From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created on 01 December 2011, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.


Vote of confidence in sysop Cygnis insignis[edit]

Three established community members have opposed user:Cygnis insignis retaining the sysop tools, which means that a vote of confidence has been called at WS:ADMIN#Cygnis_insignis. See Wikisource:Restricted access policy#Votes of confidence for the policy. --John Vandenberg (chat) 23:28, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Can only administrators vote? I couldn't figure that out. I read that "any user can propose", but that's all I could gather... If any user can vote, how long does voting last? Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
All established users can vote - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! How long does voting last do I have to cast my vote? Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Admin confirmation discussions generally run for a calendar month. Hesperian 04:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I can only recall one similar case, where a vote of confidence was called for an active sysop at the annual reconfirmation, and that is Wikisource:Administrators/Archives/Eclecticology#2009-02 confirmation (failed). Besides that we have Poetlister (unscheduled reconfirmation) and low activity sysops (a few per year). --John Vandenberg (chat) 05:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Because I am unclear, and don't want to make a wrong step (if I haven't already), who would I contact with a question that I don't wish to ask publicly at this time? Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
You may contact anyone listed at Wikisource:Administrators by email. For someone who has been mostly un-involved in discussions but is aware of what is going on you might select User:BirgitteSB. But for the most part you can count on the discretion of anyone listed at Wikisource:Administrators to maintain your confidence in so far as it does not interfere with the mission of WS (i.e attempts to form a conspiracy will be publicly discussed). JeepdaySock (talk) 10:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I think inaction is best for me right now. I appreciate the direction :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:08, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Oh, what a tangled web we weave... I think I finally know what it's like to be mad, only it's not madness—it's painful random clarity! Cygnis mentioned something in a post about ADHD, and it didn't hit me until this past evening what that had to do with anything... My husband said that he thinks my "obsession" with Wikisource is like a drug... It probably is... Two nights ago, he brought home the movie "Limitless", and all I could think is that I liked the movie "A Beautiful Mind" much better because "Limitless" involved the voluntary taking of a drug to achieve a desired effect. I abhor the use of drugs and alcohol, and refuse to allow sense-distorting materials into my body (unless you count coffee?). I found out earlier today that a Google Docs account of mine was hacked yesterday, where a file was added that I didn't add myself, as I was not on that site yesterday. I started somehow to relate that fact with my activity here on Wikisource, and I could only reach one conclusion... And that is that my "obsession" with the poet and person of Florence Earle Coates has inadvertently caused me to connect dots that aren't necessarily related. But the irony about all this is, that while I won't allow drugs or alcohol into my system, I can allow sin to enter my body... And it is a much more powerful drug... I've said before that I lack judgment. I "see" things, but I don't always know the prudent way of handling those things. I thought that creating "Supernova" might be a "smart" thing to do... but it was stupid. My intention was right, but my way was wrong... and I apologize. If any of you have a "beef" with me, please take it up with me only and leave my family, etc. alone. As far as there being any kind of "conspiracy"—at least with me—it is a "conspiracy of one" (between me and my own brain and heart). I am the only one who needs to be "outed" here, for there are no other people involved. I am guilty of "sock puppetry" (is that what it's called?), sticking my curious nose where it doesn't belong (but with no other intention than to understand my favorite poet better!), and spending far too much time here on Wikisource than on things in my own home. So I surrender—I "resign"! You will hear no more from me in this Wikicommunity in any way, shape, or form. We all have to answer to our God in the end. He is real, and He has dealt with me in ways more painful than you can even imagine! I think my family members likely think I'm nuts at this point. You might also. Who knows, I just might be! Please forgive me. Sincerely, Londonjackbooks (talk) 05:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
We are all addicts in one way or another. We depend on our family, our friends, our beliefs, our caffeine, and time in the Wikisource Community to make parts of our life more enjoyable. There is no harm in these things, as long as they do no harm to ourselves or others. JeepdaySock (talk) 10:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Suck poppetry, tut-tut! Doing this once is very naughty, and admitting it is not the game. You need to do this about 30 times, over several years, insult and harry good contributors, ask questions you know the answer to, waste an inestimable amount of these user's time, get caught out, waste more time by claiming it was someone else, then eventually be globally banned. When this happens you will get adopted by someone entrusted with privileged information and access to private details, supposedly to reduce disruption. Then you will be re-skinned, and made an admin, checkuser, or 'crat. If anyone disagrees with you, even if they are correct, civil and a worthy contributor, your adopter will use the site's email system and IRC to white ant and conspire against them. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 16:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Cygnis, if you're "out there", I just noticed your "Amateur!" note and had to laugh :) Thankfully, I have no aspirations to increase my skill level where that's concerned! :) And to any potential archivist here, while I have no problem admitting my weaknesses and looking the fool, I must say that I have been somewhat selfishly awaiting the day that this section can finally be archived :) At your leisure & appropriate time, of course! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • It gets archived when the bot runs and it has been more then 30 days since the last entry edit. JeepdaySock (talk) 15:53, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
So I just prolonged it then!? Oh, the irony... :) Gracias, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Please review WS:ADMIN[edit]

We currently have one split opinion vote of confidence on an annual review as well as a new request for adminship with rather few responses. Please take the time to review the merits of these cases as well as the commentary of your fellow community members and do your bit to help resolve these two questions before the community in a decisive fashion. I will close these at the end of month as I think it is rather hard on the two editors to be left under examination much longer. However, it would be nice if the community came together and decided what they wanted for admins, rather than waiting to see what I might imagine the community wants for admins when the community declines to work out a clear decision.--BirgitteSB 01:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


Default layouts (a solution)[edit]

A very common question from new users is "can I set a default layout for a specific mainspace page?". This has been asked of me many times, in IRC and on-wiki, and it have been asked in the Scriptorium more than once. Up until now the answer has been "no, you can't". Today, I have made a short script and a template to allow users to set default layouts on mainspace pages. To use it, you have to add the following to your JS:


On the the page that you wish to set a default layout, you simply add the following template:

{{default layout|Layout 2}}

where "Layout 2" is the desired layout name (as specified in MediaWiki:Common.js).

This overrides the user's cookie (which is how the layout persists normally) for that page only. If the next page the user views has no {{default layout}} template, the layout reverts to the user's cookie-stored layout (which is "Layout 1" for people who haven't changed it).

I propose to make the JS a default-on gadget so that new users and IPs get to see the page as the editor intended, but those who don't like the editors setting the layout can disable it easily. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 00:52, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Support- by all means; let's add this as a default-enabled gadget. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:22, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Default gadgets seems to be harder than the MW docs would have you believe. We probably need to add something to LocalSettings.php. If we play our cards right, we can also add the newly-gadgetised Edittools as default at the same time. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 09:21, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Please... no piggy backing of proposals after the fact. That is NOT what first proposed nor what I supported and in light of previous instances where somehow belief of consent was secured when no such support existed, I am inclined to withdraw to prevent this practice from taking hold. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:24, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Chill out... I was just commenting that if that was needed (another discussion) it can be single atomic bug request. Might not even be required since the next version of MW due this month. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 00:03, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Winston, eh? <chuckle> Look; don't be a hater.... should "another discussion" be mentioned within a formalized Proposal if it is not relevant/dependent to the proposal? I'd say "nope" The only reason I pumped the brakes was to Clearly establish what I do and do not support. Ya feelin' me? Didn't want a repeat of a false-positive is all. Ah-ight? can't make a tongue-out, wink emoticon here - somebody whacked my list o' symbols -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Update: working perfect across dozens of pages where this has been applied. Seeking further support/trials from additional editors in hopes to make this formally part of Wikisource soon. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
I went after a slightly larger scope--right now when you hit the layout change button it sets a session cookie with root one level lower. So if you're on Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1/May 1872/The Natural History of Man I, you've only changed the layout for Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1/May 1872/*, if you go on any other works you get default. I also had no idea what was going on with onloadFuncts so I went about it by munging all the major functions. Inductiveload's is much cleaner. Support. Prosody (talk) 19:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  • oppose A very common question from new users is "can I set a default layout for a specific mainspace page?" "This has been asked ... in IRC and on-wiki, and it have been asked in the Scriptorium more than once. Up until now the answer has been 'no, you can't'. paraphrased, with apologies, from the pitch above
The answer has always been, 'yes, you can!' Users are able to set their own preferences. But that is not the question, which is, 'how do I set my preferences as the default for this page?' The answer to that is "no, you can't". The principle being subverted by imposing an individual's choice of layout is 'honour user preferences', allow everyone to have their preference. Opting into an alternative to the default is one option, if it can be agreed that is reasonable. This is not a solution, presenting it as one to the 'problem of sidenotes' is misleading, what it purports to correct is a fundamental problem with the approach to that side issue (the solution to that is to wrangle the text, like the ref system, with a compromise that undeniably improves access).

