User talk:Zoeannl/2015

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Hi, I've been beavering away and enjoying myself and just want to know... I don't understand how Talk works - is there a For Dummies manual somewhere? How to write wiki for absolute beginners, how to ask for help, how to collaborate etc.? Talk protocol?
Cheers, Zoe Zoeannl (talk) 21:45, 9 October 2014 (UTC)


For the header sections in the Page: namespace we use {{RunningHeader}} to get the right look more easily. For the volume of PSM that you are doing, I will edit the Index: page so that we can have the header automatically added for easier population. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Urk, all the pages have been created, what I had planned only works for new pages, so to use that template you will need to add it. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

PSM project templates[edit]

I just made some adjustments to Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 24.djvu/284 and forgot to point out to you earlier that there are numerous style templates specific to PSM can be found at Pages in Category:The Popular Science Monthly Project templates that provide uniform format to the project. I also added anchors but don't bother with it. They are linked to the Index at the back of the volume - a list which is program generated.IneuwPublic (talk) 20:25, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

An incredible job[edit]

My gratitude for an incredible job of proofreading PSM. (Wish I could be that good) I very much like that you don't wrap the text because it makes the page much easier to validate. One question please: Are you using an Apple/Mac to proofread? — Ineuw talk 03:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I used to do Project Gutenberg. I'm using MS Windows with Dvorak keyboard. Cheers, Zoe Zoeannl (talk) 06:49, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Modifications of the references on your user page[edit]

Hi, I have taken the liberty to modify and add to your references on your user page. It began with correcting the running headers (rh) where an extra vertical bar was employed at the end. This caused the following:

Don't be concerned with the existing ones, since I check every page. — Ineuw talk 12:49, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

small refs playing up[edit]

{{helpme}} I'm having a problem with {{smallrefs}} mucking up formatting at the bottom of the page. I've been asked to use smallrefs as standard for Popular Science Monthly but I've noticed it puts an extra return on the last line of text and it seems to affect {{hws}} on the read page. Is there a fix? Cheers, Zoe

Assuming you are referring to Popular Science Monthly/Volume 25/May 1884/Sketch of Mary Somerville, what about now? I changed two pages here and here. The problem, as I see it was not the {{hws}} interfering with {{smallrefs}} at all; rather it was the "wild-" prefix to the hyphenated "flowers". By moving that word inside of the {{hws}}/{{hwe}} processing, advantage could be taken of the cross-page extra-space suppression mechanism they provide. (What is often not understood clearly is that the transclusion process—at least for English texts—always adds a space between pages. We simply don't notice this because of the normal wiki-mechanism which converts arbitrary strings of spaces into a single space everywhere.) This (or rather the situation prior to my two edits) happens to be the rare case when this matters. I hope this explanation is not too confusing! AuFCL (talk) 09:42, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
So what do I do here?
Cheers, ZoeZoeannl (talk) 21:45, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Check it out. Including the following page.— Ineuw talk 22:29, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
@Zoeannl: I should have mentioned that you can instantly check your work by clicking on the "What links here" link on the left of the proofread page which will lead you to Special:WhatLinksHere/Page:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_25.djvu/196. Select the main namespace article on the list Popular Science Monthly/Volume 25/June 1884/The Pole and Wire Evil and the hws|hwe is on the border of pages 186-187. The page numbers should show up in the left margin.
Never you mind the Canadian. The old man is clearly used to seeing double and leaving hyphens where they do not belong. (This appears to be a job for South-Easterners; not those North-Westerners; yesterday night-shift lot!) The trick is to gather up the entire hyphenated word; in this case "elevated-railway". Because the page-crossing neatly occurs at the hyphen in that word; break off the first word and remove the hyphen (i.e. here "elevated".) We now have the components to build {{hyphenated word start|elevated|elevated-railway}} to insert into page 186. By a similar process the remainder of the word, once again omitting hyphens (the templates put them back as needed) supplies "railway"; so {{hyphenated word end|railway|elevated-railway}} may now be constructed to put into page 187. Any clearer now?

P.S. In case the earlier comments worry you, Ineuw never takes me seriously anyway.

Oh and regaring your question as to "how talk pages work"; the easiest way to treat them is simply to edit them (look for the nearest previous [edit] marker if you prefer not to edit the entire page) and insert whatever you want to respond to at the appropriate point. When you do edit them you will often see lists of ":"s in front of each line; which you may consider to be effectively the indent (tab-stop?) level. The normal convention is to indicate a reply to a given paragraph by taking the number of colons (e.g. this one has two) and add one to prefix your comment. AuFCL (talk) 01:31, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

AuFCL, you are going to drive Zoeannl batty. Your reply about hws|hwe falls into the category:six of one and or half a dozen of the other. — Ineuw talk 01:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Don't see your problem. Batty proofreaders keeps you in your job; doesn't it? Feel free to explain it appropriately. I'll fix up your errors if you want me to. AuFCL (talk) 02:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks guys. I think I've got it. I am actually born in Montreal so don't bad mouth Canadians, we might gang up on you. I still don't "get" talk... Zoeannl (talk) 04:56, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
A true straddler of all camps. Let the teasing begin! (By the way, good response: proves you do get talk pages, even though you may not think so yet…) AuFCL (talk) 05:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion matters[edit]

Hi. I've taken the liberty to correct the styles you keep for the Popular Science Monthly. I would like to use them to assemble a manual of sorts, since the old manual is hopelessly useless. For reference, it's best if you use the completed volumes (Volumes 1 to 23). The old styles evolved for a reason, as Mpaa helped me in their definition. Unfortunately, there is no written record of the decisions taken until you have started your list. Now, I ask for your permission to continue and add missing info (and as to why it is so). The intent is to replace the old manual. If you have an issue with this approach, then I will copy your work and continue in the manual.

