From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Scriptorium Scriptorium (Help) Archives, Last archive
The Scriptorium is Wikisource's community discussion page. This subpage is especially designated for requests for help from more experienced Wikisourcers. Feel free to ask questions or leave comments. You may join any current discussion or a new one. Project members can often be found in the #wikisource IRC channel (a web client is available).

This page is automatically archived by Wikisource-bot

Have you seen our help pages and FAQs?

Multiple works on the same topic[edit]

I have recently transcribed four works about the forger, William Booth. He is not known to have ever published anything, so does not require an 'Author:' page. How can I group the works together? Would Wikisource policy support a category, or a portal page? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikisource:Portal guidelines suggests that a portal would be appropriate. Moreover, person-based categories are generally not used here. BethNaught (talk) 08:12, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: definitely portal, you can use either {{person}} or {{portal header}}. Categorise to category:People in portal namespace. We would also link that portal to the person item in WD. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Done. Why doesn't {{person}} automatically apply category:People in portal namespace? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:06, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Probably just hasn't had the focus as they were developed separately. {{person}} desperately needs to be converted to be Wikidata native as default. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Anchors for Sidenotes...[edit]


Affected templates: {{left sidenote}} {{right sidenote}} {{LR sidenote}} {{RL sidenote}}

Page:Ruffhead - The Statutes at Large - vol 2.djvu/52 has sidenotes, and these can be associated with a particular section of the text. whilst I could add {{anchor}}, it would be sensible if these could be added from the sidenotes templates directly, so as to limit the amount of Templates needed in a long work.

The fix would be to do something like:

  <span {{if:{{{@|{{{anchor}}}|}}|{{{@|{{{anchor}}}|}} ....

in the relevant templates, so that the x.y style numbering suggested previously could be included directly, for this and other works using this template family. unsigned comment by ShakespeareFan00 (talk) .

Interwiki to Translation namespace not appearing[edit]

According to, the page Translation:Tikunei_Zohar is linked to its source language he:s: page However, althought the link appears in the he: page, it does not appear on the en: page.

Index:Hans Holbein the younger (Volume 2).djvu[edit]

Was looking through this, and found some 'bonus' images and other ehpemra in the scans..

I've marked the file as problematic, so that a further discussion can be had here.

The images look like they are of Holbien (or similar-era) paintings (so PD-art). If they can be identified it would be reasonable to retain them..

However the copyright status of the ephemera is unclear. Do I mark the ephemra for blanking given the unclear status? (it's also not clear if they are contemporaneous withe the rest of the book.)

Example : News clipping of unknown date Page:Hans_Holbein_the_younger_(Volume_2).djvu/30 ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:46, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: If it's not part of the book as published then mark the pages as without text. If they are additionally of unclear or dubious copyright status then flag the specific pages and I can excise them. Just looking at the index it wasn't clear to me which pages this was concerning. --Xover (talk) 13:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I think you are both overthinking this. Like I did with my failed 9 page djvu file. Look at the publication date. — Ineuw (talk) 00:24, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Setting up Merge and Splits for The Complete Works of Geoffrey Chaucer[edit]

I just uploaded the scans for all 7 volumes of Author:Geoffrey_Chaucer#Collected_works. The first 6 volumes have text from Gutenberg done by PGDP. For that reason, they have page numbers. Is there anyway to merge-and-split these texts? Languageseeker (talk) 01:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Missing page images of a linked djvu file?[edit]

I created this eight page article as a .djvu file which displays correctly in my desktop DjVu app. But here, the page images are not showing, but the text layer is re-created with the OCR. — Ineuw (talk) 04:18, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Page images are missing and OCR error[edit]

Installed this 9 page document. The page images are missing, but the OCR succeeded, except on the last page on which OCR generates an error. Whenever someone has the time, please look at what's wrong. Thanks. — Ineuw (talk) 13:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