This "proposal" is an announcement, bundled with other yet-to-be-discussed and site-wide changes. Like many similar, questionable implementations, the response from the proponents is technical fine-tuning, consideration of the implications, outlining of documentation, and any formerly raised objections are ignored. This site should not be regarded as a sandbox, a textbed for theories on web-page design, the scope is not 'the free library that anyone can edit'. Wikisource is a small community of users quietly contributing texts, maybe take this proposal to wikipedia? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 17:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Another reason to oppose individuals making arbitrary layout decisions is given below, though it is an accusation presumably addressing my contribs, "not a personal literary trophy room" CYGNIS INSIGNIS 10:45, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Quite the opposite: the introduction of the three selectable layouts was a site-wide Wikisource customization, which was not discussed so much and which broke the default appearance of a book i have been editing. It is not my preference - it is the only layout with which this book looks well.
I wrote it several times already: Wikisource, beyond being "small community of users quietly contributing texts" is a website where people want to read books. I don't know about other books, but i know for fact that the book to which i dedicate most of my efforts here is actually used for research and teaching in schools around the world and the layout thingy gives the teachers headaches. A bunch of Wikisource regulars know what to do with these layouts, but for the average reader it is harmful. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
That implementation was one I had in mind, it broke sidenotes and the touted 'solution' became a 'requirement' to have anything but layout 1, i.e. no layout, flexible layout, reader defined layout, the standard in the millions of articles of the wikipedias. These devs would thrash me at chess, and many other games that require thinking of moves in advance of the current play. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 10:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, the original code was a rough draft to garner opinion, which it has. I have since "improved" it (cue howls of disapproval for daring to add an option to an existing proposal). Now, there can be a persistent (cookie based, just like the user's layout preference) option to ignore the "default" layout and use the user's preferred layout. It is at User:Inductiveload/layout override2.js: import to your user JS as before (and please remember to hard-refresh). Also remember that this is a proposed Gadget which means users can totally disable it if they don't like it, as well as being able to disable it on a page-by-page basis with it on. What is wrong with giving editors a way to set a recommended viewing format, and on top of that letting users to veto it and see it in their preferred format? Readers, not editors, are the target demographic of Wikisource.
Additionally, the "improved" version allows you to set a default layout for a whole work by placing the template on the index page, so you can adjust a works layout in a single edit in a consistent manner, and you can even place a different template on a few subpages (say, the "front" page) to override that.
So in summary, it is designed to be flexible in several ways, and yes, you can kill it if you don't like it. The heavy editors of the site who hate it can turn it off, the new users and casual readers that we are aiming to provide free content to (that IS the aim of the site, by the way, not a personal literary trophy room) can see it how the editor of the work felt best without having to login and set preferences, but they can still disable it if without logging in! So, who loses out here? Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 14:35, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Additionally, all code is still experimental, please make judgements on the intent not on the implementation, and tell me about any bugs. Thank you. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 15:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Also this code incorporates the code below, because as I said, it isn't possible to have both and not integrate them. It doesn't mean it will be in the default-layout code, it's just in my code because I am working on it at the same time. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 16:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - this seems an entirely useful addition to Wikisource. Some texts do require a specific layout in order to display properly (while the majority are fine in Layout 1). Sorry for the late vote; I managed to miss this proposal previously. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Supplementary idea - enable layouts on all pages[edit]

  • This proposal could be wider that that since a very simple hack enables layouts on all mainspace pages, not just the ones with transcluded Page: pages to have dynamic (and therefore default) layouts. I don't see why they should be restricted in this way, and by working around a simple test in the underlying code, I've found you can have layouts on any mainspace page.
Kind of moot since most 'workarounds' I've seen to date seeking the same results just add a hidden span tag set to the pagenum class/id somewhere in the content. Either way, I'd prefer avoiding this integration for the time being if it all possible. I'm not against the idea; just not until some other Dynamic avenues are first explored further and/or improved upon. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
OK...which avenues would they be exactly, and why would they be better than treating pages the same without worrying about what the content is? Maybe I can help? The idea behind this is you don't have to add arcane hackery manually to each page to fool the extension, it is either done for all pages by local scripting, or eliminated at the source by losing that line. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 08:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Your point(s) are well taken here and I am of the same opinion but, again, that is all we have here so far - assumptions, opinions and rationalizations. I'm open to discussing this further with anyone who is interested, and even doing some limited testing in the mean time, but feel bundling it in right now to your excellent initial proposal is over-reach imho.
Still not sure what exactly it is you don't like. Of course it needs more work, that's why I'm asking ThomasV. And as I said, the two parts can exist independently, but not together without being merged. So you can have the parent without this one, or this one without the parent. If you have both, they'll fight over the load order unless that is taken care of. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 09:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
I haven't formed an opinion that covers 'like' or 'dis-like' yet. I guess I can't get past the idea that if somebody wanted to manipulate static, non-transcluded content in the mainspece, most of which we'd like to see sourced from actual scans a somepoint before the end of days anyway, to look and act like one of the layouts they would have done so to begin with, no? Additionally, if I include the lack of any option to at least opt out of dynamic layouts entirely per User: setting or something, regardless of transclusion taking place or not, & I just don't see how fewer choices makes for more possible participation and/or contributors in the long run. I'd still like to see it in action and lean towards eventually making this a reality - but not without more robust feedback and some test runs first I guess. George Orwell III (talk) 11:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  • If any one cares about the technical side of the hack, all you have to do is spoof "self.proofreadpage_source_href" like this: "self.proofreadpage_source_href = 'anystring';" and then call "init_page_layout();". That simple assignment allows proofreadpage to think it should be adding the infrastructure for the dynamic layouts.
  • I am appending this as a separate issue for several reasons:
  1. As GO3 said already, I shouldn't modify a proposal after made.
  2. Speaking technically this code can stand alone. However, if you have both this proposal and the parent, the functionality needs to be merged, or the code could execute in the wrong order (layouts applied before the text container is constructed).
  3. Ideally (I think) the test for transcluded pages should be removed from the underlying code, as it doesn't seem to defend against Bad Things (TM), just stops innocent plain pages from getting layouts, which made sense when they were only used for adding page numbers, but not now when we have dynamic layouts. Preventing the layouts being blocked in the first place saves loading time, as we don't have to go back and do it all again. Additionally users who opt-out of the parent proposal would lose any new layout functionality if we need to subvert the test locally, since the code is combined. If done, this would affect all Wikisources as it is a modification of the underlying PP code, so it needs more careful thought and negotiation with others. To do this, remove the following line from
if( !self.proofreadpage_source_href && get_elements_by_classname("pagenum","span").length==0 ) return;
I will ask ThomasV whether anything bad happens if you remove it, but I can't see anything adverse happening when I subverted it using local code. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 07:37, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Never did figure out why the classname check is sometimes "pagenum" in certain places and "pagenumber" for others. I guess that's why I could never hide the page links no matter the layout used (being span-less & wrapped with a div I'm guessing) unless I manually get them to display inline first (which never came up as an option in the display menu either but at least where actually inline spans at that point).

Fix the foundations first - solid ones are typically better to build upon -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Could be defined in different functions with local scopes? If you give me an example, maybe I can find out. And what are you referring to as the foundations? Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 08:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm guessing you can toggle the pagelinks on and off in all three Dynamic Layouts just fine so I'll just move on & ask if you have a Display Menu option not to throw them into one container or the other and simply have them appear inline (i.e. self.proofreadpage_numbers_inline=true; or not? I don't. I would like to have the full functionality to show or hide them at a click as well as the option available to have them display inline (as frequently is the case in consolidated court-case reporters for example). -- 09:05, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
You mean like.....this?
As usual import to JS, hard-refresh and then go to any page with transcluded pages and look in the "display options" box. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 11:11, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


So, any results? A decision is really needed here. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Fwiw... the initial propsal has been exceptionally well behaved after applying it to my user settings when this was first proposed a few weeks ago.

