Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2022-12

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.

OCR failure

Both Tesseract and Google are giving me:

Error from the OCR tool: Image URL must begin with one of the following domain names and end with a valid file extension: upload.wikimedia.org and upload.wikimedia.beta.wmflabs.org

I've waited several hours, but the issue persists. Is anyone else seeing this? Does anyone know why? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:13, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

This is being tracked in T324740. It appears that the changes I have made in T298663 have broken the WikimediaOCR implementation :( Sohom Datta (talk) 12:44, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Now resolved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:16, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct News – Issue 1

Universal Code of Conduct News
Issue 1, June 2021Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the first issue of Universal Code of Conduct News! This newsletter will help Wikimedians stay involved with the development of the new code, and will distribute relevant news, research, and upcoming events related to the UCoC.

Please note, this is the first issue of UCoC Newsletter which is delivered to all subscribers and projects as an announcement of the initiative. If you want the future issues delivered to your talk page, village pumps, or any specific pages you find appropriate, you need to subscribe here.

You can help us by translating the newsletter issues in your languages to spread the news and create awareness of the new conduct to keep our beloved community safe for all of us. Please add your name here if you want to be informed of the draft issue to translate beforehand. Your participation is valued and appreciated.

  • Affiliate consultations – Wikimedia affiliates of all sizes and types were invited to participate in the UCoC affiliate consultation throughout March and April 2021. (continue reading)
  • 2021 key consultations – The Wikimedia Foundation held enforcement key questions consultations in April and May 2021 to request input about UCoC enforcement from the broader Wikimedia community. (continue reading)
  • Roundtable discussions – The UCoC facilitation team hosted two 90-minute-long public roundtable discussions in May 2021 to discuss UCoC key enforcement questions. More conversations are scheduled. (continue reading)
  • Phase 2 drafting committee – The drafting committee for the phase 2 of the UCoC started their work on 12 May 2021. Read more about their work. (continue reading)
  • Diff blogs – The UCoC facilitators wrote several blog posts based on interesting findings and insights from each community during local project consultation that took place in the 1st quarter of 2021. (continue reading)


—unsigned comment by SOyeyele (WMF) (talk) 22:37, 10 June 2021‎ (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

J3l

The Works of the Late Edgar Allan Poe/Volume 1/The Domain of Arnheim —unsigned comment by 202.165.87.161 (talk) 18:52, 25 December 2021 ‎(UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-49

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

  • The Wikisources use a tool called ProofreadPage. ProofreadPage uses OpenSeadragon which is an open source tool. The OpenSeadragon JavaScript API has been significantly re-written to support dynamically loading images. The functionality provided by the older version of the API should still work but it is no longer supported. User scripts and gadgets should migrate over to the newer version of the API. The functionality provided by the newer version of the API is documented on MediaWiki. [1][2]

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 6 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 7 December. It will be on all wikis from 8 December (calendar).

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

MediaWiki message delivery 00:41, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Small caps not working in links

For example Testing should be showing in small caps but it isn't. Does anyone know why? Jpez (talk) 06:26, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jpez: This is a known bug with no concrete timeframe for resolution. The standard workaround is to always put formatting outside the link (i.e. {{sc|[[A|Testing]]}}), possibly splitting it into multiple links where the linked text has disuniform formatting. Xover (talk) 07:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
@Jpez: I have undone the migration to template styles. Xover If the migration is broken, let us not do that migration until there is a fix as this is not an urgent conversion. You may wish to track those broken templates for later reverting to template styles. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:00, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Special:LintErrors not updating?

Hi,

I was recently using Special:LintErrrors to find missing end tags.. - I'd fixed some noted here - https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LintErrors/missing-end-tag&dir=prev went to update the page to clear them, and nothing happened.

Is this now updated on a less regular schedule? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

A policy on sensitive or controversial works?

Wikisource needs to develop a policy about how to handle sensitive works:- Some thoughts.