IOError: (invalid url?)
@Ineuw: That file claims to have a resolution of 19,204 × 26,458 pixels (about 10x what's typical), but still only 9.31 MB. I'll dig a bit, but my initial guess is that this file is broken in some way. --Xover (talk) 13:33, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Uhm. How did you extract the 9 pages? And for that matter, why? You can proofread and transclude only those 9 pages even if the file and index contain many more. --Xover (talk) 13:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Definitely a funky file. It's got indirect chunks, looks to put the text layer in annotation blocks, and claims to be an insane resolution. What tool created this file? I'll try to generate a DjVu of the whole volume, but it'll have to wait until later today or tomorrow. --Xover (talk) 13:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: Please don't waste your time. I will try it again in a different way to learn how to do it. These were made from 9 JP2 pages converted to PNG then uploaded to Convertio to convert to 9 separate djvu pages (I have no offline djvu conversion tool), which was stitched together with djvm in Windows. Go ahead and laugh. :-) — Ineuw (talk) 22:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ineuw: Regardless of how roundabout that process sounds (happy to provide guidance, but tl;dr if you have djvm you should have c44, which would convert a JPG input directly to DJVU): why not just upload the entire document, which even comes with the OCR? And then it allows proofreading of the rest of The World's Work v. 14 by others. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 22:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: You are absolutely right. There is no excuse for my approach, except that I was exploring (playing) to see the end results. The djvudump displayed everything that's wrong. So, went back to the drawing board, found c44.exe, as well as the scripts posted on the Wikimedia Commons. About uploading the complete volume. I try not to upload books which I have no interest to proofread, so this seemed to be an alternative and a teaching moment. Only because it's 9 pages.— Ineuw (talk) 00:18, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload, @Xover: I converted the .jpg page images with c44 and then assembled them with djvm. It's about 20% of the previous uploads, but the same problem exists. The text comes through but not the page image. Could you please look at it. — Ineuw (talk) 23:06, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ineuw: A big part of the issue is that you tagged the images with Internet Archive identifier : worldswork14gard on Commons which prevents the IA tool from uploading the file. Languageseeker (talk) 23:27, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining. This is not working out for me. The volume is 700 pages and is not worth uploading in my opinion. So, I will delete it here, and ask for a deletion at the commons.— Ineuw (talk) 23:59, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ineuw: I checked the new version of the file and it looked just fine, including showing the images in the Page: namespace. If you're still seeing broken images it is probably a caching issue or similar. The only thing wrong with your new version is that it doesn't have a text layer in the file itself (let me know if you want instructions for adding one: it's complicated and inconvenient, but entirely doable). --Xover (talk) 00:48, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
@Languageseeker: And just what in the world does that have to do with anything? --Xover (talk) 00:48, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: The IA tool checks if there is a file tagged with {{IA|worldswork14gard}} on Commons. Even if it's an image, then the IA tool will not allow you to upload the file stating that the file already exists. I tried uploading the entire file with the IA tool and the images that Ineuw uploaded to Commons and tagged with the IA link prevented the uploading of the actual book. Languageseeker (talk) 00:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
@Languageseeker: Yes, that is roughly how the ia-upload tool works. However, as ia-upload was involved nowhere in Ineuw's problem, why are you bringing it up at all, much less framing it as a causal factor for the problems they were having? --Xover (talk) 10:06, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ineuw: It's actually easier to manage a single 700 page volume than managing an extracted article. You don't need to proofread the entire thing, just the part that interests you. Languageseeker (talk) 00:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Languageseeker: Thanks for the correction on the commons and will that with future uploads.— Ineuw (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ineuw: If an uploaded image, DjVu, or PDF comes from IA then the file's information page should definitely contain the IA identifier or another link to IA. ia-upload was designed to avoid duplicate uploads based on an assumption that most works available on IA were not, and probably never would be, uploaded to Commons. That assumption has been turned inaccurate over the last couple of months thanks to a way overzealous bulk upload of as many of IA's PDFs (mostly low-quality, and with awkward autogenerated filenames and the raw IA bibliographic metadata) as the bot could get their paws on (mostly constrained by copyright). This state of affairs most likely means that the ia-upload duplicate checking in its current form is no longer feasible, and will either have to be removed or rewritten to work in a significantly different way. At which point the problem Languageseeker is talking about, and that affects one single specialised uploader tool, will disappear, but we will still need good information about the source of media files on Commons. --Xover (talk) 10:06, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Uploading Large PDFs to Commons[edit]

