Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2021-01

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 January 2021, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.

Feedback requested on font template[edit]

I have used {{Blackletter}} before for these Fraktur forms on Wikisource but I was surprised to see that there was no equivalent for w:en:Uncial script, so I made {{Uncial}}. I'm requesting others provide feedback for 1.) which fonts would be best to cascade and 2.) how to import those fonts to our CSS (is this via a phab: ticket?). Thanks and happy Public Domain Day! —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Reminder: The Wikipedia Library Card Platform[edit]

Probably hasn't been said in a while, however, through Wikimedia we can get ready access to a range of research databases through your Wikimedia SUL where anyone with a modicum editing qualifies

There is also access to other resources based on an application process. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:56, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the reminder and link. I've often been stymied trying to fix an obviously mistyped quote over at Wikipedia. This will help. Shenme (talk) 00:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Animal Life and the World of Nature/1903/06/Notes and Queries[edit]

Please move file:Animal life and the world of nature - Notes and Queries - Alice Foljambe - 1903-06.pdf and the two associated pages to "Animal Life and the World of Nature - Notes and Comments - Alice Foljambe - 1903-06.pdf". Apologies for the error. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

The Center of the Web, Part 1?[edit]

There is something confusing about this film, in that in the title card of this print it is labelled as "The Centre of the Web / Part 1" (not yet uploaded to Commons, I have requested another user upload it for me as I don't have the tools to edit it available to me). The print comes from the British Film Institute, and this title card is clearly one of two intertitles instated by the BFI themselves (the other being within the film, as a reconstructed intertitle). So, the title card is not the original title card (the original intertitle would probably look like the ones at A Dog's Love or Shep's Race with Death, both made by the same director in the same year). I find this claim of it being the first part of the film to be a bit dubious, but it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility that there are more "parts" to this film that have now been lost, or perhaps were planned at the time but never made/finished.

The film does seem to leave you with a cliffhanger (see the letter at the end), suggesting that there may be more to the story ahead...although admittedly this film was a bit difficult for me to understand on first watch, so I could be wrong that that was a cliffhanger. There are no listings for a second part to the film, anywhere that I could find. The only place I could find where it is ever mentioned as a "Part 1" is on this print itself; elsewhere, the film is described as if it is a single work in and of itself; the plot summaries only describe the content of this print. So, I have no idea why the film preserver decided to place "Part 1" there. There's no way to know if it was present in the original film title. So I think I'm going to assume in the transcription for Wikisource, like other places are doing, that there is no Part 2. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

You can always include an abbreviated explanation in the "notes = " about the general doubt that a part 2 exists. You can also include full details of what you've fund on the Talk page. If you've already done the research, then summarizing it for future readers would probably be appreciated. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:23, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Upon some speculation, I have thought of the possibility that perhaps whoever compiled the print at one point separated it into parts, and once they combined the two parts later, they forgot to remove the title card containing "Part 1" and replacing it with a more generic title card. But we'll never know. PseudoSkull (talk) 20:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Index:Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management.djvu[edit]

Proofreading is still needed on the index, and cross referencing it to the main work. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:02, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Just focus on proofreading and validating the text. There are bot tools to add in the links, but these are dependent on having accurate page numbers in the index, and must wait until the text is validated. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 16:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Can anyone comment on this website of LOC documents?[edit]

getarchive.net — Ineuw (talk) 01:23, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Appears to be some kind of database that wraps Pubic Domain data sources like LoC and Getty.edu's collections and then tries to get you to pay for access to high resolution assets and/or sell you some prints and/or hawk the company's other wares. Could be useful for search, but probably need to head upstream for the original documents. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:32, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
I knew there had to be a catch. Thanks for checking. — Ineuw (talk) 01:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Google spreadsheet based tool to help TOC, chapter pages creation[edit]

I created a Google Sheet tool to help prepare content for TOC page,Chapter pages. I have tried it on Telugu Wikisource. Make a copy of the spreadsheet and run the google script, by accessing Wikisource menu on the spreadsheet. You need to authorise the script to access your Google Drive, display sidebar first time you run it. By entering basic book details like index filename, author,year,chapter prefix,chapter name and page number, you can easily prepare content for TOC, chapter pages. this content appears in a sidebar, from which the content can be copied and pasted into Wikisource. Chapter content is formatted for using with pwb's pagefromfile script. I request users to try it and give feedback. If any better tool is available, please share.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 07:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Impermanence of Sexual Phenotypes by I. A. T. Savillo[edit]