  • Wikisource is NOT generally censored.
  • Wikisource will thus potentially contain texts, which reflect views, opinions or understanding held at the time of their publication, or by their authors, that :-
    • are highly objectionable, hateful, offensive, subject to ideological bias &c.; which may be considered unacceptable by current (as of writing 2022) academic and collegial standards;
    • contain highly flawed (or false) information, reasoning, conclusions, opinions or methodology; or subsequently discredited by later critical research in a given field.;
    • are inclusive of depictions of individual persons, groups and cultural practices, that misrepresent (either directly or inadvertently) those individuals, persons or cultural practices.
  • Wikisource disclaims any endorsement of "objectionable material" in works, or of the authors it transcribes.
  • Works which contain 'objectionable material, should be backed by appropriate original media, as confirmation that it was not added by a third party subsequent to the original publication.
  • Where sincere concerns about text(s) featured on Wikisource exist, are raised in an appropriate forum a panel of admins or experienced contributor will review the continued republication of the work on Wikisource.
  • Material which breaches applicable (US?) laws, will be removed or appropriately redacted to remove the contentious material concerned.
  • Review of text(s) which have been subsequently retracted by original authors or editors of the publications in which it was originally (re)published, should take into account the good faith being applied by those authors or editors in respect of the retraction, Due consideration should also be given to ethical, peer-review or methodology concerns raised externally.

By no means complete, but a starting point for discussion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:13, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose. We already have {{Moral disclaimer}} (created for “On the Creation of Niggers”), which can be added wherever vandalism arises. Besides that (in terms of what works to include), I believe the current policy (of not allowing editorial censorship) is wise, and should not be changed. Your first, second, and third points are included in the general disclaimer, and it is unnecessary to repeat them. I object to your fourth point on general grounds. As for your fifth point, we already have Wikisource:Proposed deletions, and no further place is necessary. For your sixth point, see Wikisource:Copyright discussions. I oppose your last point (which is related to a specific paper) for the reasons given in my response to your proposed deletion. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:03, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
    • And, for the record, I oppose the use of {{Moral disclaimer}} for reasons other than the prevention of vandalism. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
      This was by no means even a draft policy yet, but I would like to thank you for your robust consideration of the points and issues raised.
      On your objection to my fourth point, The reason for this point, was so there was a check against third-party vandalism 'adjusting' what an original work actually said or inserting additional material not present. I would hope that you support measures to ensure transcription integrity.
      ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:05, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I also oppose most of your points. I want wikisource to remain what it is, a source of original texts and nothing else. No disclaimers, no opinions about any of the works, no annotations, no censorship, just the source. Conversations of the works can be had elsewhere even on the scriptorium here I guess, or maybe even in the portal talk pages. Jpez (talk) 20:06, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
In general I also oppose. My thoughts are that Wikisource contains two sets of texts, archival (pre 1927) and recent texts of a documentary nature. For archival almost all these points are taken as given. If users cannot understand how archival material works and source bias that is not really something we can address, and concerns around fidelity to the original material and legality of hosting should be handled by other policies already. In general I think it is going to cause more problems if we start flagging particular authors and not others. If we flag German government official documents during WWI as biased but not American / British one say. If there is a desire to make an "age appropriate" version of WS that is targeted at children that is a completely separate discussion but currently we should expect our users to be able to judge archival materials. For contemporary materials (e.g. does a retraction mean that it is no longer published?, what types of publications merit inclusion?, etc.) I think it is going to be case by case and built up over time rather than coming from first principles. MarkLSteadman (talk) 18:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
sympathetic, but if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. objectionable or controversial is problematic, as vocal activists object to Beloved. and would you classify the Mueller Report as such? i don’t see a rash of drama uploads to this sleepy project. i do see a bunch of drama in the UK as they seek to make the internet safe for children yet again. [3] --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 00:58, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Reading the bottom of our site already gets: "By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy." Thus we do not need more disclaimers.--Jusjih (talk) 20:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

A sortable table syle shorthand list is now available

If interested, please copy this page. This list was was prepared on 2022-12-05. — ineuw (talk) 22:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Retracted paper

Index:I am not alone (Andersson paper).pdf has been retracted. This is indicated in the Commons file description and the Wikidata item. Should it be indicated here too? Brianjd (talk) 14:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