Furthermore, if you are using Windows and not averse to using keyboard macros, I highly recommend using Autohotkey. I use that exclusively for consistency and speed. The styles used in PSM already exist ON THIS PAGE and the macros are very easy to modify and assign to keys of your liking. My keyboard choices were organized up to a point but then, I had to abandon organization and use the logic of available key combinations and assign them according to their frequency of use.

Please let me know your thoughts. — Ineuw talk 20:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm all for consistency so I'm fine with being shown what to do, but you underestimate my wiki abilities. I am willing and want to learn but am far from digital native and so struggle to understand the mark-up. As I do proof-reading mostly as a time-out or wind-down activity I am often not up to tackling alot. I'll pick things up slow and steady. Having a go at tables this week has been a major accomplishment and while I do enjoy a challenge, I am annoyed at having to troll through help pages to find what I want. I have mostly gone through pages proof-read by others to see what has been done before. I do think Messrs. Editors: is in a smaller print, personally, but other than that I am just trying to keep the style set as best I can. A style guide with examples would be good.
I think if we developed a style guide, we could recruit proof-readers from distributed proofreaders who process books for Project Gutenberg. There are limits to the amount of basic proofreading/formatting available there as there are bottle-necks with second level formatting and post-processing. With Wikisource, we don't have to be so stringent because anything missed in two passes can still be fixed. I found dp a bit too demanding for me but it taught me alot. Have you seen their proofreading and formatting style guides? It would be good to use these as a basis as their resources are comprehensive and it seems clever to get people trained up on dp then set them to work here. We would actually want formatters, as we want batch proofreading and formatting done at the same time.
I have also struggled with this Talk page - I don't know how it works! I know I get a New message sign if there is something new on my Talk page but what is the protocol? I think collaboration should be the strength of Wiki but it isn't intuitive or overt (for a non-digital native).
Cheers, Zoe Zoeannl (talk) 22:06, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
P.S. I am in New Zealand if you wonder what timezone I am in. +12hr GMT
Thanks for your reply. About Gutenberg distributed proofreading, I took their online test and failed. I know that their work is 100%.
About the The Popular Science Monthly Project, I recommend that you just keep to proofreading and don't waste your time on style issues. Your proofreading is flawless, and I am grateful for any contribution you make. I follow other proofreaders of the project and it's incumbent upon me to standardize the style. I just assembled this list here as the beginning of a style guide, and glad that you are not upset with me for (temporarily) messing up your home page.
About messages: You will find the settings in the Prefernces\Notifications. To get someone's attention, use {{Ping|username}}. This will show up on the user's top bar and I think it also generates an email message - provided the user agreed to receive email from the community.
Finally, I am in Montreal Canada, and it's -4:00 UTC (GMT) (Eastern Standard Time) so it's 8:12PM here as I write this. — Ineuw talk 00:14, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Copied the style explanations[edit]

I copied the info on your user page to one of my Sandboxes so feel free to delete any info. — Ineuw talk 02:29, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

It would be unfair not to let you know[edit]

Hi. There are several oddities occur in the PSM scans and it would be only fair to tell you about them. Most of the scanning of PSM was done manually, as attested by the scanned hands of the volunteers. As you may have noticed, it also has the following repeated issues:

  1. W or w may be preceded by a " open quotation mark, without a closing.
  2. Occasionally, words starting with a w have a T inserted as w T alk = "walk"
  3. the character "p" often appears as jj.
  4. Hyphens at the end of a row are often there to pad the line and not to hyphenate the word. Just use your judgement and feel free to replace it with a space. PSM publications were manually typeset well into the 1890's, so they used a hyphen to justify the text.

FYI, In volume 24 I checked about 200 pages and found 7 omissions, which is by anyone's standards is tops, especially that in my case it's the reverse, in 7 pages I have 200 omissions.— Ineuw talk 07:30, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

PSM Literary Review {{Plr}} Template[edit]

@Zoeannl: Hi. It was I who removed the {{Dhr}} from the row preceding the Plr template because it's built in to Plr. The POPULAR MISCELLANY paragraphs that need to be preceded by Dhr.— Ineuw talk 20:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

OK. I've just figured that hard returns interfere with Plr too. Cheers Zoeannl (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it is one paragraph - I just wrote this:

Please don't use the {{hi}} hanging indent template in the Literary reviews. The {{Plr}} template was designed specially to provide the space above and below the paragraph with the hanging indent and a smaller line-height than normal. Please check out this page which I just validated: Page:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_25.djvu/433

Ineuw talk 20:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

This is the list of all the templates specifically made for PSM (they should all start with "P")

Could you give me some examples of signatures to look at? With tables, I look at the examples and then the code (multiple times) to get a handle on it. I have a sign-off in POPULAR MISCELLANY to format. Cheers Zoeannl (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2014 (UTC)



Table design[edit]

Hi. When you design a table, check the alignment of columns. If the majority of the columns are right aligned (as the case is with almost all tables in PSM), then you can declare the alignment in the table definition line, and apply a single left alignment code for the text cells column. This way you save a lot of copy & paste of alignment codes. — Ineuw talk 00:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Popular Science Workbook[edit]

Templates for Popular Science annotation.

