MarkLSteadman

Welcome to Wikisource

Hello, MarkLSteadman, 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, especially for proofreading
• Help:Beginner's guide to Wikisource
• Style guide
• Inclusion policy
• Wikisource:For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in

• Proofread of the Month
• Monthly Challenge
• Requested texts

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{Collaboration/MC}} 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 username if you're logged in (or IP address if you are not) 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! — billinghurst sDrewth 11:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Doing great work

Gday Mark. You have been quietly working away and been doing really good stuff, working well in Page ns, and got transclusion to the main ns sorted, congratulations. A note: we pretty well have deprecated the use of the quality tag, as with the quality ribbon that comes with page transclusion picks up the proofread status, making the other tag redundant. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:57, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I have several questions still about transclusion and the main ns. 1) In The World's Famous Orations Vol. 1 I cannot seem to get the sectioning to work right, where one ends and another begins on the same page. 2) I am not sure about who the authors should be for some of the works in TWFO1 (such as Achilles speech, should it have Achilles or Homer?) I guess this should be on the TWFO1 discussion page? — MarkLSteadman (talk) 03:08, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Re 1) a) added a section and b) transclusion update. My recommendation is to think of the sections as chunks, so we have select a chunk on a terminating or starting page that we wish to have transcluded, and the transclusion itself grabs the chunk. 2) For Achilles, it is pretty well a legend anyway. We would try to have the author, when we know specifically. I would suggest that for this, we could utilise the notes fields to add context. ie, Legend has it that [[w:Achilles|]] spoke these words, and they are words that were recorded among the works of [[Author:Homer|]] or something like that. No exact science, so you could put more on the talk page if you think that is relevant. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:48, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Validating Goethe's Works

Thank you for validating my work! If you would prefer it, I can clean up the formatting of the line breaks in the already done section. Or I can get back to proofreading. MarkLSteadman (talk) 03:33, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

You are very welcome. Would you be willing to validate 30 pages of my work? The "In Memoriam" is very short and has been proofread and sitting for a long while. I will continue on some more validating of your work. It is a fair exchange. Kindest regards, Maury ( —William Maury Morris II^Talk 03:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:In_Memoriam._Matthew_Fontaine_Maury.djvu

I noticed that page 14 was not a good scan. I saw they have a better version now on google books. Not sure how to replace it though. MarkLSteadman (talk) 04:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I remembered that page and marked it as not done (red). Do not worry over it, I can remedy it -- and I also have the page to complete it. Kind regards, Maury. —William Maury Morris II^Talk 04:39, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Finished with In Memoriam. Thanks again for validating Goethe. I hope you found it interesting. MarkLSteadman (talk) 05:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Our adventure is over for now <smile>. It is difficult to read in detail when one is looking for formatting, spelling of German words &c. I thank you for what you have done on my behalf. Nobody else had bothered and that is often the way of things here. Formatting a page was what I saw as an error in most of what you have edited. I left a note when I validated the pages that can be seen on your "watchlist" that covers how to format a page. Pages can look excellent but when you are in edit mode you will see that an unformatted page has scrambled text. When you format the text it pulls everything into close order which can be seen after the page is saved and one looks back at the "diff" of before and after formatting a page. Thank you again for your help. Kindest regards, Maury (—William Maury Morris II^Talk 05:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Authority control gadget

Gday MLS. Not sure whether you have seen in your gadgets (via preferences) that we have a gadget that places itself into the sidebar that allows us to search and easily add {{authority control}} templates to Author pages. Really useful it is. Also, if you are building many author pages, then I have a javascript file in my common.js file that queries enWP for the name and populates blank author pages. Give me a buzz if you want to know more, or would like specific detail. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:43, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Gday billinghurst. Thanks for reminding me about authority control. I meant to investigate it earlier and never quite got around to it. I would be interested in learning more about how to use javascript in common.js to make things easier. Is there any documentation available? MarkLSteadman (talk) 16:01, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Documentation?!? <gasp> nothing local. In the general sense we rely on the goodwill of enWP like w:Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts. We gave gadgetify numbers of them. Have a poke at user:Billinghurst/common.js but only look at the top bits where I have scripts, the bottom components are just ugly. Any admin can put them in place for you, as we have ability to write to user space. Phe's scripts (author) you will see that I just run from his user space, so it is a line of code for me (and my trust that he isn't dodgy).

