Wikisource talk:Community collaboration

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
archived suggestions
  • 11 British
  • 9 American
  • 4 French
  • 3 Russian
  • 3 German
  • 2 Canadian
  • 2 Persian
  • 2 Swiss
  • 1 Italian
  • 1 Irish
  • 1 Indian
  • 1 Roman
  • 1 Ethiopian
  • 1 Greek
  • 1 Dane
  • 1 Alsatian
  • 1 Serbian
  • 1 Scottish
  • 11 Authors
  • 8 Politicians
  • 5 Philosophers
  • 4 Poets
  • 3 Dramatists
  • 3 Inventors
  • 2 Explorers
  • 2 Soldiers
  • 2 Prophets
  • 2 Astronomers
  • 1 Humanitarian
  • 1 Psychiatrist
  • 1 Missionary

The behind the scenes choosing of potential collaborations - please exercise some restraint and demonstrate common sense. If an author really only wrote two books, or has few public domain texts - it might be better for you to focus on the improvement yourself, rather than tying up a handful of members for a week.

Please include reasons why you believe this author deserves special attention, perhaps wiki-linking to important works by the author. Providing a few potential sources of online text grabs wouldn't hurt your chances either.

Works will be listed to the growing list of waiting Collaborations, assuming that one or two other people support the addition of the author, and there are no complaints from others about the notability, texts or otherwise of the author.

You may consider using Category:Authors with no works as a springboard for ideas.

Possibles for slow weeks[edit]

  • Author:Thomas Wyatt (1503–1542), British poet in the service of Author:Henry VIII.
  • w:Isaac Brock, General who led British-Canadian forces during the w:War of 1812, there's a "bit" of his stuff online, though we could bring ourselves to the forefront, collecting it all. Also found some offline sources I'd be willing to parse for it if necessary.
Author:Isaac Brock - an person relating to Canada would be good. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


A few high profile authors relating to Australia that can be expanded:

John Vandenberg 03:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice selection, I think Cook seems like the most obvious choice if we're trying to keep COTW as "famous people from whom we're ashamed to not have more works", you happen to know if anything exists other than his diary/memoir however? If you can find evidence that there's some letters or newspaper articles (&c, &c) out there, even if they're not online - just that they exist, then I fully support making him next week's COTW. Any other opinions/thoughts? unsigned comment by Sherurcij (talk) 02:13, 15 August 2007.
For works by Cook written in his lifetime, Google Books has a few, with A voyage towards the north pole: undertaken by His Majesty's command... being full view. worldcat shows others with the same criteria. has a number of works about Cook, as does Google Full View Books. And letters are easy to locate [3] [4][5] [6][7], but I wouldnt know where to look for newspaper articles from that era. As Banks and Cook are closely related subjects, picking Cook will give us material for the Banks author page. John Vandenberg 05:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Alright, assuming there are no complaints, we'll use Cook then on the 20th. Lawson already has "enough" existing articles so as not to be shameful, and I'm not sure if the other two reach the same sort of "fame" as Cook...who names their kid "Banjo" anyhow? :P Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Henry Ford 09:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

We have picked one Brit who ventured across the seas, but nary a one who stayed! It is time for an Australian! w:Adam Lindsay Gordon is currently missing here. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia promotion[edit]

Wikipedia loves talk tags! So, I have tagged the James Cook talk page, and suggested something similar be added to the Australia Portal (see w:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Australia#Wikisource_advertising) in the hope to promote Wikisource collaboration on Wikipedia. Any objections to this? John Vandenberg 05:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think this is a great idea! Advertising like this might help us get more sources for our current collaborations as well as maybe lure some Wikipedians to stay around for a while as well.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 05:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Excellent idea! Might also be a good idea to just add a note to the talk page pointing at it, in case people scroll past templates without reading them, just saying "It's the COTW, we'd appreciate if you could help us find and add texts" or somesuch. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Captain Cook 06:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
It's been picked up and placed on the Australia noticeboard. John Vandenberg 06:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


As we have now approved the {{Author-PD-none}} proposal, it would be nice if we could focus on one of these author pages in order to use it as a poster child. If we can do one page worth ranting about in the next few weeks, we can mention it in our announcement of the change of English Wikisource scope. John Vandenberg 04:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC) is changing its scope? Could you point me to the discussion about that, as I'd like to read up on it so that I know what's (sort of) going on? Thanks.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 00:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
WS:S#Author-PD-none John Vandenberg 01:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I see. Thanks.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 01:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


