Template:Lang block

Hi! This edit by you had resulted into auto-conversion of two-liners into one-liners in the Sanskrit shlokas of Bhagavad-Gita (Besant 4th). So I have reverted it and the situation is back to normal. Hrishikes (talk) 10:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Which specfic pages? Lang block merely wraps a lang call at the moment, It should be re-written to do a proper block level call instead of merely wrapping {{lang}} with the inline yes/no hack. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
All pages, throughout the work, having Sanskrit verses. Hrishikes (talk) 11:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Index:The Letters Of Queen Victoria Vol. 3, 1907.djvu

Thanks for finding that some pages in that scan were missing! Would it be appropriate if I just attempt to find another scan of this edition (there seem to be several), check for the same pages, and upload it in place of the faulty file on Wikimedia? Or is there a better way? --22:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: Djvu patching is your area, any thoughts?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
@Tar-ba-gan: There appear to be decent quality scans of the UK edition at (IA), (IA), and (IA) from which I can generate new DjVus and upload over the existing ones. Both Benson (1862–1925) and Viscount Esher (1852–1930) died more than 70 years ago so this is now public domain in both the UK and US. However, the UK and US editions appear to have wildly differing pagination (~500 vs. ~750 pp.). Do you have a preference as to which edition we use?
In either case, given a preferred scan that has a few pages that are missing or out of order, and an alternate scan that contains the missing pages, I can relatively easily use the pages from the latter to patch the former. It involves a bit of manual technical fiddling and keeping track of which page goes where at the same time the modifications change the page indexes, but isn't otherwise difficult. But I'd need someone familiar with the work to specify which pages go where in fairly great detail, especially if we're not just talking about straight reordering or insertion of a small number of numbered pages (where the printed page numbers make it obvious what needs doing).
PS. It is really important that one does not start creating Page: pages before the scan is verified. The necessary fixes may change the effective pagination, and shifting existing Page: pages is a tedious manual job. A small number of them is no problem, but the more there are the worse the job gets: imagine moving several hundred pages one by one and manually, with multiple clicks and page loads needed for each move. --Xover (talk) 09:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for being there to help! I do not really have a preference as to British/American editions (I picked American editions solely for better scan quality).
There are only 2 pages missing (618, 619). They are Index pages (alphabetical index of subjects/persons in the book), between Church of England at the bottom of p. 617 and Consort, Prince, continued, on p. 620.
The British edition (such as this) has the missing text starting midpage on page 485 and finishing early on p. 487. I have not been able to locate a non-faulty scan of American edition.
I am not going to touch the file (my chief interest in historical texts is in Vol. II which does not seem to have the same fault). --Tar-ba-gan (talk) 18:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
@Tar-ba-gan: Ok, since there was some uncertainty over editions and completeness, I've uploaded all three volumes with new names, and set up indexes for them.
I've used the 1908 UK version, which I believe is a second printing of the 1907 edition, but as it's not noted in the work I can't be entirely sure about that. In any case, if you could check that these appear to be complete and otherwise acceptable, and if the previous copies are no longer needed then please indicate whether you are ok with these being deleted (no point having indexes for scans with errors sitting around if we have complete scans). --Xover (talk) 07:11, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading the whole set! It was a great thing to do! You can certainly delete Vol 3 of 1907 entirely but I need some time to make use of texts I formatted for Vol 2 of 1907. Best wishes, --Tar-ba-gan (talk) 09:25, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
@Xover: Thanks again for uploading the 1908 edition! It seems generally to have less problems compared to the 1907 edition I had uploaded. You can certainly delete both volumes. I made a request for deletion of subpages on Wikimedia already but I might be starting from the wrong end --Tar-ba-gan (talk) 22:27, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Author:Eileen Power

Thanks for creating the Author page - might I very politely ask that next time I be left to do it? I was working out the index and was then going to create the author page - I know Wikisource is for anyone to edit and add to, but I'd really like to get to grips with how to do things (especially the very simply things!) but it's hard to do that if everyone always does it for you. Cheers AndrewOfWyntoun (talk) 14:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