I don't seem to have a lot of luck uploading large PDFs to Commons. I've tried Chunked Uploader and it does not work. Does anybody have any suggestion? For example, I want to create a PDF for [1]. Languageseeker (talk) 20:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Languageseeker: I use just Upload Wizard and imo it should be able to handle this file too. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:22, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Upload Wizard refuses documents over 100MB.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:16, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Prosfilaes: that's the Basic Upload - te Wizard goes up to 2GB, I think (it uses chunked uploading). Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 23:27, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Actually, it should be up to 4GB. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 08:30, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@Languageseeker: I've been running into phab:T278104 on and off for a while with API uploading and the upload wizard, perhaps it's that?
On the other hand, this document produces a 55 MB DJVU from the 494MB of Hathi images, so perhaps that's a better way forward? If you must have a PDF and you want to crush it down, JBIG2 encoding the PNGs produces a PDF around 12MB, but I don't have tools to combine the JPGs with the PNGs as a PDF so only the PNGs are JBIG2'd, and I don't have tools to write the OCR into PDFs. Also the PDF is mind-expandingly slow to render compared to the DjVu. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 23:27, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: Yep, that's the exact error that I'm getting. I'll just wait until that bug get's fixed. I'm trying to preserve the image quality because of the illustrations. Thanks for your help. Languageseeker (talk) 00:48, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@Languageseeker: The illustrations are already pretty damaged by the Google's compression, so IMO it's not particularly critical (especially as it's way easier to extract the images from the existing JPGs at Hathi rather than from a PDF that another user wouldn't know has or hasn't re-encoded the image). As was said by Nemo_bis in phab:T277921, Commons isn't attempting to compete with Hathi/IA for storage of endless terabytes of "raw" (not that is really is raw, see below) scan images. Because what's the point?
Even then, the 36 JPGs in this file total 35MB, so, on top of the ~12MB of lossless JBIG2-encoded bitonal images, you could still produce a PDF under 50MB, without a byte of data loss from the Hathi scan (except in the Google watermarks). But the PDF will render like molasses, because JBIG2 is very slow to decode. So I'd still suggest going for DjVu, and if the image quality from the default c44 encoder settings is not good enough for whatever reason, you can set that manually. For example:
$ c44 -decibel 50 mdp.39015011058198.0001.jpg page765.djvu
$ ddjvu page765.djvu -format=pnm page765_from_djvu.pnm
$ compare -metric PSNR mdp.39015011058198.0765.jpg page765_from_djvu.pnm diff.png
Which is kind of what you expect since we asked for 50. 50dB of PSNR is really rather good (way over JPG quality=90). In fact, since 255 is ~48dB it's essentially perfect (below the quantization error of the actual 8-bit image, but since the two aren't quite identical I'm obviously missing something). This is the difference map between the input JPG and the 50dB c44 encoding. White means identical.
Which is all kind of moot, because although the Hathi JPGs may be set at Q=95, they're encoding substantial compression noise, probably from before the data ever reached HT, which implies that 95 is far from representative of the paper-to-user Q factor and using a Q=95 level of compression is mostly just a waste of bits:
JPG compression from a Hathi Trust file.png
Striving to store data that's already totally swamped by compression noise is not particularly useful (in the context of Wikisource), IMO. Sure, reducing compression damage at each step is a nice goal, but once the data is trashed to n dB (where n << 50), what are you hoping to achieve by worrying about further lossless encoding. You have to ask yourself what exactly you are trying to achieve, or it's going to turn into a classic w:XY problem. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 16:41, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm trying to make sure that users do not have to go through Help:Image_extraction to crop an images from a file. I know that Google scans are of an inferior quality, but they are often all we have. There is nothing wrong with lossless compression, but lossy compression alters the image. As you know, getting images from Haithi Trust is difficult. So why make users go through extra work?
Yes, DJVU can compress more, but DJVU is no longer being actively developed. It's one major bug away from following the fate of Lilypond phab:T257066. If the security team discovers a major security bug in the DJVU viewer, who will fix it? What about if the code become incompatible with the latest release of Debian? As for JBIG2, it's dangerous to use because it can alter the image, see JBIG2.
I'm not asking to import the entire IA or Haithi Trust, but I want to make sure that the images are of the highest quality because the quality of monitors are continuously improving. A higher quality image will last longer. If the scans come from IA, I don't care because I know that we can pull the scans at any time. For Haithi Trust, I'm not so sure because it already imposes restrictions. Downloading from Haithi Trust at this moment, places Wikisource in National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute territory. Languageseeker (talk) 00:16, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
FYI, not that I'm saying JBIG2 is ideal (due to the insane decode time making them truly miserable to use on all but the most monstrous CPUs), but jbig2 operates in lossless mode by default (it's lossy if you set -s).
And even if you do just use PNG, remember to make them bitonal first, because the Hathi PNGs are only not bitonal due to the Google watermark. That will save you hundreds of MBs per file. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 07:11, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Transcriptions of an audio work[edit]