Would you consider a category? Like Category:1899 works, Category:Collections of essays, Category:History of the United States, or something similar? —Quadell (talk / swapmeet) 00:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you know of an easy way of finding works by publication date? I'd definitely support something like "Collections of essays" or "History of the United States" (I at least have numerous resources at hand for these sorts of things). In general, though, I think this would be a great idea.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 01:10, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
It is difficult to track the collaboration results on a category. That said, we could create a topical index for "Collections of essays" and "History of the United States". My preference would be for the latter, as it is very easy to find works that fit into that LCC. John Vandenberg (chat) 04:11, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I love using the category structure as much as possible, but you're right, a before-and-after listing would be hard. A few other good suggestions of important authors that need work: Author:Victor Hugo, Author:D. H. Lawrence, Author:Honoré de Balzac, and (oh my god) Author:Aeschylus. —Quadell (talk / swapmeet) 04:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Hugo and Lawrence already have a few works - and wow, I honestly thought we'd already done Balzac, can't believe we haven't. He and Aeschylus both make sense to me. I think categories would be too difficult, but something like "History of the United States" could easily become an index, and thus featured. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Sabine Baring-Gould 04:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

And I've just discovered Author:Sheridan Le Fanu, too, and wow! I'd nominate him, but I'm afraid his page may not be stubby enough by the time I'm done with him. Face-devil-grin.svgQuadell (talk / swapmeet) 18:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Per Q's suggestions, first person to choose between Author:Honoré de Balzac, and Author:Aeschylus wins. Which would be better for this week? Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Augustus John Cuthbert Hare 19:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I saw go for de Balzac.  :D —Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Another possibility[edit]

I suggest at some point, if anyone's looking for another possibility for CotW other than adding the works of an individual person, that we add travel books. The Library of Congress has a massive collection of these books and I find them quite interesting.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I think "travel books", separate from any given author, would still be a good idea. —Quadell (talk / swapmeet) 18:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

World War I poetry[edit]

I have been working on World War I poetry and could use some help. Danny 19:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


I added this note to the English Wikipedia. This would probably be a good idea in the future. Who knows, it might drag more Wikipedians in. —Quadell (talk / swapmeet) 18:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Ha! I should learn to read above before I leap. I've now switched the notice to use the nifty template. —Quadell (talk / swapmeet) 18:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


If we make a significant start to collate these documents, it seems likely that there will be many hands arriving to finish the project. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm up for it, but 11,000 is huge! - Mtmelendez 13:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
It should keep us busy :-) Glad to hear you are keen. It might be a week or two before we start on this project. Lets get the ground work in order, and promote the collaboration project. If we get one or two more people interested, it will start sooner rather than latter. This is the press release, and here are the actual documents in PDF format. To prepare for the project, we need to obtained those PDF files, convert them to DJVU files using Any2DjVu, and upload them to the Wikimedia Commons project. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I'll try out a few uploads to get the hang of it. I just finished the GWB radio addresses, so I'll dedicate some time to these new documents. - Mtmelendez 14:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Would it make more sense to see who the US Democratic nominee is first, then plan on using CotW to get both the Republican and Democrat nominee's texts listed? I'd hate to turn down Obama in a few weeks "because we just had Bush and Hillary", etc. I think I'd rather say "Let's make a plan to feature either Obama or Clinton, whichever one wins the nomination, the week they are announced". We can either do McCain the following week, or we could try to do both in one week. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Aeschylus 22:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
While we wait for the US Democratic nominee to be decided, we could focus on Author:John McCain, who is presumptive nominee for the Republicans. We only have four of his speeches. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


I am nominating Seneca the Younger for a 'Collaboration Week' candidate, forasmuch as his page is scant in works and rather deprived of sufficient formatting (save, On the Shortness of Life, which is commendable). -- Grammaticus 13:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice find, but we just did Aeschylus a week ago. I'd argue for more diverse selection, although we may return to ancient authors in a few weeks. - Mtmelendez 03:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

John Masefield[edit]

I would like to nominate John Masefield. He is a widely anthologised poet, and was the British Poet Laureate, yet he only has three poems on here.--Cato 19:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

As Cato presumably knows, I'm a great fan of John Masefield and uploaded two of his three poems here. But we've had plenty of British authors.--Poetlister 12:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Japanese literature[edit]

Wikisource:Japan and Category:Works originally in Japanese are virtually empty. We could either tackle this by finding an Japanese author whose works have been translated, taking a religious angle and working on Wikisource:Shinto, or by using Wikisource:Japan as the focal point of a CotW. John Vandenberg (chat) 17:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


So if we're to get a Canadian in, can I suggest the following schedule for the next couple weeks?

