From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, 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 webclient.

This page is automatically archived by Wikisource-bot

Have you seen our help pages and FAQs?

Not Proofread to Proofread status not updating[edit]

Has there been a system hiccup somewhere? I was working on Three Thousand Selected Quotations from Brilliant Writers and noticed that three of the last four pages I processed did not change on the index page. The status on each page shows proofread as does my contributions list. Pages in question are djvu 66, 68, 69. Going in a doing a "resave" on djuv 66 did not update the status. Humbug26 (talk) 19:16, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Humbug26: try purging the index page, otherwise a null edit. The issue is the Index: page, not the Page: page, and it has been happening in regular random way, and not one I have been able to understand. — billinghurst sDrewth 20:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
I've noticed it happening for the last few months, totally randomly. It does persist, staying marked as not proofread despite purges etc and then updating for no apparent reason, sometimes after weeks have gone by… Zoeannl (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
My workaround is to remove an empty line in the footer, or anything that will create a new revision (just opening and saving a page wont do that, though that is another way of 'purging') CYGNIS INSIGNIS 06:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
The Clock/Purge Gadget helps most of the time, but not always. — Ineuw talk 18:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Sanskrit Wikisource does not have epub and mobi download links[edit]

How do we get the cool ebug and mobi download links I see in en.wikisource in books? Vishvas vasuki (talk) 02:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Gadget-WSexport.js and ensure that you have things working at toollabs:wsexportbillinghurst sDrewth 04:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! How can the JS be used so that the download options automatically appear to every visitor to the site? Does one need to be an administrator to make it happen? Vishvas vasuki (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Ping, please help sanskrit wikisource users have the same wonderful epub experience you have! Vishvas vasuki (talk) 05:56, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes. Any Mediawiki: namespace file needs someone with admin privileges. If you don't have anyone local, then ask at m:Steward requests/Miscellaneousbillinghurst sDrewth 12:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

New line or not?[edit]

Hi. Could someone explain why a missing new line (after template in TOC field) is making a difference, when one template is actually built on top of the other?

  1. see the * in "* Extract of a Letter from Geneva"
  2. Index:English_as_She_is_Spoke.djvu, see the bullet here.

Thanks— Mpaa (talk) 19:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

That's wiki syntax. The bulleted list is initiated when the line starts with an asterisk. If it's not on a separate line at the start of the line, then it's not rendered the same way. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:11, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
But it the same in both cases:
{{index validated date|January 2013|transcluded=yes}}* [[English As She Is Spoke/Introduction|Introduction]]
{{index transcluded|transcluded=yes}}* [[The Vampyre/Extract of a Letter from Geneva|Extract of a Letter from Geneva]]
Why the rendering is different?— Mpaa (talk) 21:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
No, it is not the same at all. This is a comparing "apples to oranges" situation.

The two templates differ in an important fashion internally: {{index transcluded}} has no new-line following its internal [[Category:]] coding, but {{index validated date}} always generates a free new-line after its [[Category:]] codings.

For my money I would recommend fixing {{index transcluded}} by adding an empty line just before </includeonly> AuFCL (talk) 00:09, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. @AuFCL:, what puzzles me is that {{index validated date}} is based on {{index transcluded}} (at the end of it). So the reason why there is no problem when {{index transcluded}} is used as "tail" part of another template, is still a mystery to me ... But NVM ... :-) I would appreciate if capable hands could fix it, so the two templates can be used in a consistent way wrt wikisyntax..— Mpaa (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
@Mpaa: (Overdone theatrical patience) Here are the final two lines of {{index validated date}}:
   }}{{index transcluded|transcluded={{{transcluded}}}}}
Note the blank line between the final block of five-close-braces and the final two close-braces. That is what is saving you grief from {{index transcluded}} in this instance. AuFCL (talk) 21:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done beholdBeleg Tâl (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, but the problem is not solved (try to remove the new line from Index:John_William_Polidori_-_The_Vampyre.djvu). Cheers.— Mpaa (talk) 16:58, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Hm, weird. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:18, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done carriage return needed to be outside of the #if statement. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:34, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Pages are displayed as thumbnails in edit mode[edit]

