Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2015-06

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 in , although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.

Announcements

Proposals

Charinsert modification proposal

The only reason for this proposal is to shorten the dropdown list. I propose that the three character sets, Bengali, IPA, and IPA (English) be omitted from the general Charinsert dropdown list, but facilitate their addition in the users' personal.js 'User' list.— Ineuw talk 21:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Support at the minimum. If possible, I'd like to whittle the list down even further to a community reached consensus "default" selection of sets and keep the sets that didn't make that cut optional on a per User basis instead. At best, somebody figure out a way to make all the sets beyond the primary Wiki-markup one User selectable right underneath the main Charinsert gadget's entry in User: prefs. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

    Without resorting to javascript/DOM node removal tricks (see below) I really cannot see how this (last) is feasible without changing MediaWiki:Gadget-charinsert-core.js. As this gadget currently stands the window.charinsertCustom trick can only add to the basic insertion list but can never remove existing items or character sets. If however something like modifying the existing gadget code near 

    			// append user-defined sets
			if ( window.charinsertCustom ) {
				for ( id in charinsertCustom ) {
					if ( !EditTools.charinsert[id] ) {
						EditTools.charinsert[id] = '';
					}
				}
			}

			// apply user-defined override set
			if ( window.charOverrideCustom ) {
				EditTools.charinsert = charOverrideCustom;
 			}

			// create "recall" switch
    were acceptable then the entire symbol set could be fed in in one hit allowing constructions like 
    	window.charOverrideCustom = {
		'Insert': '  –  —  {\{+}}  {\{\{+|}}}  |  [+]  [\[+|]]  "+"  =  [\[Category:+]]  #REDIRECT.[\[+]]  &nb'+'sp;  <nowiki>+</nowiki>  ␥Sign_your_posts: ␥~~\~~ ',
		'Wiki markup': '  –  —  {\{+}}  {\{\{+|}}}  |  [+]  [\[+|]]  "+"  =  [\[Category:+]]  #REDIRECT.[\[+]]  &nb'+'sp;  &#1'+'60;  <nowiki>+</nowiki>  ␥~~\~~  <span.class="plainlinks">+</span>  <s>+</s>  <sub>+</sub>  <sup>+</sup>  <ref>+</ref>  <ref.name="+"_/>  {\{smallrefs}}  {\{reflist}}  <references./>  <includeonly>+</includeonly>  <noinclude>+</noinclude>  <onlyinclude>+</onlyinclude>  <poem>+</poem>  <blockquote>+</blockquote>  <pre>+</pre>  <code>+</code>  <tt>+</tt>  {\{DEFAULTSORT:+}}  <!--.+_-->  {\{sc|+}}  {\{center|+}}  [\[Author:+|]]  {\{fs90/s}}+{\{fs90/e}}  {\{gap}}  {\{nop}}  {\{hws|+|}}  {\{hwe|+|}}  <section.begin="+"_/>  <section.end="+"_/>',
		User: '“+”  ‘+’  {\{centre|+}}  {\{small-caps|+}}  {\{larger|+}}  {\{smaller|+}}  {\{rh|+}}  '+
			'<section.begin="+"/>  <section.end="+"/>  <math>\\\\scriptstyle{+}</math> {\{nowrap|+}}'
	};

	if(window.updateEditTools) {
		window.updateEditTools();
	};
    to be specified. (This example would eliminate all language-specific sets which might be rather too severe?) AuFCL (talk) 05:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

    To address Ineuw's specific request at the head of this topic the following code fragment may be useful to remove Bengali, IPA, and IPA (English):

        var charSet = ['Bengali','IPA (English)','IPA'];
    for(var s=0;s<charSet.length;s++){
      var charinsertRemove = document.evaluate(
        "//option[contains(@value,'"+charSet[s]+"')]",
       document, null, XPathResult.UNORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE, null
      ).snapshotItem(0);
      charinsertRemove.parentNode.removeChild(charinsertRemove);
    };
    I have tested this and it works; however I am undecided as to the best strategy for launching it (private common.js code runs too early to be useful: the gadget code simply puts the deleted items back straight afterwards.) AuFCL (talk) 01:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

In the past two or three weeks -- completely by chance on the development side of things -- there has been movement addressing such oddities in the load priorities of both extensions and gadgets when there was little beforehand. If I understand this initiative correctly, this means we can set entities such as gadgets or personal scripts to something other than the current priority = top; so it might be possible to achieve something like the above in near future believe it or not. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I do not understand why specific items are being targeted, without providing justification and without formulating a policy. The charinsert gadget is for items not found in the keyboard. So it should contain letters with diacritical marks, symbols, m-dash and the like. IPA sets qualify as special glyphs. These and musical notations should be present. Sometimes, in English books, words/sentences of other languages/scripts are present; but if we want to include all those scripts, the list will approach infinity. So, as a matter of fair policy, all full-language sets should be removed. If someone wants Bengali or Hebrew or Japanese, he/she should have access to some mechanism by which that specific set is present when that user is logged in. Alternatively, if a language set is not available in WikiEditor, like Oriya, that language may have user-specific option for inclusion in charinsert. If the language is present in WikiEditor, then why to include it in charinsert? Hrishikes (talk) 03:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm of like mind Hrishikes but the timing of most of what has been laid out or discussed largely depends on the "final" version of Visual Editor being rolled-out as the "new" standard editing interface. Only then will we know for sure if WikiEditor will be kept & co-exist with Visual Editor in some fashion and/or if the CharInsert gadget and/or extension becomes obsolete in light of that change (or not?). So even though this proposal makes "sense" at the moment, it still might be a moot point & out of our hands as VE development nears "completion" soon afterwards. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

BOT approval requests

Help

Repairs (and moves)

Other discussions

Checking a .djvu for missing pages

How does one check if a selected book is missing pages, aside from paginating manually? — Ineuw talk 21:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

If the djvu is uploaded what you can do is when you label the numbers in the pages section you can see if the last page matches the correct number. So lets say if a book is 200 pages and its "1to200" and page 200 matches than you have all the pages. Or is that considered "paginating manually?"--Rochefoucauld (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
@Rochefoucauld: No, it's not "manual", it's brilliant. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 04:19, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
With the caution that occasionally duplicate page scans cover over missing pages within the range. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. It did happen.— Ineuw talk 13:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Formatting a sidenote