The (ughhh) expanded propsal to cover all types of mainspace works regardless of being transcluded or not had too many issues when applied (skewed default TOC's, bad interplay with user applied wrapping containers, among others) to gain my support. I understand there is an order of loading issue as far as the expanded proposal needs to include in order for the initial proposal to still work is concerned but I suggest we worry about that nuance if and when that expanded propsal gets enough support to implement it. The focus should be on the intial proposal not the mistaken association and roll-out with the expanded proposal. I also agree that a course of action to addopt this sooner rather than later should cut down on the amount of personal queries on why something I emailed pointing to an en.WS law-type citation "looks like a 5th grader posted it" here as well. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:00, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

BOT approval requests[edit]


Other discussions[edit]

Recent changes for a particular project[edit]

Good morning! I was just wondering if there was a way to search for most recent changes to a particular WS Project, such as PSM, etc... Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:58, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Not straightforwardly AFAIK, but for a well-organized project like PSM, you could set up a page that transcludes each of the PSM volume pages: {{Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1}}{{Popular Science Monthly/Volume 2}}{{Popular Science Monthly/Volume 3}}...., and then use "Related changes" to see what's been afoot. -- Visviva (talk) 21:33, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
There is the query API that can be used, though it needs some with familiarity with the syntax If you tell us the specific query that was of interest, and we can have a look at what is possible. For an indicator of what is possible for recentchanges at mw:API:Recentchanges. Is it pages in the main namespace? Page: namespace? Something quite specific? By a specific user? — billinghurst sDrewth 21:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
I am proofreading an article for the EB1911... At the time I asked the question above, I had yet to come across an EB1911 Mainspace article that was transcribed and not merely typed straight onto the Mainspace page. I have since found one, however (it was right under my nose the whole time!)... What I was wanting to do is find a transcribed article (that links back to the Source) to see how I should set the Mainspace page up (header, transclusion formatting, sectioning in Index pages, etc.) for the article I am working on. I have since set the page up.
However, for projects that have been around a while, I thought that it would be beneficial to be able to view the most recent edits made through some sort of search tool so that the most recent and up-to-date formatting is copied/used and not formatting that has now been "deprecated." Thanks :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:50, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Londonjackbooks, sorry for this belated reply. I would gladly guide you to where information can be found in PSM. Be it, author, article, or images.— Ineuw talk 03:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Ineuw... I was referring, however, to finding instances/use of current formatting techniques in an article (for comparative copy/paste purposes) as opposed to deprecated or "outdated" formatting (which would likely be found in earlier-created articles)—not to specific articles, images, etc. For example, if I were to "look back" at some of the first articles created for projects such as EB1911, PSM, etc., it's likely that the formatting/method used to create the articles might not be the same as what is currently considered to be "best practice." When I set about looking for a "guide" to create a Mainspace page for a transcluded article from the EB1911, I wasn't finding one very easily (i.e., one that was transcluded & linked back to the Source—or Index). @Hesperian: I was looking to search all recently created articles for the EB1911... not merely those on my watchlist (which would have been null since this is the first EB1911 article I have created—I think). Also to add, I noted that someone just yesterday created an EB1911 article by typing the text directly onto the Mainspace page (an albeit short article—I tried to find it just now, but it is too far back into the Recent changes history at this point—but the article starts with an "A"). I didn't look further enough into it to see if they also added the text to the Index page first, but probably(?) not... Instructions might not be clear that these articles can now be transcluded(?) In summary, it may be that I wasn't thorough enough in reading the contributor collaboration page (& related pages, e.g., Style manual) for the project, but even from what I found at the Style manual for the project, I still had a couple unanswered questions. Maybe I'll add/address them there on the Talk page. Thanks, and sorry for the lengthy reply! Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:59, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Special:RecentChangesLinked works for all linked pages, not just ones on your watchlist... but if you're interested in recently created works, and those works get put in a project category, then maybe you could use a dynamic page list for pages recently added to a category, as can be seen for Category:Botany at User:Hesperian/Latest. Hesperian 12:14, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you :) I copied your comment to my 'Housekeeping' page for when I have better use of my brain! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:22, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Special:RecentChangesLinked worked! Thanks, Hesperian :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Hesperian (or anyone), How can I (can I?) get similar results (as above) for recent changes related to Index:pages? Preferably with search terms that would cover changes made to any one of the EB1911 29-Vol Pages (I tried playing around with the search options, but couldn't figure it out)... Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
One thing you can do is create a page that links to all the pages you're interested in, and then use Special:RecentChangesLinked. I do this over at Wikipedia—my watchlist is full of all sorts of crap, making it hard for me to monitor articles I actually care about, so I list such articles at User:Hesperian/Contributions, and I periodically hit Special:Recentchangeslinked/User:Hesperian/Contributions. Hesperian 04:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Hesperian! I addressed you above also—just below Ineuw's reply... Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:59, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

EB1911 shoulder heading[edit]

When rendered in the Main, EB1911 shoulder headings are on the right-hand-side of the page, even though they appear on the left side of the page on Index pages. To me, they don't render as well on the Shoulder heading.right as they do on the left. Is there a way to tweak formatting of the template so that it renders on the left in the Main? or is there a specific reason why the right might be preferred? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

{{EB1911 Shoulder Heading}} has the details. align=leftbillinghurst sDrewth 09:20, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

All I can say to myself is, Duh! :) I should have known to take a look at the source of the template!—diligence is often hit-and-miss with me :) Thanks, Billinghurst! Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:27, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Actually, align=left didn't work... And if you look at the examples on the template's page, left and right examples are identical!? The text itself is apparently "left aligned inside the heading's box" (by default), but the shoulder heading itself still remains on the right side of the page even with align=left... Am I reading something wrong? Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Using align=left:

When rendered in the Main, EB1911 shoulder headings are on the right-hand-side of the page, even though they appear on the left side of the page on Index pages. To me, they don't render as well on the Shoulder heading.right as they do on the left. Is there a way to tweak formatting of the template so that it renders on the left in the Main? or is there a specific reason why the right might be preferred? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

align params is ignored in main, it has an effect only in Page:, in main the value is right, which is not a good idea imho as they are section/sub-section title which need to be more visible than at right. — Phe 14:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Is that then something that can/should(?) be adjusted in the EB1911 Shoulder heading template? Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Noted the following in the history for the template's page (I'll try to use my brain to see what it means!) :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

  • (cur | prev) 17:24, 15 December 2010‎ Spangineer (Talk | contribs)‎ (511 bytes) (automatically put all shoulder headings on the right side in the main namespace; if this is not seen as trivial feel free to rv and discuss on talk) (undo)

Transcription of EB1911 articles[edit]

Quick question: Do we not want to see articles for the EB1911 first proofread at the Index pages and then transcluded to the Main? I think that Users are not clearly directed to the Index pages for the work at the collaboration page, etc. (faq/style manual subpages) for the project. Whole lotta links to Gutenberg, IA, etc., but not to the WS Index pages! A lot of unnecessary match & split work will be necessary to correct things as a result (much will need to be done as it is). Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok... I see under Sources that the Index pages are listed... But maybe the faq and style manual pages for the project will also need to be considered... I'll think about it a bit... Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
EB1911 project well pre-dates the Proofread Page/scans, and even when we had scans, the file size defeated doing Commons and uploading, and so do some of the people. Consequently, the project has not moved to enforcing scans as can be seen on the talk page of the Project. I think that older style approach inhibits the project, but that ultimately is the project's choice. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Would anyone be against transclusion?—e.g., if I were to suggest to Users recently involved with the project on their Talk pages to consider beginning with the Index page and then transcluding to the Main? I just don't want to make the suggestion if someone already has an explanation (that might be escaping me) for not starting with the Index...? Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:23, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
I think that the conversations there should be read for individual impressions, though I would hope that nobody would be against explaining how people could use the available scans for proofreading and validating. The project is reasonably quiescent, so I would think that someone trying to organise a concerted approach to invigorating the project or assisting the project would and should be encouraged. I cannot think of a logical reason why people couldn't be encouraged to start with the Index: and to be seen how to get to the articles. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Help, please![edit]

I tried and tried to figure out why there is a break between pages here, but to no avail. Any help is welcomed, and feel free to help yourself at fixing it, for I must surrender the helm for the moment! Thanks much! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:54, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done There was the need for a line feed before the new div marker that had terminated the parargraph. <shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 09:40, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Forgot to say thank you... "Thank you!" :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:16, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Chronicles of England, France, Spain[edit]

Sir John Froissart's Chronicles of England, France, Spain, and the adjoining countries, from the latter part of the reign of Edward II. to the coronation of Henry IV.

Is there a need for this book? It was originally written in the 14th century, and is a long work. It has had many editions of it published, but I feel the best would be the 1853 edition published by Leavitt & Allen. I have recently acquired the book in print, but could not find a copy of the 1853 edition (which contains all 4 volumes) online, although I didn't look hard.

I feel this book could increase and/or better our Medieval section by giving a look at events throughout the time period it covers. Although historians say it has some discrepancies (mainly slight favor of some parties), many professors at my alma mater believe this book to be a good historical work.

I would not upload it right now, as I already am occupied with my real-life happenings (and job), and with other projects on here. But it's an idea.

I would also be pleased if someone could find the 1853 edition online for me. If not, I (or any other user) could scan pages and put them together into a pdf file for uploading.