It'll give us a nice mix of politicians, poets, psychologists, theologists and such, as well as a smattering of nationalisties. Also, once the US Democratic candidate is chosen, we'll do a week where we concentrate on the two US presidential candidates so we're doing our civic duty to keep the world informed! :) Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Cookbooks 20:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Yay to Percival Lowell. I wrote the Wikiquote article.--Poetlister 21:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
If you are seeking for another prospective candidate, I would certainly suggest John Dryden. -- Grammaticus 15:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
No objection, though I'd give him lower priority than Masefield.--Poetlister 16:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Masfield may be PD in the US, but it certainly isn't in the UK, Yet... ShakespeareFan00 10:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
What about some of the older English Poets, like for example Coleridge? ShakespeareFan00 10:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I thought we abided by American copyright law here. Nobody's objected to the poems we have so far (all published well before 1923). Yes, there are lots of older poets to be done.--Poetlister 21:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Author:Samuel Taylor Coleridge is reasonably well covered, although it did, and probably still does, neglect to mention a few of his important works. The point is that this doesnt appear to be an area where significant growth can be achieved by working on it as a group. John Vandenberg (chat) 22:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm working on Coleridge.--Poetlister 12:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Poets are generally good because it only takes ten minutes to find and add a poem, but as Jay said, we should focus on poets where we don't currently have more than two or three works. And if we can find a non-American, non-British, non-Australian, non-Russian poet, even better! Go find a Rhodesian poet with Public Domain translations! ;) Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: William Lyon Mackenzie King 00:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

ANy votes on whether to go with Wikisource:Confucianism or Wikisource:Shinto tomorrow? Personally I think the former, as I think it will yield more "writings of...", rather than "scholarly analyses". Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: William Lyon Mackenzie King 20:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikisource:Confucianism is the easier of the two. I'm not sold on Shinto for a topic; I think we should coordinate with before selecting which angle to take in order to increase our coverage Japanese literature. John Vandenberg (chat) 21:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Sherucij, perhaps Hafez would be an agreeable candidate for non-Anglo, &c. poesy? For it appears that this celebrated poet is even yet to have an article bestowed. I am certain that a number of translations, many predating the twentieth century (particularly, the Divan), are extant in the English tongue. To wit, there is a certain translation by one, H. Bicknell, about whom I know nothing; other than I own a translation by his hand (dating 1900). -- Grammaticus 17:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
We need more Arabs, less Persians - lol. But I agree, Hafez seems like a good choice for a non-Anglo author, better than Ibn Arabi (and we don't want two more Persian Sufis in such close following), so I'll replace Ibn Arabi on our schedule with Hafez, pending any other opinions or suggestions. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Wikisource:Confucianism 17:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Rhodesian: Arthur Shearly Cripps, though there may be copyright issues.--Poetlister 20:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

So are there copyright concerns about Masefield? Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Percival Lowell 20:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

If we go by the usual American rules, many of his poems (including the ones uploaded so far) were published before 1923 so should be OK. However, his later poetry and his novels and plays are presumably still in copyright. If we go by British rules, all of his work is still copyright as only he died about 40 years ago.--Poetlister 15:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


Was going to do Seneca, but saw Grammaticus had gone inactive over the summer. Now thinking something from Wikisource:Religious texts or Wikisource:Wars would be a nice choice - somebody want to choose a favourite under-represented war or religion? Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Davy Crockett 23:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Definitely wars; WWI poetry especially, to help us participate in WS:S#Wiki_Campus_Radio_-_Nov_11th_-Armistice_Day. --John Vandenberg (chat) 01:41, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Author:John McCrae it is then! We can get up a bunch of his poems and letters, to supplement the wealth we have by Owen and Sassoon! :) Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Davy Crockett 02:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Author:John Ruskin[edit]