When opening pages for editing on this page, they are displayed as tiny icons in the upper left corner. Is there any way to correct this? — Ineuw talk 23:26, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@Ineuw: I see external-style full url wikilinks on the page, that point to internal pages. No thumbs, no images. All appears as expected, and the links work as expected. Not seeing what you are reporting seeing. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:17, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Apologies for not clarifying those links. They were for Vol 45 images to be checked by me. When I opened them the first time, the .djvu image showed as a tiny thumbnail in the upper left corner. If opened now and display the .djvu normally, it means that I already opened them previously.
But no matter, I came across many pages like these while proofreading, and will upload a screen print when coming across them again. Also believe that this is related to User talk:Ineuw#Clearing the cache of an index page problem. The djvu Index display looses the pages' status colours. It is mentioned in that post by User:Mpaa with the paragraph beginning with: There is something weird in en.wikisource and at this point I think also more specifically to PSM. I hope it's not too confusing. — Ineuw talk 04:07, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Main Namespace formatting v. formatting for Download as PDF[edit]

  1. Header information seen on Main Namespace does not transfer to Download as PDF. PDF print version does not include author, year, publisher or location data.
  2. Download as PDF ignores line spacing produced with br / tag and Enter key.

I've tried to get white space made in Namespace to transfer to Download as PDF with poor results. Download as PDF seems to honor white space that follows {{}} curly brackets or <> less-than greater-than tags but ignores that which is produced as in item #2 above. For an example of what I mean see The Free Encyclopaedia that Anyone can Edit: The Shifting Values of Wikipedia Editors, push Download as PDF and check out the differences. Any advice? calebjbaker (talk) 10:23, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

3. math tags don't render in Download as PDF. Apparently, PDF function does not reed TeX markup. For an example, see The World Within Wikipedia: An Ecology of Mind. calebjbaker (talk) 10:05, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Nontrivial request: Recovering unclear pdf document[edit]

(also cross-posted to Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab)

Hello, I don't know if this is the correct forum etc. so apologies.

I'm working on a complete rewrite of w:Bengal famine of 1943 in my personal sandbox. The central document for this topic (though it's biased) is the Woodhead Commission Famine report. It's a available in pdf format here. I can save that into .txt format (hurray!), and have written a little Python program that finds keywords from a large number of similar text files and stores quotes into separate files.. however, the scan quality or the Famine Commission report is so poor that extended stretches are simply gobbledygook.

This is a nontrivial request: Is there a PhotoShop guru (or similar) who could sharpen the MANY pages into significantly better & more scannable pdfs? Not all pages could be fixed, because some show the curvature of the book pages etc., but I think many many could be improved.

I have downloaded an evaluation copy of PhotoShop etc and tried to use Sharpen and Levels or Layers whatever to make each page more machine readable, but I don't know how to do it for an entire (large!) report, and I don't know how to scan them or save them to text instead of image (printing every page and scanning each manually is obviously much too much work). I also have a family life and work etc. and learning how to do all these things would just take too much time.

Does anyone have suggestions?

In theory, this service might be valuable for other old documents scanned to pdf, but i dunno how much demand there would be for such a service.

Thanks!Lingzhi (talk) 13:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Update: User:MjolnirPants supplied a detailed answer at Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab which suggests that my request may be prohibitively impractical... I won't delete this thread (just in case), but it is probably a closed matter. Thanks!Lingzhi (talk) 22:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
@Lingzhi: Another copy here. However, this is the report on Bengal, not the final report. The final report is here. I have added them at Wikisource: 1, 2. OCR text layer is OK. Hrishikes (talk) 03:58, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
@Hrishikes: Thanks for the info! I'm mildly embarrassed to admit that I don't know what you wrote means, and I don't know what's going on on the Wikisource pages you linked... I may ask GabrielF for his opinion some time in the next few days, since another editor said GabrielF seems to be The Man... thanks again!Lingzhi (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Virginibus Puerisque and Other Papers[edit]

The table of contents is not displaying.unsigned comment by Cygnis insignis (talk) 7:32, 9 April 2016.

