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)

The Purty P of <Pagelisting/>

  The Purty P of <Pagelisting/>
I hereby award you this Letter of Merit for doing a pretty plentiful proportion of pulchritudinous pagelisting. And also for suggesting letters. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 16:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

A Huge Thanks for all your work on creating Pagelist

I cannot express how profoundly grateful I am to you for creating all these pagelist. You are truly a gem for this site.Languageseeker (talk) 14:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

The works of John Ruskin (IA worksofjohnruski21rusk).pdf

I see that you marked Index:The works of John Ruskin (IA worksofjohnruski21rusk).pdf as having a source problem. Do you remember what it was? Languageseeker (talk) 05:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Languageseeker: Missing pages around pp. 1,5. I wasn't sure if these were supposed to blank and thus omitted. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Easier to say no.... (about setting up a journal)

I was going to wait until I finished the last volume with an Ingoldsby Tale in it, but I have been uploading images (and searching for better quality ones) and it is taking a really long time now -- especially because I have just been stacking Oliver Twist up for later also....

Can I interest you in setting up a journal? Or at least get it started? 67 volumes. I have the images uploaded for 5, should be 6 tomorrow.... 1837. commons:Category:Bentley's Miscellany[[|]]

Not only is it easy to say no to this, I would encourage it if you prefer to say that. A few notable first editions within....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:19, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I am busy doing pagelisting for the moment, so I'll have to decline for the moment. Was it Index setup or uploading to Commons you were pkanning?

If the latter talk to Fae. at Commons. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:39, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Index, and the whole journal enviroment. Fae and me are of similar ability at commons. I suspect that me and faebot are equals too, maybe not in the number of uploads but in the time it takes to upload. My uploads spend very little time in nomansland.
Sorting through faebots uploads is a great way to find things, sorting through my uploads is a great way to see what to do with found things. There is a preference for putting cats on top. Cats make instant and beautiful galleries, especially for books, where the style and personalised displays should be.
So, that is enough self-undeprecation for me today. Other times I might be deeply offended to be compared to a bot. My advantage over faebot with my recent uploads is that I can see the image and first pages. How about I leave this task for you while in a state of being deeply self-offended?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:19, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Do you have a Commons category for the uploaded scans? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay, Found the category. I will say that I feel I lack experience to do the level of setup needed, consider asking LanguageSeeker or inductiveload? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
commons:Category:Bentley's Miscellany typos and pasteos. I can set the volumes up. I explained IAUpload to one of them once and got an automatted reply, filled with my own words. I prefer "offended" to "saddened and sorry I shared with no person".--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:15, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Organisations are not Author: namespace authors

special:diff/11300597 and any others should be using override_author, and on the subpages it would be unlinked. I would have concentrated on the root page of the work providing necessary navigation for portal and keeping the supbages simple. I will fix up the links to author: namespace. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:59, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Duly noted and your efforts on the author override appreciated. I've also updated the title fields to be something logical. I'm also considering if I do another pass at the Page:'s for this, as I am spotting some things I missed the first time around (mostly to do with where page links go.)

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:04, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Wrong sic template

You've recently made edits adding sic templates to duplicated words, e.g. [2]. However, you used {{sic}} which displays nothing, meaning that you changed the transcribed text to not reflect the scan. I fixed that example, please can you clear up any other instances where you broke the transcription. Thanks. BethNaught (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

CCE

In case you were wondering (with me correcting so much of the punctuation, specifically) I'm not proofreading them against the WS copy, I'm using the IA viewer of the source file in a separate window to see it without all the compression artifacts. OCR obviously did not enjoy these tables, lol. Jarnsax (talk) 21:23, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

@Jarnsax:
  1. Do you have User:Inductiveload/jump to file installed? That pulls the hires scans from IA or HT directly into the interface here (provided the appropriate source info was set up on the File: page at Commons) . In places I agree that the compression on some PDF'd makes it tough job to read, It's partly why I asked for the relevant function in the script concerned! :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
  2. I'm not sure if putting all the Zero width spacing is in is strictly needed, but I appreciate you are trying to be consistent, which makes it easier for other tools. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
No, I don't have that, and it sounds incredibly helpful.
As far as the ZWSPs, it's mainly that without the dotted rows, the 'context' of reading this depends a lot on the layout, and without that extra line to be the 'end' they look run together. I just really dislike using formatting that is invisible in the source code (and just a regular space at the end of a blank line was getting filtered out by {{nopt}}). I'm actually wanting to go back and annotate these, eventually... see https://reasonator.toolforge.org/?q=Q106866553&lang=en if curious. (I'm just adding ones where I have found the Library of Congress record, so far, and actually got sidetracked on 100-odd volumes of the Second Geographical Survey, lol.) The Robert Carter book is actually ready to be validated. Jarnsax (talk) 21:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Oh, just realized it's hard to tell on the edit history.... the lines I am replacing with ZWSP characters were not blank, they had a single space character I had added (invisible formatting) to get the line spacing right, but invisible is bad, and it failed at page breaks. Jarnsax (talk) 22:11, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Headers

I have a bot that does that at the very end. PseudoSkull (talk) 13:09, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

The running headers that is, with Template:rh and Template:rvh PseudoSkull (talk) 13:15, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Hiawatha

Please do not commandeer the project I am actively working on. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

OCR offness

We have been having collisions on the Index paging! I have been going much slower than usual due to the OCR always being off. So, I am pasting stacks of text as I do pagelists. It will be a miracle, I guess, if the OCR at IA-Upload ever works and I think this is all for "pretty first pages" of djvu files -- but I don't know that.

I feel so bad when I pick my pagelist over yours in the version thingie, so I am here, explaining my slowness....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Don't feel bad, if you overwrite my efforts.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Attack of the Red Centeroids from Planet 10

Um, the appearance of before is drastically different that after.

Oh, you've reverted. I must admit, it was a very intriguing presentation! Shenme (talk) 05:43, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Shenme: It seems one vertical bar got removed in the updates I made, I reverted that ,but still fixed the lint errors. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 06:08, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Cool. I was just amazed that everything started listing left to right, instead of top down. Sometimes we wonder how we could get a certain display effect and not know any method. Months later an accident points out a way. It's all good, eventually. :-) Shenme (talk) 22:25, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

<span><span></span></span>

I "subst"'d the wikidata module (because "follows" and "followed by" already existed and linked) and the module did that. I was thinking that those spans should be removed from the module. The module has the appearance of having been just pasted here -- maybe that was the wikidataIB module tho'.

So, more interesting than "I did not author that bad html" is who did author it.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:52, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Why fix signatures on talk pages?