The Commons file was nominated for deletion; after I pointed out that the file was still in scope, that request was closed as ‘keep’ with no further comment. My question here stands: should Wikisource mark the paper as retracted? Brianjd (talk) 05:49, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
WS:WWI It is a published paper with a license that allows us to publish it. So there is nothing that appears to put it out of scope. WS:CV is for nominating copyright issues; WS:PD for nominating works for deletion. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Brianjd: (uploader) Yeah, I missed the Commons discussion, but there is no need for a retraction notice anywhere. I got it a few hours before it was withdrawn (and then retracted a while later). The license is acceptable: I checked that before I uploaded the file. Thus, there is no problem of any sort. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:43, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Is the Retraction notice also under a license appropriate for Commons? It should be on Wikisource as well if it is. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:45, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Withdrawn - based on comments below ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

It is worth bearing in mind the following part of the retraction notice:

the Editorial Team recognises the argument that the note legitimizes sexual activity involving sexually graphic illustrated images of children and young people, both as an activity in itself and as a research method. Such arguments make the note highly problematic due to the potential to cause significant harm.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for raising that point. On what you said the original "note" is NOT "appropriate" and thus, should not be on Wikisource. Given the retracted nature of the work, the highly controversial topic, and the ethical concerns, should the work also be removed from Wikisource?

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Deletion discussion started, Wikisource:Proposed_deletions#Index:I_am_not_alone_(Andersson_paper).pdf ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks SF00. I was going to open a deletion discussion myself as that's the better venue for deciding whether or not to delete an individual text. But let me also emphasise that the discussion here does touch on some wider policy-type issues, and those could with benefit be continued here. We have a poor track record on handling sensitive and controversial content, so it is an issue on which it would be beneficial for us as a community to reflect and perhaps also to codify some principles. Xover (talk) 07:12, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Some of those wider issues are being already being discussed at the deletion discussion, hopefully in a way that sets a useful precedent. Brianjd (talk) 05:06, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-50

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 later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 13 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 14 December. It will be on all wikis from 15 December (calendar).
  • The HTML markup used by DiscussionTools to show discussion metadata below section headings will be inserted after these headings, not inside of them. This change improves the accessibility of discussion pages for screen reader software. [6]

Events

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

MediaWiki message delivery 23:34, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

H P Lovecraft´s "At the Mountains of Madness"

This work, from Astonishing Tales, was listed in the Monthly Challenge. I have been working on it via the index page - Index:Astounding_Stories_1936-02.pdf. Suddenly, that page has been blanked. I assume it was because of the copyright issue mentioned on the related talk page.

I have read claims that all of Lovecraft's fiction is now in the public domain. If that is correct, shouldn't that story remain ?

If this story is still under copyright, shouldn't that have been checked before including it in the Monthly Challenge ? And shouldn't there have been some warning before the deletion ? -- Beardo (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

  • Beardo: The file, which had been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, was deleted there because it was a copyright violation. While it is sometimes an annoyance, there is no requirement to notify local users of files uploaded at Wikimedia Commons that such files are going to be deleted. As for this file, I cannot say why Languageseeker failed to exercise due diligence in determining the copyright status of this issue (and two succeeding issues also deleted) before he uploaded them; you should ask him. Relating to the Lovecraft story, if it is in the public domain, than it must have been published in some other periodical before it was published in this one; otherwise, it is still copyrighted (until 1936+95+1=2032). The Index:, Index talk:, and all created in Page: (for which see here) should be deleted. The renewal is as follows:
ASTOUNDING STORIES.  © Conde Nast
  Publications, Inc. (PCW)
  v.16, no.
…
    6, Feb36.  © 15Jan36; B287485.
      6Feb63; R309944.
—unsigned comment by TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) .
apparently, there is a lag between when written, and when published. and in the EU his works were public domain fifteen years ago. serial renewals are the domain of professional librarians [7], astounding stories, such are the complicated US formalities where you are proving a negative by searching pdfs; people can be forgiven for their hope over experience. --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 04:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2023 opens in January

Please help translate to your language

(There is a translatable version of this message on MetaWiki)

Hello

The Community Wishlist Survey (CWS) 2023, which lets contributors propose and vote for tools and improvements, starts next month on Monday, 23 January 2023, at 18:00 UTC and will continue annually.

We are inviting you to share your ideas for technical improvements to our tools and platforms. Long experience in editing or technical skills is not required. If you have ever used our software and thought of an idea to improve it, this is the place to come share those ideas!

