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?

Nontrivial request: Recovering unclear pdf document[edit]

(also cross-posted to Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab)

Hello, I don't know if this is the correct forum etc. so apologies.

I'm working on a complete rewrite of w:Bengal famine of 1943 in my personal sandbox. The central document for this topic (though it's biased) is the Woodhead Commission Famine report. It's a available in pdf format here. I can save that into .txt format (hurray!), and have written a little Python program that finds keywords from a large number of similar text files and stores quotes into separate files.. however, the scan quality or the Famine Commission report is so poor that extended stretches are simply gobbledygook.

This is a nontrivial request: Is there a PhotoShop guru (or similar) who could sharpen the MANY pages into significantly better & more scannable pdfs? Not all pages could be fixed, because some show the curvature of the book pages etc., but I think many many could be improved.

I have downloaded an evaluation copy of PhotoShop etc and tried to use Sharpen and Levels or Layers whatever to make each page more machine readable, but I don't know how to do it for an entire (large!) report, and I don't know how to scan them or save them to text instead of image (printing every page and scanning each manually is obviously much too much work). I also have a family life and work etc. and learning how to do all these things would just take too much time.

Does anyone have suggestions?

In theory, this service might be valuable for other old documents scanned to pdf, but i dunno how much demand there would be for such a service.

Thanks!Lingzhi (talk) 13:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Update: User:MjolnirPants supplied a detailed answer at Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab which suggests that my request may be prohibitively impractical... I won't delete this thread (just in case), but it is probably a closed matter. Thanks!Lingzhi (talk) 22:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
@Lingzhi: Another copy here. However, this is the report on Bengal, not the final report. The final report is here. I have added them at Wikisource: 1, 2. OCR text layer is OK. Hrishikes (talk) 03:58, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
@Hrishikes: Thanks for the info! I'm mildly embarrassed to admit that I don't know what you wrote means, and I don't know what's going on on the Wikisource pages you linked... I may ask GabrielF for his opinion some time in the next few days, since another editor said GabrielF seems to be The Man... thanks again!Lingzhi (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
  • I want to point out to anyone interested (likely about two people over the whole project) that I just got the ping from the link to my userpage today, 35 days later. Hence my late response. Also, I wanted to clarify what Lingzhi said about my answer: The problem was that the original document was a high resolution, bitonal bitmap. That means every pixel was either pure black or pure white. That's why contrast, levels and such made no difference. My longer answer, for anyone who's curious, can be found here. MjolnirPants (talk) 14:06, 13 May 2016 (UTC)


Am working on my maths skills on Mechanism of the heavens. Open to critical comment. How to do the equivalent of {{pline}} on numbered equations on pg 15 and p 12? — Zoeannl (talk) 05:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

What is your strategy? Do you want all equation numbers to align (after the final pages are transcluded):
  1. vertically (one above the other), or
  2. a fixed margin from the edge of the page, or
  3. centre the entire expression and let things otherwise "run ragged"?
Your various choices will affect the best answer to give to you. AuFCL (talk) 06:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I would like it inset from the margin, but I know nothing about the conventions of such things. Presumably there is some typographical standard for maths? — Zoeannl (talk) 06:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
w:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Mathematics neatly skirts making a recommendation (more or less as if the issue is poison?) and there is always {{equation}} which lies in glorious disuse—so that I cannot even show you an example of what the output looks like on a "real" page, as opposed to its own documentation. You might do worse than that last one, enclosed in, say, <blockquote>? AuFCL (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I think the usual way, closest to a "typographical standard", is to use the equation environment in LaTeX; see b:LaTeX/Advanced_Mathematics#Equation_numbering. Unfortunately the <math> plugin doesn't appear to support this construction so anything that works should be fine. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

{{mfrac}} breaks Wikisource[edit]

Navigating to {{mfrac/doc}} (which is transcribed on the template page) or the talk page give MediaWiki internal errors, due to an "[e]xception caught inside exception handler". Can this be fixed by a more knowledgeable contributor? -Einstein95 (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I was the last editor back in August 2015, so this is definitely not a result of a local change. N.B. This "fault" is limited to MathML mode. Setting your Preferences/Appearance/Math to "PNG images" will restore normal function again (Yes I am well aware this is probably not the answer people want to hear.)