Please give your thoughts if you read this. - Tannertsf (talk) 22:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

There's a Google (i.e. low quality but readable) scan of an 1853 Leavitt & Allen at, but it is unhelpfully 111MB, so it needs resizing or splitting. I'll see what I can do. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 23:04, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
There's a version at the IA from 1860 with much better scan quality (JP2s are available for the images), and a DjVu small enough to upload at It appears to be a later edition of the same version (the title page is the same other than the date and publishers address and the number of pages is the same). I'm inclined to say this one is better for our purposes. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 00:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok. You can upload it now if you want to. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

While we can continue to more upload works, there is also value in getting works sufficiently completed to a stage where they can be transcluded. I understand the attraction of having multiple works on the go, and working on a different book which may more fit with the mood for the day. I also know that ultimately the success of this site is concerted efforts on a work to get it proofread and presented, rather than sitting in Page: ns with only some pages done. I find that works for the future do well to either be noted on user pages, or on the respective Author: page, linked with {{ext scan link}}. It puts it into a context rather than here where it will be archived in a couple of months. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes that was my idea. - Tannertsf (talk) 04:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Table creation request[edit]

Is there any chance that I could bug someone to create a table for me that has a minimum of 300 rows and seven columns (I would like the columns to be sortable alphabetically/numerically, etc., if possible). Also, if it's at all possible for the cells to "fit to text size" automatically? If this is too much to ask, or impossible, don't worry about it... What I would like to do, though, is manually transfer all the data I have collected on Mrs. Coates' poetry that was published in the magazines to a subpage here at WS for reference (with links to WS versions, external versions, etc.). Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:27, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Could you give me that info? I can then work on the table. - Tannertsf (talk) 19:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Basically, the table would be set up sort of along these lines:
Title Date Magazine Volume Issue Page In Collection
Hero, A 19090200 Century Magazine, The 77 4 544 Lyrics of Life (1909)
Ditto Ditto Ditto Ditto Ditto Ditto Ditto
Having played with it already, I might actually be able to do it myself, but I wouldn't know the proper table settings, or how to make the columns sortable... Also, I don't know what 'instructions' to use to center text in the cells "universally" (probably wrong word)... Open to suggestions! Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok. I would definitely like to produce this table for you. I might be able to center it...just let me add the text though. - Tannertsf (talk) 20:42, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but I was going to populate the cells as I go through cleaning up her works here. I'm still figuring out the best way of titling some of the mag titles/vol/issue no. info, etc., in order to correctly link them to appropriate WS pages/external links... So slow and steady cell-population is my goal... That way, too, I'm less likely to make errors/typos that might be otherwise overlooked... I'll probably start by creating a User:subpage, and once complete, move the page to a Coates subpage... Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
You don't need {{block center}} with a table, the style="margin... will cover that. Note that there is a template, {{table style}}, that simplifies some formatting. In this case {{ts|mc}} will reproduce the margin style. It can also centre all of the text: {{ts|mc|ac}}. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:47, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you... I'll look over those options in a bit too... Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Building wikitables on the fly is generally easier than to prebuild a table, as one might do in a word document. Just to remember that |-on the left hand margin starts a row, and  |  on the left hand margin starts a cell and w:Help:Tables is a good guide.

If you have the text available already, and can format it in the form (blank line) for each a new row, and then start each cell on a new line, it is then a 15 second job to actually run a little text replace through to create a table of whatever length, or you could do that in your word processor and paste it in. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

It wouldn't be that easy for me to copy/past any info I have in bulk into rows... As I mentioned, my titles are not 100% accurately written,—some are abbreviated, etc. I'd like to avoid errors and do it as-I-go. Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
As AdamBMorgan said, for formatting, have a look at {{table style}} it has been designed to be plug and play, and as needed we can look to add components, though for rarely used formatting, it can still be added using that template, such as my struggles with 137, 139, 140 over the last couple of days (I had to get them to evolve). For sortable, the issue is often how you want to sort, though have a look at the couple of Portal pages that I have done recently lectures, like Portal:Rede Lecture and Portal:Romanes Lecture. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
I will take a look at the wealth of info above soon (approaching brain-deadedness). I appreciate the tips/pointers! @Tannertsf: I also appreciate your willingness to tackle the "project", but I'd like to handle this one systematically. I will always be open to tips (formatting, etc.) once I get started with building/populating, so feel free to chime in any time. Thanks all! Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation "Answers"[edit]

Hi. :) I just wanted to let you all know that the Wikimedia Foundation is testing a potential new communication system intended to provide a central address to which community members who need assistance from the Wikimedia Foundation or who have questions about the Foundation or its activities can reach out and find answers. This system is being unrolled on a trial basis to test its efficiency and usefulness to communities.

What happens to your question will depend on what type of question it is. Many questions are general interest, and answers to these are being posted to wmf:Answers. Generally, at least to begin with, I will be writing these answers myself, although staff members have assisted with some questions already and I don't doubt will assist with more. Some issues will not be general interest, but may require attention from specific staff members or contractors. These will be forwarded to the appropriate parties. Questions that should be answered by community may be forwarded to the volunteer response team, unless we can point you to a more appropriate point of contact.

I imagine most of you are familiar with how the Wikimedia Foundation works, but it's probably a good idea for me to note for those who are not familiar that the Wikimedia Foundation does not control content on any of its projects. They can't help with content disputes or unblock requests, and they are not the place to report general bugs or to request features (that would be Wikimedia's Bugzilla). The letters I've answered already have included primarily questions about finances and the Foundation's work. I've been asked to get feedback from staff on diverse subjects ranging from the amount of latitude permitted to a project in drafting their "Exemption Doctrine Policy" to whether or not groups seeking grants need tax exempt status first.

If you have questions for or about the Wikimedia Foundation, you can address them to answers(at) Please review wmf:Answers/Process for specific terms and more information. --Mdennis (WMF) (talk) 19:29, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Maggie. How do you see that we should be covering this in our general help pages? Are you wanting us to just stick a link? Or do you think that it would be useful to have a page of standard text at a standard page, eg. Help:Wikimedia at each of the wikis? — billinghurst sDrewth 20:57, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
In terms of your general help pages, I'd say that's completely up to you. :) Most users probably won't be interested in the email address, since we can't help them with the kinds of problems most will have. I've already had to defer a fair number of inquiries back to the community, since I can't help with disputes or editing issues. But I would be happy to have the opportunity to help more people with Foundation level questions. A standard page is a really interesting idea. I'll talk to my supervisor about that one! :) --Mdennis (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Hiding a column in a Wiki table[edit]

Is it possible to hide a column in a wiki table, to be visible in edit mode only? This is not such a crazy question as it may sound. — Ineuw talk 05:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

You can't just use comments? As in: <!-- | Hidden 'cell' here. -->Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 06:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
I would like to apply it to some 600+ data in a column. I could code the data as you suggest (haven't thought of that or tried it). I was just hoping if it exists in wiki code. Thanks. — Ineuw talk 07:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
You could do it with JQuery. For example, to hide the last column: $("#table-id th:last-child, #table-id td:last-child").hide(); but then the client has to load it all, only to never see it. — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 07:33, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
There is a, very tedious, way to do it with CSS: Apply style="display:none;" to each cell in that column. For example, this table:
{| class=prettytable {{ts|mc}}
! 1 || style="display:none;" | 2 || 3
| A || style="display:none;" | B || C
| X || style="display:none;" | Y || Z
will appear as:-
1 2 3
I'm not sure if that helps at all. Doing it individually for 600 cells will be a problem unless you're generating them automatically in some way. In HTML, this is a lot easier to do with table rows rather than columns. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the replies and the lesson. I was hoping (which springs eternal) that it might be a part of the html/wiki table language unknown to me. It's interesting that column based formatting is lacking in the language. — Ineuw talk 01:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
The issue is html's design, not wiki. If you design full css tables, and label things you could write css to do it. You could probably write a regex to do something with it even just to wrap it inside <!-- --> all depending on the design and complexity of your table. If it is really that important, pull the html table into a spreadsheet, and just hide it there. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:18, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Why would you want to hide a column—here, anyway...? Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Beg to differ - its the lack of <COL> & <COLGROUP> support in the Wiki markup that makes table creation here such a headache; not the other way around. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:45, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Ineuw, could you be more specific as to what you want this for? If it is for any general reader then it is one problem, if it is for yourself to use on occasion, then it can be done with a Javascript bookmarklet: you just write the following in the address bar to hide the second column in all tables on the page, and you can even put it in a bookmark to be used in future at a single click:
javascript:(function(){$("th:nth-child(2), td:nth-child(2)").hide()})();
Unfortunately, the Wiki software will not permit free Javascript to be inserted into links (in fact you may not use <a> HTML links in wikicode, they are not recognised as a security consideration), so you can't easily convert this into a "click here to hide this column" button. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 23:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Again thanks to all for clarifying the issue: Posted this question because I could no longer use article titles as the natural sort order FOR MULTIPLE PART ARTICLES, as titles change even though the articles are continuous. Finally, yesterday came up with a coding system yesterday (comfortable with coding schemes) within the existing data that properly keeps related articles together. Considered to include this in a column but it's not necessary, and certainly not worth wasting time. 23:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh - well if that's the case, then...
  • you probably don't have sort arrows because you're forcing a background color for the header cells
  • you can't do secondary column sort after sorting a primary one since the 1.18 upgrade - you need to hold down the shift key now for secondary etc. sorts to work as before
  • stop using prettytable as a table class - its been usurped by wikitable everywhere
  • blank colspans wind up screwing sort sooner or later - set border tob/bottom instead
... that said; your "sortbottom" solution works around all that rather nicely as is. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Any way to display hidden characters in edit form?[edit]

I've been tweaking my css and js to make the editing form all fit within one screen, be full-width, use the DPCustomMono2 font, move some oft-used special characters up out of the menu, and give myself a new portlet link to whatever I'm currently proofreading...