Authorship for this article and the article itself is requested to be added in Wikisource. This is to disseminate this information about the unchallenged content of this article (The recent finding that there is no gay gene). In fact, Regarding the recent rape slay case (if ever there is a rape) in the Philippines done by "gays" is of note that this article applies to. This article is linked in Phenotypic plasticity in main Wikipedia but it is much better if it is also in Wikisource so people will be aware of it. I do not have to expound on the article but this is for the people to read and judge themselves and to be careful. 110.54.251.176 22:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

We store modern free works, but this is very unlikely to be free, and I certainly don't appreciate issue pushing.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Wikisource:What Wikisource includesbillinghurst sDrewth 01:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks.110.54.251.176

Not leaving redirects behind in moves[edit]

Is there an option to not leave a redirect behind when you move an entry. The entry will the old title will still show in the index, and I want to avoid that. --RAN (talk) 21:44, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators have that ability. For non-admins, you can tag the resulting redirects for speedy deletion. BD2412 T 23:58, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
I started answering this a couple of hours ago, but then my wifi died spectacularly. Just got back to find the above response. I'll extend it a little with:

Only sysops can suppress a redirect when moving a page. If the old place is a recent page that has no on-wiki incoming links, mark it for speedy deletion using {{sdelete|M2 - unneeded redirect}}. If it's an older page that may well have external links to it, then change it to a dated soft redirect {{Dated soft redirect}}. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:03, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-02[edit]

15:42, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

TOC templates[edit]

The templates {{TOC begin}} and friends have been updated following clarification at phab:T232477. This means that page numbers half-way though ToCs should now work (example).

There should be no changes to any page, but there is a new behaviour. Previously, whitespace between row templates was ignored. Now, it will be part of the last cell. One space between rows (including newlines at the end of the last parameter) is OK, but more than that will be added to the rows:

{{TOC begin}}
{{TOC row 2-1|This row is OK|1}}

{{TOC row 2-1|This row is OK|2}}
{{TOC row 2-1|This row is OK|3
}}
{{TOC row 2-1|This row will have extra space in it|4}}


{{TOC row 2-1|This row will also have extra space in it|5
}}

{{TOC row 2-1|This row is OK|6}}
{{TOC row 2-1|This row is OK|7}}
{{TOC end}}
This row is OK 1
This row is OK 2
This row is OK 3
This row will have extra space in it 4


This row will also have extra space in it 5


This row is OK 6
This row is OK 7

I believe that I have found and fixed any cases where this could have occurred. If you see anything that has not been fixed, please let me know. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 17:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Export links in the sidebar[edit]

Hi everyone! Next week we (the Community Tech team, of which I'm a part) are going to roll out phab:T256392 which will move the functionality of the MediaWiki:Gadget-WSexport.js gadget into the Wikisource extension. The main change for English Wikisource will be that we can remove the gadget, but for other Wikisources it'll mean that have the export links (lots are missing the gadget, and quite a few have it but it's not translated into their language). I and the other CommTech engineers will be scooting around cleaning up scripts wherever we can, but if anyone notices anything amiss please let me know! This is a smallish change and is a precursor to the larger change that hopefully will come soon of enabling a 'download' button at the top of works (as some Wikisources already do). See phab:T266262 for more about that. —Sam Wilson 10:49, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

@Samwilson: excellent news! Thank you for this. I just added the "PDF (beta)" option to the enWS sidebar, because the normal "PDF" option is almost entirely useless for Wikisource works.
Can we have that removed as part of this, or should raise another Phab ticket? As well as the "Compile a book" link which is currently not working at all, as far as I can tell. It's confusing for users to have these two broken tools presented above the WS-export links. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 14:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: Yes, good point: the Special:DownloadAsPdf link will be removed in this change (because it's replaced by WS Export; the function will still exist though, if people want to use it manually e.g. for Help pages), but the Special:Book link won't be removed (although I suspect it should be because it is pretty confusing… I can't find a task for this yet so will create one). —Sam Wilson 00:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