I copied the latest version to template:mfrac on test2: where it similarly fails but at least with more detailed diagnostics (I can but guess their significance.) AuFCL (talk) 00:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Some general background for anybody who does not already know: {{mfrac}} was always more of an experiment in alternate—rather than ever serious standalone—template implementation. In fact every effort was made to make it as similar to the then (and still) existing {{sfrac}} in both behaviour and output.

The upshot of this is that in desperate need a bulk global substitution of mfrac→sfrac should be entirely safe if circumstances so demand.

Nevertheless if this incident turns out to the canary in the coal-mine regarding ongoing <math> developments (whoever heard of the radical idea of testing in a non-live environment? Surely the developers are aware that these changes impact the public view?) I would encourage keeping the template if only as a show-piece: "This worked once upon a time—why does it not do so any more?" AuFCL (talk) 01:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for saying about the fault lying with MathML mode. I have since found that the problem is limited to the use of {{mfrac}} with no parameters. -Einstein95 (talk) 11:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
@Einstein95: Somewhat grinding my teeth over the inappropriateness of "hiding" rather than addressing what I consider is a bug in MathML-mode-<math>, I have modified {{mfrac}} so as not to generate the error condition when called with no parameters set. For the record I consider <math>\any-style-operator{}</math> is and used-to-be legal, though perhaps degenerate code (any-operator can be any of the variants of scriptstyle, displaystyle, textstyle etc.) At worst some kind of error should be generated (as is done so for say \text{}) but not an apparent full-on application crash as is the result of encountering these. AuFCL (talk) 08:15, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Jack London story[edit]

Hi, I recently had to make a change to the Jack London article on Wikipedia, because the wrong version of a story by London had been linked to here on Wikisource. The story is "To Build a Fire" and, as may be known, there are two versions, 1902 and 1908, of this story. A listening copy of the 1908 version may be found here, and there is another copy of the 1908 version here within the Lost Face book. Since the listening copy was mistakenly linked to as a copy of the 1902 version, maybe Wikisource could acquire a 1902 version? A copy may be found at the following link: To Build a Fire (1902).  Stick to sources! Paine  07:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I have moved the ogg {{listen}} to the correct version per your advice. Sounds like we need to create a {{versions}} page for the two works. Personally I know nothing about the works and for that I will ping @Londonjackbooks: who may wish to comment. Thanks for letting us know about the issue. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Yup. "To Build a Fire" (1902) first appeared in Youth's Companion (29 May 1902), and "To Build a Fire" (1908) appeared in The Century Magazine (August 1908) and subsequently in Lost Face (1910). Coincidentally, I recently read in Jack London: An American Life (2013) that Century editor Richard Watson Gilder wrote London concerning the possibility of having received "soiled goods" (biographer Earle Labor's words). London replied in part, "I am absolutely confident, that beyond the motif itself, there is no similarity of treatment whatever." I will create a versions page. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you both very much!  Stick to sources! Paine  00:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Uploading IA files to Commons[edit]

Since IA seems to no longer generate djvu files, do we opt instead to save the pdf files to our computer and upload the files to Commons? Is the process of creating a pdf Index here the same as creating a djvu index? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

IA still makes ocred pdf which can be shifted to Commons using the IA upload tool. Index creating is same, but source option has to be given as pdf instead of djvu. Hrishikes (talk) 00:02, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I've never used the IA Upload tool, but visiting the upload page, it looks like it will only upload .djvu files. I usually save the IA djvu file to my computer, and then upload to Commons. Can we not do the same with pdf files from IA? Are there any other considerations when working with pdf files? Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:53, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
The tool is for djvu by default; if djvu is absent, the tool will automatically pick up the pdf. Yes, pdf also can be downloaded and re-uploaded. But it only wastes bandwidth. Hrishikes (talk) 01:01, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the direction. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:30, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Calligraphy and French[edit]