Why do you waste good editing time on such irrelevant and unproductive efforts. What is any of the community gaining by such fixes? Zero. WatchList noise. Seems you are fixated on the wrong things. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: While it is certainly not the highest priority, fixing such lint errors helps reduce one of our massive maintenance backlogs. At worst, fixing these particular lint errors will get them out of the queue to let us actually notice and fix more serious problems; but is also entirely possible that even small things like this will cause actual issues at some point. For example, the new reply tool (that you'll find i the Beta section of Preferences now, under "Discussion Tools") has some requirements for the format of a signature in order to work properly. Prevalence of invalid wikimarkup is also something that significantly slows down the development of things like Parsoid (because it needs to handle such edge cases identically to the PHP parser) and binds up development resources that could have been put towards, e.g., making a Parsoid-native implementation of ProofreadPage which is a prerequisite for getting Visual Editor to work on Wikisource.
In other words, while it is certainly debatable what priority this kind of work should get in light of all the other maintenance tasks, not to mention actual content work, there are some good reasons why we should not just ignore lint-type backlogs. Low priority, but not irrelevant. Xover (talk) 06:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: @Xover: You cannot be serious that these signatures on talk pages need to be addressed. The Discussion tools only impacts all future signatures, and will have close to zero impact on edits from 5-10 years ago. Further if the talk pages are polluting the Lint lists, the better argument is to request the functionality to filter out the things that are imperfect and don't have any real impact, not to go and fix rubbish to clean out a list. Truly the worst argument for unproductive editing in talk namespaces. I didn't say ignore lint backlogs, that has never been my argument. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:37, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: The reply tool was just one example of the kind of technical changes that actually are impacted by various forms of invalid wikimarkup even though the problem is imperceptible to a human looking at the page. But misnested markup is a problem that has taken up significant resources for the Parsoid team, and though most such basic issues have already been handled (sunk cost) it is still possible that it will incur similar costs in the future. The Desktop Improvements team (the guys behind the reply tool) is working on other features for talk pages (ability to watch only a single section vs. whole page; automatic reply notifications; etc.) that could potentially be affected by things like misnested wikimarkup.
One could argue that pages that are not intended to be further edited (archives) has no use for such fixes (I would disagree, but it can be argued), but most Talk pages are likely to be further edited and eventually these kinds of things will bite us, either directly (something doesn't work or displays wrong) or indirectly (devs have to spend resources working around it, or there's something that we can't do because the problems make it prohibitively expensive).
We also do a lot of things that end up spamming watchlists. This one has so far not been among the top contenders, and may still be a very temporary blip. If it turns out to be a problem in volume or duration we can discuss how to solve that problem then (temporary bot flag, for example). Xover (talk) 07:55, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not edit user subpages, or archived pages

Those are meant to remain unedited except under exceptional circumstances. Thanks. PseudoSkull (talk) 09:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I won't revert any edits made already on the grounds that it would be "unproductive", unless you advise otherwise.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:25, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

UK signs

 
fun fun fun

I found many of those images at commons. I pasted them in the template (if they had one). I created some new pages and put them there in galleries because finding them was the thing. I was unable to get the template to work, when I did try -- it was one of the last things I tried so some tweaking will be necessary. Page:UKSI1964 (Part 3- Section 1).pdf/976 (eek)

The images seem to be all over the place there, they are at commons:Category:SVG old road signs of the United Kingdom and commons:Category:SVG road signs in the United Kingdom and commons:Category:Diagrams of historic road signs of the United Kingdom The colors seem to be all over the place, tho.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian: Yes the signs images are at commone, but they lack the dimensioning details (or are the later metric versions from 1975 or 1981). The 1964 versions were in Imperial units, and there are gaps in coverage at Commons. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 06:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
I think that I am not going to bitmap these. Incapable is a strong word, but I think I am incapablish of not completely redrawing the images (I already spent some time looking up what the colors should be, for instance. My feeling is that it is not long before I have access to inkscape and (like I said) this is a great project for me and inkscape. Overkill for me and GIMP, though.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Note that the versions in the TSGRD itself, actually have the dimensions... I would suggest reviewing the material under the "Traffic Signs Manual category", It may assist in providing a starting point for some of the earlier diagrams by looking at the later revisions. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Good luck... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Index setup

Your work on the pagination of indices is greatly appreciated by me, others too I'm sure, even with the gadget it is a tedious business. I often wonder how you crack the code when finding page skips for images and so on, is your secret the smaller size of the pages within a file? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 15:10, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis:

I use a script User:inductiveload made to import the initial pagelist from IA/HT/ Google etc.. I then use the Preview Pagelist option in the Index page edit view to manually check and adjust, by comparing the pagelist numbers against what's on a physical page.

Some other hints :

  • work backwards/forwards from a known numbering (such as an obvious title-page) to where a nominal page 1 would be, taking into account gaps for a frontispeice.
  • Some works have a list of illustrations, which can be used to determine where there are numbering gaps.
  • the start of numbering is not always the title page, but a nominal page 1 or i is rarely before any half-title.
  • Working backwards from a known page numbering at the end of a book
  • Finding the half-title and noting how many blank pages preceded it, so you know where it is likely the end of any numbering will be at the end of the book by coming back that number of pages from the nominal end cover/ end of scans.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:25, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

The importing of work somebody has already done, even as a starting point, is a great idea; kudos to you both. Most of the hints you note are things I have worked out at one time or another, now that you have taken the trouble to list them, but the point is I have to stop and focus on that when I am really thinking about all the other fiddly bits I want to do. My practice has sometimes been to do the index last, having found the pagination along the way, my impatience to start reading and proofing is obviously inefficient and a potential time-waster for others too, so you save me from embarrassment in that way. Cheers, CYGNIS INSIGNIS 15:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
  • I'm glad you understood what that weird reversal of /e and /s tags was about, I didn't anticipate the confusion it might cause, there is—no doubt—a better/'nother way to code that but I did it on the fly. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 11:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks again for the index setup. I went to find the script you mentioned, and saw a whole bunch of other useful things; I need to take some time to set myself up. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 14:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Assize of bread

Hopefully you agree that my conversion of the weights was worthwhile.... figuring out what they were actually saying was rather a pain in the butt. FYI, "shillings-weight" and "penny-weight" were based on £sd money, with 20 shillings-weight to the (Tower) pound, 240 penny-weight to the pound, and so a dozen pence in a shilling (just like old style money). Then, the W:Tower pound is 27/35 of an Avoirdupois pound. The 'pound weight' and 'shilling-weight' were just for accounting, there were no coins of that size, just the penny, also called the 'sterling' (hence 'pounds of sterlings' became 'pound sterling'). Jarnsax (talk) 22:00, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jarnsax: No objection at al, although you should be aware extensive annotations/ editorial commentary are not encouraged. Just make sure they are noted as user annotations though. Also if you giving short titles, please check them against later sources, giving those sources if possible. I'm not sure all the short titles people have used for convenient (sub)-work page titles on Wikisource are "official" ones given in other documents or later Statutes. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Right, I wasn't actually intending to annotate the acts 'themselves' with anything beyond like I did with the weights (which is just math, once you figure out what they are talking about) and "abbreviated roman numeral £sd money crap" (don't know how else to describe it)... things that are (my intent at least) purely factual and verifiable. Hopefully that those are modern annotations is obvious, since the template won't fit in a tooltip. Maybe frame a comment at the top explaining.
The Short Titles I was using were what had been listed on Portal:Acts of the Parliament of England/Henry III and I was a bit dubious as well. I've tracked down the text of the Short Titles Act 1896, but it doesn't list all the early ones, and actually tracking down which of the other later acts gives them has been ongoing fun times (sigh). It is my intent to revise those (and the portal, with a source at least) once I can track down the actual source... I guess we could comment them out for now.
I'm rather expecting that the way the sidenote references are being handled is going to be revised at some point, once there are targets for outgoing links. I'm deliberately trying to be as consistent as possible with the markup so that it's sane for someone to use something like AWB to find and mangle all refs to, say, 2 Inst., or other layout changes. Same though with going ahead and adding anchors proactively.... otherwise it'll be all inconsistent when people add incoming cites piecemeal, and 'consistent and wrong' is easier fixed than 'wrong and random' IMO at least.
Now that I think about it, it might make sense at some point (maybe at the end of each reign) to make a 'reference list' of the anchors somewhere in talkspace. Jarnsax (talk) 22:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
  1. We have a transcription of Short Titles Act 1896.
  2. Was Talk:The Statutes at Large (Ruffhead)/Authorities useful? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
  1. Nice. Far more convenient than looking at the PDF.
  2. Yes, though I'd just read over Blackstone's discussion of the citation method right before I saw it. It should be particularly useful once we get cross-references, especially if we keep it up to date.
Unfortunately, from what I've been able to tell, there isn't a 'comprehensive' list of all short titles.. quite a few lists seem to have been in acts that were since repealed (though still valid citations) don't seem to have the text on the parliament site. Jarnsax (talk) 20:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
The other useful source for Short titles is the Statute Law Revision Act 1948, Also various reports by the Law Comission ( especially on Repeals might yield other Short Titles - https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/our-work/statute-law-repeals/)(see also - http://www.bailii.org/ew/other/EWLC/)

(Aside - Provided that you can resolve the Copyright situation on them, some of the earlier Law Commission publications might also be in scope for Wikisource.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Just to write it down somewhere, found a copy at https://tarltonapps.law.utexas.edu/rare/documents/Statute_Law_Revision_Act_1948.pdf Jarnsax (talk) 22:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Linting copyvios...