I would like to proposed John Ruskin, an English art critic and social critic, as well as an author, poet and artist. I already improved his page on Commons: commons:John Ruskin. ;o) Yann (talk) 16:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I do get to grumble that it's meant to improve the collections of people we have zero/few works from, not 19 :P Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:John McCrae 05:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed: Author:Harvey Milk[edit]

This will likely be on the Main Page on 27 November 2008. Would be nice to have a cross-project collaboration effort. Cirt (talk) 19:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I assume his only works would be speeches, would there be some loophole that allows us to avoid the Coretta King controversy and undoubtedly say they are all public domain? He seems a bit recent. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: e. e. cummings‎. 20:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Moni3 would know best, she worked on bringing the article w:Harvey Milk to FA. Cirt (talk) 20:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I've never done anything like this on Wikisource. Not sure what to do or tell you. What would you like? You can leave me messages on my talk page on Wikipedia. - Moni3 -- 20:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I'll try to find some stuff doing a bit of my own research and check back here to see if it checks out for inclusion. But don't worry about it - it doesn't seem fodder for a big collaboration drive at this point. Cirt (talk) 03:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
It is a bit too late for us to be involved before the 27th. We would need a few weeks notice, to find sources and related texts, and verify copyright status. But, fill up the author page and its talk page with any works that might be of interest, and we'll slot it in if there is a sizeable amount of work ready to be tackled. John Vandenberg (chat) 06:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
No worries. Like I said, I will try to just slowly work on this one over time for now. Cirt (talk) 15:56, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Author:Joseph McCabe[edit]

This freethinker wrote, translated, and collaborated on hundreds of books, and we have one work he translated. There's about twenty or thirty proofread texts on the internet that could easily be copied over, and many more on Psychless 20:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Charles Darwin b.12 Feb 1809[edit]

I would like to see us work on Charles Darwin in time for the anniversary of his 200th birthday which is a couple of weeks away. I know that it is short notice, however, it could be a useful target with some publicity surely to take place on or around the day. -- billinghurst (talk) 05:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


Next: Author:Joseph McCabe Yes check.svg Done
After: Author:Romain Rolland Yes check.svg Done

Author:Jean Jaurès[edit]

Famous French politician, Jean Jaurès was born in 1859, so 2009 is his 150th birthday. So I proposed we should have this author sometimes this year, preferably September 2009. Yann (talk) 13:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Can I suggest that we use this as the next CotW, and the anniversary date was 3 Sep. -- billinghurst (talk) 12:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Author:Carl Linnaeus[edit]

It seems that the English Wikisource has none of his works in translation at all. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC) show these works about with these work by. -- billinghurst (talk) 05:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Next week?[edit]

Author:Dorothy Day or Author:Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din? Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:David Livingstone. 03:59, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

My vote goes to Author:Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din there are a ton of great works and they would make a great CotW. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 19:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Disney Movie CotW Idea[edit]

Guys, I had a unique idea for the next CotW. Why don't we do a CotW of works that became Disney movies? Some examples (even though we might have some of these) include Snow White, Cinderella, Pinocchio, etc. What do you guys think? Do we have enough public domain texts to add? I know we are missing Snow White and I will probably add that. Let me know what you think. Thanks. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 03:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a neat portal idea. I think we should do it. ;-) John Vandenberg (chat) 18:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
The trouble is, which version do we use? Snow White is a folk story collected by the Brothers Grimm, but do we use their version or one of the innumerable different ones published since? Cinderella is even worse, as the Brothers Grimm version differs greatly from an earlier version published by Perrault.--Longfellow (talk) 12:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
If it is published, we can provide it, and do. We don't have to choose which Snow-white, Cinderella or other version we add, and it is not what libraries do, the decisions and discussion about the choice and relationship of these pages is discussed at their articles at wikipedia. Note that they have one page for the subject or topic, we potentially have many pages with similar titles. cygnis insignis 22:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done John Vandenberg (chat) 04:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Columbus[edit]

I don't know if you guys are interested in suggestions from people that don't participate here and have no intention of doing so, but I'm having great difficulty getting my head around the fact that Author:Christopher Columbus is a red-link [at least it was when I wrote this. Hesperian 00:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)]. A Google Books search indicates several public domain translations of his journals / narratives / log; plus what has been written about him could fill a library. Though I'm tempted to create the page myself, I wouldn't do it justice. This warrants a collaborative effort. Hesperian 13:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Niccolò Machiavelli[edit]

