User talk:Languageseeker

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search

What's up?[edit]

Hi Languageseeker,

I saw the sdelete and delete requests, and your resignation from the MC, but I am not seeing any direct explanation of the reasons for it. So since I am kinda fumbling in the dark here, please forgive me if I am way off and just making things worse. But, in any case, if your request to delete your user pages is for reasons other than frustration then you need to give some hint of it because that could be a completely different calculus.

If the motivation is accumulated frustration, then I urge you to start by taking a little break before making any final decisions; and when it has subsided to a manageable level, start by explaining the causes of it. It is possible that at least some of these can be cleared away. For my own part, there are several things I find frustrating but with which I live more or less harmoniously simply by adjusting my expectations: it may not be what I wished it to be, but knowing that is the case these issues do not constantly rub at the sore spot.

Please keep in mind—and I am here, of course, just guessing about the sources of your frustration—that where you get pushback are on single instances and single issues, but those are the ones that stick out and one tends to notice. The wast majority of your efforts, like the MC in toto, either goes unremarked or is quietly appreciated. And speaking for myself, those efforts are noticed and appreciated! Despite my own strong misgivings when you proposed it, the MC is a runaway success, and one for which you should certainly take the bear's share of the credit. I feel confident that you would hear the same from pretty much any contributor you asked, irrespective of any disagreements they may have on some one detail or aspect somewhere. Xover (talk) 08:37, 10 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What Xover said. Just to let you know that I think your hard work has been a great benefit to Wikisource, and, as the driving force behind the MC, you have made contributions that are truly unique. With regards to conflict with others that may be weighing on you: to paraphrase Bjarne Stroustrup: "there are two kinds of contributions: those people complain about and those no-one cares about"! If you have decided to retire from Wikisource permanently, then I wish you all the best in your future endeavours and I hope you find as much success as you found with the MC! I certainly understand that once something like Wikisource ceases to bring you joy, then there is no point continuing and making yourself unhappy, so I will not try to convince you to stay. On the other hand, should you ever reconsider and wish to come back in any capacity and at any level of contributions, you will always be welcomed by me. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 14:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Inductiveload @Xover Thank you both for your kind words. They've meant a lot to me. I might still contribute a bit when I have the time, but I'll probably maintain a lower profile. It's nice to know that my work has meant something. Languageseeker (talk) 01:50, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Lifted Veil[edit]

Hi, Just reviewing some speedy deletion requests. I'm not sure about this one, as the source of the text is supposedly the 1921 OUP Edition (via PG), whereas the scan-backed version is the 1878 "cabinet" edition. I don't know enough about Eliot's publication history to know if these are different or the OUP was a reprint. Can you fill in the blanks a little? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:52, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beeswaxcandle Eliot only made slight revisions between the Blackwood Magazine version and the Cabinet Edition. So, there should only be minor differences. The 1921 OUP edition does not explicitly list the edition, but I suspect that it reproduced the Cabinet Edition which became the standard versions before the Clarendon editions came out [1]. Languageseeker (talk) 19:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And with it always being published in the same volume as Silas Marner, that would make sense. Presumably the only new material in the volume was that Introduction by Watts-Dunton. Okay, I'm happy to go ahead with the deletions. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Languageseeker,

First, good to see you are still somewhat active. However, I am not sure the original TOC is "useful" with this work, in the sense that the letters in the work don't really match anything the TOC actually says. More accurately, some of the TOC entries don't actually line up with individual letters (e.g. start/end mid-letter). Thus, although I slightly modified what Chrisguise and Lizardcreator had done, in ensuring that all the pages were transcluded, I didn't think it made sense to use the actual TOC entries, and so left the rest as is (and then modified the MC module and such). Maybe I am mistaken, but I thought in these situations an AuxTOC could be used when the included one is not appropriate. At any rate, good to hear from you, TeysaKarlov (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi TeysaKarlov,
!TeysaKarlov It's good to hear from you as well. I did not realize that the included TOC did not line up with the content. I think in this case, the AuxTOC should list the individual letters and that each letter should be transcluded in it's own subpage. Languageseeker (talk) 08:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see. What fun... TeysaKarlov (talk) 19:47, 27 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TeysaKarlov Yeah, it's a giant pain, but it has to be done. Languageseeker (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One year progress[edit]

Hi! Hope you're doing OK. Would you like to write the summary for the Monthly Challenge, considering we're about to pass the one year mark?

Some figures (provisional, since midnight's not here yet) for you in case you want to write it up: total processed: 53468, proofread: 33340, validated: 18428. In the same year, 308487 pages were processed at enWS, so the MC represents roughly 17% of all WS proofreading activity page-by-page. Which I think is a completely brilliant result!

