a firm guideline.
When you make an entry on talk page, type ’~’ four times like ~~~~, it will automatically be converted to your signature when the page is saved. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
A Google search for "Coresynthesis Model" finds very little published on it. This would make it likely an original work, so it is not likely to find a home anyplace in the Wikifamily, in the near future. Also given the discussion at Wikisource:COPYVIO#The_Theory_of_Matrix, there appear to be copyright issues. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 12:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Gazimestan speech


Hello Jeepday! I was looking for the "Gazimestan speech" at Wikisource, cited to be available there both in scientific sources (e.g. Polonyi 2010, Heil und Zerstörung, p. 486) and in recent versions of Wikipedia ( I found only this, but there it gives no hint (as far as I could see), why the speech actually has been deleted ("23:52, 11 December 2011 Jeepday deleted page Gazimestan speech (Proposed deletion (WS:PD): Delete, no arguments or support for PD are given.)"). Can you help me with that? I'd appreciate a lot. Greetings ,--Anglo-Araneophilus (talk) 14:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Special:WhatLinksHere/Gazimestan_speech finds Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations/Archives/2011-12#Gazimestan_speech which does not have much more then you already found. A look at the page history there find is archived in this edit from Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations/Special_discussion_for_pages_tagged_as_PD-manifesto#Other where you can see the rational for the delete. In short was licensed as {{PD-manifesto}} which was not considered compatible with our licensing requirements. If you would like to restore it you can make a proposal at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations to restore it with a license that applies and is considered compatible with our licensing requirements. If you have any other questions let me know. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 17:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so for your efforts! Greetings, --Anglo-Araneophilus (talk) 00:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

About advertisements


Hello, Jeepday, I’d like to leave a possibility for litterary texts to be accessed with or without advertisements if there are advertisements that are not chosen by the author of the text. How could we formulate that? I have tried something here but may be it is not expressed correctly. --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

How would you make it where the "reader has the possibility to access the same text without advertisements"?
I was trying to say that - advertisements that are published as part of a larger work, where the larger work is appropriate for Wikisource, do not need to be removed. Recent discussions have occurred about if those advertisements need to be proofread as to promote the work as 100% done, but putting that aside. Our goal of recreating the published work, does not inherently require the removal of advertisements.
Clearly if there are two editions of a work, where one has advertisements, and the other does not, your statement could be met, through different editions. But what about where only one scanned work exists and it contains advertisements, how could the reader be offered the opportunity to access it without the ads?
Jeepday (talk) 22:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
I perceive at least two sides of these uses.
First, we need to know how many books we may consider as completely done, and if we can mark all the pages as completely exact transcriptions, whatever is inside them, either text of the author or text of any commentator or text of any advertiser, or illustrations of any illustrator, there we have a simple system to measure what we do.
But what I meant was that there is a second side, if our visitors look for a text, for instance a poem, or a profound and difficult reflexion about something, or anything like that, it can be important that this poem or this reflexion is not deformed. Comments or advertisements or illustrations may not be desired sometimes if the visitor wants to communicate with the text of the author and this text only. If we oblige the visitor to receive the text with the comments, the advertisements, the illustrations, without any choice for them, what we bring may be something other that what they want.
I don’t know what the solution is, but this was the issue I’d like to raise. --Zyephyrus (talk) 13:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Without a solution to implement the requirement I suggest we change to Note: Advertisements that are part of a larger publication are acceptable, this removes the "perfectly" to tone down the comment, and removes the requirement "possibility to access the same text without advertisements" which is unobtainable currently.
Your issue includes advertisements, images and editorial comments, which are insertions beyond the authors artistic creation, that are placed in the published work, by editors and publishers. By inference it would also include the correction of typos in the printed work. I can fully appreciate your desire to restore the work to the authors intended presentation, but I am not sure how you could do that on Wikisource.
To achieve your vision would require a rework or restoration that is beyond the scope of Wikisource. I think you would have to take the Wikisource version, reformat it to how you believe the work was intended to be presented by the author, and then republish it. I am not aware of a wiki that would host the restoration so to make it available you would need to publish it in a e-Book format and make it available on the various e-Book sites. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thank you Jeepday, yes I think this is all right. I have updated the note.
My vision doesn’t need any reformatting, as long as who has written what is clear. To make this clear is in the scope of Wikisource, I don’t mind if it is with different tools: smaller letters may show it, or a background color or a different margin, if the source itself shows or indicates in some way that the scriptor was a different one—I like the result to be pretty too but in this I’m very often happy with what I find on :)
I’m not disturbed with the diverse formats and media, paper, screens, TV, phones, tablets, or the virtual world we will build tomorrow, what I like in Wikisource is this: it works for and with them all, in order that all of us, they, and we, can give access to exact texts. So I think I’m very lucky to live to-day and to work with you. --Zyephyrus (talk) 23:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for making the change. I completely agree with the formatting separation of who has written what, and I believe the community does as well. Though each person may have a somewhat different view of how much difference is appropriate. Jeepday (talk) 11:40, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Do you think this system might be an adequate solution to indicate different sources of notes? You can see that I have used [▹ 1] for what came from the first source: the author himself who wrote a note, and [▹▹ 1] for what was introduced by a second source: the translator who added his own notes. --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Yes. Presumably an offset or font difference indicated the difference in the paper publication, neither of which translate well to electronic formats across devices and applications. So calling it the different reference sources by groups looks good to me. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yippie Workshop Speech