I have been working on his page myself now for some time. But I could really need some help in adding more of his works. There is quite a lot of texts (and many interesting translations from different time periods) to be found online.--The Illusional Ministry (talk) 16:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice idea. Is there any time that is better than any other for this to run. billinghurst (talk) 23:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know there are now jubilees or such coming up, so I don't think any time would be better then any other. --The Illusional Ministry (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Author:Paul Heyse[edit]

Paul Johann Ludwig von Heyse won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1910. A centennial recognition?Ingram (talk) 22:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Is next week OK? John Vandenberg (chat) 18:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Author:Charlotte Marie Mason[edit]

Author:Charlotte Marie Mason has a lot of online redlinks. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Thomas Carlyle. 17:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done May 2010 — billinghurst sDrewth 13:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Domesday survey[edit]

I propose we have a CotW for this portal. See User talk:John Vandenberg/Archive/2009-2010#Domesday_Book for background. John Vandenberg (chat) 09:24, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Support and feel that we should uphold our tradition of a looooong extended week. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:22, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Carried without dissent ;-) John Vandenberg (chat) 00:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Classical Chinese Literature[edit]

There aren't many complete translations of classical Chinese works. There are some works that are complete or nearly complete for Confucius, but many others, such as the Classics, Zhuangzi, Mencius, and Mo Zi are either largely empty or non-existent. I am currently working on translating Mo Zi into English, and I hope that at least a few people can get involved to help translate that text as efficiently as possible. O.J.S. (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. I'd be interested in getting this one going at some point. Perhaps we could lay a nice framework before making it a CotW, get the Portals set up and nicely arranged ready for population and so on. I'll come back to this proposal soon with more ideas, I'm a little busy right now. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 00:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Semi-automated proposal to generate activity.[edit]

As this collaboration is going nowhere in particular beyond being a static place, so I propose that a list of 52 authors (or portals) be generated and I will code it so that a new one is rotated into place. Not particularly exciting, however, better than the nothingness that happens in this space and stops the project, and the site, looking like it is moribund. Happy for suggestions for authors, or alternative to be prepared and I will get around to it in the coming days. Billinghurst (talk) 13:12, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Go forth and automate. Jeepday (talk) 22:17, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
How about for a start that we just call this Wikisource:Collaboration or Wikisource:Collaboration time or similar, and not be specific with a period. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
The name "Wikisource:Collaboration" or maybe "Current Collaboration" sounds good to me. I support changing it, as CotW makes the front page look stagnant when it runs for months on end. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 01:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


I propose Author:Constantine. 18:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Support. Plenty of works to add here. However, I would like to suggest that as many works as possibly are added as parts of larger works, backed by scans. For example Letter to Chrestus of Syracuse is part of Index:Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus, 1842.djvu (although the translation is not the same). While the Constantine-related percentage of these encylopaedic works may be small, it acts as a convenient "anchor" to get these works onto Wikisource. So, while individually good, this can help us to expand our collection of Early Christian compendiums. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 22:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


I have just set up WikiProject NARA to co-ordinate the addition of works from NARA to the Wikisource collection. Since Dominic is currently on the ground at NARA, I think that we would benefit both WS:NARA and Wikisource by presenting this project as a CotW, thus getting it front-page exposure without interfering with PotM. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 04:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

No brainer IMNSHO. Just do it. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
OK, changing it over now. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 03:26, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Ethiopian Orthodox Bible[edit]

I've seen that the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible has a lot of books that are not included in any other version of the Bible. It would be good to make a compendium on the books they include as opposed to the other versions. --Stidmatt (talk) 03:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

That seems like a good discussion point for Wikisource:WikiProject Bible. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:16, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Index:The Army and Navy Hymnal.djvu[edit]

This has sat around for a while...

It would be nice given that there a enough hints about the typesetting in it already if an effort was made to get this proof-read and typeset before Easter? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Author:Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)[edit]

Considering his stature in English literature, criticism, and wit, I was shocked to see how little we had for this author. We do have a few works about him, but we're lacking most of his works, and what little we do have is woefully incomplete. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Land Mollusca of North America (north of Mexico)[edit]

This is one of the most important works about North American land snails/slugs, and seeing that it has over 1000 pages, I think it would be suitable for a community collaboration. Its source is the Hathi Trust Catalog (link), where you can find other works by him.