  • Glossary of obscure, obsolete and evolving words
  • Reference maps; place index
  • Timelines; date index
  • Authors pages; person index
  • Concept development: inter volume links; subject index
  • Disproved theories
  • Ongoing controversies
  • Eureka index: Discovery, significant innovations
  • Shame index: Bias, racism, sexism, classism; special topic: eugenics
  • Exemplers index e.g. scientific method, statistical analysis, education, philosophy, ethics, altruism

I like your list very much. Please consider including in your index:

  • Social development, or rather the concept and development of sociology
  • The rise of modern feminism
  • Development of modern Urbanism
  • Principles of taxation and government finance
  • The gradual diminishment of religious interference in science — Ineuw talk 12:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

These would all be concepts, I think - in the academic sense. Something I got out of teachers' training:

As Gerring (2001) suggests, we might identify and define a concept by adopting a definition others have used; considering what explains the concept or what the concept itself explains; exploring the intellectual history of a concept; or grouping together the “specific definitional attributes” that other definitions and uses of the word provide.

I am thinking of how Popular Science could be a terrific educational resource. I find Wikipedia is too one dimensional. It would be good to be able to back reference wiki articles with this sort of background information. i.e. if there was a link made to Darwin from (as) a Wikisource reference, it should automatically show up on his wiki page, and Wikisource author's page. So could a 'Wikisource reference' template do that?


My intent always was and is to connect the articles as reference for Wikipedia. Some have already been linked. We have special templates in Wikipedia for PSM article reference links - but we can't link unfinished articles. In any case that's what I was told.— Ineuw talk 04:20, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Page cleanup[edit]

Please take a look if this page and the following four pages are suitable for you to proofread. Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 26.djvu/41

Moved the running header to where it belongs, cleaned up the page by joining the hyphenated words and broke the lines close to the original line break. My program counts the number of characters in a line, which is adjustable! Normally 68 characters is the maximum, including spaces. I can come close to the original break but the joining of hyphenated words will throw off the next and the subsequent lines.

I have not done any spell check, or corrections of the text, replacing the mdash, applying italics, or bold face, or the footnotes, etc. If this type of cleanup is suitable for you to proofread, let me know.— Ineuw talk 22:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


  • It's a lot easier with the header out of the way.
  • I have concerns about automatic hyphen removing as there are quite a few archaic words spelt with hyphens e.g. to-day. I didn't find the changes in line breaks a problem.
  • The text size template thing doesn't work very well in the finished product. I've found the fine block does funny things too so I've been using a 'fine' per paragraph because it did what I wanted.
  • The * before the foot note went missing, that could be a pain when sorting multiple footnotes.
  • Should I be replacing the mdash? What with?
  • Mpaa had done {{hws}} and {{hwe}} for Vol 25 which was really helpful. Can you do that?

Cheers, Zoe Zoeannl (talk) 23:43, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Am happily validating Origin of the Species while we work this out.

This is a bit problematic but let me try to clean up as User:Mpaa does. (I will try a few pages and leave a message here.) However, I will be unavailable from Wednesday for a week so I won't be proofreading but will connect to read my messages.
  • The paragraphs below I wrote as an explanation.
  • The macro which cleaned the text is running in Textpad and unfortunately it's not editable so I can't alter it. It was designed to do things with which I had problems in proofreading.
  • I proofread the text in Firefox, and utilizing an addon named "It's all text" which pastes the page's content into Textpad (a text editor) with out me having to copy and paste.
  • In Textpad, I run the macro which performs numerous changes. - It closes up the space before the period, the semicolon, colon, question mark, exclamation mark and it closes up the space around a hyphen between words and then does the line wrap. Since the document is already proofread, whatever end of line hyphens are incorrectly joined, will show up in the final spell check. Textpad spell check is very intuitive - superior to anything I've ever encountered, and it simultaneously checks both English and French spelling.
  • When I hit the save in Textpad, the "It's all text" addon pastes the corrected text back in the Wikisource page.
  • Removing the asterisk from the footer was my doing - just a habit and I will leave the footnotes the as they are.
  • There is a problem with all font templates, including {{fine}}. They don't work for us because the line height is not proportionate to the font size. So, what I have been doing is replacing your use of the {{[[Template:fine with {{fs90/s}} {{fs90/e}} templates which is our standard smaller font size throughout the project. Since the line is wrapped, there is no break. The break with using {color|fine with {{fs90/s}} {{fs90/e}} templates which is our standard smaller font size throughout the project. Since the line is wrapped, there is no break. The break with using {color]]}} is a surprise to me. I will talk with the person who designed it because this shouldn't happen. — Ineuw talk 01:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Cleaned a few pages and ran out of steam. It might be best if you wait for Mpaa, since he uses a semi-automated system.— Ineuw talk 01:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
That looks really good. I'll proofread it when you've finished! I find the fractions formula really helpful and think it is too easily missed in your guide. I think Problem Templates would be worth including. Under work to do? You don't mention the Greek... Something I haven't checked and should be said is that we nop before a new article. That's all I can think of. Well done!
Cheers Zoeannl (talk) 02:01, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Proofreading of PSM[edit]