I have prepared a cute bar to match the text sidenote but I can't get it into the page space. The page is Page:Treatise_of_Human_Nature_(1888).djvu/47, I've put a copy of the bar template on the Discussion page. Can someone fix this for me? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 02:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Please do not consider this a "fix." Although it "works" at one level it might break transclusion later. Can anybody better this? AuFCL (talk) 05:47, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
In previous discussions regarding sidenotes, I understood that sidenots don't work well regardless and it's best to work on something else until sidenote handling is (eventually) improved on Wikisource. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:31, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
don’t know if i like the use of tables. there is another solution here Page:Compendium_of_US_Copyright_Office_Practices,_II_(1984).pdf/323 and also Template:Right sidenote - this is a perennial problem for United States Statutes at Large and many government documents. Slowking4♡Farmbrough's revenge 23:27, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
We suffer in that we don't have enough highly competent css people to derive the right solutions for sidenotes. While books go left and right, we need to push to the left, then play around with the issue where we are managing page width variability then trying to replicate the work. I recommend that you do templating and at some stage the templates will be perfected. I use {{outside L}} and {{outside RL}} which works okay with the first page layout, though fails with the second and third. Someday! — billinghurst sDrewth 09:33, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Here is my most recent work with sidenotes The Canal System of England — billinghurst sDrewth 09:37, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I have used {{Right sidenote}} which was fine for the contents of the sidenote. My problem is that each sidenote has a header and a bar above the content and the bar 'breaks' the sidenote so it ends up in the text. For now I've put a note in the Discussion page that I'm not proofreadng the sidenotes. They are in effect like running headers in this book, repeats of the Chapter title so easily put in later. My husband grimaced when I mentioned sidenotes-apparently they are perennial digital headaches and we need geniuses to deal with them? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
So is the standard procedure to move sidenotes to the left if they alternate in the book? That makes sense... Zoeannl (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I have finished proofreading the Introduction and first book of Hume's Treatise of Human Nature. Can I transclude them as requested at Treatise_of_Human_Nature? Or shall I finish the second book as well. I just thought it might get attention sooner from Validators if I transcluded it now. Also, as regards sidenotes, and for general readability, I think the Books should be transcluded as successive Sections-the sidenotes are reiterations of the Section headers so would be redundant and could be abandoned if we did this. Headers and link to Contents are at my work page. Any thoughts? Zoeannl (talk) 11:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

@Zoeannl: While completed books are definitely preferable, the entire site is under construction at all times. If you can transclude a portion now, then there's no harm in that. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Personal preference. If incomplete please place {{incomplete}} in the notes section of the header. We would prefer complete chapters rather than seeing red links for transcluded non-existing pages. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Renaissance/Early modern categories

The era categories Category:Renaissance works (1420–1630) and Category:Early modern works (1631-1899) are dated in a manner that is inconsistent with common definitions of these terms. The seems fairly arbitrary and inconsistent with modern historical research.

The term "Renaissance" is today primarily used to signify the artistic movement c. 1400-1600 or the (now outdated) notion of how the shackles of the "dark" Middle Ages were thrown off some time around 1500. "Early modern" is the periodization that is actually used today and includes everything between the Middle Ages and the modern period (c. 1500-1800). I've never heard of anyone date the modern period up to c. 1900.

Unless there are very good arguments to the contrary, I will fix these errors toot suite.

Peter Isotalo (talk) 02:09, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

These are English-specific dates. The general dates used by historians are for the artistic and intellectual movement you describe. However, these dates are generalize for all of Europe, and are of little value on the English Wikisource, or even for literature. The dates used here are those specific for the history of the English language. 1420 to 1630 corresponds roughly with the period of "Early Modern English". And yes, the "Early" Modern period in many American library cataloging systems cuts off arbitrarily at 1899/1900, to correspond with the end of the Victorian period.
That's not to say that these dates couldn't be improved upon or refined, but there is a logic behind them, and that logic is tied to the history of the English language and the publication of English literature. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:41, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
I would think that you can still create your additional categories and then collect the years into them as an alternative plan. We are not limited to having the years in multiple categorisation schemes. Or there is nothing wrong with us having a look at seeing what it looks like. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Noting that you can display works differently using existing data using Extension:DynamicPageList. It is something that we have, though don't utilise well. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:56, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
EncycloPetey, following periodizations of the English language makes sense, but if they are language-specific dates, they should refer to existing periodizations used by language historians. What exactly is the current scheme based on? Because quite frankly, the notion of "Renaissance English" sounds a bit like nonsense to me. The terms I've heard of are the traditional "Old", "Middle" and "Modern English", with or without an "Early Modern English" between Middle and Modern.
billinghurst, agreed. More than categorization can hardly be detrimental to readers.
Peter Isotalo (talk) 09:58, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
This is not about Old, Middle or Modern English. Any division is going to be arbitrary, and unless there's very good arguments to the contrary, I will oppose any changing of these "errors", especially without discussing of what the changes might be.
I get continually frustrated on various Wikis by a stream of changes by people who couldn't leave well-enough alone, meaning that trying to watch a large watchlist is futile. The real value in something like this is in letting people search for works from 1770-1776 or 1642-1651 or 1789-1799, or whatever period they need, not trying to fine-tune some arbitrary large-scale categories.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, I get continually frustrated by uses of terms like "Renaissance" and "early modern" that have nothing to do with modern academic standards. Any division like this should follow periodizations recognized by modern experts. That's not arbitrary, even if it might be rough around the edges.
However, if anyone wants to create categories defined by calender years, then just make categories based on calender years and use names that include those calender years. You don't need to "borrow" names of historical periods merely because they sound good.
Peter Isotalo (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Funds Dissemination Committee elections 2015

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson. Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson will continue during the voting. Nominations for the Board of Trustees will be accepted until 23:59 UTC May 5.

The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about how to allocate Wikimedia movement funds to eligible entities. There are five positions on the committee being filled.

The FDC Ombudsperson receives complaints and feedback about the FDC process, investigates complaints at the request of the Board of Trustees, and summarizes the investigations and feedback for the Board of Trustees on an annual basis. One position is being filled.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 3 to 23:59 UTC May 10. Click here to vote. Questions and discussion with the candidates will continue during that time. Click here to ask the FDC candidates a question. Click here to ask the FDC Ombudsperson candidates a question. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 FDC election page, the 2015 FDC Ombudsperson election page, and the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 03:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

OCR not showing

Has anyone been having issues with OCR in the past couple days? I uploaded two works with an OCR layer from Internet Archive and found that one literally "lost" pages. The images were still there, and the OCR layer was still there (verified by me), but the engine couldn't read the OCR. So, the OCR on Wikisource would come out page 14, 15, 17, etc. (missing 16, and the OCR for 17 showed up with the image for 16). I tried a few different methods of layering the OCR text and finally one worked, though there was no good reason. Today I uploaded Index:Transactions of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia (ser 03 vol 05).djvu to get some articles and the OCR isn't showing at all, despite it having a complete and working OCR text layer, again verified by me. Any assistance or hints would be appreciated. Thanks, The Haz talk 15:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