Alternatively, the collaboration could be about all of Pilsbry's PD works. There are other works by him on (Although not this particular monograph).--Frglz (talk) 18:14, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Standard Chinese: A Modular Approach[edit]

The FSI created several courses for their diplomats for learning languages, they are now in the public domain. I would like to see the Mandarin Chinese course uploaded and transcribed. This would be beneficial to many learners of Chinese. --Vegemighty (talk) 00:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Gerald Ford WikiProject[edit]

Is there any support for changing the current collaboration to Wikisource:WikiProject Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. The pages are set up in a similar manner as the NARA project, there is a current Wikimedian in Residence and this is tehnically related to the current collaboration (the Presidential Library system is part of NARA). The material on diplomacy and foreign relations extends the scope beyond just American affairs. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 02:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Related groups of Britannica articles[edit]

I don't know if this has any real chance of working, or whether it has ever been tried, even. But for our own benefit, I think being able to establish some internal links here, and the content related to them, might increase the ranking of this site on search engines, which would be to our benefit. And, personally, the old Britannica, which we already have available here, might be among the easier places to start. Having started on volume 19, randomly chosen, these sets of articles are all linked to in the text from the article first listed, so far as I've checked:

  • Munchausen, Baron – Rudolf Erich Raspe;
  • Municipality – Borough Commune; Corporation Finance; Local Government
  • Municipium – Decurio; Rome;
  • Muni River Settlements – Fang; Fernando Po; Rio de Orc; Spanish Guinea;
  • Robert Munro or Monro or Monroe – Owen Roe O'Neill;
  • Muntjac – Deer;
  • Mural decoration – Ceramics; Egypt; Greek art; Mosaic; Painting; Roman art; Sculpture; Tapestry; Tiles; Wall-coverings;
  • Murat, Joachim – Napolean I;
  • Murcia – Caliphate;
  • Murder – Homicide;
  • Murrain – Rinderpest; Pleuro-Pneumonia; Anthrax; Foot and Mouth Disease; Veterinary Science;

A later article in that volume with several links include:

  • Music - a 15 page main article, which is kind of long in itself, and direct links in text of the article itself to Bach; Contrapunctal forms; Handel; Harmony; Rhythm; Sound; and significant mention of several other composers, which could be linked to as well.

Of that lot, I think Mural decoration and related articles might be the best of the first group, and Music possibly the better choice overall, particularly if a better list of related articles were prepared. The article on Christmas, and the most closely related to articles to Christmas, might work as well, but that article already exists here. Anyway, any opinions? John Carter (talk) 17:24, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


Please see the new proposal Wikisource:Scriptorium#Featured authors. Regarding the suggestion there of shortlisting some notable authors, almost all notable English language fiction writers are covered by either (see User:Quadell/Bartleby for details) or Project Gutenberg but with the caveat that many of those aren't supported by page scans.

Regarding non-fiction works, they can either be direct translations or academic scholarship. For direct translations the Sacred Books of the East series and for academic scholarship, works by "named chairs" holders at Universities are a good starting point.

So now we need to a) make a list of which fiction writers needs to have their page scans uploaded to Commons. It will take 2 seconds per DjVu file by the new Help:IA-Upload tool and b) identify major literary/religious works which aren’t covered by the Sacred Books series and c) identify academic works which can be cited at Wikipedia. Solomon7968 (talk) 19:52, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Author:Plato, Author:Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Author:Rabindranath Tagore, Author:Samuel Langhorne Clemens, Author:James Joyce - my initial thoughts on WS Author pages with some reasonable content, notable as candidates to be featured. -- DutchTreat (talk) 11:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Robert Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy[edit]

Why don't we have this yet? It's begging to be done! unsigned comment by AnotherAnonymous (talk) .