Hi. If and when you return to proofreading PSM please omit the {{Dhr}} above the Literary Notices' {{anchor|D}}{{Plr|. The Dhr code is built into the Plr template and by adding it, will double the gap above the book review.

I did a review of the font templates with which you are having problems with. These templates all provide the same font size. but some have important differences:

No {{Fine}} - Good only for a single paragraph. 92% font size and 140% line height which is the same as the regular font, so please don't use it, because it's height is not proportional to the font size and I will have to replace it. Enclosed by <span></span>, which means that it's an inline font template.
OK {{Fine block}} - Spans paragraphs and pages. 92% font size and 100% line height Enclosed by <div></div> which is a block and cannot be used inline. (It breaks the line)
OK {{Fine block/s}} paired with {{Fine block/e}}- Spans paragraphs and pages. 92% font size and 100% line height Enclosed by <div></div> which is a block and cannot be used inline. (It breaks the line)
OK {{fs90}} - Good only for a single paragraph 90% font size and 125% line height Enclosed by <div></div> which is a block and cannot be used inline. (It breaks the line)
OK {{fs90/s}} paired with {{fs90/e}} - Spans paragraphs and pages. 90% font size and 125% line height Enclosed by <div></div> which is a block and cannot be used inline. (It breaks the line)

Whether it's 90% or 92% font size is not relevant. The wiki software cannot display such fine difference. {{|tl|fs90/s}} paired with {{fs90/e}} was made especially for PSM, and is good for single or multiple paragraphs or spanning pages, so please use this. If your line appears broken - don't worry about it. We know why it's happening, and it's not important. It probably won't show up in the main namespace, and it will be fixed during validation. - If you have any questions please contact me. — Ineuw talk 01:54, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Return of the prodigal[edit]

@Zoeannl: Hi and welcome and glad that you returned. We are proofreading the same page simultaneously so perhaps we should devise a strategy on which volume and chapter we work on? Ineuw (talk) 06:18, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, back again. Kids back at school (end of summer). Normality returns. I could work on Volume 31? A bit rusty but getting back into things. The formatting exemplers are working well for me - Correspondence, Lit notices etc. The pre formatting is good. Is there any way to put smallrefs on all pages? Cheers, Zoe
Unfortunately the reference tags are specified at the bottom of the index page and inserted automatically when the page is created. When the PSM project was uploaded/installed - all pages were created by a robot program and with the standard reference tag. I will request if a [ro]bot procedure could replace them. (BTW, Anybody can make a bot request). Wikisource no longer creates the pages for an installed book, but leave it to the proofreader to create them.
After you left, I gave it a lot thought about how make your proofreading task much easier, and can prepare a list of proposals if you are interested. Ineuw (talk) 07:10, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Sure I'm interested. Zoeannl (talk) 07:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

A belated idea that may resolve some proofreading issues.[edit]

Admittedly, feeling ambiguous about the following proposal, nevertheless I feel that it should proposed. Was thinking that you may be more interested focusing on the text in the proofreading process. My idea was that if you focus on the accuracy of the text, then I would focus on the templates and layout format because all templates and the text formatting procedures are automated at my end.

Also, the process of cleaning up pages, moving the title to the header, and correcting the hyphenated word start and ends, (which is now done by User:Mpaa), is not an automated process and is quite time consuming. I feel that it's a demand on Mpaa's time to because he also deals with a lot of other maintenance tasks.

To further elaborate:

  • If the title is not in the header space, just delete it. I have keyboard macros that take care of the titles and page numbers.
  • Clean the garbage characters from the page's top and bottom.
  • Clean up the text of the footnotes, but leave it at the bottom of the page. Don't bother with the {{smallrefs}}.
  • Fix the missing M—dashes, italics, the double quotation marks, and the accented characters. In effect just fix the text.
  • Don't bother with any text formatting of paragraphs, like blocks of text of changing font sizes, anchors, Title, and Literary Notices, small case, etc. . .
  • Don't bother with spaces preceding periods, question and exclamation marks, semi and full colons. The adjustment of these are automated.
  • Do not wrap or merge the line ending with hyphens. Just leave the line length as is because it helps me to locate the text to be formatted. Line wrap is an automated process and I apply a quite sophisticated multilingual spell checker which warns me of potential errors. All this is supported by a PSM related archaic spelling and terminology dictionary compiled in the past years.
  • Save the pages as "Not proofread".

I prepared some demo pages HERE and HERE.