Can someone please help with the lower portion of the title page and the French part of the image captions in this work? Hrishikes (talk) 01:33, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

I would/could help, but it's unclear what it is you need to be done. — Ineuw talk 19:34, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
The blurry smudges in the image are actually writing. I found a legible scan at Tâl (talk) 20:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
@Hrishikes: Sorry but I failed (again). I was able to read exactly what you already have, but I think that the missing text looks like the arrondissement (district), a street name and number. I also searched the web all over for another copy but found none except what you already have. In the past, I had some success when contacted a publisher by email for information or clarification. The publishing house still exists in Paris. — Ineuw talk 03:39, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
@Beleg Tâl: That was the source I used. @Ineuw: You are probably referring to Armand Colin. That publishing house was established in 1870. This book is of 1832. So A. Colin probably refers to the lithographer, Alexandre Colin. Moreover, if not the title page, at least the image captions in French should be legible to someone knowing the language. Hrishikes (talk) 14:08, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
I've had a look, but the scan just doesn't have the resolution I'd need to read it. It's still too blurry. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
I know enough French to understand what is printed. My problem is exactly the same as EncycloPetey's. . . . poor resolution with insufficient highlight. As for A. Colin, it is still the same publishing house as it was in 1830 - 1832 and the chances are that they will help. Just don't mention Wikipedia or Wikisource, because I found out to my regret that commercial enterprises don't like to help free sources for free when I contacted them. — Ineuw talk 18:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
It seems that Beleg Tâl has already taken care of the French captions, so thanks. Would it be Rue de Montparnasse, the old address of A. Colin, in the title page? Hrishikes (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
I would certainly agree "rue de ???? 35" (might be 33?) but think the missing word is too short to be "Montparnasse". I am fairly certain "rue" is all lower-case. AuFCL (talk) 17:20, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
I got through most of it, but I couldn't figure out the word for 'gossip' used on plate 12 (it looks like 'comonites' to me but this doesn't appear to be a real word in French). I also may have missed some accents that ought to be present but are too fine to show up in the scan; someone with better French knowledge than I can probably correct this without reference to the scan. No idea about the title page though; looks like it might be "rue d' ?u(p/f)er No. 35". FOUND ITBeleg Tâl (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Brilliant! Care to share how you located that page, please? AuFCL (talk) 17:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
I searched for "A. Colin" "rue" in Google Books, thinking maybe another of his publications would show up. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I am (very) impressed. — Ineuw talk 19:32, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@Beleg Tâl: Filled up the village gossips plate. Can u pse confirm? Hrishikes (talk) 02:10, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Transclusion help for Cassell's Illustrated History of England/Volume 1/Chapter I[edit]