I did fib, there is some documentation about some bits at Wikisource:Tools and scripts though it is a bit of a wild, untended paddock! — billinghurst sDrewth 11:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Pentagon Papers

Thanks so much for your help with the Pentagon Papers! – GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:52, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. Do feel free to add the Wikipedia / Wiktionary links to my edits. I do have one quick question. I noticed that it contains excerpts from articles / books that are copyrighted. I assume that it is ok as fair use, but I thought I should check with you. MarkLSteadman (talk) 16:59, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a bit of a nasty issue... I've been allowing the smaller quotes to remain, but I've been removing the copyrighted images and large swaths of text. I posted a discussion of it on the Scriptorium, and it's definitely a grey area. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 17:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I was looking at these to proofread but couldn't figure out where the indexes are. Searched and saw you were working on things recently. I'm not technical at all, and was wondering if you could link the index at United_States_–_Vietnam_Relations,_1945–1967:_A_Study_Prepared_by_the_Department_of_Defense? As suggested on the talk out page it would assist proofreaders like me to help on the project. Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 06:49, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

I added a list of the indices to the talk page. A bunch of them still need to be set up and possibly the scans fixed so let me know if there is one that interests you. MarkLSteadman (talk) 07:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikisource User Group

Wikisource, the free digital library is moving towards better implementation of book management, proofreading and uploading. All language communities are very important in Wikisource. We would like to propose a Wikisource User Group, which would be a loose, volunteer organization to facilitate outreach and foster technical development, join if you feel like helping out. This would also give a better way to share and improve the tools used in the local Wikisources. You are invited to join the mailing list 'wikisource-l' (English), the IRC channel #wikisource, the facebook page or the Wikisource twitter. As a part of the Google Summer of Code 2013, there are four projects related to Wikisource. To get the best results out of these projects, we would like your comments about them. The projects are listed at Wikisource across projects. You can find the midpoint report for developmental work done during the IEG on Wikisource here.

Global message delivery, 23:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

c:File:Democratic Ideals and Reality (1919).djvu

Hello. Just to let you know that the above file has been undeleted at Commons because it is now PD in the UK too. Green Giant (talk) 08:19, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Curious

Hi, thanks for your recent edits to Looters of the Public Domain. I'm curious about this edit. Is there an easy-to-explain reason why having the {{sc}} template on each line is better? In general, I see a lot of more experienced Wikisourcers (or, people more familiar with web code) tidying-up after my edits, but in some cases like this, the underlying reasons are opaque to me. -Pete (talk) 20:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

(Short version). The rendering will change when the new parser comes out which will cause the sc template to not carry over across paragraphs.

(More technical version). Sc is implemented by a span (like e.g. the smaller template) rather than a div (like e.g. the smaller block template). You can read here [[1]] about how the different parsers change the rendering of span . This is related to a change from HTML4 semantics to HTML5 semantics happening across multiple wikis.

MarkLSteadman (talk)

Excellent, thank you -- that helps a lot. -Pete (talk) 15:20, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Smaller adjustment

Your edit here seems to have made text too small. I'll let you take a look. Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 06:18, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

I only made smaller per paragraph instead of across multiple paragraphs. I closed the unclosed template since that seemed to be the intent. (See the previous commit here). Feel free to remove all the smallers if it is left from before the block were put in, I was trying to match the existing styling. MarkLSteadman (talk)

Thanks. Think I found the issue. Londonjackbooks (talk) 06:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Fasti

That is one of my very early introduced works and it was waaaay back when we were very size limited with uploads and the scan sources were scare and sometimes plain crap—and probably so was my transcribing. If there is a better scan copy around of the edition, then we could look to re-upload to Commons, and move pages over. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi MarkLSteadman,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikisource and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi MarkLSteadman,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi MarkLSteadman,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Portal - authority control

The use of {{authority control}} isn't sanctioned yet for Portals as you've been doing. However, it may be reasonable because of the way we use Portals for corporate authorship. I would recommend updating the template's documentation and/or posting a note to the Scriptorium. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I did see this https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Authority_control which references portal pages. I will comment about it in general on Scriptorum per your suggestion and update the template docs. I mostly wanted to do some work to improve our publishing company pages by making sure they are tagged with the category and linked to wikidata and fill in some gaps as well as update a few of the booklists. MarkLSteadman (talk) 22:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Created the Scriptorium comment. MarkLSteadman (talk) 17:59, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Typos in page names

Hi Mark,

Just to let you know, if you mistype a page name on creation you should mostly be able to just move the page to the right name yourself. There's a "Move" command in the "More" dropdown menu (right next to the search field) on every page. There are some pages where moving is restricted to administrators, but most pages you should be able to fix yourself. Moving a page is usually the better way to deal with such cases for several reasons (you can do it yourself, it preserves editing history, etc.). --Xover (talk) 13:56, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

contributor ... Venona: FBI Documents of Historic Interest ?