over at EB1911, some volumes had the ocr layer corrupted. had to copy volume 25 from Gutenberg. Slowking4♡Farmbrough's revenge 21:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
In this case, it never showed, or showed incorrectly from the beginning, so I had to copy the OCR from the DjVu file by hand. The Haz talk 00:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Hazmat2: I may be showing my ignorance, but filling the pages of that document with the OCR button works fine for me. Have you tried that? Or am I asking an insulting question? One never knows. — Ineuw talk 03:37, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: I haven't had an OCR button in months, despite it being enabled in my preferences, so I assumed we got rid of it. However, that's not the complete issue. In one of the instances I mentioned (and in some more since) I noticed that single OCR pages were missing from Wikisource, despite them being in source DjVu. Therefore, the OCR for page 17 would end up with the scan for page 16, etc. (ie. img 14>ocr 14, img 15>ocr 15, img 16>ocr 7, img 17>ocr 18. That's a bigger issue than just no OCR to me. I don't know if it's just the engine not processing the text layer correctly. The Haz talk 14:38, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Of course now I see that I can get the OCR button back by disabling the wizards (which I'd rather not do), but that still doesn't fix the issue of OCR text showing up on the wrong pages. The Haz talk 14:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Hazmat2: My suggestion would be to download the text file FROM HERE and paste the missing text. I had to do it a couple of times. If you were to create the pages before proofreading and mark the missing as problematic, I can try to fill in the missing text, and create the images from JP2, unless this interferes with your plans. Just let me know. — Ineuw talk 19:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Ineuw: For this text it's not a big deal as I may only use a few articles from it. I'll keep your offer in mind for the future though. Thanks, The Haz talk 19:23, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I can't see the issue of wrong alignment with OCR. Can you point at a specific page? As the OCR pages are regenerated once n a while, the problem might be fxed now.
I have nothing to show because the two examples I had I fixed by hand. The Haz talk 22:43, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-19

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now chat with other users in Phabricator. [1]
  • There was a rare problem with VisualEditor. The text of another wiki could be added to your edit. The issue is now fixed. [2] [3]

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since April 29. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from May 5. It will be on all Wikipedias from May 6 (calendar).
  • It is now easier to add a link in VisualEditor. You can see an image and a description about the page. [4]

Meetings

  • You can join a meeting with the Language team. The meeting will be on May 5 at 14:30 (UTC). [5]
  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on May 6 at 18:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join an event in France on May 22−25. You need to sign up before May 8. [6]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Sources of free books

See here This could be useful for us finding free texts. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:05, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

User: Koavf | Justin, Their copyright; " The full-text ebooks in our collection are protected by copyright laws, subject to the terms and conditions of fair use in the same way as printed works. It is your responsibility to make sure you stay within them; for example you may only copy up to 5% or one whole chapter (whichever is greater) from a book.

Before copying or printing please refer to the information given on the suppliers' websites or at the eresources@cambridge Copyright and Licensing page. Publishers will withdraw access if evidence of copyright abuse is detected." —Maury (talk) 04:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@William Maury Morris II: What are you talking about? The page I referenced above has links to other sources (e.g. Project Gutenberg and Wikibooks). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
[Ping] Justin, when I look over a site about books I look at the copyright terms first. When I went to your link, which has many links, I looked at the Masthead which shows "Copyright". I copied that (see quotation marks above) and pasted it here . —Maury (talk) 05:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@William Maury Morris II: Okay but I don't know why. This is a directory, so it's not like you're going to be quoting it at length or reproducing any original content. It's just a place where we can find similar online libraries is all. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Justin, I was hasty and made a simple mistake. No harm done and none intended. —Maury (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Has anyone noticed that wikisource isn't listed? We're not very popular are we. Jpez (talk) 06:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Jpez, I don't think Wikisource is popular either except to those here who like it and work on building it. Someone stated that wikisource is "too convuluted". Also, many people do not know about wikisource. I know because I am always asking. Wikipedia overwhelms us. People do know about wikipedia. It is a very unique dictionary whereas wikisource, regardless of format, is just another free book site. —Maury (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I think You're right Maury; but this is so sad! Because there is really only us and Project Gutenberg who are aiming at digitising texts in a decent fashion! And PG is much faster than we are — but they don't provide the original scans! Wikisource is better! I'm convinced of it. This is why it's jolly important to do things like make our catalogue available in ways that libraries and whatnot can access (e.g.), because then maybe we'll become more popular.

As for being convoluted, I think the closed thing we can be compared to is PGDP, and I hope we're more or less the same, as far as difficulty of contributing goes? What do you think?

— Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 09:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I think the main problem is that we're not known. I can't exactly remember how I found wikisource but I do remember it was from pure chance, I think the more books we add the more we will be known. We are also overshadowed by Project Gutenburg, and I just remembered how I found wikisource. I was looking into joining Project Gutenburg, and while I was doing some searching on Google to see how I could contribute wikisource came up in the search. So Project Gutenburg led me to wikisource, which is ironic because I also think wikisource is much better in so many ways, in fact I think Project Gutenburg should just drop what they're doing and come and join us. Wishful thinking?
The reason I chose wikisource was that it was far more easier to sign up and access. Project Gutenburg seemed far more closed and inaccessible. Also the layout of the texts is much more pleasing to the eye in my opinion.
I think something that can make wikisource much more popular is if we can get the links to wikisource which are on wikipedia higher up. At this time they are all the way at the bottom in the external links section, which I highly doubt anyone ever looks at, I know I didn't until I found wikisource. For example if someone was to look up The Iliad on wikipedia, if we could get the links to wikisource somewhere in the main box on the top right or under it, somewhere where it can be seen. I think this will bring many people over here, after all if someone was to look up the Iliad for example I think they would be very interested to also see the source text transcluded as we do here. Is there anyway this can be proposed to wikipedia? —unsigned comment by Jpez (talk) 2015-05-06 10:12:34.
  • I have been on wikisource for many years. I came over from wikisource where an administrator and I had a conflict so to heck with them at that time. I had done or started many articles and had been there about a year. I think I found wikisource by seeing the "sister" areas on wikipedia. But whereas I have always been a physical person roughing life I have always loved books since comics as a kid -- and illustrated encyclopedias mom purchased at one volume/month. (We were kinda poor). The gist of this is that I just love books so I seek them. As I got older I wanted hard-to-get books and had to use interlibrary loan programs. Somewhere I wanted to start my own library but I didn't have the money. I would go up to the University of Virginia (around age 14) and copy rare books. This is how I got my very own Library with books that were hard for anyone except special people. I copied page by page with pencil and paper and was watched over in a special room. When computers came out I typed some books into my Commodore 64. I didn't have money for a fancy computer but I got the text onto disks. It is very similar here on wikisource for me. We have all kinds of books and even very old books which I love! We have books of all kinds and typically I look for books on adventure. You know how it is if you love books -- you can place them on flash drives and carry a lot of them in your pocket to a friend's house. I prefer illustrated books but these places where we get files have some funky messed up pages and I know that does not have to be. I have experience with that though because the first book I placed on Internet, before web pages and before browsers, and before any "wiki" was a family book I placed on Internet when Internet was young. They had to be all plain text (ascii) and that book is still on Internet after 29 years! It is a family book about a kinsman who was in the Indian, Mexican, and Civil War. It was the 1st true book on Internet about the civil war. It came from our family attic trunk and due to time and heat the pages were very brittle and they came apart easily. I typed that book into computer and learned to type by doing it. I did not know how to type before that. I absolutely love saving books. The autobiographies and others of science and history still thrill me and I will be age 68 on this May 12th. Books are my friends in many ways such as entertainment and learning and I usually like just about any subject. Also, I believe in a Creator so when I look at rocks in a creek then I am looking at a Creator's work and I typically will seek out more knowledge such as mineralogy. I have had years of French and Spanish and there are books that are absolutely in those languages that were not often encountered in schools unless you study those languages and learn to read. They often seem strange because the history is often written in a different manner than what us "Anglos" write and read. I love learning from books -- the people once lived -- the "dead" still speak -- and of their lives and time era. Books are a time traveling machine about people and life for the mind. So, wikisource is a wonderful place for me and a way to give to people of the future. When I die thanks to wikipedia and wikisource, I will have left more things behind that has my life worthy of living. Some people take all of their knowledge to grave with them. Think about it. I have beat that situation and have left behind life from other eras to be learned from by others like us book lovers. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 17:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Promoting Wikisource & Wikisource books: Here are my two attempts on YouTube two years ago. The Windows program came with this old computer. The images came from the book we worked on here.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgRFe1NfNJB3811QB8R-4Hg