To put it bluntly, the single transcluded page was simply blowing your template-expansion limits all to pieces. I have made some modifications there which I hope do not affect the cosmetics of display too much, whilst reducing the template post-expansion size from a hefty 1655424 to a more manageable 77532 bytes, and now the beast transcludes again. Build it back towards the older layout by all means, but keep an eye on just how much of a resource hog it becomes, O.K.? Theoretically the upper limit is currently 2097152 bytes. AuFCL (talk) 08:11, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
[1] unsigned comment by Cygnis insignis (talk) 8:41, 9 April 2016‎.
Regrettably I have no idea what point you think you are making, unless it was my use of "simplify" rather than "put the overly-obese patient on severe lap-band therapy…" as a change comment? AuFCL (talk) 08:55, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
[2] unsigned comment by Cygnis insignis (talk) 11:46, 9 April 2016.
With respect this act has become old. Either explain your point or forever forego any semblance of future assistance from this party. And how about signing your posts? AuFCL (talk) 05:52, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Lastly, maths at Science and Hypothesis[edit]

Could someone fix the maths formula here please? It is the last page to be validated, other than the ads. It is already transcluded. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 11:49, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done . ShakespeareFan has put in the formatting. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Lastly the ads: How to insert vertical lines of text here? Zoeannl (talk) 11:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
It can't be done nicely. The closest would be to use {{rotate}} but this has some bugs (apparently) and also will take up the same horizontal space as if it had been regular text. I definitely recommend that you put the text at the bottom wherever it seems most reasonable. That's what I do for this situation. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I concur with (most of) Beleg Tâl's comments above. I've left the page tagged Problematic, but consider it now proofread and format acceptable in Firefox and Chromium. AuFCL (talk) 23:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

not missing, just disappeared[edit]

Worked on this last night, and on some other pages but today the scans disappeared, Is this happening to anyone else. Proof that I am not dreamingIneuw talk 16:28, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Not disappeared, but did have instance of djvu scans showing up as thumbnails about the same time as your problem. I'm okay now. Very strange. Humbug26 (talk) 16:47, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the confirmation. For weeks I also had thumbnails, but no one believed me. :-( I suspect that it was due to the purging and compressing(?) of data on the server. Here, AuFCL (one of our minor major gods), can jump in anytime and provide us with some enlightenment. — Ineuw talk 03:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

P.S: Now the problem is gone, for the time being. — Ineuw talk 03:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Line spacing using {{TOC row...}} template[edit]

Wondering how to create a line space between TOC entries using the {{TOC row}} template (see here). Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

The only way I know to do this is to add a blank line, like {{TOC row c|3|&nbsp;}} —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Also, I think "Sonnets" ... "Bellinglise" entries, etc. (see here) should be inline with the "I Have a Rendezvous with Death" entry on the previous page, but it is not. I am not sure how to fix that. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

More TOC help[edit]

Requesting help with the sonnets section on this page. I can't figure out how to align the text correctly. Thank you, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Just a small military muddle? AuFCL (talk) 03:09, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Soup sandwich. Londonjackbooks (talk) 09:45, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Maybe a variant: soap sandwich? Apologies: I completely misunderstood. Second try? AuFCL (talk) 10:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
My explanation may have been vague. Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

TOC rendering in the Main is askew. Thanks ahead of time! Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Fixed—you need to use {{nop}} —Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Great! Thank you. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:43, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Just a small note for future. Ironically the empty new line at the end of your comment previously would have served the same purpose as does BT's {{nop}} does now. Mediawiki keyword—I refer here to the initial | buried inside {{TOC row 1-1-1}}—behaviour can be strange like that. AuFCL (talk) 21:57, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Traffics Signs[edit]

Index:The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (UKSI 2016-0362).pdf

Some of the PDF pages need rotating, and the OCR layer is Junk in places :(

Anyone up for doing some fixes? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I've now got the text for page 92 onward at User:ShakespeareFan00/Sandbox/TSGRD2016, anyone want to run a Match and split=script? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