@Samwilson: I am guessing that the translations will be held at Translatewiki as part of the WM message kit. Are you able to send a list of the required labels to Wikisource-L so that those communities can start preparing, and also to ensure that the Tech newsletter has good instructions on how to complete the translations. [Many will not be transkatewiki aware.] — billinghurst sDrewth 14:48, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Yep, they'll be done (and some already have been) on TranslateWiki. Here's the full list. I've copied over all the existing translations that I could find on the various gadgets that are already in use, so those Wikisources that already had translations will continue to have the same ones. Here's the translation progress overview. I'll post to the list. I don't think it's worth putting a note in the tech newsletter because the missing translations will be done in due course, and we don't usually announce the existence of new interface messages. —Sam Wilson 00:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

This change has been completed. No more multiple PDF links for us! :-) Let me know if you notice anything odd. —Sam Wilson 23:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

RFC: Manual addition of license categories to pages???[edit]

Can anyone think of a reason why we would manually categorise works, authors or portals by the categories subsidiary to Category:Works by license or Category:Authors by license? I would think that we would be looking for all additions to be by application of a license template (see Help:Copyright tags).

I am just doing some further configuration of HotCat and I would like to exclude all those categories from a search selection through HotCat; though seeking comment prior to actioning my thoughts. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

If you want to test, I have excluded both Category:PD-old-80 and Category:Author-PD-old-80 as a proof of concept, and you have to get to the 8 to do a decent test. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm not aware of any reason.
I did a search to see if I could find a use case and found some interesting statistics:
  • [[Category:PD has 989 hits
  • [[Category:PD-USGov has 906 hits
  • [[Category:PD-USGov-POTUS has 897 hits
  • {PD-USGov.*[[Category:PD-USGov-POTUS has 888 hits
Seems to me like the latter group should be stripped of the category ({{PD-USGov-POTUS}} was deleted) and that'll fix 90% of the problem for PD tags. BethNaught (talk) 09:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Please join the English Wikisource Discord server[edit]

@Reboot01 and I a while back had suggested we create a Discord server for the English Wikisource, and now I've been bold and created it. Please join if you're interested in connecting with others on this project via Discord. I will give any administrators who join the Administrators role.

Invite link: https://discord.gg/g5UfBT6epz (permanent) PseudoSkull (talk) 18:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@PseudoSkull: Any particular reason this isn't a separate channel on the English "Wikimedia Community" Discord server? Mahir256 (talk) 18:30, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
@Mahir256: Because we're a different community from Wikipedia, and their community etc. is very different from ours. The amount of chat that the server could (possibly) end up having might make it excessive for the two communities to be intertwined. For context, I also started the English Wiktionary's Discord server which is also completely separate from the Wikipedia server, and the server is successful anyway, as a large portion of the Wiktionary community is still active on that server to this day. I don't know how many users here at Wikisource use Discord, but I set it up in case they want a chat outlet through that service. PseudoSkull (talk) 18:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
there is also a wikisource telegram, but it is more indic wikisource. nice to have another channel, but unclear use case. Slowking4Rama's revenge 03:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I make corrections to the djvu file?[edit]