If you don't want to write the summary, do also feel free to dump/list some of the works you would like to see specifically mentioned in the summary and I'll incorporate them. It's only fair that you get to choose the focus, since you worked so hard on it. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 22:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Inductiveload Hope that you're also doing well. Thanks for thinking about me. Things have been ok. It's been an amazing year for the MC and I'm really impressed with how things have progressed. I'll work on the progress report tomorrow. Stay well and enjoy the beauty of the spring. Languageseeker (talk) 00:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the Monthly Challenge[edit]

Hi Languageseeker,

I might be a day late in my time zone, but just sneaking in this thanks for the MC here. For all I know, I may not have joined Wikisource without it. Seeing the little page counter whenever I went to read something on Wikisource always made me want to help out. I only wish I had more time now, as there have always seemed to be more works in the MC that I would like to help with, than I ever seem to get round to.

Thanks again (both to you, and to any of the other people that made the MC possible, or helped out in any way, that are reading this), TeysaKarlov (talk) 20:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @TeysaKarlov,
Thank you so much for your kind words. They mean more to me than you can know. It's been an exciting and challenging year with the both the MC and IRL things. It's really heartwarming to hear this.
I'm also extremely grateful to you for helping out so much with the MC. Without you, I don't think I could keep on doing this. You've really done more than anyone can fairly ask. Languageseeker (talk) 01:34, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paleographic and Record type..[edit]

Hi,,, You wrote a guide for how to use some manuscript templates..

any chance you could look over Category:Palaeographic_letter_templates and write a guide?, (possibly based of the comments in the Junicode manual , the stuff in Martin's Record Interpreter, and the relevant section of the Statutes of the Realm volumes we have?

Thanks...

(Also it would be much appreciated if you could also consider adding templatedata for any relevant templates.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:43, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy declined[edit]

I have declined speedy deletion of Address to Young Men on Greek Literature and The Consolation of Philosophy (James) based on the discussion at the Scriptorium. However, you can list the works at WS:Proposed deletions. -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 23:08, 20 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missing license[edit]

Hi. Please add {{book}} and the appropriate license tag to File:George Orwell - 'Politics & the English Language' (1946) (IA orwell-politics-the-english-language-1946).pdf, and then either move it to Commons or add a {{do not move to Commons}} tag. Xover (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tess of the d'Urbervilles[edit]

Hi,

I just wanted to check, but was the following: Tess of the D'Urbervilles (1891)/Chapter 1 transcluded in a way to intentionally avoid replacing this: Tess of the d'Urbervilles? Or will it be replaced eventually (e.g. when all volumes are proofread)?

Thanks, TeysaKarlov (talk) 20:34, 30 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TeysaKarlov I think that Tess of the d'Urbervilles will be transformed into a disambiguation page eventually. Tess of the d'Urbervilles was first seralized and there are several original publications that are heavily censored. I'll probably nominate the non-scan backed version for deletion once the scan-backed version is complete. Languageseeker (talk) 20:57, 30 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, makes sense. Thanks for the speedy reply, TeysaKarlov (talk) TeysaKarlov (talk) 20:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please, just add this book for the next Monthly Challenge

213.166.156.201 04:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@213.166.156.201 Ok, I will add it. Thank you for your nomination. Languageseeker (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks you again, If you have the time to upload the audio from librivox
Index:The Game of Life.djvu
213.166.147.229 02:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
213.166.147.229 12:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As you seem to be good at uploading...[edit]

Any chance of looking at works tagged with {{Scans available}} and attempting to scan backing at least some of them? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:04, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ShakespeareFan00 I might run some of these through the MC, but my overall goal for the MC is to scan back the more well-know books first to attract more attention to enWS. Languageseeker (talk) 11:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Plan to match and split against: - Index:Hearts courageous (IA heartscourageous00rive).pdf ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ShakespeareFan00 Ooph, I forgot about that one. I put it up for deletion. Thanks for digging it up and all your work on fixing lint errors. Languageseeker (talk) 11:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Better would be to use your effort from the user page with the match and split tool, saves duplicating an existing effort.
They seem to be near identical editions..
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:39, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ShakespeareFan00 I tried to match-and-split the text, but they did not line up. Languageseeker (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

November Monthly Challenge category[edit]

Could you create (or cause to be created) the November Monthly Challenge category? I thought that it would earlier in the month, but I had forgotten to recommend to you the creation of the same. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At the Mountains of Madness[edit]