The copyvio template is deliberately designed that way, and it's by nature a temporary state of affairs. No need to try to close the div: it'll just clutter up the revision history that will resolve itself one way or another when the discussion finishes. Xover (talk) 15:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Table styles

I seem to recall you've done quite a bit of work using {{ts}}. I've made a first cut of a Lua backend for it (cleaner code, better performance, avoids running into MW template limits) at Module:Table style and set the template sandbox Template:Table style/sandbox up to use it as the backend. Now I'm looking for testcases for Template:Table style/testcases to make sure it works as intended before flipping the switch.

If you can think of any heavy / complicated / unique usages of {{ts}} I would appreciate page links. Xover (talk) 18:36, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Xover:
  1. In places I've used CSS style phrases as the final parameter to a ts style call. any Module code would need to take that into account., You might want to look into which non shorthand codes are used most frequently.
  2. Extensive use of {{ts}} is now not recomended. Template/IndexStyles are preferable, and I've been using those more recently.
  3. {{table class}} and subtemplates should also be examined to see if they can be migrated as well.
  4. The ts backend was also being ocassionally called in non-template situations..
  5. see also {{p}} , {{span}}, which could be updated with simmilar techniques.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

One of the more extensive usages was this - Index:Bradshaw's Monthly (XVI).djvu - To some extent this would benefit from Index/Template style classes. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, ideally we should be using something other than ts. This current effort is just to make ts's backend a little less resource intensive and prone to breakage, given we still have a bajillion uses of it and many active users of it. Thanks for the test case link. Xover (talk) 19:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

"lint"

I am working with a presumption, that you are using software to find the little errors in Page(s). If this presumption is wrong, take it as a compliment as you have been quickly finding little errors in what to my eye appears to be heavily bracketed and apostrophed messes.

Once, you did this to a page I had worked on and when you left it, all of the &aelig; had turned to æ but it did not appear in the diff. I was spooked then, but have since decided that it must be a complex escape error in the diff display software.

I mention this all now because I think the same thing is happening with &ndash; which I have been typing out because I have mdash, minus and ndash and the pub. is half mathy and half library accounting and both sides are particular about the length of the dashes. If your software is changing &ndash; to the real thing, then knowing that will cause me to stop changing them back.

I could not ask this briefly without seeming to be rude, I think. So, sorry.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian: Might it be a side-effect of AWB for some pages ( I think AWB does some general-fixes at the same time as user specified ones)? If not than I'm not sure what's happening, as I don't recall replacing entities in pages recently. HTML entities should be replaced where possible as I understand it.

Other than AWB for some mass replacements, I only use the standard in browser editor.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:21, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, thanks. I am typing them because it is easier than figuring out which little dash is the right one and I don't mind that it is not escaped, although &minus make is clear that it is a math problem and not a date span. I wonder what the reason for changing them from the entity to the "thing" would be though. I will quit changing them back; I thought it was my oversight.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
I keep thinking about this. It overlaps with another problem and that is that the characters that I pasted for the zodiac were displaying as eh, emoji-fied and not as text. It turns out that there are no "emoji" for the zodiac, it is just that they have been styled to display like them. On this old os with the even older browser, mozilla has installed the emoji character set. It is not styling the characters here though.
So, I decided that calling it by the xml escape name (and not the unicode escape) would overcome the problem. And it hasn't. The next step is further encodings and that is crap. If there were html entities &Gemini;, (which there is not) etc. I could just say "browser problem" and be done with it.
That leads me to think about what happened at {{dq}}. All of that special encoding crap could easily be replaced with &ldquo; and &amp:rdquo; which are actually, very easy to remember and people's browsers can handle them however they want to. It is generic. It is the most generic way to call characters now for decades. "Get your browser fixed" places the problem at the best/right place, imo.
So, whatever reason to replace them with the actual character, "fix your browser" kind of works for me for getting back to what I was doing and not suffering encoding wars (the new browser war, maybe).
I am not fond of the special "webkit-" etc. stuff that went into styles for html5 either. You mentioned on my talk page about finding tons of errors. In a handful of years, that stuff will be unnecessary cruft, but not an "error" now.

Finding the character and pasting it is dreary when just typing it ndash, ldquo is so easy and fairly people friendly. And that finding and pasting failed for me. So, all of my thoughts about escape vs actual. (and a little rant about css3). Thanks for your time.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian FYI, it's the "unicodify" part of the general fixed applied by AWB. (It's a 'vague' policy on enwiki, but I believe several bots do it as well.) There is actually an option to turn it on and off, if you hunt around. My only problem with 'unicodified' markup is the monospace font in the edit box makes it hard to distinguish – and —, so sometimes I end up retyping them all correctly 'just in case.' Jarnsax (talk) 19:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
(aside: IMO, the whole double quote drama would be better deal with by enabling actual 'kerning' of text (font-kerning: auto; in CSS) which would cause your browser to correctly space things like !". Jarnsax (talk) 19:09, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

permission to revert your edits

You gave me permission to revert your edits. It was when there was a collision making pagelist. I took that permission seriously.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries. I am trying to figure out why {{text-indent/s}} didn't work properly in order to resolve this properly.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:44, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry, I saw things in the Watchlist without looking into it. Truly, some of the templates have seemed to provided additional experiences. dhr, it was such that, I fled to wikidata and commons thinking that what it meant was that I was not welcome here, that kind of experience. Since then, if I know the template and it is quicker to type than the other, I use it. But not dhr. Needs to be a {{NAWB}} :) --RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:09, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
I'll do the first chapter. You might want to look into converting the subsequent chapters. You can use {{ti|0|foo}} for the paragraph tails after tables, as I've done in the first chapter. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Template:note-x

Hi. Not certain why this template was created, it is such an old and unnecessary way to do things. In this sort of situation please just use the "group" function that exists for references. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:50, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Image problem

What's the image problem you are trying to solve? When I (quick glance) checked the transclusions at the time I made the change to ppoem they looked fine to me. Xover (talk) 12:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

In ppoem lines are spans, the file syntax as used generates a DIV wrapper. DIV in a SPAN is badly formed HTML, and generates lint error. The {{ppoem}} doesn't have an !image directive yet @Inductiveload:. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: Thoughts? Context is stuff like this where an image sits in between two stanzas of a poem. The display looks fine as is, but it's not good to generate lint errors needlessly. Could we magic-syntax or dwim our way to a image-only pseudo-stanza? Xover (talk) 13:13, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: I think <> [[File:foo.jpg|300px]] will do. Adding center adds a div, otherwise I think it's just inline. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 14:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: Hmm. Simple. Sounds good. I'll try it out. Xover (talk) 14:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Never do a pagelist for a work I've uploaded

I will always do my own pagelists. The only exception is when someone has requested me to upload a work and even then I mostly do them. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I found the script for importing an index page list is now a preference, along with your other suggestions I have greatly simplified that part of the process; I guess you noticed there was little or nothing to do with the files I've done recently. Cheers for the help on these previously, others might prefer your guidance rather than having it done while they are editing.

