Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to 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 (a web client is available).

This page is automatically archived by Wikisource-bot

Have you seen our help pages and FAQs?


Side by side columns over a page break[edit]

I have a text where there are two columns - effectively an original and a 'translation'. Both are several paragraphs of continuous text which flow over a page break. How can I practically do the layout for this? I can handle the first page using a table but see no obvious way to seamlessly 'join' both columns. See https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Protestant_Exiles_from_France_Agnew_vol_1.djvu/121 GreyHead (talk) 18:33, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

It's a bit tricky, but you could use sections to divide the separate text regions for transclusion. See Help:Transclusion. I'm using sections for the work I'm currently transcribing as well. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:36, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
I suggest to ignore the fact that the table is divided into two pages and write the whole table just in one page. I do it with divided pictures (Page:An Anthology of Modern Bohemian Poetry.pdf/12). --Jan Kameníček (talk) 09:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

The Murder on the Links[edit]

I have completed the proofread , now what do I do ? 005X (talk) 07:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

@005X: regarding The Murder on the Links, I advise that you leave it alone until the potential copyright issues are resolved. Once that is done, if we are able to keep the scan, the next step will be transclusion: Help:Beginner's guide to transclusionBeleg Tâl (talk) 23:23, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding pages to existing scanned book (Once A Week Volume II)[edit]

Hi — what should I do if I am looking through a scanned-and-indexed book and notice that some pages are missing? Would it be possible, if I have to insert two pages after scan number 140, to number them 140a and 140b? Levana Taylor (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

It is correct to raise the issue here. Please post the Index page, which page number and where to find the missing pages. Page numbering will be taken care accordingly. Someone will fix it.— Mpaa (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. The problematic book is Once a Week, Series 1, Volume II Dec 1859 to June 1860. I haven't finished looking through it all yet, but the problems I so-far found are: two pages missing after scan no. 140 [it is pages 128 and 129 of the book that are missing]; scan no. 462 cannot OCR; from scan 218 onward existing OCR'd texts are not matched with the correct page image. As for a source for a scan, there is Google Books. Levana Taylor (talk) 22:19, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
@Levana Taylor: -- I have added the two missing pages. Now if you want a page move, please give specifics: start page number, end page number, increment order. Hrishikes (talk) 08:23, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
@Hrishikes: I had a look at this as well.. The first batch of re-alignment needs to start at Page:Once_a_Week,_Series_1,_Volume_II_Dec_1859_to_June_1860.pdf/141 currently this has the text for page 130, but the scan is for page 128, this misalignment continues to the text currently at Page:Once a Week, Series 1, Volume II Dec 1859 to June 1860.pdf/240. after which there are a further 2 missing pages that need to be added. I'm still looking into what the misalignment for subsequent pages is. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
And there are plenty of other problems. The scan of 208 is in the right place, it is correctly followed by 209, but then we wrongly have 208 again, 209 again, and then 210 and so on as it should be. Then, where 225 ought to be, we have an image of 227 (but the same image is also in its correct place). Then, 228 and 229 are missing. 258 is followed by 261 then 260 then 261 again then 262 and 263, then we skip to 266, 267, 266 again, 267 again, then 268 onward are correct until 276 is followed by 279, 278, 281, 282, 281 again, 282 again. 283 and onward are OK, until 420 and 421 are missing and 422 & 423 appear twice. 502 and 503 are missing. Then later pages 512 and 513 appear twice. 602 and 603 are missing.
Let me summarize all that by naming ranges that have problems, starting and ending each range with pages that are correct. 207-210 ; 224-230 ; 258-268 ; 276-283 ; 419-424 ; 501-504 ; 511-514 ; 601-604.
Also the scans of 362 and 579 are bad (edge cut off), and the scan of 453 is crooked. That's all I see for now :-) Levana Taylor (talk) 11:15, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00, @Levana Taylor: -- Added pages 228 & 229. Replaced page 362. I did not find the other problems mentioned, may be a cache issue. Clearing the cache or opening in another browser should sort it out. Hrishikes (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

You are right, rats, well, now I know which browser not to use. The different browser I tried did load the pages without skipping or repeating them.
I still think 579 and 453 need to be replaced, though. After that, all that remains is getting the texts back with the images they belong to. Thanks for your help! Levana Taylor (talk) 13:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Here is a guide to where the OCR'd text of various pages has ended up:
  • From page 128 to 206, the text is two pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 209 to 225, the text is four pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 226 to 227, the text is two pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 230 to 243, the text is four pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 246 to 281, the text is six pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 282 to 299, the text is four pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 306 to 325, the text is six pages before the image. YesY
  • The text of page 340 is four pages before. YesY
  • The text of page 350 is four pages before. YesY
  • From page 406 to 423, the text is six pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 424 to 428, the text is four pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 452 to 456, the text is four pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 506 to 515, the text is four pages before the image. YesY
  • From page 606 to 622, the text is four pages before the image. YesY
  • Pages 619 to 622 are incorrectly marked "without text."
Levana Taylor (talk) 20:18, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes check.svg DoneHrishikes (talk) 05:33, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you very much! I have checked the repaired areas, they are OK. I have removed the repair templates and the temporary page nubmers ... Levana Taylor (talk) 05:47, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Text is out of alignment and off by one page[edit]

Starting from this page on to the end of the book ~300 pages are off by one page. Would it be possible to insert a single empty page at Djvu 502 and push all others to the correct alignment? — Ineuw talk 02:23, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

What are you talking about? It seems like there is no problem from the 502nd to 503rd pages of the scan (aligning to pages 482 and 483 of the text). —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:16, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

@Koavf: Please look at the image of what I see on the screen. File:Misaligned text pages.jpgIneuw talk 03:40, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

It took me a while to understand also. You mean the saved text of each page is off by one page. I was looking for a missing page. Maybe an admin can do something about it. Jpez (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ineuw: -- Yes check.svg Done -- Hrishikes (talk) 07:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
@Hrishikes: Many thanks!

Wrong page title[edit]

Index:The Book of the Aquarium and Cater Cabinet.djvu is clearly at the wrong page title: It should be at Index:The Book of the Aquarium and Water Cabinet.djvu. The text is also not linked on the author's page. The link that should go to this book is a redlink. How do I fix this? Thanks. Diadophis (talk) 03:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Nice eye, Diadophis! —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:14, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Update on 1860 Once a Week: pages for special work[edit]

I'm making good progress in putting together this magazine volume, Once a Week Vol II, into a properly constructed form that will then only need proofreading. However, I've seen some pages that have formatting that I don't know how to do: tables, and images that are more complicated than mere full-width insertion (I can and do handle poems, though). I've marked all pages that are complicated as "problematic" in case anyone wants to look at them. Levana Taylor (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

references with symbols[edit]

Is there a template that allows us to follow the style of the original document by indicating references with * † ‡ instead of numbers? Levana Taylor (talk) 17:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