@AndrewOfWyntoun: - Duly noted. I also note https://archive.org/details/nationallibraryofscotland which could be a very useful resource, if the licensing used for the scans of pre 1870 works were compatible with Commons and Wikisource. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: Thanks - and that's not to say that I don't appreciate all the help you've given me (us) to date - I'm just a bit more ready to try and make mistakes! You know, I was never quite sure about the status of the NLS scans on Archive.org in terms of re-use, and whether or not Gweduni has plans for them further down the line. The printed material I work with at the Library normally uses CC BY 4.0 licensing, so I'm not as familiar with other types. For the moment I'll keep poaching interesting things which are out of copyright/uploaded by American libraries, but there are definitely things in the NLS collections which I'd personally like to see more easily accessible, such as the Gaelic collections. AndrewOfWyntoun (talk) 14:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
@AndrewOfWyntoun: FYI, a wider discussion on CC-BY-NC issue has been opened at Wikisource:Proposed_deletions#File:Archaeologia_Britannica.pdf, where you are, of course, welcome to contribute. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 17:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Uploading text to Latin wikisource

Hello, I was hoping to bother you for some advice. There's a text here: https://wellcomelibrary.org/item/b2851872x#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0&z=-0.9447%2C-0.175%2C2.8895%2C2.0772 which I'd like to upload to Latin wikisource. When I download the PDF file there is a licence/copyright page appended to the start by the Wellcome Library. Is it necessary to remove this before uploading the file to commons, even though it lists the copyright status as public domain? I had been reading about removing the usual Google Books copyright notice, and thought this might apply here too... Thanks! AndrewOfWyntoun (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

It depends, there are mixed views about removing 'cover sheets'. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:53, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
@AndrewOfWyntoun: It varies, but other works have been uploaded to commons with the cover sheets intact, (even though they are not generally transcribed of course.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 06:59, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: Great, thanks for the info! AndrewOfWyntoun (talk) 18:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: So... I think I've managed to upload the text correctly https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Liber:Disputatio_medica_inauguralis_de_merocele,_vel_hernia_crurali.pdf. I was having trouble using the URL2Commons function, so just uploaded the PDFs to commons manually. I then added the index page at the Latin wikisource. I've noticed two things which I was hoping you could clear up, if you don't mind. 1 - Regarding the author page https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Scriptor:James_Barry, there is a message requesting it to be linked to wikidata, which I already did https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1294046 - is there something I've not done right or is it just serious lag? 2 - I notice that when I'm on a page of the work I've uploaded that if I click the OCR button then no text appears - is this because I've uploaded PDFs(?) or is the functionality just a little different on Latin wikisource? I don't actually mind typing the pages out, the text is very legible and it means I get to dust off the cobwebs a little, but I'm also aware the likelihood is I've just done something not quite right... AndrewOfWyntoun (talk) 15:02, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


Some functionality differs between Wikisource, The OCR code at Latin Wikisource may not have been updated when the one here was. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:05, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

We sent you an e-mail

Hello ShakespeareFan00,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Index:The National Geographic Magazine Vol 16 1905.djvu

Dear ShakespeareFan00, could you please take a look at the subject? I am still ignorant about how to check whether the file is complete and no pages are missing. TIA, --Tar-ba-gan (talk) 15:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

OCR needs to be redone?

With respect to diff with summary OCR may need to be redone, what is it about the OCR that you don't like? I'm working on OCR generation, so if you have specific issues with it, please let me know. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 09:04, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Inductiveload: The generated text layer in the scan the comment related to was very poor. If you are working on getting good OCR for this, proceed :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Other than the occasional noise at the end of lines, do you have any specific comments about it? "Very poor" is difficult to action. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 09:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
I don't, so please ignore the summary. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Deletion requests at Commons