The dates for the phases of the Survey will be as follows:

  • Phase 1: Submit, discuss, and revise proposals – Monday, Jan 23, 2023 to Sunday, Feb 6, 2023
  • Phase 2: WMF/Community Tech reviews and organizes proposals – Monday, Jan 30, 2023 to Friday, Feb 10, 2023
  • Phase 3: Vote on proposals – Friday, Feb 10, 2023 to Friday, Feb 24, 2023
  • Phase 4: Results posted – Tuesday, Feb 28, 2023

If you want to start writing out your ideas ahead of the Survey, you can start thinking about your proposals and draft them in the CWS sandbox.

We are grateful to all who participated last year. See you in January 2023!

Thank you! Community Tech, STei (WMF) 16:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-51

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

Tech News

  • Because of the holidays the next issue of Tech News will be sent out on 9 January 2023.

Recent changes

  • On a user's contributions page, you can filter it for edits with a tag like 'reverted'. Now, you can also filter for all edits that are not tagged like that. This was part of a Community Wishlist 2022 request. [8]
  • A new function has been used for gadget developers to add content underneath the title on article pages. This is considered a stable API that should work across all skins. Documentation is available. [9]
  • One of our test wikis is now being served from a new infrastructure powered by Kubernetes (read more). More Wikis will switch to this new infrastructure in early 2023. Please test and let us know of any issues. [10]

Problems

  • Last week, all wikis had no edit access for 9 minutes. This was caused by a database problem. [11]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week or next week.
  • The word "Reply" is very short in some languages, such as Arabic ("ردّ"). This makes the Discussion tools button on talk pages difficult to use. An arrow icon will be added to those languages. This will only be visible to editors who have the Beta Feature turned on. [12] [13]

Future changes

  • Edits can be automatically "tagged" by the system software or the Abuse filter management system. Those tags link to a help page about the tags. Soon they will also link to Recent Changes to let you see other edits tagged this way. This was a Community Wishlist 2022 request. [14]
  • The Trust & Safety tools team have shared new plans for building the Private Incident Reporting System. The system will make it easier for editors to ask for help if they are harassed or abused.
  • Realtime Preview for Wikitext is coming out of beta as an enabled feature for every user of the 2010 Wikitext editor in the week of January 9, 2023. It will be available to use via the toolbar in the 2010 Wikitext editor. The feature was the 4th most popular wish of the Community Wishlist Survey 2021.

Events

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

MediaWiki message delivery 00:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

House Select Committee on Assassinations, final report

Hi, Just in case someone is interested to proofread that I imported the file to Commons: c:File:House Select Committee on Assassinations, final report.pdf. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I made a start on portions of this, but would appreciate someone evaluting the few pages I have done to advise on the 'correct' approaches to take. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Index:House Select Committee on Assassinations, final report.pdf. Yann (talk) 19:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Public Domain day 2023 is rapidly approaching

We have a working list of works that will enter public domain (in the United States, or worldwide). There are some high-profile works on the list already, but there may be others not listed as yet. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

see also john mark ockerbloom list blog Public Domain Day countdown on public social media networks. --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 00:50, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2023/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:35, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

File:A Room with a View.djvu

This file needs to be moved to a local upload. It will be deleted on Commons, since it is not in public domain in its country of origin. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I never transferred a file from the Commons, but I have the same copy for direct upload. And can't upload it because it already exists. — ineuw (talk) 00:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
An admin can import it at Special:Import. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:02, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
It's done. — ineuw (talk) 01:20, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

The Horror at Red Hook → The Horror at Red Hook (unknown)

I’m asking to move this page and all of its subpages without leaving redirects due to introduction of Weird Tales/Volume 9/Issue 1/The Horror at Red Hook, so a disambiguation page could be made at the page’s old address. --Nonexyst d 23:28, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Changed into redirect and subpages deleted per Wikisource:Deletion policy#G4. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 00:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Here are some more that can be deleted for the same reason:
Dagon (unknown)
The Terrible Old Man (unknown)
The Picture in the House (unknown)
Hypnos (unknown)
The Diary of Alonzo Typer (unknown)
Through the Gates of the Silver Key (unknown)
Polaris (unknown) --Nonexyst d 18:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikisource Listing Format

Right now I'm working on transcribing CIA intelligence surveys of selected countries from the early 1970s.

I have the portal set up sorting the surveys by topic (ex. Armed Forces, Government and Politics, Science, Economy, etc.) but I'm not sure whether it would look better that way or displaying it by country (ex. Spain's surveys, then Sweden's surveys, and so on.)