Hi. I see for one of the subpages of the work that author was used rather than contributor. If that was also the case with the other subpages, would you mind updating. It changes the positioning of the name of the section's author. Can also use section_author. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Ethically attentive work

Just wanted to drop a note of thanks for being attentive on WS:PD#The Ethical Theory of Hegel. If you hadn't commented there it is very likely that we would have made a mistake. It is possible the closing admin (often myself) would have noticed that the subpages were scan-backed, but by no means certain. And as you see, the entire nom was premised on the work not being scan-backed.

I also very much appreciate participation in discussions on WS:CV and WS:PD in general. The hardest part of managing those processes is that there is insufficient participation to be able to judge any clear consensus. A lot of the cases may be pretty straightforward, but a significant number end up needing opinions on "Where do we draw the line?"; either in the form of "How incomplete for how long do we permit?", or "What standard of evidence do we accept as sufficient for [some issue, often copyright related]?". Xover (talk) 06:34, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Namibia

I have finally created the score; could you transclude the work? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:42, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

@TE(æ)A,ea.: Can do (I will also fill out the Wikidata). I also uploaded the previous national anthem of Namibia and plan to do Zambia and Kenya as well. I tried to find an edict to back Uganda and was not successful. I was planning to work my way through the former British colonies and see how far I get... Hopefully we can sort most of these English ones from the 60s out. MarkLSteadman (talk) 01:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Harmonics - Aristoxenus - Macran

I had peeked ahead wondering if there was were music examples involved. I see at least Page:Harmonics - Aristoxenus - Macran.djvu/16 early on. I haven't heard about progress on Lilypond support at WS/Wikimedia, so I was very surprised to see Page:Government Gazette of the Republic of Namibia - No 6807.pdf/7 by User:TE(æ)A,ea.. Is Lilypond back? Shenme (talk) 01:41, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Shenme: It's being tested pending a full rollout (see comment here and the commit here). MarkLSteadman (talk) 02:24, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Also feel free to work on it if you are interested, I mostly wanted to set it up because it looked like an interesting work and I wanted to create the indices in case someone is interested, I have a bunch of other projects in flight... MarkLSteadman (talk) 02:32, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

• If you need some help with scores, Shenme or Mark, feel free to ask me. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:33, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Your Nominations for the October MC were Selected

I wanted to let you know that Index:London - The People of the Abyss.djvu and Index:Footsteps of Dr. Johnson.djvu were selected for the October MC. Languageseeker (talk) 02:04, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. We will see what kind of interest they attract. MarkLSteadman (talk) 02:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

LST

I'm transcluding the Eddas that I see you have been working on. Great job!

I don't know if you are familiar with LST (labelled section transclusion), but if you may find it easier to add section tags as you go rather than going back and adding them in afterwards. See the changes I made to Page:The Elder Edda and the Younger Edda - tr. Thorpe - 1907.djvu/79 for an example of what I mean. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

When transcluding my own, I am happy to do it but I wasn't sure with challenge works whether whoever who was planning to go through it had their own ideas about conventions so I let it be... Thanks for transcluding it, I wasn't sure how far we wanted to go before concluding enough had been done to merit transclusion. MarkLSteadman (talk) 20:40, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

new version

Hi, I noted your find, a Kropotkin pamphlet, and uploaded that to The wage system. I see there is another version at the title case, do with that what you will. Regards, Cygnis insignis (talk) 14:21, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

