Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help/Archives/2013

Scriptorium/Help

Noob with questions

Hi, all. I have recently downloaded to my own computer the full text of the old Hastings Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, with the intention of adding the various articles therein to this site. Before anyone asks, yes, I do know just how freaking huge that source is, and that there is likely little if any chance that I will actually add all of its articles within one limited lifetime. I expect to start with those articles which are on topics which are included in more recent reference works on religion, so that people in other Wikimedia entities can have ready access to at least one good source on the subject. And, yes, some of the articles in that work have been called recently the best things on their topics ever written. I went through the how to create a page instructions, and am copyediting the versions I intend to upload here, but I do have a few questions regarding these matters first.

1) Many of the articles have images of specific relevant material included. I am assuming that there are public-domain copies of those images available, considering the articles are themselves PD at this point, but wonder whether they are actually required for inclusion of the texts of the articles, and, if they aren't, if there are any real reasons to object to removing the "see image X" material from the articles themselves.

2) I also assume we consider it acceptable to remove similar material from the article to the effect of "see page X, column Y" earlier in the same article internal references, because I think they would be incoherent in this format, but would appreciate verification of same.

3) Lastly, I have to say that the #*&%@$ thing contains a huge amount of #*&%@$ Greek and other texts, and that I as an individual have serious problems telling the characters apart in some instances. What if anything are the procedures here for such matters?

Thanks in advance for any responses. John Carter (talk) 17:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Speaking from experience, I'd recommend that you try working on a collaboratiove project here, before attempting such a monumental task on your own. It would mean a slight delay in acting on your enthusiasm, but would likely acquaint you with an array of issues and tools before you begin, thus saving lots of time and frustration in the bigger task. As it happens, this month's collaboration is on a religious subject, which might be of interest to you. You'd be able to work alongside others and learn by asking questions as you go. I answer in this way, rather than directly answering your specific questions because (1) I see you've made only about a dozen edits here before, and the task you are looking to complete is monumental even by experienced standards, and (2) there are some big steps you'd need to accomplish before beginning the tasks about which you ask. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I strongly second EncycloPetey's comments and in addition, we encourage the use of the .djvu format which would allow others to collaborate, rather than just uploaded text. Also, our past experience has been that projects which require many months of work are not completed and we already have a large collection of incomplete works.— Ineuw talk 19:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Fortunately, the scans seem to be available online at IA.org.

Please note more than one of those PDFs exceeds Commons' max upload file size of 100M. Additional manipulation of those files will be required to make that "fit". Conversion to DjVu might be another option. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

With regards to your questions, I think:

1) you should add all images and keep the references "see image X" (this is in keeping with our philosophy of trying to make our works facsimiles of the actual texts)

2) you should keep the "see page X, column Y" references and do the best you can to link them to the page number in reference

3) you should mark any pages with Greek characters with Template:Greek missing and someone who can handle the Greek and can type it efficiently can come through and do that for you.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 21:14, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Djvu format is also available on IA (~67MB). It's preferable because of its size and also because it's indicative that the work is also available in in JP2 format (it is) for image extraction. — Ineuw talk 21:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe there are still technical issues Wikisource:Scriptorium#Anyone_having_trouble_pulling_text_layers.3F with import of DJVU files, so pending that fix I would not begin the work yet. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

A good start is to add {{welcome}} template on a newbies' talk pages, as that has our primary links. Also, we should look to ensure that the text gives new users the required "get out of jail" cards that says, leave the hard bits, mark them 'such and such' a way, and mark the page as problematic. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

adding new books without text layers

Even though I keep seeing that note where it states problems pulling text layers upon entering, this problem does not exist totally. Ineuw talk has added the page images without the text layers. He cleaned and uploaded the illustrations to Commons. I then took those uploaded images where they were full page images, with no text, and inserted them in the proper page of Vanity Fair. Where pages were a mixture of image and text I left those alone thinking that when WS has pulling text layers in that it may overwrite the pages with both text and images. Still, a good portion of the work has been done aside from the fact that presently text layers cannot be done. This way part of the book is already completed. The same can be done with other books. Once the text layers are pulled in only that portion of editing will need to be done. Therefore, aside from all of the negativity of "we can't do this" -- we can still do that -- and that portion would have had to be done anyhow. It may be possible to type in text pages and then delete them. This way they still exist. Therefore when pulling in text layers, all one has to do is copy/paste from the page once created and deleted. This way an entire book can be done regardless of any inability to pull in text layers at the present. —Maury (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

But if there may be a problem in the file's text layer. We can't judge this if we can't access that layer. If there is such a problem found with the file, then the file may need to be redone, and the whole process started again from scratch once the text layer is made accessible. It is therefore better not to work with the problematic file, and thereby not have to face redoing a lot of the work once the problem is corrected. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

It presents an interesting problem but also an interesting experiment. I would do only a very few pages shown in various ways (full page images should not be affected -- part text and part image probably will be affected -- and all text probably will be replaced. I enjoy experimenting to learn so that if it happens again I will know the answers to my own questions. Since I will do only a bit of this as an experiment then there is nothing I see to lose and if I do lose the little bit of work as an experiment then it was only something small that I can do over again. It really is not the work I am interested in as much it is the experiments I am curious about. I thank you for your answer. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 21:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

But if, for example, we find that one or two pages are missing, then the original file has to be reprocessed, and the created pages will be in the wrong place. This is just one of the kinds of problems that can arise. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

There is no problem that cannot be resolved. Have no such fears and be willing to face challenges. When entering Wikisource one of the statements is to be bold and that is exactly what we are doing. Too, you are not involved in any of this yet. There are only two of us who have worked with all page images and all of the illustrations. Let us learn and learn in peace. You have nothing to lose in this. I don't intend to sound mean but I really do want to try this as an experiment We two have worked on it can rework it if need be. We are all volunteers here so let us not argue nor debate this work that only two have done. There is, at this very point, nothing more we plan to do with our work. On your home page you have many works listed that you plan to get done. We are not requesting any help from any administrator and do not need any "help" from any administrator. Do not touch what we have set up! Keep other volunteers happy by leaving them in peace some times. Take care of your long list of work "to be done" or if you prefer edit whatever the proofread of the month is. We do not need an argument, nor a debate, or even more conversation about it. It burns up your and my time for editing. Thank you for your consideration, —Maury (talk) 23:26, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

If, as you say, we do not need a conversation, then why did you start one? --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

It is more like how far should a conversation go? Only you and I have been having a conversation on this subject and we both have stated our thoughts. Thus it is more like what else is there to say? Have you something new and productive to add? If so then please do add it. —Maury (talk) 06:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Well that's a little strange

So I was doing a bit of validating while Skyping with the girlfriend (don't tell her, she didn't notice), but when I looked at the changes, there were some line breaks that I wasn't purposefully introducing.[1]

I don't think that it's an actual issue, but I'm more curious as to why my edit would have changed anything in the copy itself. I even went back and clicked the Edit button again, making sure to do nothing except change the page status, and I still got the additional copy tweaks. Wha? EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:21, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Line break looked okay to me. The old method of reference transclusion didn't. In your time away, you missed on of ThomasV's lovely innovations of using initially <ref name="match">blah blah</ref> and follow on subsequent carry over reference stuff <ref follow="match">more blah blah</ref>. For my practice, I usually call the first pXX where XX is the page number, and utilise that thereafter. Numbers alone (ref name=XX)don't work with <ref>. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:04, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I figured it was something like that. Thanks for the correction; I'm making a note about the footnotes in case I run across the issue again. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:30, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I have just had an "Oh <generic expostulation>!" moment. I also had noticed and (I thought corrected) an oddity in the footnote on this very page. Just finished writing a confession to Billinghurst about same. Hope I haven't made the situation worse! MODCHK (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

text alignment in table that spans two pages

Hello. Yet another question. If anyone has a solution for keeping text in a table aligned (top of this page) so that it renders correctly in the Main, I would appreciate it. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:49, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

This Itinerary table is also frustrating me. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that you are having the software render two different tables, so it is changing up the sizes of both tables and not matching them to each other. What you need to do, is use the header and footer of those pages. Put the closing of the first table (on page 25) in the footer and the opening of the second table (on page 26) in the header. What this does is it makes the software render the tables so they look fine when you're in the Page: namespace, but it only renders one table when it's transcluded (because nothing in the footers/headers makes it into the main ns). Basically, the table on page 25 is transcluded as an "open" table because its closing code is not carried with it, and it uses the closing code of the table on page 26. This forces it all to align properly.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 17:14, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

<trying not to be self-deprecating> Where to put the "|-" (or do I need one?)? After one hundred edits of the pages, I can't find a good solution. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:39, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay... I got the first problem (thank you). Let me take a look at my other issue... Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:55, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Good to go on all accounts, thanks. Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:10, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you both, Help:Table updated using above explanation and example. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Sectional transclusion using <pages> on PDF. What have I done wrong?

Can somebody please set me straight as to what is wrong with this directive (as used here):

 <pages index="Cadet Handbook and Section Roll.pdf" include="1,5-7" tosection="registration" />

I had intended this to transclude pages 1,5 and 6; followed by the top half of page 7 (i.e. excluding the "registration" section); however as you will see this unwanted section insists on coming for the ride.

In frustration I have come up with this approach (which produces the effect I wanted to achieve), but which seems rather unwieldy:

 <pages index="Cadet Handbook and Section Roll.pdf" from=1 to=1 />
 {{page break|label=}}
 <pages index="Cadet Handbook and Section Roll.pdf" from=5 to=6 />
 {{#section:Page:Cadet Handbook and Section Roll.pdf/7|statutory}}

Would some kind soul please show me where my apparently broken brain has led me astray here?

I am sure I have not encountered this sort of problem with DJVU indices, so could this be a PDF-related quirk? MODCHK (talk)

It should be tosection="statutory" rather than "registration". I haven't checked the documentation but I think tosection means the last section to be included, not the section to exclude (nor the marker at which to stop). I've re-edited the page to show that. If I've messed anything up or completely misunderstood this, please just undo my edit. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:27, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, you got it exactly right. I really thought I had tried that combination and it had not worked; but can only plead bewilderment now. And you also expressed my mistaken former understanding of "tosection" quite accurately: I really thought it designated the section at which transclusion was halted (i.e. that only the starting point of the section was used.) I shall just have to get my head straight on this again! MODCHK (talk) 19:00, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

MODCHK, don't even say you are an idiot because it is not right. Adam is just very, very smart. —Maury (talk) 19:54, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Spanning table and reference problem

Can someone please help with this table two page table Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 60.djvu/529 (529 & 530) and reference position? The reference appears above the table. Thanks. — Ineuw talk 14:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I think this is an artefact of the way we do split tables in the Page namespace. I've run into similar problems before and given up trying to sort it—particularly as it transcludes just fine. In the end, it's what it looks like in Mainspace that is our main concern. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:13, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

How is it now? (Although strictly according to Help:Page_breaks#Tables_across_page_breaks the trailing {{nop}} may not be necessary...) MODCHK (talk) 21:24, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies, as well as for the lesson. It looks fine now. — Ineuw talk 21:29, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Images spanning a two page spread

I was wondering what the standard "best practice" is for pictures that span across a spread. Example here and here. Should I combine the two images together into one large image or keep them separate?

For this case, I'd say that a single combined image would be preferable. I can't think of any good reason to have them separate. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:37, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Agree - but keep in mind that you will need to do some tweaking to the final transclusion to ignore one page or the other and substitute the full image for the main namespace for what would amount to only half an image in the Page: namespace (i.e. use something like... {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Page|Half image call|Full image call}} to accomplish that). -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:22, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I figured that I should combine them, but I was unsure about the proper way to handle transclusion properly. MarkLSteadman (talk) 11:11, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

And now it is done. Thanks again. MarkLSteadman (talk) 04:16, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Legislation Formatting templates

Would it be possible for someone to look through the various back and forth of these and come up with 'stable' versions of these, and then 'protect' them? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Side-by-side formatting suggestions for Francesca

If anyone has a better way to display Francesca of Rimini in a side-by-side display similar to this one (excluding references), I would be all ears. I copied the transcription formatting Zyephyrus used for Eleven Poems, since every other page of Francesca likewise alternates between translations. Any ideas/changes/suggestions welcomed. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Mpaa. Looks good! Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

refs centering in Main, don't know why

Hope this won't be like looking for a needle in a haystack, but I couldn't figure out where the issue is. [ Page here ]. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Header Trans

On Latin for beginners (1911)/Part II (and presumably elsewhere) when the first level header (i.e =Lesson II=)starts a page this is transliterated to there, the header is not displayed correctly. I went through and took a bunch of nop’s off of the before pages and that did not fix it. Any ideas? JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

A nop at the beginning of the page helps, but I do not know why or if it is acceptable. See Page:Latin_for_beginners_(1911).djvu/34--Mpaa (talk) 16:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks that works. Jeepday (talk) 23:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

"2.B.", "3.B."

Does anyone know what the "2.B." & "3.B.", etc. notation is for on pp. 35 & 36, etc.? I don't think they are related to footnotes, for the one on p. 36 does not correspond with one. There's a "1.B." on p. 15, but I ignored it. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:37, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I got it. They're notes which follow each Canto. Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:46, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 67.djvu/157

The word "and" was duplicated in the original text and I struck it over, but never having come across this before, I was wondering if this is the correct procedure to deal with it? — Ineuw talk 20:08, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we should be improving texts. I would transcribe as-is. Hesperian 01:21, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

You are right. I got your point and remove the overstrike. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 06:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Page:Palestine Exploration Fund - Quarterly Statement for 1894.djvu/8

It's embarrassing but try as one might, I cannot successfully embed the table definition in the header - the table collapses. I've done this hundreds of times using {{nop}}. All columns, rows and cells were verified, and when the header is in the main body, it's fine. Could someone in the know look and see something I missed? I placed an HTML note where the header should end. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 16:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Should be OK. Apparently you need to leave an empty line before the table openings, otherwise it is recognized as text and not as wikicode.--Mpaa (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. We salute you. :-) — Ineuw talk 17:09, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

{{nop}} question

Is it necessary/desirable, etc. for {{nop}} to occupy its own line, or can it share the same line as the last word on a page? Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:59, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

It's necessary that nop is on a line by itself, be sure that it's not followed by space after (or before). — Ineuw talk 22:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

It also shouldn't be used inside tables, which is something I've seen happening of late. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you please supply context and/or examples? Whilst I agree I cannot think of a useful (or indeed harmful either) use of {{nop}} in inline tables; surely Help:Page_breaks#Tables_across_page_breaks practically mandates its use in cross-page-transcluded tables? MODCHK (talk) 05:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, my experience is that the advice given for use of {{nop}} in that Help page is just wrong, as the template isn't needed at all. All the multi-page tables I've done have worked just fine without it. See for example the monstrously large table at the end of this chapter, where no {{nop}} was needed to get the table to format.

The bad instances I've noticed recently include: this one, where it was used at the end of the first page of a multi-page table. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the response and clarification(s). Umm, don't the page bodies of both Page:An Introduction to the Study of Fishes.djvu/89 and Page:An Introduction to the Study of Fishes.djvu/90 (2nd and 3rd pages of the "monstrously large table") commence with {{nop}}s? In both pages you are listed as the (only) editor. MODCHK (talk) 05:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

They do, yes, but it isn't required for proper display of the page content. I've just verified that again myself with a test edit to be certain I wasn't mistaken. The only thing that the {{nop}} does is that it permits an individual page number link to appear in the transcluded version of the page. Without that template, the transcluded version would not show page numbers to the left for any but the first page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 08:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Which is incorrect behaviour as all page number links should be there. So the {{nop}} is required. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

How can that be "incorrect" behavior? This same lack of page numbers will occur whenever a paragraph runs across multiple pages, and I have seen this happen. There is no way to guarantee that the page numbers will display when there is a multipage passage with no paragraph breaks. The page numbers may be desirable, but they cannot be enforced. --EncycloPetey (talk) 09:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Every page included in the <pages/> command to transclude a range of pages from the Page: namespace should appear in the main namespace. The exception to this are those Pages: marked empty for without text within a transcluded range. The other known issue concerns those instances where a table spans more than 1 Page: in the Page: namespace. Otherwise the pages numbers should always be displayed. The true test is to see if the page numbers are missing under all three Dynamic Layouts not just the default. If it is just the default, its your browser vs. the wikicode and not everybody will experience this in the same instances as you do. -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Your statement about page numbers always displaying is at odds with the observed facts. I've edited from a Mac running Safari, a PC running Firefox, and a PC running IE, so my observations are not specific to just one browser or one platform. When a paragraph spans three or more pages without a paragraph break, page numbers display only for the page on which the paragraph starts and for the one where the next paragraph begins. Any page that includes no start of a new paragraph, or for which the previous page did not end with {{nop}}, will not have its page number displayed. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Nevertheless, the only HTML element that is known to prevent the display of embedded page numbers back to the Page: namespace are the wikicoded closing table row & table cell tags. All other common tags accept the insertion of one or more span tags and that is what is generated when the page breaks in a transcluded range of Page:s are rendered in the mainspace for the embedded links. The length of a paragraph (or lack of paragraph breaks) across multiple pages in the Page namespace should not affect this. If it does (i.e. you do not see the embedded page links under all 3 dynamic layouts) then trust something is not right. The hiding of some embedded links as you describe would be completely contrary to the purpose & design of the extension.