Hello Wikisource editors, we have been publishing (in Apple Podcasts, and the like) and also donating to Wikimedia Commons a podcast series, under the standard Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International. We are considering creating a Wikisource page with the transcription of those podcast episodes. It seems that Wikisource welcomes transcripts of audio (WS:SCOPE), but more guidance, especially to confirm whether this contribution is within the scope of Wikisource, would be much appreciated. JCPod (talk) 19:52, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikisource:What Wikisource includes should give you an idea of what we include. For works published after 1925, the work should meet out equivalent of "notable". Podcasts generally do not meet that criterion, as they do not pass through peer review or editorial controls. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@JCPod: while it's pretty unlikely a modern "self-published" work like a podcast meets WS:WWI, I think it sounds like something Wikibooks would allow, since it's essentially a book? I don't speak for them, but you could ask at wikibooks:Wikibooks:Reading room. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 20:27, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you both for your prompt responses. JCPod (talk) 20:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Aside from this specific case example, we need to better look at how we handle transcriptions of audio works, especially progressive transcriptions. Are we going to work in the Index: / Page: ns from a file at Commons, and look to go through the double process of validating. How would we get the snippets of sound into files, etc. We have done something with video, and I think that it is time we looked to better formulate these media types. Needs guidance in Help: namespaces for video and audio files. PseudoSkull would be our current lead exponent. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:13, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Author creation requested[edit]

Can anyone help to create the author page for Bruneian sultan Hassanal Bolkiah? I'm working on his Syariah Penal Code Order, 2013, and other emergency enactments solely made by him. In particular, I'm not sure how to deal with all of those authority control scribble-scrabbles. Many thanks.廣九直通車 (talk) 13:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@廣九直通車: Yes check.svg Done See Author:Hassanal Bolkiah. I am uncertain about the best copyright tag to use, so I've stuck EdictGov there for now. --Xover (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Looking for help for some hebraic caracters in a french Champollion book about hieroglyphs ![edit]


I'm active in the french Wikisource, and I'm working on a book from Jean-François Champollion about hieroglyphs... In this book, there is THIS PAGE with a text in hebraic caracters... As I'm not good in hebrew langage nor in hebraic caracters, I'm looking for some help to correct the page. Any help would be welcome. Thanks Lorlam (talk) 18:50, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ineuw: Is this something you are able to help out with? --Xover (talk) 19:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Done. — Ineuw (talk) 19:52, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks for your help — Ineuw :-) --Lorlam (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Paginated text without scan[edit]

Following from this lengthy discussion and others on English Wikipedia w:en:Talk:Sir Charles Asgill, 2nd Baronet#General Washington's Dilemma by Katherine Mayo, Anne User:Arbil44 has transcribed a hard-to-find historical letter at w:en:user:Arbil44/New_sandbox4. It's well out of copyright. Anne has retained the original pagination and headers. Would someone be able to help copy this across to Wikisource with the appropriate page structure? Or advise me how to do it? (For example, without a scan, do we still use the Index: namespace to assemble the pages?)

Note, I don’t want to ask Anne to go back and add a scan, I get the sense that she has become somewhat frustrated in her interactions with Wikipedia and I don’t want to make things worse. So I’m hoping we can accept this as a non-scan-backed text as it is.

Pelagic (talk) 01:34, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Pelagic: I made the 6 pages into an index: Index:General Washington's Dilemma - Mayo - 1938 - Appendix 2.djvu. I'm not quite sure how it should be transcluded to mainspace, as it's just a fragment of a complete work. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:38, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
OMG, I didn't see that Anne had already posted above. Great news that she was able to provide a scan! Many thanks for your help on this, Inductiveload.