The following is a lot more professional than mine. It is in Italian but look and see how much can be done. I like the effect of the pages turning. :0)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR0g5ACaC-g

—Maury (talk) 18:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Yet another idea (I use Firefox newest) is to create a button like they have for Wikipedia on their site. I have also seen it as a search engine. But there is none for Wikisource. —Maury (talk) 18:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Wow Maury, it was very nice to read about your love of books and knowledge in general. Even though I am half your age and we come from different generations I see we have so much in common which I think is amazing. I can relate to so much of what you wrote. Thanks for sharing.
Ps Sorry I always seem to forget to sign my posts. Jpez (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

delete Author page

Author:R. S. Calvin is actually Author:Samuel Calvin. The only work attributed to "R. S. Calvin"—"A Piece of Coal"—was written by "Samuel Calvin" (reference). I've not been able to find what the "R." stands for. I cant find any reference to a middle name or any other mention of given names starting with R. (Anyone else wants to try finding that?) I request that Author:R. S. Calvin be deleted and merged with Author:Samuel Calvin. (I wonder, what happens to the Wikisource Authority Control number 637779 assigned to R. S. Calvin. Will it be reused? Or permanently retired?) --Siddhant (talk) 20:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Siddhant: You can redirect the page if you think they are the same person. The fact that there is authority control info is actually interesting: do you know of any authority control libraries that have these two names as the same person? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:09, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
@Koavf: Out of curiosity, what authority control info are you referring to? I only see our internal Wikisource number. Thanks, The Haz talk 22:30, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
@Hazmat2: I'm guess I wasn't clear. I was asking if any other authority control databases (e.g. VIAF or LOC) have a record of these two names referring to the same individual. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:44, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
@Koavf: Sorry, I understood that part. I was referring to your writing, "The fact that there is authority control info is actually interesting". I can only find authority control for Samuel Calvin, not for R.S. Calvin so I was wondering what AC you found interesting. The Haz talk 22:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
here is the viaf for Calvin, S. http://viaf.org/viaf/16896723/ - no sign of Calvin, R. S. without evidence they are the same, i would keep them separate with a note. Slowking4♡Farmbrough's revenge 03:33, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
From the work cited:

Professor S. Calvin, of the University of Iowa, not R. S. Calvin, as it was erroneously printed, is the author of the article entitled "A Piece of Coal," published in the March number of the "Monthly."

—Popular Science Monthly/Volume 19/May 1881/Notes

I am going to merge them. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Sounds good The Haz talk 17:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
@Beleg Tâl: Nice find! Thanks. (Come to think of it, why didn't I search for the string "R. S. Calvin" in the first place!) --Siddhant (talk) 17:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I would delete "R. S. Calvin", not keep it as redirect. He looks like the son of a typo ...— Mpaa (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree. Can an admin please delete Author:R. S. Calvin? Thanks. --Siddhant (talk) 19:37, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-20

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now make charts and maps on your wiki with the new "graph" tool. If you have an old browser, you will see images instead. It uses a tool called Vega; you can learn how to use it and write help pages for your wiki. You can use the Vega edit tool to make charts and copy the code to your wiki. Charts and maps use complex code and you should put them into templates. In the future, you will be able to create charts with VisualEditor. [7] [8] [9]
  • You can apply for technical jobs to develop tools for the community. [10]
  • The logos of all wikis are now in a new place. It will make pages load faster. You can still ask to change the logo. You can also use local CSS for brief changes. [11] [12]

Problems

  • There was a problem that caused slow editing. [13]
  • Pages were sometimes removed from your watchlist in VisualEditor. This problem is now fixed. [14]

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since May 6. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from May 12. It will be on all Wikipedias from May 13 (calendar).
  • You can now use data from Wikidata on more pages. The page doesn't need to be linked to the Wikidata item. It works on a few wikis and more wikis will be added soon. [15] [16]
  • You should get fewer errors when you add files to Commons. [17]
  • When you use an external link to link to a wiki page, VisualEditor now converts it to a wiki link. [18]
  • When you add a link in VisualEditor, you see pages that match what you type. It is now easier to see where they match. [19]

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on May 13 at 18:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:34, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata and arbitrary access

Just to point the community to d:Wikidata:Arbitrary access the next evolution of Wikidata for the communities. With WD there is currently a limitation in place that hinders some use cases: data can only be accessed from the corresponding item. We may have cases where we want to pull data directly, eg. works listings for an author. For those with an interest in the development, please follow the page linked, and also look to utilise d:Wikidata:Wikisource for questions and discussions about how we might use it. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata: Access to data from arbitrary items is coming

(Sorry for writing in English)

When using data from Wikidata on Wikipedia and other sister projects, there is currently a limitation in place that hinders some use cases: data can only be accessed from the corresponding item. So, for example, the Wikipedia article about Berlin can only get data from the Wikidata item about Berlin but not from the item about Germany. This had technical reasons. We are now removing this limitation. It is already done for French Wikisource and Dutch Wikipedia. Your project is one of the next ones:

  • 18. May: Farsi Wikipedia, English Wikivoyage, Hebrew Wikipedia
  • 1. June: Italian Wikipedia, all remaining Wikisource

We hope to have it rolled out nearly everywhere by the end of June 2015.

We invite you to play around with this new feature if you are one of the people who have been waiting for this for a long time. If you have technical issues/questions with this you can come to d:Wikidata:Contact the development team.

A note of caution: Please be careful with how many items you use for a single page. If it is too many pages, loading might get slow. We will have to see how the feature behaves in production to see where we need to tweak and how.

