User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 1

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Welcome to Wikisource

Hello, Pigsonthewing, 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! — billinghurst sDrewth 10:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW we are allowed to choose our own version of the template. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What would be useful is for someone to meld {{Botanist}} and {{Bot auth}} — billinghurst sDrewth 10:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Illegible text[edit]

Hi, Pigsonthewing --

I saw you recently worked on Page:Description and Use of a New Celestial Planisphere.pdf/38 and used [??] to indicate illegible characters. I'm not sure if you're aware, but we have a template {{illegible}} which serves the same purpose, and also automatically sorts the problematic page into a special tracking category of pages with illegible text.

Just a heads up about the template if you were not aware. --Mukkakukaku (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:nop for terminating a paragraph at the end of a page[edit]

When we transclude pages they are joined with a "space". So when a paragraph terminates at the end of a Page: ns page, we need to stick a {{nop}} (div coded) on a new line after the paragraph to make it force a paragraph when transcluded. There is a gadget that allows one to put a "nop", on the preceding page, which is useful for when you get to any next page and see that you should have poked a "nop". Hope that helps. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:01, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mukkakukaku, @Billinghurst: Thank you, both, for your tips. Is there a single page cheat-sheet that lists such things, to aid those of us new to this method of working? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:41, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The links in the welcome message are meant to provide that, though as we are reproducing works and these works take so many different perspectives over the past 300 years, a one page representation is too tricky. Part of the reason that we patrol and look to provide a supportive environment. We take whatever positive feedback about how we can improve things. We cover NOP in four help pages, depending on your approach

There may be some duplication. A smaller community focusing on transcription is not necessarily always burying its head in documentation. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:14, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Thank you. I saw all those, but I specifically wanted a single page cheat-sheet, akin to the one at en:w:Help:Cheatsheet (precisely to avoid "burying my head in documentation"!). I've started drafting one, at User:Pigsonthewing/Cheatsheet. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:34, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There really isn't one. I refer back to those pages constantly, and anything that I figure out in the meantime I put in a personal cheat sheet in my own userspace -- generally templates and things I tend to use more often but which are not included in the general documentation. And even now I am still learning about new templates -- no longer as often as I used to, of course, but often enough.
(In addition to the above links, I also find the WS:Style guide useful to refer back to on occasion.)
As an example/annecdote, I generally work on government reports related to aviation accidents, and cookbooks. I rarely have to work with poems, or with musical scores -- so when I do end up running into such things, I have to go look at the documentation and examples, and even now occasionally ask for help. (Especially with the musical scores.) But typewritten documents usually have certain kinds of quirks that I've figured out how to template around, and I've documented those in my userspace in a way that I'll remember. I probably make more use of the {{illegible}} template than most other editors just because of the types of documents I deal with. My cheat sheet would be of limited global use since the majority of our works are, well, not typewritten aviation accident reports from the early 20th century. :)
I would heartily recommend that you start a cheat sheet of your own in your userspace somewhere -- possibly in your sandbox unless you're using that for something else -- and put in there the templates and syntaxes and policies and other oddities that you find yourself having to look up/reference constantly, or that are the most common in the types of works that you're addressing. The works that we deal with are generally too widely varied to support a single cheat sheet, but you can always maintain your own based on your interests and the types of works that you're dealing with. --Mukkakukaku (talk) 06:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Were you going to have a go at page transclusion?[edit]

I am not sure whether you are pausing at the end of a day, or thinking "now for images", or looking left and right to see what is happening. As there can be a pleasure with transcluding and (finally) seeing all that work come together, it is unusual for someone to step into the breach, well at least until a work sits at proofread for an extended period. If you were wanting some pointers, or assistance, you can pop into WS:S or just ping someone, plenty of people would be happy to show you the reins. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Billinghurst: The latter of your three options, with the added issue of not knowing whether the images must come before anything else. Any suggestions gratefully received. Also, I have an old book which I would like to scan and upload. Where do I start? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As images are not everyone's speciality, it has been acceptable to leave images as problematic and allow transclusion. If marked with {{raw image}} rather than {{missing image}}, the whole page displays, and every so often Hesperian runs his bot through and uploads JP2000 images here from the scans at, which allows a cleanup for those, and their migration to Commons. Others will head over to a page like then magnify to the greatest level, right click and save, then cleanup from there. There is some info at Help:Digitising texts and images for Wikisource#Images and illustrations.