Index:UN Treaty Series - vol 1.pdf, etc[edit]

This work and subsequent volumes of the United Nations Treaty Series are in English and French. I see the first volume proofing only English, so I would like to be ask if separate indexes would have to be made in French Wikisource to proofread the French portions. If so, I am making more indexes here to encourage proofreading, but I do not have a reliable OCR.--Jusjih (talk) 05:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jusjih: frWS would need separate index pages, yes. But they should mostly be able to just copy the data we have here if we have ones they don't already have. And, of course, they can use the same File: on Commons.
What's your problem with OCR? --Xover (talk) 07:35, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I wonder if reliable OCR is available online.--Jusjih (talk) 18:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps this site already has OCR when creating page namespace? I just added some well formatted covers of the United Nations Treaty Series, but we will have to mark the year published since Volume 401.--Jusjih (talk) 00:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Transcribing directly from webpages (Highway Code)[edit]

Hi, I believe the current Highway Code, published by the British government's Department for Transport, falls under the CC-BY-compatible Open Government Licence and thus would be eligible for inclusion (we already have a 1931 edition and parts of the 2008 Traffic Signs Manual). But how would I go about copying it here? I know scans are preferred for verifiability - would it be appropriate to print the webpages to PDF and upload them to Commons, or is a URL sufficient attribution? If so, how do I create the relevant pages without a scan? --Wodgester (talk) 17:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

I would "print" web pages into PDFs, upload then to Commons saying that the source web pages have been converted to PDFs, create indexes here, then proofread the pages.--Jusjih (talk) 20:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the help @Jusjih! I've started an index. --Wodgester (talk) 16:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
You are very welcome and I see the PDF well describing the tools used.--Jusjih (talk) 01:48, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

How to Browse? A Lot of Confusion for a Beginner User[edit]

From the Navigation Sidebar => Help - at the bottom of the Help page

I clicked: "Do you need assistance? Post a request!"

My request is to reduce the confusion for a beginner user to browse, and to improve the browsing experience overall.

I came looking for books about time travel. My objective is to browse by Fiction => Genre, and I expect to be able to choose "science fiction" in a list of genres, and narrow my search further to "time travel" in a subsequent sub-genre list to return a list of all the science fiction books in Wikisource that revolve around time travel. I also want to browse Science => Physics and find time travel in a list to return a list of all science books that discuss time travel, but I did not get that far.

The most impactful improvement would be an enhanced method to create, assign and search Categories. Here are some comments I had as I browsed:

In Help:Beginner's guide to navigation => Browsing

  • Browse by Authors - this is fine, and there is a Navigation Sidebar link to click for Authors - intuitive, consistent and useful.
  • Browse by Subjects - this is confusing. There are portals, and there are categories. Neither term appears in the Glossary of Terms on the Help page. Neither term appears on the Navigation Sidebar. There is "Subject Index" on the Navigation Sidebar that returns a Portals list. My first thought was, "What is a Portal?" Nothing in the portals list says Fiction, Popular Fiction, Genre, or Science Fiction. At a glance, this looked fruitless. Clicking on "Index" at the bottom exposes a hierarchy of portals, and with some exploration, there is a sub-genre for time travel with three books. This is a paltry list, and I do not know if the list just reflects a small collection of books in Wikisource, or poor use of categorization. or ability for a book to belong only to one portal that reflects the dominant sub-genre when there are potentially several that are appropriate.

In Search

  • I next tried to use the Search function for a browsing tool - I searched at the top for "science fiction", and I had three directions I could take - Portals for Science Fiction and also for Science Fiction Films, and for pages containing "science fiction". Are there any Categories for science fiction? I did not see any in the search results.
  • I used the Search function again for a narrower search of "time travel" - nothing bubbled up in the near-in results except for Wells' The Time Machine. The vast majority of results were for time, or travel, which were all unrelated to my search objective.

Portals and Categories

My presumption is that Portals are hierarchical, that a book belongs to only one portal at the bottom of the hierarchy, and that a portal may contain many books (or perhaps as few as one). I frankly do not like the Lib. of Congress classification system, but it is well described and freely reproducible, so why not, I guess. It works fine.