The obvious first thing to test after that would be the same multi-page paragraph being forced to open and close with the traditional html opening and closing pargraph tags <p> rather than the default wikicoded generated substitions of paragraph tags. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

{{nop}} is principally used to stop wikitext collapsing, so it is akin to a position holder, and sometimes it is within a table commencement/termination due to the <noinclude>s. The help text was clearly defined at a point of time due to the necessity, and while it is always possible that a coding change may render this unnecessary, last time I checked it still provided a useful piece of coding, even within a table. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:41, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource FAQ

Does en.Wikisource have a FAQ with questions and answers -- but not highly detailed answers consisting of several pages -- the typical FAQ we all are used to seeing with short questions and answers? —Maury (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

There are three

• Wikisource:WikiProject 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/faq
• Wikisource:WikiProject Wiki Bible/FAQ
• Wikisource:WikiProject DNB/FAQ

There is also Help:Contents and Wikisource:For Wikipedians. Jeepday (talk) 01:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Jeepday! —Maury (talk) 01:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource FAQ areas

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:WikiProject_Wiki_Bible/FAQ#Why_not_the_GFDL.3F

6 Why use a wiki?

Two papers written by A. Désilets describe the benefits of using a wiki for collaborative translation:

"Translation the Wiki Way", 2006

"Translation Wikified: How will Massive Online Collaboration Impact the World of Translation?", 2007

results

Error / Erreur

HTTP Error 404 - Not Found

—Maury (talk) 01:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Looking for a justified text block template

We have centered and hanging indent templates but I can't find one that forces justification on a block of text with a set width. I need it for multi-line image captions, (a newly introduced PSM style as of volume 57) Is there such a thing, before I make one? — Ineuw talk 02:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Umm, {{justify}}? Operates on a paragraph-at-a-time basis; so I guess that is not what you are looking for? I usually wrap it around a {{block left}} or {{block centre}} and use the |width= from that if I need to force a given width. (Not sure if that extends the paragraph limit on effect though; please experiment.) MODCHK (talk) 03:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

On second thoughts, cancel that concern about crossing paragraphs. Works fine by itself (e.g. Page:Things Seen In Holland (1912).djvu/261) MODCHK (talk) 04:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Also note I got the embedding backwards above: {{block centre|width=NNNpx|{{justify|text flow etc.}}}} is the correct way and works. MODCHK (talk) 00:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I would (blindly) ask why we would want to do so. This is about the text, not a facsimile when the presentation form when we are in a different medium. Unless it is critical to the presentation, I am not sure that I will overly fuss. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:28, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I was attempting to respond to the technical question posed. As Ineuw has not clarified the matter further, either this answer sufficed, or (more likely after this lapse of time) the matter is now thoroughly stale. MODCHK (talk) 00:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)= Help =

Table help request

If anyone wants to take a stab at it, the table on this page needs tweaking. Also, if there could be a buffer placed between the columns; and I don't know if it's possible to replicate the distinction made in the original with regard to the contents in italics. Thanks ahead of time, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Not really nice. Feel free to do what you prefer. Did not get your point on italics.--Mpaa (talk) 22:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay... What's "not really nice"? I'll check back here tomorrow for a reply, and hopefully someone can explain what I mean by the text in italics. I'm tired. Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

What I came up with.--Mpaa (talk) 23:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

What's nice is the effort and intent—and time taken. Thanks for both all. Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I will be the first to admit this solution is "unusual", but the biggest flaw I can see is an extra padding line which I don't seem to be able to suppress separating quotes (53) from 54. Best I can do. I look forward to how to fix it further... MODCHK (talk) 18:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The Romance of Isabel, Lady Burton/Book 1/Chapter 1

Why does the family tree at /35 transclude to the end, and not immediately after page 8 where it belongs? Moondyne (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Chart didn't have an end, so wikicode just dumped the lot to the end of the page. Fixed. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Tks. Moondyne (talk) 02:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Page blanking edits

This appeared on my watchlist. I'm too lazy/tired at the moment to look thoroughly through the history, but page blanking, in my understanding is, if not 'illegal'—then at least frowned upon here. But I'm not sure where the distinction lies (to what extent), so I thought I'd inquire here. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• Without addressing the content change appropriateness Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing the content is being moved, not blanked. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 17:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

[Some] Index page images in The kernel and the husk not appearing on the right hand side in my browser

Can someone please look into the above issue? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm... One page I alighted on had the image, so I went either forward or backward (can't remember which), and when I alighted back on the original page, the image disappeared was no longer visible on the page. Some kind of glitch? Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Considering further... This is an issue for comparison purposes, as I have made many mistakes in proofreading, and I do not want to mislead any reader if a typo I make or leave gives the original intent of the text a whole other meaning. Seems this should be addressed pronto. Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

P.S. The images appear in edit mode. By the way, has the layout in edit mode changed recently? Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit raw watchlist

What is the purpose of the above "raw watchlist"? Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

If you have 500 pages of a book on your watch list and you want to remove them; with ’Edit watchlist’, you have to check each page; with ’Edit raw watchlist’ you can select all of them with your mouse, remove them, and save the changes. Other magic options are available depending on your skill set. Jeepday (talk) 22:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

But why would you want to rename titles in the watchlist? A personalized reference system (as it seems to me to be) seems logical—it reminds me of renaming a folder on your computer, but what purpose(s) might a page such as that serve here? And does only the specific User have access to the "raw watchlist" or do admins and above also have access to the pages? Seems to me that Users personalizing page names in this manner would give others (if any) a bit too much insight into the personal preferences of the User (not that that doesn't happen with regard to other aspects of this site—such as choices of books to proofread, etc.), but seems to me that this goes a step further, and you should at least post a caveat (let the user beware) at the top of the page in red (similar to the large print at the top of the page when you are logged out and trying to edit in edit mode) to warn Users that others may have access to their personalized naming system, etc. This isn't a Facebook "like" list after all. Just a thought. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't let you rename titles in the watchlist - the raw watchlist is just a plain list of all pages that you watch. If you change a row in the raw watchlist from "Title A" to "Title B" then Title B will be added to your watchlist and Title A will be removed from it. There is no "personalized naming system"; it's just an alternative way to get at the same list that you see at the ordinary "View or edit watchlist" link. - Htonl (talk) 02:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

See w:Help:Watching pages -- "Ordinary users or administrators cannot tell what is in your watchlist, or who is watching any particular page. Publicly available database dumps do not include this information either. Only Developers who have access to the servers that hold the Wikipedia database could obtain this kind of information." Moondyne (talk) 02:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Editing your raw Watchlist happens without leaving information that other editors can see. Editing the list also does not change anything except the list itself. The key advantages of this tool are that (1) you can see what it is you've decided to watch, and (2) you can remove lots of items from the list in a single step, should you choose to do so. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:26, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the explanations, Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:33, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Noob needs help

Can someone familiar with the Weird Tales setup help this new user? Pages lack headers, and sometimes are oddly formatted redirects. I'm not going to be on-line much today, so I don't have time to help, but this user is working at a frenetic pace. So, an ounce of prevention and all that. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I spent two and a half hours yesterday on their contributions and have asked user that headers be added—to no avail. Several of the additions yesterday were copyvio and a quick scan of today's contributions doesn't look much better. I'll see what I can do today, but I will have less time than yesterday. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The Clipper Ship Era (1843-1869)

The Clipper Ship Era (1843-1869) would someone please fix this book so that the proofreading/validating blocks end up in the "mainspace" reading area that actually looks like a book? It's partially done but then it stops and I don't have any more patience to play around and experiment to get the danged thing working. —Maury (talk) 03:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

See The Clipper Ship Era/Chapter 7. Moondyne (talk) 03:50, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Moondyne, thank you so much for the reply and example. A portion is easy but I get confused about the chapter page numbers and when I tried I made things worse. I then went to Index and made it even more worse. I think I put everything back like it was but am not sure. What is this process called? —Maury (talk) 04:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I guess everyone has their own technique, but for me to assemble the line <pages index="The Clipper Ship Era.djvu" from=132 to=156 />, I did the following:

1. open the index page Index:The Clipper Ship Era.djvu
2. looking at the Contents panel, note the 1st page# for this chapter (note that this is the "real" page number and not the internal PAGE: number). For Ch7, its 100
3. find p.100 in the middle Pages block and hold the mouse over it. Jot down the PAGE: that appears inside the mouseover box (in this case its /132).
4. do the same for the last page number for the chapter (generally 1 less than the 1st page of the next chapter). ie. 119-1=118 which equates to /156)

I don't know what this process is called, but good luck!. Moondyne (talk) 05:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what the process is either which is why I asked. It should have a name. I was thinking of finding it on Wikisource/Help and if it is not there it should be. Like all things when one doesn't know how to do something it's confusing but when one does know then it's easy. The name "Good Luck" would be a fine name for this process. Thank you again for helping me. This is the first one (presently named "Good Luck" ) I have ever worked on. —Maury (talk) 11:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

see w:Wikipedia:Transclusion, JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The Clipper Ship Era (1843-1869) Would somebody please just fix the simplistic blasted thing? I have a long day of work ahead and NASA needs my physics skills working on the "coefficient of linear expansion" of various metals heated to various degrees so the nuts and bolts on rockets won't blast apart when expanded by any given temperature in centigrade/kelvin. —Maury (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Moondyne (talk) 03:17, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Moondyne. I want to tell you something interesting. I actually Dream of editing. In dreams I edit and never have a problem editing, I just easily edit. I dream of editing many nights. —Maury (talk) 12:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear oh dear. Noting that my brain can be thinking in terms of IP addresses, and IP range blocks. [Kill kill kill the wretched vandals and spambots] — billinghurst sDrewth 13:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Line numbers

Hey. In proofreading over at the Icelandic Wikisource I came across these line numbers. This is not poetry and the line division is not vital. It is probably conceived as a reading aid for that particular version (it's a 1909 version of a work originally made in 1664). What would be a proper way to deal with this? --Bjarki S (talk) 03:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that every page (granted, I only looked at two pages and am assuming) begins line numbering anew. Does any section of the text refer back to pages/lines of text in reference? If so, it seems as though some sort of notation might be in order—perhaps using sidenotes somehow as opposed to basic line numbering (which wouldn't work really, in my opinion). I dunno. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

My comments would be that the line numbering is the artefact of editor's usually where the work is being used as a reference. To reproduce them in situ is difficult, especially as forcing a width onto a web document without knowing the reading device is a pain in the bum. If there is value in the references (ie. evidence that someone, somewhere did it as a commentary or study guide) I would keep them, have them as anchors, and then in the notes section put link to the anchor points, but maybe keep them invisible. Alternatively, if there is no value in the anchor points, forget it and just do the text. Depends on how much you wish to fiddle. If someone wishes to come and put them in later, so be it, it is a wiki. As a balloon thought, dropping some easy invisible code like {{Æisag|$1=1|$2=5}} {{Æisaga|1|10}} ... which you would make as a null template allows easy formatting for the links for this work at a later time. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I went with ignoring them mostly. I made an empty template to keep track of the numbers in case anybody wants to do something with them at a later point. --Bjarki S (talk) 01:37, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Surely this is similar to The Canterbury Tales/The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale which uses {{line}}; or alternately Page:The Wasteland.djvu/14 using {{pline}}? MODCHK (talk) 14:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

MODCHK, your examples are in poetry form, not prose—and with line breaks (which lend themselves better to line numbering). Bjarki S's example is in prose form, as he/she has attested to above. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Fair point. In which my suggestion degenerates into... exactly what Billinghurst says above. I would suggest simply ignoring the numbering component altogether. MODCHK (talk) 15:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Off [WS]-topic question about 'long s' use

From MODCHK's Talk page:

...Which would you use for upper case use at the beginning of a word? 'long s' (ſ) or 'descending long s' (esh, ʃ)—or something else? Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I am by no means authoritative on this, but my understanding is "ſ" may be used to start a word, or be embedded within it (e.g. "ſadneſs"), but I do not believe either form is permitted to be the final letter of a word. I suspect most documents using this were of a vintage where upper/lower case was not particularly observed. I recommend asking further, and would be interested if you get any useful information! MODCHK (talk) 15:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)...

To clarify, using MODCHK's example of the word "ſadneſs",— If the title (modern-day) of a poem, short story, etc., was "In Sadness", and one wanted to make a "play" on the upper case letter "S" by making it "old-fashioned", which rendering of the 'long s' would one use? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:51, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

A closer reading of w:Long s (which Londonjackbooks located/provided prior to this discussion moving to the Scriptorium) debunks just about everything I stated above (cringe!) Unfortunately, neither does it answer her question … MODCHK (talk) 22:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the anſwer to the queſtion is "neither": you'd uſe upper-caſe "S". "Long s", whether deſcending or not, was a lower-caſe-only form. - Htonl (talk) 23:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Darn! Well—there goes my play on words idea. Learned something in the process though, so no loss :) Appreciated, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Maybe that bit of info could be added to the WP articles for ſ and ʃ (esh). But not by me; I wouldn't know how to phrase it. Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I sometimes feel that we should turn our direction around how we use "long S" to have an essay with it that pulls in all the {{long s}}hit that has been spent/wasted/thrashed through the time. We can have a help page/section and in the WS: ns an article, call it "In the throeſ of long s" —unsigned comment by Billinghurst (talk) .

Poorly disguised cursing notwithstanding, such displays of unique personality is in part why I like to edit here :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey! There was a gem of sense and poignancy in among the silliness. We have spent lots of time over the 'eons discussing long s, so an essay to cover the points of view, and how we arrived at our position isn't a completely wrong thought bubble. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

How would you link this?

On this page—in the ref-follow where it states, "see Poems, vol. i. p. 5, note 1", I want to link to the actual note which is transcribed here. Can someone please show me how that can best be done? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:13, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I've put an anchor in the note and then added a link back to it from the volume 8 page. I'm sure there are other ways of doing this, but this was my first thought on how to do it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok. So for subsequent references/links to notes, I should continue with anchors note2, note3, etc. (only two in the case of "Death of a Young Lady", but just as a 'for example') as they correspond with the actual reference numbers on each Mainspace page, right? But, I can also "reuse" anchor note1 with a different poem (i.e., Mainspace page), right? Sorry if I am being confusing. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I would only add anchors for notes that you need to link to. The name of the anchor is arbitrary as long as it's unique for the mainspace page, so yes reuse anchor names on different poems. I just selected note1 so that it would make some sense to both of us. By the way, transcluded page numbers are anchors already, so no need to create anchors for pages. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Odd equal sign problem

While editing, "Short title=A" or similar keeps turning into "Short titleĀ". Is this a problem with Wikisource or the browser? How do I fix this? - Presidentman (talk) 12:52, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

The browser is Mozilla Firefox 18.0.1. - Presidentman (talk) 12:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Check in your Preferences/Gadgets if this is enabled: "Keyboard shortcuts to type special characters (works in Firefox, Chrome). [example : ^ae -> æ ]"--Mpaa (talk) 13:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

It was. Thanks! - Presidentman (talk) 14:12, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

If you want to leave the keyboard shortcut on and type the =A, type the A and then put the = in front of the A. Jeepday (talk) 11:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

The Biographical Dictionary of America

Earlier today I found several illustrated volumes of "The Biographical Dictionary of America." They were placed on en.WS by Billinghurst. I need to know if the two-column pages have to be edited as two-column pages (which I don't know how to do) or if I can edit them as one page. These several volumes look very good and as far as I have read on what I know the volumes are historically correct. —Maury (talk) 20:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Single column. Double columns makes the transcluded text nearly impossible to use on a desktop computer and even worse on an eReader. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, Good! Thank you Beeswaxcandle. —Maury (talk) 21:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Definitely what BWC said. A case of KISS, and not to render a form that was useful for a book form but doesn't translate well to a longitudinal web pages, or other variable width/variable page formats. The whole set of those works is uploaded User:Billinghurst/The Biographical Dictionary of America

Dotted lines, what is the best way to do it?

