Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Scriptorium Scriptorium (Help) Archives, Last archive
The Scriptorium is Wikisource's community discussion page. This subpage is especially designated for requests for help from more experienced Wikisourcers. Feel free to ask questions or leave comments. You may join any current discussion or a new one. Project members can often be found in the #wikisource IRC channel webclient.

This page is automatically archived by Wikisource-bot

Have you seen our help pages and FAQs?


Language help[edit]

From time to time, I do the proofreading of Index:A History of Hindu Chemistry Vol 1.djvu. This work frequently has quotations and footnotes in Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, French and German. I have done the proofreading as best I could, but would appreciate if someone knowledgeable in languages could do some checking. Hrishikes (talk) 11:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Hrishikes, if you add the template {{greek missing}} to any Greek text you may find I'll add it for you. I can't help with the other languages though. Jpez (talk) 16:26, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jpez: I had just gone ahead and put the text there, so right now I can't remember where the Greek words are; however, in another of my projects, you can help with the footnotes on this and this page and other pages. Thanks in advance. Hrishikes (talk) 16:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I also keep an eye on Category:Pages with missing Greek characters, so anything tagged with {{greek missing}} will be gotten to eventually. I can help with Latin and French too if/whenever there is a list of problematic passages. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
So that explains why when I make my weekly visit to this category it's empty these days. Thanks for doing this. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Speaking of which, would it not be prudent to make Category:Problematic language templates for common Latin-alphabet languages, for precisely this reason? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
We've avoided doing this, because it's assumed that the diacritics of the European languages that use the Latin alphabet are easily accessed through the Latin option on drop down menu on the CharInsert bar. But if it's felt to be something that would be useful, then {{diacritics missing}} could be created. I'm suggesting just one template, rather than proliferating for all the Latin and Germanic languages. Alternatively, could just use the existing {{symbol missing}}. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
For starters:

With thanks, Hrishikes (talk) 17:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I've gone through most of them. They are all fine (better than some English-language proofreading I've seen) so there is no need for anything beyond the regular validation process. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
@Beleg Tâl: Many thanks. I was not really confident that they were OK. Though I try to be meticulous. Hrishikes (talk) 01:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Reworking material from elsewhere[edit]

I teach history at the university level, and want to ensure that I am giving students texts that are accurate, cited properly, and legal. The Internet Sourcebook is a nightmare in these respects, and cannot be corrected since it is no longer maintained. Wikisource strikes me as one of the best available solutions for fixing this situation due to its ability to provide a clear and verifiable relationship to an original document, and to break things down into appropriate sections rather than giving students a link to one massive file representing the entire book. But the process for importing material from elsewhere is unclear to me. I've posted a few books on Project Gutenberg, creating files in their PG RST format, which can be easily converted into MediaWiki markup using Pandoc. It would be ideal if you had software that could take such a file and automatically break it up to match a set of imported photos, using the in-text page numbers.

I would also appreciate the ability to show in the text where I have corrected the original, and on looking through the archives I see many other limitations, such as the lack of a standard way to insert sidenotes: these are much easier to encode in TEI, and it seems that there has been some discussion of using it, but I cannot find anything more recent than 2013. It would be brilliant if you would consider supporting something like TEI Simple, since this would allow all sorts of accurate materials from elsewhere to be added and corrected, such as from the Text Creation Partnership.AndrewNJ (talk) 21:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Delete pages from djvu[edit]

Hello, can someone please help me get rid of the two pages marked problematic (duplicate) here in this index before I star proofreading. Index:A Compendium of the Chief Doctrines of the True Christian Religion.djvu. Thanks in advance for any help. Jpez (talk) 08:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg DoneBeleg Tâl (talk) 15:07, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Jpez (talk) 15:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

1911 Encyclopædia Britannica[edit]

I've been finding all sorts of newly appearing errors in parts of the 1911 EB that previously included no errors. There may have been a template change or a software bug; I do not know.

Two affected pages are:

and

Oddly, the volume 26 is not behaving like a DjVu file when I visit it on Commons, and this may have something to do with the problem. However, I can see no edits in the edit histories there (or here) that would suggest anything. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:52, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: This is an ongoing issue. Perhaps Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help/Archives/2015#Error:_Numeric_value_expected ought to be dragged back out of the archives and somehow "pinned" here until the underlying problem is resolved? AuFCL (talk) 21:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea, provided you know how to pin the item here so that it is not bot-archived. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:06, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
You've got me right there. I was hoping somebody else knew how to do that! AuFCL (talk) 06:29, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Per User:Wikisource-bot#Delaying_or_preventing_archiving_of_particular_threads inserting, e.g. {{DNAU|120}} ought to pin this thread for 120 days. Worth doing? AuFCL (talk) 06:50, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
see also EB1911 Volume 25 Scan File Corruption note there is a phabricator https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86611#974012. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 18:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Iran nuclear deal[edit]

