User talk:Beeswaxcandle/Archive6

Dec Featured text Edit

Will you be setting up the Featured selection for December? I nominated a work specifically for this month, and I think it's been cleared. However, since only two people commented (including myself), I don't feel it would be appropriate for me to set up the selection. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:09, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

== Easy sysop Brownie points ==

Heads up: opportunity going begging? AuFCL (talk) 06:08, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forget it. I appear to have stirred up a hornet's (Yes guy: I am proud of you!) nest elsewhere. AuFCL (talk) 23:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you do "unspeakable" things to a spammmer? Edit

Special:Contributions/Mahielsee thanks .. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page:Handbook for Boys.djvu/20 Edit

The ToC Templates don't really work here, In any case TOC row etc look a bit like overkill when reading the template code to figure out how to make 'nice' versions for this work. (sigh) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:39, 5 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh dear, that's definitely too challenging for the templates. I've never tried to nest TOC templates, which would need to be done. I think the most straightforward way to handle this one is with a table and forget about the dot-leaders. Are the parts of Chapters I and II going to be transcluded as sub-pages to the Chapters? Or will they be long pages with anchored sections? It makes a difference when creating the links in the TOC. All those authors need sorting out as well (except for the Special Committee). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:25, 6 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I shall not be in the slightest upset if either of you choose not to go this way but here is a demonstration of possibilities with an (admittedly) work-in-progress system. AuFCL (talk) 09:25, 6 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Blimey Charlie! That's quite impressive. Didn't know that this was in the wings. Next time I've got a non-straightforward TOC, I'll take a closer look. @ShakespeareFan00:, you still need to do author links and at least chapter links. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:09, 7 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

POTM filler material Edit

I found this - (which is only about 44 pages), and is scans for a work by Milton which currently isn't backed by scans (there's also a commentary). Up for adding this to the POTM queue given life in motion seems to be progressing rapidly? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:23, 9 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you don't object, I think it would be best to go for another in the series of annual science lectures. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:40, 10 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep going :) This one's only 44 and I can probably do it Solo, Going to sit out the POTM official work as I've done most of the previous 2 ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:04, 10 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another Spammer Edit - Time to hit their ISP with a firm letter?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:19, 11 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page:Cox and box 2.djvu/20 Edit

I think I found a missing dymanic in the 8th bar in this page? Would you mind carefully checking?ShakespeareFan00 (talk)

There's nothing missing in bar 8. However, there was a piano missing on the vocal line at bar 5 and one in the score reduction at bar 6. When we get another lilypond-capable musician here, they'll be able to look after things like this in the Validation process-that's what it's for. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The wonders of the 'Page tools' sidebar Edit

Hi. If I didn't thank you before, then I do so now. It's been great help realizing my dream of proofreading using Linux.

I have two questions regarding this tool. One is that the drop down list closes between pages, and wondered if there is a way to keep it open as long as it is selected. This is how both the 'Navigation' and the 'Tools' lists function. The second question is, whether the following 'Page tools' list, which I never use, be hidden? They are:

  • Add header
  • Add footer
  • Make reference
  • Convert to small-caps
  • Convert to uppercase

Thanks, — Ineuw talk 06:57, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you perhaps mixing up Beeswaxcandle with Pathoschild? I cannot help you with the first part of your query (as I don't understand the request) but for the other I suspect you want to go to this link; locate the section titled "Page tools"; and then untick all sections except "Clean up OCR". Back to your normally scheduled presenter... AuFCL (talk) 07:21, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure what drop down list you're referring to, so I can't point you in the right direct either. I recommend you have a go at using the Make reference tool. It has proved invaluable to me when I've got multiple references on a page and the ref markers have scrolled off the top of the edit box—particularly in the Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:41, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not mixed up (this time). :-) It was BWC who got my .js code running properly. As for the first part of the request, I should ask GO3 because I am using his sidebar layout gadget which remains "open" when I go from page to page and proofread. By remaining "open", I mean that the small triangle (arrowhead) is pointing downwards, showing all the choices of the list. . . . as in the Navigation group, they are: Main Page, Community portal, Central discussion etc. While Pathoschild't "Page tool" collapses.
I did make the selection in Special:TemplateScript but nothing changed. I think that I have to log out and in. — Ineuw talk 08:39, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pagelist entries (redux) Edit

