Hello, Slowking4, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for joining the project. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

George Eliot, por François D'Albert Durade.jpg

You may be interested in participating in

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{Collaboration/MC}} to your page for current Wikisource projects.

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

Have questions? Then please ask them at either

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username if you're logged in (or IP address if you are not) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.

Again, welcome! — billinghurst sDrewth 14:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

A DNBer :-)Edit

Gday. By now I do hope that you have come across WS:DNB.

As a couple of pointers. For links internal to the wiki, especially between DNB articles, we created {{DNB lkpl}}, and I munged together {{d}} which crunches something like {{subst:d|Peter Paul|Benazech}} to give Peter Paul Benazech. We have a number of other tricks and guidance on the page. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:44, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

thank you, i only saw that at MoS after doing a couple of piped links. will try to return and fix those. expect to get some transcription done at DNB. please note any obvious errors, that i can avoid. Slowking4 (talk) 13:14, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello there, thanks for the DNB contributions. I've fixed up the three "problem" articles on your userpage: different transclusion problems (page range, markup issue, missing text). Charles Matthews (talk) 07:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
thanks, i have gone back back and fixed sometimes. Slowking4 (talk) 10:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Two further ones: it was the same each time, missing </poem> further up the page confusing the transclusion. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Two more: markup, one an extra row of ####, the other was d. that had got in by mistake. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:05, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thanks, i've been fight the #### in ie. the nice thing about the article transclusion is that it catches the code errors, and disambigs. i see you're moving some article names, which i mindlessly got from toc, there is some confusion between the volume toc, and the author page list; and typos, will try to cleanup. Slowking4 (talk) 13:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
There's a point you might note about "tacit disambiguation", which comes up frequently. Basically if the first part of a name occurs as the initial part of another name, we put in dates. The point of the messy lists is to generate better ToCs; they have been typed in from a handbook, onto the author pages; and then sorted. They still have their problems (disambiguations, and the fact that the order isn't correct). I use them to check that the author pages tally with the correct names as created, when redlinks show up. Keep up the good work. A couple of things to look out for: "bom" for "born" is a common typo to miss. Also dates are subject to OCR errors: "l" for "1" is very common, and it happens frequently that 5 is read as 6. Charles Matthews (talk) 22:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thanks, yes i noticed - 5 for 6 about half the time? i'm including the em dash when inline of text, not always that way. the greek letters are always wrong. do we want to tag greek and latin pages for expert review? i dunno if i have those right. Slowking4 (talk) 22:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletes?Edit


Sorry to bother you but I felt it best to double check before I went ahead and deleted all These DNB articles. It seems you did blank the pages but another User, who is not a regular such as yourself (in my view at least), went further and tagged them all with {{Speedy}} delete today.

In short, I'm just not sure if you intended on finishing them up and forgot or if you blanked them because they are no longer needed / redundant / created in error and so on. Let me know here either way. Thanks. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

yes thank-you. i was blanking the page, after a cut and paste move, rather that a move, since i didn't think the wrong name was appropriate for a forward. i see it's also done the other way. Slowking4 (talk) 21:23, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

  Done -- thanks for your timely reply & good work! -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:01, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Draft of the Smithson willEdit

I've realised that I got pages 1 and 3 the wrong way around when creating the DjVu of Smithson's will. I will correct this later today and move the pages of text that you have already proofread when I do so. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:42, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

thanks very much, the smithsonian fellow will be excited (i noticed reading it, it's in letter order 3214). Slowking4 (talk) 12:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
transcript here, but capitalization wrong [1] Slowking4 (talk) 13:53, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

{{gap}} takes parametersEdit

A quick note to say that {{gap}} can be fed with distance, eg. {{gap|10em}} will put in a ten em gap. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

thanks, that will help with variable indents, but how to measure the em space indentation, for instance at the address of a letter for instance [2]; [3]? Slowking4 (talk) 15:36, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Page triageEdit