I'm looking for a way of formatting these tables. Which template should I use to get the same effect of those spaced dots? Thanks in advance!--Micru (talk) 22:11, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

The templates that we have are at Special:PrefixIndex/Template:Dotted. My comment is always why use them, to me they are cumbersome and less than attractive clunky things. I find them somewhat problematic in their rendition, and I generally choose not to use them. They are typographic elements, presumably not prescribed by the authors of the works. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Concur with billinghurst, and the columns question/answer above also applies here. You can put 7 under 6 instead of next to 1. Jeepday (talk) 11:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, maybe you are right about that not being very relevant for the reader. It will save work and headaches not to copy it, that for sure.--Micru (talk) 16:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Combining pages

I'm working on proofreading Index:United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_A6719.pdf. I'm wondering if it is acceptable to combine the pages into one. Wikisource:Style_guide#Formatting says, "A Wikisource page does not usually correspond directly to a printed page, but rather to an article, chapter, or section."

One benefit of doing this is that the footnotes can keep their original numbering. I'm not sure if I can make the footnotes on Page:United Nations General Assembly Resolution A6719.pdf/2 start at 2. Superm401 - Talk 04:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Do the references separately for each page in the Page: namespace. When the pages are transcluded into the single mainspace page they will be in a single sequence. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Where should I put the <references /> tags? Superm401 - Talk 05:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

See Help:Footnotes and endnotes for full details. In the Page: namespace the tag goes in the footer field. In the mainspace it goes at the end of the text before the licence template and any categories. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes sense. Superm401 - Talk 06:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

.js

Why won't the running header script at User:Moondyne/common.js work for me anymore? Moondyne (talk) 01:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Shove Hesperian IMNSHO. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Ref revert help

Can I get a second opinion on a ref revert situation (where the footnote text appears on a page following the reference note—in this case, reference note #2). I followed direction for such a situation in the past, but I would like to know what other options there might be at this time (if any). Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Try to see if it looks ok. I put an empty ref in the first page and a ref follow in the next.--Mpaa (talk) 09:57, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Thank you! Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Need help keeping text inline

On this page, last line... I need the sentence beginning "It might be..." to be in line with the paragraph which precedes it, beginning "Knowledge...". You can see rendering in the Main. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:30, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

How is this for a <div>-mad solution? Any improvements in form? MODCHK (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Mad as Max. Thanks. I'll figure out how it works now. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Combines white coloration to a width of space(?). How would that render on a background with color (grey or otherwise?) Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:44, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

O.K. Got me. How about this? MODCHK (talk) 03:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

A benevolent thanks to you :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Umm, why not use {{hii}} and just shunt the paragraph in by the amount in the first variable? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:03, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The formatting would break across the pages (something like that)... There is no {{hii/s}}/e. Would that matter? Keep in mind I don't know much of what I speak... Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Were there an hii/s, e, I think the 'setting' would be {{hanging indent inherit|1.2|.8}}. What are the positives/negatives of either method? Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Two points:

• Since {{hii}} stands alone, there is no real need for an hii/s form (If it existed it would in fact be identical to hii. In either case the block should be ended with {{div end}}.)
• As the line needs to be shunted left, the first parameter to hii needs to be negative. I suggest: {{hanging indent inherit|-0.6|0.8}} might be appropriate.

Neither approach is entirely "pretty." Mine has invisible text; Beeswaxcandle's involves arcane constants. Both cases may trip up the unwary/next editor. Entirely your choice. MODCHK (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I guess whichever solution is most technically straight-forward and logical (two areas I am deficient in) would be the winner, but I don't know which that would be. Your solution (to my way of thinking, which might not be right [my way of trying to not offend]) seems more of a solution-in-the-absence-of-a-solution solution, whereas BWC's suggested template seems to be made for such a purpose. I guess we can see how hii renders and go from there. Would you mind applying it to the pages? Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. Not entirely happy with coding of the affected next page ({{hii|0|0}} place holder in header seems strange), but the result seems to look O.K. on my browser, and transclusion into Main is not affected. MODCHK (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Additional note. Shortest coding I could come up with for Beeswaxcandle's solution is nett one character longer than the alternative. Cost accountancy at its finest! MODCHK (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

As soon as I saved above, I realised I could have made it shorter two more characters. Sorry BWC for maligning you. Not going to make that change as just too silly. MODCHK (talk) 22:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

In my browser, the line reading "It might be..." is a bit too far to the right in the Main. How is it in yours? Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I tweaked your settings (to -0.8|0.8). It looks right in my browser... Yours? Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Pre-tweak: File:Kernel and Husk 374-5.png Post-tweak: File:Kernel and Husk 374-5-post.png

I really don't see a significant difference. MODCHK (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

It was more noticeable in my browser than apparently in yours (from what I can see). I'm good as is. Thanks—I know you thought you were FIN with it... Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The issues between -0.6em and -0.8em are mostly around which italic font a browser uses. The degree of slope does lead the eye to see things as aligned or not quite aligned. As a result I would usually make sure it worked for a roman font and then add the italics.

I wasn't so much concerned with the number of characters that were used, as to creating a new solution when a viable one already existed. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

How do I format the contents and index pages in a work?

Please see heading? Work in question is - Index:Mediaevalleicest00billrich.djvu —unsigned comment by Sfan00 IMG (talk) .

I've done the TOC (p.ix) for you. For the index, copy the formatting used in Page:A Brief History of Modern Philosophy.djvu/324 ff. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:05, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

{{nop}} vice <br />

With regard to the end of this page, and the beginning of the page that follows: In order for the desired break (line height?) between paragraphs to occur in the Main, a {{nop}} needs to be placed with two blank lines preceding it. Is that the desired formatting technique in such a situation? For poetry, where a page ends between stanzas, I have been using <br /> with one line preceding it, and it has the same effect as {{nop}} with two lines preceding. What would the suggested method be in both cases? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Either works, so there is no "correct" way. I use two blank lines and a nop for end of stanza poetry as well. I should point out that Help:Footnotes and endnotes#Endnotes says that if endnotes will be on the same main page as their references they should be treated as <ref></ref> with a {{smallrefs}} as usual. If the main page will be subpaged, then references should have their own subpage. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:56, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

BWC, I made some comments here about endnotes in reference to your above comment, but I moved them over to your Talk page in a section that deals also with footnotes. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Main namespace article header problem

This is a multi part article, where the navigator to the various parts is always placed in the 'notes' section of the header. In this case, this article also belongs to the 'Judaism' portal but the two parameters visually overlap one another. Can someone suggest a solution? Thanks.— Ineuw talk 23:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

... and the need for an all div-based, component-optional, mainspace header rears its ugly head once again. :-)

Off the top of my head, how about we remove the internal |portal=Judaism parameter and place the stand alonne {{Plain sister}} template after your running header in the notes field instead? -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I support any solution. :-) — Ineuw talk 00:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

To be clear- I did not observe any overlap as I cycled through the article parts. It was always to the left and horizontally inline with the Portal banner (could use some padding however). -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't overlap for me either, anyway I changed it to use {{float right}} as use of {{RunningHeader}} doesn't make sense to me (we continue to see the abuse misuse of that template). I have a number of concerns about the config and have expressed them to Ineuw separately. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

err.... "float" would work for the first and last pieces of the multi-part work but not the entries in between (got to click on the link at the provided 'start' page to see what he is getting at --> running header is no longer centered when all three links are provided). I do get your other points and agree; this point, however, at its core is the same problem I faced trying to insert a citation bar for legal-ish works using the standard table-based header as a foundation (sooner or later, something else extra or atypical will "conflict" with the new addition or the final rendering). -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Are bulk file replacements from external sites to Commons possible?

break-out secondary discussion not related to Proposed Deletion to here....

.... As an aside, the roadblock to full validation at this point is the lack of an OCR'd text-layer in the remaining 30 or so DjVu source files to be proofread. Archives.org has DjVus with text-layers ( more info ) but damn if I know how to smoothly replace that many existing files on Commons; any ideas? -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Why replace them? — billinghurst sDrewth 12:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Again, because the existing source files have no embedded text-layers to proofread from. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Just upload new files with a good naming structure. If we think of that we were starting a fresh then how would we handle it? Lots of other thoughts, but these are the more helpful. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Wha?? Source file naming has nothing to do with the eventual naming framework used in the mainspace. I just don't think the current scheme reflects the report's item-levels and the sub-divisions under them as best as possible was all. Part I should be the 1st sub-page, under the base, A should be under that, i should be next under that, folowed by a and so on. We do it for Volumes & Chapters and redirect the titles to them for plain-old books all the time so I don't see your point at all. -- George Orwell III (talk) 13:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

┌───────────────────┘
Long Story; Short - There are ~30 files on Commons that are part of a larger transcription project here on en.WS [The Pentagon Papers]. None of the files have embedded text-layers to extract and proofread from. The same files, but with slightly different file names, exist on Internet Archive. They all have text layers.

The question is... do I have to download/upload each one to replace the current source files or is there some way to automate & batch the importation (and needed renaming) of all the files from the IA server to the Commons server without my po' ol' & slo' connection having to get involved in all that jazz? TIA -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

If you provide me with a list of IA keys and the names of the corresponding Commons DjVu files, I will be happy to modify a script and bulk download and upload them. (But I won't be able to get to this until the weekend.) Hesperian 01:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Full-file paths/names on Commons like used in WGET I assume? And just give me one example entry for a list best suited for you -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Just specify the djvu file name on IA, and the corresponding file name on Commons; e.g.

Pentagon-Papers-Part-IV-C-9a.djvu Pentagon-Papers-Part IV. C. 9. a.djvu

I can do the rest. Cheers, Hesperian 01:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

(ec) Utilise Magnus's url2commons tool it does bulk files, especially able to do a series really well with its variables. Happy to do them if required. Re my "why replace them" statement, it seems that it was ambiguous. I was meaning why not just upload new versions, rather than replace them. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

FWIW this tools is always my first choice to upload, it goes direct and takes a {{book}} template, handles multiple volumes with $URL$ and $DESCRIPTOR$ variables. You can even have categories, etc. Air Magnus is my budget carrier of choice. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:04, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure, but if you've forgotten your password, you're stuck as it won't let you start over. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I've gotta start [re]learning some of this stuff I suppose.... maybe I'll poke it if I have the time while I get that list together in a day or two. Thanks for the offers in the meantime - I just might have to take one of you up on it (... and again re: naming, if I upload these new, what hapens to the other files that got proofread inspite of having no text layer? Leave them under an already forked file naming scheme between them all by introducing a third variant? Please no offense intended here but you really should check your mouse, eyes & mouth for synchronization -- one of them is getting way out ahead of the others. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Reaching the index on some works

I was browsing around to see examples of completed works here on Wikisource, and I thought of a favorite of mine, Machiavelli's The Prince. Searching for it turned up a couple of English translations, and I noticed that this one translated by W. K. Marriott is incomplete. I wanted to see if it needed simple quick stuff like proofreading or whatever, and so I looked for a way to access the index, but there was no Source tab up at the top of the user interface. I couldn't find it by searching the Index namespace either.

Does this mean that that particular book doesn't have a scanned in file, or what? Kierkkadon (talk) 22:23, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

It's been uploaded as a copy/paste from an unknown source directly into the mainspace. If you're interested in it there's a copy on Internet Archive that we can upload to Commons and then create the Index: page. We would replace the unsourced work with the new pages.

The best place to look for complete works is Category:Index Validated. Many of the works in Category:Index Proofread are complete and are waiting for a second pair of eyes. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Lovely, thanks. Kierkkadon (talk) 03:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Confirmation that my contributions are helpful

I've recently added Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines to WikiSource and begun working on getting it proofread and such, but I would like to make sure that the work I'm doing so far is following the correct procedures and style for WikiSource. Would an experienced contributor mind just checking over some of the pages I have done, and make sure that the work I'm spending lots of time on isn't just going to be overwritten because I'm doing it wrong? Thanks. Kierkkadon (talk) 15:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

At a quick review looks fine to me, keep up the good work. Jeepday (talk) 01:59, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

The proofreading is fine, the topic is very interesting to me as a machine mechanic, and the image is great. Two comments to help you along. We have {{running header}} or the redirected short name = {{rh}} template which greatly simplifies the header. I placed one example on this page. The second item is categorizing the commons image in a unique collection. I created a new category named commons:Category:Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines (book) which should store the book and all images from it. This category became the subcategory of three other existing categories: commons:Category:Machine tools, commons:Category:Machining tools, and commons:Category:Milling machines. It's perfectly normal to cross categorize. I hope this helps. — Ineuw talk 02:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh my god, that template makes everything so much easier, thanks. And thanks for the help with the images, too. —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 03:52, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

You're most welcome. I learned the hard way that if I seem to have a new issue, then someone else already solved it. Of course, it doesn't mean that one cannot use one's own solutions. :-) — Ineuw talk 04:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

1 or 2 Missing page(s) what to do? Continue on ?

After the page below there is an image page and a blank page ("No Text") then page 9. What to do? Should I continue with page 9 or should the image page and no text page have the 2 missing pages found and inserted? —Maury (talk) 00:00, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Page:The_history_of_yachting.djvu/32

Let me take a closer look at the source file & its origins... in the meantime please do not create any additional pages under that Index:

Back in a bit. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. —Maury (talk) 00:25, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Well scan pages 7 & 8 (text content) are missing alright. Saddly, the PDF on IA which the DjVu was derived from is also missing these two pages. Without an alternative source file to pull and convert those two missing pages from, the best I can do is insert two blank place-holders in the interim and then request a bot to move all the existing pages accordingly.

This is classic example where completely filling out the pagelist first would have identified a problem prior to all those pages being created & now having a need for them to be moved afterwards. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:04, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I will try to obtain a hardcopy of this from an interlibrary loan because the material is fascinating. I never thought of the huge ships in 1600s-1800s, or before, as "yachting". It's educational and the ships are grand. Would you please go ahead with what you know needs to be done to remedy the missing pages (insert two blank pages)? I too regret the missing pages and deeply so. I really wanted to work on this book. Thank you for being here and assisting. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 01:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I will go ahead with the blank place-holder insertions & bulk move requests. Once that is completed, the eventual content (when located & converted) becomes an easy swap rather than starting this process from scratch at that point instead. Until that time, Proofreading can continue as usual. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:37, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

As an FYI, there is a second copy from the library of congress here on IA that has pages 7 and 8 but lacks the illustration, but has pages 7 and 8. It is listed as copy 2 and has the same copyright info, LCCN, so I think it might count as the same "version". MarkLSteadman (talk) 03:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks & indeed, it is the same 1904 copyrighted edition. While it does have the mssing scan pages nos. 7 & 8, it is also 522 pages long while the one Indexed here on en.WS is 400 pages long -- one is probably a first attempt with a bunch of duplicates and the other the resulting attempt to edit the first. Anyway, I'll swap the 2 missing pages in for the place-holders; the BOT request is still pending regardless.

ONCE AGAIN - issues like this are best avoided and/or identified by completely filling out the pagelist accurately BEFORE the creation of ANY pages in the Page: namespace. For example, without the full adjustment of pagelist in place, we still don't know for sure if there are any other missing pages in this work. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Hesperian 08:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Lesson Learned? -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

<sigh> yes. Hesperian 01:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────┘
Of course a simple check of the List of Illustrations to the existing page progression reveals both missing images and out of order images. The two source files are NOT as originally published. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:15, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

... attempting fresh recovery from HathiTrust instead. -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:23, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

The correct source that mirrors the book as first published has caption sheets for all full page images - that is why it is 520 pages "total". Good Luck trying to straighten out Hesperian's oversight. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hesperian's oversight has been removed. Hesperian 04:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Good heavens, George. What a mess. Is the book correct so that it can be worked on now? Whether it 'tis or 'tisn't, I thank you and the others for trying to square it away. If it is not workable, HathiTrust has a "full book download option" with the proper pages. I downloaded it last night and started removing the watermarks from it. I didn't place the book here on WS, I requested that from a friend and apparently neither he nor I knew about setting up a "pagelist" first. I know I didn't know about that pagelist process and indeed it is important as I have seen here for my first time. I had never encountered this situation until now. Thank you for your hard work and administrative dedication on this book.—Maury (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Well I'm not sure if the original page progression as scanned makes the most sense for us. Understand that every full-page image in the book as published has 4 pages associated with it...

1. reverse image caption
2. image caption
3. image itself
4. blank opposite the image

The only other thing I can do is re-arrange and trim 2 of those pages so in final transclusion the caption would follow the image -- i.e. 2 and 4 above would be swapped and result in...