What is the general consensus on this? Should I sort by topic or country? Which would be easier to read and be more visually appealing?

Please feel free to take a look: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Portal:Central_Intelligence_Agency JoeSolo22 (talk) 21:06, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

please work from the pdf uploaded on commons to start a match and split, rather than dumping the CIA pdf, as source. i.e. [15] ; i see only one national intelligence survey there c:File:National Intelligence Survey Gazetteer for Communist China CIA-RDP01-00707R000100130002-2.pdf ; you have the example of The World Factbook (1982) from c:File:CIA World Factbook(1982).djvu as an example. --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 22:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
So what you're saying is that I need to upload each individual NIS report (of which there are over 100) to Commons then work from there as opposed to just dumping the link from the CIA FOIA reading room?
I'm also a little confused as I was asking about how the reports should be sorted in a list visually and what the preferred format would be (topic vs. country-specific) and not at all really about how the reports should be sourced or anything like that.
JoeSolo22 (talk) 23:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
with a sortable table, we can sort both ways Help:Table, mw:Help:Sorting (although table code is a little advanced, you can use an excel to table converter [16]).
it’s important to do the pre-work to build page by page links to the source pdf image. see also What to do about incomplete, non-scan backed texts that have been sitting around for more than a decade. if you don’t want to do the 200 uploads, give me a week or two and I will. --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 01:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
If you wouldn't mind that would be great. Thanks!
JoeSolo22 (talk) 01:38, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
and the reason why you are having to custom build a table of contents, is their piecemeal release of pdfs. might want to consider a National Intelligence Surveys page to hold the table of contents, as it sure looks like a work, and better to find a pdf with a list of countries. i.e. this one [17]
you have some double counted, how would you characterize NIS 11, Sweden - is it a Society Survey or a Economy Survey? I suspect that the pdfs will have the topics combined, but lets see. --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 01:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Building a separate page is a good idea, I might do that.
I did not see the index of countries that you attached - very interesting how they actually sorted them. I've been going off the CIA's FOIA reading room page of the documents they've declassified.
If you look at some of the surveys - they are split into Economy, Society, Armed Forces, etc, as in the case of Sweden. However, for some countries (such as Romania, Bulgaria, Albania) throw them all into one larger General Survey, but for the sake of simplicity I was going to separate all of them; especially since there are some countries that do not have every topic of survey - i.e. Spain having an Armed Forces Survey out but not a Government and Politics or Economy one. Whether that's because of classification or because one wasn't written, I'm not sure.
JoeSolo22 (talk) 02:08, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Update: I created a new page to hold all the surveys and am going off of the document you sent, listing all countries and if they don't have documents, marking them as classified. That way, if/when the CIA declassifies those documents, they will be able to added when that time comes.
Portal:Central Intelligence Agency/National Intelligence Surveys
Only about 20% of it is done since I have to go through and cross-reference - but that looks much better, I think. Please provide any feedback - I've only been doing this for less than a year and don't have a ton of experience in dealing with Wikisource!
JoeSolo22 (talk) 16:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
you are adopting a wikipedia style with sections. on wikisource, we tend to follow the text table of contents with linking. we do not need the wiki toc. you are adopting a gutenberg text dump. we convert those to match and split. your work is going to be recast. --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 14:09, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
My work is going to be recast? What does that mean?
I apologize, am very unfamiliar with the wiki vernacular as I am recently new to this.
JoeSolo22 (talk) 15:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Just as an aside, I was told the way I've been doing it previously was fine, as long as the information was sourced. It is massively easier to just "dump" the text into one page rather than split each page, as I assume you're referring to; both in terms of adding the reports and overall readability, in my opinion.
I understand it may not be how Wikisource does things but this is not like a standard book or other piece of literature that is normally on here. It is a usually short report about some aspect of a country that the CIA has created. The amount of headache that is required to upload each file as well as split pages and then transcribe is more than I'm willing to spend my free time doing at the moment. Thanks.
JoeSolo22 (talk) 16:43, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
it means that your wikipedia articles will be edited to look like a text, as in the CIA yearbook examples i gave you.
i should like to know who told you that; perhaps some admins here would like to have a word. you have not provided a source, rather you rely on others to search the CIA database. easier and out of consensus, you just don’t like the learning curve;, you are lucky your work is not summarily deleted, as discussed in the consensus that i linked, thanks.
here are some indexes to work on, they will be the basis of this work going forward, not your text dumps. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; TRANSPORTATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; THE SOCIETY, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; THE ECONOMY, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; SCIENCE, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; MILITARY GEOGRAPHY, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; COUNTRY PROFILE, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 14; POLAND; ARMED FORCES .--Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 22:48, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Okay. I apologize. I am not trying to go against the grain, I was just not aware how it is done. Thank you for alerting me to this before I got too far into the weeds.
I have opened one of the indexes you attached. I assume from there, I select "1" and begin transcribing page by page? Again, sorry if I'm being annoying. I just want to make sure this is right, and once I'm clear, I'm willing to fix what I've already done and rectify all of this. Thank you.
JoeSolo22 (talk) 23:10, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Update: I have figured out what to do via Wikisource guides and I think I've figured out how to begin transcribing and making sure everything is all set up correctly.
If you'd like please check my work, and I assume I should upload all of the reports and delete all of the text dumps I've done before?
Also how should all the reports be organized - links to the indexes in the NIS-specific portal?
Again, thanks for your help, and have a happy holiday season.
JoeSolo22 (talk) 01:55, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
thanks, that’s a good start. i will list the other indexes in the portal page, and repaginate them. sorry about the file names, i will improve those, for future uploads. please don’t delete, rather we will edit those with the transclusion of the pages (stitching together the page views to get the chapter view). here is another pdf that would work as a table of contents. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS NATURE, PURPOSE, AND SCOPE OF THE NIS PROGRAM. --Slowking4 亞 Farmbrough's revenge 14:14, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