Have you looked over the new patrolling feature I proposed us enabling at the Scriptorium? It does not interfere with the current method of patrolling so no one would be forced to switch if it were brought in. --BirgitteSB 01:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

ok i will give it a try, don't see a wikipedia link; contributor field. Slowking4 (talk) 01:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
the next article appears not to link Miller,_Edward_(DNB00); Miller, George (DNB00). Slowking4 (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

"Tacit" disambiguationEdit

Hi there. By moving Christie, William (1748-1823) (DNB00) to Christie, William (DNB00) you were relying on "tacit" disambiguation from Christie, William Dougal (DNB00). I.e. that the reader would know that the William Christie in question happened not to have a middle name. The project decided quite some time ago that the more robust explicit disambiguation by dates is better in this type of case. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

ok, feel free to change back. hard for me to decide between conflicting contributor and volume link. Slowking4 (talk) 20:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The volume ToCs are actually not that reliable. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Few things while validating...Edit

I wasn't sure if you were aware of {{hws}}/{{hwe}} (hyphenated word start/end) for tackling hyphenated words between pages; also, while validating some pages you have proofread, I have been eliminating spaces left before/after some punctuation (quotation marks, colons, semi-colons, exclamation marke, etc.). I thought to address a third issue as well (with regard to {{fs90}}), but as I was beginning to address it, I noticed some possible template issues I had questions about and addressed them at the Scriptorium instead. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2012 (UTC):

yes, i am aware, i plead laziness. the fs90 i picked up from another editor; wrestling with how to show those blocks of quotations through the work. Slowking4 (talk) 21:03, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Personally, I like how the following renders in the Main: {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Page||<div style="margin:1.0em 2.0em 1.0em 2.0em; text-align:justify;">}} / {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Page||</div>}}. I just forgot about it until recently. Add a smaller text size to the equation, and it would look much better in the Mainspace. Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
that's pretty slick, color me confused how to implement, might play with it; needs to be rolled out across the book. Slowking4 (talk) 03:12, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
If an agreement can be made on some other type of formatting, I wouldn't be against applying the changes myself; but probably not until next week. Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:30, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
if you did a couple to show me how, i would follow; i'm sure people would follow your lead; you could also drop a note on scriptorium to build consensus. Slowking4 (talk) 03:32, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Different topic, but not requiring a whole new section: The DNB author of the "Arnould" article on this page reads "F.R." in the original, but you have (OCR error?) listed it as "F.E." (with a link to another(?) author). I'd look it up, but am short on time, and can't remember exactly where the list of authors are (in Index) for the DNB. Just thought I'd make mention. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

thanks, yes, i tend to miss the contributor when copyediting, but pick them up when i transclude later. also clean up contributor bio name versus TOC name conflicts. E for R is common. (new editors with funky lower case in supplement.) Slowking4 (talk) 18:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thinking about reasons why editors would choose the lazy route here... then I remembered a situation (et. al.) where I got lazy. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for training me!Edit

And, I found some aeronautics history in Popular Science Monthly that is immediately useful to my research and I'm reading and proofing that. -- Econterms (talk) 09:31, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

PotM quotation formattingEdit

Quick note. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

ok, i am agnostic, this seems to be a common practice among printers to show block quotes as smaller type. the indent on the block quote is quite different from the source text. Slowking4 (talk)
It is... but since the formatting suggestion was made on the Talk page, and no one else 'challenged' it, I thought I'd alert you for the sake of uniformity. At least you are not apathetic. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
...or lazy ;) Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