1. reverse image caption
2. blank opposite the image
3. image itself
4. image caption

... then I would delete 1 & 2. Other than that, the current file is the way the original book is. -- George Orwell III (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

---

---

* George, I thank you once again for your hard work and dedication and I regret that you went through this. This is not a book we're dealing with. It is a puzzle akin to scrambled eggs with too many pages in the wrong place, pages that need not exist, and as you show, and I am well aware of:

1. reverse image caption
2. image caption
3. image itself
4. blank opposite the image

---

---

1. There should be no reverse caption
2. the image caption should be below the image
3. note the excessive space of a small image, a faint border, and then the larger page

...and then there are these absurdities and other absurdities worse than this....

Page:The_history_of_yachting.djvu/107

This so-called "book" has too many "filler pages" with nothing of value other than to make the book look thicker. It is worse than any "mess" it is an abomination - an abhorrence. If done right this would be an excellent book but such is not the case. This maze of pretzel-like text and images is as bad as a twisted U shape of a sniper's barrel. This entire mess should be removed, totally removed, completely destroyed because it will never be done, never be repaired nor completed by anyone as it should be on Wikisource -- not by me and not by anyone else. It will just sit where it is until doomsday when it finally and is totally destroyed. It is a "bloody" shame that it is as it is but it is. —Maury (talk) 03:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

My apologies for that. I got hyper over that book situation.—Maury (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The Statutes at Large (Ruffhead)

I've noted some 'unusal' page numbering in the scans, Can someone add checking that in Vol2 for example this actually an 18th century printing error, rather than me needing to call in a shrink? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Bottom-aligned image

I'm working on page 30 of Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines. This particular page was printed with an in-line image, aligned to the bottom of the text and to the right. In the printed version, text flows around it and then the last line of text lines up with the bottom of the image and caption. Is it WikiSource policy to make sure that this happens in our version as well, and if so, how do I do it? —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 19:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I should note that I expect this to be effectively impossible without disabling one of the best features of Wiki software: automatic text wrapping to fit browser width. I just thought I'd ask in case it actually was possible. —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 20:08, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at template {{img float}} for making the text flow around a right-aligned (or left) image. Don't worry about making it line up at the bottom at any particular point because of the browser width issue you mention. I usually put them in at the beginning of paragraphs in the Page: namespace so that I can find the template again more easily if I have to adjust it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Mediaevalleicest00billrich_n17.png

This was a downsample from the Djvu scans to a 2bpp PNG, Ideally though this should be SVG as it's a line art map. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Procedural (Image extract): Index:Mediaevalleicest00billrich.djvu

It would be appreciated if someone could extract the images for this from a suitable hi-quality scan.

I am wondering though if the plans should be candidates for vector conversion. :} Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Long s

Is it possible to add " ſ " to the special characters box?

I had been using the s template, but being able to place the appropriate character directly would be appreciated. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:11, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

From memory it was decided that this would be done as a template so that readers could chose how it would be displayed to them (s or s). If we enter it directly then that option is lost. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Beeswaxcandle, although as I recall the function did not work properly and was disabled. However, someday someone will make it work and on that day the template will be really useful to have. At the moment, it just puts a modern lewtter S in place in the main namespace. Technically, a bot could find and replace all long-s characters at that time but its better to have everything in place as much as possible. However, would you like {{ls}} added to the box instead? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 14:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes Please :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I've added it to the "Ligatures and Old English" line. I know it isn't either but that was the closest match without starting a new line. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Hebrew character sizing

I am working on this project which has a lot of large Hebrew characters as can be seen in this link. Currently, I am enclosing the {{he}} in a font template. I was wondering if someone used a simpler solution than this? — Ineuw talk 08:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

P.S: As an afterthought, I've looked at the "he" template code and I think that something is incorrect, because there is a 125% font size parameter. Can someone enlighten me? Thanks. — Ineuw talk 08:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Couple issues with Departmental Ditties, etc.

Issue #1: I copied the formatting that Theornamentalist had done with The Five Nations, but this page still needs some tweaking/reworking to fit the particular text (color, etc.). If anyone can work the page, it would be appreciated!

Issue #2: For some reason, 'next' and 'previous' are not showing up for the first and second poems respectively in the Main. I don't know if it is a glitch in transclusion or how I have formatted things in the Index.

The title was not linked in the Index: page, so header=1 did not know where to start from.--Mpaa (talk) 14:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Aah, thank you. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:42, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Page with many images and non-regular captions

This page: Page:Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines.pdf/97 of Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines has a lot of images on it, arranged in an irregular manner with captions both below, and to the sides. I did the best I could using the built in Wikitable formatting, but did I do it right? Is there some more efficient or desirable way of formatting this? —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 17:33, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

It looks great. You may find it easier in the future if you consider creating separate table for each row.— Ineuw talk 08:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Transclusion & TOC setup

If the following transclusion formatting is used

<pages index="Rudyard Kipling's verse - Inclusive Edition 1885-1918.djvu" from=467 to=469 fromsection="s2" tosection="s1" header=1 />

for this text, which presents the TOC in this way (note alpha vs. page order), the order of poems when Mainspace browsing will likewise render alphabetically vice in page order. Is this okay? or should some other transclusion formatting be used?

I have already proofread and transcluded "Bobs", which can be used as a guinea pig. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks like the first quotes annoy header=1 (fromsection="s2" tosection="s1"). If you try fromsection=s2 tosection="s1", it works. Do not exactly why though. Maybe someone else can chip in.--Mpaa (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Now it looks OK even with quotes. I must have dreamt. --Mpaa (talk) 17:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Well then I dreamt it too, 'cause after you posted, I tried what you were talking about, and I believe I saw what you saw. Still, my other question about whether WS wants the poems to be "read" alphabetically or in page number order (see TOC)? Does/should it matter? Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

The previous and next fields in the header template should be in the book order because this replicates the editorial intentions. The TOC is just making it easier to find individual poems. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks both, Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:38, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Need help with file transfer

Hi all,

I'm unable to over-write...

• commons:File:A_New_Survey_of_the_West_Indies_or_The_English_American_his_Travel_by_Sea_and_Land.pdf

with...

• http://ia701203.us.archive.org/21/items/newsurveyofwesti01gage/newsurveyofwesti01gage.pdf

found under...

• http://archive.org/details/newsurveyofwesti01gage

... because my connection keeps timing out (88 Mb file). Can somebody with the time and the spare bandwidth give replacing this text-layer lacking problem file a shot? TIA. -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. Moondyne (talk) 07:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Strangeness. The Commons page shows my 88mb upload worked but I cant seem to download that to confirm. I wonder if its a caching issue? Moondyne (talk) 08:19, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Seeing the same thing here. I went to go create a few pages and the text-layer is indeed getting dumped from the new upload (and it looks like the existing Page:s will need an adjustment of -3 positions) but I can't verify any of that since the thumbnails aren't coming thru.

• http://ia701203.us.archive.org/21/items/newsurveyofwesti01gage/newsurveyofwesti01gage.djvu

What about if we replace the PDF by adding the DjVu instead? -- George Orwell III (talk) 09:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I did wonder about that. Commons:File:A New Survey of the West Indies or The English American his Travel by Sea and Land.djvu looks better behaved. Moondyne (talk) 09:45, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks like the DjVu route is superior. I'll save what is worth saving and delete the rest. Thanks for all your help. Prost. -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Book of Common Prayer

There are three versions of the BCP on WS, none complete and two with substantial content. The one at Book of Common Prayer is apparently copied from this website. According to this page from that site, a 1987 Cambridge edition was used as a "standard text." I think Book of Common Prayer should be moved to Book of Common Prayer (1987) and Book of Common Prayer be made into a disambiguation page, but there are a whole bunch of subpages so I didn't want to do the move myself. --Jfhutson (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree that this should be moved and I have done so. This raises another problem, however. A 1987 text, using 1964-8 modifications, probably isn't in the public domain. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:45, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

What a mess. I believe, though I do not have it in front of me, that the 1987 work on which the website is based from which this page was copied is substantially the 1662 BCP with modernized spelling. At Cambridge's website, the copyright claim being made is the perpetual copyright for the 1662 work. I don't think it has changed enough since then for a new copyright claim to be made, but I'm no expert. --Jfhutson (talk) 23:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

There is a discussion here about the copyright status. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Help with adding in a book

I need help with this book: Index:An_introduction_to_the_early_history_of_Christian_doctrine_to_the_time_of_the_Council_of_Chalcedon.pdf

The pages won't show up (images are blank).

If someone could me ASAP, that would be great!

- Lucyrocks=) (talk) 00:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Appears to be similar problem to 2 sections above. Suggest you use the djvu at [2]] instead. Moondyne (talk) 00:43, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I would, but I can't get it to work since my computer doesn't open or download DJVU files. Could you upload for me?

Doen. File:An introduction to the early history of Christian doctrine to the time of the Council of Chalcedon.djvu Moondyne (talk) 01:19, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Side-by-side table needed

May I impose on someone to format this page for me? It continues on to the next page. I can copy the handiwork for the poem that follows. Thanks ahead of time, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:18, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Done Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and also for the Greek. Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Text and images rotated 90°

On this page of Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines, the image and text are both rotated 90°. Would it be best to reorient them for Wikisource (by rotating the image and just typing in the text) or just using the raw image of that page? —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 19:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I prefer to rotate images and type in the text myself. It makes the text searchable (and linkable where needed) and readers on fixed screens won't have to turn their heads sideways. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Does this work? —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 21:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes. My only suggestion would be to restrict the width of the image as it's too wide for mobile text-readers. As a rule of thumb, I usually use 350px or 400px for vertical full page images and no more than 500px for horizontal images like this. When it's being read on-wiki the image can always be clicked on to see the full-sized version. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Alternatively, at Commons, order their rotation using RotateBot. There is a template available to get this done. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Question

If we use header=1 transclusion, and there is a Wikipedia article associated with a piece, how would/can we place that information in the Notes section of the Mainspace page? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:44, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe {{Plain sister}} before <pages>? Drawback is that the link will appear above the header box.--Mpaa (talk) 22:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

(e.c. with Adam below) Right. I tried that, and it's an eyesore. I'm not too far into the work that I can't change the header parameters (is that the right terminology?) over to the traditional ones... The other option would be to bug Tpt about the template again, but that would be the second time I've done so, and I don't think the first issue was figured out yet (references appearing below the blue navigation panel at the bottom of Mainspace pages as opposed to directly following the text). How important is that link to the WP article? Can/should I be lazy and continue on as-is? Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

That's controlled by MediaWiki:Proofreadpage header template. I added the wikipedia sister link to it a while ago but I'm not sure how to call it. I based my additions on a pre-existing sister link (commonscat was already there) but no luck. It might need to be part of the Index page in some fashion to be pulled through. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 23:06, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Re:"It might need to be part of the Index page in some fashion to be pulled through": Maybe some kind of 'anchoring' on the TOC page corresponding with a poem title? Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:16, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not sure how it would work. At one point, after reading some related documents, I was under the impression that parameters could be entered through the <pages> tag. eg. <pages index="Foo.djvu" header=1 wikipedia="Danny Deever" from=x to=y />. Now I think the extension software assumes a section on the Index page like the title, author, year etc. This might be a job for Tpt, or anyone else who works with the extension (if there is anyone else). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll phrase a question to Tpt soon. Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

In order to make parameters work, you have to add them to MediaWiki:Proofreadpage_index_data_config. I've just done it for sister template parameters. The "hidden": true is here in order to don't show the added fields in index pages form. Tpt (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:11, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Ruffhead_-_The_Statutes_at_Large,_1763.djvu

The index for this needs updating I was able to patch the file. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're after here. If it's just a matter of adjusting the pagelist on the Index page, go for it. It's something else can you please give a bit more detail? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

It's moving all contributions after page 40 up by 2 pages, I can't do this because it requires a mass page move, which I agreed not to do currently. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:18, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

OK. Log a request on WS:Bot requests (use one of George's as a model) and someone will look after it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:27, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Most of the text completed, can this work be pushed into the mainspace?

I've completed the proofreading for almost all the textual pages of Index:Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines.djvu. The remaining unproofread pages are primarily composed of images with short descriptions and then a universe full of dense tables. Once I finish the non-table pages (or somebody else does), can the work be pushed to the mainspace? I'm eager to link a Wikipedia article to it, and the way I plan to work them the tables won't be searchable anyway. —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 17:43, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it can go to the mainspace. In fact, the preliminary pages and chapters 1 to 7 can happen now. Do you want some help with this, or do you want to have a go yourself first? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to give it a try myself, if nobody minds. —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 20:11, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

From this Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines it looks like you have it under control. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:27, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Weird dotted box showing up in the middle of the page, cannot find a cause

So on this page: Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines/Chapter 4, midway down (listed as being transcluded from page 63, in fact) the text is set apart in this box with a dashed border, and it changes font to the same as that used in the editting window. I can't figure out why, either at the beginning of Page 63 or the end of Page 62. —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 20:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

There will be a stray space or two at the end of page 62. You just need to remove them. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

EC. Removed. Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:27, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah. For some reason I thought I checked that. No matter. Thanks! —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 21:22, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Rule color

Is it possible to change {{rule}} color to 'solid red'? Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:39, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably, but one has to ask why? If the fact that it's a rule is all that's important then don't worry about its colour. But if the fact that it's red is integral to understanding the work, then that's another matter. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:41, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Should have linked to it, sorry! There might be a better way of formatting(?) Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not entirely sure why this works (foreground and background colours seem to be reversed to my way of thinking with rules), but you might try: {{rule|style=background-color:red}}, which renders like this:

---

This quite aside, I would approach your example (Kipling) as a table border with style specified as "1px solid red" (i.e. {{ts|border:1px solid red}}) instead. (Silly me, that is exactly what you have done!) MODCHK (talk) 22:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I can't take any formatting credit; I copied Theornamentalist's work from Five Nations. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

No, that might have been me you saw playing around. What about now? -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks all, Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Best practice with page usurpation

I want to convert the unindexed The Last Department to a redirect to the indexed Departmental Ditties and Ballads and Barrack-Room Ballads/The Last Department. What to do about the associated Talk page? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

There will be numerous cases like this that I will be dealing with with Kipling's poetry. I would tag the associated Talk pages with Speedy Delete, but I thought it might be good to preserve the history, and wanted to double-check. I just didn't know which page to preserve it on: The original (which will be converted to a redirect) or the newly created (indexed) page. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:39, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

What I would do is to move the Page under the new structure prior to the transclusion (leaving a redirect), then trasclude and replace the content. The Talk page will then stay near the original page, with the history.--Mpaa (talk) 07:30, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Makes sense, thanks. I've got five poems where I'll have to move the talk page contents manually, but after that, I'll continue on as you suggest. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Copyright of U.S. Supreme Court oral argument

• Hustler Magazine v. Falwell/Oral argument

I've added a transcript of oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court, at Hustler Magazine v. Falwell/Oral argument.

The text of the transcript is from Oyez Project, and there is some minor de minimus header background info in the way of case information at the top from LexisNexis.

Presumably testimony and oral argument before a federal court in any lower or upper jurisdiction of United States federal courts is public domain as a direct product of the United States federal government.

The audio version is copyrighted by Oyez Project, but I don't think the text-based transcript itself of proceedings in open court can be subject to any copyright except public domain as a product of the U.S. federal government.

Just checking here, to see if that sounds right?

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 22:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

• Moved to Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Copyright_of_U.S._Supreme_Court_oral_argument for discussion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Page:MALAYSIA BILL (Hansard, 26 Juli 1963).djvu/2

Prior to recent concerns I had an OCR button in the Wikisource toolbar.

Can someone explain if as a consequence of removing certain user rights, this button is disabled, because looking at the above text, it should OCR quite reasonably? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Check your gadget preferences. It may have become disabled there as the OCR button is not attached to user rights. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I can see the OCR button on the pages, so it is not a system issue. And now I see you got it working. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Pretty sure the problem here is that pressing the OCR button doesn't produce anything while it seems like it easily should and that is why he's calling it "disabled". Can anyone generate anything on any of the subsequent yet-to-be created pages in the same Index: ? Note that there are existing issues of unknown cause with some of the DjVu's in that same MALAYSIA series that won't OCR even at Any2DjVu. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I went to Page:MALAYSIA BILL (Hansard, 26 Juli 1963).djvu/12 and could not get the OCR button to work. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 14:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Text recovered by a Match and Split from the source listed. Needs proofreading. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

So we think this OCR button issue is related to the source document? It has been a while, but I remember a couple years or so ago it was not working, but I have a vague memory that problems was solved (I think). Jeepday (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The issue in this case has nothing to do with the OCR button; especially if one is able to use it and get results under some other source file at the same time. For others (like me) the OCR button never provided anything either way (old browser?).