See for example History_of_the_Municipalities_of_Hudson_County,_New_Jersey,_1630-1923/Volume_3/Freudenberg,_Arthur_Oscar, how would I fix errors in the text? Is the text housed at Commons? I have only dealt with the text that is right on the page here. --RAN (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ):There are page numbers in square brackets to the left of the text. When you click one of them, you get to the page, e. g. when you click on [729] in the above mentioned article on A. S. Freudenberg, you get to Page:History of the Municipalities of Hudson County (1924), Vol. 3.djvu/461. On the right there is the scanned page and on the left there is the editable text. Then you simply click the edit button and the rest is easy. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 18:39, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Are we allowed to add in links to Wikidata and Wikipedia in djvu files? Can you remind me how to handle typos in the original printed text, mark them with "sic", but where would you show how it should read? Do you add a footnote? Do you just ignore it? For instance an article may say someone was born in 1900, and a more reliable source, like a birth certificate stored at Commons, may say that he was born in December 1899. We see that a lot in obituaries where they count back from the person's age, and can be off by a year. --RAN (talk) 19:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Unlike Wikipedia, we do not try to make here reliable articles but we just transcribe original sources as faithfully as possible. So, if a source contains a factual error, we reproduce it as it happened, because the error is simply an inseperable part of the original historical document. When the original text contains a typo, we keep it as well, although it can be pointed out using the template {{SIC}} (written in capital letters). As for e.g. mistakes in death years in obituaries, it can sometimes be considered to be just a typo as well, and so it is imo acceptable to indicate it using the SIC template too. We do not mark it in the printed document, only in the transcribed text. As for the footnotes, these are used only when there are some original footnotes in the original text. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 20:39, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Oh, I forgot to answer about the links. Many people consider placing hyperlinks leading to Wikipedia articles into the transcribed text to be a sort of annotation and avoid it, although from time to time you can see texts where such links were added. I personnally do not do it either. However, if the transcribed text is about the same topic as a Wikipedia article, such a link can be placed into the "wikipedia" parameter of the header, see the template {{Header}}. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:11, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
there is some limited wikilinks in the work header template. also Help:Contents is your friend. Slowking4Rama's revenge 03:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Best practices for a magazine[edit]

I've started working on the first issue of The New Yorker and while I've searched the project pages, I don't really see a good guide on how to best transclude scans of magazines. Other periodicals seem to have individual articles broken up into text, which is probably wise for readability but it seems like there is also value in transcribing pages as a single document, too. Additionally, I seem to have screwed up the very simple task of trasncluding pages as well, so I guess I'm a total mess. Is anyone interested in helping me? Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 10:28, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

that's very good work, 44 issues to go. you might want to cut each issue out from file:The New Yorker volume 1, numbers 1-19.pdf, and file:The New Yorker volume 1, numbers 20-45.pdf (thank you hathi and google books) in the future, you will want to combine single pages into a multipage pdf on commons to make it easier. Slowking4Rama's revenge 02:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Slowking4: "in the future, you will want to combine single pages into a multipage pdf on commons to make it easier" It is: File:The New Yorker 0001 1925-02-21.pdf. What do you mean? —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Page clean-up observation.[edit]

Sorry if this issue is known about already, thought I'd raise it just in case.
I have noticed that when I use the page clean-up button after I have created a table with a pad left entry in it, that my {{ts|pl2}} entry is changed to {{ts|p12}} which breaks the formatting. Not a major issue but just wanted to highlight it. The page I created is here Sp1nd01 (talk) 10:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sp1nd01: This will be the rule .replace(/[il]([0-9])/g, '1$1'). I think generally it's better to run cleanup before adding templates, as it can be tricky to tell Wikicode from OCR mistakes, because Wikicode is not plain text, and the cleanup assumes it's looking at page text. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 11:01, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation, I'll ensure that I only run page clean-up before I add templates from now on, I have been running it after I edit a page just in case I inadvertently add issues. Sp1nd01 (talk) 11:27, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I had not known this gadget which looks useful, so I searched for it and found out that it is provided by Wikisource:TemplateScript. So, I copied the code into my common.js as suggested there, but nothing changed, at least I do not see any change, no new button appeared, nothing. I tried clearing my browser’s cache, but it did not help either. Did I miss anything? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jan.Kamenicek: The script is this one:
mw.loader.load('//en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=User:Samwilson/PageCleanUp.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');
I also have a more in-depth one here, but it's pre-alpha in terms of reliability and it needs better config options:
mw.loader.load('//en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=User:Inductiveload/cleanup.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');
Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 15:34, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: Thanks! I have just tried it and looks really great. Can I update Wikisource:TemplateScript, replacing the advised code there? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jan.Kamenicek: makes sense to me. Though I think really it's not a "templatescript" script (even if it uses it internally), so it could really go on a new page, maybe Wikisource:Tools and Scripts/PageCleanup. And then link there from Wikisource:Tools and scripts. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 17:15, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
If the whole page should be moved to Wikisource:Tools and Scripts/PageCleanup, then I will probably leave it to somebody else, as do not understand the page in detail and there might be more things to take care about. For example the other code mentioned on the page, which should enable some script dealing with typography, diacritics and letter case, probably needs to be updated too. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: There is one more advice which does not work: "Go to Special:TemplateScript to disable scripts you don't use", but the provided link does not work. Where can I disable it? The gadget as a whole is very useful, but I do not like that it changes all curly quotes and apostrophes into straight ones, although the curly quotes have already been approved here, and so I would like to disable this particular feature. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 13:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Instead of using this sidebar version, use the toolbar pair mentioned on Wikisource:Tools and scripts. There's one for page cleanup and the following one for curly quotes. Once they're in, it's just two mouse clicks and done. The sidebar version is used by contributors like myself who don't have the toolbar switched on. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I can see it, thanks very much, I will use it. However, it seems quite redundant to turn all the curly quotes into the straight ones by one tool and then turn them back again by another tool… --Jan Kameníček (talk) 17:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Not redundant really. I frequently get OCR'd pages with a mixture of curly and straight on them. Best to turn them all to straight first, which allows the correct pairings to happen with the optional second tool. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah, true. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 20:01, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