I'm just wondering if anyone knows how I might get invisibles, or at least just end-of-line characters, to display in the editing form? Tabs and spaces too, would be good.

Thanks!  :-) — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 06:35, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Could you create a search-and-replace function to change the existing invisible characters into visible characters? Such as changing an invisible line feed (\n) into a visible pilcrow (¶). You might also need a similar function to change them back again. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
You can do exactly that with Javascript. Put the following into your common.js:
importScript('User:Inductiveload/Easy proofread.js');
At the moment the font setting doesn't work—it is reverted by something later on. However, I am not sure what is doing it. If anyone can fix my code so that it doesn't happen, that would be great. I can set it properly with CSS, which goes in your common.css:
#textBoxTable * #wpTextbox1 {
   font-size: 95%;
Another issue is that space->dot rule will prevent your browser wrapping text properly. You can just remove the rule if this is more annoying that useful. Cheers, Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 16:53, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Getting a progress bar[edit]

Hi. I would like to propose the following feature, provided that this is found useful by others as well.

Given as input a title page, get the colored progress bar that appears in the main page with transcluded pages. So that it could be used wherever is needed (same concept at here). As the proofread extension has already the power to handle that, could it be enhanced to support this? Or, if not, could some client-side code be written to support this? Thanks --Mpaa (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2011 (UTC

  • I would like to see this functionality added somehow.
  • I am of the opinion that this code would be better off as a small extension of the extension's functionality, rather than as client-side code. The function prepareArticle in ProofreadPage_body.php generates the current coloured header bar. Presumably a little bit of shuffling could break that out into a standalone function that can be used to render a new tag, something like <proofreadstatus title="Page Title"> for a mainspace page transcluding some pages or <proofreadstatus title="Index:Foo.djvu"> to get a bar showing the whole index.
  • If client-side code is preferred, it could be done with a single API query per status bar: This data can then be processed into a status bar. However, this would duplicate the process already done in the PHP file, entail several client-API requests, and slow down loading so I would say it should only be done as a workaround if the extension cannot be changed for some reason. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 23:19, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
    It has been previously discussed/requested, and it was either here, or on ThomasV's talk page. There was a reason why it was unable to be done, though that may have been at that time. I forget why it wasn't possible. I believe that there is a direct request to have the page status as part of the API, and that may be a helop or may make no difference. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
    Plus we can build links to suitable pages, just not display them inline on a page, or a series of them on a page. Do you have a look at
Hi. All the links give the same result, as if the Search Key had no effect. Is it only me? --Mpaa (talk) 17:05, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Sadly it looks though it is broken. I don't know when that happened. — billinghurst sDrewth 20:13, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't understand anything technical that Inductiveload said, but I like Mpaa's idea. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:49, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I have mentioned this before elsewhere, I really think we need the ability to show the status of works anywhere we wish, such as on author pages. If we don't think every reader needs this then maybe it could be an opt-in gadget eventually but I see substantial value to being able to show others at a glance where a work stands, without having to go to index space or the Special:IndexPages.--Doug.(talk contribs) 11:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
    I don't think that anyone is disagreeing about the usefulness for such a change. It just is yet to be able to be done. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:56, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
    Well, I'm arguing for prioritization ;-) and if we moved forward on suggestions to make this happen and there were complaints it hadn't been discussed, it wouldn't be the first time. I thought Inductiveload was suggesting possible solutions that we could work towards.
    Have we submitted a bugzilla for the Search function? On a related note, do we track bugs on wiki? I think we should - though maybe that is best done on multilingual.--Doug.(talk contribs) 14:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
There is now a ticket on bugzilla about the problem of the search engine bugzilla:33719. Pyb (talk) 08:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Possibility to free some PUBLIC DOMAIN Scientific American volumes[edit]

This ought to keep me busy on Wikisource for a few weeks longer after completing PSM. I was beginning to worry that WS is running out of material to proofread.— Ineuw talk 03:52, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
A few weeks? You might want to up that estimate by a little smudge. I have identified 3307 issues in the available date range. :-D Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 04:21, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
OK . . . Give or take a few days. Also looked at the offerings but the way they are presently, it's impossible to see how large the initial editions are. - Rather didn't want to waste time on it. Truth being, that it was the desire of proofreading Nature and Scientific American that led me to Wikisource. Then, met Mattwj2002 who got me interested in PSM since those two were not available. Blame him. :D.— Ineuw talk 05:09, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Given the volume of work available and the short time to harvest these PD works, are there specific works that we want to harvest or is the goal to import as much possible then begin setting up scans for proof reading? Alternately someone could harvest it all to their personal computer and sort through at leisure. Jeepday (talk) 11:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I have already started a bot download and I'm about 25% through (volumes 1 and 60-101, 13GB so far). I have a bot to upload too, and it has done volume 1 already. I am uploading the pdfs by issue, as it is important that the full quality files are available, since the source will close again. I don't consider the not insignificant effort required to resize the PDFs to fit one volume under the 100 MB commons limit worthwhile when the originals are still needed for image extraction. My priority is to complete the download before worrying too much about the upload, as access time is limited. If anyone wants a volume expedited, I'd be happy to oblige. Likewise, if anyone wishes to do any of volumes 2-50, leave a not and I'll make way. Cheers, Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 19:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC).

Commonshelper 2[edit]

Has anyone in the past six weeks or so used this tool to transfer images to the Commons, either from WS or WP?— Ineuw talk 00:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

To further clarify this question, I've been trying to transfer images to the Commons using Commonshelper #1 or #2, and it never worked for me. This effort fails whether it's from here, or from English Wikiepida. I have valid TUSC key (several) on the Commons. Posted a bug report on the toolserver JIRA on October 2, 2011, as well as looked at the history of problems relating to this tool. There is a problem with it, but I don't know details. The programmer responsible has accepted my report including the accompanying screenshots of the failure messages. If anyone in the know who can clarify this issue, I can wait patiently for the solution because downloading and uploading is a pain.— Ineuw talk 06:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Replaced PSM Vol 47 djvu on the Commons and the text layer doesn't match as expected.[edit]

I was about to complete Index:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_47.djvu TOC and its index, when I noticed that it's missing pages. Since I regularly check IA for duplicate and recent uploads of PSM, I found a recently added edition. I compared our existing version, page by page, with the new version and there are other pagination errors, so I replaced the .djvu on the commons. Naturally, the text layer doesn't match, and I don't know what to do about it. (I saved all my text work) Here is the link to the good copy Can someone help what I can do next? — Ineuw talk 06:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Well for starters the previous DjVu from 2009 was 918 pages and the new one is only 900 pages. I'll have to take a closer look at both to better "see" the real differences between the two. I'll touchback in a bit -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:02, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I can help you with that. There are different numbers of blank pages (haven't counted them), at the beginning and there were 24 pages of ads at the end: FYI Here is the original layout and pagelist. Also, I was thinking or replacing the complete text file. — Ineuw talk 07:56, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

P.S: 24 Advertiements files and less blanks. — Ineuw talk 07:59, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Long story short - I've fixed everything up to the old scan page 556 (djvu position 570) with a newly edited upload of the better Volume 47 DjVu file. As is the case with PSM vol. 43, a bulk move of about ~300 existing pages needs to be done. I've separated the good from the "bad" on the Index pagelist already and corrected the trimmed advert pages out at the end as well.
Somebody just needs to setup and run that bulk-move script. -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:25, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I'd be happy to do the bulk moving with page shifter. What is the offset and the page ranges?
Also, I see that v43 still has some unmatched pages. When it disappeared from my talk page I assumed it was done already, which was cursorily confirmed by DjVU page 894-896 seemingly matching the content, but it seems that it still has a shift of 2 in previous pages. Is that job still outstanding? Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 00:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
It vanished to the BOT-Request page because I didn't get any sense that my third (or fourth?)request to run 300 or 400 pages at a pop in nearly as many days was still being recieved well. If you could address the two PSM volumes, it would be greatly appreciated. The sections needing corrections are clearly labeled on the Index: pagelist (i.e. still show trailing or leading uncreated pages to facilitate the move).
Any previous page "matches" were purely done due to an inability to leave months of work alone for a few days without giving in to temptation to fix an article or two here and there. Thank you for your attention. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Don't worry about dumping page shifts (or file grabs for that matter) in my lap, though sometimes they take a while to get going as I have learned from Female Prose that a lot can go wrong! Sorry about the lack of reply, I had it down in my head that I had replied on my talk, but apparently I didn't. Then again, I was running around a lot last week and didn't get much chance for WSery. Also I bizarrely didn't have WS:BOTR on my Watchlist, so that explains the disappearance from my radar. I'll report any problems with the shifts there. Cheers, Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 02:36, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Inductiveload, sticking my nose into where it may not be wanted, only PSM Vol 43 requires attention to articles. In PSM Vol 47, this doesn't matter because the proofread & validated pages are images only and I have a record of what was done.— Ineuw talk 04:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

It's your project, feel free to nose-stick. I have adjusted the one page that needed pages re-aligning for v43. It wasn't overly strenuous ;-). v47 is now underway. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 05:29, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done -- Bulk moves completed -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:05, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps we shouldn't remove line breaks[edit]