Background/Findings: Most [free] OCR routines require the source file strictly follow established file specifications, be based in the same default language as the software is set to (usually English) and have an internal DPI that the OCR software can work with by default. Something is odd about the DjVus in this series because none of the ones marked 'Needs OCR' will generate one when run thru Any2DjVu.org even though the content appears to be nothing more than 2 or 3 dozen pages of "born digital" (i.e. not scanned), un-extraordinary text.

If we take the previously linked to Page's source file in particular and have a closer look - there is no way ~24 pages of "born digital", simple text should result in a ~30Mb DjVu source file. In my limited experience in dealing with such oddities, the culprit seems to point to the use of software other than DjVuLibre based ones to create/convert a finished DjVu source file (Digital DjVu? in particular). The code on our servers, as well as the routines at Internet Archive and Any2DjVu.org, all rely on DjVuLibre to read and write DjVu files - mostly because that [free] software handles all three of the opening points on [free] OCR routines well enough and reliably enough to become a permanent part of their online services.

I'm afraid the easiest solution to getting the rest of the marked files in this series into a ready for proofreading state would be to do the same copy & paste from the original Hansard site for each page just like ShakespeareFan just did, followed by a new creation of the same pages into a new PDF that can be newly processed into a new (& workable) DjVu file. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:38, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

And I see the remaining Index pages needing text-layers in this series have already been addressed by said importation of text. Thank You! -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Help locating a contributor

Looking to assist one of my students who would like to contact WillowW about the subjects that have been translated- such as Maupertuis "Accord between Different Laws of nature that seemed incompatible " (1744).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.247.113.125 (talk) 19:35, 12 March 2013

WillowW is still active on Wikipedia. You should be able to get in contact through his/her talk page over there. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:31, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Database Error

When editing two separate pages of Scientific Memoirs Vol. 2 I get the following error...

Database error A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was: (SQL query hidden) from within function "MathRenderer::writeDBEntry". Database returned error "1048: Column 'math_outputhash' cannot be null (10.64.16.8)".

I think it has to do with the equations on the pages but not sure what further to do. MarkLSteadman (talk) 22:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like submitting a bugzilla: request would be of value. After you have entered the bug, there will be a basic form, and we would normally add the number 35925 to the block field, as that assigns it to have an issue at Wikisources. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

It already exists as bug 46042. Not sure how to set the blocking flag. MarkLSteadman (talk) 18:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue with header=1

Hi. This page is skipped and not recognised as link by header=1: Flame and Shadow/Sunset: St. Louis. Previous page, Flame and Shadow/Redbirds, ignores that link and instead of using Flame and Shadow/Sunset: St. Louis as next, it points to the page immediately after it, Flame and Shadow/The Coin. The same happens in the other direction (Starting from The Coin). Can someone explain why? Is there something wrong in having punctuation in titles and how header=1 handles them?--Mpaa (talk) 06:06, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Removed the column from the page name and now is OK. Should this be a bug to be filed?--Mpaa (talk) 13:29, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The pages either side needed to be purged in cache to get the links resolved in the adjacent pages, and done. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I did it before changing the name with no success. After changing, I purged and it worked, so I connect it to the presence of ":".--Mpaa (talk) 15:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

<ref> tags in mainspace

As you can see in Page:Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines.djvu/97, this part of Index:Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines.djvu involves footnotes. When I pushed that to the mainspace at Practical Treatise on Milling and Milling Machines/Chapter 6, apparently the <ref> tags broke? I have no idea what happened and no idea how to fix it. It says there is no </references> tag, but there is clearly a </ref> tag in the page. —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 13:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, wait. There's a difference between </ref> and <references />. So new question, where do I put the reflist in the mainspace? —Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 13:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

At the bottom of the page. You can also use {{smallrefs}} for smaller fonts. See you example.--Mpaa (talk) 13:14, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Move Book of Common Prayer (ECUSA) pages to subpages

I would like to request that someone with more experience with moving of pages move the pages linked from the table of contents for Book of Common Prayer (ECUSA) to be subpages. All of these pages except for the Ratification, Preface, Concerning the Service of the Church, Calendar of the Church Year, and Daily Morning Prayer: Rite One are practically empty (just headers) so I would advocate deleting them if that's permissible. --Jfhutson (talk) 21:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included.

In the course of validating Index:The Boy Travellers in Australasia.djvu, I first noticed The Boy Travellers in Australasia/Illustrations was not transcluding correctly (the final <pages to=...>-specified Page: was not being expanded, and simply rendering literally as "Page:The Boy Travellers in Australasia.djvu/24".) Upon editing /Illustrations the above warning was shown, and I subsequently discovered the same page was appearing in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded.

As a (perhaps rather lazy) fix I divided /Illustrations into a pair of approximately equal sized pages. However, is this too irresponsible a solution? Am I simply setting up a failure situation for the short-term future, and if so is there a recommended "official" approach to address this situation? MODCHK (talk) 12:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I would have been inclined to get rid of all those TOC page listing and dotted TOC page listing etc templates. If I had proofed that pages I would have done them as a table, without using a single template. Hesperian 14:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

cant open zip files

--Tina timmins (talk) 17:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)yfyhĒgeFÅbg

• Absolutely no idea, what this is about. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

setting attribute of table columns

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Help:Tables paragraph "Setting column widths" recommends:

{| class="wikitable"
 ! scope="col" style="width:50px;" | Name
 ! scope="col" style="width:225px;" | Effect
 ! scope="col" style="width:225px;" | Games Found In
|-

so, tried:

{| { {ts|ma|al|lh1|sm80|width:80%}}
|-
 ! scope="col" style="width:40em;" |
 ! scope="col" style="width:40em;" |
|-

doesn't work

so, tried:

|-
 ! scope="col" style="color:red;" | col 1
 ! scope="col" style="color:blue;" | col 2
|-

only sets colors of own row, not entire column

Is there a syntax which applies an attribute to an entire column of a Wikisource table?

Reb40 (talk) 11:22, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there are no column parameters for table at this time. They are for the whole table, a row, or a cell. scope="col" may be an indication of things to come. — Ineuw talk 16:58, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I would agree except I noticed column groups are somehow being applied when the DoubleWiki extension is in play ( see an example of DoubleWiki and view it's HTML source code. Search for the term 'colgroup' if you can't find it for some reason right away). I wish someone would look into the possibilities of getting that into the mix from there. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:07, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, Ineuw & George, though that's not the answer I was hoping for. It seems like the WikiBook table help page I cited is incorrect or "ahead of time". If WikiSource markup worked that way I'd be very happy, but in the meantime the help page should be corrected or annotated. I don't want to do anything high-handed: could someone please notify the person responsible for that page, and ask them to do it? Thanks. Reb40 (talk) 11:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I usually use w:Help:Tables for my review. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

You are correct Reb40, especially since it was written over two years ago. The most updated info source is what billinghurst recommends above. I also found another change from previous table declarations but I posted it in the Scriptorium. — Ineuw talk 17:03, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Bulk delete request

I am not sure if this is the right page to post this request, but I need to upload to the commons a corrected version of this volume and I need these pages to be deleted beforehand. From Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 77.djvu/423 to Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 77.djvu/526 inclusive. Thanks. — Ineuw talk 01:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

replicated on Wikisource:Bot_requests#Bulk_page_range_delete_in_Index:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_77.djvu Please address there. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:52, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Translations

Hi there. I have several PD-100 works by Lie Kim Hok which I'd like to copy here. One of these is in Dutch, while the other is in low Malay. Are we allowed to include original translations, or should the Dutch work go to the Dutch Wikisource and the Malay one go to the Malaysian/Indonesian Wikisources?Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Our rules for translations are at Wikisource:Translations. We are currently developing new rules, that are leaning towards requiring the new original translations have the original language text hosted on the original language (or multilingual Wikisource) before the translation is started/hosted here. I see you are an established Wikipedian so the CC release of your original translations should not be a surprise. Jeepday (talk)

• Yeah, no hidden surprises in the licensing. Thanks for the link, I'll take a look at that. What is a/the "multilingual Wikisource"?Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• It is also called old wikisource there is a brief history at WS:WIW, there is a cross wiki link oldwikisource: or just remove the language indicator from the url. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:35, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, that might be easier. So I'd just create oldwikisource:Mijn Hart and oldwikisource:Orang Prampoewan, then translate from there (uploading scans of my source, of course). Thanks. – Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:13, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• Use whichever language-wiki is most appropriate, I believe they are only hosted at oldwikisource if that language wiki does not exist. Because the scans are going to be licensed PD-100 they can/should be hosted at Commons. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:41, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Image/caption formatting

What's the best way to combine the image and caption here so that it is separate from the main text? A table? Feel free to tweak. (Rendering in the Main) Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:17, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I've tried a couple of different ways. See here where I've used a constrained {{block center}} and here where I've used {{img float}}. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I'll use {{img float}}, thank you! Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:32, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Last word of the page repeated on the following page

Hi, I encountered this problem while proofreading on Latin Wikisource, but that project's community is not exactly active, so I'm asking here ;-) The book in question always features the first syllable of a page already on the preceding page, a bit offset; see for example p. 4, last line is "**... tanto", p. 5, first word is "tanto"; or a more absurd example: p. 11, a "HOC" is trailing somewhere at the end of the page, on p. 12, the Latin text starts with "HOC". Now I'm looking for a template which would work similar to {{hws}} and {{hwe}}, in order to transcribe the full pages, but only display the words once on the page showing the whole content. Is there something like that already? --MF-Warburg (talk) 23:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

You dont need a template; just use <noinclude>TEXT</noinclude>. This will prevent the text for appearing in a transclusion, but still have it show up on the primary source page for verification. Because of its location, you could also use something akin to {{float right}}, if you so choose, but it would still need to be bracketed within <noinclude> coding. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

The easiest place to put these is in the footer as this is already noincluded. See Page:Completeconfectioner Glasse 1800.djvu/219 for an example. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:22, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Using the footer and a template for right-aligned text seems to be the easiest way to go. --MF-Warburg (talk) 01:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Letter

Hello, I'd like to know if a letter that was made public by a musician via Twitter could be added to Wikisource. The letter can be found in music magazines sites like this one and this one. Thank you. --Moraleh (talk) 07:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

In short no. The work is copyrighted, at the bottom of the webpage is "Copyright 2000-2011 Bauer Consumer Media", which is not compatible with "Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License", but thank you for asking first :) JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, JeepdaySock. I think that the lisence we should consider is the one that applies on the original work, which is the page Twitlonger. Anyway, that site doesn't give much information about it and say that the rights are kept by the authors, so that wouldn't be useful neither, am I right? --Moraleh (talk) 03:07, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

You are correct, it does not look like we can host it here. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Hopefully some day I'll figure out the way to make it compatible. --Moraleh. (talk) 05:44, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I know that on Commons and Wikipedia, they is a way to store agreements by the authors to release their work under CC-BY-SA. If you contact the author directly, and then an admin here, maybe that would work. See w:Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission Abjiklam (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

The same release would work for all projects in the Wikimedia Foundation. But I am not sure that the letter would meet WS:WWI so we could still not host it here. Jeepday (talk) 11:14, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Punch's Pocketbook Alamack 1851

I own a Punch's Pocket book an Almanack dated 1851 with 13 illustrations by John Leech. Bradbury & Evans, Printers Whitefriard is printed on first page. I can't find any information on this book. Can you help. If you need photo's sent me you web page Thanks Nick

Worldcat records the entire series under OCLC number 228702302. There does not appear to be an entry for the 1851 edition but the 1852 edition is under OCLC number 76758643. I can't find much else. (Google Books lists it] but with no page images or significant data.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Actually, Google does appear to have a scanned copy. However, there isn't much information and, since the title is incorrect, the information that is there is suspect anyway. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Need help overwriting file on Commons

Can someone please take this newly fixed local DjVu...

• //en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:Sal_vol3.djvu

... and overwrite its old counter-part on Commons...

• //commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ruffhead_-_The_Statutes_at_Large_-_vol_3.djvu

Thanks in advance. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Done by Ineuw. Many thanks for wrangling that turd. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Rendering in Main

The last line on this page does not render well in the Main, and I am not sure how to tweak formatting to lose the undesired line spacing. I suspect it has something to do with the blank pages/image following the affected page... Also, I have posed a question on the POTM Talk page about naming title redirects if anyone can give two cents. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I have no help to offer, but I realize that you are becoming an expert on fine manipulation of text on Wikisource. I wonder if you would be interested in documenting your solutions someplace? JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:36, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't even know where to begin. I'm a copycat, not an expert. I use formatting, but don't always know why a thing works. I am probably the wrong person to document anything. Thanks, though. Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

It is completely up to you, but if you start keeping notes that are helpful to you someplace like User:Londonjackbooks/MyNotes they will eventually mature into something usefully to all. Many of our help pages started as someone keeping notes for themselves. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Closest I came to such a task was jotting down some observations/opinions and notes on footnotes within footnotes & endnotes in a sandbox, and made note of my notes on the Footnotes & endnotes Help Talk page in case anyone wanted to consider situations I have come across in my editing. I think the general opinion is to use <ref> for all purposes, and I have found that that is not necessarily a good general practice or principle... Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

One possible solution is to transclue the image either after or before the poem, rather than in the midst of it. Plates in older books were displayed wherever it made it convenient for printing and where it looked better in terms of a multi-page book. We're rendering in a different format, where the principles of what looks best are different from thos of a book. I would say that it should be fine if you resequenced the order of transcluded pages to solve the issue. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I 'fixed' it by placing an {{nop}} at the end of the affected page. That got rid of the unwanted line space (appearing in the Main) between the last line and the line preceding it. Whether it was the best fix, I'm not sure, but it seems to work okay. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Portal subpage structure problem

The Template:Portal subpage forelink is correct but the backlink has the portal home page address built in as well as providing an undefined portal link, and this makes for a confusing, and esthetically poor appearance. Please see THIS PAGE where I only wish to navigate to the previous section, which is the order of appearance in the publication. Perhaps I am using the wrong subpage template? In any case, I think that the way it is now is wrong. A solution would be much appreciated.— Ineuw talk 22:32, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:50, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks. — Ineuw talk 23:16, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Problem with page-spanning formatting template

We've got a {{larger block}} that starts on Phil. Trans. vol. 2 p. 552, is closed in the footer, reopened in the header of 553 and then closed there. Both pages look nice. Transclusion here yields the template wikitext. Anybody know what I'm doing wrong? Prosody (talk) 23:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that you're spanning pages with a template to that wasn't itself designed to span pages. This template can't do that. Compare {{block center}} versus {{block center/s}} and {{block center/e}}. The former cannot span pages, but the latter two, used in tandem, can. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:38, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I believe that if you close the template within the body of the text instead of the footer, then on the following page, begin the template all over again (within the body of text—not in the header), it will produce the desired effect(?) Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

As a block-level template, closing it and opening it again will create two separate blocks, with a line break between the two. Hesperian 00:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Mental note made. Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

That depends on the underlying HTML of the template. Thanks for the pointers, all. Pretty sure I was conflating templates and tables when I was trying to do this. Prosody (talk) 23:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

You are right that the underlying HTML would not be correct in this circumstance. I have taken the liberty of creating /s, /e forms of {{larger block}}, and used these on those two pages. Please check if the result is to your liking, as I noticed the line spacing seems to have increased as compared with the former user of {{larger}}. MODCHK (talk) 00:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

World Brain by H G Wells

I've started a stub for World Brain. This is my first editing here, although I am active mainly on Wikiversity. Would appreciate any advice about bring over text - what should be considered or done next? Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I placed and updated welcome template on your talk page, it has a link to Help:Contents. The first goal would be to get a copy of a scan preferably with a text layer on to Commons. While this is not always possible, it is the best start. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

H. G. Wells' works are still copyrighted in Great Britain, so a scan should not be uploaded to Commons. If a scan is to be used it would be uploaded onto Wikisource. ResScholar (talk) 07:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Section 12-1 should have a paragraph break.

Can someone please explain why in passing a text block to a template, the parser chokes on what should be a straightforward paragraph break?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

wouldn't know where to begin.... but if you're editing within the wikicode and want something to behave like a pargraph normally would?

