User talk:Londonjackbooks/Archive 2012

Archive 2012

National Archives ExtravaSCANza

Hey, I was happy to see you back when we had the DC meetup. I just realized that you are not on the invite list for Wikipedians I was using, so I just wanted to make sure you saw this. Hope you can make it! Dominic (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to the National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success! This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

talk page

[This was brought from my talk page -William Maury Morris II]

14 Question

I noticed here where User:William Maury Morris proofreads a page, and William Maury Morris—as Brother Officer—validates the same page? Is that now accepted practice? Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

   Angel-Princess, Observer-Goodheart, you should take what you notice about so many people to an administrator for verification. But I would guess it would not matter if it were two different people. Perhaps it does not matter if it were one or more people as long as wrongs were not being done. Did you tire of e-mailing me? I haven't looked back there since your last message and I want that to stop. I am not contacting you but you are contacting me and now here. Go in peace and let it stay that way. I am not interested in communicating with you in any manner whether in my email or here. Go collect information from and on others for whatever your reasons—or work on wiki projects which is best of all. As some would say, "Cheers!" —William Maury Morris II Talk 07:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

   BTW, you didn't just "notice", I told you that was my other account sometime back in my email reply to you about people you were asking questions and being suspicious of so many people. I have all of my older accounts openly listed as I moved from one to the other. Since my wife is here in the hospital with a stroke my sons and their families are here in this state taking turns assisting in proof-reading. Go do something positive and quit being suspicious about people, Sonja. —William Maury Morris II Talk 07:17, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

       What was "noticed" was not the [Brother Officer] user name, but the fact that the user name was used to validate a page proofread by the same person "behind" the user name. If that was another family member using your account, then my apologies; I would not have been able to intuit that. By the way, I have only edited here as Londonjackbooks, with the exception of the admitted Supernova hiccup. If that can't be proven technically, then I am at least satisfied that God knows it. My initial email to you (21 December 2011; 6:56am) was with regard to your deletion of my edits from Billinghurst's Talk page—which I was curious about. You answered my question, I answered back, etc., with the last exchange being from you on December 26 (7:43pm)—which I never answered in reply. I have no tangible reason to be "suspicious" of you; I will oblige you, however, in not communicating with you further. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Sonja, (or should one use your full name and cox e-mail address?) I am not interested in any suspicious you may have about people or whether your intuit was right or wrong. I also accept your apologies on that. I am also not interested in any aliases you use. As for God, HE knows us all, not just what you think and do. I do thank you for stating you will oblige me in not communicating with me further because the useless chatter fills up my talk page. Vaya con Dios, —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 20:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

For context

How William Maury Morris' Talk page read as of 09:21, 21 January 2012—before the above info was transferred to my Talk page by Mr. Morris: Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Question

I noticed here where User:William Maury Morris proofreads a page, and William Maury Morris—as Brother Officer—validates the same page? Is that now accepted practice? Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Angel-Princess, Observer-Goodheart, you should take what you notice about so many people to an administrator for verification. But I would guess it would not matter if it were two different people. Perhaps it does not matter if it were one or more people as long as wrongs were not being done. Did you tire of e-mailing me? I haven't looked back there since your last message and I want that to stop. I am not contacting you but you are contacting me and now here. Go in peace and let it stay that way. I am not interested in communicating with you in any manner whether in my email or here. Go collect information from and on others for whatever your reasons—or work on wiki projects which is best of all. As some would say, "Cheers!" —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 07:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

BTW, you didn't just "notice", I told you that was my other account sometime back in my email reply to you about people you were asking questions and being suspicious of so many people. I have all of my older accounts openly listed as I moved from one to the other. Since my wife is here in the hospital with a stroke my sons and their families are here in this state taking turns assisting in proof-reading. Go do something positive and quit being suspicious about people, Sonja. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 07:17, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