Please refrain from putting such requests without proper logic. I have started the Statues of the Realm uploads per your request only. Now you are proposing deletion for 1963 reprints. See the language of the license: "It was published prior to 1970". 1963 is prior to 1970, isn't it? As for the 1902 volume, the scanning department has no right to put copyright restriction on PD works; that would amount to copyfraud. And for the defective Vol 4, Part 1, that is cause for file fixing, not for jumping to the deletion arena. Anyway, I have fixed the 1882 volume. I'll look into other volumes, i.e., the ones where you have clearly specified the defects. Hrishikes (talk) 04:31, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hrishikes: The issue is that in the UK , the 1963 scans (and the 1802 ex Southampton University scans) would have a separate 'sweat of the brow' copyright. I am fully expecting Commons to reject that argument (And I would expect you've commented along those lines), for both of these, but filed the DR, so that logic was on record.
I left a note on your talk page concerning the scans of other volumes... I suggested that where I'd marked theam as needing a source repair, the PDF was sourced directly from the Google URL source given at IA. (The volumes obtained directly, don't have the issues identified, concerning duplciated or as many missing pages, suggesting that the errors occured in processing the PDF at IA possibly.)

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: "Sweat of the brow" is a settled issue at Commons: see c:Template:PD-scan. It is the position of the WMF and Commons that we do not recognise it, due to Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., and no file should be nominated for deletion based on a claim of "sweat of the brow" copyright. --Xover (talk) 10:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Short Title

About the item A Collection of Charters and Statutes relating to the East India Company/53Geo3 c155. The Act has a short title, allotted by Short Titles Act 1896 (see Page:The Public General Statutes of the United Kingdom 1896 (59 & 60 Victoria).pdf/79). Should not it be preferred to legal citation as page title? Hrishikes (talk) 18:51, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, I think the One in the collection is abridged compared to the Full Act, so.. I leave it to your discretion... Yes for the FULL Act the page title should be the Legal short title. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Experimentation - please use sandboxes

Hi, would you mind experimenting in a sandbox? Template:Left sidenote/sandbox already exists, and you can create Template:Left sidenote/sandbox/styles.css if you want. If you're not pretty sure what you're doing is going to work, please don't pollute the template history with experimentation. So far 10 out of 13 edits at Template:Left sidenote/styles.css are today's experimentation. Also, it can break all connected mainspace pages during the experimental period. Also when making edits to "public" templates, edit messages explaining what you're trying to achieve are appreciated. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 09:55, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Noted,, moved experimental code to a sandbox. See: [[1]]

Wikt links

Hello ShakespeareFan00, in this edit comment you ask for a way to "put in Wikt links to this without breaking the text flow". Is this ([[wikt:this|this]]) what you're looking for? --Andreas (talk) 09:42, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes but it was more to do with application of the annotation policy here than about the specfic technical means. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:43, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Index:Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management.djvu

For some pages (such as this one), you used “?” in place of a Greek letter, which I believe is “φ.” Would you be able to go through and change these characters? There were also a large number of proofreading errors, but I don’t believe that those survived validation. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:39, 22 November 2020 (UTC).

Do you have a list of affected pages, as the symbol you mentioned may only have appeared on that page specfically.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:34, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
  • The symbol appears on a number of pages in the chapter but some instances of “?” refer to other missing symbols, so a fully automated substitution would not be feasible. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:41, 22 November 2020 (UTC).
    • I have checked through the other chapters; only this one uses that symbol in this way. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:49, 22 November 2020 (UTC).

A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace

You mention templates no longer needed. I think this is only the second book I have set up from scratch, and I just tried to follow what I was reading on Wikisource. I've no idea how I got the "Authority Control" or the box about public domain. I think I just filled out a template as best I could which was what some Wikisource page told me to do. I've looked back through my browser history and can't work out what I'd been reading or in exactly what order I did things. Sorry! --PeterR2 (talk) 10:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Still learning

Sorry, are you able to explain briefly why this change; when I put 1 instead of "1" it still seems to work, doesn't it? Do the quotation marks change something? I'm not being rude, I honestly have no idea :) Peace.salam.shalom (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry to say I do not know either.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:15, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
@Peace.salam.shalom: -- Quotation marks are needed when you are using two words with a space in between. 1 is a single word, so quotes are superfluous. Hrishikes (talk) 00:41, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I assumed digits were "special" since it auto-counts after them seemingly. I usually use camelCaseForVariableishThings thankfully. Peace.salam.shalom (talk) 02:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Collapse bottom

Hello. I would like to ask about this edit at the template {{Collapse bottom}}. It has caused some problems in my User page: the text under the title "In magazines" stopped floating and was dropped much below. If the only problem is my user page, I can handle it in some different way, but I am afraid it could have caused some similar troubles in the main namespace too. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 14:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Seems someone redirected it, without understanding what it did. I am seeing many lint-errors. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for confirmation. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

custom bar -- +8 year old device

Not finding previous visits here in my history. My fear right now is that knowledge and experience has been cherry-picked (versioning language).