My assumption is that a book may have several categories. I would think that categories are analogous to "tagging" in metadata. A book should probably include categories for each child portal in its classification hierarchy, and I see that is done. It would be useful if a book had a variety of topical categories that the contributor assigns, but I don't see that is done here. That would be useful!

What is the basis for Categories? How are they chosen / assigned? What categorization is automatic if any? Is there a "pick-list" of Categories? unsigned comment by ‎Bccrowe (talk) .

Did you see the "Highlights" block on the Main page, with a line on "General literature" and a direct link to "Science fiction"? --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Please stop tinkering with the mediawiki OCR![edit]

The title says it all. It's dead in the water again.— Ineuw (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Formatting of dot-separated left and right align[edit]

Hello! I'm a bit new here, and so I'm still getting used to the text formatting templates. Can someone let me know what to do in the case of a page like this? I assume it's a bad practice to hardcode the dots in (see example 1), but I do not know of a way to replicate this with a template. So, should it just be aligned to left and the page number to float right (see example 2)? Is there a more elegant way to do this?

Example 1:

Input: 1. Section Title .......... 1
Output: 1. Section Title .......... 1

Example 2:

Input: 1. Section Title {{float right|1}}
Output: 1. Section Title 1

Thanks, Tol | Talk | Contribs 01:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

There are currently two schools of practice here with respect to dot leaders: a) replicate them, using the various Dotted TOC templates; b) omit them and use a table format instead. Both are accepted practices. I lean to the second (e.g. Page:At the Fall of Port Arthur.djvu/15). An example of the first style is at Page:Ballantyne--The Pirate City.djvu/11. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:04, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
@Beeswaxcandle: Thank you! Tol | Talk | Contribs 04:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
IMO, if you're going to use dot-leaders, it's better to use {{TOC begin}} and {{TOC row 1-dot-1}}/{{TOC row 2dot-1}} rather than {{dotted TOC page listing}}, because the latter uses a complete table for every single row and this 1) exports badly, 2) is semantically highly suspect and 3) massively inflates the HTML output. {{TOC begin}} produces a single HTML table (though the markup within the row isn't very "tidy", but I don't think it can be in the current state of CSS). Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 06:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation for John Ward[edit]

This doesn’t seem to be working: {{similar|Author:John Ward}}. It redirects to only one of the John Ward’s. I’m not sure how it is supposed to work? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 10:06, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Author:John Ward had a redirect on it. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Thanks for this. I have another disambiguation to do. I’ve figured the format now but how do I redirect links to Author:Richard Jones which should be Author:Richard Jones (1564-1602). Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 22:58, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi. How do you move?—tab or drop down at the top of the page). Or how do you fix and find the links that point to the page?—Special:WhatLinksHere/Author:Richard Jones. Call me as you need, generally I will teach rather than do. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Locked myself out of My Facebook Account[edit]

i dont have access to the phone number to get the login codes but still have access to my gmail account

That is some misunderstanding. This is Wikisource and we are not able to help you with your FB account. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:PD-EdictGov and HK Commission of Inquiry Reports[edit]

I recently found the two Blair-Kerr reports commissioned by the Hong Kong government on corruption published in 1973, which resulted in the establishment of the Hong Kong ICAC. Are these reports OK for English Wikisource under Template:PD-EdictGov? I know both reports won't be accepted on Commons, can it be accepted here? Many thanks.廣九直通車 (talk) 14:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

TOC with braces and dotted cells[edit]

Please help to format TOC with braces and dotted cells: Page:Works of Thomas Carlyle - Volume 01.djvu/286. Thanks. Ratte (talk) 18:21, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I've made a start for you by way of example. I don't usually bother with dotted cells, so haven't attempted to reproduce those. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help! Ratte (talk) 18:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

DjVu: two missing pages[edit]