Another topic: you were working on a book about printing some months ago, I intended to read some more when you when done. Cygnis insignis (talk) 23:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis:, Don't wait for me , if you wish to continue proofreading a work that is incomplete. If you mean the bock that essentially a compostiors manual, I stopped working on it because I wasn't sure what the standard method here on Wikisource for doing certain of the formatting shown was. (It made sense to try and conform to the style/standard templates used here, so it's an example for proofreading/typesetting other transcriptions?) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 06:52, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I think that is the one, can you provide a link please. Cygnis insignis (talk) 07:06, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis: Index:The practice of typography; correct composition; a treatise on spelling, abbreviations, the compounding and division of words, the proper use of figures and nummerals by De Vinne, Theodore Low, 1828-1914.djvu ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:10, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes. thanks. If I may, there is some interesting parts that I can attempt; I remember that there are some tricky proofreading decisions to be made. Cygnis insignis (talk) 07:20, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

The brown fairy book

What pages are missing? The scan goes out to p. 350 at the end. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:35, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

my bad fix U.S. Government Printing Office Style Manual

Subject title makes it sound like there was only one, and that is really wrong.

I did a bunch of stuff, like this to get the nesting to work in the Main.

Check out the main, while my markup was bad, the nesting there was good. Like that double numbered/e, probably was closing an open one somewhere else, but, darned if I could find it.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:31, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I have no idea what happened at Page:U.S. Government Printing Office Style Manual 2008.djvu/118, but you apparently fixed it as all seems right in main. Maybe I will figure out what you did as my day gets a little longer.... Much better than what I did.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
I checked the entire run of pages in the relevant chapter. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:41, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

pesky index

Can you take a look at this: Index:Spencer - The Shepheardes Calender, conteining twelue æglogues proportionable to the twelue monethes, 1586.djvu. Maybe you have a different way to handle it; I am unhappy with what I did.

It is the oldest at IA that I could find, but the ocr is terrible and I wouldn't mind the suggestion to trash it for another version (which might have the same or similar numbering of pages).--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

About "long s", is it a local convention to use them only at the beginning of a word and not in the middle?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
I've attempted to go by what was in the scan. Generally long s was not placed at the end though. ShakespeareFan00 (talk)
It is my first experience with the language. I just made a request at the Scan Lab. The ocr is simply terrible, I am surprised you got as far with it as you (and others) have.
If I understand at all what I have read so far, the word "Æloguie" is an invented word, Elogie meaning Greek goat heards tales, Æloguie is to mean English shepheards tales. Then, I think in Januarie, Colin Clouts love for Rosilind is compared to the hoare frost built up on the sheeps flanks. It is making me laugh more than I thought something from its time would....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

gazumped

… in a sense, evidently you also enjoy creating new pages for previously unrecognised authors. Do you understand what I am getting at here? ~ Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:28, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Again apologies. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:32, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll merge what I have ready and move forward. Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Your edits are a rollercoaster of distraction to very helpful ;-) Thanks for the index fix. Cygnis insignis (talk) 08:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Matthew Henry volume title pages

I fiddled with various things - this at Page:An Exposition of the Old and New Testament (1828) vol 1.djvu/51 is the best I could do but I don't really know what I am doing. Tried to get the individual columns to align left-justified by using an indent, but it didn't work out, so I am left with this at present. Thanks for all the tidying up you've been doing on the various volumes. PeterR2 (talk) 12:33, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Index:Epigraphia Indica Vol 1 (1892).pdf

Please specify all faults; later I'll try to rectify. Thanks. Hrishikes (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Fixed. -- Hrishikes (talk) 01:58, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

hin

What is it you are trying to achieve with {{hin}}?

PS. Even when frustrated, it's best to avoid four letter words whether partially censored or not. We're a multi-cultural project and in some cultures these are quite a lot more offensive than intended. Not to mention that expressing ones frustrations in this manner can give the impression of a hostile and confrontational environment. For example, some studies have shown that the gender gap on enwp is partially explained by a lower tolerance for conflicts and direct / confrontational language among women as a demographic. The wikis aren't a professional environment, but it's generally wise to adopt norms of communication and interaction from such settings as a yardstick when deciding how to express oneself. Xover (talk) 08:37, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Xover: Apologies, It is unprofessional of me to use them (and I really should know better, given I am a long term contributor here), If you haven't already, I have no objections to the comment(s) concerned being suppressed, and formally request you do so in the interests of promoting the kind of professional environment that should be encouraged here. The relevant id's to suppress being - https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Hanging_indent_inline&oldid=11806685 and in a related vien https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Hanging_indent_inline&oldid=11806756 (Aside: Swear comments get censored in log comments on other projects and repositories as a matter of routine policy, and I would not oppose that being policy here.)

What I was trying to do was add a left-margin override to address the formatting here, Page:Writings_of_Saint_Patrick,_Apostle_of_Ireland.djvu/127 and Page:Writings_of_Saint_Patrick,_Apostle_of_Ireland.djvu/127 in relation to the use of formatted references. I've now implemented the required functionality, almost identically to how I did it previously (so I must have made a typo when editing too late (most likely mismacthed braces.). I've also now implemented {{hin/m}} (which isn't fully documented yet). The situation with the notes on the relevant pages isn't ideal, and is awaiting some improvements/enhancements to the cite extension. The other alternative was to reformat the notes (and where they are linked from to use {{authority reference}}, or some other kind of semi-externalised footnote template, but didn't feel overly confident in implementing that without some kind of more detailed technical consultation.

What I have not yet implemented is {{hin/epo}} and {{hin/mpo}} for end-page-only, and middle-page-only tags, as I am wondering if this could be an option to the existing /m and /e version anyway. The reason I have not put the /m or /e in the header or footer, is because the structures generated by the Cite extension meant malformed HTML would be generated if I did that. (That was also why I was using {{hin}} as updated instead of {{hii}} as was used previously on the pages concerned. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:25, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

On te edit summaries, I can hide them if you want but I don't really think it's necessary. It was just a reminder that they're visible to everyone so it's better to constrain oneself.
On the margins… You can't really set a margin on a hanging indent, because it's not a real hanging indent: we're faking it by combining a negative text-indent with a margin, and the two have to match each other (+2em/-2em). Specifically, we're setting a +2em margin that affects the paragraph as a whole and then setting a -2em negative text-indent that "pulls" the first line back to the zero point. Any additional margin has to come from a surrounding block element (or we'd need to do math on the parameters, which we can't since they have explicit units).
Regarding /m and similar: I don't understand what you need these for. Why can't you just put a /s in the header, and so forth? Xover (talk) 11:39, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
because
  1. the resultant markup in putting /s in the header generates <span><ref></span></ref>. which is misnested.
  2. The text indent is NOT set on the /m version, as it in the 'middle' of a continued paragraph. ( The parameter's are retained for tracking.)
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:46, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Hmm. Well, for the first, why not put the /e after the </ref>? The Cite extension spits out a span in any case (to my great annoyance) so that ought work just fine.
On the /m: "hmm". I think that's rather a lot of complication for a minor cosmetic issue in the Page: namespace, that will look just fine on transclusion, but fair enough I suppose. I'm just a bit wary of all these increasingly complicated templates that solve smaller and smaller issues at the expense of massively increased complexity and maintenance cost. We have far bigger fish to fry than millimetre accuracy in formatting in Page: pages. Xover (talk) 11:56, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

{{nsl2}}

The first time I reversed the order for that template, I saw and used the named parameters, but they did not work. So, I haven't tried it again. When you put them in, there was a }} between the two you named so that would not have worked, regardless.