Mostly I am here to drop this terrible but good enough photo of the custom bar in action on an old and beloved device.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:00, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Also, your talk page is in the Category:Scans from the Internet Archive. Was that intentional?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:03, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
I archive my talk page periodically. Also make sure you intended the above for me rather than another user. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:11, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I intended the cat message for you. I caught commons featured pictures candidates categorized in Zoology or some such, years ago. I suspect that there is a msg here with [[Cat and not [[:Cat (Its gone now...) --RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:35, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

IA-Upload tool

I see that we have same problem, https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T269518 , result that a bot? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/F%C3%A6 is mass uploading from Internet Archive and with pdf versions, that block upload djvu versions with IA-upload tool. This is bot, the question, is autorizathed? Shooke (talk) 23:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm catching up to you (:

Could you please proofread the next few pages of Motion Pictures, 1912-1939 within the next few days? Thanks. PseudoSkull (talk) 08:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

A Little Bit of Thanks

Good morning!

I know you're quite busy around here, but I just wanted to show a little bit of thanks for your corrections to my edits on the various pages of The Public General Statutes of the United Kingdom 1873 (36 & 37 Victoria). As I'm sure you know/can tell, I'm quite new here, so many parts of formatting are still unfamiliar to me. Although transcriptions by other editors have aided some, there are obviously better ways to do things in many cases, like with rvsn over antiquated HTML-style markup that I was using before.

Anyways though, I just wanted to say thanks, since even small fixes do help me a lot starting out on here. - PubSyr (talk) 12:52, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

categorisation Template:Ci-author

Hi. Can you please resolve the issue of the categorisation of the template. It isn't obvious what it means or what it is meant to be doing. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:45, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Don't just create a category just because, what is the purpose and the point of the categorisation?
The categorisation is to track the two usage types of the Template concerned, with a view to replacing those usages If it isn't obvious from the template documentation, then I need to update that. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst:, I am now in the process of using the category, to remove the Type 1 usages as they can be replaced with a simple link, In the process of doing that I am also 'bypassing' some redirects for authors that now have expanded names on their Author: pages thanks to your very considerable efforts in this area. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:12, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks and a note on EB1911 California

Hi, firstly thanks for your fixes on EB1911 Combinatorial Analysis - this was converted from the Gutenberg version but a few "sub" statements etc. statements were not adjusted correctly. I agree these should be converted to "math" statements at some stage.

Also, I edited the EB1911 California article, reverting to the previous method of displaying pages. I saw you cleaned up the multiple statements using <pages> , but that resulted in the map on djvu/20 being displayed twice. I did edit the article using two <pages> statements (skipping p. 20), but that resulted in an unwanted line-break between djvu page 19 and 21. So I reverted to the older multiple statements so it displays correctly. regards, DivermanAU (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Riverside style

It's a mess, I know.

I have been trying to get columns to work on my ereader. Both {{div col}} and interestingly {{Multicol}} fail on the devise.

The last thing I did was to strip {{Plainlist}} which also failed. I don't know if Plainlist failed or if the exporter stripped it off, as iirc, that only recently failed.

The next thing I was going to try was simple, unadorned tables -- which I prevented someone else from using at the start of the editing.

Something that failed gracefully on the device was dotted tocs! If the page no. would float to the right I would call it "failing successfully".

I have photos at Help talk:Preparing for export and File:Dotted index-failing gracefully.jpg and File:Two books-gridded menu.jpg shows how nice the first image works as a cover in the gridded library display.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Using HTML versus templates for styling.