Wikisource:Scriptorium#Entries_in_pagelists - To avoid future mis-understandings about what is or isn't standard, I'd appreciate your feedback, given that you previously stated my approach wasn't in some areas. I regret having to ask for things to have to be specified in detail, but given the views of certain other contributors it seems necessary.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:34, 24 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Assume good faith ? Edit

The work concerned appears to be unsourced in any event. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:27, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK it's sourced, just not scan backed :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:04, 30 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yep, AGF. I'm doubtful that some of the changes are in the published translation that we're hosting, but without scan-backing I can't be sure. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:52, 30 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Index talk:The Kiss and its History.djvu Edit

I've made some suggested changes to the overall style, and would like feedback / discussion before proceeding. In particular, it is easier to use the style= parameter with {{block center}} than to invoke an additional template. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:26, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, on test edits, it looks as though {{gap|1em}} reproduces the printed indentation better than 1.5em. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@EncycloPetey:No problems with these changes—I never remember to use the style parameter, so it didn't cross my mind. For the gap indentation, I usually use 2em by preference as I find 1em too small when reading poetry on the screen. I thought 1.5em would be a compromise, however I'm not worried if you wish to pull it down to 1em. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:12, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Burnt Candlemas Edit

King of England destroys much of Scotland - called Burnt Candlemas - Beez, please fix the link on this page properly.'s_Illustrated_History_of_England_vol_1.djvu/406

—Maury (talk) 08:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shout at me for interfering but… Edit

this change turned an iffy-format, content basically correct and validated page into mush which nobody seems to have noticed in the 3½ years since (superficial tweakage notwithstanding)? (Not saying my changes are necessarily fully defensible but Crumbs! I would not let this one stand once noted.) AuFCL (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm, I think that {{ts}} has been expanded since I did that table—which was a rescue job anyway as the tables throughout that work were in an inconsistent parlous state. I think I also assumed that the spellings, etc. were OK having been through a couple of editors on the way. Anyway, I have no objection to anyone making my table coding more efficient and more accurate (as long as they don't use those TOC or weird legislation templates to override what I've done). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:45, 16 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
O.K. I'll buy that. I didn't think of template rot—plausible though a (different) kind of worry. (And between you and me the number of wfws I added gives me the willies: mobile mode has a lot to answer for—and I suspect the valignb class will soon break which is sort of exponential sadness.) AuFCL (talk) 02:52, 16 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not even sure of what "wfw" does. It's not in the documentation for ts. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:21, 16 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So glad you asked that question! Complete brain snap; I meant wnw as in white-space:nowrap;. Need sleep? Anyway at least stop making a fool of myself? AuFCL (talk) 08:38, 16 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Changes Edit

See Wikisource talk:WikiProject DMM -- PBS (talk) 17:41, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greek double-check Edit

Hello. Wondering if you wouldn't mind (at your leisure) doing a double-check of the Greek on this page. It is validated otherwise. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done Beeswaxcandle (talk) 16:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another request for you if/when you are available. The work will then be done. Thank you :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:20, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done Mostly right except for a few breathing marks and the Greek apostrophes (which is a UNICODE character of its own, separate from the single quote). --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:58, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Beeswax: I'm using the character from Perseus from the Greek "apostrophe" (copied and pasted, and verified to be consistent there), but don't know how to find out which specific character it is, or whether Perseus is doing something weird. Nothing in the Greek extended Unicode table makes any of this clearer to me, but it appears to be the coronis / smooth breathing mark. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:11, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@EncycloPetey: This is not in my knowledge area so this might not be at all relevant. Whilst recently hunting for something quite different I stumbled across Unicode point ᾽ (a.k.a. ᾽: ᾽) described by my source as Greek Koronis. Is this the code you were looking for, or just a sad coincidence? AuFCL (talk) 06:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I put the character into Babelstone and it came back with the same name and number as AuFCL suggests. It's not available in the LexiLogos Ancient Greek Keyboard, which is the one I usually use, presumably because it's a more modern invention. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:31, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not part of the character set available for editing on Wiktionary either. It's one of a small number of characters I have to keep in a special cut-and-paste file, along with the two versions of rho with breathing marks. But it is the character that is used in the texts at Perseus. --EncycloPetey (talk) 10:32, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Index:1947SydneyHailstorm.djvu Edit

This is the Hailstorm that broke the back so to speak.

The file at Commons is Undated, and I am not sure if it's written in an official capacity or a personal one.

So it was blanked, but I'd like a third opinion, and have objections to it's reinstatement if you think it is in fact acceptable.