Just make it a paragraph regardless of the wikicode. Use <p> </p> -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:26, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Ye

What are the conventions for the word ye when it stands for the. For example, at the bottom of this page, in place of the text marked as illegible, should I write y^e, þ^e or something else altogether? Abjiklam (talk) 18:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Use what will most closely replicate the text on the page. In this case, it will be y^e. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Abjiklam (talk) 19:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to add for future reference that there is {{ye}} that can be used. Abjiklam (talk) 11:16, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Images of different editions of the same book

Life with the Esquimaux Vol. 1 & 2. contain the same images as Arctic Researches, And Life Amongst the Esquimaux since the two works are only different editions of the same book. Arctic Researches seems to have higher quality scans of the images, so would it be acceptable to use them for Life with the Esquimaux? Abjiklam (talk) 10:02, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

If those images are identical I would use the best ones. Further, in "Vanity Fair" or another work, there was an image that was black and white whereby I asked Bilinghurst (an administrator) if I could replace that with the same image but in color and he said "Yes". We also had that with a black and white Flower where we replaced it with one in color.—Maury (talk) 10:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick answer. Abjiklam (talk) 10:57, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

You are very welcome. Also take a look where I enlarged the image. We (I) try to get them the same size if the original isn't very small but often we enlarge them a bit so that a person can see what the image is about. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 11:04, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes I noticed. I didn't do this myself because I read in one of the guidelines that image sizes are supposed to be defined by the user and are better not forced to a specific value. Is it better then to ignore this guideline? Abjiklam (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Index of Titles transclusion

The Index of Titles in this work is not included in the TOC. Considering that I am using the header=1 transclusion, should I/how should I best transclude or link to the Index in the Main? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:02, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

A question for enlightenment

I tried adding DEFAULTSORT parameter to an author's page and this triggered a sort overwrite warning. Where is this hidden parameter? Does it exist for all author pages? I am about to add numerous new author pages and/or update PSM contributions.— Ineuw talk 05:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

See Author Template page:

Overrides (for exceptions): {{{defaultsort}}}: Override the category sorting, which is normally "{{{lastname}}}, {{{firstname}}}".--Mpaa (talk) 06:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the enlightenment. :-) — Ineuw talk 01:49, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

SCOTUS case with 2 majority opinions

How would one formulate the USSCCase and USSCCase2 templates for court decisions that contain two or more majority opinions (e.g., United States v. Booker (543 U.S. 220))?--Dlarmore (talk) 01:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Asking for help with the Custom regex tool

Searched the web for this but found no solution. How can I specify the \newline code in the Custom Regex 'replace' panel? The find parameters are clear and I use it, but replacing any 'find' value with \newline just doesn't work for me. Thanks.

Example:

Search: /foo/g
Replace with: \n\n . . . this inserts the literal value \n\n. — Ineuw talk 21:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Just use Enter as in a normal editor, it will create newlines.--Mpaa (talk) 22:02, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow!!! Amazing, thank you, it worked.— Ineuw talk 02:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Score Deployed but won't pasre valid notation

User:ShakespeareFan00/scoretesting ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. You have entered a "raw" score, so you need the raw setting. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Page:The_Army_and_Navy_Hymnal.djvu/32/score

OK I've made a start to test things.. If someone can continue the transcription I should be able to pick up the syntax fairly quickly.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:06, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at Page:The Army and Navy Hymnal.djvu/33 where I've done the score already. I've deliberately not added the lyrics because putting them into the score makes them unsearchable. For example, "When morning gilds the sky" vs "When morn -- ing gilds the sky". No-one will search for the second phrase. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

OK I've spent the best part of day trying to get my head around the syntax and failed, I've thus blanked the sandbox attempt

linked to above, so that someone that is actually competent can typset it accordingly. Thanks ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:43, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Question http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Barzaz_Breiz,_huiti%C3%A8me_%C3%A9dition.djvu/644 has midi? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

And I've added Vorbis=1 to the proofread examples.. I think a full blown MIDI scoring version rendered using Fluidsynth is out of scope right? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't know what to do

Hi. I'd like to start editing here, but I'm having difficulty figuring out how it works. I get the idea that the stuff in mainspace isn't supposed to be touched (because the text doesn't change), but I'm not sure how to create new stuff. AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 20:39, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Editing happens in the Index and Page namespaces. A good way to start is with the Proofread of the Month project. For example, try clicking on one of the red-highlighted pages in Index:Natural History, Birds.djvu and editing the text to match the page scan as much as possible. To try starting a page from scratch, try Index:Tales from old Japanese dramas (1915).djvu; click on one of the un-highlighted page numbers. The goal is, again, to edit the text to match the page scan. When you are done in either case, set the page status to proofread (yellow) with the radio buttons at the bottom of the screen and save the page. Look at Help:Proofread for some more instructions.

If you want to start your own work: you need to upload a scan to Wikimedia Commons and start a new index page for it (see Help:Beginner's guide to Index: files for that). Lots of scanned works can be found at the Internet Archive and similar websites. When all the pages are proofread, the text can be transcluded to the mainspace (see Help:Transclude).

Is there anything in particular you wanted to try? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I would like to create works for hymn texts. Is it absolutely necessary to upload the scan to the Commons? I can't access the Commons on my computer. AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 21:40, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The scan (which is usually a DjVu or PDF file) needs to be available for the proofreading system to work. It can be uploaded to Commons or, in some cases, directly uploaded to Wikisource. If it is a problem, you can ask another user to upload the scan for you if it is available somewhere (like archive.org or Google Books).

However, you can write directly to the mainspace in some cases: if you are transcribing from a printed, unscanned book or if you are copying from another digital library (although that is not the preferred approach). You could also do this if you are going to copy and paste everything to a matching scan later. That will cause you more work though. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 23:57, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Versions of the same book

Hi! I'm new to Wikisource (but not to Wikipedia though) and I have a couple of questions. First of all, if there is a number of reprints of some particular classical book, is it fine to digitize any of these reprints? I mean, is it a good practice to upload and proofread, let's say, a publication of a Shakespeare's play in 2005? I guess the best thing would be to have scans of the original publication, but of course it is not always feasible. --DixonD (talk) 13:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikisource. Wikisource:Versions might answer some of your questions. In brief, yes, any version (or even multiple versions) of a book can be digitized on Wikisource, although we'd prefer the closest thing to a first edition where possible (and with high quality scans—again, if possible). Be careful with a 2005 edition, however, as sufficient editing can create a new copyright (although I doubt anyone would rewrite Shakespeare enough for that to happen). Also, if you don't work from scans, you need to state the source of the text on the talk page with a {{textinfo}} template. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:11, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Another question. I have a scanned copy of a book with a collection of works of one author. How should these works appear in Wikisource - as separate pages or as subpages of the page for the collection? --DixonD (talk) 22:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Subpages of the page for the collection. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hash target link

How can I make a hash target link, for example Amazing Stories/Volume 01/Number 01/Off on a Comet—or Hector Servadac#Chapter VI? Heyzeuss (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The link will work but you need to add an anchor at the other end. The easiest method is using a template, either {{anchor|Chapter VI}} or {{anchor+|Chapter VI}}. In this case, the anchor needs to be added to Page:Amazing Stories Volume 01 Number 01.djvu/14. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I thought it was automatic, as with ==wiki markup== type headings. I'll try those templates out in a few places. Heyzeuss (talk) 03:00, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

The chapter headings are just formatted text, like the rest of the story, although inserting the anchors during proofreading makes sense now that I think about it. However, this has reminded me that there actually are some automatic anchors: the page numbers. Amazing Stories/Volume 01/Number 01/Off on a Comet—or Hector Servadac#12 would be the closest thing to the link you want. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 03:07, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Translation laden Transcription Projects

Hi there,

I'm a college student in, Ireland and I am working on a proposal for a crowd sourcing transcription project, of items held in the United States. This one is different however, they documents are in 19th Century Puerto Rican Spanish, and potential transcribers are asked to transcribe from this to English. I was wondering if someone could point me towards a project that may have been done or is ongoing that involves translation at the sametime?--Fonzbob (talk) 15:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Abraham,_Robert_(DNB00)

The 'wikipedia article' link here points at a disambiguation page on en.wp. The correct article is "Robert Abraham (architect)". I don't know how to fix this, so... :) Revent (talk) 01:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

fixed Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:15, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Books with texts in multiple languages

What would be the policy in this case? Let's say we have a book with poems which is written mostly in English but contains also German text. Should we put English and German parts into English and German Wikisources, respectively? I tried to find something related in former discussions and in policies, but I didn't manage. --DixonD (talk) 14:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

It varies; I don't think there is a hard rule on it. If it is a multilingual book aimed at English readers (for instance, a text book on a language or some translations) it belongs here on English Wikisource. If it is a true multilingual book it may be more appropriate for Multilingual Wikisource. In some cases, I have seen books split over different projects, as you describe. In your case, it sounds like it is an English work rather than multilingual or spitable; but I have not seen it and can't give any definite answer even if I had. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Annotation(s)

What was decided about annotations? Are we allowed to use them? I ask because I am using one. I thank you gentlemen, —Maury (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

We can use them but only in a separate, clearly marked annotated version. I will relaunch WS:Annotations as soon as I have enough time (which should be before the end of the month). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 15:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Noisy Scans

Index:Art of Cookery 1774 edition.djvu - Cleanup possible?

Toggle ProofreadPage

How can I edit in the index and page namespaces directly without using ProofreadPage? I am in the process of debugging Finnish Wikisource, and I need to turn the extension off briefly so that I can copy and paste. Heyzeuss (talk) 08:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Turn off javascript. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Thx. Even though I believe you about my crappy pdf, I still have to try it for myself. I'm also going to try to load up Emily Dickenson at Finnish Wikisource. Heyzeuss (talk) 09:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I disabled javascript in a few different browsers, and it still looks exactly the same all of the time. I'm trying to get just one big edit box instead of the form.

EDIT: It does not all look the same with javascript turned off. The index page and edit screen are unchanged, but the edit screen in the page namespace just has a big edit box. Heyzeuss (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Bench_and_bar_of_Colorado_(1917)/Portraits

Can someone explain why it's a pain to get multi page table transcluding? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:34, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Footers & Other Questions

I am new to Wikisource (this week!), and am editing the Letters of Jonathan Swift, volume XIII. The title of the book and the page number are at the top of the page. Most pages have a footer which includes the first word or two of the next page. Should I put those in the footer when proofreading, or delete

Also in the footer are sometimes random letters and numbers, such as "D 3" or "XVIII". Should those be included?

If I include them, is there a special code that allows text in left, center and right justification? I have found {{RunningHeader}} useful in the header and in the text of the page -- can I use it in the footer?

For the three points above, it is your choice, depending on how close you want the look and feel be to the original page. If you choose to include them, you would insert them in the footer and they would not be transcluded anyhow. You can use {{left}}, {{center}} {{right}}, {{float left}}, {{float right}} or similar.--Mpaa (talk) 19:38, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes, in the text, the letter's address will be on the left and the place and date of writing are on the right. I use the running header for that. This page is an example: Page:The_Works_of_the_Rev._Jonathan_Swift,_Volume_13.djvu/66 I have two concerns about this one. First, the address is not quite on the left margin -- it is offset a bit. I've been ignoring that, as I don't know how to add an offset to the running header code.

I would not use {{RunningHeader}} within a page, but use the above templates. For the rest, it looks OK, the text is the main concern, a fac-simile of the original is nice to have but not the main goal.--Mpaa (talk) 19:38, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Second, the font is slightly different from the rest of the text. How much does that matter? If I do need to add a code to reduce the size of the font, how do I do it? I've tried adding |smaller| within the running header code, but that doesn't work.

You can use {{smaller}} or e.g. {{fsx}} or similar variations.--Mpaa (talk) 19:38, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for helping with these questions.Susanarb (talk) 18:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Index:The New Latin Primer (Postgate).djvu

I'd appreciate some advice on how to cope with the accented characters I can't find in the toolbars.

I'll do my best with it, but I'd appreciate somone that works with accented stuff extensively filling in the difficult stuff.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:21, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll do my best. Is it just the pages marked purple at the index? I'm not sure how to get a horizontal line over a group of several letters as with the Roman numerals on Page:The New Latin Primer (Postgate).djvu/217. I don't think there's a diacritic for it, but maybe there's some sort of HTML style setting that will do it. Angr 11:55, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

try {{overline}}. I've not used it with all-caps, so am not sure if it will collide with the tops of the characters. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. Thanks for your help! Angr 14:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Proofreading problems

Some new script has made it possible to [mark this page as proofread] without editing. Unfortunately, it seems to also prevent the source text from appearing next to the text to be proofread. I've tried on several pages now, and can't get source text to display next to the Wikisource text unless it was a page that I edited last (which is no help). This is happening on half a dozen texts that previously had no such problem. I won't be able to proofread until the problem is resolved. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:53, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed. My process was to go to Category:Not proofread, and randomly click on a page. I tried this numerous times, and not a single page image displayed for me.

I am not seeing anything corresponding to the [mark this page as proofread] comment above, so I can't comment on the cause. All I know is I'm not seeing any page images. This is a critical outage, and needs to be resolved quickly. How to proceed?

Hesperian 03:20, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

There was some mention of that in the Tech newsletter to a change to patrolling, and it points to here. That said, I am not facing any issues in patrolling. New pages? Revised pages? Got more info? I can pull up pages and see text beside images in view and no images. I am poking Special:RecentChanges and yet to strike an issue. NOTE that I have different rights, but none that should override anything that affects local advanced editing rights. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:57, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

It has come good for me again. Hopefully it was an intermittent issue and working for Petey too. Hesperian 06:09, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I am no longer seeing this problem now. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:20, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Follow the gerrit link and it says Update May 31, 2013 4:30 AM so presumably a fix. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Greek

I am editing letters to and from Jonathan Swift. Occasionally, there is a letter containing another language. I'm fine with Latin, French, and Spanish, but the Greek letters are quite beyond me. Here is the page: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Works_of_the_Rev._Jonathan_Swift,_Volume_13.djvu/342. If any of you can read and/or transcribe Greek, I encourage you to take a look to fix it! And thank you! Susanarb (talk) 00:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

What you can do, if you wish, is mark the text with {{Greek missing}}, save the page as "Problematic", and move on. The template will place the page into Category:Pages with missing Greek characters, which, one would hope, is monitored by people with the skills you are looking for. Hesperian 00:51, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks! Susanarb (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I do know some Greek, but this text contains at least three printed forms of Greek characters that I'm unfamiliar with. If I can get hold of one of my Greek expert contacts, I'll have him take a look at it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:04, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I check this category once or twice a week (usually on a Sunday) and deal with any pages that are tagged. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:50, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I think we've got the Greek fixed now. A colleague at Wiktionary figured out what was going on and supplied me with the Greek script, which is now added to the page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:41, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Internal link to other ws

Stupid question: what am I doing wrong?

• http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Orlando_furioso/Canto_1
• wikisource:it:Orlando furioso/Canto 1

Moondyne (talk) 01:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

You want this? it:Orlando furioso/Canto 1 Hesperian 01:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, ta. Moondyne (talk) 02:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Formatting a book's back index

I'm trying to format this index here: Page:Origin_of_Species_1859_facsimile.djvu/503. I can see that the page number should go in the header, and that the index is labelled by the first letter of the words. But the index here also includes the first and last index elements on the page ("aberrant" to "bees", for this example). Where should I place these so that the transcription is consistent with the original text, but they won't get in the way when the index is viewed together as a whole here: On the Origin of Species (1859)/Index? I was thinking in either in the header or the footer? Ozhu (talk) 01:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I would put them in the header. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I've put them in the same running header with the page number. There really isn't any reason to do otherwise, since the headwords are not going to appear in their published location anyway. Also, please look at the use I've made of the {{bar}} template. A parameter of "2" produces a single bar of the same length that you've tried to recreate with two dashes, but without the space in between. I think it makes the result look cleaner. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that tip. I'll go back and use that. Also makes it easier to edit with gvim on Windows, which doesn't handle special characters well at all. Ozhu (talk) 01:31, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

How do I use plain sister to link to 2 wikipedia articles?

A Dictionary of Music and Musicians/Bärmann covers three members of the same family, two of whom have WP articles. w:Heinrich Baermann and w:Carl Baermann. How do I link to both of them from the same mainspace page without resorting to the deprecated {{wikipedia}}? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 23:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

If you're trying to avoid using interwiki links, you could create an author page for them and link from there. The only other thing that comes to mind is the creation of a template like {{taxon}} or {{dated}}. - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Also, if you use {{header}} instead of {{DMM}} (or modify the latter appropriately!), you could make use of parameter "related_author", which permits multiple (local) author links using the syntax (e.g.) related_author=Heinrich Baermann/Carl Baermann. MODCHK (talk) 00:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

H'mm. It's taken me all day to realise what you meant by using an interwiki link. I've obviously got too close to this project and can't step back far enough to look at it dispassionately enough. Oh well, at least I've got there now even if it is 9 hours later. There's also a hat note on Heinrich's WP article for Carl's. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be possible to modify the "wikipedia" parameter in header to accept more entries with the same syntax as " realted_authors"? I had the same need as BWC elsewhere.--Mpaa (talk) 07:19, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:Header just "calls" the Plain Sister template and that is where you'd need to add the capability for "extra" WP links. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:38, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit: btw... has anyone tried applying a stand-alone plain-sister template in the header's notes field in addition to using the "built-in" parameter? Done ? -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

We come humbly and grovel at the feet of the master, who even in the deadest hours of the night always produces the goods! Thanks. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, I rephrase. Wouldn't it be better to modify Plain Sisters to accept multiple links? Even if a stand alone template call in notes produces the result, we are just distributing around info which should logically stay together.--Mpaa (talk) 11:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

One possible drawback of duplicating the "related_authors" approach on the wikipedia= parameter is that the internal use of {{#titleparts:}} would preclude links which contain a "/". I am aware this is a really silly example, but w:/etc/passwd exists, even if it is actually only a #redirect... MODCHK (talk) 11:50, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

How many times are we legitimately going come across something like BWCs example? I can just as easily take any recent executive order and bind it to 6 or 7 relevant existing pieces/persons on WP; the question then becomes if I should take it upon myself to make every work a 'top ten list' of what I think is most important to expand-upon / investigate further or not. Sometimes the perceived limitations on what or how much one can do turns out to be a good thing & I think this might be one such case. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Umm, I thought I was agreeing with this basic point.