References, Greek & typosEdit

I wanted to let you know that I re-proofread the page Page:EB1911 - Volume 16.djvu/151 and noted that the reference which started on the previous page continued on to this page, and so I utilized the ref-name/ref-follow method (hoping I handled the reference placement correctly). There was Greek within the reference that was not proofread. If you are unsure of how to add Greek, just place {{Greek missing}} in place of the Greek, and someone will come along and add it for you eventually. I also noted tens of typos, mostly consisting of failure to italicize words or phrases, spelling/character errors, date errors, and failure to remove line spaces. Granted, many of the errors can be difficult to detect (as my eyes can attest to), but there were too many errors overall, in my opinion, to have marked the page as being proofread. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:38, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

quite right, i've been spoiled by the quality of the ocr's over at DNB. i will stop validating for a while, making more red pages, and use more zoom button for the smaller characters. this is part of my ongoing effort to transcribe EB1911, for articles in wikipedia that are cut paste from there. Slowking4 (talk) 18:52, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource meetup or trainingEdit

Hey Slowking,
Over the weekend I was talking with Econterms and he mentioned that you might be able to help train Wikipedia editors who are interested in Wikisource. It is tentatively planned for the summer, likely to be in NYC. Is this something you are interested in? - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

yes, sure, although, i'm more a proofreader, than coder. i could used some match and split help. Slowking4 (talk) 01:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Which work do you need match & split help with? I can have a look for you. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
sorry, it was a more general discontent. but Goddard Rocket Apparatus Patent; from here [4] (didn't get from jpg to dejavu) the process is very opaque to me. need something for non-coders, hence my passing on the desire for a wizard from GLAM archivists. Slowking4 (talk) 02:40, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, not my area of expertise. I just upload documents to IA and hope that they will produce the appropriate go-with files. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:08, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm more of a proofreader myself, never actually (successfully) used M&S myself. Maybe that's something we could work on at the meetup. - Theornamentalist (talk) 02:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
About Goddard, is the problem creating a DjVu file from 3 Jpegs or skipping that stage and creating an Index page based on individual Jpegs? Both are possible. I ask because I seem to have extracted an image from the second page and I haven't done anything with it (and I can't remember why at the moment). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
yes, i think. loss of momentum to do extracted image, when the other text only docs were done.. Slowking4 (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Hübmaier headersEdit

WE seem to be fomatting these differently on the pages we've done. You've been using the smaller template for dates (but not larger for the section title, I note), whereas I've felt that shrinking the dates isn't imporant, since they won't show up in the transcribed work anyway. Thoughts? --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

yeah, flip a coin; last one there gets last word. i was just happy to figure out that "ref follow". this work has some funny across the open page formatting that will get lost in transcription. Slowking4 (talk) 21:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
I started work on a another book with a similar issue, where the pages typically consist of more footnote text than running text. The footnotes can span two, or even three pages sometimes. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
the headers are shruggable, useful mainly for navigating and proofreading. the body and footnotes are more important. note there was also some quoted text in body at reduced font; it has been done 90% in other works. Slowking4 (talk) 15:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
I haven't come across much of that, but our "finer block" template uses 92% rather than 90%. I'm not entirely sure why this is so, but I suspect it has something to do with resultion of text being easier for machines to handle. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource User GroupEdit

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

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

Template:DNB LRPEdit

What I always do is to go to an existing template such as Template:DNB AA, edit the author and initial fields there, copy but don't save, and paste into the new template to save. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:29, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

yes, thanks for noticing my confusion. the code is very opaque. the template documentation refers to DNB authors not supplement authors. about 20 more to do. Slowking4 (talk) 19:20, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

The "noinclude" stuff is the standard gimmick to get a category on the template page, but not on pages where the template occurs ... Charles Matthews (talk) 08:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oops, sorryEdit

You may be getting a notification that I've reverted one of your edits to this page (depending on how you have Echo set up). Sorry about that; it was an accident. I clipped the rollback link when I was counting edits. I rolled back my roll back, so there is no lasting effect, but I thought I should explain. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

yes, i thought you didn’t like the {{smaller|}} for {{small block|}}; no worries. Slowking4 (talk) 18:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Tenth Anniversary Contest winnerEdit