Henry David Thoreau[edit]

I propose that we replace NARA with a collaboration collecting and proofing Thoreau's works in preparation for his 200th anniversary of birth. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support. I don't know much about Thoreau but it's about time for a new collab and a 200th anniversary is a great choice. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:48, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done . Perhaps a bit hasty, but considering the discussions here and at the Scriptorium I feel that w:WP:SNOWBALL is a reasonable approach here. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:02, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps I am premature, but I don't yet see the change reflected on the Main Page. Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Yep, was updating that also. I didn't realize that {{CotW}} and {{Collaboration}} were two unrelated templates. Both are updated now. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Featured content on the main page[edit]

Maybe a stupid question here, I don't know, but is there maybe, if the community collaboration is changed regularly, a way to alter the main page in some way to feature more of the content, if any of it rises to that level? If nothing else, we might be able to get in many of the cases a biography of the subject (maybe in this case from Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography) and a specific work by the subject. Potentially, I guess, in many cases, we might be able to get up to at least three such sections - a biography, a regular "nonfiction" work, and maybe either a fiction work or a work of "literature" (like an essay or poem maybe). Alternately, I suppose, maybe there might be some utility to a "Focus on..." or similar section to the main page which might function like the DYK section of the wikipedia:Main page and have short entries relating to multiple works. The latter might be easiest to keep up, as it might allow for easy inclusion of multiple shorter works like encyclopedia biographies, or shorter poems, or short stories, which might look kind of odd as a full "featured text." Anyway, just an idea. John Carter (talk) 13:58, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

First: I hope you don't mind that I split this discussion from #Henry David Thoreau above, since it seems to me to be an unrelated question.
Second: let me see if I understand your question correctly. You are suggesting having multiple simultaneous community collaborations at once, and tying them thematically into the featured text for that month? It sounds plausible, though it would be a massive undertaking. Not only because the community collaboration and the featured text are usually unrelated processes, but because of the difficulty in getting consensus on three related Index files to proofread at once within the monthly theme, and also because of the logistics involved in queuing the texts for proofreading--what if two of them are completed and the third still has a way left to go? Do we change out the two with other, thematically related ones? Remember that we do frequently get multiple collaborations per month, but having them follow sequentially is a pretty simple and effective solution for this, and their thematic relationship is quite broad and not specific to a given subject.
If I understood this correctly, then my thoughts are as follows:
  • I would support a motion to have more than one simultaneous community collaboration, and I hope you are willing to put in the extra work should this happen.
  • I would oppose a requirement to make them based on a specific common subject, rather than the broad themes currently used or similar.
  • I would also oppose a suggestion to use portions of an Index file as a community collaboration, such as a selection of pages comprising a single article from Index:Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography (1900, volume 4).djvu.
Beleg Tâl (talk)
More using the topic of a community collaboration, which might generate several potential pieces of featured content, as the basis for inclusion of multiple qualified works in perhaps separate sections of the main page at the same time, or maybe in a single unified section of the main page which might include links to multiple works. Granted, however, the first would require the possibility of multiple simultaneous main page sections, and the second would require an at least occasional use of an additional main page section. John Carter (talk) 17:03, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Eminent/Famous Women series[edit]

W. H. Allen (UK) /Roberts Brothers (US) published a series of women biographies written by women (bar one) from 1880-90s, edited by John Henry Ingram. It would be neat to get that series of works together. I haven't found an authoritative and complete list, so this is what I have deduced so far, and I need to add links to scans.

  1. George Eliot by Mathilde Blind
  2. Emily Brontë by A. Mary F. Robinson
  3. George Sand by Bertha Thomas
  4. Mary Lamb by Anne Gilchrist
  5. Maria Edgeworth by Helen Zimmern
  6. Margaret Fuller by Julia Ward Howe
  7. Elizabeth Fry by Emma Raymond Pitman
  8. Countess of Albany by Vernon Lee
  9. Harriett Martineau by Florence Fenwick Miller
  10. Mary Wollstonecraft by Elizabeth Robins Pennell
  11. Rachel by Nina H. Kennard
  12. Madame Roland by Mathilde Blind
  13. Susanna Wesley by Eliza Clarke
  14. Elizabeth Barrett Browning by John Henry Ingram
  15. Margaret of Angoulême, Queen of Navarre by Mary Robinson
  16. Madame de Staël by Bella Duffy
  17. Mrs. Siddons by Nina Kennard
  18. Hannah More by Charlotte Mary Yonge
  19. Mary Shelley by Lucy Madox Brown Rossetti
  20. Life of Her Majesty Queen Victoria by Millicent Garrett Fawcett
  21. Jane Austen by Mrs. Charles Malden
  22. Saint Theresa of Avila by Mrs. Bradley Gilman
  23. The Life of Dr. Anandabai Joshee by Caroline Healy Dall
  24. Adelaide Ristori by Adelaide Ristori

billinghurst sDrewth 02:24, 17 May 2017 (UTC)