Your comments are much appreciated. Ineuw (talk) 19:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I am more than happy to drop the formatting (text size, lines, anchors, headings) but won't your proposal mean another step to validation? A third person to validate? Seems to defeat the purpose of proofreading to save as "Not proofread"...
I would have an issue with not dehyphenating words. It would be irritating to read when I check the preview. Happy to put a hard return in to keep the text aligned. I can (have been trying to) be conservative about removing hyphens where it may be archaic spelling.
I would consider proofreading to include inserting {{<ref>footnote</ref>}} and small caps. So I would propose doing these too and saving as "Proofread".
But then there are the tables...
Please don't think of proofreading as a bother to me. I would really enjoy doing a page to this standard. Less would bother me.
Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 02:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
I had similar reservations about my suggestions, that's why my response was delayed. As far as I am concerned I am comfortable with whatever process you wish to apply and ignore. Also, don't bother with tables at all because I've done so many (~400) that formatting them are second nature by now. Also, most have already been done there is just a few stray ones I missed here and there. Ineuw (talk) 05:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
OK. Did you want me to go back to Volume 29 or continue with 31? Zoeannl (talk) 05:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
It's best that you continue with 31. I am working on 29 now. One other item I forgot to mention. - There is a gadget called "Charinsert" in your Preferences/Gadgets. Please check if it is selected. This gadget activates the list selectable extended (accents, etc. Greek, etc.) characters. At the bottom of the list, there is a "User" selection. I took the liberty to add this in your javascript page. It contains a selection of the most used accented characters in PSM. If you wish to add any other characters, you can do it yourself, or anyone (I), can do it for you. This selection tool may appear above or below the editing area. Ineuw (talk) 05:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
The gadget is handy. Can you add an em-dash and minus sign too? Cheers— Zoeannl (talk) 04:06, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
@Zoeannl: dash and mdash added.Ineuw (talk) 07:02, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Arrg! Am going to bed now. Zoeannl (talk) 10:36, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Don't see anything wrong with this page. I think it's very neat.Ineuw (talk) 07:02, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Fine block versus fs90 template[edit]

@Zoeannl: Please don't use the {{fine block}} template and instead always use the {{fs90/s}} paired with {{fs90/e}} This is our standard reduced font size for poems and paragraphs throughout the PSM project. This pair of templates have the advantage of spanning several paragraphs and/or pages, and already include the padding at the beginning and of the template and makes the use of {{Dhr}} unnecessary. Now I must change all the fine blocks you applied. — Ineuw talk 01:27, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I thought I was following your advice from Now I know. Zoeannl (talk) 07:34, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
You are correct as far as the font size and line height, except neither of the two {{fine block}} or {{fine block/s}} & {{fine block/e}} have the top and bottom padding of the paragraph. — Ineuw talk 03:58, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Some info and questions[edit]

Took the liberty of correcting the footer (it was {{small refs}}) adding the header to be generated FOR THIS NEW PROJECT OF YOURS. The header created is the same on every page but is only valid for the even numbered pages. For the odd numbered pages you have to create them yourself. Please see some samples I created there.

If its not an intrusion, could you let me know what is your operating system and the browser you are using? If you are interested, I have some tools for Windows, which simplify applying the templates to the text, rather than typing or copy and paste. — Ineuw talk 04:15, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm using Windows 8 and Chrome. Cheers, — Zoeannl (talk) 04:18, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in replying. I was going to recommend for you to download & install Autohotkey. This is a freeware and superior keyboard macro tool for Windows. It's a small program, runs in the background and doesn't interfere with anything. The installation creates and places a small sample file named Autohotkey.ahk, (usually in My documents folder).
  • Copy this 2nd section of the page, paste it into a text file named as above, Autohotkey.ahk and replace the sample file.
  • This first section of the same page lists my current keyboard assignments, but they are changeable to any key on the keyboard.
  • Some of the key assignments are duplicates (triplicate if you include the Wiki editor toolbar), for flexibility whether I use the keyboard or the mouse:
    • Alt + ' = ''italics'' and Win + i = <i>italics</i> when a word contains single quotes.
    • Alt + b = '''bold''' and Win + b = <b>bold</b>.
  • You can assign any key of your preference to any action and delete from the list what you don't need. Each macro begins with the an indicator and ends with the word "Return".
If you have any questions please ask .— Ineuw talk 02:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

My edit page has gone strange[edit]

@Ineuw. The last two days proofreading the edit page has been difficult with duplicates of the edit space being produced-the top with a working tool bar (that has changed too) but the bottom space doesn't have a tool bar that works. So I've been editing the top and then I have to copy and paste to the bottom to Save. Obviously a glitch, I was hoping it would 'just' get fixed... I'm using Chrome. I hope you know how/who to chase up. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 00:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I have fired up Firefox which is working fine, so it's a problem with Chrome? Zoeannl (talk) 00:21, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Follow the discussion in the scriptorium HERE I also have the same problems but I don't think it's the browser. Weekly software updates here that messed up the Proofreading module. I am sure they are working on it.— Ineuw talk 02:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Proofreading Guide[edit]

@Ineuw I decided to try and get my head around anchors so I went to the PSM Proofreading Guide. Still confused... Went to Help:Transclusion. A link to this would be good. ... One source of confusion is the example in the guide under Tags uses ##Label## not section begin/end which is what the guide talks about.