I can't figure out what is the license of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action:
http://eeas.europa.eu/statements-eeas/2015/150714_01_en.htm (links at the bottom)
Is it possible to put it on Wikisource? --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 18:38, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Triggerhippie4: Yes, you can put it onto Wikisource. Hard to tell immediately which licence the European Commission is releasing their documentation as it is vague here and aspirational here. I would say {{PD-EdictGov}} and have a poke at help:Copyright tags. If you have a source file (pdf or djvu), load it here, and we can look at it again, after some more opinions, then work out whether we copy to Commons. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:37, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Alternative text of speech by King Edward VIII of UK in 1936: ok or not?[edit]

King Edward during his abdication crisis submitted his proposed text to the government. Is the text of that speech suitable for inclusion in Wikisource? Darmokand (talk) 09:34, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Help is needed for a mysterious hanging indent problem[edit]

Can someone please look at this mystery? About halfway down the page there is a problem with the hanging indent of this index entry and can't figure why. All other entries with identical hanging indent, {{ts|padding-left:12.8em;text-indent:-10.2em;}}, line up perfectly. Cornell University. First Annual Report of the Agricultural Experiment Station, 1888 etc.Ineuw talk 06:13, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

They all lined perfectly because none of the initial strings were long enough to need wrapping; only the subsequent 2nd or 3rd entries needed it (plus were "padded" with template:gap). The difference between padding and indent should have followed the premise set by the rest of the "normal" entries (padding-left:4em; text-indent:-2em has a diff of 2.0em while padding-left:12.8em & text-indent:-10.2em is a diff of 2.6em) when it came to those exceptional lines (padding-left:12em; text-indent:-10em is still a diff of only 2.0em in other words). -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:48, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
and fyi... view that page again and tick your browser's select all option to "highlight" everything; note the normally "invisible" yet still clickable "hash" marks in the right margin. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes! Everything makes sense and thanks a lot. I suspected the wrap and noticed the clickable hash marks but didn't know what to make of it. As for the padding/indent differences, I tried to line up the text as in the original, but will settle for close. — Ineuw talk 16:18, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
n.b.:Instead of using two {{gap}} templates, you could use a single {{ditto}} template, and everything would align precisely. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:01, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Missing TOC Line[edit]

In Page:Forth Bridge (1890).djvu/7, the row under APPENDIX does not show. This is probably a simple fix for somebody who knows what they are doing. Thanks, Ostrichyearning (talk) 12:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done ; your {{sc}} template had too many pipes. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Content hierarchy of the American Journal of Sociology[edit]

I could use some help sorting out the best way to organize the hierarchy of the American Journal of Sociology. Specifically, I am unsure how to best organize the items which aren't fully-qualified articles, the things that fall under "Reviews," "Notes," "Recent Literature" and similar sections. Items under these broad sections seem to range anywhere from a handful of pages, to couple paragraphs, to a single sentence in length, or sometimes even lists. So far these have been collected into a single page and #section-linked, which is valid, but I wonder if and how these should be given their own subpages to emphasize them as standalone items. djr13 (talk) 19:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

A way to do it is by using Portals, see Portal:Popular Science Monthly for an example. Cheers, Captain Nemo (talk) 00:21, 30 July 2015 (UTC).

Formatting help[edit]

Suggestions welcomed for the formatting of headers in the PotM. See example. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, perhaps a better place for the discussion is Index talk:Parsons How to Know the Ferns 7th ed.djvu ?
Secondly, how about this:
{{block center/s}}
{|
|-
|{{ts|pr1}}|{{nowrap|GROUP I}}
|{{ts|bb|xs}}|STERILE AND FERTILE FRONDS TOTALLY UNLIKE; FERTILE FRONDS NOT LEAF-LIKE IN APPEARANCE
|-
|}
{{block center/e}}
GROUP I STERILE AND FERTILE FRONDS TOTALLY UNLIKE; FERTILE FRONDS NOT LEAF-LIKE IN APPEARANCE
GROUP II FERTILE FRONDS PARTIALLY LEAF-LIKE, FERTILE PORTION UNLIKE REST OF FROND
GROUP III FERTILE FRONDS UNIFORMLY SOMEWHAT LEAF-LIKE, YET DIFFERING NOTICEABLY FROM STERILE FRONDS
GROUP IV FERTILE AND STERILE FRONDS LEAF-LIKE AND SIMILAR; SPORANGIA ON OR BENEATH A REFLEXED MARGIN
GROUP IV FERTILE AND STERILE FRONDS LEAF-LIKE AND USUALLY SIMILAR; FRUIT-DOTS ROUND
Benefits: no hard line-break, no use of deprecated <u> tag, line will only be on the bottom row if the line has to wrap. I think the group description should be left-aligned browser default, but I am open to disagreement. We could also {{nowrap}} the two lines of the description so that if it wraps it will wrap at that specific point. We could also use a hard line-break but I think that is undesireable. Note that if there is a hard line break and the screen width is too small it will be really wonky.—Beleg Tâl (talk) 23:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)