What was "noticed" was not the [Brother Officer] user name, but the fact that the user name was used to validate a page proofread by the same person "behind" the user name. If that was another family member using your account, then my apologies; I would not have been able to intuit that. By the way, I have only edited here as Londonjackbooks, with the exception of the admitted Supernova hiccup. If that can't be proven technically, then I am at least satisfied that God knows it. My initial email to you (21 December 2011; 6:56am) was with regard to your deletion of my edits from Billinghurst's Talk page—which I was curious about. You answered my question, I answered back, etc., with the last exchange being from you on December 26 (7:43pm)—which I never answered in reply. I have no tangible reason to be "suspicious" of you; I will oblige you, however, in not communicating with you further. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Correction to above (14:21, 21 January 2012) post by me—which was originally posted to WMMII's Talk page until it was moved here to my talk page

I stated above that the last email exchange was from WMMII on Dec 26 @7:43pm. That is incorrect. I did answer Mr. Morris' email on December 27th @7:07am. That was the last exchange. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:31, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Context

Sir Galahad

Thanks for picking up that misattribution: an embarrassing error that had survived an embarrassingly long time.

It might amuse you to know that this error is now enshrined in an actual book. There are certain unscrupulous "publishers" out there who mindlessly scrape free web content, pull it together into book form, and then try to sell that book to unsuspecting buyers. Such a publisher has done so with Wikisource's collection of Longfellow works; thus will find Sir Galahad proudly occupying a place in a book entitled Works of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, here.

Hesperian 01:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

That is amusing! I suppose such errors have been made in "scrupulously" published works as well... These days of self-publication, however, particularly lends itself perhaps to even more errors being made... But public domain is public domain—errors and all (let the buyer beware!), and many people are trying to "scrape" by. We'll never know who has the right intentions—all we can do is make sure ours are true! :) Thanks, and have a good one, Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Heh. Thankyou for that well-deserved lesson in humility. Hesperian 13:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

It's only on my mind constantly, as I have to reteach it to myself every day! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Greek text

Hi. You might be interested in this link [1] for typing Greek characters. Antother tip is search and copy Greek WS once you have identified the basic letters to find the right accents … Bye --Mpaa (talk) 14:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Noted. And thank you for your recent help on Genius pages as well. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Mpaa,—Middle names go on the same line as last names on Author pages? Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

My understanding is "Yes" "No". The reason is that in {{Author}}, when "defaultsort" is not specified, sorting is done based on "lastname, firstname". If you put the 2nd name in lastname line, it will sort by 2nd name and not lastname. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 20:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Or vice-versa... I am dense, and fear I always shall be... Better for everyone (including myself)! Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Oops, you're not alone :-) See strike-through. Middle names do not go on the same line as last names. Guess it is time to log-off for me?!--Mpaa (talk) 21:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

If that were the standard, then there'd be no one left to do all the work that needs to be done around here! Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

William Snow

Congratulations on finding the elusive W. Snow. I kept trying but I could never find any matches myself. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

As ambiguous as the name is, I could still be wrong... But I think the Oxford connection—and the fact that "William Snow" is primarily listed as "W. Snow" in Google Books searches put it in his favor (at least for me). Time will tell! Thanks for your help! Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:25, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Underhill?

I reverted your change to Author:Evelyn Underhill. Is there any proof that Underhill is a pseudonym used by Stuart Moore rather than being the wife of Stuart Moore? —Tom Morris (talk) 16:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak... I could do some more digging/Googling to compare and contrast other sources... Or else you may! Thanks for pointing it out, however. It's good to make sure info like that is cited/sourced correctly. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

That says "Mrs. Stuart Moore ("Evelyn Underhill")". That's not saying that Evelyn Underhill is a pen name for Stuart Moore, it's saying the wife of Stuart Moore writes as Evelyn Underhill. There are plenty of sources (see Wikipedia) for the fact that her husband was not interested in spiritual matters in the same way she was. She is Mrs. Stuart Moore in the same way that Hillary Clinton is "Mrs. Bill Clinton". That's not the same as saying Hillary Clinton is Bill Clinton! —Tom Morris (talk) 17:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Your point (or argument) reminds me of something my son might say to "trip me up", so to speak... Although I am sure that is not what you had in mind to do here! As he can be quite the wordsmith at times, he often confuses me with how he words things. As my mind is currently a muddle, I will leave the answering of Mr. Morris' question to anyone more apt who would like to tackle answering it! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