Also, my ego would like to add that this whole is the reason it usually doesn't allow the id to save before finishing because: What a mess!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:34, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Fixing lint errors in archive spaces

Please do not attempt to edit subpages of Wikisource:WikiProject Film/Drafts/Archives unless there is a dire need for it, as the purpose of that space is for archiving past draft material as it appeared at the time. It'll be helpful to make the edits you made to the actual film transcriptions instead. (I have added a note about this on the main page of the Archives, as it was not made clear in the past.) PseudoSkull (talk) 19:09, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 2.djvu

Fixed. Also Vol 1. -- Hrishikes (talk) 16:44, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 1.pdf

Fixed -- Hrishikes (talk) 17:31, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 5.pdf

Vol 5 fixed. No plate missing in Vol 6. Hrishikes (talk) 05:15, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 6.pdf

Fixed. Image 46 was present before page 357, now re-ordered. Hrishikes (talk) 17:04, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Re-ordered afresh. Hrishikes (talk) 14:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 7.pdf

Re-ordered. Hrishikes (talk) 07:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 8.pdf

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 14:03, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 12.pdf

Re-ordered. Hrishikes (talk) 06:27, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 10.pdf

Re-ordered 10, 11, 13. No image missing in 13. Hrishikes (talk) 06:06, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Images are correctly placed in vol 10. Fig. 27 is after page 170 and faces that page. Fig. 28 is before page 171 and faces that page. Page 192 is faced with a blank page. Next page is Fig. 29, which faces page 193. Hrishikes (talk) 13:24, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Vol 13 corrected. Figs 2 and 21 re-positioned, Fig. 11 is in correct position. Hrishikes (talk) 13:54, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 14.pdf

Re-ordered. Hrishikes (talk) 16:44, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

The last image is on page 351 itself. Hrishikes (talk) 17:44, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 15 (IGNCA).pdf

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 06:17, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Corrected. Also JRAS 1895. Hrishikes (talk) 12:02, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Vol 1.djvu

Missing images added. The missing pages are intentionally left out, I think, after checking another three copies. Hrishikes (talk) 14:15, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

pp241to244 are present, maybe you are having cache issue. Pages 234-237 are absent in all copies, so it can be deemed as intentional. Hrishikes (talk) 14:47, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Vol 1.pdf

Fixed. Also IA-9. Hrishikes (talk) 14:12, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Also, you may like to check {{Epigraphia Indica}} -- Hrishikes (talk) 16:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
I was leaving those, as I don't want to get a reputation for being the default "page-list anomaly finder" on Wikisource, Also some of those volumes appear to have an additional later copyright notice on re-publication. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:20, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Reprints have no fresh copyright. Anyway, which volumes have those notices? Hrishikes (talk) 17:37, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
And as for your anomaly-finding, that has been of really great help to me and I guess, to the site in general. Hrishikes (talk) 17:44, 9 November 2021 (UTC)



ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:25, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I could remove the reprint front pages. Underneath it is the original front page. But it really is not required, because reprints carry no fresh copyright, even if claimed. Moreover, reprint was done by the creator department, ASI, and these are also downloadable from the ASI website. Being copyright-expired government works, there is no issue here. You perhaps are aware that HathiTrust is a more stringent stickler of copyright than we are here; they don't allow full view beyond 1895 for foreign works. See at 1 the list of reprint volumes of Indian Antiquary (Vol. 1 is separate, at 2). You can see that they are allowing full view for these reprints upto 1895. Therefore, there really is no issue. Hrishikes (talk) 01:44, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 16.pdf

Re-ordered. I put the last image after p. 360 (and not 369, which is obviously a typo), as per the volume at HT here. Hrishikes (talk) 02:39, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 17 (IGNCA).pdf

There is no image facing p. 238. Actually it is 228 but looks like 238 due to scan blurring. See clear scan here -- Hrishikes (talk) 05:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Missing pages added. Hrishikes (talk) 12:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Please explain your comment about fp300. There is no image at that position, either in the TOC or the scan. However, I have removed the dup. pages. -- Hrishikes (talk) 07:26, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Must have made a typo... I did a recheck and it's fp200 ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:37, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Done. Also Vol 18. Hrishikes (talk) 14:02, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Index:Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Vol 2 Part 1.pdf

Fixed. -- Hrishikes (talk) 06:30, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Indian Antiquary, 21, 22

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 06:16, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 28 (IGNCA).pdf

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 06:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 29.pdf

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 06:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Indian Antiquary Vol 30.pdf

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 07:53, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Public General Acts of the United Kingdom and Church Assembly Measures 1968 Vol 2.pdf

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 14:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Index:The Public General Acts of the United Kingdom and Church Assembly Measures 1969 Vol 1.pdf

Fixed. Hrishikes (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Adventure List and Monthly Challenge

I'm going to run the Adventure List as a long-term series which means that as soon as one is proofread, I'll add another one from the list. If you have any suggestions as what should be next, please drop me a message. Languageseeker (talk) 21:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Well Ideally select one and update the list :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

compromise? {{ts}} {{smaller}} for {{smaller block/s}}?

About these brownie versions. It is weird that your table style didn't work. I want to wrap the whole thing in a block/s and /e now. You okay with that?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:56, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Ideally the image (and it's verse) should be a single colspan=2 , do what you think is best. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm thinking to do up the images for the brownies in Vol. 40 and ask you nicely to do the layout -- completely with the selfish reason of seeing what you do with it. So, I'll just let you know when they are here. Some of these kiddie things are really fun for layout workouts....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
commons:Category:St. Nicholas (magazine)/Volume 40/Part 2/The Brownies at Haymaking The images are not all there yet. Also, there are a couple of pages where you might want the images to be split up -- you will know which one I am talking about (2 total, like that, but only one uploaded yet). It starts at Page:St. Nicholas (serial) (IA stnicholasserial402dodg).pdf/476 and I have a class ("background-verse") that centers the content and serif family only (no max-widths, etc) but feel free to whatever to the styles for that volume. I am sorry it took so long to upload them. I will datafry everything soon also. I hope you enjoy this as I did the others.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:44, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

The Smart Set Pagelist

Thank you for all your help with the pagelists. You are truly amazing. Can you hold off on doing The Smart Set. I just found a better set and they'll be batch uploaded soon. I'll probably sdelete the other one's afterwards, so I don't want to make you do the hard work twice. Languageseeker (talk) 18:59, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

PD/US and PD-US

Hi. Would you please upgrade from using {{PD/1923}} and

 

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1927. It may be copyrighted outside the U.S. (see Help:Public domain).