January 6 Committee reports

For anyone interested, I have uploaded the executive summary to the committee report (Index:Introductory Material to the Final Report of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.pdf), the shadow committee report (Index:Security Failures at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.pdf), and the full committee report (Index:Final Report of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.pdf). TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I created Portal:Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol to host links to transcription projects for the executive summary to the committee report and the full committee report. If that name is too unwieldy, I'm fine with someone moving the portal to a different name (which I assume that's possible on Wikisource.)
A portal for the January 6th attack in general could include the shadow committee report and other documents, but I'm not sure exactly what parent portal it would fit under. Lovelano (talk) 08:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

UFOs

Hi, I uploaded several documents in c:Category:US Federal documents related to UFOs (42 files now, not including subcategory c:Category:Project Blue Book). You may be interested to transcribe some of these files. What about creating a portal for this subject? Yann (talk) 22:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

ditto template

Something got wrong with the {{ditto}} template, which renders well in the page namespace, but does not work properly after being transcluded to the main namespace, compare e. g. Page:Modern and contemporary Czech art (1924).pdf/11 and Modern and contemporary Czech art. Could anybody have a look at it, please? -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:06, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Template:Disambiguation

It seems that the defaultsort parameter int the {{Disambiguation}} template does not work. For example Author:Mánes has it set to defaultsort=Manes, but it is still listed at the very end of the M section in the Category:Author disambiguation pages. If I remember it right, it worked well not a too long time ago. Can it be fixed, please? -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Exporting works to PDF

I have read somewhere that all the pages linked from the root page are exported into a PDF book after clicking the Download button. However, when I tried it with Modern and contemporary Czech art, the Illustrations page with the plates was not downloaded. May I ask what the problem is? -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

It was my experience that the big blue Download button was an option free quick thing, at the time, similar to Gutenberg no-images and I have avoided it in the years since. The pdf download is interesting, as a default setting. Use the options in the Navigation bar (Download/Print instead!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
@RaboKarbakian: Unfortunately, the result is the same, the Illustrations were not been included in the PDF. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 18:59, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Per Help:Preparing for export: "If you use any template that applies ws-summary (e.g. {{AuxTOC}}), then only links in that container will be used by default. If you have other links to include (e.g. in a TOC that's part of the original work), you can wrap that TOC in {{export TOC}} to add the ws-summary class to it." {{TOC begin}} applies ws summary so it will only pull items in the TOC and not additional tables in the root. MarkLSteadman (talk) 20:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Ah, thanks, that helped. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 20:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2022-12&oldid=12968743"