I am no graphics expert, though I somewhat successfully (my opinion, maybe not factually supported) prod around with GIMP, and I use a locally developed script User:Inductiveload/Remove-background-colour.scm to help on image cleanup. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:21, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re scans, it is our general recommendation that users upload to Internet Archive in best quality, and let them do their processing with their high end tools; then we import to Commons using toollabs:IA-upload. If you felt that you wanted to do more leg work, there are local pages explaining what others have done. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Re transclusion, tell me/us what you would like to happen and what assistance you would like (OR if examples are needed, I could do the root page, as that usually needs a little more tinkering, and one of the chapters, and you can play from there). (Within the realms of Wikisource:Style guide) as I indicated, it is your contribution, and we have a practice of being guided by lead contributor, rather than us forcing the pace. While not a perfect approach, it is less confrontational and has been mostly successful, especially when someone has slaved over a work for days, months, years. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Billinghurst: "I could do the root page... and one of the chapters" - sounds good; please do. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done If you are a mobile app person, you may wish to have a look to see that it renders okay in that form. To also consider whether you think that the ToC and the ToI might be better with a max-width set (we can wrap those inside {{block center|max-width=nnnpx|<pages index=... />}}) as some ToC and the pages look better a little more compact. You can also toggle through the [default layouts] in the left hand toolbar to see if any representation looks preferable. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:49, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Billinghurst: Thank you again. Please check now. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are subpages for the chapters, and obviously the links are not sufficiently overt. Maybe have a look at In Dickens's London/Chapter 2 and work forward. You will see the red links at Index:Hopkinson Smith--In Dickens's London.djvubillinghurst sDrewth 13:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Billinghurst: Please try now. We seem to be missing half of the expected chapters(!), and there's an issue with text after image captions on some pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:45, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Billinghurst: So how would I, for example, get the images I just put on c:Category:The Monk's Prophecy into IA? (Feel free to point me at an FAQ; and thanks for your lead on the Dickens book.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:39, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A strong of gifs is difficult with which to play. We would ideally grab as a pdf, or find the overarching edition of "Irish Monthly". If you are stuck with a string of gifs, then I would suggest that we build an index page with an artificial page listing. A recent example of something very simple is Index:What Can I Do^ - NARA - 534471.jpg, and for yours we would just build the respective images with the respective gifs, and each link is the corresponding page number. Then we just use the google ocr gadget to pump out the text. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:57, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment we also have a reasonable gadget that allows addition/input to WD from this end (use the "FRBR edition" link). The gadget still lacks some components though covers most needed components. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:52, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missing images[edit]

When pages do not yet have their images; we tag them as "problematic". Marking a page as "proofread" on Wikisource implies that not only has the text been proofread for errors, but it has been formatted and images have been included. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:12, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like help setting up the book's Table of Contents, I'd be happy to do so. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

House style[edit]

Older books usually include a half-space on wither side of an em-dash. English Wikisource collapses that half-space, in accordance with modern typography, rather than expanding it to a full space or attempting to recreate the compacted spacing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:32, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{nop}} is used when there is a new paragraph on the following page. Normally, when pages are transcluded, the paragraph at the end of a page is assumed to continue onto the following page. So when the next page begins a new paragraph, we have to add {{nop}} on its own line at the end of the previous page to keep the software from concatenating the two paragraphs. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:17, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also useful: {{sc}} (small-caps) Which renders text to look like this. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hello. I was wondering if you have another source for the last page of this text (that is not Google books) where I could compare text for validation purposes where words are missing. Perhaps upload an image of the alt source you used so we can document it here? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:46, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I found the source I used fully legible, once the contrast and gamma were adjusted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:33, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Played around with the image in Photoshop a bit and it did help significantly—almost fully legible. Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:44, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilivres page[edit]

Your edits don't correct the link; it merely breaks the link to the wrong site without establishing the correct link.

As I see it, we have two options: (1) wait for the issue to be fixed at Meta, or (2) temporarily disable all links through this template. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:00, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Try again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:00, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be working now. Thanks. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:02, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The actual fix has gone through at meta now. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

House style is not to use "Sr.", "Jr.", "III", etc. in Author page names, because that is not part of the individual's name. Instead we use parenthetical dates following the name to distinguish individuals with the same name (using a hyphen between the birth and death dates, not an en-dash). A redirect from the form with "Jr.", Sr.", etc can be used, but such elements should not appear in the title of the Author page itself. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:20, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See (e.g.) Author:Martin Luther King and Author:Richard Henry Dana (1815-1882). --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:23, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will you be adding articles from The Nidiologist this week? Wikisource does not host articles about works; we host copies of works. So blurb pages like this with no content are usually deleted. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:49, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DOI and BHL[edit]

These links don't belong on the Author pages. They should be stored on Wikidata at the data item for the publication in question, and repeating the links locally is a waste of time.