It's really not like this forum to leave a question unanswered... I really don't want to have to use my brain this morning! Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think Tom is right. Although I don't have any knowledge of Underhill or Moore, it is or was quite common to refer to a woman by her husband's name. I mention this as I've had a hard time tracking down some names for authors credited in this way; most recently "Mrs. D. Giraud Wright", aka Louise Wigfall Wright. Creating that author page reminded me about this discussion. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't think I ever argued that particular fact... There was something else in Mr. Morris' comments above that messed with my brain. If I feel up to using a particular cerebral hemisphere (whichever one it is) later today, I'll try to sort it out... Sometimes the {{gap}} between the two is difficult for me to traverse! Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Was it because the linked text put Evelyn Underhill in quotes? (ie. Mrs. Stuart Moore ("Evelyn Underhill") and the Westminster Gazette.) That would normally imply a fake name, but in this case it seems to be providing the real name of the author. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Yup! Probably as simple as that! But it was also something I came across when Google Books-ing that threw me. Tried to just now find the reference, but couldn't... But I came across the following which I thought was worded funny: "The work of Mrs. Stuart Moore and Miss Evelyn Underhill was combined in a quiet round of daily activities. In the morning Evelyn supervised the work of two servants and then began her writing about ten o'clock. She continued to work through early afternoon. Every day she had tea with her mother who lived around the corner on Campden Hill..." But that is probably just referring to her wearing of "two hats" during the course of a day (I assume). Ok... I think I'm good now... Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

OK... Mr. Morris wrote the following: That says "Mrs. Stuart Moore ("Evelyn Underhill")". That's not saying that Evelyn Underhill is a pen name for Stuart Moore... I think Mr. Morris meant to say "pen name for Mrs. Stuart Moore." For I did not think "Evelyn Underhill" was a pen name for the Mr. (did something I wrote/write? leave that impression?)... That might have thrown me as well—trying to figure out what Mr. Morris might have thought I was thinking... Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Wait... I might take all that back... Back to the drawing board for me... See why I didn't want to get into this?! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:59, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

And then it may be just as simple as my accidentally leaving out the "Mrs." in the Author page header description... The world may never know! Granted, however, I agree that "Evelyn Underhill" is not a pseudonym, but Mrs. Stuart Moore's given name. Done—I think! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:05, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

April's Proofread of the Month

Hi, I'm thinking ahead to the next Proofread and intend to propose a poetry month. Billinghurst has already suggested a collection of "favourite Scots songs ancient and modern" collected by Burns. Do you have any suggestions? I presume that you don't want us to do any Coates as they're a personal project. But is there something we should have that we don't?

By the way, I'm addressing you here because this persona is the poet. If you'd prefer me to use the other, just let me know. I'm happy to fit in. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Good morning, Beeswaxcandle! Even though Mrs. Coates' works are "pet projects" of mine, I would never be against their being worked on as a community project; but they have all already reached at least Proofread status. If there's any more by her out there that I am unaware of, now THAT would be a treat! Otherwise, anything Billinghurst would suggest would probably go over well with me... He knows how to pick 'em. I would be interested especially in his choice of poetry, however, for I am under the impression that he has somewhat of an aversion to the genre . Thanks for asking, and either persona will work—and write poetry (albeit sparingly—and only when inspired)... <thinking sans rocking> Actually, a recent visit to Robert Service's author page, come to think of it, came up wanting yesterday... His works were recommended to me years ago by a friend who knew I liked Jack London's work... But I wouldn't know which volume(s) to recommend... Again, Thanks for asking! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look at Service and see what I can find. The Burns' book might not be long enough, so I'm looking for a couple of others. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh... I meant to also ask... Was it you who added the em- and en-dash icons to my editing toolbar? If so, would you mind doing likewise for my other persona?—er, account? :) Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:11, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Done. What I did was copy them from your LJB vector.js and then paste them into your new common.js. If you want them I have a few other similar buttons for the æ & œ ligatures and the £ sign. Just copy them from the bottom of User:Beeswaxcandle/monobook.js and paste on the bottom of User:SonjaNBohm/common.js. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks on both counts, and Cheers to you too. Have a good one! Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Come to think of it, I don't use ligatures enough to warrant placing them in a prominent position; and I don't think I'll ever have any use for the £ ;) Thanks though! :)