Somebody also has to make this blindingly obvious comment, so it might as well be me: Whatever is wrong with embedding links in the article text at the point right where the eventual reader may want to look them up? Sure in this case it is a short piece, but who wants to scroll to the top of the article in case there is a relevant link, especially since the sister links don't exactly advertise where they point to: ((1) Wikipedia article) vs ((4) Wikipedia article)?

NoBoDy - that's who! (well... at least in my opinion that is). Personally, I don't practice the typical sister-linking thing much if at all. If I need Ickipedia at some point for some reason & we don't already host that person, place or thing on its/their own for a jump-point, I just point to WP in an inline-piped link. -= either it gets utilized upon arrival or folks will effortlessly read past it; not my problem =-.

This is why I'm hoping Wikidata at least manages to centralize the core info on proper people, places and things. When that info is sufficiently compiled, I'm guessing it will all be standardized and readily available through the Pageinfo (API?) thingy instead. Maybe then this circle-jerk with inter-language linking this & sister-linking that will finally start to fade (You might not have been around yet but I was never in favor of embedding stuff into the navigation header in the first place fwiw. I only work to "improve" upon it however I can because that is what the community wanted & decided; my PoV is over-ruled by that). -- George Orwell III (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Also what about multiple links, each to a local Author: page; each one of which links to exactly one wikipedia page... You know, the way it has been done for almost forever before? MODCHK (talk) 13:04, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Find a way to automate it - I don't believe people are against what you're saying but the realities of editing/profreading are all stacked against this. Having the capability in the same place, using the same practices makes it far easier to go back and link to WP as opposed to [re]proof-reading everything just for running down a half-dozen or so possible inline-link points. -- George Orwell III (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

A simple "No, it's not" is enough.--Mpaa (talk) 16:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Request local file move to Commons

Once again, I am unable to upload a file to Commons for some reason. Can someone please take the local file...

• File:SaLv124.djvu

...and overwrite my previous upload to ...

• File:United States Statutes at Large Volume 124.djvu

Thanks in advance. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:46, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

On it. Hesperian 02:04, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. Hesperian 03:22, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

"Margin notice"

Hi, on Latin Wikisource, I imported this template la:Formula:Randnotiz rechts from the German version in order to display text written on the margin. It doesn't work so well (see la:Pagina:Hortus Malabaricus Volume 1.pdf/20 where the "Fig. 1" is displayed somewhere over the original page; while on la:Hortus Malabaricus/Liber I it appears over the rest of the text). Do you have a template which works better? :D (Unfortunately I don't know how this "concept" of writing on the margin is called in English, so I was a bit unsuccessful in searching). --MF-Warburg (talk) 02:43, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at {{sidenotes begin}} and its companion templates in either the sidenotes series or the outside series. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:12, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! --MF-Warburg (talk) 02:48, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Riders of the Purple Sage

This is a long-languishing item on my to-do list. Adam suggested that this edition, which is the first edition, ought to be the one uploaded, and the file is certainly the cleanest. I noticed that page 1 is one of those "Google notices" that needs to be removed, and page 2 is the book's cover. However, I need help adjusting the Djvu accordingly, since I have never understood how to remove the Google notice. The file in question is already on Commons here, and the local index file is Index:Riders of the Purple Sage.djvu. Note that the index file has been set up according to the way the file should look once the Google notice has been removed. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Done -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! The second task I'll need help with is getting the four images prepped and uploaded (five, if you count the publisher's mark on the title page). The Index page has all the image locations identified, and there is a clean copy at the Hathi Trust. The images should be uploaded to commons:Category:Riders of the Purple Sage. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Addendum: I take it back. The scans of the images at the Hathi Trust are terrible, with chromatic interference patterning that destroys the image. Wherever someone can find clean images, please use that. The original source of our djvu file at the Internet Archive appears to have been a PDF, so it's not a good choice either. If we can't find a clean copy online, we might have to rescan ourselves, if someone has access to an original edition. At least there are only four images needed. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:20, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm doing an image run with HesperianBot as we speak. Let us see how it fares. There are a lot of ifs, but if it succeeds in following the trail from the Commons page to the archive.org page, identifying the right zip file, downloading it, identifying and extracting the correct image file for each page with a raw or missing image tag, converting it from tif to png, and, after all that, if the images therein are of an acceptable quality, then your problem will be solved. :-) Hesperian 06:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

It didn't work, and when I attempted manual extraction I found that the scan images in the zip are just as awful as they djvu images. Not worth pursuing. Hesperian 10:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

As I said, we might have to go with original scans or photos. I do notice that in commons:Category:Riders of the Purple Sage there is a photo of the title page and frontispiece. The user who uploaded that image has been active on Commons as recently as this past May. Someone who knows the requirements for images might contact them about whether they still have access to that copy of the book. I don't do work with images (yet) because I don't have image manipulation software suitable for dealing with quality images. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

The original scans of the book come by the way of GoogleBooks' digitization project so the notion that there are other sources for this book are slim to none. The available full view GoogleBooks copies for the 1912 edition are all at least 5 years old or more to boot (you'll find the exact link way down near the bottom of the info found on Archive.org's host page).

A quick look through the images available thru GoogleBooks aren't much better than the those found on Archive.org but they are at least full sized ones & have a better chance of being workable than what we currently have (the image pages in the DjVu file are about a third of the size of all the other pages in case you haven't notice thanks to our thumbnail resizing in the Page: namespace). -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:07, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I haven't looked at all the options at GoogleBooks, but I have checked every copy at the Internet Archive, most or all of which seem to have come from GoogleBooks. They're all very old (in internet terms), all with extremely poor quality images, and some have even had the images stripped out. So, I don't put a lot of hope in finding on-line images either. I've left a message with the person at Commons whom I mentioned above. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

FWIW, there are only 3 or 4 available full veiw versions of the 1912 edition available to me here in the U.S. on GoogleBooks; maybe other locales will have more options.

Regardless, the primary concern here should be reproducing/replacing the text, followed by securing quality images (if and when that is possible of course). -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't anticipate any further problems with the text, now that the source file is up and corrected. But, as the images may take some time to track down and process, I'd like to get a head start on that issue. Although our priority should be text first, that doesn't mean that the one must be completed before the other is begun. The text can proceed apace at the same time as a search for images, yes? --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

To each his own... There is no "right" way to approach this; only the most logical or most efficient way (in my opinion). Since images are moot for most mobile device viewers anyway - and a general pain in the azz to secure & produce correctly - I prioritize them dead last in order to theoretically satisfy the largest number of potential readers with the most complete high-quality content that's possible. Otherwise; why bother with visiting WS at all? I can read what we're hosting now directly from IA (warts and all) or from Project Guttenberg. Of course, this is just my opinion; not policy. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:03, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

My own view is that the images we process serve a greater good. Once they're uploaded on Commons, they are useable not only here, but also on Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikispecies, and other MW projects. Their presence then serves to promote what we do here, and to raise awareness of this project, in a way that goes beyond the mere availability of the text which (as you say) may already be accessed from many locations. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:07, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

All points well taken and am 100% in principled agreement with here... but I just don't see any evidence of that approach outpacing [my] the view that complete and accurate transcribed text, albeit wikified instead of pure HTML/XML, is still the only current "advantage" WS has over similar outlets. The benefits of producing high quality images in addition to the goal of providing complete and accurate transcriptions as near as possible to the original seem marginal at best (at least for me that is). Had we the traffic comparable to the kind enjoyed by Wikipedia, imho you'd be absolutely in the driver's seat here with your POV. But when auto-logins out pace main page views somewhere in the ratio of 10 to 1, I become more concerned with proving ourselves as useful to the potential reader/researcher than I am with rounding out what I consider the more aesthetic aspects of hosting works.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes the inclusion of a diagram or a map is indeed paramount to remaining true to the original content in our transcriptions; how blurry it is another matter altogether for me however. Again, there is no "right" answer regarding any of this, I'm just glad that we have regular contributors who care enough to voice such nuances in the first place. Prost. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:00, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

A poem with a reference which also contains a poem

Can someone please help and look at this PAGE? The poem at the end of the page contains a second reference which also contains a poem and I can’t seem to place the reference number to match the original. — Ineuw talk 03:28, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. Don't use poem tags is the simple answer. I'm sure there's a more complex one, but let's not go there. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Great - thanks for the advice and the help.— Ineuw talk 05:02, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Author: pages for "non-standard" author names

I have just (tentatively) created Author:Chu Hsi, with author index references at both Wikisource:Authors-Hs#Hs and Wikisource:Authors-Hs#Ch. Both? I suspect neither index is correct, as frankly my (non-existent) Chinese is not nearly good enough to even guess at this gentleman's proper surname. For a completely bewildering list of "translation-aliases", have a look at his VIAF entry (18 "preferred forms"; 197 "alternate name forms".)

Whilst I have no doubt whatsoever of the validity of this author, I am almost certain my efforts at creating an entry for him will all require re{vision,version,creation}. Can anybody please recommend a preferred approach to creating Author: pages for this class of person? MODCHK (talk) 01:10, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

In modern usage, his name is transcribed as Zhu Xi. The form Chu Hsi uses the older Wade-Giles transcription, which has been superceded in both China and the West by Pinyin. It's the same reason we now call Chungking Chongqing, or why Peking is now Beijing. I'd use the modern Pinyin form as the primary one for his Author page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:55, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks EncycloPetey. I encountered this name in a Giles work (Index:Gems of Chinese literature (1922).djvu) so this answer is not entirely surprising. However, my basic issue of the family-name-index assumptions of Author: space still remains an unaddressed open question… MODCHK (talk) 02:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

When I created Author:Deng Xiaoping, I set up the author template as:-

{{author
 | firstname    = Xiaoping
 | lastname     = Deng
 | invert_names = yes
 | last_initial = De

Deng is useful here because you can see the same sorting on various sister projects. In your case, I would say that Chu (or Zhu, if you prefer) is the surname and Hsi (Xi) is the personal name, so everything should be sorted by "Chu". - AdamBMorgan (talk) 03:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Umm... you're half right. Zhu (Chu) is the only part that is a name. Xi is an honorific title, and translates reasonably well as "Master", so it's actually not his given name. However, it is always included when discussing him, so it shouldn't be omitted either. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

In which case it works a little like the Saints, Monarchs and others with titles (eg. Author:Saint John) and still sorts by Zhu (Chu). Treating Hsi (Xi) as the first name is still probably the best way to do this. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:14, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions. I clearly have not followed them correctly, because now this author sorts in Category:Authors-Ch under "H." Can somebody please spot my apparent mistake? (Oh: forgot to swap the invert_names swapped names. D'oh!™) MODCHK (talk) 04:01, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

See my inserted reply above. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────┘
Thank you―both―for your advice and guidance. I think I've got it right now (even if for perhaps the wrong reasons) so if anything still looks wrong to anybody please feel free to fix it. This is clearly another exercise in learning. MODCHK (talk) 01:14, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

how do I make the page tag exclude a section?

Does anyone know how to use the page tag to exclude a particular section without breaking inline flow? See The Galaxy/Volume 24/Number 2/The Picture Season in London, where there is a line break at the end of the first page, caused by my exclusion of a footer which I have transcluded elsewhere. Hesperian 07:15, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Check it agian - I'm sure there is a better way (or a more correct way) to pull that off, but it escapes me at 4 in the morning.

Still; it worked! :) -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks; in hindsight that was pretty obvious, darn it. Hesperian 00:35, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Poems with numbering

This question should be asked in Ukrainian Wikisource basically, but as the community there is not really active, I'm seeking help here. Are there existing templates that might be used to achieve numbering like on this page? If not, what would be the best way to go? A table? --DixonD (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I suggest that you use {{shift left}} for the first line of each stanza and set the remaining lines in the usual way (i.e. don't use poem tags, but <br /> with the whole lot wrapped in {{block center}} templates). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion! It looks good here, however there is one inconvenience with this approach: when the numbering goes from one-digit to two-digit, we have to adjust intervals for shifting. --DixonD (talk) 08:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. You're right (of course) and a 1 takes less space than an 8. I've had a play myself with {{pline}}. Have a look at User:Beeswaxcandle/Sandbox4. Obviously for your purpose you would need to version this template and change the colour and size of the stanza numbers, but this might work. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, now it looks perfect. Thank you very much for help! --DixonD (talk) 11:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Img float and unwanted paragraph break

Please look at Page:An Introduction to the Study of Fishes.djvu/70. The first call to {{img float}} does not force the start of a new paragraph, but the second one does. I don't understand why this is happening, but it certainly is not desirable. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Addendum: This behavior does not occur when the page is transcluded into the Main namespace, even though it occurs in the Page namespace. Weird. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Requests for assistance

Justified text block template?

I am looking for a template which justifies a block of text along the lines of the templates {{Left|, or {{Right|. I am aware that there is a natural justification, but the one I was looking for is with two user specified parameters. width, and L, C, or R float.— Ineuw talk 00:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Before I misunderstand what you're looking for specifically, why don't you point to me to an example where this is needed by you. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

This image caption is a good example where the caption width shouldn't exceed the image width in the main namespace. As you can see, I've been using tables, but I thought that a template with an optional parameters would be quicker to define and more elegant. Now, I realize with all the possible user defined parameters, perhaps I should keep using a table, or at least a table imbedded in a template. — Ineuw talk 03:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

A couple of possibilities:

a) Use {{block center|text}}, where XXX=width of image. What you could do is then use {{justify}} on the text within. Much easier than fiddling with tables. See Mr. Punch's Book of Sports for examples of this.

Alternatively, use {{img float|file=filename|align=center|width=XXXpx|cap={{justify|text}}}} per example at User:Beeswaxcandle/Sandbox4. The advantage with the second possibility is that if one wants to float the image to the left or right of the page, one just changes the "align" field. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Beeswaxcandle, Thanks for pointing me to the {{justify}} template. Including your instruction, that's exactly what I wanted. — Ineuw talk 19:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

How to add a file for inline reference

Here is the file File:Affidavit AY from Phil Lib to SRF 1953.jpg - I tried to make it an inline citation but it didn't work. Any suggestions? Is this how without the brackets- wikisource-inline|File:Affidavit AY from Phil Lib to SRF 1953.jpg |Legal Transfer Affidavit of Autobiography of a Yogi from Philosophical Library to Self-Realization Fellowship Thank you!Red Rose 13 (talk) 13:10, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure if we can host this image here. I may be wrong though, mostly as I don't know the laws on something of this nature; did the Philosophical library make it public domain or something? Did you scan it yourself or maybe pull it from the Philosophical Library? - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:23, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

In what sense do you mean "inline citation"? Wikisource is not Wikipedia and I can't think why you would have to cite anything. If you mean an annotation, we have no templates for that (the draft policy should be around by the end of the month, however). In that case, and assuming a clearly identified annotated work, <ref>[[:File:Affidavit AY from Phil Lib to SRF 1953.jpg]]</ref> would be a start. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Problem logging in as User:Thekohser

Something strange is happening. (I am User:Thekohser here, in good standing on Wikisource.) When I try to sign into my account, I get the notice: Login error Incorrect password or confirmation code entered. Please try again. Even if I try to reset my password via e-mail, I get the same notice using the temporary password. This phenomenon is what happened when at one time my account was inappropriately placed under a "Global lock", which was decided by an out-of-process discussion between two administrators on another Wikimedia wiki. A Wikisource bureaucrat saw that the "lock" was inappropriate, and my User name was renamed, then named back again to "Thekohser", which had the nifty effect of undoing the global lock, at least as far as Wikisource is concerned. Is it possible that the new WMF "single user authentication" thingy they are working on had re-instituted the inane global lock on my account? I ask if someone with the necessary tools could please look into this matter, and then notify me here (in public) and/or via private e-mail (my user name, at gmail). Note, this problem is also happening on (for example) Wikimedia Commons, which is another project where I am in good standing and the global lock was worked around. -- 2001:558:1400:10:79C9:1DF9:AC6D:32BB 17:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC) (as, Thekohser)

Hmmm.... I wonder if any of this applies to you - please see Wikisource:Scriptorium#.5Ben.5D_Change_to_wiki_account_system_and_account_renaming and touch back here. -- George Orwell III (talk) 19:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I can't see anything that would be causing this. The block action page and the blocklist confirm there is a global lock but no local block. You probably need a bureaucrat, or someone from meta, to have a look. The single user login changes were my first thought too but as the SUL account was already around I don't think it should have made a difference; all previous notices were about potential conflicts between non-SUL accounts. NB: Special:CentralAuth/Thekohser and Commons:Special:BlockList/Thekohser say you are explicitly blocked on Commons, however. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Please weigh in at Meta with your opinion. -- 2001:558:1400:10:AC59:E4DF:6A5C:CD23 19:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC) (as, Thekohser)

To note that accounts of the same name, and email address have been unified if they could be, and therefore the global lock that had been applied to the account has now been reapplied by the system. Thekohser has made a request to have their global account unlocked. That said, I am not certain that an encouragement for comment is exactly how a process that we encourage. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

<page index> doesn't recognise the existing .djvu source

Created QST March 1916 to transclude this Index:March 1916 QST.djvu, but it reports that there is no such index. Can someone please let me know what I am doing wrong? — Ineuw talk 11:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Needed to drop the Index: namespace-prefix part. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:50, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks GO3.— Ineuw talk 12:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

References appear at the top of the page

Proofread this page and the references show up at the top of the page. Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong? — Ineuw talk 18:31, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Well that one beat me. I know the "problem" is that there is no place for the ref list to be "created" other than at the top where the phoney paragraph spacer (or in this case the NOP) usually goes. I can't get it load after the table no matter how much spacing/padding/line-breaks I added after the closing table tag in the bottom noinclude section.