identity crisis

You were skating circles around me and my latest batch of authors. I got one that I am pretty sure should be merged with another but would rather a better skater do this than me. See d:Q109522780 I just made that for Powell Millington. LCCN says that this is a pseud. for d:Q96081644 Mark Synge. LCCN: https://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n85231211.html I found him as author a short story in 1902. Thanks, show off....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:28, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Re the previous edits, I appreciated the work you had done in finding them which made it much easier to track down and search for the death dates. In general I enjoy finding death dates as it is like a mini-challenge to track down and find on the web as a mini-mystery... I actually have not done much admin stuff on wikidata like merges or deletions. I generally left a note on the talk page for both items and then someone came along and merged it (not much of a show off then)... MarkLSteadman (talk) 02:25, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Merge is easy. Too easy, really. It is in a drop down under "More". I merged records before I lost my ! there, even. Just run with the defaults, like "merge with the oldest" and "load the merged when completed". The only problem that can arise is when it is open in another tab and later you start to edit it, but even then wd complains and causes the edit to stop, or at least for the editor to think about it.

Administative at wd is more like knowing how to set the properties up. What is allowed, not allowed and regexp for urls and numerics, etc. They don't seem to delete, just occasionally they discuss reusing previously merged numbers.

I went back to see if Lt. Col. (or whatever) had a viaf, and there wasn't one; so, I am pretty sure it is the same person. I think you should merge it to see how easy it is, nothing to brag about like filling in a history of a person who died a hundred years ago or so. viaf thinks they are the same, (I just checked the other name). Try it!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 05:06, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

My Apology

I'm sorry about nominating two of your Namibian Acts for deletion on Commons, mistakenly believing that they were locally copyrighted. It is later found that Namibian copyright law has provision that releases government edicts into their local public domain, so that they should be allowable on Commons. I'll deal with all the mess later then, regards.廣九直通車 (talk) 09:45, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

No problem at all. Thanks for your attention to detail, it is certainly the case that I could have missed some thing as I am also not particularly adept at any law and it is good for someone else to get involved. BTW if you do want to scan-back more laws, feel free to reorganize them to be more user-friendly. elLet me know if I can help out in any way. MarkLSteadman (talk) 15:34, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

The Arden Shakespeare

Thanks for setting this up. I do wonder however why you chose to switch to an inferior Google scan for Much Ado About Nothing over the scan I had linked at IA? I sought out high-quality scans for any Arden editions when I went through and revised the versions pages. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:53, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey Because the IA scan link is for Measure for Measure rather than Much Ado About Nothing unless I am missed something. MarkLSteadman (talk) 21:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Well then thanks for catching the error. I must have borked and copy-pasted without updating. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:38, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Template:IA

Per the documentation, this template is intended for use in the Talk and File namespaces, not Author, Portal, etc. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

I was meaning to use {{IA small link}}, and got confused between them, sorry. MarkLSteadman (talk) 21:01, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Vote-ish processes

A request: in vote-ish discussions such as at WS:PD, to the degree you're willing and able to formulate a definite stance, it would be helpful if you could make it explicit with a keep or delete vote; preferably using {{vk}} or {{vd}}. You can of course further qualify your stance to express nuances beyond those two binaries (e.g. "By delete I mean convert page under discussion into a redirect to target page"), but having a clear overall position is very helpful to the poor admin trying to manage the process (i.e., on PD and CV, me). The biggest problem with WS:PD and WS:CV and making them function properly is limited participation in discussions, which often makes it extremely difficult to assess the outcome (and makes it vulnerable to bias and hijacking; cf. the recent spate of ideologically motivated cut&paste votes that were clearly made without so much as a glance at the text in question). Which in turn leads to a massive backlog, which makes clearly expressed explicit positions a great boon and timesaver when trying to process them. If you're not able (or comfortable with, or...) to express a specific position then you should of course not feel any pressure to do so. Xover (talk) 08:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

EB1911 maths

I happened to notice that on Page:EB1911 - Volume 01.djvu/666 and nearby pages you're using {{polytonic}} and a bunch of other formatting to mimic the math, rather than actually using math markup. In fact, I think I saw in the page history for one page that you removed actual math markup and replaced it with formatting templates. This makes me curious as to the reason why you've chosen that approach? Is there some problem with the math markup support in MediaWiki for these pages? Xover (talk) 08:22, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Add authors to Index?