• Beeswaxcandle, Do you have a link to the Burns collection? Is it this text? If so, It's pretty long actually—lookin' like a 2-Volumer too... May take a whole month after all! Sounds good to me... AKA Londonjackbooks 18:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC) Nevermind... I see it's a different one that Billinghurst had in mind... AKA Londonjackbooks 18:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps this will help

From Brother Officer talk page:

Quote:

==The mysterious Header toggle button ==

When proofreading in the Page: namespace and one has their toolbar turned on [Gadgets | Editing (tab) | Editing toolbar (checkbox)], one will see the button , and clicking it toggles the header/footer on and off. In this space we put the relevant components for top and bottoms of pages, usually by use of the template {{RunningHeader}}, so for example {{RunningHeader|Stanhope|3|Stanhope}} produces

I personally have my header/footer set to open in the Page: namespace and I achieved this by activating that option in my Gadgets. To also note that at this time, the use of the newer Wikieditor toolbar (Editing tab in My preferences) does not yet display all the tools that we utilise for proofreading. If you turn it off in your preferences you access the older toolbar and more editing options. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:08, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I see no use to toggle that button. If anything it is confusing because it isn't needed. I think it should be deleted and something better can be placed in that spot. I too am now doing as you have taught me. I have the system set to show the header and footer every time. I thank you, Billinghurst, you always come through to assist others and there is great honor in that. Respectfully, —Brother Officer^Talk 05:27, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll sort through all of the above in a bit. Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:37, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Billinghurst's tip above ("I personally have my header/footer set to open in the Page: namespace and I achieved this by activating that option in my Gadgets.") did the trick (My preferences / Gadgets / Editing tools for Page: namespace / [check] Show header and footer fields when editing in the Page namespace). Thanks for the toss, Mr. Morris... Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:26, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

You are very welcome. It was a toss to me and I am glad I could toss it on to someone else. Sorry about my toss looking so messy but I just copy/pasted it as it was. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 12:48, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

No problemo... Or is it sin problemo? I forget... Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:56, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I think what you have used was meant to be funny in one of the "Terminator" series. Arnold S. said it. I am not positive but I think it is, No es una problema. (It is not a problem) —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 13:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you could be right! Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:01, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Existing work that needs love

Gday LJB. I have stumbled over The Complete Poems of Emily Brontë that is neither in one form or another, and could do with some love. To me it looks as though we should be shifting all the existing works to be subpages of the work, with redirects from top, and there seems to be a good need for standardisation, and the adding of next links, etc. to give the work some flow. If you don't get to it, that is okay, I cannot give the time to it at the moment, and it won't go anywhere in the interim. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Billinghurst. I don't mind taking a look at it when I get a good chunk of time... These author's works have come so far, so good, and they deserve to be represented and preserved as such. Thanks for the toss; I'll give it the consideration of at least a facelift, and perhaps a bit more TLC than that if I see a need! Have a good one, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Double redirects

Hi, hope all is well...

Just not sure if its OK to "fix" these yet 'cause my gut is telling me things are still in a bit of flux at the moment. Should I just leave these to you to straighten-out? Its about 3 days before the next list so you'll have plenty of time. If not - let me know here. Thanx. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:05, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

All is well, and same to you. Thanks for the link to the double redirects; I think I saved that link somewhere on one of my subpages... Still trying to get the double redirect thing straight. I know what it is practically, but as I move pages and redirect pages, I am never sure at what point I will be creating a double redirect. Must be a left-brain/right-brain thing! I'll take a look at them soon. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:24, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem, though sooner would be better than later -- there is a busybody BOT that comes through here whenever it feels like it and can make fixes contrary to what is ultimately desired (i.e. deletes stuff) by an actual contributor such as yourself.

A double-redirect occurs when you move the same content twice (or more) without either asking for a speedy delete or making a dated soft redirect of the very first title ever created at the point in time of the first move.