Thanks for editing the COVID-19 Plan. Can you walk me thru why you are using divs instead of {{serif}}? Is there something I'm missing about why that's preferable? Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Koavf: Serif is SPAN based, which means templates like {{c}} can't be nested inside it. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:34, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
That is a really good reason: block and inline elements. Good thinking. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank You for the Page Indexes

Thank you for making all those page indexes. It really helps me out. Languageseeker (talk) 19:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

"EB1911 Fine Print" and "EB1911 footer initials"

Hi, thanks for changing from the "Fine" template to "EB1911 Fine Print" like on Page:EB1911 - Volume 06.djvu/102 — I've been making some of those changes too. But be aware to include "EB1911 footer initials" inside the "EB1911 Fine Print" statement — otherwise the initials no longer appear on the last paragraph line (they appear a line below). I've edited the page I mentioned above to re-achieve alignment of initials (this also involves re-sizing the font). DivermanAU (talk) 23:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

thanks

For what? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 15:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC) @Cygnis insignis: For reviewing the Index. At shows your care, even if you revert. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC) It was a fully validated text, please don't experiment with those. Was it ever in doubt that I care (about this site, in theory I care about you and everyone else)? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 16:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Changing Index page of proofread work

You will need to check to be certain that there are no links on Wikisource that rely upon the previously existing pagename. Links such as [[Foobar/FrontMetter#Dedication]] will rely upon the target having a page numbered as "Dedication" on the transcluded work. These links may exist inside the work, or may be links from another work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Have you actually found anything that broke? because I've re-checked the ones I had updated earlier and not found any obvius breakages. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=&limit=500&target=ShakespeareFan00&namespace=106&tagfilter=&start=&end=

If you want to confirm it page by page. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

How did you check for breakages? The breakages will occur between pages in the Main namespace. That's the whole point. Even if we checked every proofread page from every Index you altered, there could be links within the Main namespace that relied on a connection that was broken, but that wasn't in any of the pages from an Index that was altered. There was nothing wrong with the Indexes before you began mass-altering them, but there could be many things wrong now. We would know unless someone develops a tool that checks every section link within the main namespace. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:13, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I examined every page that would have had an updated label, and then looked at what linked to where it was transcluded. I will continue to re-examine them, until you or other contributors can come up with a link checker. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:58, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I still haven't found anything that seemed broken. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:01, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Just leave me to work on my works, I don't need your intervention

Do you ever learn? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

I thought Wikisource was a collaborative project? Seems I was wrong.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:36, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
It seems I was wrong about the level of collaboration needed, especially when other contributors are also more experienced and thus don't need any sort of 'intervention' in works they had definitive plans for. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
I was actively working on that page that I had set up, and was starting the works, and you caused me edit conflicts. Shouldn't have to say that. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:49, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Fair enough, I've had edit conflicts happen to me when doing pagelists as well. @Inductiveload: Is there a script (other than history/or recent changes), that can put a 'Recent Activity' warning bar at the top of a page (like an Index page, to say it's been edited in the last 30 mins or so?) or has had considerable recent activity? (An extension to this would be included activity on linked pages, the thinking being that if a specfic Index page has been recently setup, related Page:'s will bed under edit as well? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:57, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Ironic that you make this comment, considering you have done the same thing you accuse towards SF00—making aesthetic changes to works that others contributed, some that were against community consensus at large and that they weren't okay with (I'm not just talking about the Bobbie, General Manager incident). Also what was even wrong with diff? That doesn't even look like it would cause a problem (and instead of reverting it, you come here to complain about it). Now you've potentially scared off one valuable contributor to the project, even worse over something that you're being entirely hypocritical about. And if you want to use the "well I have more experience so it's okay for me to do it" card to rebut this, I can already say that while we may not have the amount of experience on this wiki that you do, there will almost certainly be admins who have around the same experience as you here who would agree with me on this, so it would be a moot point.
@ShakespeareFan00: I'm sorry to hear that you're semi-retiring. I'm not gonna say you have to come back or anything, but I encourage you not to feel dissuaded from editing because of this. Your edits have been so helpful, despite what the OP will probably say, and I think most others will agree with that. BH's gripes (or anyone else's for that matter) are not necessarily implicitly or explicitly the same as what Wikisource is actually about; WS is a collaborative project, and this is evidenced by even the first statement on the Main Page—"Welcome to Wikisource, the free library that anyone can improve." PseudoSkull (talk) 15:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
@PseudoSkull: Please don't bring your problems here. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:08, 5 April 2021 (UTC)