See Help talk:Proofread#"Remove end-of-line hyphens and line breaks." where I suggest we don't remove line breaks, which does seem to be current practice anyway. Mark Hurd (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

You are right; line breaks are a relevant datum, when you try to match the derived text with source text (both as image, or OCR result, or djvu text layer). But a solution for hyphenated words is mandatory. This could be done using {{St}} but… it deserves the hard needed job? --Alex brollo (talk) 15:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
I have to respectfully disagree... and I did here. I am always open to being wrong, however—as I have been on many occasions! Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:16, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Just a more comment - I came here to give my greetings to John only, but your village pump is so interesting! Parsing of .dsed files from djvu files can wait a little more. :-)
It.source tries to obtain two different results while proofreading: a text as similar as possible to book page into nsPage, and a different text (in particulars obviusly) into ns0. Internal links too work in two different ways: they link page-to page in nsPage, and ns0-to-ns0 in ns0. Here too there's something similar dealing with hyphenated words at the end of a page: words appear splitted in two parts into nsPage, but appear as a single word into ns0 thanks to your Hws-Hwe templates. Well, if you like to save line breaks, and there are some sound, even if controversial, reasons to save them, why don't use Hws-Hwe at the end of lines too?
Dealing with any case of different codes/texts/templates/anything into nsPage and ns0, usually we use {{St}} (it's name in it.source is it:Template:Pt, it's perhaps the most used template). The main difference between {{St}} and {{Hws}}-{{Hwe}} is that {{St}} doesn't manage hyphens, so that it can be used anywhere; another difference is that there's only one template, and to manage one template is simpler than to manage two. ;-)
And now, back to .dsed files. --Alex brollo (talk) 21:11, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Re: "Well, if you like to save line breaks, and there are some sound, even if controversial, reasons to save them, why don't use Hws-Hwe at the end of lines too?" Mark Hurd might like to save line breaks, but I don't think it beneficial (for the reasons I stated in the link above). I would be interested in having you list some of the reasons you alluded to for keeping them, however,—and why Hws-Hwe used at the end of lines (other than for common use between pages) might be easier(?) or more desirable. My reasons for not preferring to keep line breaks are primarily practical-based—not technical... Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Really, there are exotic uses only of original line breaks (such as comparing/managing djvu text layer), so it's not a good idea to add complexity to soucre code, just to make simpler some esperimental project. Thinking about a little more, my conclusion is that there's no need to save line breaks into proofreaded work: they can be recovered from original djvu text layer, or from the first version of the page into chronology, if it has been saved as first version of it. --Alex brollo (talk) 17:15, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
I thought a little bit more about line breaks, and I found a sound reason to save them, while I was reviewing poems and I was impressed from the ease and the speed of my proofreading job. It's a matter of fact that it's much more comfortable to proofread poems than prose; the reason is, that it's simpler to match texts and their image if line breaks are the same. Aren't they? So, it could be that there's a reason to save original line breaks till proofreading is completed. The only problem are hyphenated words: very hurting if they are saved.
I wrote, as an exercise, a very banal five-rows of js code, that replaces /-\n/g with "\u2063", and converts back /\u2063/g to "-\n"; this trick "magically" removes any visible trace of hyphens, while saving them. This is the code:
function mhy(){
     editbox = document.getElementsByName('wpTextbox1')[0];
     if(testo.indexOf("\u200d")!=-1) {testo=testo.replace(/\u200d/g,"-\n");} else {testo=testo.replace(/-\n/g,"\u200d");}
Try it if you like.
I changed the invisible code to \u200d, perhaps it's better. --Alex brollo (talk) 09:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Has a CSS general paragraph indent been developed?[edit]

In my first attempt at processing a djvu import I added {{gap}} to the front of every paragraph (e.g. here). I have now read the discussions re not using {{gap}} except for intra-line gaps and, perhaps, poetry.

The summary of those discussions as far as indented paragraphs seems to be, for now, just ignore the indented paragraph, and, in the future there may be a CSS solution. Has that future arrived and I just failed to find it in my searches? Mark Hurd (talk) 16:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Isn't that what the text-indent property is for? Throw something like <div style="text-indent:2em"> and </div> before and after the text in question. - Htonl (talk) 17:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
If you're looking to do this for most of a whole book, I assume the only way to get this partially right in the Page: space is to use {{ti/s}} where the first indented paragraph starts, {{ti/e}} where it should stop, (specifying possible template names) and add {{ti/s}} in each following header and {{ti/e}} in each footer. The obvious problem with this is the first, continuing paragraph will be indented at the top of each Page:. (I should test this in the Sandbox at some stage though.) Mark Hurd (talk) 01:27, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
In my experience with this, if you have a <div style="text-indent:2em"> in the page header it doesn't indent the first line of the page unless you follow the div tag with a blank line (or a line with {{nop}}). I don't know why this should be the case, but it's quite convenient. To see this at work, compare Page:South Africa Act 1909.djvu/41 (no first line indent) and Page:South Africa Act 1909.djvu/42 (indented first line). - Htonl (talk) 01:34, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
@Htonl: This is probably caused by the bug discussed at Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2008-12#div needs to go on a separate line Hesperian 01:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
(probably off topic) Why don't page links work at South Africa Act, 1909? Mark Hurd (talk) 02:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure if its post v1.18 related or not but Htonl's is not the only work where tagged section/page transclusion appears broken (I don't even see the page links, never mind no longer work back to the Page: namespace). Most likely IE specific as I've tried to mention to hm before though. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Nah, it's because South Africa Act, 1909 is a version that incorporates amendments, so it's not exactly a direct transcription of a single source DjVu. Hence, no page links. If you go to South Africa Act, 1909/Unamended you should find all the page links as desired. - Htonl (talk) 06:07, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Your're right, my mistake. I see now its not using the {{Page}} template as I had originally believed. -- George Orwell III (talk) 15:34, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Labour prevention tip (ignore if known): there is a CSS option on the index page for allowing CSS styling to be applied to each page. Failing that, you can preload templates into the header and footer using the relevant fields on the index page. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Broadly speaking, the CSS style "text-indent" is exactly what you need. However, there is a problem with {{dropinitial}}, which has a "float:left" property:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

LLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

This was a show-stopper for me when I ran into it a while back and I gave up on text indents then as I could not be bothered to fix it. However, now I have found out about Javascript, it could be fixed by adding a line of JS to the Common.js:
$('.dropinitial').parent().css('text-indent', '0');
You can try it yourself by entering the following into your address bar:
javascript:( function(){$('.dropinitial').parent().css('text-indent', '0');})();
Cheers, Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Also have a look at {{hanging indent}} and {{hanging indent inherit}}, latter is useful where you need to something inside some other formatting. — billinghurst sDrewth 20:42, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Into it.source we have the opposite trouble, since text indent is the default both into ns0 and nsPage. This caused a difficult "drop initial bug", solved in most cases simply by the discover that, when text indent is running, one blank line produces text indent, two don't, three do… and so on. :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 15:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

One easy alternative is to apply the indent via a <div> around the pages only in the mainspace. --Eliyak T·C 14:46, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Print or eBooks[edit]

Wikipedia has w:Help:Books, There are also & We have what none of them has, a verifiable scan of the original work and an easy means to correct errors (which are plentiful in the free works). Any thoughts on making it easier to use Wikisource material without going through PDF? I personally lean towards .mobi for purely personal reason (Kindle), but we might consider everything else as well. JeepdaySock (talk) 17:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Both ePub and Mobi files would be nice but they would have to be created manually at the moment. The easiest method, therefore, is a plain text file (created by copying and pasting from your web browser). That should work for both eBook readers, printers or even print-on-demand companies such as Lulu. Beyond that I've thought about trying to make my own ePub files (they're mostly just HTML with some extra bits) and adding a link from the Wikisource page but I haven't tried anything yet. Reasons why not include: it will probably be time consuming; there is an ePub extension being processed somewhere; and, the results would never be able to keep up with all of Wikisource. I'm sure I've read about some plans to adapt the book tool to output in both .mobi and .epub formats but, if the tool doesn't work for us now, adding new formats won't make much difference. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking of some automatic process that would convert on the fly to ebook like the PDF button, I now see the "Book creator", somehow I never noticed it here before. Jeepday (talk) 22:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
There is some of this covered at Wikisource:Wishlist. The output in the book forms comes from Extension:Collection and Extension:EPubExport and my reflection is that there does not seem to be a momentum to further these ideas expeditiously. — billinghurst sDrewth 20:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
FYI, we have our own Help:Books now, albeit stolen imported from Wikipedia and localised a little. I've added some notes about the book tool problem. I'll expand on that a little when I get a chance. We should probably add something about ePub and Mobi to the FAQ too, seeing as it is a question that is asked somewhat frequently. I'm not sure if DIY e-book information beloongs here or elsewhere. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Volume information for EB1911[edit]

At the moment I am working through a backlog of Wikipedia pages that cite the Wikisource EB1911, the trouble is that may of them need to be attribute the source as they are in part or totally a copy of an EB1911 article on wikisource.