This book has chapters start and end inside pages, so I need to use section transclusion, but I cannot figure it out. Can someone help me with Chapter 1, that way I know how to do the rest of the book? If you could describe what I need to put in the pages of the index that would be great to. - Tannertsf (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@Tannertsf: I prepared for you chapter 1 transclusion. But some words of advice:
  • Don't use "names with spaces" for section references.
  • Organize by creating a list of the chapters numbers with their .djvu numbers to be used for the section codes.
  • Section codes without spaces don't need to be enclosed in "".
  • This list is also valuable as a TOC for chapter access.
  • In my scheme of things, the characters prefix of E for end of the old chapter section and B for beginning of the new chapter section as in:
  <section begin=E34 /> top of a split chapter page
  <section end=E34 /><section begin=B34 /> placed between the end of the old and new chapters.
  <section end=B34 /> bottom of split chapter page.
  • One doesn't need a section code on a chapter which begins on the top of the page.
  • Section codes must begin with a letter. (check out any of PSM transclusions).
Ask and you shall receive. — Ineuw talk 19:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much! It's very nice to have something I can go off of now. - Tannertsf (talk) 20:36, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
@Tannertsf: Personally I prefer to use section tags that align with chapter names <section begin="Chapter 1" />, and I always use tags with quotation marks wrapping the label, as it is my understanding that it more aligns with the standards and other practices. My reasoning for descriptive names is that for pages with multiple sections it is more productive. [Well, that and the fact that aligning a section name with a subpage name allows for automating transclusion.] So I disagree with Ineuw's absolutism in his advice, they are his preferences, and that is okay. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
@Tannertsf: If I may add yet another detail to Ineuw and Billinghurst's points above, may I also suggest you bring up your Preference options and locate the "Editing tools for Page: namespace" section. Consider turning off (unchecking) option "Easy LST: Enable the easy section labeling syntax in the Page: namespace," unless you are already used to and rely upon using the "## section name ##" syntax. This will not affect I & B's instructions above and may reduce future potential problems to boot. This gadget has some nasty behaviour on occasion. AuFCL (talk) 00:20, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the extra input. I always wondered what that preference did, so I will disable that. I consider myself a veteran Wikisource guy but this is really hitting me hard today! :) I have always found transclusion easy, but in this case, not so much. So the advice helps. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
@Tannertsf: Whichever system you use, consistency is the key. My advise is to prepare the necessary tags beforehand. A very handy tool is a spreadsheet with which you can multiply the common elements, and use a separate column alongside for each tag value. Then, export it as a text file and just copy and paste as you create the main namespace headers. Also, add spredsheet columns for the .djvu numbers and the page numbers and record them on the spreadsheet as you go along. From this we can generate a table of contents. — Ineuw talk 03:21, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
So, @Ineuw:, I guess I can go ahead and make a spreadsheet marking when the chapters start and end and such? Would that be the next logical step for me to take? - Tannertsf (talk) 11:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Ok I have figured it out now! Thanks for all the help. - Tannertsf (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
It was my pleasure. If you need more help, let me know. — Ineuw talk 16:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

File upload template: obsolete copyright templates and category selection bug.[edit]

  • The public domain license selection of the file upload is no longer valid. It should be "PD-release".
  • After upload, when the {{PD-release}} is saved and its category is inserted automatically, it deletes the manually selected category of Category:Instructional. — Ineuw talk 20:48, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
If someone has the user right, the knowledge, and the time, to update the Wikisource file upload template, it would be greatly appreciated. Our template is an outdated and buggy derivative of this mediawiki template. — Ineuw talk 19:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Issues fixed. — Ineuw talk 19:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Move of an author?[edit]

Not comfortable attempting this. Note Author:Friedrich August Gotttreu Tholuck has too many "t"s in third name. Of the four WMF sites, we are the only one showing "Gotttreu" instead of "Gottreu. Humbug26 (talk) 18:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I moved it, but then I noticed that Gotttreau is actually not incorrect, so I moved it back.
Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:49, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts on this. My links work and it appears Wikidata is showing both versions. Humbug26 (talk) 19:37, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Three Thousand Selected Quotations from Brilliant Writers[edit]

After three months (and a little bit), I finally finished proofing this project. I have attempted transclusion: got the first part, index of authors, and index of subjects done; however, there is too much for the "Burning Words..." part. I got the dreaded template limit notice, which crashes somewhere in the "Ministers" subject. Methinks, the unknown-to-me part needed is sections. I have read and studied and still can't figure it out. Not yet. Can someone go into this and fix? I'll go back and check in a few days how this should've been done. Then I'll know for any possible next time for this kind of project. Humbug26 (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