Thanks for adding some more authors early last month. Could you add them to the Author Index, too? You can see the ones remaining to do on Special:LonelyPages. If you don't, I'll probably get around to them eventually, but it'd be nice to get them fixed up sooner rather than later. JesseW (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Chicago Martyrs note

I saw you working on this, and just wanted to let you know that a very similar index exists here, although by this point, what’s proofread of the old index should be moved over for your work. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, like many of things like this there are many different versions and editions, many of them with their own value and merit (for example, that one being edited by Lucy Parsons has particular relevance with the speech of her husband). MarkLSteadman (talk) 15:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Tolstoy again

Hi, Now that we have 2 complete collections, I wonder how to format this work: The Novels and Other Works of Lyof N. Tolstoï. I see in The Complete Works of Count Tolstoy and The Works of Voltaire (another big collection), that there is a plan for a page for each volume. Is this really necessary, specially when a volume contains only a work or part of a work? How to disambiguate works by different translators? Thanks, Yann (talk) 22:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: Of course it varies based on the exact situation, but some guidance:

• Single works published in separate volumes are commonly spread across multiple volumes (e.g. Great Expectations (1st edition)). This is not universal (e.g. Pride and Prejudice (1817) is just chapters, while Pride and Prejudice (1813) is in volumes.
• This is a recurring problem with works serialized in magazines. E.g. here: The Strand Magazine/The Hound of the Baskervilles
• The same work with different translations is handled by {{versions}} / {{translations}}. E.g. we would move what is currently on Anna Karenina into a distinguishing name (e.g. Anna Karenina (1917), convert the current page into {{translations}} and then link to both, or update the current disambiguation page at War and Peace
• Current style practice is that it is okay to link to a complete work included in a collection (e.g. to a whole poem or play, e.g from Hamlet (Shakespeare) to Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Hamlet) but not to parts of a work (e.g. linking to Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Hamlet/Act 1 Scene 1). You can an example here: Agamemnon (Aeschylus)

MarkLSteadman (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

defaultsort field in {{author}}

Hi. When creating author pages with the de/le/von/van/... nomenclature, would you be so kind to utilise the defaultsort field to help those pages sort properly in Category:Authors by alphabetical order. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:43, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikisource:Adminship

[Seems that we need to poke. ] Why have we not got you amongst our "esteemed" team of button-pushers? You meet the criteria as expressed, and you have been around ages long enough. I know that the pay is rubbish, and the glory is a bare sheen, however, I think that you have plenty to sanely contribute and some decision-making and button pushing is within your established abilities. How about you read the above identified page--which I am sure you have read previously--then either say that you are happy for me to nominate you, or that you will nominate yourself. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:36, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

@Billinghurst I would be happy to help out as much as I can, in general I know that there is a lot of work going on and hopefully by continuing to each do some we can keep it enjoyable. I am happy for you to nominate me. MarkLSteadman (talk) 01:24, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for taking up the mantle. I have completed the nomination and the process is typically that you accept the nom. With regard to the work, I have nominated you as I think that you can assist and use the tools appropriately, not b/c you see things my way or agree with my point of view. I nominate solely on the basis of competence, as I see it, to identify and act on the consensus of the community. We would be giving you a mop to use on our behalf. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:06, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now an administrator. Please familiarize yourself with the administrator interface and tools, which you should now be able to access. Depending on the skin you are using, they should be under the "More ˅" tab. BD2412 T 05:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Adding my congratulations. If you have abilities in languages other than English and/or other accesses in the wikiverse, please note them in the table at WS:ADMINS#Current Administrators. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Yea! Welcome. Always feel that there is no pressure on you to act where you are uncertain, and do feel free to find someone to consult if you feel you wish to. Here to judge consensus, and to act on consensus, new or has been expressed in the past. Thanks for taking up the broom. Use it wisely. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:46, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both, one thing that isn't clear is whether we have a 1-person or 2-person policy in general for things like {{sdelete}}, i.e. whether I should continue to nominate things like redundant images for mass deletion or whether I should just delete them myself based on my understanding of community consensus, when appropriate. MarkLSteadman (talk) 21:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

For NowCommons images feel free to move straight to delete, especially as when you use the migrate tool it is part of the deal. If it is uncontroversial maintenance then feel free to action where you don't have a conflict of interest [working with established community consensus]. If you feel that you have an aspect of CoI, then of course feel free to play on the safe side of the fence [where there is either no established consensus or there is that conflict and clear independence is better.] — billinghurst sDrewth 14:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