Basically, the DR list has at least three entries for an article in "hazard" - the very last at the far right being the actual base page holding the content. Only the title to immediate left of that very last far right title has the proper redirect path. Every other title to the left of that once removed title needs to be corrected to point to the very last far right title to match. (Hope that wasn't too confusing). -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:46, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Done And as far as being confusing: The great thing about putting things down on "paper" is that you can review it later for clarification. The same can not always be said about the spoken word (unless it is recorded, of course). I prefer the former. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

The closest thing to poetry in PSM

Hi. I thought that this article may be of interest for you. — Ineuw talk 18:25, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

It's would also help if I include the link:

Popular Science Monthly/Volume 4/December 1873/Tennyson and Botany — Ineuw talk 18:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. When I get the chance, I'll validate as I read through. Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Done, Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

It's I who thank you. Didn't mean to distract you and validate. Just remembered our conversation awhile back about proofreading PSM and it's lack of fine prose and poetry. This is all I found that may have been of interest to you. :-) — Ineuw talk 23:07, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

It was no distraction... I just can't see 'wasting' a read if I can kill two birds with one stone and validate at the same time! Perhaps you missed the fine piece on Charles Darwin, poetry & science...? Still in need of validation! Have a good week, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

You are very funny. :-) I am nowhere near volume 74. I partially completed (the article titles, authors, TOC, volume indexes, main namespace titles, images, and tables), up to volume 50. now I am working on proofreading volume 6 ... 7 ... probably until volume 10. Then, I return to volume 51 and restart the above perhaps to volume 92, which was the last of Matt's original upload. Thus, I balance the work to keep things interesting.

On a related subject, do you recall our "conversation" about volume 75 of PSM? We didn't include it yet because of the missing photos. (The drawings are there). I remember your mentioning that you saw a version with the images included. Do you recall where you saw it? Below is the link from Internet Archive Volume 75 page 56 with the missing photo. I just wanted to show you how it looks with the missing photo. if you remember where you saw it, could you please advise? Many thanks. — Ineuw talk 00:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I remember the conversation... I believe I found the volume at Google Books, but am not 100% sure. I can double-check tomorrow. Signing off for tonight! Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Google-searched with text from volume: "jaw with a tooth from any other one" came up with: this!? Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hi, you may remember our little chat. If so, can I ask you to give me a hand with translation? I know that you do not speak Russian, but I think you will still be able to help me. --Kaidor (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

What are you looking to do? Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:51, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

If you are not in principle against it, then I'll write a letter with giving an account of the problem and how you can help with it. --Kaidor (talk) 18:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I can neither be for nor against it unless I know what "it" is. If it is within the scope of Wikisource policy/guidelines, then you can possibly bring light to the problem at the Scriptorium (WS Central discussion). Many helpful editors there too! Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I just wanted to ask for explanation of some words and phrases that aren't contained in any dictionary. And you're the only native speaker of English whom I know little. But I understand your concerns (some obscure Russian asks for some obscure things), so I can write them right here. --Kaidor (talk) 19:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

That would be fine, and I hope I can help... It may reveal my ignorance of my own language, however! :) Fire away... Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! So…

1. We had no sooner let-go the anchor than we were environed with canoes, laden with poultry, pigs, tarro, yams, bananas, cocoa-nuts, via apples and oranges. (From there) Why «via»? What means this «via» here?
   
2. The weather was fine, the wind
 fair, and, with studding sails set on either side, — below
 and aloft, — our good ship, like a thing of life, bounded
 onward, as eager to reach home as were her jolly crew.
 (From there)
   
3. They danced the fandango to the tunes
 played on the guitar, while others were drinking their
 orgedent, singing, gambling, swearing, laughing, fighting,
 and begging. (From there)
   
4. In fact, Jack says they are lop-sided
 and out of kilter altogether. (From there)
   
5. Our mess bill, which we received at the end
 of each month, read as follows: "Tea, sugar, tobacco,
 mustard, pepper, bees-wax, soap, white and black thread,
 thimbles, scissors, palms, large and small needles, dead-
eye buttons, tin pots, tin pans, tin spoons." (From there)
   
6. They sit upon mats
 spread on the earth-floor, both sexes cross-legged, and
 "sail right in."
 (From there)
   

That's all for the time being. --Kaidor (talk) 19:46, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

A start... Other WS users, please chime in if you can contribute where I am unable!