It seems that you added the issue of Astounding Stories that contained this. It seems to have all been removed - I guess as copyvio. -- Beardo (talk) 22:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beardo I’m extremely sorry about this situation. It seems that while H.P. Lovecraft did not renew the copyright, the magazine did. Your work is not lost, it just needs to wait until the issue falls into the public domain. I feel really bad about the situation.Languageseeker (talk) 22:56, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Noted. I wonder if I will still be here in 9 years.
I see that you have put a copyvio note on the existing copy. According to wikipedia, there are three different versions. Would they all be covered by that Astounding copyright renewal ? -- Beardo (talk) 23:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And what about The Dunwich Horror ? Are we clear that is in the public domain ? (Though I see that is on Project Gutenberg - so I assume that they concluded it is.) -- Beardo (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beardo Commons deletes files with any copyrighted material very quickly. Unfortunately, much of Lovecraft falls into a tricky part of copyright law (1927-1964) in the US where authors had to file to have to have their copyright renewed. If they didn't, then the work fell into the public domain. If they did, the work maintains a regular copyright term. Periodicals are even more complicated because they have a copyright on a collective level and an individual story level. Conde Naste renewed the copyright on Astounding Stories, so Commons deleted the file because at least some part of the work is under copyright. The open question is does the Conde Naste renewal cover At the Mountains of Madness. If yes, then all versions of At the Mountains of Madness have to be deleted because subsequent editions of a text are covered by the original copyright. If no, then the PDF can be redacted to remove all the copyright material and then hosted on Commons. In this case, your proofread text will reappear. In short, it's a complicated situation that requires further discussion to protect the Wikimedia foundation from a possible copyright lawsuit.
I think we had a discussion about The Dunwich Horror and concluded that is was in the PD.Languageseeker (talk) 23:28, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK - I understand that the Lovecraft copyrights that Weird Tales held were transferred to Arkham House, and not renewed. What about the rest of that Weird Tales issue ? -- Beardo (talk) 01:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BeardoThe rest of the Lovecraft stories published in Weird Tales should be in the PD. I'll try to put one in for January. Languageseeker (talk) 15:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks - but I was wondering about the non-Lovecraft stories in that issue of Weird Tales, as some have started working on those too. -- Beardo (talk) 21:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It depends on the story. As far as I know, the individual authors and not Weird Tales retained the copyright to the stories published in Weird Tales. If the author renewed the copyright, then the story is still under copyright. If they did not, then it fell into the public domain and can be hosted on enWS. Languageseeker (talk) 09:35, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can't we get better scans?[edit]

Hi, I see that the scans for The Secret of the Old Mill and To the Lighthouse are some old Google scans from when they were munging text and images. Can't we get better ones? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:27, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beeswaxcandle These are the only scans of the original printings that I could find. So unless, you have a scanner and the books at home, then it's the best that we're probably going to get. Languageseeker (talk) 17:34, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But this is on IA now, and hopefully the others will follow shortly. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:51, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beeswaxcandle Cover's can be deceiving, flip the pages and you'll find the potato inside. Languageseeker (talk) 17:53, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Goodness knows what you mean by that. This has a reasonable looking version of the frontispiece and a quick flick through indicates the pages are there. It looks, to my eye, as a good copy of a Stratemeyer book. I wouldn't have flicked you the link if it didn't. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beeswaxcandle I only meant that it's also b&w inside. I think that we're dealing with a situation where good scans are probably going to be hard to come by. I really don't know how many people would have access to a second printing of To the Lighthouse, the cover is awful, but the inside text is legible. I'm grateful to you for the link to The House on the Cliff because I was looking for it. We all do our best with the best scans available to us. Languageseeker (talk) 18:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Death Comes for the Archbishop[edit]

I see that you set up the index for this book to be transcribed. Another user has transcribed the whole book from a different copy in the Internet Archive - Death Comes for the Archbishop. From a quick look, that seems to be from a different copy of the same version - but that does not have the title or copyright pages, so it cannot be confirmed. I don't know what should be done in this sort of situation. -- Beardo (talk) 11:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beardo It's a tough situation because I know that the user put a significant amount of effort into their work. While it's possible to match-and-split, experience has shown that it tends to introduce subtle errors that are hard to catch. So, the work will still need to be proofread against the original scans. Languageseeker (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Big Four duplication[edit]

I see you have recently created Index:The Big Four.pdf (1986 reprint); see also Index:The Big Four (Christie).pdf (1985 reprint). I don’t have a preference (they are probably the same anyway, text-wise), but one should be chosen and the other deleted. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:18, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TE(æ)A,ea. I don't have any brilliant insight into the situation. I chose this edition because I didn't realize that you already uploaded a copy. My gut is to go with a British edition of a British novel, so I updated all the links to your edition. Many thanks for it. Languageseeker (talk) 16:02, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]