Kastrel

Welcome

Welcome

Hello, Kastrel, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for joining the project. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Help pages
• Style guide
• Inclusion policy
• Wikisource:For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in

• Proofread of the Month
• Community collaboration
• Requested texts

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{CotW}} to your page for current wikisource projects.

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

Have questions? Then please ask them at either

• Wikisource:Scriptorium; or
• Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.

Again, welcome! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Future work

Glad to see someone working on works by Voltaire. It's wonderful to have more variety in our content.

I notice that you're working with a file from the Internet Archive. Did you know that when those files are uploaded to Commons, you can rename the file to something more meaningful, and easier to read? You don't have to keep the same filename that was used at IA.

I wouldn't recommend making that change with the current project you're pursuing, because it's a hassle to move that many pages without a bot, but you might keep this in mind for your future work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for being in touch. I uploaded this Voltaire text on something of a whim, but it's actually a great little text, very easy to read and very funny satire on the English and French. Unfortunately, I realised too late that the title of the files was not what I'd intended. I had some problems using the available tools for uploading internet archive files to Wikimedia Commons, so by the time I found one that worked for me, I'd got confused about where to put the new filename etc. Something to improve on for the next text I try! --Kastrel (talk) 18:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

If you run into a problem like that, you can always ask for help in the Scriptorium. Changing the name of an uploaded file is a simple matter, as long as it's done before setting up an Index page, proofreading, and such. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Plomer dictionary

Just wanted to say huge thanks for your ongoing work on this! MartinPoulter (talk) 13:28, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Please make author links local

Hi. With links for authors, please make them local to Author:... rather than wikipedia. If it means that we need to create an author page, or it is a red link, that is quite okay. Many of these author pages will exist, or we will have biographical items (for long ago authors). Our aim for authors and works is to link local, as that is our core business. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:21, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I wasn't sure about that, particularly in cases where there isn't much of a page on Wikisource. As a reader, I often found it a bit frustrating to follow a link to a very sparse author page when instead I wanted to know about the person. Particularly for public figures like kings or Cromwell etc. Creating author pages while going along with Plomer's Dictionary of Printers with be very time-consuming (although worthwhile I'm sure). I'll bear it in mind. It does seem unnecessarily off-putting to red link if there's a perfectly good Wikipedia page, and you'd hope if a Wikisource page was later created for the author, a box would go on the Wikipedia page to flag it up.

is this written down in documentation anywhere? I remember when starting out looking for stuff on how much interwiki linking is preferred and because of the nature of texts I've done I've ended up with a lot. Kastrel (talk) 09:44, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

John H. Ingram

On an Author page, we list only works written by or translated by that author, we don't list works in series for which they were the editor, although for major publications that have a page of their own (such as periodicals), we may list the series with a link, and indicate the person was the editor. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:38, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that and for removing the edit. Is the rule written down somewhere explicitly? Also, given that the current Community Collaboration is the Eminent Women Series, of which he was the editor, I think it would still be worth adding that to the list as a series rather than individual books. It's important enough to have its own portal. --Kastrel (talk) 17:46, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

We don't have Editor pages, and are unlikely to have a namespace created for that. Unlike Wikipedia, we don't stick so much to written rules and arguing those rules. We rely more upon common sense: limiting Author pages to works where the person is an Author, or to works about that Author. There is a page Help:Author pages that provides basic guidance. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Again, thanks for clarifying. I just wanted to know if this situation fell under what you said before: major publications that have a page of their own. I'm not trying to argue the rules, but it is difficult to avoid breaking them (and then wasting both our time reverting changes and explaining) when they aren't written down somewhere explicitly. As you can see above I have already fallen foul of this in the context of inter-wiki linking, where interpretations of common sense seem to vary. --Kastrel (talk) 18:21, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Common sense with linking should always be the local links are used in a work. That's the same here as on Wikipedia. Users are likely to be surprised to have a link take them away from the site in the middle of a section of text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:24, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Also thanks for joining the Community Collaboration. The Eminent Women Series got off to a slow start, so it's nice to see more people now joining the effort. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! For all my argumentative responses above, I do love contributing on Wikisource, and I love George Eliot, so I am very keen to get stuck in with this collaboration. --Kastrel (talk) 15:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)