For the sake of simplicity[edit]

Can I use this "<!-- -->" universally, regardless if table, or end of paragraph, or page?— Ineuw (talk) 19:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Or, can someone please suggest a single universal {{nop}} that is acceptable in a table structure and elsewhere?— Ineuw (talk) 04:59, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
html comment <!-- --> can be used for their effect anywhere within a page / page section that is html. Which means they cannot be used within themselves, they cannot be used in css or js pages, or where the html is interrupted, eg. with <nowiki>.

{{nop}} is a <div>-based interruption to wikitext rendering and {{nopt}} is a <span>-based version. Typically in a table we should use the "nopt", the span-based version, not the div, which is stuff that we worked out over the years and have discussed here. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:06, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-03[edit]

16:10, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Video games[edit]

I noticed there are no video game transcriptions here as far as I can tell, and I know there are freely licensed games that are popular and would probably meet our standards for inclusion. So I started this WikiProject/proposal page that explains my thoughts on 1.) why we should have video game transcriptions at Wikisource, to follow the same rules as for books or film, and 2.) some ideas on how transcription of games could be implemented. Video games are culturally significant and do count as works, so I think transcribing them here would be acceptable. As mentioned on the page though, a great majority of the video games we would normally include are going to be copyrighted in the US for 60+ more years (and in other countries much longer), but we should start now with what we have that's free if we're going to do it.

I'm willing to create a prototype of a transcription for a freely licensed video game, just to show my thoughts on what such a thing might look like. Any thoughts/comments/interest? PseudoSkull (talk) 07:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Which games would be copyright-okay here, please?--Jusjih (talk) 05:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jusjih: I started a list here. These are a few games that were self-released into the public domain. Note that any game we cover not only has to have freely licensed source code, but freely licensed data—that would include the text you see during gameplay. Some games are open source but the data is copyrighted. For more info, see also Wikisource:WikiProject_Video_Games#What_video_games_are_free? PseudoSkull (talk) 05:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Don Q, Son of Zorro[edit]

It has come to my attention that several people on here wanted a copy of the silent film "Don Q, Son of Zorro" (1925) in one part. I am currently uploading the movie (single part) to Wikimedia Commons. It should be available on there soon. (SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 22:48, 18 January 2021 (UTC))

@SurprisedMewtwoFace: That would be me. Thank you so much for doing that! I will transcribe the Zorro series fairly soon then. PseudoSkull (talk) 23:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
@PseudoSkull: The upload is now complete on Wikimedia Commons. Hope you find this useful! You can find it at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Don_Q_Son_of_Zorro.webm (SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC))
Incredibly useful, and a good quality encode, thanks! PseudoSkull (talk) 04:58, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
(Keep an eye out for Don Q, Son of Zorro if you're interested in the movie) PseudoSkull (talk) 04:58, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks so much for all your work! I'm sure you'll do a great job transcribing it. (SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 05:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC))

The Unholy Three (1925 film)[edit]