Can nothing be done here? This is just a person talking in a public park which happened to get recorded by a journalist, a person whose other two notable works are entitled Fuck the System, which is explicitly copyleft, and Steal this Book which while copyrighted, was copyrighted by an organization, IIRC, called "Pirates, Inc." and, ya know, basically asked to be stolen (and also gives permission for partial republishment by the underground press). I read what you wrote above, but it is a hilarious catch-22 that, of course, we can't get a licence to something that wasn't ever copyrighted, especially since the very concept that speech could be automatically copyrighted didn't exist prior to w:Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc. in 1999, long after this anarchist's suicide (1989). Can we not apply some common sense and make an exception? -- Kendrick7 (talk) 02:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

You are welcome, to start a new discussion at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations and mention the closed discussion at Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations/Archives/2011-12#Yippie_Workshop_Speech. I would suggest that you find some legal/licensing support for your arguments to restore the work, before presenting. The header of the WS:CV has some good resources to begin your search. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Bright Red Marks


Jeepday, if you are allowed, can you remove the red exclamation marks from Legofan94's yet? He has been participating since Sept. 01, 2012 and has proofread of the month awards. I am often removing them after he has posted. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 03:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Per Wikisource:Autopatrolled the correct place for the request is Wikisource:Administrators' noticeboard. I am not sure when I will next be logged on with admin access. If it does not occur before I have the tools, I will be happy to do so. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Done Jeepday (talk) 00:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

H.R. 41


Kindly explain the reasoning for re-opening this matter in your view. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:37, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Between the time it was opened (21:44, 23 February 2013‎ ) and the time I reopened it (11:37, 27 February 2013‎) it had been closed and opened and commented on after closure like 3 or 4 times. There is no harm in leaving it open, and I have no particular interest in the subject. IMHO {{closed}} means the community discussion is concluded. In this case it seemed there may be more discussion. As for your decision, on the mater I believe it is the correct one. It is just a mater of allowing for due process. Nothing personal, how many of my own closed discussions I have re-opened? JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. Nevertheless, I'm afraid all you've done is managed to pass the point of deminishing returns and all that can be accomplished now is the introduction of more doubt. I didn't put the Wiki servers in the U.S., I didn't write the Laws governing practices we need to follow on en.WS and I'm truly sorry folks live in places where Crown-this, Perpetual copyright-that or the Queen's so-and-so prevents them from dealing with the laws and regulations they must abide by in a clear and consise manner. Hopefully the next Copyright Office Compendium will put an end to the remaining gray areas concerning edicts of [foreign] government and folks will turn on their own governments for access instead of hedging their bets by trying to wedge one thing or another under U.S. Federal law & Supreme Court decisions.

Have a good one. I will try to moderate myself from furthering commenting on this on PD. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Annotations and derivative works


I have just closed the Derivative works proposal on Scriptorium and started a Request for comment on annotations and derivative works. I intend this second stage to work out the details now that we have some consensus that some derivative works are within our scope in theory. Sorry for the over detailed page but I thought it was the best way to get the problem solved. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)Reply



Okay, thank you, I've gone ahead and replied over there. :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)Reply



Ah, an unclosed nowiki tag...thanks! -Pete (talk) 23:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Using Firefox to proofread


Hi, and thanks for your reply to my OS question. I've been experimenting with the Regexp search & replace tool on the editing side panel, which made me realize that I am using the same methodology in TextPad a Windows text editor. If I learn the necessary javascript to re-create my keyboard macros and replicate my offline work, I can work in Firefox on any OS.

I don't know if you work in javascript, but it's worth asking. How can I specify the \newline code in the replace panel? The find parameters are clear and I use it, but replacing a value with with \n just doesn't work for me.