The "house" style here is to convert them all to numbers—see Help:Footnotes and endnotes. This is because when the text is transcluded the list of references goes to the end rather than displaying at each page. If we to use symbols, then there would multiple references with the same marker and the reader would not know which one applied in a particular case. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:29, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Yep, that makes sense. But I thought maybe someone had programmed a template that would apply to the whole article and display the reference list with custom symbols instead of numbers. Levana Taylor (talk) 17:46, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
That wouldn't solve the problem of multiply repeated symbols. There are more than a few limitations of physical printing-by-page that simply do not transfer well to electronic format. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:48, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Why would repeating symbols be a problem? the current system counts up the number of <ref> in the article and displays them in order as 1, 2, 3. Why couldn't it display them as * † ‡? Levana Taylor (talk) 17:59, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Imagine you have a text with 59 references across 100 pages. Each reference in the original is either * † or ‡. By numbering the footnotes, they can be numbered 1 through 59. If using symbols, there aren't 59 footnote symbols, so you would get two dozen * and a dozen † and a handful of ‡, all on the same page, and it would not be clear which * refers to which footnote. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:19, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
I know, it wouldn't be useful for anything but a short piece with not more than 5 references (the number of traditional symbols — though you then go to **, ††, etc.). I will stop beating a dead horse now :-) Levana Taylor (talk) 19:07, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Index:Field Book of Stars.djvu[edit]

Was looking at this.. Text is good, but the 'diagrams' seem clipped in the scans? Anyone good with SVG to be able to make 'repairable' versions? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Looks like they're supposed to be like that —Beleg Tâl (talk) 01:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Images can be taken from the Google-digitized version: https://archive.org/details/afieldbookstars01olcogoog and https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001476074. Example: c:File:A Field Book of Stars 131.jpg (taken from HathiTrust). -- Hrishikes (talk) 02:01, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Broken links to machine-translated text on an external site[edit]

What should we do about On some controversies regarding origin and nationality of Nezami Ganjavi? The Russian text has been released under a free licence, and a page has also been created here at ENWS, but only the abstract, keywords and contents page are in English. The bulk of the document is in the form of external links to Google Translate which are now broken. Even if the links could be fixed, it seems odd for Wikisource to be directing users to machine-translated text and for something to be "on" ENWS when it's actually on an external site. The research looks interesting, but if almost all of it is in Russian and not English, does it belong on English Wikisource? MartinPoulter (talk) 21:12, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

OCR is off by one page[edit]

In Index:Philosophical Transactions - Volume 053.djvu the OCR is off by one page: OCR for page 2 appears on page 1 and so on. Thanks in advance for any help. MartinPoulter (talk) 21:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I fixed the file (that was wrong), but I think there is more to it. In djview text is aligned with pages but not in Index/Page. I think this is similar to what hapened with an EB199x Volume. Something goes wrong with how text is loaded, but we were not able to explain it (at least so I recall).— Mpaa (talk) 21:04, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
Filed phab:T214729.— Mpaa (talk) 21:17, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Help with layout positioning[edit]

Can you help me make this page] look a little prettier? I've got two tables of contents positioned next to each other, using "float." I think they would look better with more space between them (that is, in a narrow window they would) and/or maybe a line between --how would I do that? Any other proposals for layout? Levana Taylor (talk) 04:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I'd merge the two lists, maybe something like this:
  • Part I
    • Chapter 1
    • Chapter 2
    • Chapter 3
  • Part II
    • Chapter 4
  • Part III
and so forth. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:50, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
I still think parallel columns are preferable, but when you said "combine", I said, "Of course! I can put both lists in one table, and that'll give lots of formatting possibilities." The result was this, which I really like. Thanks for shaking my mind loose! Levana Taylor (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Meat for Thrifty Meals[edit]

Can someone come up with a "better" solution for the images that have left or right captions? {{FIS}} doesn't seem to handle them cleanly...? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

"Editor's comment" in EB1911 page[edit]

I've been doing some work in the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, and came across this page:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:EB1911_-_Volume_11.djvu/403

It includes the following footnote added by a wiki editor: "EDITOR'S COMMENT (FEB. 2015): The date in 1815 given by the original text is wrong and should be the 8th of August."

They may be right about the date being wrong, but my understanding was that we digitise what's there, not correct it when it's wrong. Seems to me like we'd be adding a lot of footnotes to a 100-year-old encyclopedia if we did that. Should this footnote be removed? Chuntuk (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Chuntuk: you are quite correct. I have replaced the footnote with an HTML comment. You can also use {{SIC}} if desired, but I don't think that's desirable here since this is not a typo —Beleg Tâl (talk) 01:34, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
I would usually move comments like that to the talk page for the article. However, the claim is completely unsupported by any reference at all, which really makes it worthless as an emendation. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:37, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

How to update the display of a DJVU file?[edit]

@ShakespeareFan00: discovered that File:Portland, Oregon, its History and Builders volume 1.djvu lacks an image of page 449. I found an alternate scan of the book, extracted the page, inserted it into the DJVU file, removed a neighboring blank page to preserve pagination, and re-uploaded it. But the page previews are not updating. This is true both on Commons and here on Wikisource (but Commons has updated one of the pages, but not the other; Wikisource has updated neither.) I tried refreshing and purging all involved pages, with no effect. It's been more than 24 hours, so I'm not confident it will "fix itself." Does anybody know what's happening, or what to do about it?

Specifically:

Both display properly on my local copy. -Pete (talk) 23:51, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

This took care of itself, a few days after upload. Must have been a cacheing issue. -Pete (talk) 20:42, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Hmm, I think I must have looked at the wrong pages before. I have checked several times since posting the above comment (now struck), and the problem persists. -Pete (talk) 20:31, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
I noticed, however, that on Commons when I try to purge the file page, I get an error message that says "purge failed" (without further explanation). I don't know why that purge fails, but perhaps it's related to this problem. -Pete (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: would you mind taking a look at this one? I saw your comment on WS:Scriptorium on (what I thought was) a similar case; but this one is a DJVU, not a PDF. How can I get the Wikisource interface to display the page images properly? It still (now a couple weeks later) seems to be displaying pages from the previous, deleted file. -Pete (talk) 20:38, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
My best guess is that a cache purge is needed at Commons to made the change show through. I've tried several things at the Wikisource end, including an edit to the Index page, and several forms of purges and cache clearing. Looking at the page itself from the file while at Commons shows the correct image, and using the OCR generates the correct text; it is only the display through the Proofread Page extension that seems to be at fault. So, unless there is a subtle error in the structure of the DjVu file itself, I suspect it will take a purge at Commons or time for the correction to trickle to Wikisource, or else there is a (new?) problem in the Proofread Page extension. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:48, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I've added a phabricator ticket (see top of this section). I have a screenshot in phabricator of the failed purge, something I haven't seen before -- so I agree, that seems like the most likely cause. -Pete (talk) 21:54, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

vertically-centered asterisk?[edit]

I have been pretty successful so far in finding templates that reproduce the special typographic features used in the 1860 magazine I'm entering, but one I can't find is a largeish asterisk vertically-centered in the line. Levana Taylor (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

UPDATE: Problem solved by using Unicode &ff0a;. Levana Taylor (talk) 10:56, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

@Levana Taylor: You could also use {{...|3|*}} --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:46, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Fullwidth characters are not really for use in English texts; they're designed for use with Eastern Asian scripts that are inherently monospaced, and when Latin characters are stuck in, they are either halfwidth or fullwidth. EncycloPetey's solution is probably best.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:28, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
OK, then that particular asterisk is not the right one. The main problem with the regular asterisk is that it's too small. Here is a comparison of the original with {{larger}} asterisks—quite good. And Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 2/Where is the other?, various uses of enlarged ordinary asterisks in a story. Not bad, as long as I tweak the formatting enough. The pre-made templates are all wrong. Levana Taylor (talk) 05:00, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
It looks to me like the original publication was simply using a font in which the asterisk * is larger than most fonts. For example this page has an unusually large but otherwise unremarkable asterisk for the note in the bottom left. It's not a different character, just a different font. For this reason, an ordinary * would be the best character to use here. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 23:29, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm sorry about asking such trivial questions. I haven't even tried the difficult things like tables yet.