Some of the information that is needed for a full citation is the volume and page number.

I would like to request that a bot goes through the complete set of EB1911 articles adding volume=number. Where do I go to make such a request?

Although I realise that obtaining the page number is complicated for some pages because they have not been saved with page information. Others have it displayed on the left of the page, but others have it embedded as a comment within the text. Is there any place on the article page where that information could be displayed?

-- Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 21:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikisource:Bot requests is the page for requests. I think that we can do vols, though the template has not been configured for the task. I remember putting comment on the page that I thought that {{EB1911}} was old and I thought that they should be aligning to the more modern components of our updated header. With regard to page numbers, as most of these pages are not transcluded text, it would be either the task to copy and paste the text to the article in the Page namespace, or manually identifying the page number and adding it with the left set variation of {{page break}}. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
The goal of attribution is to avoid w:wp:Plagiarism. Exact page numbers are helpful but not mandatory for this, so there is no pressing need for a 'bot to "fix" the "problem." To avoid plagarism at WP, we must attribute. But it suffices to point to the Wikisource article from the WP article. There is no strict requirement to point back to the actual EB1911 article. Yes, pointing all the way back to the original is worthwhile, but this is no more urgent for attribution than it is for other EB911 references. Instead of a 'bot, you may wish to create a hidden category at WP for "EB1911 missing pagenum." Then, get an admin to modify the w:Template:EB1911 to add this category. -Arch dude (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Tannertsf/Volume 6[edit]

Just discovered, but now not needed anymore. Would someone want to delete this page for me? - Tannertsf (talk) 10:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Done. - Htonl (talk) 13:00, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Scientia (babelian-interwikisource project)[edit]

Dear all,
I'm pleased to announce that the Italian Wikisource has started a collaboration with AlmaDL, the digital library of University of Bologna (

The project, called Wikiproject Scientia, aims to take on Wikisource(s) around 40 issues of "Scientia", a scientific journal published at the beginning of the century. The journal has been published in 4 different languages, and includes (original) articles from scientists from all around the world, as Giuseppe Peano, Enrico Fermi, Bertrand Russell, E. Rutherford, H. Lorentz, Sigmund Freud, Henri Poincaré, Ernst Mach, Albert Einstein, Werner Heisenberg, Rudolf Carnap, Otto Neurath, and many, many more.

The whole journal has been published here:

but we are still uploading the bundled djvus on Commons (and doing the OCR with ABBYY).

We have completed and formatted one issue (it:Indice:Rivista_di_Scienza_-_Vol._I.djvu), to have a clue of the complexity of the work; and we discovered it is definetely complex. You can take a look here:

The biggest challenge is to set up the transclusion of the articles in all the Wikisources interested (mainly fr, de, en and it), because every issue contains articles in at least 3 languages (sometimes 4).

So, this mail is to inform all the potential wikimedians interested in participating, and helping us to set up books and indexes in the respective wikisources.

Thank you, --Aubrey (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

NB: I work for AlmaDL, so I "persuaded" my boss to try releasing some djvus and see what the community of Wikisource could do. This does not mean I am a full time "Wikisourcian in residence", but I certainly can use some of my work time for this project and I can definitely help with original scans, metadata and even the OCR with ABBYY Finereader. I discovered soon that the project is much more bigger than I expected, especially for the multilingual issue, and this is why it needs some coordination of interested users (and interested Wikisources).


I am trying to conduct some experiments on the use of sidenotes (i.e. text with margins that shows notes in the right and/or left margins). I recently found that there is a highly developed system here for showing sidenotes. So please forgive me if there are some things that should be obvious but that I still don't understand :-)

The typical example given in the documentation is The Solar System/Chapter 1. In that example, when you look at an individual page you see the marginal notes appear at the side, just like they appeared in the original edition of the book. But when you look at the "regular" edition in the main namespace, the text appears without special margins (except for a small margin to indicate the page numbers on the left) and the sidenotes themselves appear within the regular margins of the text. Rather than appearing at the side of the text, they are surrounded by text (just like is often done for images that are embedded within the text). As a matter of style it seems that marginal notes aren't currently shown in the main namespace, although faithful reproduction of some books might seem to call for exactly that.

What I am trying to accomplish is to show an edition of a text in the main namespace (or at least outside of the "Page" namespace because my experiment is within my personal namespace) that shows sidenotes in the margins parallel to the main text. So far it doesn't work: The margins look fine, but the "sidenotes" appear within the text instead of in the margins. Does any one know if or how that example could be made to work to show the sidenotes in the margins? Thanks, Dovi (talk) 16:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

If you find and expand the "display options" item in the main sidebar, there should be a sub-item called "Layout 1". By clicking this you can cycle through various page layouts. I think either layout 2 or layout 3 is the one you want. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:09, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Sidenotes, in the manner Dovi desribes, have been a long standing issue for non-"literary" works such as the United States Statutes at Large project. I've tried to accomplish the desired effect using the various templates that force left-to-all-right & outside-to-all-inside sidenotes under dynamic layouts to no avail.

In my view, in order for folks to click-in on a mainspace work that displays a set dynamic layout such as Layout 2, the layout that current displays sidenotes as published best, we need to first agree to standardize the proposal above to set a default layout followed by the creation of additional dynamic layouts to easily handle the few existing sidenote-per-work layout needs. The current application of a two or three tiered template for sidenote manipulation is just too complex for the average en.WS visitor to wrangle and too limiting for anything other than the most basic of literary works under a dynamic layout shell. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:44, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. Adam, it seems to work fine in Layout 2 for The Solar System/Chapter 1, though it would seem to me that it should be the default, or that there should at least be an option for making it default. Also note that the "display options" doesn't seem to exist for my experimental page in my user space. I agree with George Orwell III that there should be a way to make this the "hard" display for special texts that require it.
Furthermore, I just noticed this: Look at the example given by T. Mazzei at the very end of Template talk:Sidenotes begin. It appears that code exists that can accomplish this (such that standard templates could be built for it). However, the code scares me a bit because I don't fully understand how margins are done in the first place. Dovi (talk) 04:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Tables and classes[edit]

Hi. Given a table with a certain class (e.g. "prettytable"), is there a way to avoid that specific cells are formatted as specified by such class?

A Use Case: {{PageStatus}} is based on a table, which mimics the progress bar as implemented in the proofread extension. When used as stand-alone or in a table without class, everything is OK, when inserted in a table with class, things are messed-up. See User:Mpaa/Sandbox1 as example, and note how the yellow part pops-up ... Thanks --Mpaa (talk) 15:36, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so but you can add CSS style elements to specific cells. If you can identify which element is causing your problem, you may be able to override it in the specific cell. I would guess it is something to do with padding or spacing. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I should add that I can't work out which property or element of the table is causing the problem. I copied the code from MediaWiki:Common.css and tried to rebuild the table as if it had the prettytable class (so that I could delete/alter one piece at a time and see the effect). However, that didn't work. The table I ended up with is this:
{| style="margin: 1em 1em 1em 0; background-color: #f9f9f9; border: 1px #aaa solid; border-collapse: collapse;"
! style="padding: 0.2em; border: 1px #aaa solid; background-color: #f2f2f2; text-align: center;" | PageStatus
! style="padding: 0.2em; border: 1px #aaa solid; background-color: #f2f2f2; text-align: center;" | Col2
| style="padding: 0.2em; border: 1px #aaa solid;" | Example
| style="padding: 0.2em; border: 1px #aaa solid;" | {{PageStatus|10|0|30|40|50|60}}
which results in:--Mpaa (talk) 18:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
PageStatus Col2
This actually works and does not mimic the effect of just having the "prettytable" class (not just the visibility of the yellow segment; this isn't changing the width, height or borders of the table in the template either). So, something else is happening. I don't know what that is but maybe someone else can figure it out and this at least eliminates some possibilities. Maybe you can try using spans instead of a table? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. My wild-guess is that once common.css defines "table.prettytable td/th", those are applied to all td/th elements, including those of inner table. What I do not understand is why defining the inner table as "pr_quality" does not override the outer one. I was unable to find the definition of such class, but must be somewhere, as colors are anyhow applied. Let's see if someone else can clarify. --Mpaa (talk) 20:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
There many issues with the above that could be in conflict with each other depending on their application - the most glaring is the continued "use" of the prettytable class that has been deprecated wiki-wide for the for some time now and superseded by the wikitable class but somehow "we" still managed to define it & keep it relevant via the en.WS common.css file here anyway. The second problem ,as far as I can tell, is the PageStatus template partially relies on definitions found (as well as not found) in the pr_quality & quality defined classes and partially relies on defining its own style settings & values while ignoring the elements that normally inherit attribute values by default altogether. I added the border-collapse:collapse; empty-cells:hide; stylings to the template with some improvement but since in this case we have what amounts to a table within another table's cell, issues arise that are not typically seen due to the lack of a more specified style for pr_quality not being defined coupled with the automatic inheritence of certain values taking place by default. This is why even though a certain PR status is null or zero, a sliver of the color (yellow?) still comes thru (i.e. no visibility:hidden/collapse; present to "stop that bleed" per a given single table cell though border-collapse: and empty-cells: are set already for example). Fixing this would require some effort simply to insure the exsiting use of the PR quality bar doesn't get screwed up in the process of making any template and/or stand-alone use both functional and friendly in one shot as well. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I made the template based on what is implemented in the function prepareArticle in ProofreadPage_body.php, which creates a table. I gave for granted that the class pr_quality was defined then. I also saw that table-base+PR use was done on Page status template in Swedish WS. Before posting, I tried with "wikitable" class, with same result, I just picked prettytable for convenience. Probably, a table based template is not the best choice if one would use it also in tables, due to problematic "unforeseen" inheritance in case of nested table. Maybe, a span-based implementation, as suggested above, might be an option. Hoped the solution might have been simpler. Anyhow, too bad, only a bit frustrating when I can't make things work as I wish :-) --Mpaa (talk) 21:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
It is not your fault - the original premise and coding seem to be. For those PR pages that amount to 'none' (or '0' (zero) in our case of the 2nd input value in the template) a hard-coded width=, even one that's set to equal zero, will more often than not, usurp any such idea of collapsed borders or hidden empty cells among other unwanted inherited/overridden paramaters and/or values. When there are no pages of a particular PR status, the cell's visibility setting should be hidden - taking any of these nonsense, unwanted settings and any inherited values out of the final rendering without affecting any of its sibblings and their settings in the process. Introducing a hard-coded width parameter and then trying to set it zero does not achieve the same results as collapsing borders and hiding unwanted cells plus it opens the door a bit more to the possibility of unwanted inheritence cascades.