I don't understand why the ## E27 ## is not at the end of the section, it is at the top of the page?
Have I got this right- at the beginning of this project a list of all the articles was made and the anchors link to this? And there will be a separate wiki page for each article?
Yes an article or a chapter uses one single web page and please read below.
The anchors and section indicators are two different matters.
If enabled, please disable Preferences\Gadgets\Editing tools for Page: namespace section: "Easy LST: Enable the easy section labeling syntax in the Page: namespace." For some idiotic reason (and there are many of these here) someone deemed to to introduce "## E27 ##" Section markers instead of these:
<section begin=E /> On a page where one article ends and another begins, we indicate the end section of the previous article with section codes. In my scheme of things, E = End and B = Begin. Then, this portion of the article is appended to the last full page of an article.
<section end=E /><section begin=B /> This indicates the end of the previous section and the beginning of the new article.
<section end=B /> This appends the beginning of the new article to the rest of the article.
In the main namespace if you open an article that began and/or end in the middles of a page,


Rereading the Proofreading guide, more of it makes sense now. Re our conversation about proofreading issues; the list of What needs to be done could be a handy delineation -> section titles. Under proofreading section, include Problem Templates to mark missing tables, images, greek etc. Put OCR shortcomings, paragraphs, dictionary/spell check, character list etc there. Have font sizes and titles as separate sections; Tables and images too.

If you found a missing section title, (or anything else), please bring it to my attention because I must check my reference database which records the articles' parameters like a partial page. Also one minor error doesn't qualify for a new set of templates. Someone has to manage and monitor them. We have a general template dedicated to PSM {{PSMCorrections}} which I monitor occasionally. Otherwise, I am not inclined to create general templates. There are so many unused templates that no one remembers them unless one studies them constantly. There are other simple ways to mark a page, like "Problematic". Once our job is done, the PSM proofreading manual is for the ages, (but I am negotiating with the US Library of Congress.)
However, if you wish to contribute to the general help sections - like copying a section from the proofreading manual, please feel free to do so.

Would you like for me to have a go at restructuring the guide? I would like to go back to Distributed Proofreading and tell them there is lots of proofreading to do at Wikisource but there is a lot of differences that a good Help Guide would navigate through... PSM could be a good place to upskill proofreaders. Generally I find Wikipedia Help terrible... And it's a great shame more people aren't proofreading at Wikisource. What are your thoughts? — Zoeannl (talk) 11:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Please don't bother. It's not a general document, as I mentioned before. There are very few projects here that would use such detailed structuring, and the ones that I know of (Dictionary of National Bibliography and Encyclopedias are well into being the project and their structure has been designed long before I showed up. From my proofreading experience of other books, none would qualify for such extensive planning.
Like I said before it's better to update the general Help guides, and perhaps point to the PSM guide as an example.— Ineuw talk 00:52, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

An addendum to the above post[edit]

Thanks for your valuable contribution and I don't feel comfortable to be seen as a naysayer, so please feel free to modify, add or edit the PSM proofreading guide as you wish. It's not my property. Information that applies to general to general proofreading, I will copy it into where it belongs, because I doubt that many people read the PSM guide.

Just a mention. In the Notes {{Pn}} section of the volumes you began to add {{Dhr}} between the paragraphs, which were never used in previous volumes. My idea of consistency is based on applying the same consistent format throughout the volumes for the same sections from the beginning. I have been removing them, unless you consider adding them to all the prior volumes.

It is only fair to tell you that the layout format changes in future volumes (in fact changing back and forth under the new owners/publishers). Whatever was proofread in theses volumes, earlier formats were maintained as much as possible because there are enough of them already. So if you come up against a new section, let's discuss it.— Ineuw talk 19:07, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

You proofread really well[edit]

Hi. I have to say that it is a pleasure to come along and validate page where you have done the proofreading. What quality. smileybillinghurst sDrewth 14:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi back. Thanks for the validating/validation. The proofreading is slightly substandard P2 Distributed Proofreaders quality :) I think it would be really worthwhile to transfer some DP skills over to Wikisource but need to upskill myself with how wiki works… So I think I have upload and proofreading pretty well sorted. I’m now wrestling with "post-production"—does An Introduction to Ethics look ready to announce to you? I was looking for a textbook category and only found instructional which doesn’t seem right; I’ve listed works on the author’s page which aren’t out of copyright yet in the U.S. Is that alright? Any suggestions? All feedback gratefully received. Thanks again, Zoeannl (talk) 12:34, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I’ve just finished proofreading Hume's Treatise of Human Nature, if you are interested in more of the same. I found it very interesting.