I have noticed that none of the pages on Wikipedia or Wikisource have the film "The Unholy Three" by Tod Browning, which is now public domain. I have found a high-quality no-music upload of this film on Internet Archive and am now uploading it to Wikimedia. I hope this is helpful and increases access to the film. (SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 12:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC))

Nice! Thank you again! I hadn't even stumbled across that film yet and so it's not in the WikiProject Film list, so well done. @SurprisedMewtwoFace: By any chance, could you grab a copy of Stella Dallas (1925 film)? Here's a copy, for example, but the audio and unofficial title and ending need to be stripped. PseudoSkull (talk) 12:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
By the way, if you'd like, you could join Wikisource:WikiProject Film, a collaborative effort on Wikisource's film coverage, with a lot of resources on films listed. PseudoSkull (talk) 12:39, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@PseudoSkull: Upload is now complete. You can find it at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Unholy_Three.webm (SurprisedMewtwoFace} (talk) 18:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)))

CSS help wanted[edit]

Page:The New Yorker 0001 1925-02-21.pdf/25. I spent hours on this unholy mess. I give up. Can anyone make this work? —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:22, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

{{overfloat image}} is good in combination with plain text but much worse for combinations with table-like designs.
I suggest to upload images of single bags instead of one image of both bags. Then we can create a table with a cell on the left spanning across four rows and containing an image of the bag, a column of four cells in the middle, and a cell with the other bag on the right. Alternatively, it should be OK to use only one image of the bag twice. For the middle cells I would use {{dotted cell}}. If you agree with this solution, I can do it. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 10:07, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a single bag image already on Commons but that is not tabular data, so it's bad semantics. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Can I ask the question "why?" We are here to represent the text in a way that reasonably portrays the publication. We are not slaves to an absolute facsimile. If something is an artefact, like that image, then stick in the image as a png/jpg, as long as people can see what the page contained, then so what that it somewhat differs in look, that will happen due to screen width and the toggle of screen layout. When it gets to be an epub, it will be different again, so why do we fuss beyond a representation? — billinghurst sDrewth 03:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
yeah, i would be happy with a centered image in the middle of text in one column, and push corner image (not text) to bottom. - like side footnotes, verisimilitude is more trouble than it is worth. thanks for trying though. and only 44 issues to work on. Slowking4Rama's revenge 01:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: The reason why is because accessibility is not optional. I agree that we are not obliged to have complete photographic reproduction, just typographic and as long as we can make the text appear in some logical fashion, that's what matters (e.g. I did not try to retain all of the pagination-related formatting such as arbitrary columns). The frustrating thing is that HTML and CSS can do this but I'm just failing to make it actualized on this page. —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Koavf: Why can't you add the image, and add the text as alt=. That is generally what I have done when I have added pictures of monuments where the words are evident in the photographs. Or simply give a good alt description when it is an inconsequential part of the reproduction. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: That is also bad semantics: the purpose of alt text is to serve as an alternative to the image in cases where (e.g.) someone is blind or someone has images turned off or someone has bandwidth constrictions and the image won't load. Including alt text for a monument, grave marker, sign, etc. where the actual object has writing on it as an integral part is appropriate but adding it here would not be. That said, were someone to do this, where would you actually put the text itself for users who are reading it? —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:55, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
It is a trade-off where we are reproducing a work from ages ago where the work is not envisioned to be presented. With these works, add the image, if there is text on the image then transcribe it; explain it. Trying to reproduce the text in a scroll box at an angle seems like a waste of good time and effort to try and facsimile. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:04, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Slowking4: Yes, unfortunately, there is still a lot to do in an ideal sense, such as converting line drawings to SVG and having transparencies instead of opacities, etc.) I'm reasonably happy with what I've been able to accomplish there minus this CSS problem. I'm not sure how motivated I am to personally go thru the Herculean task of the entire first year of The New Yorker but if I have assistance, I'd be motivated to continue. —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
oh, it is not that herculean. just have to make some proofread compromises. should be all red, if not yellow, by year end, just in time for next year's batch. Slowking4Rama's revenge 18:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Not at the rate it's going now: it's taken three weeks to do one issue and that's without all of the best practices I mentioned above. Plus, that has probably been c. 100 hours, so that would be two full-time jobs doing it by myself thru the year (which I will not commit to) and the fact that I've done a lot of the heavy lifting solo (altho, of course, I am very appreciative of any the work that my collaborators have added and continue to add). Additionally, the scans of subsequent issues are much lower rez and missing pages, which will require a decent amount of forensics and reconstruction. I would be pleasantly surprised if we were half-way done by the end of the year before an even bigger crop of issues drops. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:45, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Alice in Wonderland (1903 film)[edit]