 

to our migrated version of template. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:03, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Migrated version of which template? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:32, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

TextQuality

The reason for the {{TextQuality}} indicator for Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Zorrilla, Francisco is that the transclusion indicator indicates only one part of the article is proofread where actually the entire text of the article is proofread. This article and others like it were originally not transcluded, but completely proofread, and then a portion was copied over to a page which was not completely proofread and then transcluded, so the transclusion indicator misleadingly indicates it is only half proofread. Once the transclusion indicator is correct (that is, once both pages have been proofread) the {{TextQuality}} should be removed, but before that I think it is useful to have it there to give a correct indication of the proofread status of the article to editors and readers. That's the idea anyway. I would appreciate it if it could be retained in this case. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 00:16, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Table row markers

Is there a reason you keep changing only some of the table row markers? And, is there any difference for having them in one place or the other? TOC are difficult enough with out having them being broken while I am working on them.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian: - You had this in the page before my edits.
|-<noinclude>{{nopt}}
|}
</div></noinclude>

which doesn't necesarily close the table as might be expected. That why I was removing the terminating row marker, on pages, because it resolves the LintError about mismatched opening and closing DIV tags. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Without a new row, this happens -->St._Nicholas/Volume_32#vii. If you know a way that the table can have a row start in between two pages that lint will be happy with, please share it. If I have only the choice of lint being happy or the table rendering accurately, I choose accurate rendering.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
It is probably going to be fixed by the time you look at it. If there are lint errors after my edit, can you let me know?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Alternative text

Are you sure you know what you're doing with alt text? If you're just working off some lint type list somewhere, please keep in mind that alt text is an accessibility issue and bad alt text is worse than no alt text! In particular, this is incorrect. For a screen reader it's going to look like "Commons Commons", and it will be read out as "Commons Commons", which is going to be really annoying to anyone using a voice browser. Xover (talk) 10:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Have attempted to revert ALL the alternative texts I recently added. Perhaps you can review and add "appropriate" ones to the relevant templates instead? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Most of the template-provided images do not actually need alt text, partly due to their function and partly because screen readers have gotten really smart about dealing with images so long as we don't force them to treat them dumbly (i.e. add bad alt text). Much as I hate to quote Billinghurst at you, I think this is an instance of "a solution in search of a problem". Solutions to accessibility problems are rarely this kind of mechanical addition: they require a thorough understanding of an actual, concrete, problem and some significant care in implementation. The Web Accessibility Initiative learned this the hard way two decades ago (and this "all images should have alt text, always" thing is born of those mistakes). The correct mantra is more like "You should check whether your non-textual information makes sense in a screen reader, and use tools like alt text, title attributes, and longdesc text to compensate when needed." Text that is needlessly verbose, possibly repeated several times on a page, and file names that are not both concise and descriptive are generally going to be much bigger hindrances to screen reader users than a lack of alt text. Imagine having to wait while listening to a computer voice slowly read through all the boilerplate and decorative stuff on every single wikipage, including trying to pronounce an Internet Archive identifier… Xover (talk) 11:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Perhaps you could also make your views about the relevant new Linter category as well, It's apparently not been popular. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with that issue. Do you have a relevant link? Xover (talk) 14:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
See T297334 on Phabricator..ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Index:The German Civil Code Translated and Annotated (by Wang Chung-hui).pdf

After you marked the previous version of Index:The German Civil Code Translated and Annotated (by Wang Chung-hui).pdf having missing pages, I've found and uploaded another version that doesn't have missing pages. I'd therefore like to ask if you can rearrange the pages of the index? Many thanks.廣九直通車 (talk) 03:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Change to "EB1911 fine print/s" template has an issue

Hi, I think your recent change to the {{EB1911 fine print/s}} template has had unforeseen consequences e.g. on https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page:EB1911_-_Volume_12.djvu/276&oldid=10408914 the fine print used to display without a line-break in the middle, but now an unwanted line-break shows. DivermanAU (talk) 00:15, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

The problem occurs because the text is on the same line as the template it follows. The text sandwiched in the template needs to start on a new line. Do that, and the problem is resolved. In general, text should not be placed on the same line as any /s template. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: — Thanks for the explanation, I understand that. But there are probably hundreds of pages that have text on the same line as the /s template that used to display OK, but now don't. Is it worth breaking the display of these pages for the sake of one line-break in the template? Or, can a robot be run to fix these pages up? Thanks, DivermanAU (talk) 21:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
If there is a consistent problem like this, then it should be a simple matter for a bot to insert a line break to correct the issue. Then both the template and the text are fixed. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: — The problem is consistent, there are many pages with {{EB1911 fine print/s}} (or {{EB1911 Fine Print/s}}) with text following on the same line. How does a robot get configured to fix this up (and who does it)? Thanks. DivermanAU (talk) 22:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
In the Scriptorium is a section called Repairs and Moves. If you succinctly and precisely describe the problem, (i.e. that in the EB1911, there are multiple instances of the template {{EB1911 fine print/s}} that do not have a carriage return right after them, causing formatting problems, so the return needs to be inserted where it is missing), then someone with a bot and the know-how can configure their bot and run it to fix the issue on all the affected pages. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Great! thanks for the advice, I'll lodge a request. DivermanAU (talk) 23:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

what tool do you use for page creation?

I noticed this edit came with footnotes and all without any major typographical errors. but the lack of edit summaries seems to indicate it was done directly with a tool without any human corrections? please name the tool if you did use one. and also thank you for doing the pagelist on the Manas scan. regards, TryKid (talk) 23:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Standard Web interface. Nothing more elaborate than that. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

An awkward Record character

Just as an FYI, I have come across a Record character not mentioned in Junicode's Record guide (long s with flourish), which doesn't have its own Unicode code point and isn't possible to create with combining charaters. MUFI support it with the PUA character E8B7, and Junicode does support it, though it also has it as an OpenType option for the simple letter "s". I've opted for that second option, to avoid using PUA characters.

s

It's mentioned on pp. 678-9 of A Dictionary of the Art of Printing and Vol. 2 p. 255 of the 1824 edition of Typographia, which both have extensive collections of Record characters beyond the Record Interpreter. I've also checked it against this rough guide to abbreviations due to the variation in form, and it matches up (it appears as part of sr in the text). Theknightwho (talk) 08:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Interesting, Do you want to develop some notes or crib-sheet about transcribing scribal abbreviations or works containing archaic letterforms? based on disparate (but cited) sources? The transcription notes at the Junicdoe github were originally linked with a specific work, "The Record Interpreter" (Martin) and may not be comprehensive (whereas other documentation for the font would be), which is also needing to be transcribed by the way.. I'd also suggest having a word with Junicode's developer, so that an appropriate expanded 'crib-sheet' can be added.

I will also note here that sometimes, where a character form or "glyph" isn't well known, the approach taken on Wikisource has been to expand the abbreivated form or use a more modern (but semanticly equivalent form), as the aim is transcribing meaning and intent of the author more often than making a direct facsimile. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:14, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks - it would be good to prepare something a little more complete, particularly given that there are a handful there that I'm not sure exist in Junicode at all. Though it's actually quite difficult to get any kind of measure on the complete font, as the original was destroyed in a fire in 1808. However, that was only really used in Farley's 1783 facsimile of Domesday and this 1774 history of Dorset, which he used as a testbed. The 1783 Domesday is not freely available online, though I do have both volumes myself. The Record Commission recreated and developed it, but it seems to have been further changed over the years. Quite a few of those glyphs referred to in the two reference works I believe only crop up in Domesday, though there are others that I don't recognise at all.
On your point re expanding the abbreviated form, I agree to an extent, though there are two issues:
  1. The expansion should be done as an alternative. This is particularly important with Statutes of the Realm, because that text is the legally definitive edition for those early statutes.
  2. My Latin and Anglo-Norman aren't good enough. No expansion is better than a bad one, and I don't want to do a piecemeal job either.
Theknightwho (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
If you have found glyphs not in Junicode, raise it as an issue on the Github for Junicode with an appropriate reliable source for that glyphs use.
On your second point see {{scribal}}. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:25, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm writing the post as we speak haha. I also have aspirations to scan in my Domesday volumes, though I need a spare weekend to do so. Those would be excellent to transcribe at some point, though it has too many unique glyphs to be possible yet (take a look at that section of the 1774 county history, especially a few pages on - it's quite a bit denser than conventional Record type).
Thanks for the template. I think I'll refrain from using it for the time being, as I'm still not confident enough in my own ability to interpret, and I think given the sheer number it would be preferable to prepare an expanded edition of the text. Even then, there are a huge number of difficulties and ambiguities requiring expert knowledge, to the point that you'd essentially be publishing a new edition. Theknightwho (talk) 18:14, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
https://github.com/psb1558/Junicode-font/issues is where to raise issues if you didn't know already :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:17, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Ta - have done. Have also made some other minor requests. Theknightwho (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Combining character templates

I'm trying to think what the best way to do combining templates is. Separating the base character from the template isn't ideal for the reasons I stated already, and the other option of adding the base character as an argument to the template makes it much harder to parse because it flips the intuitive order (e.g. {{+er|p}}).