1. "via" usually means through or by way of; I'm not sure how one can be "environed with canoes, laden with poultry [& etc., by way of] apples and oranges." My dictionary at home doesn't give another use.
2. "like a thing of life" just means that the ship resembled a living thing based on its "behavior" (i.e., "bounding onward", etc.), seemingly "as eager to reach home as her ... crew."
3. I can not find your exact word; In my dictionary I found the word "orgeat", but I don't know if the two are related. Orgeat is "a non-alcoholic drink prepared from the sweetened juice of almonds and other flavorings usually served cold..." Not knowing if you can separate orge from dent, but dent has to do with the teeth. Bottom line, I don't know about this one other than it is a drink made of ??? and it is either alcoholic or not, I don't know...
4. Kilter means "good working condition" or "aligned". Out of kilter means that it is not in good working condition; or not operating as it should, etc.
5. a) One definition of "palm" in my dictionary is "a piece of leather or heavy canvas fitted to the palm of the hand as protection when sewing heavy materials (as harness leather or a sail) by hand..." That is probably the correct reference within the context of your sentence above. b) a "dead-eye button" is "a rounded wood block that is encircled by a rope or iron band and pierced with holes to receive the lanyard and is used to set up shrouds and stays and for other purposes."
6. "Sail right in" might be similar to another expression, to "dig in"—or to "have at it"... In other words, to hastily help themselves to the food, without waiting.

One User who comes to mind that might be of more help with your questions is User:Beeswaxcandle. Or anyone else who might come across this post... Hope I have helped some! Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very mach! It all has been explained to me at least. But I don't quite understand what means «Out of kilter» in that text towards the women. Does it mean that they had bad figures or they was crippled or something else? --Kaidor (talk) 19:00, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the context, it seems they are indeed speaking about the women's physical features ("round-shouldered, knock-kneed, bow-legged", etc.) Are you translating Twenty Years before the Mast into Russian or another language? or is this just for your own edification? Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Of course I'm translating it into Russian, for the purpose of creating the article about US Ex Ex in the Russian Wikipedia, and at the same time this work helps me to improve (very slowly, as you can see) my English. :) --Kaidor (talk) 21:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

A couple of notes on the things that LJB wasn't sure of. "via apples" is a wrong plural form of "vi-apple". It would normally just be "vi-apples". A vi-apple is the fruit of Spondias dulcis. It's larger than an apple and the rind tastes of turpentine but the flesh has a pineapple flavour.

I can't find anything definite about "orgedent", but we (a couple of botanist friends and I) suspect this is an alcoholic/hallucinogenic drink brewed from cactus juice. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:35, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikisource:Maintenance of the Month/Base Pages

It's not necessary to keep these lists up to date. The plan is to periodically generate either a list of new works since the last list, or an updated list, or both. --Eliyak T·C 23:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I 'moved' a page, and the Maintenance of the Month page came up as containing a link to the old title. I wasn't sure if the update would be necessary, but I thought better safe than sorry. Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:08, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Seven Seas

Do you think we should be wrapping the poem titles in no include? They are in the header at the section parameter and it seems a little repetitive to me. What do you think?--BirgitteSB 03:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure what you mean... But bottom line, it's how it's transcluded into the Main that counts, and the title should be transcluded along with the poem—as it is in the original. If I'm not getting what you're saying, would it be too much trouble to rephrase your question? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you are saying "no"', but I will try and clarify what I am seeing. The Seven Seas/A Song of the English In the header it reads bottom center A Song of the English and then the next thing you read is A Song of the English. I am thinking it would be better to only read this once. But it is only a slight preference and I would not mind skipping the title in the section parameter and leaving the transcluded version instead of my first suggestion.--BirgitteSB 03:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I guess I was saying "No" :) If one instance had to be eliminated (which I don't believe it does/should), I would opt for the instance in the header vice in the body. My opinion. But as a standard, I usually defer to those who know better ;) Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem with having it in the header only is that it then goes missing when the work is exported to ePub or pdf for use on an eReader. The headers are only used for reading here on WS. The header parameters are used for various WS things. As a result I think titles should be in both places. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Accounting

Hello again, hope this finds you & your's well....