Index:Works of Thomas Carlyle - Volume 17.djvu: pages 214, 215 are missing. Could someone please add them to file from here or here? Thanks in advance! Ratte (talk) 19:29, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Ratte, you don't need to add them to the file, simply uploading those two pages from the same edition separately can be suitable. Create the file, index page and just transclude them. It is not technical issue in transcluding works fromdifferent index pages to the same page. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
But this is not a fix for the source file, as the red message here dictates („Source file must be fixed before proofreading“). And the source file will remain incomplete. I have doubts about the correctness of such approach. Ratte (talk) 13:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
I suggested somewhere recently that languageseeker replace this file with a different source (NYPL, Robarts), after consulting you that it was okay, and indicated that I've had bad experiences with scans from the current source. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 14:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
@Languageseeker, @Ratte: probably best to coordinate with yourselves on what to do with these volumes. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 14:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Ratte, it is an acceptable solution, that it is not a fix for the source file is a different situation. Been done on multiple occasions. That dropdown is generic, and guidance only. There are many ways to resolve issues. If you are solely focused on a fix for the file, then please drop the request into the appropriate section in WS:Sbillinghurst sDrewth 23:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ratte: Yes check.svg Done
@Billinghurst: For DjVu files, both Inductiveload and myself can make these kinds of repairs fairly easily (we just both happened to be a bit busy right now). Since fixing the files in place is a far simpler solution than having a work transcluded from multiple indexes I would generally recommend trying that approach first. For PDF files that cannot be manipulated quite as easily as DjVu files the equation may fall out differently. And in either case, as you say, the requests are best put in the Repairs and moves section on the Scriptorium so the right people will notice them, and so we can keep track of them. Xover (talk) 09:37, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
There is next to zero difficulty in transcribing two different indices. Both ways work, either are functional. The fixation on perfect File: is a fixation, it has no necessity. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:51, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Both ways work, sure; but all else being equal, fixing things at the source is generally the better approach. In particular, for most users that's going be easier and less confusing, and it won't create extra complexity in keeping track of extra indexes, files, and special transclusion rules that we will have to maintain indefinitely. So long as we have people available that are able and willing to patch files in this way, my strong recommendation is that we try that first and only fall back to multiple indexes and other workarounds when we have to. Xover (talk) 11:05, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: you are awesome, thank you! Ratte (talk) 12:16, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Import from Wiktionary of a dictionary transcription that is out-of-scope there[edit]

wikt:Wiktionary:Information desk/2020/April#IP transcribing Hepburn's English-Japanese dictionary.

  1. Determine what edition the editor used.
  2. Upload that edition to Commons.
  3. Import wikt:Wiktionary:Waei Gorinshūsei 1910/1 (page 1? [2]) into Wikisource.

Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Dotted TOC line template: An additional column for author?[edit]

Could somebody show me how to add another column, for the authors of magazine articles, to the {{dotted TOC line}} template? See here: Page:Pacific Monthly volumes 9 and 10.djvu/13 -Pete (talk) 16:26, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

You likely would need to create a new template for that. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Ah, OK thanks. I don't have any strong preference for this particular template -- is there another way of approaching these pages that you'd recommend using existing templates? Would it be better, for instance, to render the whole page as one big table, rather than a bunch of individual templates for each line? -Pete (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Typically, I have simply used a table for complicated ToCs like this one. If the ToC is on a single page or two pages, that might be the simplest approach. I am not familiar enough with the template alternative options to comment on those. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Songs and Sonnets (Coleman) table of contents[edit]

Why is the multi-page table of contents broken? I genuinely have no idea. I thought I carefully prepared the headers/footers for this and can't fix it... Can anyone help please? PseudoSkull (talk) 02:36, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Inspecting the page I find that in the instances where it shows a "|-", it combines two <td>s into a single <tr> Hmm... PseudoSkull (talk) 02:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@PseudoSkull: It's {{TOC row ragged}}: it wraps its contents in <div>…</div>, so when transcluded you end up with <tr><td><div></div><span><span class="pagenum ws-pagenum" ></span></span></td></tr>. That is, a <div>…</div> followed by a <span>…</span>. Since the div—by nature of being a block-level element—is followed by a new line, and the span—despite being otherwise empty—has line-height, you end up with a blank line separating each page of the toc.
This is one reason why I really don't recommend using any of the TOC templates, in favour of just using plain table markup. You'll run into weird edge cases there too, but they are rarer, much more obvious when they occur, and generally easier to fix. --Xover (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: this was actually a missing new line in the template: diff. Though the ragged template is probably not ideal here since the right column isn't ragged.
I know what you mean re the templates, but on the other hand, manually formatting a table in the general case is actually quite a lot of direct formatting, once you have taken into account the text alignment, page position, wrapping, vertical alignment, padding and so on (most of which need setting on every single cell). Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 19:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't say that because raw wikitables are a perfect solution: it's a pragmatic far-lesser-of-two-evils call, and the upshot of having to do all that direct formatting is the direct control it gives you. --Xover (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Proofing, Formatting, and Linking in The Pilgrim's Progress[edit]

I'm brand new to wikisource. The book that has my interest and that I have chosen as a first project is the original Pilgrim's Progress published in the 1600s. I have done several pages, but would like an experienced eye to look over what I have done to make sure I am doing it right before I get too far into it.


