User talk:ShakespeareFan00/Archive6

Archives: I II III IV User talk:ShakespeareFan00/Archive 5

The Poems of Sappho

If you're interested in working on this, and will proofread the first two chapters (mostly in English), then I will be free to concentrate on chapter 3, which includes Sappho's poems (in Greek) with translations. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

I'll do the first two chapters and then see what else can be done.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

It looks as though something's gone awry with whatever editing tool you're using. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: No. It's not the edit tool that's broken it's to do with Mediawiki 'mis-inserting' opening or closing tags. The empty comment is to FORCE a line-feed, so the back-end "tidies" properly. Can you please explain how it's SUPPOSED to be done? Thanks.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The lack of a line feed for the footer is a long-standing issue (I'm not sure which Phabricator item), but it's been an issue here for years. I do not expect it will ever be corrected. There is no established way to correct the problem that works in all situations, and it's a problem in the Page namespace that most of the community has learned to live with. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Please don't go marking every page with an unkown Lint error as problematic. We'll have countless pages de-validated for which there is no fix that can be applied. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Fair enough.. I was about to mark them as re-proof-read. However, I'd appreciate someone taking another look at ALL the tempaltes on those pages, because I am not sure the LintError is soley due to the 'footer' line-feed concern.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

There is the remote possibility it is related to the database hiccup that happened some time ago. I know that Wikidata is still recovering from a system glitch. Perhaps something is tied to that, but it looks as though the problem is not inherent to the pages here, but to something in the software. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Reminder: The Poems of Sappho was proofread with smart quotes. Removing smart quotes indiscriminantly is inappropriate. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks... Revalidated. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I see one thing you've tried is moving the opening "/s" tag into the body. Is that clearing the problem? If so, then this is a new problem requiring a new Phabricator ticket. Whether such a template is in the header or the body should make no difference; it's never caused problems before. If it's causing problems now, then some update has (once again) failed to consider how the Page namespace works on Wikisource. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Yes that cleared it.. but what I think cleared it is the 'line feed' after the closing <noinlcude>. If you want to do some further digging, Take a look at the 'raw' generated by the two different versions.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Compare what happens with:-

<div><span>content<span></div>

<div><span>
content<span>
</div>

<div>
<span>content<span>
</div>

Which is a simplified to bare minimum of what's happening in the various instances. Mediawiki needs the "line-feed" apparently to correctly insert the P tags. I've said at least three times previously (and no-one listened) that expecting contributors to know about whitespace rules is not reasonable. Especially when to them the behvaiour doesn't seem consistent. There's a long standing Phab ticket requesting someone DOCUMENTS what's actually going on in relation to whtiespace, linefeeds etc. , but it's not apparently been actively responded to ...)

Very Long term, I'd like to see the headers and footers moved out of the current noinclude kludge and into a better thought out structure... (If wikidata can have custom extensions to the database logic so can Wikisource.)

Index:Citizenship (Amendment) Act on Gazette of India.pdf

Many thanks for helping out with the index!廣九直通車 (talk) 03:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Sappho and the Sapphic Metre in English

Now done, with five pages to be validated. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Index:The Complete Works of William Makepeace Thackeray Vol.20.pdf

Hey, thanks for your help with the index! :)

I'm a little confused by your latest change, however - could you please explain why you removed the Roman numerals for the initial pages? -- Contrapunctus-1 (talk) 09:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Error on my part. Restored. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:17, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Index:Singular adventures of Sir Gawen, and the enchanted castle.pdf

Hi

One of my team is working on the above book on Wikisource but it seems you are editing it too. Would it be ok if you held off working on it for now in order to avoid any editing conflict?

Many thanks Gweduni (talk) 10:55, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Will do so.. I'll go back to getting some of the Scots songs, transcribed (if not proofread)? I'd done some OCR cleanup on them already ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:10, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Great, thanks very much. You'll see we're finding our feet a bit with this but its great we have 50+ staff members all working on Wikisource right now! Gweduni (talk) 12:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

BTW I left something on your talk, concerning something a bit more specialist.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:21, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

NLS Uploaded works

Hi, while you're trawling through these newly uploaded works, I wonder if you could make a list of works that posted more than once? We're going to need to do some Versions pages for them and rather than creating and then disambiguating and moving works, it would be good if we already know which ones need it. I'm about to create a WikiProject page for them, so a sub-page of that would be the best place to put the list. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I was doing purely mechanical tagging.. I hadn't checked for duplicate scans. In terms of catalouging the songs and works, I think it would be better to liase with the NLS contributors as they may have a suggested categorisation scheme? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:22, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: BTW although many are marked as validated, I think someone might need to do style guide checks (and a layout pass)ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

You'll have seen on the Admin Noticeboard that I'm working with the NLS people on the formatting issues. We already know they need to do another pass through once we've sorted things a bit more. I'm not too worried yet about categorisation on the transcluded pages—particularly as there is only one of those so far. It was more that you're likely to pick up the double-ups because of the way you work. They're not duplicate scans, rather it's a case of different publications of the same work that have been uploaded. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:34, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Hmm.. You might want to ask the NLS people how they categorise different editions/printing. Because in some cases, what I've seen are identical copies (albiet different printings possibly). I'll have a look on Monday. I'd like to take a break for a bit. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:36, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: You meant something like this? User:ShakespeareFan00/NLS_scans ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:35, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

That's a good start. Now, I know (for example) that there are four Indexes called Six Excellent Songs; Are they each a different set of songs? If they're the same set, are they different printings? What do we need to know and to do? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

@Beeswaxcandle: That's exactly the sort of question I would be asking the NLS people.. Sometimes there are identical printings, and sometimes different. I had not got to the songs in any detail yet, but was planning on recording the song name/first lines as well the indexs. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:36, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Superb work on getting the category onto all those Indexes (307 by my count) while I slept and then had to work. This is very much appreciated gnoming work. I'll get Gweduni to take a look at your duplicates subpage over the next couple of days. I've thrown the category at him to start with. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for setting up the category https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_NLS. Can't see them in the Category section of an individual book though - is that an issue? Thanks.