The only reason stuff like that went un-noticed until now was that the status bar as applied before trying to break out its function into other areas/uses was rather small and nobody could noticed such "imperfections". I never even saw the status of "untouched pages" with the dotted border until this template-break-out-thing came to be for example. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Well I couldn't help myself (again!) so I started tinkering to try to overcome these & some possible future use issues and came up with...

{| class="wikitable"
PageStatus Col2

... see the sandbox of the PageStatus template for the "universal" fix (as bloated as it may be now for practical future use). -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:33, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I can see it on IE but not on Firefox. Any clue? --Mpaa (talk) 12:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Not clear which "it" you're seeing - the continued appearance of an unwanted PR status even though it is set to zero or other parts &/or portions of the table or tables. At any rate, you should try and peel away the overkill of additional settings I've included in the template's sandbox to see if you can't get Firefox to match IE in a testcase. Some of them are completely redundant and not needed for this instance to appear correctly no matter what browser is in use at the time. Sorry, I'm forced to use IE because of work but I'm sure it can be solved if folks pitch in and work together. Just going by Adam's example, the solution seems to depend upon the prevention of padding and border values inherited from the overall prettytable[wikitable] table class. All the other stuff about hiding/collapsing border and/or cell display might not be needed at all. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
update... I think I "hid" when I should have "collapsed" earlier - see if the change made any difference. -- George Orwell III (talk) 17:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Same as before. I cannot see anything with PageStatus/sandbox, also in table above.
Now I can. --Mpaa (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Other folks? I'd feel better if more than just 2 people can see it before I change the sandbox to the main template. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I can see it in IE and Chrome. (For a short time it was invisible in IE but that changed before I could comment; I guess it was during some editing. Everything is fine now.) NB: The blank segment at the end displays slightly differently in the different browsers but it's not significant. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I went ahead and swapped in the sandbox for the primary PageStatus template. If the trailing undefined pages' differences don't bother anyone then I take it that there is no desire in running that issue to ground as well? -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks fox fixing this --Mpaa (talk) 07:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Federal Reporter[edit]

I have newfound interest in the Federal Reporter. Can someone explain to me how we are coming on them, and how many of them there are (easy proofread ones) and how I should edit them or start. - Tannertsf (talk) 02:26, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thus far, we have the first 10 volumes of the Federal Reporter, First Series online in scanned form. There are a total of 300 volumes in the First series, 999 in the Second (“F.2d”), and currently around 700 (and counting) in the Third (“F.3d”). Only the First Series content is presently backed by scans, although we have the text of many cases from F.2d and F.3d online here as well. Scans of many of the volumes we are missing are online at (Obviously, copyright issues may prevent us from hosting scans of Federal Reporter volumes published since 1923 here.) Tarmstro99 17:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Cecil Sharp's English Folk Carols[edit]

Hi. I'm fairly new and inexperienced here. I was mooching around the folklore section yesterday and somehow came to Index:English_folk-carols.djvu which seems to show that a lot of work still needs to be done on this book (it says "To be proofread" and most of the page numbers are in red). Being interested in the author and subject, I started working on some of the early pages and verifying them, with a bit of formatting to match more closely the printed book. Today I wanted to pick up the work where I'd left off, but came instead to the full transcluded book (without the original images, however) which has been available for almost a year. It has a few improvements on the version I was working on (eg decorative initial drop caps – though not the ones from the book), but still has some errors and omissions. Can I ask why it has been transcluded, even though it hasn't been verified? Or is there a verified version somewhere that I haven't found? Cheers SiGarb (talk) 15:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

PS Have my changes been done for nothing? And what is the Wikisource policy for books such as this one that involve large amounts of musical notation? Will they eventually be included as images? But, as the online transcluded version is made to seem as standalone as possible, and is included as one of Cecil Sharp's works on his author page (without a caveat of any sort to say that it is only part-finished) how will anyone ever notice that it has the wrong initials and no musical transcription? SiGarb (talk) 15:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
The "complete" version you see if not linked to the scans which you were working on, so nothing you have done is lost. On the talk page of that work, there is a note to migrate the text to the Page: space. I would suggest that you keep doing what you're doing, matching the text as close as possible. The work in the pages will get transcluded. If you need any help, please feel free to ask :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 15:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
As Theornamentalist said, your work is not for nothing. Eventually, the version you are working on will replace the "complete" version. As for musical notation: the current policy is to include them as images. A few years ago there were plans for a special tool to implement muscial notation but nothing ever happened. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
There has been recent movement on the Lilypond extension with a view to including it in Production. There isn't an actual policy that says what to do with musical examples and they are being managed in three different ways. 1) images (as mentioned by Adam); 2) using {{Page contains sheet music}} in place of the music; 3) Adding Category:Pages requiring musical examples to the footer with :Illustration where the music should go. (This last method has mainly been used on A Dictionary of Music and Musicians.) Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks to all of you for your help. SiGarb (talk) 10:05, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

WWII Records[edit]

There are new WWII records released on, but the link is here:

Should we add them or some of them? - Tannertsf (talk) 03:28, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

The news article directs to which gives a searchable data base. A quick review did not find a set of documents that would be appropriate for WS. What are you thinking of adding? JeepdaySock (talk) 11:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I felt that maybe some of the docs could be used on here, like on the NARA project. Thats all, really. - Tannertsf (talk) 11:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Which documents? Do you have an example? I am not familiar with the site, nor do I have a log on for it. All I found was listing that were searchable. Is it possible to collect an entire book, or only brief extracts? Pretty much anything that is PD and available as a complete work is appropriate for WS, particularly if can serve as a support for any projects. JeepdaySock (talk) 17:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I did not investigate it much, just thought there could be some good stuff for us in there - thats all. - Tannertsf (talk) 18:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

These will be records from NARA, what I can see listed as new are
  • U.S. WWII Draft Cards Young Men, 1898-1929
  • Honolulu, Hawaii, National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific (Punchbowl), 1941-2011
Nothing else obvious. In answer, my opinion is no. If we are getting the set maybe, but as individual items, they should only be introduced as a notability per person, which has been our approach. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Concur with billinghurst, Jeepday (talk) 22:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Why is Ottava Rima indefinitely banned?[edit]

No one is going to be left in the project, come soon. unsigned comment by SplitTooth (talk) .

He isn't banned, by us, here. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Indeed; the only block listed in the block log is a one-day block a year ago. - Htonl (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
sulutil shows he is blocked at enwiki and enwikiversity, and no global lock. OR has always been welcome to contribute to our main namespace, and I would be happy to see him putting in work there. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 40.djvu[edit]

Will someone please set up a page for this book? Mainly just want to have each chapter in a table of contents, and for each chapter to have its own page. That page would have usual stuff like previous, next, section, etc. I can transclude the pages in after. - Tannertsf (talk) 05:01, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Working on it. Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 40 is in place now. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! - Tannertsf (talk) 12:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Monthly Housekeeping[edit]

We have WS:PotM & WS:CC I am suggesting something similar for housekeeping chores that we as a community should address. maybe items from Category:Proposed Wikisource policy which need community decisions and/or Help:Contents which need community input. Maybe alternate between sources each month. Focus on things that makes it easier for the new WS volunteer, either wikivirgins, or veterans from other wikis to transition into our family. Jeepday (talk)