For example:

Search: /"=="/g Replace: \n\n . . . and this inserts the literal value \n\n. — Ineuw talk 01:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I do some work in JavaScript at work, but in my personal life I just use the off the shelf Firefox. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:43, 29 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. — Ineuw talk 17:02, 29 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Slash and burn


We have got OTRS ticket number 2013040210010711. Please release the page. Bjørn Eggen



Don't know how closely you've been following the thread you started on making this policy, but I've severely expanded and restructured the page to try to include all the bits I'm aware of that were missing. As you started the conversation, and are one of the only three people who seem to be active in this concern, I'd appreciate a look over my changes, and a comment at the thread in the Scriptorium. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I will take a look at WS:Translations, have been half watching, but wanted to wait until you were done. It may be a couple days before I get a chance to give it a good review. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 14:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
I've more or less finished, unless I find a typo or similar error. The three items left to be done I either don't know what to do with or suspect will require further community discussion to decide. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
see Wikisource_talk:Translations#Most_recent_changes. Jeepday (talk) 11:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
Further to translations, I've found a way to create language-specific copyright warnings as editintros but it would require adding code to MediaWiki:Common.js. The following code will add the template from Template:Translation copyright warning/de to any page in the translation namespace with Category:Works originally in German (which is added by the header):
// Translation namespace editintro example
function addEditIntro( name ) {
    $( '.mw-editsection, #ca-edit' ).find( 'a' ).each( function ( i, el ) {
        el.href = $( this ).attr( 'href' ) + '&editintro=' + name;
    } );
if ( mw.config.get( 'wgNamespaceNumber' ) === 114 ) {
    $( function () {
        var cats = document.getElementById( 'mw-normal-catlinks' );
        if ( !cats ) {
        cats = cats.getElementsByTagName( 'a' );
        for ( var i = 0; i < cats.length; i++ ) {
            if ( cats[i].title === 'Category:Works originally in German' ) {
                addEditIntro( 'Template:Translation copyright warning/de' );
    } );
I've tested this in my personal Common.js and it works. It is a lot like the existing editnotices that explain header templates. However, unless a more elegant system exists elsewhere, we would have to repeat the last IF statement separately for every language (as well as creating a template for each under Template:Translation copyright warning, only German exists at the moment). Do you still want to go ahead with this function? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
Good work, but I believe your right, that seems like a painful solution that would fail to gain acceptance and usage. We now have a requirement that the original language work be on wiki, and that a link it be provided, were it would presumably have the appropriate copyright information. I think my concerns will be adequately addressed without an original language copyright notice on English as is should be on the original language wiki. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Wikisource User Group


Wikisource, the free digital library is moving towards better implementation of book management, proofreading and uploading. All language communities are very important in Wikisource. We would like to propose a Wikisource User Group, which would be a loose, volunteer organization to facilitate outreach and foster technical development, join if you feel like helping out. This would also give a better way to share and improve the tools used in the local Wikisources. You are invited to join the mailing list 'wikisource-l' (English), the IRC channel #wikisource, the facebook page or the Wikisource twitter. As a part of the Google Summer of Code 2013, there are four projects related to Wikisource. To get the best results out of these projects, we would like your comments about them. The projects are listed at Wikisource across projects. You can find the midpoint report for developmental work done during the IEG on Wikisource here.

Global message delivery, 23:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm confused over a deletion


Hi, on 3 June you deleted Index:The New York Times, 1900-12-05.djvu with a reason of WS:PD. I can't find the discussion for this. The only reason it's come to my attention is that the deletion left an orphaned page and I need to work out what to do with that. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

See THIS for the request & discussion (I probably should have worded it to include any pages under the listed Index: pages to be deleted as well - sorry - delete away however). -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:12, 7 August 2013 (UTC)Reply
Yep, what George said. That was rather messy, you might find a couple other orphans around related to that deletion. Sometimes I leave the orphans because the don’t seem related, sometimes I leave them because I missed seeing them. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:04, 7 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thirty-Nine Articles


You apparently deleted the Thirty-Nine Articles of Anglicanism for a 'copywright violation'.

The text is not under copywright.

I believe you are talking about the deletion discussed and archived at Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations/Archives/2013-06#Book_of_Common_Prayer_.281987.29. In any case if you believe a copyright deletion was incorrect, please start a new discussion at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)Reply



I added the lyrics of school song. it was removed. Will you please guide me on how to provide evidence for its copyright. Mail me at Prathamprakash29 (talk) 14:44, 6 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Response at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations
Response at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations--Prathamprakash29 (talk) 07:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Autopatrolled request


Hi, I left you a message in the Administrators' noticeboard. Thanks!--3BRBS (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2014 (UTC)Reply



Thanks for what you have done with your time here, and enjoy the next (weird) step to another community. smileybillinghurst sDrewth 09:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks from me also. I sure hope we still see you around here from time to time. Your admin removal request has been met. Hesperian 02:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Welcome back


It's nice to see you, and have you back here. — Ineuw talk 17:41, 2 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Charter 08



Please, help me find a discussion (or smth else) about deletion of Charter 08. Sorry, I cannot find it, neither in Archives nor in history.

Yuriy Dzyаdyk (tc), 19:12, 15 July 2017 (UTC).Reply

Replying on behalf of Jeepday, who is not currently active. The discussion was actually in the Copyright area, so Wikisource:Copyright_discussions/Archives/2012-06#Charter 08. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:40, 15 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! — Yuriy Dzyаdyk (tc), 20:26, 15 July 2017 (UTC).Reply