If you want to make the information available for a work that Wikisource does not yet host, one option is {{Wikidata edition}}, which will link to the Wikidata item and its links. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource is not a link farm. Please use Wikidata for metadata links. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:05, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Work on improving your tone; and assume good faith. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:07, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to follow your own advice. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:09, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Don't post here again until you have sufficiently addressed the above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I so need to get {{wikidata edition}} to be smarter and cleverer. I started working on that and it was missing components, and I lost patience. I think that I asked Mike Peel to look at it at one time, though I would have to dig through my bits of discussions. <shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 13:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Billinghurst: I'm not sure if I ever thanked you (I do so now) for your kind use of {{doi}} on the Author page here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:58, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Author pages[edit]

I have had a look at what has been done, and it is my opinion that you are over-complicating author pages. They are not meant to be an authoritative listing of every work, and all the related detail of publisher, etc.. They are meant to be listing/find aids, a ready access place to a compilation of works, somewhere between notepad, and bibliography, not a hagiography. There is meant to be the element of simplicity and readability, so we would consider that we have a well-tried KISS principle here, at least for the primary presentations, so edition data appears in an edition. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:19, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That said, it would be lovely (at some point) to be able to pull from Wikidata a generated list with all the paraphernalia of published works and editions, translations, etc., and doing that via a link in the author page, or maybe a permanent regenerating standard subpage to author ns: page, though not as the primary presentation.

All that said, you obviously have a vision for what you are trying to achieve, and I don't want to have a closed-mind to what you are trying to achieve. So can you explain what it is you think that we are missing, and how the additions that you are making make things better. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:19, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Billinghurst: As I said on the Scriptorium, "edition" pages for the individual works did not exist when I created Author:Frederick W. Lanchester; and in all but one case, they still do not. By including the publisher and publisher's location of the linked, scanned versions the works I listed, I suppose I was trying to do the same thing that you did, when you included the publisher and location in, for example, {{NIE link}}, {{Americana link}} and {{Collier's link}} and thus on the hundreds of pages on which they appear; or as you did here; or those you left here. And as I also said on Scriptorium, "I note that publisher details are often included in author pages without drama, for example: Author:Henry Eliot Howard; Author:Brooks Adams; Author:Choudhary Rahmat Ali". I'd be fascinated, by the way, to know which author page you think I made a "hagiography". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:54, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Billinghurst: In case you missed this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:13, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, regarding this request. I've been looking at a couple of your projects recently, and was wanting to inquire -- could I maybe be of assistance in showing you how to extract high quality scans from the Internet Archive? I have a short blog post, which contains an instructional video, aimed at just that. However, since I wrote that up I've learned a number of things, mainly how to download, convert, and optimize images from the JP2 archives that IA generally maintains. For myself, I've found that the conversion from {{missing image}} to {{raw image}} is an unnecessary and time-consuming step; once you have the right tools, it's less work to just upload the final image and link that. I've been meaning to create a new set of instructions, or screencast, now that I have a fuller understanding (since I haven't found any good overview here yet). If you're interested, that would give me a little extra motivation to get around to it "sooner rather than later." -Pete (talk) 07:23, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The user annotations on this work would be considered out of scope per Wikisource:Annotations as we are not presenting the work as produced, but your version of it. We don't treat our users as being clueless so annotating the reasonably obvious is not our style, and you could cover some by some straight wikilinks. Stick a portal statement to "Tibet" or Everest, etc. Thanks for your consideration. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's not my reading of Wikisource:Annotations . Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:03, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Please show to me the unadulterated version of the text, especially in context of the published work. Please demonstrate to me that these may not be better undertaken with wikilinks to enWP, rather than annotations. Please explain to me why you think that the general user needs an explanation that Thibet and Tibet are the same, and do this in consideration of the use of a portal: ns link from the header, and in consideration of all the other works that we have at Wikisource, and whether we are going to undertake that same treatment. Thanks. There has been much discussion about annotations, and they are not our practice for good reason. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:33, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you're telling me it's OK to use wikilinks instead of footnotes, I'm happy to use those; but early in my Wikisource career I was told not to use wikilinks. And yes, it is necessary to make clear that "Thibet" refers to what we now call Tibet Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(The) Radio Times[edit]

I noticed that you made Radio Times a redirect to The Radio Times, even though all the articles listed there are under Radio Times. Additionally, neither Wikipedia nor the modern company use the "the". Am I missing something? BethNaught (talk) 14:01, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Throughout it's first decade and more - and for all the articles that are currently out of copyright - it's title was "The Radio Times". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jannion S. Elliott[edit]

Hi Andy,

I moved the OCLC nrs (which were not linked, by the way) to the talk page of: Author:Jannion Steele Elliott. I'm not sure about this, but I recently had a conversation with User:Billinghurst. He made this advice. see: User_talk:Dick_Bos#Making_for_ugly_author_pages. So there is a certain difference with Wikipedia: here on Wikisource the main target is on digital copies (and especially on copies on WS, of course). That's how I understand the - partly not formalized - policy regarding author pages. But perhaps it would be good to create something like a guideline for these things. Moreover, on Wikipedia, I sometimes put the whole OCLC-stuff (and relating links) in a footnote, because it indeed does not look really decent, when you have all these links etc. in the main text.