Box formatting[edit]

Another question. Is there a help page explaining how to position text inside a box with a border? The documentation for Template:Frame doesn't explain how to change border properties or which other templates you can use inside it for positioning the text, and it looks like Template:Float box doesn't allow for anything very elaborate inside the box (I could be wrong). Levana Taylor (talk) 00:33, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

{{float box}} allows for arbitrary styling; do you have an example of what you're aiming for? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 23:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
The pages in question are this and this. Levana Taylor (talk) 00:51, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Since that's just a border around the text in question, I would use {{border}} and then use regular formatting inside it, like so:

Knocker to Brown.

London—Helmston.

Happy Jones—communication—twins—come off at once. Be here to-day by 8·30 p.m. train. Immediate.

That's all that's needed. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 03:40, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
I tried that on page 288 but something is wrong: why the big white space at the top? Also the text isn't quite horizontally-centered in the box and I couldn't figure out how to add some padding at the left. Levana Taylor (talk) 04:16, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
@Levana Taylor: -- Yes check.svg Done -- Hrishikes (talk) 04:53, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
@Hrishikes: -- Thanks! I translated the width into ems, though; why did you use px? Levana Taylor (talk) 05:26, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
@Levana Taylor: -- That is ok, px or em, whatever you like. But to note that curly quotes are against the house style. Also, the page should not be set to proofread status without the image. Hrishikes (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

A deleted draft[edit]

After a disagreement on the language of a text, where we seemed to be reaching an understanding, I was going to move the text to my sandbox for then moving to the multilingual Wikisource. The text was marked with a template indicating the percieved language issue (part of the book is in English, and a larger part than I initially realised in a constructed language), but it didn't indicate any particular timeframe, or that the text would neccessarely be deleted (moving to a user subpage, as a draft, would otherwise be a possible option), if I remember correctly. I was also going to ask for second opinions, and normal disputed contributions are normally not deleted that fast in the Wikimedia projects I've been active in, so when going for dinner, I didn't expect much to happen this very same day, at least.

The communication from the editor has indicated that 1) he didn't make much effort checking his statements in the discussion on beforehand 2) he didn't make much effort in understanding what me as another editor wrote, which made the communication frustrating. The discussion can be found at my discussion page.

And then the same editor deleted the whole page.

I would be very happy about undeletion and moving to my sandbox or a subpage of the sandbox. Then I could use the edits I did to it. Undeleting, moving with history to user:flinga/sandbox/alteutonish, 1915 would have been excellent, but I would be grateful for any constructive help.

With regards, Flinga (talk) 19:14, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

You were told repeatedly the work couldn't be hosted here because it was not in English. After 40 minutes of back and forth trying to get you to understand this, you finally agreed that only the introduction was in English. Then you say you suddenly went offline the moment you were told it would be deleted. How inconvenient. It seems that you are only here to cause trouble and disrupt the community. You still have access to the scan; it has a DjVu file with a text layer. Use that text layer on multilingual Wikisource. The English Wikisource does not host works written in artificially constructed languages. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:30, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: Undelete it and I will import it to mul.ws. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:45, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
@Koavf: done: Alteutonik. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:52, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: Thanks. @Flinga: Please define the language at mul:Alteutonik. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:05, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
The language is w:Tutonish, a "constructed language" like Esperanto or Klingon. (see the linked Wikipedia article) --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:10, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Both of you: Thank you very much! It is greatly appreciated.
EncycloPetey: I appreciate this last help very much. I have to say I don't really understand what's been our problem. I understand that you feel personally attacked in the last messages, but from my viewpoint 1) I was here to contribute 2) I never did or say anything bad or strange 3) I found your dialogue lacking in terms to reach an understanding, and a cooperative outcome - I found a tone in it that I really don't understand the reason for. I've also contributed to Wikimedia projects for well over a decade without big issues or ever being blocked. I did agree on your point in my (next to) last message, then I went for my break, and I can't see what's neccessarely strange with that - in other words, I didn't see your reply before dinner, and I only tried contributing with a text, which is after all the point of this project, isn't it?
The initial topic of our disagreement was whether the book was in English at all or not, and to what extent. From my viewpoint, that's what we were straightening out, we partially disagreed, and as editors we are normally equals, so I disagree with both the premise and the content of "was being repeadetly told".
I do think giving feedback on this is important for this project.
Again, thank you for that helpful action! Flinga (talk) 22:17, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Assuming that EncycloPetey got the impression early on that my intention was to cause trouble here, which I only realised long after this discussion, I have apologized for any harm potentially caused by my actions, and for essentially making a too big thing out of it. That apology is also directed to anyone else here who might possibly have been affected. Flinga (talk) 03:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Parenthetical can't necessarily appear in a pagelist tag on an Index page..[edit]

I've mentioned this in a phabricator ticket here - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T214827 and (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T214797 in respect of related issue).

However, the work-around (until the script is repaired), would be to amend the Index pages containing parenthesised page numbering inside a pagelist. So:-

  • Does anyone have a script which could at the very least identify ALL affected Index pages?
  • Could an appropriate edit-filter be implemented to check for this when an attempt is made to save an Index page?

Although it may also be possible to have an automated script 'repair' many of the affected Index pages, I'm not sure it would be able to do this reliably in some contexts. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:01, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Per your closure of those tickets, you stated was this solely a local issue thus here would be the "appropriate" place for further discussions. One of the relevant documentation pages has been updated already. If you would like to outline work-arounds and solutions below, it would be appreciated.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:22, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

A Preliminary list of Index pages to repair is : https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=525&offset=0&ns106=1&search=insource%3A%2F%5C%3Cpagelist%28%28.%29%2A%29%5C%3D%28%28.%29%2A%29%5C%28%28%28.%29%2A%29%5C%3E%2F&advancedSearch-current=%7B%22namespaces%22%3A%5B106%5D%7D with apologies for the lengthy escaped portion. Anyone want to go through this assist in resolving the issue? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:50, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
I can’t parse the regex in the above comment to see where exactly the problem lies, but it seems to be producing some false positives. For example, the first item in the “list of Index pages to repair” is Index:United States Statutes at Large Volume 12.djvu, but that page does not use parentheses in any of its <pagelist> calls. Is it possible that the regex is flagging all pages that (1) call <pagelist> and (2) have a parenthesis anywhere on the page, whether or not it is part of the <pagelist> call? Because that would substantially overstate the number of pages that need to be repaired. Tarmstro99 19:30, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes, the regexp isn't perfect. If you want to generate a better regexp, feel free, the current regexp was \<pagelist((.)*)\=((.)*)\(((.)*)\/\> . Thanks.. I estimate about 200 Index pages may be affected, The search generates 500 or so results and many false positives :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:28, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

No pages numbers displayed ...[edit]

I cannot figure out why the page numbers are not displaying on the later parts of the transclusion here: Provincial_Geographies_of_India/Volume_4, given that I've implemented the workarounds about removing certain characters

There doesn't seem to be a consistency as to where the page numbering script fails, other than it does not seem to like certain non alphanumeric characters in a defined string to be displayed as a page number.