What was your plan, to include the entire work from A-Z in the Burning Words part? In that case, I think the book would be especially good with a page for each subject since then you can have easy tight sections. I am happy to do the transclusion for you. - Tannertsf (talk) 22:52, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't sure just what the ultimate plan should have been; alphabetical breaks or subject breaks. There are two letters not included, and a couple of subjects have only a couple of quotes. If you are willing to take on the transclusion of this part of the project, however you think appropriate, I'll be grateful. Thank you. Humbug26 (talk) 02:10, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Most definitely break it down to component parts … work of that length as 600 scrollable web pages, <shudder> readability alone! You will know the work best, though a quick look at the ToC would seem that an A-Z breakdown may be suitable. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I think either letter sections or subject sections would both be good options. But, with 600 pages, that would be around 20-25 pages of content on each page. Subject would have more links, but we could make it look nice and work nice. So, Humbug26, I'll leave it up to you to pick out what type of transclusion to do since you know the book more than anyone else. Then I will start on it! - Tannertsf (talk) 09:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Two things. First, Billinghurst: I agree that it seems to make perfect sense to go with alphabetic breakout; second, Tannertsf, you did offer your help. As I have put "anchor+" against the alpha-letter AND we can use "compactTOCalpha" to go to an alphabet area, my decision, reluctant as it is, is to ask for a subject breakout. We currently have no way of getting to say the subject of "Meekness" or "Merit", both of which have 2 quotes each versus the subject "Christ" which has 48 pages of quotes. I did put in DJVU page links but see it doesn't transfer to transclusion, which is not a good thing. (There must be a reason why it doesn't; then why have it? Is there not something that does work?) Tannertsf, I'm sure you have your game plan in place for subjects, as you spoke for that decision in a nice way. Humbug26 (talk) 17:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Alphabetical is fine to me as well. I am happy to start it if you give the go ahead. - Tannertsf (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Alphabetical is okay with me as well. Go ahead. Humbug26 (talk) 19:22, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Ok I have done the first few letters and set up a rudimentary TOC. This would be a perfect way to learn sectional transclusion: if you take a look at the pages which switch into different letters, you will notice that those pages have a section tag marking the part of per se "B", and the other tag is marking the second part, which would be "C". These tags are truly handy, and if you follow what I have done with the first few letters you should be able to go through the rest on your own. Feel free to ask for help if you try and don't succeed, but I want you to take this as a learning opportunity. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll take a look at this maybe tomorrow or the next day. I just spent the last 3+ hours upgrading from Win8.1 to Win10. I'm still trying to figure out my way around. Humbug26 (talk) 04:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Much better. Thank you, Tannertsf, for your help on this. And no, I don't want to do any more like this; there's just so much fun a person can handle at one time. Humbug26 (talk) 18:05, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Table over page break won't transclude correctly.[edit]

Having reworked the template to what I THOUGHT was now the correct approach, I went to review the transclusion using <pages> and found it had busted completely. Short Titles Act 1896/First Schedule/6 Ann. Can someone explain in very simple terms what went wrong, as I am getting frustrated at having to work around a pedantic parser. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