The current Page: might not be "pretty to look at" this way but its the mainspace transclusion that should really matter (still, I'm wondering if anybody else can come up with a fix). Sorry. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks GO3. No matter, I am curious where this will end up when it's transcluded. :-).— Ineuw talk 21:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Does this produce the effect you wanted? I don't entirely know why the trick works (and hope it is not limited to my browser.) MODCHK (talk) 22:58, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Kewl! It works because you're placing the ref-list in its own table - which is just fine in this case. I don't know how that additional NOP will affect the final transclusion of the entire span of tables though (might not affect anything at all - fingers crossed). -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree (regarding the citations going inside the table.) However what I don't really understand is why the lower NOP gets chosen preferentially. Regarding transclusion the noincludes ought to rule it out of contention... MODCHK (talk) 00:20, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

My bad - thought the 2nd NOP was outside the bottom no-include.

Anyway if you look now you'll see the wikicode's urge to auto close table-cell/table-row wiki-markups is easily defeated if straight HTML tags are substituted at the key "boundary points" (no need for 2nd NOP then). The entire header/footer no-include approach is more trouble than its worth and this instance shows why the entire premise needs a serious re-work. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:27, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Eep. I won't say that isn't clever… and it certainly works… but it would be a brave person would come up with that solution up-front and expect it not to break the parser. In fact, I'm not too sure you'd always get away with mixing wikicode and pure HTML like that. I suspect coding the lot in raw HTML might be the safest/most comprehensible way—in which case what is mediawiki really doing for us other than supplying the editor? MODCHK (talk) 01:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Right - just illustrating a point there & not recommending Users: follow my variant at all - the point was to make clear the 2nd NOP was not really the solution but an acceptable work-around. In the real world, the closing table-cell (/TD) tag is understood (& applied) if the next element detected is either the closing table-row (/TR) tag or another opening table-cell (TD) tag but that cannot hold true in the wikiworld. Opening/closing tags are replaced with a single set of symbols. In order to fulfill this "double duty", the auto-generation of closing tags is put before any actual need' for such termination (& when to apply it) - which makes trying to align the end of a table-row found before one page's non-included footer section with the next page's header & opening of a new row one big headache more often than not. The Wiki mark-up just wasn't designed with Wikisource's "mission" in mind and the approach to building HTML tables clearly reflects that. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:24, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

┌──────────────────────────┘
Umm, why this level of complexity? Just use MODCHK's trick of putting a {{nop}} in the footer before the |}. See Page:The Campaign of the Jungle.djvu/15 for an example. An alternative is to leave a blank line after the last |- in the body and another before the |} in the footer. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Need help getting scans

Hi! I am trying to get this magazine, called "The Russian Review" from Hathi Trust, but it only allows me to get it page by page (because my IP address is not in US, I presume). Please, somebody, upload it to the Commons, djvu preferred, I am keen to transcript few very rare works from it. The whole lot is three volumes approx. 300 pages each. The thing is 100% kosher, first published in USA in 1916-1917, copyright not renewed. Thank you a lot!!! Captain Nemo (talk) 02:39, 12 September 2013 (UTC).

Byrd speech as actually spoken

I'm not familiar with the policies around here regarding recorded vs. published speeches (and Portal:Speeches wasn't very helpful in this regard), so I'm asking here: what happens when the published version of a speech differs from the recorded version of it? To be specific, I just compared our text of Senator Robert Byrd's "The Arrogance of Power" speech (given before the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq) to YouTube video(s) of the speech recorded off of C-SPAN2, and I found many differences. In such a case, do we ignore the words that were actually spoken and go with the (presumably) "official" written version? Do we use the published version and note where different words were spoken in footnotes? In in-line brackets? Do we host both versions separately (e.g., by treating the C-SPAN broadcast as a separate "publication")? (See also my talk page post at Talk:The Arrogance of Power#Spoken version.) - dcljr (talk) 10:04, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we have a policy on this. Hosting both separately seems like the best solution (with links between them in the headers). If the recording is available, it would be good to add that too, although the copyright presumably belongs to C-SPAN in this case. It should still be listed as the source so it can be verified if/when necessary. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Sigh... OK, now my talk page comment is at Talk:America's Image in the World#Spoken version. I think the former page should have been left as a redirect. But whatever. - dcljr (talk) 23:30, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Your previous comments are preserved on the new talk-page and you beat me to updating that new link here is all that has happened. The re-direct that really matters, the one in mainspace, was preserved just fine. We seem to be in the old time warp thing where your comments lead my actions and vise versa.... let's take a breath an re-examine everything moving forward.

(and YES I will be doing the same to McCain's response if you can wait just a bit longer. TIA.) -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

You shouldn't find a policy on this - don't need one - in this case because all Remarks formally recognized then made on the floor of the United States Senate are dutifully recorded and diligently transcribed AS GIVEN into the official Congressional Record. What we "had" been hosting all this time, and frequently is the case around here before this patriot came along & noticed the difference, is most likely the "hand-out" or press release versions of the prepared remarks provided to/for/by third-parties for any number of the usual [and innocent] reasons. Versions like this are rarely if ever exactly as actually spoken - even when they originate from the person that made the remarks themselves (nobody goes back and amends their own prepared speech to reflect any changes that might have occurred when it was given do they? Nope.)

Stuff like this is why I personally get frustrated with my fellow countrymen and plays a part in the ever growing misinformation stupidization (not a real word) of the American voting population in general. Coupled with the commercialization of what was once a Free and Reliable press here in the U.S., instances like this, where the "reported" content does not match the actual content (or worse - becomes parsed), have been increasing at an exponential rate for more than a decade now. I cannot stress enough how critical it is to verify; then trust (screw Reagan too) when it comes to content of this nature generated in the post cable-news era - You Just Can't Trust Any of It at First Glance.

While this instance seems to be the innocent tweaking of a Senator's prepared remarks while being given on the floor of the Senate followed by the poor/lazy reporting on the part of the news media culminating with us hosting an inaccurate transcription of those remarks, there are far more devious and deceitful examples of 'report what we want you to report and not what was actually said' so being diligent on the sourcing of such content absolves en.WS of unwittingly playing any role in perpetuating such constructed misdirection (in addition; C-SPAN is neat and nice to have around to call upon as a reference source but the Congressional Record has the additional benefits of being a lawfully recognized source in any U.S. court of law (in in other words 'is evidence' if need be) not to mention a percentage of your taxes makes it yours to begin with, so why bother injecting 3rd party middle-middlemen into the equation if you don't have to?).

Nobody should care that Salon.com got the transcription wrong or that Sen. Byrd's staff is just as lazy as Salon's reporters were - It should be no surprise to anyone by now that both politicians and the media work together at times and/or conspire against each other at times with the ultimate goal to secure more votes on the one hand and obtain higher ratings for the other. Find something just as erroneous or worse in the official, tax-payer funded, non-partisan Congressional Record and then you should start to be concerned (or even better - you have uncovered a real conspiracy!) -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Now who needs to "take a breath"? [w] Anyway, thank you for replacing the text with a more reliable version. I take from your description of remarks in the CR as having been "dutifully recorded and diligently transcribed AS GIVEN" that the CR is supposed to be an accurate record of what was actually said. Unfortunately, they still didn't get it completely right, as you can verify by simply listening to the C-SPAN2 recording(s). But... it is a lot closer than what we had there before — and, as you point out, the version in the CR is treated as if it is correct, so I suppose that's what we'll end up doing, as well (much as Wikipedia policy can favor incorrect information from "reliable sources" over correct information, in some cases). - dcljr (talk) 05:30, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

For the record (no pun intended), at Talk:America's Image in the World#Spoken version I have drawn up a table detailing the differences between what was published in the Congressional Record and what Byrd actually said (AFAICT) in the C-SPAN2 recordings on YouTube. This particular issue can be discussed further on that page (although note that I disagree with George's judgment that we don't need a policy to cover this sort of thing, since clearly the CR can be wrong — and significantly so, in some cases — about what was said on the Senate [or House] floor — and that more general point obviously can be discussed further here, if desired). - dcljr (talk) 07:53, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Its not a matter of discovering something transcribed is not accurate but a matter of how do we host something like that? Granted, even the audio & video generated by a Federal employee during the course of their official duties are probably exempt from being copyrighted just like any other government document but we'd need to steal a copy from someone and make it our own & then put it up on Commons I suppose. Maybe then it would make sense to provide another text transcript in addition to the existing Congressional Record version - otherwise I just don't see the point of adding to what would amount to another copy & paste where it's verification depends on something that is hosted elsewhere. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:42, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

C-SPAN actually provides a voluminous digital archive of their video content, including (apparently) all of their coverage of House and Senate proceedings. Video of Byrd's 2003 speech is still available on their website (starting at 06:08:29), and presumably will continue to be so into the foreseeable future (hence, we can link to it as a source). I assume the same could be said of several other similar speeches we have around here (McCain's response to Byrd's speech, of course, but also any other speech made on the floor of the House or Senate in the last however-many years). Therefore, this issue doesn't boil down to whether we can host a local copy of such a video but instead whether we will accept such a video per se as a source. (Obviously we shouldn't rely on second-hand copies on YouTube as a matter of policy — that's just what I had to work with in this particular instance, before I found C-SPAN's archive.) Simply put: I think our text of a speech should reflect as closely as possible what was actually said during that speech. In the past, this meant using a printed transcript published after the fact; today it should mean using a "live recording" when it's available. Our policies and guidelines are currently heavily skewed toward printed sources, for obvious reasons. I guess we have to decide whether our purpose in providing texts of speeches is to accurately reflect a printed version of the speech or the speech itself. - dcljr (talk) 02:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

C-SPAN provides such speeches on a per-the-person-speaking basis as well as in the context of an entire session (as was mentioned above). So if one visits Byrd's bio page on C-SPAN, they would have found the speech in question as a stand-alone clip as well.

Nevertheless, the issue is more about copyright/access and what they allow us to host rather than anything else First. Even following the best interpretation of C-SPAN's re-use policies, its still not as crystal clear as operating directly under Title 17's copyright exclusion for Federal generated works.

Second comes the general accepted practice that transcriptions based upon video or audio should be annotated with intervals indicating the timestamps of the beginning, the passage of time covering the content, and the ending.

These two reasons are basically why the preference has been to go with the copyright-free GPO provided text sources over audio or video -- its just a lot easier and less problematic at the end of the day. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

C-SPAN's copyright notice clearly states that "Video coverage of the debates originating from the chambers of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate is in the public domain and as such, may be used without restriction or attribution." So that would appear to be the end of that argument. By my reading (although IANAL), this would even allow us to actually upload their video of Hyde's speech (or, indeed, even the full day's coverage, if we wanted to) to Commons. However, I am not recommending that we do this. We don't have to: we just need to link to it. Now, since C-SPAN doesn't claim a copyright to the video itself, how could they possibly claim copyright to the content of a transcript of the video — even complete with timestamps? Unless I've missed something very important, I don't see how either of your concerns are actual problems. As for your final "easier" remark: I would hope that we would value accuracy over expediency (something I actually almost included in my previous comment, but took out before I posted it). - dcljr (talk) 23:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Nothing here is an issue; merely an explaination of why things have developed the way they have. It still boils down to hosting the video in addition to its transcription. Currently we try to host the scans in addition to the transcription of those scans. And all I've tried to rebuke so far is your unfair claim we are being intentionally biased towards text when the truth is we are biased to hosting the [scans of] the original in addition to the transcription/proofreading of it. Text was/is just easier to manipulate and that is why it became more popular than other formats.

You can link to C-SPAN all you like (& fwiw... I link to the Federal Register for Executive Orders much the same way you describe linking to C-SPAN but I also provide scans of the Annual Code of Federal Regulations - Title 3 to back the transcriptions, if need be, so there is still a difference in standards of validation between your approach and the approach practiced by the vast majority of contributors to date) - nobody is saying you can't do what it is your saying. And, all I'm saying is without hosting the source, be it a scan or a video, not hosting the source here locally (i.e. on Commons) amounts to nothing different than any other copy and paste of unsourced content to WS is. I didn't promote that perception - the reading traffic to date has (but I'm not as "lazy" as most visitors are; I actually follow the linked external sources). Your mileage may vary. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

George is correct to encourage you to have the original source hosted in the WMF family. While not currently policy, there is a strong tendency to dis-value content without verifiable sources. Should C-span no longer make the source available there is potential for your work to be deleted in the future. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Pagelist for a book with two page numbers on each page

Could anybody help me to fill in the "pagelist" parameter for this index page? The problem is that each page has two columns and each column has its separate page number. --DixonD (talk) 14:50, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

To me it looks OK, I would have done the same.--Mpaa (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

HathiTrust

Does anybody has access to HathiTrust? I've found some books there that are certainly in public domain in US and the country of origin, but I cannot download them from there as I'm not affiliated with any partner institution. --DixonD (talk) 14:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Customisation of the vector toolbar

Hello, I started to import this book which containes some special characters. To help me, I decided to add a tab to my vector toolbar with this code that I call from common.js. The first time I added this code, it worked perfectly but the day after, it did not work anymore. To you have any idea why? And could you help me to fix it? Thanks in advance. Pamputt (talk) 07:29, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I found the problem. It was stupid... Pamputt (talk) 18:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Kubla Khan contributor note

What's going on with the first note on the Kubla Khan page? I was about to delete it because it appeared empty, yet there is text there. The second note seems to be displaying correctly, but not this one. I've looked through the wikitext and it looks right, so I'm not sure what's wrong. Matt Deres (talk) 15:27, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. The problem was caused by the colon used to indent the last line of the refnote. Replaced it with {{gap}}. —Clockery Fairfield (talk) 15:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Matt Deres (talk) 18:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Agriculture, farm tractors from beginning to present

Agriculture, farm tractors from beginning to present. How they have affected our culture through the years.

I am seeking some information as part of a school project. I am looking for information on antique farm tractors that date back from the beginning ( the first one produced) to present day. I would like for the information to cover, John Deere, Massey-Ferguson and New Holland brands.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.230.13.36 (talk)

We don't have much about agriculture on this project at the moment. It's probably better to ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous instead. They should be able to help more. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

OTRS issue?

re: [3]

I tried sending the proper copyright permissions but the address failed. What address can I use to get you the proper authority? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.9.244.37 (talk)

The deletion says it was per a CopyVio ruling on Commons for source file, in that case the correct email would be to contact commons at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org once the works are restored there, they can be considered for restoration here by posting a request at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations, be sure to read Wikisource:What Wikisource includes to see if the content is appropriate for this site before requesting restoration. Jeepday (talk) 13:09, 14 July 2013 (UTC)