It would be appreciated if those with technical ability, (rather than continuing to suggest work-arounds) documented what page number formats (and charcters) are accepted by the page numbering script because I am getting tired of tracking down technical minutiae, which don't seem to behave consistently. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: The PageNumbers script rather uncritically stuffs the page number value in a HTML ID attribute, so the safe rules (HTML 4 rules) for what you can put in there is something like: A–Z, a–z, 0–9, hyphen (-), underscore (_), colon (:), and period (.). And the first character must be A–Z or a–z.
As of HTML 5 the rules for ID attributes are much laxer (no space characters, must be at least one character, must be unique in the page), but once you exceed the above list you start running into what are special characters in JavaScript, HTML, URLs, and MediaWiki. Some will work, but more by happy accident than design.
This state of affairs is partly due to MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js being effectively a personal half-experimental project of GOIII's (as far as I've been able to tell, but I wasn't around at the time) that was never fully polished or architected, and partially due to the limitations of what such a script can do without being made a part of MediaWiki proper. For example, some of the limitation stems from needing to use the page numbers as identifiers, and it would be… not trivial… for such a script to generate non-pagenumber derived unique identifiers that retain a connection with a page number that is otherwise used only for display. --Xover (talk) 07:03, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you.. That explains the failure of "("")" bracketed numbers, "'" would conflict with string terminators used in CSS. I am still not sure as to why a terminating period, caused issues though, but will remove those anyway as it's helps solve the problem. Are you willing to look into this in more depth, so there is a definitive list of characters that shouldn't be present, so that the relevant help documentation can be updated?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:47, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
So far I've got that "(" ")" "." and "'" should not appear in pagelist entries ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:47, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, I'll certainly be happy to help however I can, but there's no actual code that can be parsed to discover the set. The only real way to find the answer is to try various characters and seeing what fails. And we have several different layers of technology interacting here (WikiMarkup and the MediaWiki parser, the ProofreadPage extension, HTML, and JavaScript. It's not impossible CSS is also involved due to selectors for the relevant identifiers. --Xover (talk) 11:10, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Page Numbering anomaly part 3[edit]

Acts of the Constituent Assembly and Dominion Legislature of India 1949/Act1 This numbers from 4 because on the index page the last defined page in the previous page list was "3" (rather than 10 which would the DJVU page index), but does it say this is in the documentation? How am I expected to KNOW this is the expected behaviour by intuition or telepathy?

I was testing what happens with multiple page-lists on a single Index page.. The behaviour is not unexpected, but not seemingly clearly documented. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Tools for building transclusion pages?[edit]

I'm going through the painstaking process of creating a page for each of the many short chapters of The Souvenir of Western Women. It occurs to me that maybe there are tools or scripts that assist in this stuff -- any suggestions out there? -Pete (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge. I keep three tabs open: the work's table of contents, the page being transcluded, the page being created. Paste the contents of previous chapter page into new chapter page. Update next/section/previous based on TOC in first tab; update pages being transcluded based on info from second tab; copy whole thing to clipboard, save, click the red link to next chapter and paste content, repeat. It's the most efficient process I've got. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 02:13, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Or you can create a text file with all the needed information for each chapter (e.g.title, prev, next, start, end, section, etc) and we can set up a script to generate pages. If the format of the file is standardized, it could become a library script to be used e.g. for Bot requests.— Mpaa (talk) 09:50, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
That is a great idea—I am about to add another volume of a magazine with several hundred articles, and I would like to be able to submit a text file for you to run through a script (I don't know how to use scripts myself). The data that would be useful for magazine articles are: title, section, contributor, previous, next, index, from, to, fromsection, tosection, defaultsort, category. Title and index are the same for every article. One category would be sufficient. Levana Taylor (talk) 18:56, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Beleg Tâl, that's more or less the process I've been using. But I agree, an something like Mpaa describes would be ideal, especially for works like this with many chapters. I'd be happy to try creating a text file for the remaining portion of this work, if you want to give it a try. I should be able to do that tomorrow. Thanks! -Pete (talk) 22:19, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

OK @Mpaa: I have created a text file here: User:Peteforsyth/Souvenir I don't know the best format for you, but I think all the information you need is in there. Please let me know if you need me to make changes. A few comments:

  • I started where the bulk of the redlinks begin. There are, however, already some blue links interspersed among the remaining redlinks. If a page already exists, maybe the script could just ignore that line in the text document and move on to the next. (Ideal would be to check, and add in fields for "previous" and "next" if they are missing. But that's probably hard to code, and not so hard to fix manually.)
  • I have no idea what the most convenient delimiter is, so I put three percent symbols between the chapter title and the page number. I figure it should be easy to search-and-replace if there's a more suitable symbol.
  • The page numbers are offset by eight from the DJVU file. (E.g., page 200 in the original book is the 208th page in the DJVU file.)
  • I removed author names, since there is much inconsistency in how they are presented. I don't mind going through and adding "contributor=" items to the headers after the pages are created.
  • There will be a number of cases in which one page contains parts of two chapters. I have no problem fixing those manually.
  • I would suggest including "year=1905" in each page.

Please let me know if this is sufficient, or if you need me to do anything else. Feel free to edit the page in my user space, if that's the easiest way to communicate what format works best for you. -Pete (talk) 23:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

@Mpaa: I realized it's better to include the known contributors so I updated the text file. It now includes the name of the contributor at the end of the line, in the cases where it is known. Please let me know if you have questions. -Pete (talk) 19:46, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
I copied a sample of how it should be to your page. Better tab separated. Order of columns is irrelevant, keep for now the header row as is. Pages in 'djvu' values are better (both from/to). I tried to extrapolate the end page but it is wrong, please review it, there are also sections to be added (see the few pages I have created as MpaaBot, there are errors).
This is just a small script, long way to make it up to a standard bot ... but it will do for this work.— Mpaa (talk) 21:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
To add sections, add two columns (fromsection/tosection) with corresponding names of sections as applicable.— Mpaa (talk) 22:03, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you @Mpaa: that all makes sense. I've now updated the text doc, it's accurate with both page numbers and section numbers. -Pete (talk) 23:47, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
p.s. In some cases the section markers do not yet exist in the pages, but I'll be going through to make sure they are included. -Pete (talk) 23:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
That all worked great. Thanks @Mpaa:! And thank you @Victuallers: for all your proofreading work too! I just added it to the "new texts" page and will tweet it out too :) -Pete (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China[edit]

I have imported Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China from the website of the Chinese National People's Congress. However, I am not sure whether the text fulfills the requirement of English Wikisource. Would any more experienced users proofread the text, as I am not familiar with the formata of English Wikisource, thank you.廣九直通車 (talk) 07:34, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Auxiliary TOC for Once a Week[edit]

I have several questions, but will start with the basics. I would like to use the template {{Auxiliary Table of Contents}} to add a table of contents to volumes of Once a Week magazine, because the volumes don't have a TOC, only a subject index (quite a different thing: for instance, in Volume II the article titled "The European Difficulty" is in the index as "Pope Pius IX"). I have here created part of a contents page for Volume III to show what it might look like, with the auxiliary table of contents above the transcluded index. Before I go on with more of this I would like your thoughts on whether this is a reasonable thing to do.