  1. Am I using formatting correctly (for centered text and major font size changes)?
  2. Is it appropriate to link to the wikisource KJV bible as I have done in the title page and for the footnote on page 1?
  3. This footnote was originally a sidenote. Was I wrong in changing the format, and if so, how should it be encoded?
  4. Are my comments on the relative discussion pages appropriate?

--Bountonw (talk) 01:37, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

A few notes:
  • There's a few cases where text should be centered but isn't, like on Page 8.
  • The w:long S should be kept in the transcription, using template:ls.
  • The first letter on page 13 should use template:di. On page 21, it should also use an image (see the template's documentation).
  • Bible links can be done with Template:Bibleverse.
Glad to see a new editor! Mcrsftdog (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! On point four, comments on discussion pages often go unnoticed, central discussion pages like this one draw more eyes. I would replace the 'long s' with an 's', because given a choice most readers would prefer a clean transcript. However it is done, using the template is preferred if that character is transcribed, but that is so the labour of the proofreader to display them can be avoided. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 18:25, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

I've had a look now. On your query 3, I think what you have done is appropriate, in fact an improvement on the sidenotes they replace. On query 2 the KJV is a reasonable assumption for the quote, but another caution: if we get more than one edition of that Authorized Version then linking the relevant part of the text will present a difficulty. 18:35, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

TOC linking for a single line with multiple parts[edit]

Does anyone have a good idea for how to link the last two entries at Lippincott's Monthly Magazine/Volume 46 (namely, "Book-Talk" and "New Books"). Both "sections" actually have 6 parts (one per issue). I'm planning to omit the "issue" tier of the naming structure, since the TOC isn't done like that, so the links are probably going to be [[Lippincott's Monthly Magazine/Volume 46/Book-Talk (1)], etc.

My problem is: where does one physically put the links? Linking the page numbers is pretty non-standard and non-discoverable since people probably assume that would lead to the Page NS.

This is an issue For Lippincott's in general, but lots of periodicals do the same and combine recurring segments into a single TOC Line when they have a per-volume TOC. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 18:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, there were per-issue TOCs at the time (at the BL, for example), but apparently the covers were either removed for binding or the bound volumes never had them. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 20:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

When I was thinking about transcluding similar series in The New Monthly I was thinking about linking to something like Book-Talk (Lippincott) from the Main TOC which then can link to the (1), (2) via an AUX-TOC to have them all together and linked, possibly with a volume or year anchor if there are a large number of them. MarkLSteadman (talk) 22:29, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
I probably would put them in a Portal (assuming they're in all issues, there could be ~600 of them in the first series). Going via another page would break basic export expectations, so it'd at least need an {{hidden export TOC}} to compensate.
Another option I though of was to (re)construct the in-order issue TOCs as an AuxTOC or similar. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 09:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: This is why PSM is like it is. The other option is just transclude them all together into one section per volume, the only issue that causes is that you can only have one _/SOURCE\_ tab and the page numbering will not flow, otherwise it works well blending things. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Moving existing pages after an index has been renamed[edit]

Index:Narrative of Henry Box Brown.pdf has been renamed, but it has a number of pages, which appear to have had some proofreading done, that have not been moved to this new index. It starts with Page:Narrative of Henry Box Brown - who escaped from slavery enclosed in a box three feet long and two wide and two and a half high (IA narrativeofhenry00brow).pdf/10 and goes up to page 94. Could someone with the ability to batch a move to the new index name do so? Thanks. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@CalendulaAsteraceae: Yes check.svg Done (it was actually p4–94). Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 09:20, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
@CalendulaAsteraceae: Please just ask an admin to move in the Index/Page namespaces. Far easier to just do it all and less chance of mistakes. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:41, 5 May 2021 (UTC)