I see you've come to a decision to go with just this account and apparently can't stop yourself from the temptation to log in under the other one on your own. Not sure a "speedy deletion" is the right route to accomplish this. I think the best thing to do would be to consult one of the 'crats (Bridgett or Hesperian) on the approved way to abandon a declared alternate account. Prost. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:54, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Yup. Only need one account. Easier on the brain. I'll ask Hesperian. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:59, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

EDWARD COATE PINKNEY

[[2]]EDWARD COATE PINKNEY ("COATE") William Maury Morris II (talk) 04:26, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

An upcoming change to poem tags

Hi, there's been an announcement on the Scriptorium about a small change to the way poem tags deal with indenting. I know you don't usually use them, but thought you would be interested. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I took a look at it, and don't understand what is meant exactly... but I'll play around with the poem tag/colon use come Sept. 19th or so and see what happens. If I'm still clueless, I'll knock on someone's door. Thank you for the heads up! Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:34, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Width size reduced to see wrapping effect

Colon use wrapped in poem tag	Colon use not wrapped in poem tag	Using poem tag & 'simple spaces' (not colons)	Using breaks and gaps (not colons)	Using breaks & emsp (not colons)
ALL are not strangers whom we so misname: Man's free-born spirit, which no rule can tame, Careless of time, o'er vasty distance led, Still finds its own where alien altars flame, Still greets its own amongst the deathless dead!	ALL are not strangers whom we so misname: Man's free-born spirit, which no rule can tame, Careless of time, o'er vasty distance led, Still finds its own where alien altars flame, Still greets its own amongst the deathless dead!	ALL are not strangers whom we so misname: Man's free-born spirit, which no rule can tame,      Careless of time, o'er vasty distance led, Still finds its own where alien altars flame,      Still greets its own amongst the deathless dead!	ALL are not strangers whom we so misname: Man's free-born spirit, which no rule can tame, Careless of time, o'er vasty distance led, Still finds its own where alien altars flame, Still greets its own amongst the deathless dead!	ALL are not strangers whom we so misname: Man's free-born spirit, which no rule can tame,   Careless of time, o'er vasty distance led, Still finds its own where alien altars flame,   Still greets its own amongst the deathless dead!
Fails copy/paste test	Do not use	Passes copy/paste test	Poor copy/paste test (renders single-space indent)	Passes copy/paste test

Declined speedy delete

Hi, I've declined the speedy delete for Song (Brontë) because there is still a link to Poems by Currer, Ellis, and Acton Bell and I'm not sure where you're headed with it, so I can't resolve the link. All the others are done. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 23:45, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. That particular "Song" begins with the line, "The linnet in the rocky dells" which we have hosted here under a different source text (The Complete Poems of Emily Brontë). I'll link to the alternate source (other of Emily's poems on the Currier, Ellis, etc. page are linked to Complete Poems), but really,—it/they should probably be redlinked to their own source. Maybe I'll get around to that some time. Thanks again, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:52, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

spelling

LondonJackBooks, I offer my sincere apology for the misspelling of Allan as Poe's middle name. I have a brother-in-law whose name is Allen so I guess that is where I get "Allen". Anyhow, thank you and continue to watch for my misspellings in that area in the future. Kind regards, —William Maury Morris II^Talk 21:09, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Done it myself. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:33, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

request

Londonjackbooks, would you please provide a/some entrie/s on Coates for "This Date in History"? You have good materials and it perhaps can promote what you like which may cause others to see, read, and become an admirer of that authoress. I ask, in part, because I like the works myself -- but I know where to look for them. Kindest regards, —William Maury Morris II^Talk 21:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll give it some thought. Feel free to add anything yourself that you may like; it's there free for the taking. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

A couple of new templates that may be useful

Hi, User:T. Mazzei has been busily creating some new templates. A couple of them I thought you may be interested in: {{Center block}}, {{Left block}} and {{Right block}}. These use a different way of blocking text than do {{Block center}} &c. As a result they may behave better for some of your applications. They can probably also be used within tables as they don't create tables themselves. He hasn't got as far as doing /s & /e versions, but if they work they way I think they will, you may not need these. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