How to use it, once it is enabled:

Cheers Lydia Pintscher 15:19, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

@Zyephyrus, @Phe, @Tpt: can you tell us how you have been using this feature at frWS? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

No File - Index:Life of Emanuel Swedenborg, with Some Account of His Writings.Djvu

Didn't want to speedy in case it could be rescued. 80.176.129.180 10:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Moved; file renamed at Commons from .Djvu to .djvu. Hrishikes (talk) 11:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Authority control VIAF

I noticed that when VIAF is entered, it shows up also as a WorldCat link in the AC template. However, the link doesn't seem to be working for works. (ie. http://www.worldcat.org/identities/viaf-313719933/ doesn't work, although the VIAF number is correct). The Haz talk 16:40, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@Hazmat2: presumably there is some configuration issue with our template. What is the work, and can you find it at WorldCat? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:04, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
@Billinghurts: See The Rover Boys at School. The OCLC is there which of course also links to WorldCat. My assumption is the same but I didn't want to attempt any changes for that in case someone had a better idea. The Haz talk 03:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
fwiw... a VIAF designation without an ISNI number associated with it ain't worth a hill of beans (more often than not). In my experience, if an entity doesn't have an ISNI associated with it, it typically means the VIAF record is in flux, in doubt or incomplete... and that happens to be the status of the Rover series apparently. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
If we were talking about VIAF for contributors, I can understand where you're coming from, though I can't agree as I've seen VIAF with 5 or 6 library authority records linked (not "sparse" or "undifferentiated") that don't have an ISNI yet. Nonetheless, I'm fairly confident that ISNI are for contributors only and we're talking about a VIAF work record which shouldn't have an ISNI. I'm not saying that the VIAF record shouldn't be linked (it can always be deleted from Wikidata later). I'm just wondering why it leads to a search on Worldcat using VIAF when there's already an OCLC there. The Haz talk 04:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
it may also be for work without an isbn number, the viaf/worldcat won’t work. isbn use tends to predominate, maybe we need to add oclc numbers for bibliographies of works before 1960, and promote their use. Slowking4 18:45, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Index:The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996 (uksi 19960341 en).pdf

Another UK secondary item transcribed... Anyone want to do the image extraction? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Done except pages with images--kathleen wright5 (talk) 09:44, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
If someone else hasn't done it by Tuesday I'll work on it next week. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:50, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Halsbury

I out of interest did a search to see if Archive.org had a pre 1921 set of Halsbury's Laws of England (https://archive.org/details/texts?and[]=Halsbury) - Looks like they have a complete set. Does anyone want to do an evaluation of which volumes/editions Archive.org has.

Getting this transcribed could be a major multicontribuotr/multi-year project though :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Veracity of Constitution of India as 1949 document

I have reverted edits by someone adding 2015 amendments to the 1949 constitutional document, and I see some evidence of previous additions, though hard to tell the provenance of such changes. I have semi-protected the pages with an overt comment. I hope others can eep an eye on the document, and to note that it would be worthwhile looking for a scan of the original published constitution and moving our text to something that is evidence-based. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

This work is Wikisource creation (i.e., latest updated version) and should be prefixed with Wikisource:. Original scans available at {{Constitution of India}}. Hrishikes (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Ideally Constitution of India should be a versions page with links to each of the published revisions, which are based on scans. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The British Library has media related to Magna Carta.

I thought people might enjoy this embroidered version of the Wikisource logo, taken from Magna Carta (An Embroidery), a 40-foot long recreation in needlework of the en-wiki article Magna Carta as it stood in May 2014, that was unveiled at the British Library on Thursday.

Further images at c:Category:Magna Carta (An Embroidery). Jheald (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jheald: I love that. Thanks for sharing. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Place a border on it, place Wikisource.org beneath, have a batch made and send me one to place on my jacket or shirt. —Maury (talk) 15:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I'll buy one too! Sounds great :) The magna carta tapestry looks brilliant; can't imagine what it looks like in real life! — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 10:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Is it a logo that as well as being hand-stiched, is it possible to make it in a machine-stiched version? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
you can machine stitch from a scan (for a little set-up fee normally) [20]; [21] Slowking4 03:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

How is "Provincial Geographies of India: Burma" in the public domain?

Our current Proofread of the Month is Provincial Geographies of India (Volume 4): Burma. This would appear to have been published in 1923, but the public domain status of works by age alone only covers works published before January 1, 1923. BD2412 T 16:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Does not seem PD to me even by author's death criterion. Author died in 1931, so this became PD after 2001 in UK. So it was not PD on URAA date. But the work had simultaneous US publication by Macmillan as shown in the colophon; so may be PD under copyright-not renewal clause, if copyright was actually not renewed. Hrishikes (talk) 02:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I can't find any evidence that the copyright was renewed in the US. The Haz talk 03:06, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Not renewed basd on the PG transcriptions of the Renewal lists for 1950 and 1951. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Is that sufficient for our inclusion of the work here? BD2412 T 15:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Is what sufficient? We're worried about PD in the US, and if there's no renewal, then it is PD. If you want to check the images, you're welcome to, but the PG transcriptions are reliable enough if searched under multiple keywords. I did my own checks, and surely one of Herbert, Thrikell, Burma, India or Provincial would have hit, even if one or two typos hit our renewal.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The question came up for me because I wanted to upload the images to Commons, but the PD rationale there requires the work to be pre-1923. Although I appreciate the desire to put this through as a proofread of the month, I am also wondering why we are starting with Volume IV of a four-volume work, when the three earlier volumes (covering different parts of India) were published earlier. BD2412 T 02:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
In Commons licensing, put {{PD-URAA-Simul}}, going for the any other reason option. As for your second question, Burma (Myanmar) is under-represented in this site, the Indian subcontinent is not, and the other volumes of the work deal with the subcontinent. That is not to say that the others should not be done; but a coloured scan of vol 2 is required for doing justice to the images; the links I have put in the volume listing are all B&W except Google, the Google version is not PD and not downloadable. Hrishikes (talk) 02:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
you can upload images to commons as "PD-not renewed"; there is however the cultural problem that people do not believe you can prove a negative. Slowking4 03:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
As Slowking4 noted, you can upload as {{PD-US-not renewed}}. A few of us have looked through to confirm that it indeed was not renewed (in the time frame it needed to be to be legal). Therefore, it is proven legally, which is good enough for me. The Haz talk 21:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I think PD-URAA-Simul is better in this case than the not-renewed template. It informs the reader that the work is a US work due to simultaneous publication as the overseas version and that the US copyright was not renewed. This work's primary version was British, not US; non-British versions were "simultaneous" ones. So the simul template is more appropriate. You cannot just claim it simply as a US work, disregarding the Cambridge edition. Hrishikes (talk) 01:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
As an IP lawyer, I am always wary of edge cases. Then again, the chances of anyone asserting a copyright in this work are fairly remote. BD2412 T 03:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Template:Sans

Recently created and I'm us sign to mark headings that should be rendered as sans-serif regardless of overall page style, feel free to criticise, and the font choices could probably do with tweaking.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Unless I missed something, I think that's no different from {{Sans-serif}}. Perhaps it can be a redirect/alias? My only criticism of either is that I don't quite understand its intended use beyond the title page or if something contextually depends on a sans-serif font. If that's what you mean, then disregard. The Haz talk 05:07, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections 2015

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Board will continue during the voting.