The current revision looks fine to me. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
The only problem I see is that each page is identified as [page] instead of by its page number. The table itself looks OK. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
And when I attempted to fix it (see the history) It refused to behave, making me wonder if there's something more seriously wrong with the underlying templates, which only manifests when <pages> is used vs direct transclusion of each page. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
This would of course be academic if there was a SANE way to run tables across page boundaries...ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
What's even more puzzling is that on a previous set of pages trancluded elsewhere , the issue of the table formationg goin haywire doesn't occur. - The problem template seems to be {{Statute table/titles/entry}} which should probably be re-written because it's quite intensive on the parser currently. In the process of documentating at the momentShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm also of the view that {{Short-title}}} should be re-built as Lua, as it's reaching the limit of what can be done in template markup. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
This is what you get for presenting—as having a problem—an item in which you have subsequently attempted to mask the very problem you ought to be demonstrating—hoping for general assistance.
The prior version using <pages> was attempting to build a table from the output produced by:
{{statute table/titles/header}}
<pages index="Public General Statutes 1896.djvu" from=36 to=37 />
{{statute table/titles/footer}}
—which fails due to the resulting table consisting of only one row of three cells (you clearly expected it to produce many more rows but in fact the entire <pages> transclusion populates the rightmost cell due to LST enclosing its output in <div> </div> tags. The solution is to take a lesson from the prior chapter and rearrange your transclusion such that <pages> delivers only entire table structures (i.e. including table header, content and footer) as a unit.
Also, should not "6 Anne, c. 11." be included under both chapters, as it equally suits both banners "6 Ann" as well as "Pre Union"?
Finally, EncycloPetey's point above regarding page numbers may be partially addressed (if you want to persist in the current path) by substituting each, for example {{page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/36}}, with {{page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/36|num=16}} etc. AuFCL (talk) 15:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I did that here - The_Public_General_Statutes_(1896)/Table_VI (which has a simmilar issue) and nothing happened, I.E no page numbers. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:48, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Really? No, you didn't. I recommended use of the {{page}} template. What you did was to directly transclude individual Page: space pages. Either of the following approaches works in this situation and both generate the structures necessary for mediawiki:PageNumbers.js to do its magic and generate the page number displays:
Method 1
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/516|num=496}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/517|num=497}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/518|num=498}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/519|num=499}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/520|num=500}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/521|num=501}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/522|num=502}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/523|num=503}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/524|num=504}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/525|num=505}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/526|num=506}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/527|num=507}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/528|num=508}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/529|num=509}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/530|num=510}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/531|num=511}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/532|num=512}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/533|num=513}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/534|num=514}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/535|num=515}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/536|num=516}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/537|num=517}}
{{Page|Public General Statutes 1896.djvu/538|num=518}}
Method 2
 index="Public General Statutes 1896.djvu"
 from ="516"
 to   ="538"
For I hope obvious reasons I recommend use of Method 2. AuFCL (talk) 10:29, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Can you give the exact differences, because the idiot I am I having a hard time seeing the issue, is it because the Pre union pages have the header in the 'body' rather than seperate? Also do we need an option on <pages> to supress the div generation so that this is not an issue in the future? BTW I've got NO objections to someone re-working the templates or the pages so they work consistently in line with what's SUPPOSED to happen. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I tested something... Pages 35 and 36 in structural terms should be identical, (the entry template embeds the |- row, marker. So it would seem to solely be about how <pages> works. Is there an easy way to suppress the div so that what pages generates isn't as pre-baked, raw=yes param maybe?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:44, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
A side issue is that the current approach overloads the transclusion limits a bit.. There's probably a better way of doing it :(, if someone wants to write a script to re-work the formatting to something simpler, I don't have any objections. It's a shame there isn't a subst function that gives you the 'output' (like Lua does) over a direct substitution, because for a large number of the table based works I've done it would be rather helpful, in that in quite a few instances what the template is nominaly parsing only needs to be parsed once and intelligently subst, rather than what the the current direct subst does. for all the scripting possible Wikitext is still remarkably static.16:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Another aside Template:Statute table/entry and some of it's relations have reached the limits of maintainability in their complexity. They really need an overhaul :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Index:Chronological Table and Index of the Statutes.djvu Tables again[edit]

I'm now rather dissapointed. For performance reasons I was reworking the formatting on the efforts I'd made in terms of the index portion of this work, so that it wasn't calling a template for each row of the table which would eventually hit the transclusion limits. However in re-working the formatting, I seem to hit the SAME issues with spanned tables that I've come up against on previous efforts.

Comparing Page:Chronological Table and Index of the Statutes.djvu/365 and Page:Chronological Table and Index of the Statutes.djvu/366, the latter seems to include some undesired whitespace, even though structurally the pages should be simmilar.

Can someone that's more experienced please come up with a "long-term" fix? Whilst there are workarounds such as using <includeonly> portions vs actual headers, this doesn't seem to behave consistently.

Need a short, left aligned heavy line in table[edit]

The fourth row from the bottom of the table of this page Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 51.djvu/780 starts with a heavy line. Tried using {{bar|2}}, but I couldn't bold it so, I am looking for help for any acceptable solution. — Ineuw talk 01:25, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Unicode? AuFCL (talk) 02:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Went through hundreds of Unicode characters of BabelMap, and there is a thick "minus" sign ➖➖ but they are too short, and there would be a gap with two side by side. Perhaps, I should leave it as is? — Ineuw talk 06:28, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks AuFCL, didn't realize that you already corrected it. — Ineuw talk 06:30, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Unicode block (hexadecimal) 2500 through 259F has a very useful line-drawing/block-graphic set which largely "fit together." I simply looked through that until I found some likely matches. AuFCL (talk) 06:50, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Directly Trannscluded pages in mainspace[edit]