Some notes on the stylistic choices I made for the TOC: It is divided into numbers not just for usefulness and readability, but also because the book is so divided: In small print at the bottom of the first page of every number is "Vol. XNo. Y," and the date is at the top of every page. As for how the entries are formatted, Title. By Author . . . . . Illustrated by Illustrator., that is directly taken from how the magazine displayed their contents in their advertisements. (I can't simply copy over the advertisment, though, because that isn't quite a TOC either.)

Thoughts? Levana Taylor (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

OK, I will take the lack of comments to mean that no one has an objection to my implementing this table of contents, and will move on to the actual help question I wanted to ask.
How should I format the lines in the TOC, given that {{Dotted TOC line}} doesn't work inside of {{Auxiliary Table of Contents}}? (And neither do other potentially useful templates like {{block right}} and {{hi}}.) Is there some other combination of templates I could be using? Ideally, the "Illustrated by" column should be a separate column at the right, left-aligned within itself, and with a caption at the top; it's coincidental that the "comment" field of Auxiliary Table of Contents provides a caption for it. And of course the main column should have a line of dots of the correct length and should wrap with a hanging indent. I could do all that by building a table by hand but that would be a bad idea because it would make the page much too hard to edit. The point of templates is to keep complicated stuff under the hood. Levana Taylor (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
I think Dotted TOC line works inside Auxiliary TOC, see e. g. Songs of the Slav. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 18:09, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Actually Songs of the Slav demonstrates that Dotted TOC line breaks Auxilary TOC: notice that the box is only around the first item in the contents, and the content item title creates a white space inside the box Levana Taylor (talk) 18:35, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
@Levana Taylor: Actually, the auxilliary TOC contains only the first item on purpose, the rest is the real table of contents. But you are right about the white space, although this issue is hardly visible (at least on my monitor) and I would not notice, hadn't you told me. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 19:21, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, I see what you were doing adding the preface there. This is what it looks like with more than one line: not too good! there are two problems to fix. The background color of Aux TOC needs to be set to white to match the bgcolor of the lines, and it doesn't have that option (nor do the lines have the option of changing the color to green). Also, I don't know why the left margin of the Dotted lines is different from the undotted ones. (BTW, feel free to edit that TOC experiments page if you have better ideas!) Levana Taylor (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Using the chapter-width parameter may help with adjusting the left margin. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 20:55, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that's much better! Thank you very much!
I have posted on the main Scriptorium to see if any programmers want to fix the background color thing. --Levana Taylor (talk) 21:19, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
As for the chapter-width, it seems that the inconsitency is caused by different default values of both templates: it is 2.5em in TOC line and 3.5em in Dotted TOC line. I do not know whether it is a mistake or whether it is set differently on purpose. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:33, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Index:The Peerage, Baronetage and Knightage of the British Empire Part 1.djvu[edit]

I'm seeing an unusual problem with this , namely that in some of the scans, what should be an n is transposed for a u, and vice versa in the images generated from the DJVU file. Whilst I can in context find many of these, I would like an explanation as to why this is occurring, as it's not exactly convenient to have to proofread against 2 sets of scans ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:31, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Can you give a specific example? From time to time I have noticed scans where what should clearly be an "n" looks like a "u" (and vice versa). For some of these works, I have obtained a hard copy of the same edition, and found that the original does not have this issue. My guess is that the dual process of scanning and compression loses some of the visual distinction in 19th century fonts between the two letters. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:35, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Page:The Peerage, Baronetage and Knightage of the British Empire Part 1.djvu/77 being a page with a specfic example. The scans on IA is clean, whereas the DJVU on Wikisoruce have the n u switch. This file was recently re-encoded at a higher resoloution, which I would have reasonably expected to resolve this. If a DJVU version can't provide clean scans, it's time to use the PDF, or some other lossless format that doesn't create these issues ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:48, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
The problem is likely a reflection of the tiny font size in which the page was printed. I notice the same sort of issues with footnotes and other tiny print. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
The original uploader upped the encoding resolution, just how high does it have to be for something like this? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:13, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Ad as I said, if DJVU can't provide RELIABLE scan images, maybe it's time to use a more reliable format... PDF isn't ideal because of other issues, and there is no current support for using a TAR/TGZ/ZIP archive of JP2 scans in an easily index way at present, ( and of course using direct scans mean no text layer currently) (sigh :( )ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:16, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
DjVu has a feature where the pages can be lossly compressed, which means that images of letters are replaced with images of other letters that are close enough. This can cause this type of problem if that feature is turned on.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:14, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

DropInital and MarginNote are incompatible..[edit]

See the third paragraph here - Page:Ruffhead - The Statutes at Large, 1763.djvu/84.

So far no-one has come up with a 'satisfactory' solution to this, that works consistently. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Also - User:ShakespeareFan00/Sandbox/Firstletter using a custom defined style works correctly, when implemented in the page listed, fails entirely. It would be nice if for once Mediawiki behaved CONSISTENTLY, when the SAME markup is used in two different instances.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 02:35, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
They both use floated blocks, and as far as I can tell they behave entirely consistently with the standard behaviour of floated blocks, which is that the first one goes up against the margin, and any subsequent ones next to it on the inside. You'd have to use fancy positioning in the template to move it from there to the other side of any intervening floated content. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 02:44, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
That answers the first concern, what it doesn't answer is why IDENTICAL markup is rendering in one instance and NOT in another, Perhaps someone else can take a look at the respective markup, and get Mediawiki to give CONSISTENT renderings , rather than forcing me to play hunt the obscurity every single time I actually want to improve something.... (rage noise) ShakespeareFan00 (talk)
It is also well-known that not everything will display well in both the Page: namespace with its narrow pagewidth and the mainspace with a much wider pagewidth. Don't look for solutions for nice display in the Page: namespace if the transcluded text is behaving nicely in the mainspace. The transclusion is the only thing that counts in the end. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:12, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
There is another glitch with the margin-note saying "not-in the original" in that it's currently not positioning correctly. It should be right over on the left, not indented as currently. As I said , it would be nice if someone actually overhualed these templates "properly" so that they will play nicely together, instead of creating frustration for contributors. (sigh) 03:27, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Well lets see User:ShakespeareFan00/Ruffhead - and the drop cap works, but the note-positioning behaviour doesn't. I'm fed up having to play "guess the stable combination" based on templates, namespace, and phase of the moon, &c. Consistency and repeatability are not unreasonable things to expect from a platform like Wikisource... (sigh) 03:36, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Page:Ruffhead - The Statutes at Large, 1763.djvu/84 and User:ShakespeareFan00/Ruffhead look the same to me —Beleg Tâl (talk) 03:47, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
They should look identical, barring the page header lines, I am puzzled as to why the firstletter behaviour isn't being applied consistently. Maybe a it's a browser issue, which one are you using? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
They both look the same to me in both Firefox and Chrome on Windows 10, with or without your .sanity rules in my common.css page. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
It also helps if there's a strightforward way to put experimental CSS so everyone can use it (as opposed to a personal common.css) ... TemplateStyles being one possibility, but at present it's not possible to use Userspace CSS files in a templatestyles src field, for various reasonsShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:43, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