I'm really curious to hear your opinion. Greetings, --Dick Bos (talk) 16:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

site style is a dash/hyphen in titles for dates[edit]

Hi. For date separations, like in author page titles Author:Edward Baines (1774-1848), it would be great if you could please use the style of a dash/hyphen. It definitely cuts down on some of the maintenance if you do it for us. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

local style for author pages[edit]

Hi Andy. Please reread Help:Author pages, as the style for author pages is not to use peer styles, just to use their name, and expanded as much as possible. Where disambiguation is required, to then use years of life, as known. We are comfortable with their being redirects from expected variations to the target page. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:34, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote {{uksi}} and the {{uksi/paragraph}} family a while ago, and was recently updating some of it so that formatting could all be done in a stylesheet. Perhaps you could review your recent addition, and {{Uksi/styles.css}}, so that it's not relying on a lot of manual {{gap}}'s? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:13, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{uksi/paragraph}} and it's higher level variants, do some anchor generation, which the current manual formatting doesn't. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ShakespeareFan00 If you'd like to make a start, I'll try to follow suit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:34, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well.. Review of the stylesheet first would be good at any rate. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:39, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above index is no longer in 'Limbo' - now validated. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 03:43, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kathleen.wright5: That's very kind; thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are we certain that he is British?

I can see the American (1790-1886) ... He shows as being an engineer in "Massachusetts, State Census, 1865" — billinghurst sDrewth 07:15, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata has him as British; not having any other sources to hand, I followed suit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits

PD-1923 and pd/1923 are different[edit]

Hi. PD-1923 is used when we don't have a death date and is just the simple static template. pd/1923 is used where we do have a death date and it is does the more complex jiggery pokery of displaying dynamic templates based on the year of death. Similar difference happens with PD-1996 and pd/1996. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Billinghurst: Indeed so, and for things with such different functions, they are far too similarly - and thus incredibly badly - named, as I have pointed out previously. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:20, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

completeness of new text[edit]

Hi Andy, I see the new entry on Scots is missing the section, listed in the toc "Bold Experiment, A", and the images still need modification. Near enough? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 11:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The section is not missing; the entries in the table of contents do not match the actual chapter headings (I'll add a footnote to that effect shortly). If you have a usable source for the images (I was advised not to use the .djvu file, and those in the PDFhe, from which the former was sourced are too low quality), please point it out. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:25, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What is the source of the pdf, forgive me if I don't see where that is on either file. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 12:03, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The source is correctly credited on Commons as being the book; as to its intermediate source, the PDF has that watermarked on each page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:06, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't see a watermark, please save me the trouble of looking by providing the url (or that I've misunderstood and you scanned it). CYGNIS INSIGNIS 12:51, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I removed this as a new item on the front page for the moment. A source and image improvement, from same or other, would be an exemplar new text. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 13:31, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please put ToC on the root page, it makes for better e-publications. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:10, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extracting the images from a PDF[edit]


In reference to the above, this is a ZIP of all the images in the PDF (no compression or other processing applied). You can do this yourself with pdfimages -png in.pdf boyscouts (it won't include the red watermark, because that's not an image, it's text) Some PDF viewers let you right click and save images too. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 13:33, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case it is of interest, I have brought the work in, and am having my bot put in the text from the page layers. Only basics there at the moment, though will endeavour to get the framework better configured in the next few days. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

wikidata templates[edit]

"Importing" some templates has been on my todo list for a while. The information you provided me, while grieving me to no end, also saved me a lot of other grief finding this on my own. So, thank you.

There are some other wikidata templates. As Billinghurst mentioned {{wdl}} and I started some which have been thankfully improved {{WD version}} and others listed there, for the author and version pages.

Another wikidata thing is that if the data has a main subject, then if the book does not have a wikipedia article, the Header template will pull in the wikipedia page for the main subject.

I am looking forward to the wikidata form filled Index page creator. So, thanks for the early concentrated grief!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]