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is the ultimate governing authority of the Wikimedia Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization registered in the United States. The Wikimedia Foundation manages many diverse projects such as Wikipedia and Commons.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 17 to 23:59 UTC May 31. Click here to vote. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 17:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

Jennifer Baptiste Primus - a female trade union leader from Trinidad and Tobgo

Hi I am new to Wikisource. But already I fee as though I love this facility. I will like to find information on this subject. 64.28.140.228 10:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

We have nothing on her but I checked for you and found information on Facebook and Google search engine. —Maury (talk) 11:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-21

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since May 13. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from May 19. It will be on all Wikipedias from May 20 (calendar).
  • References are now always in the right order. Also, the reference list now only shows references used on the page. [22]
  • You can no longer create an account with a colon ':' in it. If you already have one, it still works. [23]
  • The toolbar in VisualEditor now looks different. It is easier to see the icons. [24]
  • You won't be able to use e-mail lists for a few hours on Tuesday. [25] [26]
  • UploadWizard now shows better matches when you add a category to your file. [27]
  • A test about VisualEditor will start on the English Wikipedia on Thursday. [28]

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on May 21 at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join a technical meeting in France this week.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Another major item done

Traffic Signs Manual : Chapter 5

Now before I start adding the other chapters, can someone advise on how best to name the images? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Are you uploading them to Commons? I would go with a scheme like File:UK Traffic Signs Manual, Ch. 5, Fig. 2-3, and so on. That way the images will show in order in the Commons category. BD2412 T 16:25, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I've done the ones for Heading-3 - Mostly a case of cleaning up an imported PDF page in Inkscape.. If someone wants to do the other headings (and or chapters, see: commons:Category:Traffic Signs Manual (UK) Which is where I was putting them.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Page:UK Traffic Signs Manual - Chapter 3 Regulatory Signs. 2008 (Second Impression 2008).pdf/24

Simple formatting issue. The diagrams should be in a block on the left. Mediawiki seems not to won't to do this in a consistent way. I've tried {{float-left}} and Template:Tl-block left. Neither worked effectively.

Suggestions ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

How about putting the page in columns, with the width of the left column set to the image width? BD2412 T 15:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Well I used {{left block}}{{right block}} and everything worked nicely :), added some tweaks to those tempaltes in the process. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

ODNI release

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32817456

http://www.odni.gov/index.php/resources/bin-laden-bookshelf

Thought this might be of interest to some archivists here. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Signatory property on Wikidata

There is a new property, signatory (P1891), on Wikidata. The name is probably self-explanatory, but for anyone adding official documents to Wikisource, when you create the Wikidata entry for it you can now add signatories (ie. the 56 signers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence). The Haz talk 19:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Template:OGL3

Can someone review this so it's line with Commons? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:34, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

  • It makes more sense to me to copy the license template as completely as possible, at least until the day we all use interwiki license templates. Plus, I think the additional does not cover section is useful here as well. For now I copied it over and categorized it. The Haz talk

DjVu file okay at Commons but looks faulty from here

When I look at File:United States Statutes at Large Volume 123.djvu here on Wikisource, it looks to be corrupt — it ‎doesn't thumb, and it shows "(0 × 0 pixels, file size: 33.8 MB, MIME type: image/vnd.djvu)". But it looks just fine at Commons:File:United States Statutes at Large Volume 123.djvu. And no, there isn't a local file eclipsing the Commons file. Has anybody come across this before and does anyone know how to fix it? Hesperian 01:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I think you will find this is yet another manifestation of the already archived but not yet resolved issue discussed here and supposedly tracked as (currently open/low priority) task T23526? AuFCL (talk) 02:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


Thankyou.

I haven't read all of the linked discussion, but I note George's comment "I haven't found the trigger point -- when exceeded -- that causes this "failure" we are all seeing." To assist with that, I can tell you how this file was brought to my attention.

In my API scripting I have for a little while been regularly encountering a warning when requesting very large lists such as a list of every Page: namespace page on the English Wikisource: "This result was truncated because it would otherwise be larger than the limit of 12582912 bytes". The limit referred to is $wgAPIMaxResultSize. Last night I was running a different script that pulls image information from DjVu files in order to extract a page count. The script ran happily until it reached File:United States Statutes at Large Volume 123.djvu, at which point it issued that warning "This result was truncated because it would otherwise be larger than the limit of 12582912 bytes" and then crashed on the next line of code when I tried to access a page count that wasn't there.

Therefore I speculate that the root cause of all this that is the ProofreadPage extension makes an API request for image metadata, and, in cases where the image metadata is larger than $wgAPIMaxResultSize, receives a truncated result.

Hesperian 02:47, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes that falls inline with developments prior, during & since the archived discussion linked by AuFCL but the steps taken in response have proven ineffective at best if not outright "anti" proofread extension itself at worst. See task T96360 and task T32906 for additional background.

Plus there's been quite a bit of related discussions regarding this phenomenon (both on User: Talk pages and in open discussions like here & /Help) but most seem to have been archived since their last comments (Note: the 2014 & 2015 /Help archives are now in their proper place & order fwiw). -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikisource in print

[[29]] ?

Glad to see Wikisource is getting reprinted. :) Shame that Google's treating it as Copyright material and blocking the full scans, despite the original being PD and the Wikisource effort being CC-BY-SA ;) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

are they scraping the printable version? why are they not using the epub version? do they need a word? Slowking4♡Farmbrough's revenge 17:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
If you ever find a PD book on Google that is "snippet" view only, just notify them via the link on the bottom. It takes time for the corrections to kick in but they've always been responsive when I've marked them in the past. The Haz talk 17:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
i see they don’t have a DNB e-book yet. Slowking4♡Farmbrough's revenge 18:18, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
It's not Google Books that put it up there. It's Kreactiva Editorial according the page so they probably said they own the copyright to the edited version and Google let them sell it. The Haz talk 18:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: I forgot to add that even our transcription would still be PD in the U.S. If we add new material, such as in the "notes" section (that meets the threshold), only the new material could be licensed CC-BY-SA, but not the original text, even if made into electronic format with only editorial decisions. It's more like a digital reprint, which can only use the copyright of the original. The Haz talk 18:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
DNB - LOL .... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
As much as a joke it seems it wouldn't be surprising, the rate they are producing digital editions is incredible. Example --Rochefoucauld (talk) 01:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
On another note I've been doing some research on "Kreactiva Editorial"....Notice anything suspicious in there work? Oh wait the incredible similarities of our hard work being used for profit! The similarities like red text as a substitution for our internal links, or the missing indentations...They could atleast have the common courtesy to follow creative commons. --Rochefoucauld (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Despite the fact that they don't have to (since we can't license PD material as CC-BY-SA) they actually do include licenses and attributions. See this page for an example. The Haz talk 03:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: Just to be clear, are saying that the publications by Kreactiva Editorial are downloads from Wikisource??? — Ineuw talk 04:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
What I was saying was that Kreactiva Editorial printing is possibly re-using Wikisource material, it's attributed and has a note about the license, so I'm not that concerned. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


