User talk:WeeJeeVee

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Hello, WeeJeeVee, 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:

Carl Spitzweg 021-detail.jpg

You may be interested in participating in

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{CotW}} 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.

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 IP address (or username if you're logged in) 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) 06:47, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome from me too. Nice to see a volunteer conscript. smiley We try to be very accommodating, so if you have special interests then do feel free to ask questions, or to make suggestions, especially through the Wikisource:Proofread of the Month. We really like fresh ideas. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Treasure Seekers[edit]

Hi and thank you for your work on finishing off The Treasure Seekers. If you want to carry on working on validations have a look at Category:Index Proofread and see if there's a work there that takes your fancy. Alternatively, you could have a go at proofreading things for the first time. Category:Index Not-Proofread has works that have been uploaded and are waiting for someone to pay them some attention. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


You're a very neat proofreader. Thanks for proofreading Popular Science. — Ineuw talk 17:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

need a little help with proofreading[edit]


While I was proofreading page 180 (djvu 192) in Natural_History,_Mollusca I had to make

Genus Purpura.

to get Genus purpura in larger letters in the center of the page. But I also want to use Genus purpura to write all letters in kapitals. But using them together gives a problem.

I cannot find an example somewhere else, so that i can copy it. Can someone have a look at it and make it how it has to be. Then I can copy it if i need it in an other page.

Thanks WeeJeeVee (talk) 20:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Does this solve your problem?

Genus Purpura

Center uses div tag while sc uses span, so I think that's why the order makes the difference. --Mpaa (talk) 20:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that solves the problem. It was the order. Thank you WeeJeeVee (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

some remarks[edit]

Just to let you know. On page 184 of the Mollusca I changed:

  • the header -> use {{RH}} = {{RunningHeader}}
  • the footnote; compare page 5

greetz, Dick Bos (talk) 08:04, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

  • On a couple of pages I validated I found that you leave a blank line at the top of the page. If the text is just a continuation of the previous page, please remove that blank line and start immediately with the text (e.g. page 228 of the Mollusks). Otherwise the text in the "book"-form will show sudden breaks. It is always good to have a look at the "book"-form every now and then, btw: Natural_History,_Mollusca (this is the index; click on the chapter you're working on and scroll down). / Sorry - I checked this out myself; and your blank line does not make any difference! (Dick Bos (talk) 08:56, 6 February 2012 (UTC))
  • I have put a question concerning linking in the Scriptorium Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help. And there is more info on the images one topic higher!

Dick Bos (talk) 06:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


Perhaps you understand more of this than I do: see: Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help#images. I leave it for now. Too complicated for me (especially with the low-level tools I have available here). So I hope we will find the images on Commons shortly. But perhaps you like to give it a try. Greetz, Dick Bos (talk) 09:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for the tip on the headings. Mstock (talk)

Wikisource talk:Proofread of the Month[edit]

As one of the newer contributors in this space, why not pop over to Wikisource talk:Proofread of the Month and have an opinion on what you think should be the PotM for March. If you don't like the choices, make a suggestion. A new brain is always welcome. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Red wikilinks[edit]

Hi, WeeJeeVee! Thank you for validating the PotM. However, it is not actually helpful to remove red wikilinks from works. They are inserted when the name of the person is known, but we don't have an author page yet, "yet" being the operative word. Having a red link allows an interested reader to know that the person named is known, gives his full name (which often takes some sleuthing to find out in the first place), and allows him/her to follow the link and create the page if interested. I often spend time filling in author pages, and I can see which ones are required from finding red links. Missing authors are also collected occasionally into a big list for tracking, and this can only be done if there is a red link. Additionally, if multiple pages make the same redlink, when the page is created, there is a ready-made "web" of incoming links, which is the big advantage of the wiki format.

I hope this makes sense, please ask if you have any questions. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 16:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Inductiveload, Sorry for removing all the red links. I hate reading a wikipediapage or a bookpage with numerous red links. Better make a link when the page is made. Didn't know there was a big list of missing authors. Makes a bit sense!
WeeJeeVee (talk) 21:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
phe (talkcontribs) has a script that queries enWP and helps to populate {{author}}, so if that is a penchant (for me it is close to obsession wink) then give us a hoy. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for work on PSM[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your work on PSM. If you have any question in that area, you can ask User:Ineuw, which is very active there, or myself. You can also find some information material on the project page Wikisource:WikiProject_Popular_Science_Monthly. Bye--Mpaa (talk) 20:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, thanks[edit]

Thanks for catching my copy-paste error.[1] EVula // talk // // 20:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

No thanks! My eye was caught by the references. Doesn't look good when they are centred or when they start on the same level as the sidenotes. Now waiting for someone who has a brilliant idea for that.

Just another heartfelt "thank you"[edit]

The title says it all, and your help with PSM is most appreciated.

I resolved the problematic issues on Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 30.djvu/524. There are two ways to handle multi-page references. I used to merge them into one page, as you have done, and leave a note in the page header which won't appear in the main namespace. {{fs85|{{ua|note=split reference was placed on the previous page.~~~~}}}} The standard method is, naming the reference tag <ref name=D524></ref> at the beginning, and using <ref follow=D524></ref> on the subsequent page(s).

For reference paragraphs, one must use the <p>.— Ineuw talk 18:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Help decide the future of Wikimania[edit]

Wikimania logo with text.svg

The Wikimedia Foundation is currently running a consultation on the value and planning process of Wikimania, and is open until 18 January 2016. The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in 2018).

After reviewing the consultation, we'd like to hear your feedback on on this survey.

In addition, feel free to share any personal experiences you have had at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania. We plan to compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk), from Community Resources 21:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Towards a New Wikimania results[edit]

Wikimania logo with text.svg

Last December, I invited you to share your views on the value of Wikimedia conferences and the planning process of Wikimania. We have completed analysis of these results and have prepared this report summarizing your feedback and important changes for Wikimania starting in 2018 as an experiment. Feedback and comments are welcome at the discussion page. Thank you so much for your participation. I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, 22:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Life of Petty - images[edit]

A good place to find images (and cover) of Life of Petty:

Every page can be downloaded on its own as a jpg in rather high res.

--Dick Bos (talk) 19:15, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

The Bird Watcher in the Shetlands[edit]

Hi. I undertook maintenance on the work to align with wikisource:style guide. We don't replicate chapter numbering of roman numerals and instead use arabic numbering. I also inserted relative links to the top level of the work, and removed the year parameter from the chapters, we only need to do the top level of the work. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Deletion request; and nomenclature[edit]

Hi. You have labelled Bird Watching/Chapter II. for deletion. Why do you believe that is the case. Nothing evident for the work itself.

Re the naming, to note that we don't utilise the original chapter titling for our subpage titles. As stated in Wikisource:Style guide we will always utilise something like Bird Watching/Chapter 2.

So I am more inclined to remove the deletion and to move the pages to the preferred titles. Looking to hearing back from you. (please {{ping}} me) — billinghurst sDrewth 02:41, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Ah, you retranscluded the pages. I would have recommended moving, and then requested deletion of the redirects. More clarity. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:44, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Billinghurst, thanks for your attention. I was a little bit fighting with the transcluded pages and saw far to late that i was on the wrong way. For me easier to make new ones (and check them better), then to redirect. As a pity i am still not so very skilled with included pages. WeeJeeVee (talk) 13:42, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
None of this is a worry, it is open communication. And you are correct that transclusion is a learning exercise with some syntax. I never remember it all and visit mul:Wikisource:ProofreadPage to check. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:09, 12 May 2018 (UTC)