Hello, Sbh, welcome to Wikisource! Thanks for your interest in the project; we hope you'll enjoy the community and your work here. If you need help, see our help pages (especially Adding texts and Wikisource's style guide). You can discuss or ask questions from the community in general at the Scriptorium. The Community Portal lists tasks you can help with if you wish. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page.

John Vandenberg 00:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Who owns the copyright on the disputed Gospel of the Hebrews? Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Pulitzer-winning writings 00:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Much thanks, I sent him off an eMail asking him about the translations :) With any luck we'll be able to restore the full text :) Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Pulitzer-winning writings 02:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As a follow-up, any idea what's up with the strange formatting of author's names on the Christmas Garland text? Was that in the original? Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Pulitzer-winning writings 02:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, I learned something from Wiki today, not a waste! :) As per the category, seulement dans francias...maintenant! Feel free to add one though! Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Pulitzer-winning writings 02:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

headers Edit

Hi, could you use the "header2" instead of "header", as described on {{header}}. We are currently migrating from the old header to an improved header. If for some reason, the new header2 is causing you grief, let me know and we will try to improve it further. Cheers, John Vandenberg 22:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

collections Edit

Hi again, I have moved Zut-Ski to a shorter page name in order that the URL to address it is simple.

Our Style guideline says that works that were published as part of a collection should have a "top-level" page name; i.e. poems and short stories dont appear as "sub-pages" of the collection, as they are a distinct work, often first published in a magazine before they are collected into book format, and they are re-published many times separately from the main collection that they are found in. John Vandenberg 15:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

a few answers Edit

In regards to whether a collection of short stories is single work or not, I understand what you are saying, however for simplicities sake it would be best to consider them as separate works for the purposes of naming them. For example, even The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes are given separate names; they are not under the name of the group, as this keeps the URLs short and allows them to be treated as distinct. Sub-pages are usually only used for chapters within books, but exceptions to the rule always occur.

We have no rule here against original research in the notes field, but we do expect that any facts and figures are either straight-forward, or that a Wikipedia page is created to carry the bulk of the information about a work.

Images from out of Google Books can be used, provided they are free of copyright. It is best if they are uploaded onto Wikimedia Commons.

Parodies of Author:Rudyard Kipling can be added to the relevant author page, which is essentially just a dumping ground of anything related to the person. We sometimes create Author: pages even when the person hasnt published anything, if it is worthwhile collating works about the person there.

Hopefully that answers all your questions; if not, feel free to ask again if I have missed something. John Vandenberg 19:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have cropped both of the images you have uploaded onto commons, and reduced them to grayscale so that they dont use the color ink cartridge when someone goes to print the page.
If you dont like these alteration, you can "revert" to the previous ones, or you can upload a new copy of the image. All previous copies of an image are kept on Commons. John Vandenberg 00:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

drama Edit

Author:Anonymous Elizabethan Dramatist and Wikisource:Drama list The Revenger's Tragedy, yet it says the author is Author:Thomas Middleton.

We dont use the Author: namespace for anonymous works. "Author:Anonymous" has been deleted a few times. Author:Anonymous Elizabethan Dramatist needs to be merged into Wikisource:Drama, and then deleted.

I suggest you use the "notes" field to explain any authorship when it is disputed or unknown. John Vandenberg 00:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Epistle to Mary of Cassobola Edit

Thanks for adding the Epistle to Mary of Cassobola! Where are you getting the text to transcribe? Are you using this? I'm working on similar material, and I'm always looking for the easiest way to do it. All the best, Quadell 01:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

transcribing Edit

Dont worry too much about the formatting, as that isnt always desirable anyway. The main objective of the these projects is to display the page image so that the accuracy of the text cant be disputed. If you can enter the text, someone else will come along and proof read it, and maybe improve the formatting as well. Thanks for helping. John Vandenberg (chat) 23:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am uploading the raw OCR text for all of the remaining pages in Index:Abroad with Mark Twain and Eugene Field.djvu. The OCR text looks OK, but will need to be cleaned up. John Vandenberg (chat) 01:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It looks like the OCR text hasnt been correctly aligned with the images. e.g. p248 has the text for p250. I will fix this. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I found the problem, and the bot JVbot (talkcontribs) is now running again. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Index:Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc.djvu Edit

Thanks for reviewing the pages at Index:Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc.djvu, you are doing a great job! Jeepday (talk) 23:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scans for the works? Edit

Gday. We are encouraging all users to include scans of works to Commons, and then work on them using the proofreading space to add rigour and to allow others to help validate works. Are scans available for the current set of works. Also we are trying to improve our chapter/subpart methodology. For your current work, the use of I, II, III doesn't allow for ready reference and ready cross-linking, what are your thoughts on a more robust subpage naming for the work. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Am I losing it? You have one work, and you seem to be putting it twice into the main namespace. If you wish to show it as another work, or without components, then it should still be a subwork of the existing work, rather than as a new work at the top of the main namespace. — billinghurst sDrewth

Sir Clyomon and Sir Clamydes (critical edition) Edit

Where is this work currently situated? Do you think that you will ever progress it? Is there a scanned file version available that could replace it? — billinghurst sDrewth 16:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since I launched this project I have lost my home, my research library, and most of my enthusiasm.

As there is no good modern edition of Sir Clyomon and Sir Clamydes my notion was to use the interests of the Wikisource community to create one, by allowing users to decide how to modernize the text, whether to adopt a particular emendation or not, and what explanatory notes were needed. The heart of the project was therefore the critical edition, which originally included a transcluded text incorporating textual notes (based on the nineteenth-century editions of Dyce and Bullen), a set of explanatory notes (mostly derived from Dyce and Bullen), and an exact transcription (old spelling) from the original publication--or rather, from the Malone Society reprint of the original. In theory the hypothetical reader could either read the Wikisource modern-spelling edition sans apparatus, or use the critical edition to examine it with all the notes and (for reference) see the text in its original spelling.

I am not sure what exactly has happened to the text since I dropped the project, but the transcluded text which was the point of the thing seems to have disappeared, leaving only broken links, the explanatory notes and the transcript of the original. I could try to recreate it, but as I seem to be the only person who sees any value in the concept, it might make more sense to delete the explanatory notes and just keep the transcription of the original as found in the 1913 Malone Society Reprint.
On the other hand I hadn't actually given up on it, and I could start over on the missing portion. Although I was working from photocopies of the original editions, Dyce, Bullen and the Malone Society reprint are all in public domain (which is what made this particular project attractive for the concept), and so should be available either at Google Books or the Internet Archive. I haven't checked this out yet, but assuming that they are I could recreate the project; I probably still have the files on my computer where I did the actual work before uploading it to Wikisource. Probably.
I imagine though that interest in Sir Clyomon and Sir Clamydes is not high and it might be better just to delete the whole project as a failed experiment. As I put a lot of work into it I would like the opportunity to download the files for my own use first, though. sbh (talk) 18:09, 15 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have moved the critical edition to a subpage in your user space. It may never have been aligned with WS:WWI if you look at Wikisource:Annotations. I have labelled the unannotated version as incomplete, though with no source and incomplete it will always run the risk of being nominated for deletion. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey Edit

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Community Insights Survey Edit

RMaung (WMF) 14:31, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey Edit

RMaung (WMF) 19:12, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey Edit

RMaung (WMF) 17:02, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]