As I was doing some maintenance on all films across the project, I noticed this film's encode was deleted from Commons (see the deletion discussion). Having a transcript with no film is not good. It could still be reuploaded here though, though it will be PD enough for Commons' standards in just a few years. PseudoSkull (talk) 04:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

on hold In the process of migrating the file, though pywikibot on toolforge is failing for me phabricator ticket in play. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst:, task T272345 is resolved. Mpaa (talk) 21:20, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

PDF icon[edit]

Can we change our PDF download icon from Pdfreaders-f.svg to something like Document-pdf.svg (which is what frWS uses)? Or something else from commons:Category:PDF icons under Public Domain. Using the FSFE "free PDF reader" graphic is a noble aim, but PDF icons are white with a red trefoil for the vast, vast majority of people, and the "f and green" means nothing to most people, so there's no instant visual recognition. If we really can't tolerate the trefoil, the icon should at least use a "red" metaphor. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 11:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

@Inductiveload: Are you watching the work Community Tech is doing on export? At least one of the tasks covers icons and descriptions, and one way or another these two should be sync'ed. --Xover (talk) 14:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I am, but AFAIK there's not been much about icons so far. There are some very small icons on phab:T271869, but they won't be obvious at all without a label next to them. Perhaps if we just have a textual "download" button we won't need any icons, but I wonder how obvious that will be for passer-bys. And the front page especially is text-heavy (by necessity), so icons help differentiate from the content of the works.
And we can always swap it out for a really nice themed set later on if one appears. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 14:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: Well, I was thinking more along the lines that it won't help if we find nice icons if they use crap ones, but… :) --Xover (talk) 14:18, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: that sounds like a bun fight for a future day? For now, it's just {{featured download}} and {{export}} (and the icon from Mediawiki:Mobile.css). Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 14:26, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have no preference as long as it suitably indicative of what is being presented. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:48, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Share your feedback on the OCR improvements![edit]

Magic Wand Icon 229981 Color Flipped.svg

Hello, everyone! We (the team responsible for the Community Wishlist Survey) have just launched the project for OCR improvements! With this project, we aim to improve the experience of using OCR tools on Wikisource. Please refer to our project page, which provides a full summary of the project and the main problem areas that we have identified.

We would then love if you could answer the questions below. Your feedback is incredibly important to us and it will directly impact the choices we make. Thank you in advance, and we look forward to reading your feedback! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:35, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Public Domain Day 2021[edit]

A reminder that many works will enter public domain on Jan 1, 2021. We have a page Wikisource:Requested texts/1925 that lists some of these works.

Please keep in mind that:

  • Some works enter public domain in their country of publication but not in the US, in which case we would not host them on Wikisource.
  • Some works enter public domain in the US, but not in their country of publication, so scans of these works must be hosted locally on Wikisource and not on Commons. There are notes about the date an Author died on the page listings to make this determination easier. Most often, the issue is a UK publication, where copyright applies until 70 years after the author's death.
  • And some works are entering public domain in the US, and were published in the US or were already in public domain in their country of publication. These works should have their scans uploaded to Commons.

Also keep in mind that some databases will have imperfect scans. It is always a good idea to give a new scan a thorough check to ensure no pages are duplicated, missing, upside-down, or otherwise problematic before starting transcription. Some scans entering public domain have not had many sets of eyes checking them. And a happy Public Domain Day to everyone. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I wish you a happy Public Domain Day, and TBH I care about that more than the actual "New Year" holiday. As a side question, do works all officially go into the public domain at 12:00 AM EST? Or is it when all US time zones have crossed to 2021? PseudoSkull (talk) 00:37, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
That's a tricky question, since the US publications were generally published in New York (EST) but the servers are in PST. I generally start once the scan of a work is available at whatever scan repository hosts it, which can be several days after. I do not know what timing Commons uses for this issue. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
yeah, the copyright lawyers tend to go for date and year only, so no case law for time of day, either UTC, EST, or NZST. it's five o'clock somewhere. Great Gatsby and New Yorker have the most buzz, but hard to find first editions. Slowking4Rama's revenge 01:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Please undelete previous versions of The Great Gatsby. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

