User talk:RaboKarbakian

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Babel user information
en-N This user has a native understanding of English.
Users by language
Here and other places

Birdcraft[edit]

The file for this book will need to be fixed before the book can be proofread. The OCR text layer is out of synch with the scanned text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

I have been using the OCR button on every page. If there is a better way... --RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Ask in the WS:Scriptorium for someone to correct the file. There should be a text layer already there, which matches the text. I've checked several pages, and although it's there for most pages, it doesn't align with the correct pages. Asking for help fixing the file will delay work, but will make the work much easier to complete. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:34, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

small scan link[edit]

You may find the template {{small scan link}} useful for Author pages. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Bird-Lore‎[edit]

It is unclear what the purpose of this page is to be. It seems to link to volumes titled "Bird-lore", to educational pamphlets, and to plate illustrations. If this is meant to collect a variety of resources, then it will need to be converted to a Portal: of some kind. If it is meant to be the primary page for a set of volumes in a single series, then it will need to prominently display that information, along with the appropriate license for the text(s). --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:45, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Heh, sorry. I was enjoying the easiness. The jounals contained the Educational Leaflets and also Plates. The Educational Leaflets were spread between (iirc) Volumes 5 and 28. The color plates started in either Vol. 4 or 5 and continued for some time. I just thought to collect those two features, each into one list; both are only from the journal itself. It would need to be a portal to the Jounal.
The navigation here is compelling... --RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:53, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Trueness to published work[edit]

I have finally had some time to look at some of your, and it diversifies from numbers of stylistic components that we have been utilising, see Wikisource:Style guide.

Firstly, you are not being true to the published work, and you seem to be recreating the navigation, such we have found problematic as it lacks robustness in our environment, internal to the work, and when working with other works, primarily with preparing future links. You are pulling pages up and down out of the volume and issue level, that makes navigation and templating difficult, and becomes personal rather than logical. I have started to improve Template:BLVolSpeciesheader though need to work out what is going on, whether we have to do works per issue, or per volume. We also need to get these pages best available for Wikidata, and for the eventual templating from somewhere like Wikipedia, so well worth the early investment.

Internally within the page: namespace it is quite unusual for us to utilise heading formatting == and === ..., we find that they don't have the graduations that we wish to achieve, they throw problematic section marks, and they prove difficult for users to consistently use through works. I would suggest that Help:Templates gives some good information on the size templates (div or span).

I guess this sounds very interfering, and it is, though I hope that it can see in the best light for the work, ease of work, and for fitting within our corpus of work, and calls from external. Probably a time to focus on Page: namespace for transcription, whilst we work together on the main ns navigation. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:10, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

P.S. We have done lots of these, it will be fine, and hopefully make things lots easier. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:13, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
I think you are abusing the word very and perhaps the word interfering also.
Putting all articles of one species together (especially with these smaller articles) should make a nice link for use on other wikis. The species pages are just separate from what will be the normal navigation. Bird-Lore, Volume I, No. 1 is having what I think is the actual navigation here, it wants to go onto No. 2.
I started to move the Portal:Birds#Birds_by_type around. Not so much for these club type articles, but the scientific type entires on the species (in other books) contain a list of previous mentions of the species.
Here is an interesting example. Ornithological_Biography/Volume_1/Song_Sparrow. The lower third of that page is about a species of plant. As a documenteur of species, it would be nice to have that description transcluded into its own page so that it might be included with the plant articles. In the bird portion of the page, there is a list of other books that have described the Song Sparrow and what they called it. It is the way of the TOLers (I don't like to mention them too often, them and the Flat Earthers...).
Perhaps the problem is the navigation. The navigation is uncomfortable to me as it is based on when mentioned in the journal. And it would make it a lot easier to grab the species articles (without navigation). I started the navigation among the species so that no one got lost as almost happened with the Chipping Sparrow.
So, as a summary, the books and magazines should all have the usual navigation. The species series should run independently and is easier to gather as I go.
PS, my PS is about Linaeian (an invented word) type indexers. The attempt to name everything and make an index of where it was mentioned is so appealing in its only semi-usefullness and the utter futility of the effort on our constantly changing little blue ball.... I will not attempt to sell this idea to you, but as a goal, it is irresitable. Can I please continue?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:55, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
I was going to try to spell entirely correctly but I noticed the '==' information. I am so glad to be free from that! <section /> is just great! Almost like putting your finger on it and getting an "includes". I am really loving this wiki....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Linking to Wikidata[edit]