File uploads[edit]

I see that you have recently uploaded File:Philosophical_Review_Volume_19.djvu and a partner edition. Files should be fully described, preferably with the {{book}} template, especially with reference to source. If we do this then the metadata will flow through to the Index: template. We preferably upload files to Commons rather than locally, and to make this easier there is the tool toollabs:ia-upload which can do the bulk of the heavy lifting where the work is at I will coordinate the moving of these files to Commons. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:29, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I knew what I was supposed to do but had saved the wrong link. Fixed now but there will be a few Philosophical reviews in the wrong place. Thanks for picking this up. Cheers, — Zoeannl (talk) 11:39, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

A Mighty[edit]

A might thanks for proofreading PSM Volume 35!!!!— Ineuw talk 22:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I got tired of some of the 19th century bullshit so have gone ahead in time… There’s a missing image on Vol 85 320.djvu — Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 11:34, 8 July 2015 (UTC) And an unassigned footnote on Vol 85 325.djvuZoeannl (talk) 11:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC) Another missing image on Vol 85 333.djvuZoeannl (talk) 12:32, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Adjustment to Beginner's Proofread Page[edit]

Just to keep you in the know...

I made some wording changes to the side-by-side layout section, as I too was a little confused when I first came in. Maybe it's a little bit clearer now. That being said, we still need Fig 2.

Humbug26 (talk) 02:44, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Where are we up to with Popular Science?[edit]

Hi Ineuw, I’m back for more, but not sure where to start. Most of the Volumes are not showing Page Status. Vol. 61 is but has no running headers etc.-shall I just get on manually or is there a bot (or whatever it is) going through to do those things automatically (still don’t understand what you and Mpaa do to clean-up)? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 08:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@Ineuw: Beeswaxcandle is giving me a tutorial on using my talk page. So hopefully this will show up on your notifications now! Zoeannl (talk) 01:20, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
@Zoeannl: Hi and welcome back. I got your "ping." To see the page status you need to reload/refresh the page as you would with any web page. If that doesn't work, go to your Preferences\Gadgets and select the Clock and Purge from the Interface section. It's the second from the bottom. This places a digital clock in the upper right corner of the pages and if you click on the clock it is a more thorough purge. This will restore the pages' status.
I am working on Volume 39. If you start with Volume 41 or 42 it's close enough to the ones I am working on so you can use my work for reference. The original layout style evolved as the years go buy. So if you start with a higher volume number, you'll come across sections that you haven't seen yet - in any case just ping me and I'll help. I don't know if Mpaa did any additional page cleaning. Perhaps you can ask him or leaf through some of the volumes. — Ineuw talk 03:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: Mpaa has cleaned up Vol 55 for me to do when I’m not up to Nietzsche. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 00:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Wonderful. If you need any help let me know. (Mpaa is a good guy). — Ineuw talk 04:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: Something very odd happening with p 57. The Read page is there but the Edit page was blank so I copy and pasted, proofread and saved and the Read page is unchanged? — Zoeannl (talk) 08:16, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I suspect it's a cache issue. I can see the text twice now. Try purging the page. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello folks. I just expunged a complete (looked like raw OCR) duplication of the text of this page from within the header region. Did MpaaBot slip up with respects the initial <noinclude><div> boundary perhap? AuFCL (talk) 09:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
@Zoeannl: All of the above is possible and you can trust the night crew (based on my time zone). They are completely trustworthy. Even I trust them. :-) — Ineuw talk 19:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: I think that you have attributed some articles in PSM to John Townsend Trowbridge which are actually by John Trowbridge (no s:author page or Wikipedia article) as in this article; also World Catalog. What do you think? Cheers — Zoeannl (talk) 08:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
@Zoeannl: You are right. I found a .pdf biography from the National Academy of Sciences, showing an older John Trowbridge, than his image in his PSM bio here. The NAS .pdf is here. If you feel like adding the WS author page, and the Wikipedia page, with the info, go right ahead. — Ineuw talk 14:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
WS Author page done. I’ve tried to do a Wikipedia page before and been knocked back for lack of refs which I had supplied so I’m reluctant to try again… — Zoeannl (talk) 01:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: On Vol 55 Index pg some of the pages I have proofread are still colored pink. Do you see this too? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 00:38, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
@Zoeannl: I don't know which pages you are referring to, but this does happen fairly often because of cache issues on the server side. I wouldn't worry, it will clear out eventually. 01:17, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: Happy New Year. Volume 55 proofread. Cheers, — Zoeannl (talk) 07:27, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Happy New year to you too, and thanks for the work. — Ineuw talk 08:37, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Missing images[edit]

Hi. Just tripped over Page:Woman of the Century.djvu/7 and Page:Woman of the Century.djvu/8 which are both showing with red linked images. I haven't had the time to investigate, and thought that I would touch base as you might know what is the current situation there. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:34, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I think this is a case of wiki interuptus. Can't remember why I didn't upload the photos. I shall endeavour to finish what I started. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 04:38, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Sweet. I will leave them as is for the moment, and let you attend to them in your time. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 06:04, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Conversation non-starter[edit]

Dear Z. Once more you have mystified me by requesting a start to a conversation which seems to have again gone "one-sided." To quote the immortal words I am beginning to think that word does not mean what you seem to think it does. If I do not get any response to this I shall assume my input on the topic of Tables of Content truly are not wanted; undertake not to take offence and will not bother you further upon the topic. Is this acceptable to you? AuFCL (talk) 08:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)