I've updated it with a working solution: wrap all of the margin notes into a single {{float left}}. This means that when the browser places the dropinitial beside the previous floated block, it places it next to the column of notes as a whole, rather than beside the final floated note in the series. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:16, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks that approach may be what I use to update other pages. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:47, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

TemplateStyles[edit]

Hi,

I had some experimental CSS I wanted to test and demonstrate more widely.. Is there a way of using TemplateStyles to link experimental CSS from a User space page into a Page: Wikipedia: or Main namespace page? Or are there limitations on what can appear and where? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

If this message is red, then the answer is yes. You might need an admin to change the content model of the linked CSS file from "CSS" to "Sanitized CSS". I'm not sure if this requires elevated permissions.Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
BTW be prudent with this. If you have an experimental CSS rule you want to try out, you should put it in your sandbox and link people to it. If it applies to a particular work, you can create a work-specific template and clearly identify it as an attempt to improve that specific work - noting this both on the template documentation, and within the Index talk page. If you start putting user CSS where people don't expect it, and you forget to remove it afterwards, other editors will not take that kindly. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Okay so what I want to do is thus entirely impossible, because the CSS selector I want to use can;t be used inline... Thanks ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:38, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: That doesn't sound like it would matter; what specifically are you trying to do? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Use a selector to implement ::firstletter behaviour, with a view towards the CSS4? style dropcaps styling, (which would make the currrent dropinital approach less of an issue once browsers support the functionality concerned.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:10, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: Like this?Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes That was it EXACTLY. Now if that could be tested with some exactign test cases... there might be a replacement for the current {{di}} template. The next problem would be how to handle things like drop initals where a normal sized quote preceeds... hmmm... And thanks for the hint ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:29, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: FYI, implementing drop initials using ::firstletter should result in exactly the same problems that {{di}} has currently, because you still need to float the element in order to have the second line appear beside it rather than below. Given that a solution to this particular issue has been found, I'd suggest saving yourself the headache until the dropinitial feature in CSS is fully implemented across browsers. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:31, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Sidenotes (ongoing)[edit]

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Statutes_at_Large_(Ruffhead)/Volume_9/Doncaster:_Small_Debts,_Lighting,_etc._Act_1763

This has overlapping sidenotes, which I made an attempt to resolve by adding an optional 'clear:' in the relevant templates {{Outside}} and {{Outside2}} to try and get the sidenotes to auto wrap (the way {{MarginNote}}'s do.,

The relevant diffs being: https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Outside&diff=next&oldid=9100920 https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Outside2&diff=prev&oldid=9100921 https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Outside_RL&diff=prev&oldid=9100923 https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Outside_LR&diff=prev&oldid=9100924 https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Outside_L&diff=prev&oldid=9100925 https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Outside_R&diff=prev&oldid=9100927

and https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page:Ruffhead_-_The_Statutes_at_Large_-_vol_9.djvu/270&diff=prev&oldid=9100932 Where is the coding mistake, because the fix doesn't seem to being implemented? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:39, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

The Statutes at Large (Ruffhead)/Volume 9/Doncaster: Small_Debts, Lighting, etc. Act 1763

This has overlapping sidenotes, which I made an attempt to resolve by adding an optional 'clear:' in the relevant templates {{Outside}} and {{Outside2}} to try and get the sidenotes to auto wrap (the way {{MarginNote}}'s do.,

The relevant diffs being:

and

Where is the coding mistake, because the fix doesn't seem to being implemented?

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:39, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, had trouble parsing your comment. I might be able to help, give me a bit and I'll look into it. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:37, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Part of the issue seems to be that {{Outside R}} isn't passing on a parameter "clearfix" when it should be... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
sounds of insane laughter... It's ALWAYS a misplaced bracket., anyway I've solved the overlapping sidenotes issue that's been an annoyance for over a decade, with one simple clear: in the Sidenotes code. :) (more insane laughter...) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:51, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Wow, nicely done! —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:56, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Now to figure out why using clear makes it harder to use DropInitial's ;) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Dropinitials are just ordinary floats, so they will be cleared like any other floats. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, it's time to think laterally. Why does it have to be sidenotes? Just because in print the decision was made to print the references as sidenotes, why do we have to when presenting the text? After all, putting them there makes the work less accessible to some of our readers. Some possibilities (with thanks to the Braille community):
  1. Regular footnotes collected at the end of the piece of legislation;
  2. Regular footnotes collected at the end of the print-page representation (least acceptable here);
  3. Regular footnotes collected at the end of each section/subsection/subsubsection/paragraph—whichever makes the most sense for the piece of legislation; or
  4. Inline notes marked off in some distinguishable way (e.g. [], {}).
An explanation of the variation from print should be placed in the Notes field of the header in the Mainspace: transclusion.
My own preference would be No. 3. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:01, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
I do prefer sidenotes, they look much better and work exactly the way the original author intended. Sidenotes are used for a different purpose than footnotes–they should help the reader find the place in the text where a particular topic is dealt with (while footnotes provide extra information and thus can be placed at the end). What is more, footnotes always disturb the readers forcing them to leave the text and go downwards and then return back, which is OK from time to time, but it is not very comfortable at the beginning of every paragraph. (It is possible that some browsers may have problems with sidenotes, but it is a problem of the particular browser, not ours. It is the browser that needs to be improved. I believe that programmers of browsers should serve the needs of internet users, not vice versa, i.e. internet users adapting their behaviour to make the situation easier for browser programmers). --Jan Kameníček (talk) 19:33, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
If the marginal notes were topic-based, then I would not be recommending changing them to footnotes. However, in this particular situation the notes are not topics, but are providing extra information. The print conventions of the period were to use marginal notes rather than footnotes. In this case there are a lot of notes that need to be attached to each paragraph. As a result when done as sidenotes there are frequent overlaps in the wider mainspace: windows. If we want to continue to allow our pages to be viewed at multiple widths on multiple devices, we need a way to manage the overlaps. Thus my series of suggestions to avoid sidenotes for the references. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
@Beeswaxcandle: As far as I see there is e. g. a part mentioning appointed commissioners, next to which there is a sidenote saying "Commissioners appointed". There is a part saying "...the first Meeting of the said Commissioners shall be held on..." which is accompanied by a side note "First meeting". And so on... They are typical sidenotes attracting the reader to the topic, not notes adding extra information. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:25, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Well my preference is to keep the "subect-titles" as sidenotes (per more recent legislation, if not modern ones ), I'm open minded in respect of what are in effect cross referencing
Compare Page:Ruffhead_-_The_Statutes_at_Large,_1763.djvu/82 vs the MarginNote based approach on Page:Ruffhead_-_The_Statutes_at_Large,_1763.djvu/84 or {{cl-act-p}} elsewhere (which is mostly implemented to have anchoring.) 20:12, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
In respect of a complex page like - [[1]] It works, but it's vomit inducingly ugly...

and ends up with far too much white space in the run of text... Maybe some kinds of better hybrid approach is needed... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

I found a wrong cite - I just to make one edit[edit]

The wrong page in De Vinne, Invention of Printing (1876).djvu/554

the citation is right,

Johnson J. Typographia, or the Printers' Instructor, including an Account of the Origin of Printing. 24mo. 2 vols. London, 1824.

but the wikilink is wrong. There doesn't seem to have a page for John Johnson (1777-1848) (see [2]) - the page is for John Johnson Jr. Editor of the Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science

That hasn't a Wikipedia either.

can someone make it right - it's too hard for me.