As long as you add the Author page to Wikidata, you do not need to add a link here. The fact that it's linked at Wikidata will automatically be found up by the local page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:06, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

E.g.: If you look at what I removed here, then visit that Author page, you'll see that none of that was necessary to have, and is supported entirely at Wikidata for us. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:07, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Addendum: Also, we list works by an author first on their page, and then works about that author or their works. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:12, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Prioitizing. Good help, Thanks. I had wanted to separate articles from books, using the latexish definition of the two. I wonder if there is a way to deliver number of chapters to the link?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:26, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
We don't usually subdivide "Works" unless there are a lot of them. If there are fewer than six works, there is no real reason to add extra section headers. But, we always distinguish between works by an author and works about an author and their works. We never mix those two groups in the same section, even if there is only one of each. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:59, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Author:Florence Augusta Merriam Bailey[edit]

When listing an author's works on the Author page, we don't list the author in the citation. The author's identity is implicit in that the work is listed on that author page, so giving the author's name is a redundancy. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:25, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Yeah. I was using the page while refining the template. Refining the template in this case means learning how to "if then" with that syntax so that the authors name does not need to be included. --RaboKarbakian (talk) 22:28, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Birds as weed destroyers[edit]

The copy you have uploaded was published in 1899 in the journal Science. Publication information is always for the copy we have here, and not for any other copy. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:26, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

The Hathi reprint does indeed look far superior, especially since it includes the plates. I would recommend using the Hathi copy. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:07, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
You'll find two things are usually true on Wikisource: (1) a broad search before you start on a work can often pay off with a much better copy, and (2) nothing is ever as quick as you think it will be. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:08, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Template:Internet Archive link is not for author or portal namespaces[edit]

Hi. Template:Internet Archive link is for use in the Talk: and File: namespaces as it categorises works.

For author and portal namespaces, we instead use {{ext scan link}} to link through, especially as this chains for multi-volume works. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:51, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Pity that the two letter template goes to autofill on the index pages.... --RaboKarbakian (talk) 03:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Not really, they provide different tasks. Also, with {{ext scan link}} we collect all works that have scans from a multitude of sites, which is not the case with "IA"; further if we have volumes at different sites, we collect under the one framework. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:43, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Again, thanks! For fixing what I had done.... The pity is for the ease of use. I tried 'tia' first. Eventually I stopped because it looked so ugly. Bibliographies in old books are pretty cool, eh? --RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:38, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
To help you out (hopefully), if you turn on your gadget for CharInsert, you will find that I have added {{ext scan link}} under the user dropdown. So you can just click it to get the text inserted. Plenty of other useful additions there too. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:49, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Image widths[edit]

I usually limit my image widths to no more than 420px. Much larger than that and the right half of the image will be lost on mobile devices and some monitors, so I will sometimes go with 360px, if I can. Not everyone has a widescreen monitor. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:55, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I randomly chose 620px, but my formula (from the original page sizes) width/ppi*96 screen ppi has this field guide at 640px(ish). I'm going to fix it tomorrow or monday. Frogs tomorrow.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 03:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Hardly the most interesting subject... but...[edit]

Index:Coloured Figures of English Fungi or Mushrooms.djvu

Also if this gets your interest try and see if any out of copyright works using Bertrix Potter's Mycological recordings are available yet. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Its crack. I can't even look at those until I do some more work on Curtis. The Wayside book has the appeal of having images of our common weeds in which were one way or another imported from that one comparatively little island.
The printing of the Brits is already enough crack, btw.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:33, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Not text indent, and div/span templates[edit]

Hi. Please don't use Template:Text-indent in general use, see the style guide for how we generally ignore paragraph indentation.

Also, we have div (block) and span (inline) templates, we cannot wrap inline templates around block templates as it breaks html formatting. If you are sizing a block of text, then we would recommend {{smaller block}} rather than {{smaller}}. It is a tricky beast at times, and blame the devils that created html nesting. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 05:00, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Our block templates usually have a start .../s and end .../e variation which allow us to continue over pages. We will stick the first /s in the body and pair it with an /e in the footer, and then on the next page do the /s in the header, and then the /e in the body. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:53, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
eek!! Good to know. --20:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
With {{nop}} the accepted practice is to put it at the tail end of a page, rather than to lead a page, we had a loooong conversation about that years ago. To help to do that when you get to the next page, we have a gadget that puts a link in LH toolbar to do that. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:22, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
Truly, I have been putting them everywhere.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Fractions. If there is the unicode for a fraction, it is preferable that we use them, rather than create a representation. Noting that the representations are not searchable, whereas the unicode are. There is an available list of fractions on the drop down character menu "maths & logic" tab. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:21, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
{{frac}} appeals so much to my humble LaTeX beginnings AND the way that using that makes all of the fractions be uniform in presentation. It will be difficult to get over it, but I will work at it. Also, I try to think of a reason/situation to search a whole document for a fraction; I find for reasons to search for what the fraction is measuring--The mathematicians that I have known and been graded by were about those numbers but the physicists wanted units (the item being measured) and the latter makes sense to me.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Good thing I have you…!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Sections[edit]