I do get overwhelmed at the mention of programming but my current lack of communication is mainly due to the sulks with both computers broken. I am so over these machines. I am undergoing proofreading therapy in the small amount of time I have on my son’s laptop; it soothes me to some extent. Totally not caused by any affront or reluctance to contribute. Re the TOC, having read conversation and seen the proposal, the main input I think I can make is from the non-technical viewpoint, your effort looks much friendlier and easier to proofread than previous. And I wonder if it is worth the complication of replicating the dots so precisely. If certain people want to be so pedantic maybe they should learn to programme?
To be perfectly clear, I really struggle with the technical side of things. It stopped me working at Distributed proofreaders/project gutenberg. At least on wiki I can learn a little while I proofread. I am currently trying to figure out how templates work across pages e.g. do I need to put a nop after an image?
Hopefully will get something fixed and in a better state of mind to tackle these challenges. Thanks for re/initiating contact, I shall try to keep in touch despite sulks in future. Cheers, Zoe — Zoeannl (talk) 08:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Sulks entirely understandable. Am beginning to think that is the only way to get things done around here. Either that or outright bribery of those in "power." Personally I am starting to get heartily sick and tired of lack of initiative of our esteemed overlords. As for your specific question regarding {{nop}} after images; as always it depends: if the image is centred then it does not matter as the following text flows on in a new paragraph... and if the image is floated to left or right it does not matter as the following text flows on irrespective of whether the {{nop}} is present or no...

O.K. That was too cynical even for me. Care to point to an example and I will try to answer more usefully? AuFCL (talk) 11:08, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

American spellings[edit]

Hi, "aluminum" is the American spelling for what we call "aluminium". As such {{SIC}} shouldn't be applied to an American work for this spelling difference. As an aside, I wouldn't mark every appearance of a particular mis-spelling in a single chapter of a work. Just marking the first one would be sufficient—remember that we want to support the reader at the other end of the process to access the content rather than be distracted by the nuances of the typesetting. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:02, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle:Yes once would be enough. I still think it worth noting that it isn’t a typo for non-American readers. Readers might think it is poor proofreading. To-day creates the same dilemma. Project Gutenberg usually have a transcriber’s note at the start of the work where notes are made of inconsistent spelling, whether within the book or at odds with modern spelling. The Index page Discussion Tab would be a good place to log such notes and also scannos particular to the work. This could then be used by proofreaders/validators when they start, to get consistency; and when transcluded, some notice for readers created? Then, if it is a word is listed on the Discussion Tab as standard spelling for the work, it isn't SIC'd. Project Gutenberg have a Project Manager for each work who manages this sort of thing (they would be the one who start a project and see it through to transclusion—definitely lacking in WS process at the moment). I've searched scriptorium and found a couple of discussions. In terms of basic proofreading {{SIC}} is the standard go to for marking "mistakes" on the printed page. The subtleties (as in this case) beyond that would be something to sort out at transclusion; I don't think it's fair to expect proofreaders to know better, it is too open to interpretation. A Project Manager who owns the project and writes up the rules on the discussion tab could inform regular contributors of a new rule, and proofreaders can feed back on the discussion tab when there are inconsistencies or dilemmas. This would be more proofreader friendly.
I've been looking for a list of common scannos. I'm sure I read reference of it before, do you know where it is? I am slowly compositing a WS Proofreaders Guide that assumes no previous wiki experience. I know I find it useful… Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 04:36, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
If you really want to mark an alternative standard spelling, then a Wiktionary link on the first use would be better. I don't often use {{SIC}} preferring to use {{sic}}, which doesn't show up on the mainpage as a tooltip or as grey text on my eReader. The concept of having a "project manager" for each work is a good one in principle, but I think it's better done via the already existing WikiProject concept. In re the list of common scannos, there is a sort of one in the Cleanup script section on WS:TS. There are others such as "bad" for "had" that can't be fixed by a script. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:12, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Index:Bedroom and Boudoir.djvu[edit]

I have been doing some work at Commons and we have this file retrieved. I am not sure exactly where you were up to with the work. If you need assistance, here or at Commons, please do come and prod me. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:29, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I have been struggling a bit lately, generally, and had put making a protest on the back-burner. I would have moaned on Scriptorian eventually. B&B is on my to-do list, quite a way down. This query to Wiktionary went nowhere, Commons was mentioned, do you know how a sister link what-links-here could be done? Cheers, — Zoeannl (talk) 20:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
I have responded at Wiktionary to your question. For the book here, are you planning to transclude the pages? I have done the ToC and illustrations list, so it is pretty well ready for transclusion. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:34, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for taking part in the Community Health learning campaign![edit]

Community Health learning campaign - Analysis Report of Community Responses
Thank you!

apologies for writing in English, if this is not your first language.
I want to thank you once more for engaging in conversation on the Community Health learning campaign. It took us a while, but we can finally announce the winner of the prize, as well as share the outcomes of this conversation.

You might also be interested in taking part in the 2015 Harassment consultation. This is the first of several planned consultations on this topic, intended to provide a place to discuss ideas, concerns, proposals and possible solutions regarding Wikimedia communities’ harassment-related challenges.

This conversation would not have been the same without you. If you have more ideas, or follow up comments on the findings of the campaign, don't hesitate to leave me a message my talk page.

Have a great day,


MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)