Talk about confusing (talk) 10:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@Talk about confusing: fixed. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:56, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Okay why does parameterising line-height completely stop something working?[edit]

https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Right_sidenote&action=history

I've attempted MANY times this morning, to get the sidenote to have closer behaviour in the two respective versions... Something was more seriously clearly broken in the relevant template because parameterising ONE component should not have caused the template to cease rendering utterly.

As I've REPEATEDLY asked in the past, WHERE was the coding error, please? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:13, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

It also doesnt't help that someone else seems to have assumed line-height is supported for SPAN ed content, MDN and W3Schools seem to say otherwise, meaning that the parameter concerned is effectively processed but may not have a visual effect. (sigh) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:32, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Giving an example:-

{{sidenotes begin|35|11}}
{{right sidenote|A.D 686<br />Cures an earl's wife|height=125}}
{{lorem ipsum|2}}
{{-}}
{{right sidenote|A.D 686<br />Cures an earl's wife|height=140}}
{{lorem ipsum|2}}
{{sidenotes end}}


A.D 686
Cures an earl's wife
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Curabitur pretium tincidunt lacus. Nulla gravida orci a odio. Nullam varius, turpis et commodo pharetra, est eros bibendum elit, nec luctus magna felis sollicitudin mauris. Integer in mauris eu nibh euismod gravida. Duis ac tellus et risus vulputate vehicula. Donec lobortis risus a elit. Etiam tempor. Ut ullamcorper, ligula eu tempor congue, eros est euismod turpis, id tincidunt sapien risus a quam. Maecenas fermentum consequat mi. Donec fermentum. Pellentesque malesuada nulla a mi. Duis sapien sem, aliquet nec, commodo eget, consequat quis, neque. Aliquam faucibus, elit ut dictum aliquet, felis nisl adipiscing sapien, sed malesuada diam lacus eget erat. Cras mollis scelerisque nunc. Nullam arcu. Aliquam consequat. Curabitur augue lorem, dapibus quis, laoreet et, pretium ac, nisi. Aenean magna nisl, mollis quis, molestie eu, feugiat in, orci. In hac habitasse platea dictumst.

A.D 686
Cures an earl's wife
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Curabitur pretium tincidunt lacus. Nulla gravida orci a odio. Nullam varius, turpis et commodo pharetra, est eros bibendum elit, nec luctus magna felis sollicitudin mauris. Integer in mauris eu nibh euismod gravida. Duis ac tellus et risus vulputate vehicula. Donec lobortis risus a elit. Etiam tempor. Ut ullamcorper, ligula eu tempor congue, eros est euismod turpis, id tincidunt sapien risus a quam. Maecenas fermentum consequat mi. Donec fermentum. Pellentesque malesuada nulla a mi. Duis sapien sem, aliquet nec, commodo eget, consequat quis, neque. Aliquam faucibus, elit ut dictum aliquet, felis nisl adipiscing sapien, sed malesuada diam lacus eget erat. Cras mollis scelerisque nunc. Nullam arcu. Aliquam consequat. Curabitur augue lorem, dapibus quis, laoreet et, pretium ac, nisi. Aenean magna nisl, mollis quis, molestie eu, feugiat in, orci. In hac habitasse platea dictumst.


Here the sidenotes should have different line spacings, but with the current templates there is no appreciable visual difference. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


@ShakespeareFan00: Deep breaths :) Yes, it appears to be primarily that line-height is a block-element parameter being used on an inline element. Should you maybe use display:inline-block;? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
PS since sidenotes look different depending on Layout, perhaps some of these changes should be done in Layout.css rather than in the template. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
And whilst the layout options seem to function outside Mainspace. (the option for previewing them doesn't appear), which is not an acceptable long term approach... I'll revert back my changes for now, as this clearly isn't going to work unless someone does some much more fundamental rethinking (Sigh) :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Something like ? Template:Right sidenote/sandbox.css , if you were willing to go test, clearfix is the solution I mentioned in a previous disscussion, Not sure where it should be implemented. Willing to test further? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:33, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

And on testing that didn't behave.. This is now beyond frustrating, and I'm still no closer to figuring out WHY it's not working. Page:The Heimskringla; or, Chronicle of the Kings of Norway Vol 1.djvu/101 2 sidenotes, but doing clear:right doesn't seem to have the desired effect at all. Perhaps someone else here can calmly explain why it's so hard to figure out floats and clears properly? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: the sidenoteRight class is already defined in the sitewide CSS, and is positioned absolutely - so any dynamic positioning will have no effect. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 22:23, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Hmm.. So How do we do the clearfix like behaviour, if the flr stuff is not going to have any effect. :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:25, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Essentialy how in CSS do we tweak the positioning so they don't overlap in situations like ? Page:The Heimskringla; or, Chronicle of the Kings of Norway Vol 1.djvu/103?}ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:27, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
It might not actually be possible... If the sidenote is positioned absolutely, it can't be dynamically affected by the position of other sidenotes. However, if the sidenote is positioned relatively, it can only be placed within its parent, and not in its parent's margin... I think this is a place where CSS may have failed us. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 22:29, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
In the case of sidenotes specifically, it could be possible by forcing a fixed-width margin. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 22:31, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Can you come up with an alternate approach then, like converting them to footnotes instead? 22:33, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Converting to footnotes is a viable solution. Honestly I would just use sidenotes and let them overlap, and then we can resurrect this discussion when future versions of CSS are released that might give us more options. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:06, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Best placement for an editorial note[edit]

What's the best place to put the editorial note that ran at the bottom of the first page of this magazine article? I'd imagine others have found an elegant way to deal with this sort of thing... McClure's Magazine/Volume 10/A French Critic's Impressions of America -Pete (talk) 06:43, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

I personally would put it at the bottom of the transcluded page, either as a footnote or using LST. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 14:30, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I did the former, and I'm happy with that. I read the LST page, but I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at with that one. I'm curious, if you're inclined to elaborate. -Pete (talk) 15:16, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Page:Compendium of US Copyright Office Practices, II (1984).pdf/445..[edit]

And others... Can someone else possibly with AWB, assisst in the repair of various tables over multiple pages? I am cleaning up LOT's of pages, but I am about to burn out doing it manually. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:29, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

I can do a quick AWB run, if you tell me precisely what changes need to be made —Beleg Tâl (talk) 00:53, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Well I did eventually do this one manually, so some validation would be appreciated... but the basic repair needed elswehere is...
{|
|<row data>
|-

needs converting to

{|
|-
|<row data>

and

{{nop}}
|<row data>
|-

to

{{nop}}
|-
|<row data>

And of course any trailing

|<rowdata>
|-

needs converting to

|-
|<rowdata>

All tables need the row marker at the start of the row, fixing this resolves a large number of 'fostered' content warnings. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

The other cause of a fostered content warning appears to be:

Header

{| <table style>

Body

{{nop}}
|-
|content
...