We would only utilise a <section> where we were looking to transclude a part of a page. [Section is a tag from "labeled section transclusion"). If we are going to pull the whole page of text, it is redundant, as we would not use a "to|fromsection=" component in <pages>.

Note that the Wikisource:style guide asks for us use to straight quotes. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:28, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

PLEASE FOLLOW THE STYLES. They have been demonstrated to you, yet there seems to be an inner stubbornness to an individuality. There are clear reasons why we have abandoned the formatting that you are attempting. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
It is not so much an inner stubborness as it is a familiarity with the (gnu) culture--but I only guess at this as you have not shown the problem I am apparently creating.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:46, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Why is it that I need to demonstrate to you that the styel guide is wrong? Why do I need to push that the document developed over years of our experience and learnings to be blithely ignored as you have different ideas? Mate, give me strength. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:01, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
I could use some help, as long as I have your attention, Suggestive programs for special day exercises/Labor Day/The Moral Dignity of Labor -- I can't get the paragraph between the pages to join. Probably it is because I am just not good at wiki.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC) (@Billinghurst:
There was out-of-date syntax on the Mainspace page, but more importantly, there was a template on the second page interfering with the formatting. I removed it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:10, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Suggestive_programs_for_special_day_exercises/Labor_Day/The_Moral_Dignity_of_Labor&curid=2511601&diff=7530703&oldid=7530662 <-- Is that what billinghurst is talking about? I got to the wikimedia page from the Help pages here about how to transclude pages. I have been enjoying that. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Labeled_Section_Transclusion
There's a simpler local guide at Help:Transclusion. When in need, search for WS:Thing or Help:Thing to find information. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:19, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
It has been deprecated for all of 5 months! https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Help%3ATransclusion&type=revision&diff=6142877&oldid=5709933 And it became deprecated after I bookmarked that link to wikimedia. Deprecation, from where I have been lasts years, almost decades. Stability is the goal there, though. I will change the syntax and expand my pages knowledge. Software Stability is something to maybe to consider? I truly do not want to upset people or ways here.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 02:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
No, It's been over two years. 2016 was two years ago. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Why are the pages going backwards in your presentation. That is not representing the work as published. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:59, 30 June 2018 (UTC)


I using the program as a menu. In my minds-eye, I see this book(let) as being published both as sections with navigation following the program (at the beginning of each section) and the whole book also, with all of its pages and sections intact the way it was published (Suggestive programs for special day exercises/book. See Suggestive programs for special day exercises/Labor Day or Suggestive programs for special day exercises/Memorial Day. I have yet to enjoy the magic that happens when the {{djvu page link}}s do their thing....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 02:12, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
We are reproducing the book, not reinterpretting it nor individually creatively representing the day based on the book and the program.
We have also gotten local positive notice from a goldstar mother, whose opinion I truly value, for the memorial day section as it is and to have the whole book running on my ereader would be just the thing! Is there a problem with what I envisioned? The using of the software to make text available in different formats and for different gizzmos? Reading online is much easier in sections and to me, following the program shows their intent not so much their space restrictions. The book was cobbled together. Evidence of that can be seen by the residual page numbers on some of the individual parts. Several of the poets are represented here in all manner of ways, cannot the teachers also have some leeway?
We should really like using software to its fullest when it has a useful application.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 02:55, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
{{djvu page link}} is all work and little benefit. It has no value in the main ns. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:46, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Something I read in the Help made me think that using this would help in moving the pages into one big all inclusive book. I liked thinking that way. --RaboKarbakian (talk) 02:55, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Has someone put their pipedream into a Help page? :-(
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment use of width. Because of small screen presentation, we prefer to use max-width rather than width. I didn't change the as I didn't have visual when using AWB to capture and regex the existing code. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Michigan Department of Education[edit]

For organizations that publish works, and are not actually authors, we use the Portal namespace. So Portal:Michigan Department of Education. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)