Perhaps it's time I took a break? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, and requesting formatting help with underline, TOC, temporary margin indents, and others. Edit

Thanks for the welcome message!

I am working on: "Scientific Methods" See: and can use some help in formatting it.

How can I learn the parameters to the "{{Dotted TOC page listing ..." template? I began using it for the TOC on: but need to learn more of its options.

For the {{Dotted TOC page listing}}, the options are all detailed on the template's documentation page. Just click on the blue link I've just made and you'll be taken there. That said, this TOC is too complex for this template and I would set it directly as a table. When setting a TOC you need to be making decisions about how the work will be structured when it's taken through to the mainspace. This particular work will need to be sub-paged, so how will it be split up?

The original text includes both underline and italics. How an I indicate underline as a text format?

Underlining is ugly, it interrupts descenders on the letters, and reduces readability. In some browsers it also looks like a link. It was only done during the typewriter era because there was no other way of emphasising text. I can't remember the last time I underlined something in any text that I have produced. On Wikisource I find some other way of emphasising the words (italics or bold, or even both).

The original text indents quotations, reducing both the left and right margins. See: How can that best be done?

This is best done using blockquote tags. i.e. <blockquote>. . .</blockquote>

I found a really spiffy horizontal divider bar, ("Custom rule") you can see it in use at How can I learn the parameters to that device?

Again check the template documentation page at {{Custom rule}}. However, we do have a template {{***}} that will reproduce the three asterisk separators that the text uses.

I need to learn how best to import the images from the .pdf to the formatted text.

I've randomly opened a few pages, but didn't see any images in the text. Can you please point me to a couple so that I see what we're looking at?

I have a complete version of the book in html format. See: (I have the author's permission to update the notice and place this in the public domain.) Can this .html text be uploaded to Wikisource?

It would only be as a copy/paste. As Billinghurst said, we're not really set up for such things.

Thanks again for your help. --Lbeaumont (talk) 11:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Lbeaumont:, I can answer some of your questions. To make it easier to see what answer belongs to which question, I've interpolated my answers above. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:18, 6 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jan PotM award Edit

Thank you for awarding this but I do feel a bit of a fraud in accepting it. As far as I can tell I only changed one relevant page and for the life of me cannot recall what drew my attention to that. I most certainly was not formally participating in the communal drive and indeed normally take conscious effort not to do so any more for perhaps not entirely sane reasons. AuFCL (talk) 01:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Domestic blindness Edit

Doing a match and split, and for the life of me I cannot work out what I have mucked up in the LST at Critique of Pure Reason (Meiklejohn)/Volume 2/Chapter 2. The sections look right to me at Page:Critique of Pure Reason 1855 Meiklejohn tr.djvu/524, the page says it is transcluded. The s1 transcludes fine in the previous chapter, however, when I do either the first or second section in the chapter 2, fail fail fail. I have been through the obvious, and the unobvious, so it must the bleeding obvious that I am missing and your help would be appreciated. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:27, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apologies for intervention. Medically could not resist. Wrong keyword used within <section/> was start= not begin= in Page:Critique of Pure Reason 1855 Meiklejohn tr.djvu/524. N.B. Page:Critique of Pure Reason 1855 Meiklejohn tr.djvu/545 will need to be resolved as well: currently it has two <section end="s2" />s! AuFCL (talk) 07:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I get the point. Delete the revision(s) if you must. AuFCL (talk) 11:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nah. Moving links! The thanked confirmation link was there, then it redrew, and it was another as I clicked. Hell bells, I reverted me too. Please stop the sniping. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the welcome! Edit

Thank you. 2015.ww (talk) 07:19, 9 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A musical page Edit

Hi! Can you lend a hand for this page? It is the last page of the work, and beyond my skill level. Hrishikes (talk) 15:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hrishikes: done. It's not very good music as a setting for this poem, but that's what's there. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Many thanks. Hrishikes (talk) 06:20, 2 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's been over a month, and there's seemingly no real objection to the removal of the annotated file version, in the relevant disscussion. The issue seems to revolve around the underlying source document, as opposed to the annotations which definitely can't stay. Another contributer's already pulled the "original" text into a seperate page.

You expressed a view towards removal, and I feel someone needs to take the iniative. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also in checking back the uploader , found this -

which appears to be yet another version. Something doesn't seem right here. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:08, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wives of the prime ministers, 1844-1906 Edit

What is the source for this book? I have cleaned all of the images and am ready to upload them. —Maury (talk) 09:10, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The file is File:Wives of the prime ministers, 1844-1906.djvu, if that helps? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Nope that doesn’t help. All images now on Commons. One image inserted into book. I am sleepy now at 5am.