The best solution might be to introduce a template similar to {{cdm}}, but with named arguments. I was thinking something short, like Template:~ (specifically because it's very short, and the tilde is the generic paleographic abbreviation). Theknightwho (talk) 13:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

@Theknightwho: {{+~}} was already in use to handle the ~ abbreviations, but yes I see what you mean, about the reversed order. I could also add {{+-}} to handle the +m/+n situation, Hmm..

See also:- "https://github.com/psb1558/Junicode-font/discussions/120" ... Generally what's needed for Wikisource is the 'meaning' of the text not the exact rendering, so if the rendering can be handed over to the font/typsetting engine somehow... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:16, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, what I mean is that you'd put e.g. {{~|c|~}} for c͏̃, {{~|n|-}}, for n͏̄, {{~|p|re}} for p͏͛ or whatever, depending on what the most sensible schema for the arguments would be.
In terms of getting the meaning, it's too complicated and unreliable with a work like this. It's possible to do it manually, but you'd essentially be creating a new edition with all the ambiguities you'd encounter. It's a work that spans 600 years and at least three languages, so there's just far too much variation. That's to say nothing of the number of ambiguities created by omitting the full Latin endings, nonstandard variations etc etc. Even the early modern English has some bizarre stuff in it. Theknightwho (talk) 14:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
BTW I'd suggest checking if some of the {{cdm|?|335}} should in fact be {{cdm|?|334}} in line with the notes I linked previously.
I've been really careful about these, and I've also been checking against a hard copy of a volume called Introduction to the Authentic Collection of the Statutes of the Realm, which is just the "Introduction" to the main work, but with a few formatting changes for the smaller quarto format.
So far, every b is {{cdm|b|334}}, every l is {{cdm|l|335}} and almost every d is {{cdm|d|335}}. Theknightwho (talk) 14:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

@Theknightwho: See the changes I just made to {{+~}} , It sounds very close to the approach you were thinking off, The second parameter is optional, but is used to set a title so we get tooltips for the known abbreviations. I tweaked the handling a little, so the thrid parameter is the hex code of the combining mark no entity wrapper.. It does 303 by default, but you can supply 334,335, 35B etc.

Thanks - I'll have a look. I'm not sure that tooltips are going to be all that helpful for Statutes, simply because having an incompete set is unhelpful for the user, and having a complete set would be hugely cluttered. Feels like the most sensible way to do it is to have it as a user option to turn on and off. Theknightwho (talk) 14:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
That's why I moved the 'expansion' to the second part. There are various ways to show the expansion, The tooltip method is what's been used on Wikisource to date. Another possibility is to use 'ruby' tags, under user control, but these might confuse searches...ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:54, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
I think the best option would be to have subpages called "/expanded" for each page in the Page namespace, have the template show the full form if that condition is met, and then introduce an option to switch between which set is transcluded in the mainspace. It's not something I want to attempt for this work, though, as a wrong expansion is worse than none (as highlighted by me accidentally putting {{per}} not {{par}}, which I didn't notice on the proofread becuase the abbreviation is the same). Theknightwho (talk) 15:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Missing images

Hi. What happened here: Page:Fourth Book of Occult Philosophy, 1655.djvu/65? Xover (talk) 10:06, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Not sure, all I did was realign- content. Have you checked for a deletion on Commons? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:11, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
I didn't find any trace of the individual images, neither here nor on Commons. Were they there when you changed the page? Xover (talk) 10:13, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
I can't remember, I've gone back to a {{raw page image}} ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Module:pagestyle

Hi - just to say that this module is highly experimental and not working as intended at the moment. I'm trying to work out a way to transclude the {{PAGENAME}} of a page in the Page namespace such that it remains static when that page is then transcluded to the mainspace. This is with the aim of having a {{pagestyle}} template with 0 arguments that can be put on any page that needs its only stylesheet, which will insert a templatestyles tag linking to a stylesheet page based on the Index name (i.e. {{ROOTPAGENAME}}) and page number (i.e. {{SUBPAGENAME}}). Without something keeping it static, the link to the stylesheet breaks on transclusion.

Obviously it's possible to achieve this by having template arguments, but this is literally just a convenience template so I was trying to minimise any input required.

I was experimenting with frame:getParent():getTitle() as that seemed like a possible way to manage it, but unfortunately it only lets you go up one level (i.e. it'll only give you the name of the page on which {{#invoke was used). It does work if you {{#invoke directly from the Page namespace, but that's completely useless on its own. As soon as you box that up in the template, all you end up transcluding is the name of that template. Theknightwho (talk) 12:39, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Hmm - The approach I would take is to read the pagename where it's transcluded, and process that using string splitting. I.E get the page and then split it down. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:54, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
What you are trying to do is:-
Page:$1/$2 -> <templatestyles src="Index:$1/p$2 styles.css" />

?

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:58, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Essentially yes, though the primary issue is that it's almost impossible to find out any information about intermediate transclusion pages. Whether you use {{PAGENAME}} and string split or {{ROOTPAGENAME}} and {{SUBPAGENAME}}, they're all processed after transclusion has taken place. Theknightwho (talk) 13:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Raise the issue on Phabricator, as I don't think the way the REF tag is currently done can cope with this at all. The defaylt formatting used in Mediawiki, generates a SPAN inside a List-item. This is not compatible with trying to 'class' indvidual list-items.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk)

You can class individual reflinks by giving them names. Have a look at the notes on this charter from Statutes - you'll see I've set some of them to span across all columns. Theknightwho (talk) 14:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes but that approach is leading into the mess of having to have individual rules for each reference. There should be a generalised class for all of the column spanned references. Also {{brace3}} fails to render properly inside REF tags. Rethink the approach you are using for references, because the current one cannot work with current Mediawiki limitations.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:38, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

You're going to have to manually specify them anyway, whether it's in-line or in a stylesheet, and it's not currently possible to do it in-line. Given it's rarely more than a tiny handful per page, I don't think it's onerous.
In terms of {{brace3}}, it renders fine in <ref> tags for me in Chrome. Which browser are you using? Theknightwho (talk) 15:38, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Firefox - Screenshot please.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Page 60 in a table. It's possible to span multiple pages, which I've done for Appendix C towards the bottom, as it's more elegant than having arbitrary breaks with "(continued)". Page 38 in a ref - it's intentionally asymmetric as it isn't possible to centre the number. You can specify the ratio as an optional parameter. In this case it's good to do something like calc(100% - 1em).
   

Theknightwho (talk) 15:55, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

{{Brace3}} is not rendering correctly on Firefox for me. In addition, if the wrapping TD is set to things other than 1px height I get the same glitched rendering in Chrome. A template should give consistent renderings across all platforms if it's valid HTML, so I am puzzled, as neither of the examples you give render properly on Firefox. Please test on a browser other than Chrome so as to pin this down to being a browser issue.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

It renders fine in Edge, Safari and Opera. I've also tested Chrome and Safari on mobile, and they're both correct as well. Firefox seems to be displaying the braces at 1px. I think this is probably solvable.
I can't replicate your issue with heights other than 1px - the brace always fills the full height of the cell it's in for me, irrespective of whether the specified height is the actual height. Theknightwho (talk) 16:53, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Puzzling. Have you also tried height:auto; height:100%; etc on the wrapping td? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:55, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Also I'm concluding based on Wikipedia, that Edge/Chrome/Safari share Webkit/Blink as the underlying layout engine, whereas Firefox uses Gecko.

