User talk:Pmsyyz

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search

GNU General Public License[edit]

Do you still belive this page should be deleted because you did not complete the nomination by listing it on Wikisource:Proposed deletions--BirgitteSB 07:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, I guess even though the GPL itself is not under the same license as the rest of Wikisource, it could be left in if marked a bit more prominently at the top. Too bad you can't removed the "Content is available under GNU Free Documentation License." bit at the bottom from selected pages. --Pmsyyz 15:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

EB1911 classification[edit]

Hi, A discussion has started on Scriptorium [1]about adopting the same classsification for the WS version as was used on the original printed version. This has distinct advantages. Your comments are welcomed. Kind regards. Apwoolrich 18:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource:Protection policy[edit]

I saw your question about protection reasoning and wanted to point you at the policy. Protection is not done in regards to vandalism, but more because of well-meaning "corrections". I imagine a request to unprotect a text to add links would be fulfilled quickly with no questions asked. Proofreading is tedious business and when it is done, it is best if it not so easily undone. I hope to one day get "Protect Section" enabled to allow editing of the notes area without having to request unprotection, but until then we must protect all or nothing. --BirgitteSB 13:15, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Have you tried semi-protection? --Pmsyyz 04:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Iraq Study Group Report[edit]

A note about the all of our efforts on the ISG report has been posted on [2].Jmcneill2 06:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


Soft redirects are not speedily speedy deleted. See CSD M2. If you do not like this policy, you may bring it up at the Scriptorium --Benn Newman (AMDG) 02:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the images[edit]

Thanks for adding the images for the medals to the various Executive Order pages. Sometimes I forget that we can use images from over on commons. :) — MrDolomite | Talk 13:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I uploaded those images to the Commons and in the descriptions there linked to the Executive Orders here on Wikisource. Links between the different Wikimedia Foundation projects enriches them all. BTW, see what Michael Badnarik has to say about Executive Orders. --Pmsyyz 00:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the helpful wikification at Presidential Message: Eid al-Adha, don't know why I didn't think of that. :) Cheers, Cirt (talk) 03:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

{{EB1911 Link}} for your purposes[edit]

Gday. We have a template specially for these purposes, so {{EB1911 Link|Melville, Herman}} gives

billinghurst (talk) 02:27, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. --Pmsyyz (talk) 02:30, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

La Marseillaise[edit]

Greetings Pmsyyz.

A work you contributed, La Marseillaise, had no attribution to the translator. The translator, it turns out is a living person, and thus we need a license from him. If you are willing and able please ask this individual for a license, or this contribution may be deleted. If you need help, please ask at the Scriptorium or at WS:COPYVIO. A copy of the pending deletion discussion at WS:COPYVIO#La_Marseillaise is reproduced below for your convenience, in case it gets archived before you return to the website. Thank you for your longtime contributorship.

This work has needed the name of its English translator for many years now. I found a translation of three verses in a 1917 public domain document. What do say we start from scratch and use those verses, because I don't know where to begin to find the provenance of the text that's there. Does anybody else know? Does anyone care at this point? ResScholar (talk) 01:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

It's from Wikipedia; early articles in 2003 have a different translation, but this matches a June 2007 article; the history is probably somewhere between there.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:18, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Here's the story. Both the 2003 version and the 2007 version came from earlier "improvements" by Wikipedia users to the December 2001 version contributed by an anonymous user. This user posted this version (without attribution) with the website as the ultimate source. The name of the author is Iain Patterson and he was an amateur Francophone. His story about how he came to be the first English translator of La Marseillaise on the world wide web is found here.

This is User:Pmsyyz's contribution. I think he should decide whether he wants to get a release from the author or not, unless someone wants to save him the trouble. ResScholar (talk) 08:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I copied it straight from the Wikipedia article. Which currently says it is PD from the Library of Congress. Start from scratch with that if you like. --Pmsyyz (talk) 05:27, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
If you look closely, there's two versions: One at the top and one at the bottom, which is one they seem to be calling PD from the Library of Congress. I'm just telling you this for the record; I wouldn't blame you if you have limited interest in this subject. Thanks for your reply. ResScholar (talk) 07:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I read your reply too fast! You are suggesting we use the Library of Congress version. Unfortunately, it apparently appeared on one of their front pages like the way we have featured texts on the front page of Wikisource, and is now gone, so we can't confirm it's copyright status. Again—just for the record, and thank you again for your now-understood reply! ResScholar (talk) 07:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

There appear to be several copies available at the Library of Congress website now. Here is one: [3] Hmm, maybe not, that doesn't seem to be a proper translation... --Pmsyyz (talk) 03:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


Yep, the reason was reverting an unexplained addition of content not found, or referred to, in the text: [4] cygnis insignis 21:48, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Links explaining unfamiliar terms are encouraged in Wikisource. A link is not a change in the text as no new text is added. A link could be biased, but one simply to the Wikipedia article of an Unusually proper noun is not. Since the page is transcluded into The American Review, Volume 1, February/The Raven, the only way to add the link is to edit the validated page. --Pmsyyz (talk) 02:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)