The url is what I wanted and found.

Title Wives of the prime ministers, 1844-1906
Author Elizabeth Lee
Year 1918
Publisher Nisbet & Co., Limited
Location London

—Maury (talk) 10:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The return of an old colleague... Edit

Hey Bees - I am back on Wikisource! Its been almost 2 years but I am glad to see the Source still going strong. How have you been? What is new around here or what has changed? I am thinking of continuing work on the Medieval Mind for starters.

Glad to be back. - Tannertsf (talk) 11:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome back @Tannertsf:. Hope all is well with you and yours. I do check on Mediaeval Mind from time to time to see if you've done a little more. However, don't feel you have to work on it if there is something else that takes your fancy for a while.

I don't think that there have been any major changes in the period since you were last here. If I do think of something, I'll let you know. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you! I started to get the feel that nothing was new after doing some work on here yesterday. - Tannertsf (talk) 10:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another chapter complete Edit

Hello Bees,

I wanted to let you know that I have gone through another chapter for Medieval Mind and transcluded it. I have been annoyed at one user's quick proofing of the rest of this work and Vol 2 (he is on it now) and I am making sure to go through all of his pages and usually have a good number of fixes so I will validate them. But since I proofed the first part of the chapter, it would be great if you could validate it for me. I know I can't make people stop but I enjoy proofing a lot more than validating. Oh well.

Cheers, - Tannertsf (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update: This person has done well so far on Medieval Mind. I am going through and checking any errors and eliminating spaces so text looks better transcluded. Would you mind going through and making sure all of the harder formatting things are done correctly? Mainly, I don't mind proofing poems but gosh dang they are hard to format. :D - Tannertsf (talk) 14:27, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problems, as I have time I'll chip away at it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Off For Hawaii. pp 112, 113 use of hws and hwe Edit

@Beeswaxcandle: On pp. 112 and 113, p. 112 looks fine, but the beginning sentence on p. 113 is incorrect. The hyphen is missing, but the word "Mark" is incorrectly there. Maile66 (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done On page 113 you needed {{lpe}}, not {{lps}}. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:07, 12 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maori Religion and Mythology Edit

Maori Religion and Mythology.djvu is validated with the exception of 4 pages. I haven't worked enough with family tree formatting, or footnote formatting in Wikisource, to make the technical corrections.

  • Page 14 - alignment seem off between Rere and Ue
  • Page 15 - alignment off between Korouaputa and GENEALOGICAL DESCENT FROM TOKO-ROTO.
  • Page 16 - alignment looks off beginning with Pakak
  • Page 29 is a footnote issue. The footnote numbers don't match beginning with 5. Could it be that I'm just not familiar with how that kind of footnote formatting is supposed to look?

If these can be corrected, I can go ahead and validate them to complete this book. Maile66 (talk) 14:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for working on this book. I do hope you have enjoyed some of the stories. To get the family trees to behave at all I had to make some compromises with representing the printed page in the electronic medium. Remember that our goal is to make the content available rather than re-create the pages exactly. If you think that I've changed the meaning of the structure or the intent of author with my layout tweaks, then we'll have another try.
For the footnotes on page 29, this is an artefact of the way that the wiki software deals with repeated footnotes. The alternative is to repeat the footnote text for 5 and again for 10 & 11, which I felt would be less representative of authorial intent. (It's interesting how the Victorians got around explicit terms by simply not translating them.) Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As long as what is there is what you intended, I validated the pages and changed the index status to validated. And, yes, I very much enjoyed reading this book as I went along. Maile66 (talk) 12:03, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Framley Parsonage Edit

