Open main menu


Prescribing Cvr/Title/etc.? bad ideaEdit

Just wondering where the presription guidance came to use "Cvr" "Title" etc. for works. It is unnecessary retitling of pages for no value, and looks ridiculous when the pages are transcluded. I believe that we should be removing that and stick some simple principles of page numbering. dashes, roman numerals, and standard numerals that actually represent the book. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:44, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: Elsewhere you have said that the image pages should be specifically labelled as it is unhelpful to have one of the dashes to represent. I dispute that, and feel that we should not be introducing aspects like "img" and I don't see that it adds value. If they are unnumbered pages, they should remain so, not have a labelling that has no value when transcluded, people can see it is an image. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:15, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Why are you concentrating only on transcluded pages? I have frequently felt the need of navigating through the pages of an index file, like when I am uploading images. In those times, definite labels of special pages (cvr, title, image etc.) are helpful. After transclusion, whether the label appears in mainspace as frontispiece or emdash hardly matters, readers can see what it is and ignore the label. But the label has value when navigating the index. Hrishikes (talk) 15:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

It is impossible to link to a particular transcluded page if all the pages have the same "page number" in the form of a dash, without going to the additional trouble of inserting an anchor, so I can see a good argument for at least occasionally using "Cvr", "Frontispiece", or "Contents" when these would otherwise all be "-" instead. Using these alternative labels can improve navigation in some works.

But I do agree that when the pages of a work have numbering system of their own, it is best practice to use the numbering system, and interpolate or extrapolate as needed, whenever such a page numbering system exists within the work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

The general recommendations for labelling pages (yellow box) says "Preliminary pages that are not part of the sequence or ranges of numbering … should be named…". i.e. the pages before the first page that is numbered. Should the first page with a number not be 1, i, or I, then the numbering should be extrapolated backwards so that the first numbered page on the pagelist is 1, i, or I (as appropriate). If the word "not" is not clear enough, then come up with a better wording for that paragraph. The advice for naming pages needs to be taken in conjunction with the paragraph starting "Label positions that are void of any published content …", which says that empty pages that are outside the flow of page numbers should be represented with a dash of some sort. I usually use a hyphen. Because these pages will be marked as "without text" when proofreading, they will not show up in transclusion. This means that the page label for these will not be seen in the mainspace, which in turn means that if we keep the hyphen (or dash) solely for blank pages that are not numbered, then we will have the desired outcome of standardisation.

As to the source of the recommendations, they—along with all the rest of the Parameters section—are based on a draft that I wrote as a distillation of the discussion at Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help/Archives/2012#Request:_Guidance_editing_Index:_pages. That draft was discussed, amended and then adopted a month later in December 2012. Note that I did not move the draft into the Help: space (I was somewhat unwell at the time). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:17, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

"Illegal" characters in pagelist entries, "additional texts" and "multiple-pagelists"Edit

Three issues : -

  1. Illegal characters - Some characters in a pagelist entry confuse the scripting code used to add sidenoted page number indications in works constructed by transcluding from Index'ed works. There's no advice here on what characters should be avoided.
  2. Additional texts - Some pagelists have "additional texts" detailing errors with the scan or internal issue information which isn't easily represented in the pagelist itself. There isn't any advice here about the inclusion or non-inclusion of these.
  3. mutliple-pagelists - On some bound collections, there can be a number of parts which have been included as one volume, There isn't any advice here as to whether these should be listed as multiple page-lists or as a single one. (This is related to the question of additional texts.

I am asking if the advice here should be updated, as in resolving an issue of seemingly "undefined" pagenumbers on a transclusion, removal of "illegal" charcters, "additional texts" and "multiple-pagelists" and the consturction of clean, single paglist without "additional texts" in the Pages field seemed to resolve the issue of "undefined" pages numbers

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Is there any tool available for index pages?Edit

I am from ta.wikisource. We got cc0 license for 2250 pdf books. we are uploading the books in commons. We need automation help. Is there any tool available for index page management. We are using python language for uploading and converting the pages in google OCR. Thanks in advance.--Info-farmer (talk) 14:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Two pages a number?Edit

In some old Chinese text, they assign a number to every two pages. That is: Pages 2 and 3 on the PDF file --> page number 1, and page 4 and 5 on the PDF file --> page number 2, and so on. How can I number this using <pagelist />? --維基小霸王 (talk) 11:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

@維基小霸王:In Western texts, the "front" of a sheet is called the recto and the "back" is the verso (from the Latin from "right/correct" and "turned"). So if I had a Western text numbered this way, I would manually number the pages "1r", "1v", "2r", "2v", etc. This is how Western scholars deal with situations in which the pages were not originally numbered. It would be a lot of work to manually number them all this way, but it would preserve the numbering system. --EncycloPetey (talk) 11:51, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. --維基小霸王 (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Return to "Index pages" page.