We will want to do that when the clock hits 12 AM EST at least. That's 1hr8m from time of posting. (But we need to make sure there's a source DJVU or PDF first.) I'm hyped! PseudoSkull (talk) 03:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I took a look. Only one of the deleted Gatsby edits contains the text of the novel, as a single-page info-dump, from Gutenberg Australia. I do not know how reliable their texts are. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:17, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
that scan version. [10] has a 1953 renewal. Slowking4Rama's revenge 21:25, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
As I understand it, renewals for 1925 works should not be relevant any more… Am I right? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:37, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Correct. And thus, our tags of 1925-not-renewed templates should just be changed to 1925-expired, as that trumps even the lack of renewal. PseudoSkull (talk) 21:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
it is not a first edition, so you should not put a 1925 on it. which may not matter for this work, but some authors revised considerably, and the general lack of firsts is a problem. Slowking4Rama's revenge 01:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
That is true. However, there is the original 1925 edition available too. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 01:46, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
And the first edition is now available at File:The Great Gatsby (1925).djvu and Index:The Great Gatsby (1925).djvu, at the full resolution HathiTrust has (but won't let you download). Work is ongoing at Index:The Great Gatsby - Fitzgerald - 1925.djvu using the post-1953 reprint, but I might actually be tempted to dive in on this one myself just so we have the first edition too. Time permitting… --Xover (talk) 03:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
it seems to be fully downloadable now. don't know that the editions are different enough to matter. we should really cultivate a wikipedia library / academic librarian with hathi access to work a download list. Slowking4Rama's revenge 21:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Well let's make it official[edit]

Happy Public Domain Day, as it is now 2021 in EST, a time zone within the US! Please welcome our new handful of public-domain works, now freed of their needlessly restrictive copyrights. PseudoSkull (talk) 05:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

If we want to be generous, I suppose we should wait three more hours for PST to go into 2021, though. PseudoSkull (talk) 05:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
If you want to be really thorough, wait for Hawaii. BD2412 T 07:31, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I would like to wait for UTC-12 to enter New Year next time to be fully thorough, despite no one living on Baker nor Howland Island.--Jusjih (talk) 04:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree with this. BD2412 T 17:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
I don't see any point in being so careful. Even pedantically speaking, I can't see it being worse than filing in the federal courts in California, under PST, and even that I think would be tossed out as de minimis. It's cutting such thin straws to push it after that.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay, then, on January 1, 2022 at 7:00 AM EST, several films from 1926, under copyright right now, will have transcriptions automatically added to Wikisource by PastLovingBot. By then no incredibly litigious lawyer with nothing better to do could argue that we uploaded something 1 hour before it technically went PD for all US time zones, because some EVIL SAILOR who is stranded on Howland Island might PIRATE the movie there via satellite Internet, and have it finished downloading 1 hour before midnight. What kind of HORRIBLE man that sailor would be, isn't that right, copyright lawyer? Shame on him! PseudoSkull (talk) 18:11, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

RfC: HotCat and better customisation[edit]

HotCat is a gadget that enables easier categorisation of pages throughout the wiki. There has been customisation undertaken to make things easier for our needs, or to stop duplications, or to allow for finding categories after they have been moved. There is also possible customisation that users can do individually, and some of these we can do collectively.

I invite users to read the help pages at Commons => c:Help:Gadget-HotCat and consider should we be doing some better local configuration. Current local configuration at MediaWiki:Gadget-HotCat.js/local_defaults.

At the moment we have it configured to traverse up and down hierarchies, to use its redirect functionality (present in {{category redirect}} and use the feature to not populate certain categories. We have not got any shortcuts in place globally, though I use a couple for some of my current project work.

Just putting it out there in case anyone can think of valuable changes we could discuss. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)