Thank you for picking up validation behind my proofing. I noted that you fixed something on my transclusion efforts. I did have a printout of the coding of a previous chapter and missed that second /. Although the chapters did fall in line, obviously there is a reason for the slash. I'll try to be more careful for the rest. Again, thanks. Humbug26 (talk) 17:34, 13 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've been meaning to come back and finish this book off, but have got caught up with other things. It was a pleasant surprise to find someone else working on it. I've put a few layout choices on my part back and added notes to the Index Talk: page. I need to learn to document these when I start a work so that there aren't tangles. The advantage of using the {{header}} template is that it's linkable. For the second / character in links, this is a short-cut for relative links that displays only the last part of a multi-level link. Without it the links showed as "Framley Parsonage/Chapter 26", while they only need to say "Chapter 26". The long-hand version of the link is [[Framley Parsonage/Chapter 26|Chapter 26]] Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:25, 14 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Shall I continue with the proofreading? I did revalidate the first book, validated the second and third, and just continued on with the fourth. Without the prior formatting requirements, I merely tried to make the book look similar to those proceeding this one. Good to know about the linkability of the template chosen. Also good to know about the slashes; how things appear with or without them. I noticed that you started to bring this series of six books in about 2013. The last two books are in Commons, volume 1 and 2 for each. Would you be willing to bring them across, setting them up to a standard of your choice? I could then proof these to try to finish off the series. It would be a great benefit to the site to have all six books in the "Chronicle" available. I would really like to see this series as complete. :) Humbug26 (talk) 03:02, 14 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I absolutely agree that getting all six books up would be great. That's been my intention all the way along, I just get distracted by other things. By all means continue with the proofreading. From memory the OCR for Framley has some "frustrations" and it was nice to not have to deal with those (grin). It will also be good to get the series off my to-do list. I'll set up the Indexes for Small House at Allington this evening (my time) and do those for Last Chronicle of Barset later in the week. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:35, 14 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is now DONE! I do have one question though. On page 359 you removed the SIC template around the word arrrangement' (3 r's). Is this not an appropriate time for the use of this template?
Onto to A Small Town. I note that you did not set up specified formatting. Did you want to continue with the chapter titles/headings as in Framley Parsonage? I took a quick scan through this version at IA and I note that every other page has a different header, long dashes appear, there are no ellipses, and, best of all, chapters start/end on pages by themselves; no more sections [happy dance!] Humbug26 (talk) 17:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Excellent! I didn't notice the 3 r spelling. I'll put it back. Yes, please carry on with using the heading template. If there are any quoted letters, please switch over to using {{quote}}. I've got quite a busy few days ahead in RL, so I won't get to making Index Talk: notes for a little while. Feel free to start them. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:49, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Small House at Allington Edit

Will you please validate page 142/djvu 162 of this project? My concern is with the ending of the correspondence at the bottom of the page. It doesn't look quite right on the page, and looks so-so on the transcluded page. Is there a better way? Humbug26 (talk) 18:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sometimes these things are better done from the left side of the page rather than back off the right. Have a look and see what you think? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, this is much better. I did think of the gap template, yet when I read the documentation on it, it seemed to read that it was not to be used for this purpose. I guess whatever works. Noted for next time; with this author, there will be a next time. Humbug26 (talk) 16:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

spam? Edit

I was telling the guy some of the books he wrote articles on itwiki are stored here. And also, that I couldn't leave this message on Italian wikisource because he wasn't registered there yet. I do that often on many different platforms, and it's the first time it is ever considered spam. Mainly because I am not selling anything, just informing. Too bad for enwikisource not for me, I got nothing from that. :D--Alexmar983 (talk) 10:36, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BTW if the problem was the link I used, that was an interview to the user I found on the internet. I wanted to be sure he was that guy, because it is a retired principal. We are trying to introduce wiki in the schools in Italy and wikisource is one of the main option. --Alexmar983 (talk) 12:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do a lot of patrolling here and from extensive experience: Leaving someone a message on a project where they have never edited is pointless. Having it left by someone who is not involved in that project is suspicious. That message being in a language other than that of the project is also suspicious—particularly when the message includes external links. I also noted that the two user names contained the phoneme "mar". As a result I elected to speedy delete the page. The external link is the reason for the particular deletion reason I chose. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:04, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That sound so "2007" to me. I do a lot of message on different platform, leaving someone a message on a project where they have never edited is NOT pointless, it just depends on the message and the users: we are in an interconnected system, involvement on a platform is quite predictable based on the user general behavior. I create crosswiki connections all the time. If all the projects had this patrolling, they would have lost many motivated users I brought to them. Good for them they don't :D
BTW I did have a edit, I am involved on itwikisource and wikisource in general, and don't assume just because I reviewed one page I didn't look here around. I did, that's why I know that those books I cited in the message are stored here. For the future don't worry, will try to avoid English wikisource unless necessary. I will just leave a message to that guy on wikidata (when noone cares too much) or on Italian wikisource as soon as his SUL is connected there. Also I am quite surprised how an interview of that type could be considered spam. --Alexmar983 (talk) 02:07, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
with the cross-project notifications, it is not entirely pointless. although it might get lost in notification stream. Slowking4RAN's revenge 11:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Westward Ho! — two pages not transcluded Edit