So it seems you may be relying on a Webkit/blink rendering quirk, rather than what the HTML/CSS specs you should be able to do. Firefox is seeing the 1px and duly sizing the bracing div to be 100% of the 1px (specified in the TD). The Webkit/Blink based browsers are for some reason doing a different calculation, ie. 100% of the full height of the 'content' in the row, effectivley ignoring the 1px in the calculation). It's not clear to me right now which browser is actually following the spec. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00 Found a solution that works in all browsers: set the table height to 1px - which is actually all that's needed in Chrome, so specifying 1px for each brace was unnecessary. However, Firefox also needs you to specify a height for either the cell or row. Conveniently, I can just repurpose the "brace" argument for {{ts}} by changing it from height:1px to height:100%, and I'll create a "bracetable" option and make it height:1px, to be entered as a style for the whole table. Theknightwho (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
That sounds completely illogical, but if ti works... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
It seems to boil down to the fact that height:100% needs something to be 100% of, so you set a nominal value that gets overridden. I just don't understand - given it's clearly able to work with a calculated value - why it can't just do that without bothering with the nominal value in the first place. Theknightwho (talk) 17:40, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
It seems there ought to be a content-limits function, that gives you the maximum values for the 100% to be based on. hmmm.

I wonder if that's worth raising on Mozilla/Gecko's bug tracker. Because you would think logical behaviour would be to use the height/width of the actual content, rather than 0 if it's not specified.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2022 (UTC) ShakespeareFan00 (talk)

Well this didn't render correctly - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Statutes_of_the_Realm_Vol_1_(1101-1377).pdf/63

I strongly suggest writing some test cases, so you aren't changing things continually whilst it's still a bit unstable.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:56, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

That page works perfectly on my installations of Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari and Opera. Try a hard refresh?
It is a weird one though. Xover seems to know more about this issue, and has just left a message on my talk page about it.
You jumped the gun on me changing "brace" by the way - I was going to do that after putting in all of the "bracetable" arguments to ensure to a smooth switchover. Is it working for you now, though? Theknightwho (talk) 18:00, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
It's working, But I am still convinced that it's a kludge and that there should be a browser fix so that 100%/unknown gets a sensible value ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:08, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
It is absolutely a kludge, yes, and I agree it needs to be properly implemented by the spec. Theknightwho (talk) 18:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
I've just spotted one minor thing to watch out for: where a table spans multiple pages and contains braces, it's easy to forget the "bracetable" parameter in the principal table header if there aren't any braces in the table on that page. You also won't spot it until transclusion. This just happened with Appendix D, where I was trying to figure out why the brace on the second page was only disappearing in the mainspace. Theknightwho (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
See also :- https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51285308/how-do-min-content-and-max-content-work These might be what we are actually looking for, That seems to work for the calculations in Firefox, I will test in Chrome.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:02, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes - it seems to work in Chrome as well. It also allows the table syntax to be stripped down, too. Theknightwho (talk) 20:22, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Classing References

What would be useful is to be able to do <ref class="_column_smash"> like you can with other tags. That way you could set the column breaking up directly (and potentially make it different for page vs mainspace, or indeed for mobile display where the 2 column layout doesn't make sense.).ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree - though I suspect it may be hard to get this through the Phabricator. I feel like this is something that will have come up before, but I may be wrong. Theknightwho (talk) 18:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Medieval scribal abbreviations

Just as an FYI, more than anything else, this short book gives an excellent background on scribal abbreviations. It’s an English translation of the forward to Adriano Cappelli’s Lexicon abbreviaturarum, which is the most widely used dictionary of scribal abbreviations, but which has never been published as a complete volume in English for some reason.

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/213385262.pdf

Theknightwho (talk) 15:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

@Theknightwho: - Do you know if that's an extract from a larger publication? I can't see a copyright notice, and the copyright.gov online catalog doesn't seem to be aware of it either. Interesting.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:56, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Does Itallian Wikisource have Cappelli's original? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:45, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
I've found this on Archive.org also - https://archive.org/details/CappelliDizionarioDiAbbreviature which seems to be a revised Italian edition?

(There also seem to be some translations to German of an earlier edition) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I did some more digging- https://www.adfontes.uzh.ch/en/ressourcen/abkuerzungen/cappelli-daten-zum-download - This is a crowd sourced dataset for all the abbreviations in Cappelli's work. I am wondering if someone could use that on Wikitionary? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

It’s a translation of the foreword published in its own right in 1982, and the copyright status seems uncertain to me. Cappelli’s original is out of copyright, though you’ll want the 1929 edition (iirc) as it’s the most complete. I have been (slowly) preparing images for upload for use on Wiktionary, but it’ll take a while to do.

There’s also a supplement from the 1960s, as well as Chassant’s similar dictionary in French from the late 1800s. A compilation of all of them would be extremely useful. Theknightwho (talk) 21:43, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

New texts

Hey, am I remembering right that you're one of the people in charge of quality control on the "New Texts" section? Wanted to ask about this one. I have not fully proofread the advertisements, but I did collapse them inside {{advertisements}}. I also haven't created any of the many, many blank pages, but I'm not sure doing so would serve any useful purpose. How would you go about bringing this text to a status considered "complete" enough for the new texts section?

The Heathen Chinee (1871)

Would it be a good idea for me to upload a new file with the bulk of the blank pages removed? -Pete (talk) 19:30, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Why remove several paragraphs by commenting them out?

Hi, just wondering why on this edit: https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page:EB1911_-_Volume_09.djvu/748&diff=next&oldid=12034887 you removed several paragraphs by using the comment tag. I've since reinstated those paragraphs (and made some edits). DivermanAU (talk) 02:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Commented out to diagnose a lint concern, and forgot to reinstate. thanks for the heads up :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 06:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
@DivermanAU:, @Xover: Is there to find all edits where I've added HTML comment strings, so I can re-check those edits? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 06:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Not that I can think of ottomh, no, sorry. Xover (talk) 07:37, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
@Xover: I'll see if theres a way to do it with Pywikibot, Combination of usercontribs and grep options perhaps?, See also the comment I left at User talk:DivermanAU concerning {{remarks}}, with a view to migration of wiki-text markup comments/annotations away from being raw HTML comments. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:40, 9 May 2022 (UTC)


@Xover: https://public.paws.wmcloud.org/User:ShakespeareFan00/comments.txt. Much appreciated if someone did check some of these, I can further filter it to already validated pages if desired? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:01, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect conversion to "pages" format

Hi, your conversion of 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Doctor to "pages" format resulted in losing the part of the article by omitting the second page. I have now fixed this by using "include=383-384".

Also, you broke 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/California again! Your edit of 7 Jan 2022 resulted in just 2 pages of text being displayed where there should be 14! — I have since fixed this up so all 14 pages of text display and there is no unwanted line-break after the plate image.

I just found another "pages" conversion error in 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Wisconsin - you have include="760,762-790" where the previous edit correctly ended at djvu 769. So your edit includes text from articles "WISCONSIN, UNIVERSITY OF" to "WOLCOT, JOHN".

Have there been many other conversions to "pages" format you have made? You might want to check them for errors. DivermanAU (talk) 20:12, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up , I'll take another look at those conversions.
I also fixed up 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Zircon, you had the images being displayed twice (I re-did the section tags). Maybe spend a bit more time checking the results of your edits. I usually compare the old and proposed new versions in different windows to check for differences. DivermanAU (talk) 13:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I've now gone through all the conversions I did. The one's you've highlighted seem to the the only ones found with issues. I can recheck again if you like, but I'm not sure I'd spot the glitches, given you seem to have sharper eyes. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2022 (UTC)