First thing I notice (see) is too much space between lines—at least where poetry would be concerned. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:26, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I see what you mean, that's inter-paragraph spacing within the paragraph, so each line is being treated as a new paragraph. There's been some discussions about the templates at WS:S/H, mostly technical, but it appears that the templates are using html in ways that they shouldn't. I suggest we leave using them until there's some resolution. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:44, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Have another look at your sandbox. T. Mazzei has changed the templates a little so that the vertical spacing is normal. Also, the centre block one now works without a dictated width. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

end spaces

I leave those in there deliberately. Although the software currently ignores them in transclusion, there is no guarantee that it will do so in the future. I therefore leave a final space when the paragraph continues on the next page, in case this change should happen. There are some known issues currently that might lead to such a change happening. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:24, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, that would affect an awful lot of work here. At least in my browser, where end spaces are left, I often see a dashed box between text as a result in the Main (but I haven't gone so far as to test whether only one space causes it or multiple—I just get rid of them). Where did you see the subject of these issues discussed? Also, with regard to chapter title font size, if you compare actual text size, the title font is the same as caps in the text body; likewise, subtitles are smaller than regular caps in the text body.

In the Scriptorium. There are at least two page-break issues I've seen raised where the current software implementation generates unwanted line breaks or the like. Now, I mean a space at the end of a line, and not a space on a separate line following the text. The latter is a no-no and should always be removed, but I've never seen a browser that had issues resulting from a space at the end of a text line.

For the lecture title, I simply copied the format used at the start of the first lecture (page 1) for consistency. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks X2... Makes sense... but the size is still wrong there as well; but I'll let someone else tweak it. Because while the subtitles are 'smaller', they are not really {{smaller}}. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, I did some calculating, and found that the current PotM could be done by the end of the month as long as we average 17 pages proofread per day. So, three people doing 6 pages each day would get the job done with a few days to spare, and we're a day ahead right now from having some work already done. But then, I'm a person who likes math, plans, and schedules. :) --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

You just got me to chuckle... I am not good at math, am a procrastinator, and dislike schedules. But I like to figure out how things work—at least on a practical/applicable level—and find myself occasionally subjecting myself to brain-strain. You took the figuring even further than I did—and your results are probably more accurate... I'll take your word for it! ;) Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Shift left template

I know you borrowed it from someone else before I borrowed it from you, but it is useful. I've just used it on Page:Paul Clifford Vol 3.djvu/190 and, knowing that you like to collect different ways of using various templates, I thought I'd let you know about this one. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:29, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Very nice! Thanks for sharing, Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:20, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

(using … across the board)

Hello.

I am, of course teasing, but was amused to note that in correcting my handling of ...'s in [3], despite your comment above, you had actually removed said punctuation instead...

Seriously, up to now I have always treated any form of . . . as eligible to have all leading, internal and trailing spaces removed and replaced by a single "…", with the obvious exception of dot-leaders. Would you please be so kind as to at least make Index talk:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu#ellipses unambiguous as to which presentation is preferred (presumably " &hellip; "?), and whether this applies simply to this specific work; or universally?

I for one would really appreciate the clarification.

Regards, MODCHK (talk) 21:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I posed the question, but then decided to use the 'hellip' option, as Billinghurst—who has been validating many of the pages—seems to prefer that usage... While (I believe) any of the three applications are acceptable, I went ahead with following Billinghurst's lead for uniformity's sake. I'll make note of it on the Talk page. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem. It is always best to fall into line with the style leaders! (Consistency always valued more highly than rationality―most especially in proofreading…) MODCHK (talk) 03:00, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Huh... thought I was being rational. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:09, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I have clearly teased you too much―you appear to be doing it to yourself, now. Thank you for noting the clarification in any case. MODCHK (talk) 01:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

The joke is [lost] on me. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:23, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

RE: Speedy edits.

Thanks, sometimes I just get focused on validating pages that I get caried away. Will be more vigilant in the future. --Legofan94 (talk) 01:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem; I hesitated to even bring it up. Happy validating! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:03, 20 December 2012 (UTC)