Gweduni (talk) 10:33, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hmm - That may be because I did them manually, rather than putting them in the field on the Index: page...

@Beeswaxcandle: Please see the note I left on your talk page earlier ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:35, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gweduni: Also Wikisource has 'hidden categories' that don't appear unless you enable the option to show them in your preferences. see Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering under Advanced Options.) Typically Hidden categories are used for maintenance and tracking categories. If you wanted a more visible attribution category, then I would suggest discussing this with the other Wikisource contributors you are in touch with. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I have a couple of questions around the NLS work. First one, a couple of the editors have noticed that you have been correcting words from texts they have been working on, particularly when it is not clear when a letter should be a "c" or an "e". E.g. the word "forces" often looks like "forees" in the text". We have been leaving words like this spelled as they appear on the page (so "forees", in this example), but you seem to be changing them to the correct spelling ("forces") - can you give guidance on what we should do here? Second question was I've noticed you have been doing some proofreading of the texts, which is fantastic, but if you have time to help out would you be able to do validation work instead? We have a lot of people working on proofreading and don't want to run out of work for them to do. Thanks again Gweduni (talk) 07:50, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gweduni: Given your concerns above, I will be leaving the NLS uploads alone in respect of actual transcribing and basic proofreading, given that you have a lot of contributors. However, I hope that the WikiProject categorisations, and certain 'technical' repairs, (such as the re-nesting and pairing of certain templates I did last night) will still be reasonable.

Ok, thanks - I appreciate that. Any help / guidance you can give around the technical aspects would be greatly appreciated Gweduni (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

In respect of corrections, my view was that I've 'corrected' based on context. If you and your contributors feel happier leaving the original printings (there is a debate both for and against correcting printing anomalies), that's not an issue as far as I am concerned, but it would be useful for other potential proofreaders and validators, if you could mark these using so it's obvious that what may seem like a misprint, has been noted, but entered as printed on the page.

OK, we will start using the tag for possible misprints that have been entered as printed on the page. Gweduni (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I've also in some places used an old convention of marking certain 'reconstructed' words with ⟨⟩ brackets. Here I've often used an alternative printing or the reperesented work in a different collection to aid the reconstruction. Again, if you and your contributors fell happier if this wasn't done I have no issues with such attempts not being done, I just don't like seeing too many (illegible) markings in a page.

we'll use the new template for this Gweduni (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Another point, not raised directly by yourself, but relevant was that my understanding was that English Wikisource, doesn't attempt to represent exact typographical arrangements to facsimile level, provided that the general intention and meaning of the original work is mirrored. In some of the other (non NLS) works I've transcribed and proofread I've had to adapt the layout slightly because of limitations of the Wikisource platform.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hope this helps. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gweduni: Also, I would suggest occasionally checking Special:LintErrors to see if pages your team have added appear. The reporting here is from Linter an extension used on a number of projects like Wikisource,to find 'technical' concerns (such as misformed HTML being generated) in contributed content. Typically these concerns arise due to the mis-nesting of certain templates, unpaired templates, or unexpected 'breaks' (normally paragraph) where the Media wiki platform wasn't expecting them. I use a third-party script (see w:User:PerfektesChaos/js/lintHint) to help with identifying some of these 'technical' concerns.

will do, thanks Gweduni (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Emory University Libraries Uploaded Works

Thank you for the guidance about adding a pagelist to our Index Pages. I was not clear whether the use of the tag did this automatically -- as all of the uploaded pages are referenced on the Index Page. I'll look more closely at the documentation and do the task properly. Jkylefenton (talk) 13:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Life and prophecies of Mr Donald Cargill

How does "continues" work? I take it this doesn't get transcluded (?) into the completed text? I hope I'm using the right technical terms - maybe that's a "namespace" - in any case the one that has all the pages flowing together, which I don't think has been created yet for this book. I'm curious as to why you did not use "continues" on Page:Life and prophecies of Mr Donald Cargill.pdf/6 as you had on the other pages?PeterR2 (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

@PeterR2: , You are correct, as it's in the footer it doesn't get included on transclusion, but is on indvidual pages for completeness..

On page 6 it's because the paragraph had already ended in the body (with {{nop}}. Hence it was more appropriate to use {{right}} as the catchword was for a New paragraph. This is to do with how the HTML generated by each template differs.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:51, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Broken formatting

Your changes to Page:The Story of Nell Gwyn.djvu/184 and Page:The Story of Nell Gwyn.djvu/185 have broken the formatting on those pages. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I quit trying to repair this one. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:18, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: On reverting back to the versions prior to my changes, the formatting is STILL broken. What is ACTUALLY wrong with the formatting, as opposed to what the various scripts THINK is wrong with it PLEASE?

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

When I carefully re-implemented my inteneded repair, the formatting issues on the transclusion ceased to exist. So I ask again what ACTUALLY went wrong ( as opposed to the possibility of a typo in the first attempt at the repair.)?

I'm not certain, but at the moment the problem is not present. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)