There are a very many print-on-demand "publishers" who do this. They scrape free content from wherever they can find it on the Web, and offer it for sale. Search Amazon or Abebooks or Alibris or Google Books or any of the other popular book stores for any popular public domain text, and you'll find most of the search results are for cheap print-on-demand scrapes. Usually these days they scrape the Internet Archive scans, but they sometimes take our texts, or Project Gutenberg's, or even (shock horror) uncorrected OCR. I regard it as unethical because they are selling mutton dressed up as lamb, and I believe a large proportion of buyers will feel like dupes when their purchase arrives. I also regard it as unethical leaching on our efforts, but it is certainly legal on that score. Furthermore we all know what we are getting into, or ought to. The decision to work to make public domains accessible to readers implies making them accessible to unscrupulous scrapers as well. Hesperian 13:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

the way to preempt them, is produce an e-reader ready "product". there are attempts in this direction, but the package needs to be more reader friendly. Slowking4♡Farmbrough's revenge 01:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-22

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Problems

  • VisualEditor was broken for 30 minutes on Tuesday. The problem was due to a tool it uses. [30]
  • Some Labs tools had issues last week. [31] [32]

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since May 20. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from May 26. It will be on all Wikipedias from May 27 (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on May 28 at 18:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Page blanking activity

Noticed some page blanking activity here. I took care of Billinghurst and Treasury of War Poetry. Might want to look over "Kepler" though; I can only undo, and can't revert back to appropriate edit. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

There's no difference there, but all of the user's "contributions" can be reverted and deleted from histories by an admin. The Haz talk 17:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

OCR broken

As with Hazmat2 in this discussion above, several of the volumes of the 9th edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica (as Volume II) are missing their OCR layers. I wouldn't mind fixing that by hand as I go, but despite having the OCR button enabled in my preferences, there isn't one.

A) If someone has the time to go through and fix the currently OCRless EB9 volumes, that'd be great;
B) If someone could explain to me what Hazmat2 meant when he said he "g[o]t the OCR button back by disabling the wizards", that'd be helpful;
C) If one of the code monkeys could repair whatever damage ruined the OCR button in the first place, that'd be even better.

It's amazingly pointless and frustrating to have every single index page load with a header saying "just use the OCR button" when it doesn't exist and cannot be enabled. — LlywelynII 00:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

B. Go to Preferences, then Editing. Under the Editor heading, uncheck Enable wizards for inserting links, tables as well as the search and replace function. I can't help with the rest and I'm not sure what happened in the first place as it's pretty much always been this way since I joined Wikisource. The Haz talk 01:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I may be off the mark, but to those who don't have an OCR button on their toolbar, it just might depend on which toolbar you are using, and/OR check your common.js if the OCR button isn't disabled. Also check the "enable OCR button" in your Preferences\Gadgets. — Ineuw talk 18:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
i have also hand copied ocr’s from gutenberg, but the lack of support is discouraging. Slowking4 18:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Dawn Over India source

I think we have Dawn Over India but had no source here. Someone at Google Books just got back to me and they now made the entire book viewable as it is in the public domain now. It's uploaded to Internet Archive. The Haz talk 22:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Need a simple request to be fulfilled

Can anyone who is on line and reads this post in any country, I ask if they would try to log on to https://duckduckgo.com/ (Duck Duck Go search engine) to see if it's available because I haven't been able to do so? — Ineuw talk 20:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Ineuw, the search itself works for me. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, now it works for me me as well. — Ineuw talk 22:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
For times like this, there's also things like http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ with which to check. :) (Not saying asking here isn't cool too, 'course!) — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 10:24, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I use that or http://www.isitdownrightnow.com/ on a regular basis. Very useful, especially with Wikimedia sites going down. The Haz talk 12:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks fellows! I didn't know about this. —Maury (talk) 10:53, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

OCR Was working but isn't now

Index:UK Traffic Signs Manual - Chapter 3 Regulatory Signs. 2008 (Second Impression 2008).pdf, produces mangled OCR, thoughts? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:51, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I think Wikisource OCR application does not like pdf files. I have had the same problem with one pdf work, so I downloaded it, OCRed it with Abby FineReader and replaced the original OCR text of the proofread pages. Hrishikes (talk) 19:03, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Willing to do it for the work concerned? It's OGL, and the original is on Commons.. It's a bit odd in the PDf anyway..ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
OK seems to be working again... must have needed something to catch up.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Newly validated works

In the last 10 days these works have become validated:

I made this list semi-manually, but I'm wondering if I'm missing some groovy tool somewhere that's already doing this (i.e. checking what's recently been moved into the fully-validated category). Anyone know of a thing? — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 23:45, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe you are looking for something like:
<DynamicPageList>
category             = Index Validated
count                = 5
mode                 = unordered
order                = descending
addfirstcategorydate = dmy
namespace            = Index
</DynamicPageList>
For reference here is the output (expanded to 10 items to ensure all items in your list are (currently) included):
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:Weekly List 1983-01-11.pdf
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:The Suffix -μα in Aristophanes.djvu
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:American Jobs Plan State Fact Sheet KY.pdf
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:American Jobs Plan State Fact Sheet LA.pdf
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:American Jobs Plan State Fact Sheet MD.pdf
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:Death comes quickly to Emil Folda, part 1.jpg
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:Fr. Anthony Folta Dies1.jpg
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:The Southern Marseillais.pdf
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:The Southern Flag.pdf
  • <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2024-04-14">14 April 2024</span>: Index:The Southerner’s Departure.pdf
    • AuFCL (talk) 00:07, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
    I don't know of anyone doing this and I like your idea. Too, it would be nice to have a list of completely proofread but not validated works or all proofread and all validated but not transcluded works. —Maury (talk) 23:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
    Slight variation of above:
    <DynamicPageList>
category             = Index Proofread
count                = 5
mode                 = unordered
order                = descending
addfirstcategorydate = dmy
namespace            = Index
</DynamicPageList>
    gives something close to what I think Maury wants? Sample result:

    AuFCL (talk) 00:36, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

    Ah yes @AuFCL, that's what I mean! :) Thank you. Don't know why I didn't know about addfirstcategorydate. Next trick: how could one associate these with their matching mainspace works' pages? i.e. get St. Botolph's Priory, Colchester from Index:St. Botolph's Priory, Colchester (1917).djvu?

    And @Maury, you can get all proofread-but-not-validated in Category:Index Proofread, but I'm not sure how to find validated-non-transcluded... AuFCL, can you help us?

    — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 00:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

    That (validated-non-transcluded) is the hard case! I have a vague memory it might be a maintenance category (can't find it in Category:Wikisource maintenance: maybe that was too logical?) or perhaps this is all a false memory. Sorry—can't help at present—will amend if inspiration strikes. (Just to annoy everyone: Category:Needs transcluding is currently empty.) AuFCL (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
    This has good links to pages you might be looking for. (Index Progress) you may also like Category:Fully_transcluded and Category:Not_transcluded. good luck finding validated-non-transcluded... --Rochefoucauld (talk) 01:05, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
    Thanks. It was Category:Not transcluded that I was trying to remember. However, not quite what I think these guys were looking for though. AuFCL (talk) 01:20, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
    You'll find the last five entries to Category:Index Validated at the bottom of Portal:Proofreading milestones. The "recent changes" link in the bottom right corner will give you the last 50/100/250/500 changes to Validated Index files.

    Finding the linked mainspace page will need a query that pulls the link from the title field in the Index. I haven't yet played in quarry.wmflabs.org/query but this would be the place to do it. @Mpaa: might be able to assist here

    Proofread/validated but not transcluded is quite complex as we have works that are partly transcluded, and we don't transclude all the pages from an Index anyway. There was a "checker" tool designed to give a list of pages from a single Index with their transclusion status (accessed via the paperclip icon top right on an Index), but this stopped working a while back. @Ineuw: has complained about it, but nothing has yet been done. If this tool was resurrected, then there might be a way of adapting it to provide a table of page counts of transclusion status in a similar way to Hesperian's list giving page counts by proofreading status. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:41, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

    Portal:Proofreading milestones is great; I'd not seen it before (of maybe I have, but don't remember). :-) And I think the <DynamicPageList> for recent additions is terrific. As for finding the matching mainspace page from an Index, I've done it in ws-cat-browser by just finding the first linked page; certainly not the best idea! However, I'm not sure even pulling the 'title' attribute will do it, because of things like Index:Austen - Northanger Abbey. Persuasion, vol. I, 1818.djvu where there are two titles in the one work. :( So... dunno. :-) — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 08:32, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
    I have asked what has happened with Checker at Labs, and it is being investigated. There has been no changes to the config or the script, so we are having to have the Labs staff have a look. As a very clear statement, wherever, and whenever this is broken can someone please make a clear and separate statement that the tool is broken. Finding out from having to read a conversation with it being buried in the text is not conducive to quick resolution. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
    I think it was reported at Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help#Page_Checker_gadget_-_page_is_not_directing_properly_._._._again — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 23:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
    Tracked in PhabricatorTask T101097Resolved

     Comment Special:IndexPages tracks all index: name-space works, though it would be useful if it was able to be better filtered, eg. (show only|exclude) validated works, or to be better ordered, eg. by date of activity, etc. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:38, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

    From reading wikisource-l mailing list and some of the wikisource bugs, there was discussions at the recent hackathon about making updated to Special:IndexPages, so it may be worth putting suggestions for that special page and its output into Phabricator: and make sure that you add the Wikisource project. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

     Comment With regard to Billinghurst's last couple of edits it may be useful/worthy of general note that if users enable the "BugStatusUpdate" gadget (middle of "Development (in beta)" section of Preferences/Gadgets) then the {{tracked}} box updates directly out of Phabricator without the necessity for manual intervention. Case to consider making this gadget opt-out rather than opt-in? AuFCL (talk) 04:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

    Sounds like it should be turned on by default, yes. Although, probably moved out of the Development (in beta) section. Is it considered stable enough? — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 05:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
    @Samwilson: Regarding stability of the gadget I simply don't know: that is why I was hoping for some feedback here. AuFCL (talk) 05:26, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
    Ah right! Sorry. It looks like the code could do with some tweaking, to judge from the comments in it. To make it more robust against future changes in that template, if nothing else. — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 05:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
    There is a general reticence to make gadgets default to on unless there is a compelling reason. I don't see that it is a compelling reason for three pages of use (here, Help, AN) for a limited subset of our user base. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

    Index:Creativecommons bylaws.pdf

    No file? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:55, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

    File was deleted on Commons -- George Orwell III (talk) 09:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

    Templates to merge

    Hi,

    Shouldn’t Template:-, Template:Clear and Template:Clearright be merge? Can someone do it?

    Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 10:24, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

    In point of detail {{-|right}} and {{clearright}} have equivalent effects, and similarly {{-}} has equivalent effect to {{clear}} so {{-}} is clearly the most capable choice.

    As currently no project relies upon {{clearright}} isn't it an easy candidate for immediate deletion? AuFCL (talk) 22:32, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

    Wikidata: Access to data from arbitrary items is here

    (Sorry for writing in English.)

    I have previously announced the arbitrary access feature here. It is now enabled for you.

    More background information: When using data from Wikidata on most Wikipedias and other sister projects, there is currently a limitation in place that hinders some use cases: data can only be accessed from the corresponding item. So, for example, the Wikipedia article about Berlin can only get data from the Wikidata item about Berlin but not from the item about Germany. This has technical reasons. This limitation has now been removed for your project.

    We invite you to play around with this new feature if you are one of the people who have been waiting for this for a long time. If you have technical issues/questions with this you can come to Wikidata:Contact the development team.

    How to use it:

    I hope you'll make great things with this and that it will make your work on this project easier.

    Cheers Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 14:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

    Tech News: 2015-23

    Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

    Problems

    • Many wikis were slow for a few hours on Wednesday due to a code error. Sometimes the pages did not load at all and showed an error. [34]
    • Some tools in Labs were broken on Wednesday and Thursday. [35]
    • Edit tags added by the software were broken on all wikis from May 23 to May 28. [36] [37]

    Changes this week

    • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since May 27. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from June 2. It will be on all Wikipedias from June 3 (calendar).
    • You won't be able to use e-mail lists for a few hours on Tuesday. [38]

    Meetings

    • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on June 3 at 18:00 (UTC). See how to join.

    Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

    15:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

    Multi-lingual proofing

    Is there somewhere to ask for proofers of other languages-mostly French and German, occasional Italian and ?-for The Philosophical Review? I ♥ the missing greek template-is there anything similar I could use on a multi-lingual page? Or a forum … I know there are inconsistencies with Authors’ names throughout the series-accents are especially variable. And I am having the occasional hyphenation issue. Cheers, — Zoeannl (talk) 09:25, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

    When I have been in this situation, the best solution I could come up with was to use Category:User languages to identify users with the linguistic skills I'm looking for, then check their contributions to figure out which of them are active and likely to be willing to help, and then approach them directly. Hesperian 11:39, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
    I'd like to add that you could drop a line at the corresponding language Wikisource. If you happen to have OCR software (ie. ABBYY) you can also rerun the OCR yourself, selecting the correct language for each section so that, additionally, there would be very little to correct. The Haz talk 13:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2015-06&oldid=13430063"