As there is no row defined at the point at which the {{nop}} occurs there is content outside the table structure which causes the 'fostered' content warning. Using

<!-- -->
|-
|content
...

instead resolves the error in some situations, but the longer term fix would be for the parser ( and wiki-markup) to explicitly recognise it is inside a table and handle the SOL context for the |- correctly, or by providing an unambiguous continuation syntax. There is a unresolved Phabricator ticket concerning this. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Please fix redirect for Volume III of OAW[edit]

I moved Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 3 to Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume III and then decided I should instead have made "Volume III" redirect to "Volume 3" because all existing links are to the latter. Could you please do the deletion and recreation needed to reverse the direction of the redirect? Thanks. Levana Taylor (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes check.svg DoneBeleg Tâl (talk) 00:52, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Page:A biographical dictionary of eminent Scotsmen, vol 1.djvu/337[edit]

Enough..

Either I can waste time running around playing hunt the random whitespace rule, or someone can actually care, and get the parser fixed so it has ONE CONSISTENT and REPEATABLE behaviour for how to handle continued tables. This has been unresolved for some time, which doesn't inspire confidence in the platform used for Wikisource. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:45, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

 ? - there is a consistent and repeatable solution, which you are very familiar with - use {{nop}} to separate table syntax from other content so that they don't collapse into each other —Beleg Tâl (talk) 11:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
That was what WAS being used on that page... It was STILL generating a "fostered content" warning, apparently due to the <section /> tag, and also possibly due to the reasons I mentioned in the thread above. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Another - Page:January 1916 QST.djvu/11 with the section tag being treated as fostered content (which it is not). As I said, I'm getting frustrated in having to play "guess the handling rule". ONE rule please. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
What I am saying is that I shouldn't have to remember where {{nop}} (or {{nopt}} or <!-- --> works and where it doesn't. There should be ONE syntax that works in all instances and interactions, without me as a contributor having to guess/test on every single instance. It doesen't help that Wikisource is STILL apparently trying to do multipage tables with a syntax designed for single continuous pages. This isn't the first time I've mentioned this, and the sooner certain people overcome their resistance to actually fixing the real problem and provide a working syntax that doesn't depend on template or comment 'work-arounds' the better. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
I've proposed something on phabricator - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T216367 , we can solve this once and for all.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
I don't know what a "fostered content warning" is, but I have yet to see a scenario where {{nop}} failed to work as expected. As far as I know {{nop}} is the one syntax that works in all instances--that's kind of the point of it —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
What fosteref content is , where there is content appearing that doesn't fit with what media wiki thinks the expected table structure is.
{|
Run of text
|-
|Start of row.
|}

Would generate a warning because after the {| the parser is expecting to see either a | or |-. {{nop}} generates a <p></p> which can only appear within a <td> or <th> tag. Mediawiki in an attempt to clean up the output moves the content to the parent container (I.E Outside the table.). Using a <!-- --> instead to effect the line break does not insert content that shouldn't be there as whitespace between a <table> and a <tr> is acceptable..

In some instance the {{nop}} works because it's appended to the end of the row generated in the header portion...

{|
|-
!header1!!header2{{nop}}
|-
|Data 1|| Data 2
|}

Is what's the parser effectively thinks it's seeing.

Where the header only contains an opening {|

What's actually seen is seemingly

{|{{nop}}
|-
|Data 1||Data 2
|}

which breaks the intended stucture as the parser isn't expecting to see a <p></p> immediately after a <table>.

Because figuring these interactions out is tiresome, the proposal was a cleaner method of indicating the ditching of the initial <table>...<tbody> header code, that puts the table generation ENTIRELY within the body text of a page, which is one less set of handling rules to deal with and should be the repeatable and consistent approach desired. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)


In respect of the proposal, what the parser would see is something like
<!-- first page -->
{| nofooter=true 
|+caption
|-
! Header 1 !! Header 2
|-
|Data 1|| Data 2
|}
<!-- next page -->
{| noheader=true 
|-ribbon=true <!-- I.E. Supress display of next row when transcluded. -->
! Header 1 !! Header 2
|-
|Data 1|| Data 2
|}

respectively and this would generate from page

<table>
<caption>caption
</caption>
<tbody><tr>
<th>Header 1</th>
<th>Header 2
</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Data 1</td>
<td>Data 2
</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table>

<tbody><tr>
<th>Header 1</th>
<th>Header 2
</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Data 1</td>
<td>Data 2
</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>

For the two pages in Page namespace

and

<table>
<caption>caption
</caption>
<tbody><tr>
<th>Header 1</th>
<th>Header 2
</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Data 1</td>
<td>Data 2
</td></tr></tr>
<tr>
<td>Data 1</td>
<td>Data 2
</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>

on transclusion, which is all within HTML5 structuring rules with no need for <p></p> or other insertions outside of <tr><th> etc.. and entirely linear.

Fixing this for good at parser level avoids the complications and is easier to debug. Spotting a missing noheader/nofooter in the table syntax is easier, then figuring out the absence of various line-feeds and template combinations.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:01, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Next step would be figuring out how to more precisely define how to handle no-footer/no-header rules work in templates which are transcluded to pages which are transcluded to mainspace., but these could be more tightly and rigidly defined than the current approaches.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

The other consideration, is of course where to put a suitable 'gap' so the page numbering script works correctly (Sigh) :(

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

It would also be NICE if someone documented where precisely the parser expects or inserts whitespace.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
As you probably know, headers and footers are simply <noinclude /> tags. You could use this knowledge to your advantage if you liked, for example:
<!-- first page -->
{| 
|+caption
|-
! Header 1 !! Header 2
|-
|Data 1|| Data 2
<noinclude>
|-
|}</noinclude>
<!-- next page -->
## LST ##
<noinclude>
{|
|-
! Header 1 !! Header 2
</noinclude>
|-
|Data 1|| Data 2
|-
|}
Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
You could also, alternatively, simply ignore the "fostered content" warnings. Where do you even see those anyway? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Special:LintErrors/fostered , sometimes I'm also seeing them with "Missing end tag" errors for DIV tags. The Missing end tag errors are also useufl for finding unpaired /s /e templates and unclosed italics. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Delete my account[edit]

Your site is really complicated. Not user friendly

I want to delete my account please. unsigned comment by Christianview (talk) .

@Christianview: it is not possible to delete an account. However, you can go to Wikipedia and request a courtesy vanishing in order to make your contributions harder to find, or to remove your association with your edits. Have a look at w:Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing for more information. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 23:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)