File:The Novels of Ivan Turgenev (volume XIII).djvu-1.png

Hello. I cannot find the transwikied copy of File:The Novels of Ivan Turgenev (volume XIII).djvu-1.png, can you provide a link, please? -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 08:53, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jan.Kamenicek File:Novels of Ivan Turgenev cover.jpg. I put the name(s) in the commit for reference. MarkLSteadman (talk) 15:39, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, that is not exactly the same image, but I guess it might be enough when we have whole the cover if the extracted coat of arms is not needed. I am going to delete it. Thanks for all the cleaning work! --Jan Kameníček (talk) 17:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

special:massdelete <= admin gadget

The page you want to get rid of multiple images, actually multiple anything. Magically it appears as a red link, even when the gadget is on, however, follow the link and for admins it populates with ability to delete. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 08:44, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

You don't want to do the File:...s yourself? — billinghurst sDrewth 14:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Page:De Vinne, Invention of Printing (1876).djvu/559

I’m going through and proofreading the last few pages of this work of yours. For the last entries on this page, the listings look like they have been subst:-ed, (1) is that true and (2) is that because of transclusion issues? If you have otherwise proofread these pages, would you mind marking them as such? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

That is correct, the way I started off with the leaders broke the template limit such that the index wouldn't transclude, so I changed how it was done for the later portions of the index to use an explicit table but stopped before I had a chance to update the whole index to be consistent. I would probably redo it again to use CSS styles instead of the large amounts of repetition, but I have been putting off learning the proper CSS styling of tables.... MarkLSteadman (talk) 05:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

 Comment Fairly easy with our regex tool to do a replacement as required. Can I say thought that the linking to the Page: ns like that is not appropriate. We should not be doing deep links like that to Page: ns on pages that are transcluded. They should either be left unlinked or if you do desire then done, then to use {{djvu page link}}. If you need a hand to fix, or to be shown the regex tool, then please let me know. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:25, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

userrights cheat

Hi. Just to let you know that you can quickly and easily set user rights for a relative period, use the other period and type "5 minutes" or whatever, and save it. Just so you don't have to return to the settings page, or forget to unset. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:07, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Charles Arthur Ginever

Thank you for your Author: markup on Ginever. Where on earth did you find that he was a Unitarian minister? I found him a complete cypher, so just wrote the blindingly obvious: author, translator, grammarian (although I suspect the latter was more his wife.) Her page on hu.wikipedia.org doesn't even mention him! CharlesSpencer (talk) 08:39, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

https://www.google.com/books/edition/%C3%89tudes_historiques_hongroises_1985/IdVnAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Ginever%20unitarian MarkLSteadman (talk) 14:42, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Also https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Essex_Hall_Year_Book_for/eiANAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Ginever, President, East London Unitarian Sunday-school Union MarkLSteadman (talk) 14:45, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

(Ab)use of running header :)

cf. Page:A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism - Volume 2.djvu/338 and the rest of the pages in that work.

Whenever you're tempted to use {{rh}} outside the header or footer areas in the Page: namespace you should generally stop and think before proceeding. The template is designed specifically for use for running headers. Based on the use it was put to I'm guessing it was just the most immediate way to achieve the necessary formatting? For a one-off need on a single work I'd use a table for that (raw wikimarkup table). If the need is wider (e.g. I suspect many books with math formulas are formatted similarly) we can look into making a new template specifically for that use case. Xover (talk) 11:47, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Many places it is super convenient to have the one row I have text that is left-aligned or center-aligned as well as some on the right margin. Doing a table is a quite heavy way to achieve that (and probably should use a custom css style to avoid loads of {{ts}}) and then it is confusing and ugly to switch between center aligning using {{center}} and table, setting it to fullwidth, and then creating a cell and sticking ts ac on it. More naturally, is probably something like {{inline-center}} / {{float left}} followed by {{float right}} and then something like {{clear}} to prevent it from messing up the transclusion and get back to normal and preventing it from messing up subsequent lines, but that is a little obscure to figure out given our documentation around those templates. MarkLSteadman (talk) 12:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, documentation (and learnability) is definitely an issue, and combinations of float left/right and manual {{clear}} are kinda grotty and hard to use, especially for newer contributors. I think you're too hard on raw table markup: for things like this it's, IMO, an excellent approach for ad hoc use (though I doubt MediaWiki's table markup is anybody's favourite thing in the world). It's the discoverability of it, and a little too much overhead, when you get to lots of uses where it falls down.

