User talk:Philbarker

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Hello, Philbarker, 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:

You may be interested in participating in

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

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! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:31, 6 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 00:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Naming subpages[edit]

"Works that have chapters/sections should be numbered, not named..." So Omniana/Volume 1/Chapter 1 instead of Omniana/Volume 1/Mirrors. Please refer to Wikisource:Style guide#Page titles.

Thanks for the comment. They're not really chapters or consecutive sections, they're independent articles, a bit like the entries in [Brittanica] or [[1], so I took my lead from there and used the article names for section names. I really don't think that calling the article on Mirrors "Chapter 1" or "Section 1" would make much sense. --Philbarker (talk) 08:37, 8 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But the source copy you're using has them numbered, so we would follow the numbers per our MoS. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:19, 8 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The work is a collection of articles, each was published originally in a magazine, and some later in another collection MoS: "When a work is a collection, then the subpages are works in their own right (e.g. poetry), and the section name should be for that of the work." I can add numbers, so Omniana/Volume 1/1. Mirrors. seems the way to go.Philbarker (talk) 16:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS: example of similar book Table_Talk_(Hazlitt)
The preference is for numbering, but names are used in edited collections. Mixing both numbers and names is generally a bad idea. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Edited collection seems like a good description of Omniana. Published originally in the Atheneum by Southey and Coleridge (anonymously) Edited by Southey (again anonymously) into the 1812 edition; and later the Coleridge contributions + others were put into other collections (e.g. "Coleridge's Table Talk and Omniana", ed H N Coleridge (1836) ) Philbarker (talk) 16:36, 8 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]