Was it purposeful to not transclude the image and the title page? — billinghurst sDrewth 22:46, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Given that there is a "normal" title page (/9), I elected to ignore the unattractive one and therefore the author image as well. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bunny Brown at Camp Rest-a-While Edit

I've validated Bunny Brown at Camp Rest-a-While.djvu as far as anything that was proofed. I did not change its status, because what is remaining are three Adverts that have not been proofed. Love the Stratemeyer Syndicate books. Maile66 (talk) 22:17, 4 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Maile66: Thank you so much for doing these. We have a policy that adverts and other material that aren't part of the work don't have to be proofread/validated before changing the status. So, feel free to update the status.

If at some stage you would like to proofread a Stratemeyer book, I can send you a Word document on how to work through the whole process (including the bits on Commons). Any book on Portal:Stratemeyer Syndicate that has § beside the title has a file on Commons ready to go through the process (there are 80 at present). Just email me via the "Email this user" link in the toolbox on the left. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:28, 5 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Last Chronicle of Barset Edit

Hello. I'm currently finishing up The Small House at Allington, Vol 2 and am wondering if you would please bring over the last of this series from Commons? If you set up the initial transclusion like you did with Small House, I can finish the transclusion as I proof. The only thing I'm still not confident in tackling is images. The help documentation does not instill in me the push to try this yet. Humbug26 (talk) 17:53, 8 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought you might be close. I've set up the Index files and done the pagelists. Index:The Last Chronicle of Barset Vol 1.djvu. I'll have a look at the images for Small House when I've a moment. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, I'm lost. I've done the TOCs for vol 1 and 2, and was going to try the main namespace using Small House as reference for coding. This has now become frustrating. I can't see in my mind's eye the correlation between the coding and the final result. If you could do this part, I'll transclude the chapters as I proof. One other thing: There are thumbnail pictures at the beginning of 16 chapters in vol 1 (assume vol 2 is similar). See chapter 1. I marked as missing image and status problematic. Is this correct? Humbug26 (talk) 18:09, 19 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mainpage is transcluded. For the initial pages for the chapters, yes mark as problematic and we'll come back to them later. The way I usually work is to proofread all the text first, then go back and do the images all in one go. That way I have single task focus. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]




Hi, Beeswaxcandle. Shouldn’t this be WOMEN’S—WEAR GRADATIONS? GOOD WOMEN NEVER SWEAR ANYTHING. --Maury (talk) 19:53, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The page is in a section about prostitutes, so no. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:01, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Betty Gordon in the Land of Oil Edit

Betty Gordon in the Land of Oil is all validated, except for the two adverts at the end that are waiting for images. Maile66 (talk) 00:28, 24 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:59, 24 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

/*Index:Air Service Boys Flying for France.djvu*/ Edit

Index:Air Service Boys Flying for France.djvu   Done --Maury (talk) 23:47, 30 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Maury. Hope you enjoyed it. Would it be possible for you to look at the two TOC pages so we can change the status? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:23, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure, Beez, but all of those source TOCs are red and show the following text, "let 'em have it now. we're right over a big building." So what ever shall I do? Mark ’em as done? And yes, sir, it was a relaxation reading over that book, a break from what I had been working on, "Cassell’s Illustrated History of England" (9 vols). Do you like those images? Hundreds of ’em! But I didn’t like the "Air Service Boys" sinking that sub even though it was a German sub. Go Navy! --Maury (talk) 17:58, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of POM contributors Edit

Hi. I extracted a raw list of contributors from the "recentchanges" database table, for the Nov 2016 POM 'Tom Swift and His Airship.djvu' to help assemble the list of contributors, but I was only partially successful because the recent changes table only stores page namespace data for about 20 days, (about 28,500 records), so it's the wrong source to get the complete info. This is the query I created. If you think that this type of data extraction would help you to save time, then I would gladly continue the quest. — Ineuw talk 02:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, but Mpaa has already done some queries through the tool lab. See #April POTM section somewhere above. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:33, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, better late than never. In any case, it woke me up to work more with SQL. — Ineuw talk 19:09, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry to disturb you again, I was curious to see Mpaa's query, so I posted some info on his talk page. I designed the query so that anyone can use it to extract the historical contributor info by the project name since it was created. — Ineuw talk 20:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]