But if you can come up with a small handful of examples of where {{rh}} starts to look tempting in the body of a page I can try to see if I can come up with something that works more like {{rh}}. In fact, now that CalendulaAsteraceae is migrating the mess of grotty template code in {{rh}} to Lua it may be possible to reuse a lot of it for this hypothetical new template, just with a different invoking template and separate stylesheet. Or if the use cases are predominantly for math (which is mainly where I've seen that need), we may even get more clever and save you the need to write out the math tags (not sure, haven't looked into it). Xover (talk) 15:56, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

We do have {{equation}} for math, which would be possible to leverage instead or update. In general, the use cases I see are things like headers and footers inside of the document (e.g. a letter included in a chapter) or things like a single line of a title page. I just find the idea that hey this line has the date on the right so use {{right}}, this line has a title in the middle use {{center}} but now if you have both completely change the implementation to a table a bit awkward and jarring as well as just creating a single cell table everywhere, I just like the idea of center=foo,right=bar, the intent is clear (fine if we want more verbose names) and someone knowledgeable can deal with whatever implementation issues come up in one place, and then can use tables when I do want more complicated formatting (e.g. aligning the different pieces, controlling the line wrapping, forcing widths, etc.). MarkLSteadman (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree (I was just being a booster for tables as a tool to consider).

But what made you go for {{rh}} over {{equation}}? It was more familiar, and had a comprehensible model (the left/center/right stuff you mention)? I note that {{equation}} seems a bit complicated, with no less than 5 texty positiony parameters, in addition to the actual math and a formatting param I don't quite understand. If it were a little more straightforward would you, do you think, have reached for that instead of {{rh}}?

I am inclined to semantically specific templates (rather than considering them solely based on the visual effect they achieve), so my thinking right now is that math and letter headings are separate use cases with separate templates (possibly sharing some code back in the bowels, but…). But I am not sure I really understand all the use cases so I am uncertain both about naming and how they should work. Xover (talk) 07:27, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Maybe I was just being lazy. and focused on cleaning up the math rather than digging into whether to use {{equation}} or {{numb form}} or {{disp right}} or {{centalign right}} etc. I should go back and actually do the second pass on a bunch of works like that to standardize the style and get to proofread stage... Re categorization I understand the difficulties. It is nice to have simple templates that just do what they say on the tin, I understand why people want to build out the more complex capabilities as one big template with all the knobs (does the header include a rule? Does the header include a "Top Secret" classification, etc.) and then also the desire the to create these semantic categorizations. And of course naming is hard, do we want to distinguish a=b as {{equation}} while a/b as {{numb form}} since it lacks "="? just create something like {{math row}} etc. My two cents is to to look to have a few categories to get a few big categories "math", "headers and footers", create something like {{lcr row}} for the rest and be done but YMMV. MarkLSteadman (talk) 17:27, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Just as a note, EB1911 also seems to be using {{rh}} for equations, e.g. Page:EB1911 - Volume 12.djvu/804. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 08:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Historical Materialism

There is Index:Nikolai Bukharin - Historical Materialism (1925).djvu and Index:Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin - Historical Materialism; A System of Sociology (1925).pdf - do we need both ? -- Beardo (talk) 06:15, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Beardo: Probably not. The djvu is actually a later edition / reprinting, was created first and is missing pages and then later I found the pdf version, which appears complete. MarkLSteadman (talk) 00:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Tycho Brahe

I am systematically changing the minutes and seconds when validating this entire work. Please explain your reasoning why you have a problem with that. Thank you.

PWidergren (talk) 16:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@PWidergren: Sorry, I had the recent changes up on my phone and for some reason it clicked the rollback. I undid it, my mistake. MarkLSteadman (talk) 16:47, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

No problem. PWidergren (talk) 16:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Letters of Junius

I note that the tables of content are transcluded on to the main page but also on to Letters of Junius/Table of contents/Volume 1 and Letters of Junius/Table of contents/Volume 2. do we need those separate pages ? -- Beardo (talk) 03:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Beardo: I haven't looked at the work closely, e.g. whether we want to create separate Volume 1/Contents and Volume 2/Contents and reorganize it. My effort was merely to fix the {{no header}} by replacing the duplicated material with a template. MarkLSteadman (talk) 14:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Discussion revert

Umm, would you mind explaining why you reverted me in a discussion in WS:CV? I don't think that my comment was vandalism or that it is usually done to revert in discussions. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 06:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind, I just realized that you reverted the revert. Sorry for the inconvenience.