Am working on my maths skills on Mechanism of the heavens. Open to critical comment. How to do the equivalent of {{pline}} on numbered equations on pg 15 and p 12? — Zoeannl (talk) 05:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

What is your strategy? Do you want all equation numbers to align (after the final pages are transcluded):
  1. vertically (one above the other), or
  2. a fixed margin from the edge of the page, or
  3. centre the entire expression and let things otherwise "run ragged"?
Your various choices will affect the best answer to give to you. AuFCL (talk) 06:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I would like it inset from the margin, but I know nothing about the conventions of such things. Presumably there is some typographical standard for maths? — Zoeannl (talk) 06:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
w:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Mathematics neatly skirts making a recommendation (more or less as if the issue is poison?) and there is always {{equation}} which lies in glorious disuse—so that I cannot even show you an example of what the output looks like on a "real" page, as opposed to its own documentation. You might do worse than that last one, enclosed in, say, <blockquote>? AuFCL (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I think the usual way, closest to a "typographical standard", is to use the equation environment in LaTeX; see b:LaTeX/Advanced_Mathematics#Equation_numbering. Unfortunately the <math> plugin doesn't appear to support this construction so anything that works should be fine. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

{{mfrac}} breaks Wikisource[edit]

Navigating to {{mfrac/doc}} (which is transcribed on the template page) or the talk page give MediaWiki internal errors, due to an "[e]xception caught inside exception handler". Can this be fixed by a more knowledgeable contributor? -Einstein95 (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I was the last editor back in August 2015, so this is definitely not a result of a local change. N.B. This "fault" is limited to MathML mode. Setting your Preferences/Appearance/Math to "PNG images" will restore normal function again (Yes I am well aware this is probably not the answer people want to hear.)

I copied the latest version to template:mfrac on test2: where it similarly fails but at least with more detailed diagnostics (I can but guess their significance.) AuFCL (talk) 00:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Some general background for anybody who does not already know: {{mfrac}} was always more of an experiment in alternate—rather than ever serious standalone—template implementation. In fact every effort was made to make it as similar to the then (and still) existing {{sfrac}} in both behaviour and output.

The upshot of this is that in desperate need a bulk global substitution of mfrac→sfrac should be entirely safe if circumstances so demand.

Nevertheless if this incident turns out to the canary in the coal-mine regarding ongoing <math> developments (whoever heard of the radical idea of testing in a non-live environment? Surely the developers are aware that these changes impact the public view?) I would encourage keeping the template if only as a show-piece: "This worked once upon a time—why does it not do so any more?" AuFCL (talk) 01:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for saying about the fault lying with MathML mode. I have since found that the problem is limited to the use of {{mfrac}} with no parameters. -Einstein95 (talk) 11:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Jack London story[edit]

Hi, I recently had to make a change to the Jack London article on Wikipedia, because the wrong version of a story by London had been linked to here on Wikisource. The story is "To Build a Fire" and, as may be known, there are two versions, 1902 and 1908, of this story. A listening copy of the 1908 version may be found here, and there is another copy of the 1908 version here within the Lost Face book. Since the listening copy was mistakenly linked to as a copy of the 1902 version, maybe Wikisource could acquire a 1902 version? A copy may be found at the following link: To Build a Fire (1902).  Stick to sources! Paine  07:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I have moved the ogg {{listen}} to the correct version per your advice. Sounds like we need to create a {{versions}} page for the two works. Personally I know nothing about the works and for that I will ping @Londonjackbooks: who may wish to comment. Thanks for letting us know about the issue. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Yup. "To Build a Fire" (1902) first appeared in Youth's Companion (29 May 1902), and "To Build a Fire" (1908) appeared in The Century Magazine (August 1908) and subsequently in Lost Face (1910). Coincidentally, I recently read in Jack London: An American Life (2013) that Century editor Richard Watson Gilder wrote London concerning the possibility of having received "soiled goods" (biographer Earle Labor's words). London replied in part, "I am absolutely confident, that beyond the motif itself, there is no similarity of treatment whatever." I will create a versions page. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you both very much!  Stick to sources! Paine  00:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)