Following on from a previous concern, How do we find pages that are directly transcluded, as opposed to using {{page}}? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:44, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

This works. AuFCL (talk) 12:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Not as many as I thought. Anyone want to consider adding them to a to-do list?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:31, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Transclusion of tables on several pages[edit]

I just made the index of Pekinese Rhymes/Index as a long table spanning several pages (is it the correct way? Should I have used the TOC templates?)

Each page is individually OK, but when I look at the end result on the link above, there are two problems:

  • The first line of each page is not shown in the transclusion
  • The page shortcut does not work and links to , apart for the first page

Could someone with more experience on transclusion look at what I did wrong?

Koxinga (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

You were so close! Unfortunately the Help: page for this is slightly misleading and so I won't refer you there. To address your issues in order:
  • To display the first line of each page (in transclusion) requires a little sleight-of-hand: add |- after the {{nop}} at the start of the page content proper. This fixes the "first line" problem but wipes out the insertion point where mediawiki:PageNumbers.js inserts the page links (which kind of addresses your second point.)
  • To reestablish a structure PageNumbers.js above can work with, rearrange the last line and footer of each transcluded table page (except the last) from:
    <!-- content end/footer start -->
    <!-- footer end -->
to instead:
<!-- content end/footer start -->
<!-- footer end -->
Mad as it might seem the {{nop}} marks the point (in the transcluded result) at which the "next page" link will eventually be established. Yes it is a confusing mess of compromises!
Please check if the current result is per your expectations. AuFCL (talk) 02:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! The page link is one line above the actual first line, but that's ok. I did try to follow Help:Page_breaks#Tables_across_page_breaks, but without really understanding the {{nop}} template usage, and as you said, it does not really work. It would be a good idea to update it.
Koxinga (talk) 06:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
The "page link is one line above the actual first line" is the result of the compromise I tried to describe before. If you choose a page link and hover your mouse pointer over it the secret is revealed. Note the start of the greyed area indicating the extent of the sub-page starts at the end of the prior where did that second {{nop}} go? Same spot!
To forestall the question "why does the page link not start at the other {{nop}}, the one at the top of the actual page?" sadly you will find that by the time the final HTML has been prepared the parser has completely eliminated all trace of it. In effect that is the base problem (remember those page shortcuts back to Main page?) all over again in another form. (Yes this explanation is slightly glib. The proper answer is even messier and might even involve impolitic language.) AuFCL (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
@AUFcl- That may help explain why some of my table code wasn't rendering right, however confusingly the above tail-nopping is NOT what the current help says you are supposed to do with tables over multiple pages. As I've said elsewhere it's very confuding for new users and needs a long term soloution.  :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:45, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
O.K. Might as well lay out the full horror. In the most general case all "intermediate" pages in a long-spaning-table-transclusion require three insertions of {{nop}}:
  1. one just at the top of the content section (really protecting the necessary but invisible new-line which everybody forgets is essential for wikitable (|-, |+ or | etc.) recognition;
  2. one just at the end of the content section (provides a break in table flow where the next page's link will be later rendered); and
  3. one just at the top of the footer section (new-line protection as above.) This last can frequently be omitted if no visible footer content (e.g. page number) is present. A real empty line works here as well but as some "clean-up" scripts remove this I personally dislike that approach.
The first and third cases above "disappear" having served their marker purpose to the parser and leave no remnant in the final HTML. Case 2 usually transforms (processed via MediaWiki:Proofreadpage_pagenum_template) into a special hidden span carrying sufficient information for MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js to later construct the page number link.
Note that none of the above usages correspond precisely to that of "normal" {{nop}} usage at the bottom of a page ending with a complete paragraph, and so could be viewed as technical abuses of the spirit of that template. AuFCL (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2016 (UTC)