WS:10 winner

Congratulations, you had the highest score in the Tenth Anniversary Contest. (You actually slightly exceeded the edit count of every other contestant combined!) I will be contacting Wikimedia UK regarding the prize, an e-reader, soon to see how they want to handle that. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

hopefully, WMUK will not be adverse to my free beer counter proposal prize. failed to recruit any WMDC, will talk it up at holiday party. <shrug> hopefully, can be made an annual contest, like wikicup. Slowking4 (talk) 00:12, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations! Yann (talk) 05:54, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Slowking. Adam has been in touch and if you drop me an email on richard.nevell wikimedia.org.uk we can start getting the prize sorted. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 14:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Formatting for Poetical Works of Matthew ArnoldEdit

Hi, Slowking4! Just a heads-up that there are formatting guidelines for this text on the Index Talk page. I have not been using the poem tag, but instead use breaks. Sectioning is also used between poems (also illustrated on the Index Talk page). Thanks for helping! Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:48, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

ref name and followEdit

I saw that you skipped some of the pages with split references. The page with instruction is at Help:Footnotes and endnotes. In short <ref name=pN > (traditional) on first page, <ref follow=pN > on subsequent page(s). The name is to be the same, and not start with a number, my suggestion is p{{{pagenum}}} of the name . — billinghurst sDrewth 03:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

PotM guidelinesEdit

Hello! Just a heads up that we are not using the poem tag for the Proofread of the Month, but instead use end-of-line breaks. You can see an example of the formatting styling here. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:22, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


Really? So what does "FOBM" mean? And why is there a zero in C0RN? --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

hey, i’m just happy to spell Otjombindè right. late at night, when the eyestrain is on, no amount of zoom will help on the ocr spell correct. maybe lighting a fire would work. i can leave them all red if you prefer. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 21:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
I think the problem is more than, like a lot of folks I've seen here, we get sloppy about not checking the page headers, image captions, and similar things. I've seen this a lot from people here. They check the body text, but not the other text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
the ocr makes more errors for small caps, fewer errors for normal body text. so correction rate may be same, but more errors to miss in headers & captions. 2 on one page would indicate i was getting sloppy. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 13:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Men of Mark vol.2Edit

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:Men_of_Mark_in_America_vol_2.djvu Slowking4, you did such an excellent work on volume 1 would you please consider coming back and work on volume 2 with me? I intend to validate all I can of volume 1 and 2. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 05:44, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

ok, better than slogging thru the POTM. it will be next week before i have time. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 14:39, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
—Maury i did a rough TOC at Men of Mark in America/Volume 2, but it needs some work. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 21:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

proofreading and validatingEdit

Slowking4 instead of just proofreading and leaving me validating your work how about doing some validations on my proofreads? Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 23:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


Parser decided to be 'difficult' about whitespace. :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

And fixed. BTW I made the /s and /e versions for a reason. Makes it VERy much easier to do the "examples" entries as embedded ones:) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
thanks very much, works well. the paragraph indent for (1) is clever. i would suggest documenting for a general case of tabbed sidenotes, since our gov’ment docs use them a lot. for example: United States Statutes at Large if we had a "how to" manual, we could recruit some non-coders to transcribe. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 18:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with the botanist's guideEdit

Thanks for your help with the Botanist's guide. It's great to have it completed and all in green! Feeling in an enthusiastic mood I've uploaded the next Northumbrian botany project the New Flora of Northumberland and Durham. If you have any suggestions on formatting that I could follow I'd appreciate them, particularly in the middle of the book where the plants are listed. Regards Qgroom (talk) 19:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

not at all, sorry i got distracted by macarthur photos on commons,
will return to Index:Transactions of the Natural History Society of Northumberland, Durham, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne 1838 Vol.2.djvu, will look to you to add the species links.
if you could finish the pagelist at Index:Transactions of the Natural History Society of Northumberland, Durham, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne (1867).djvu, that would be nice. see also Help:Page numbers. check out the proofreading documentation, it has lots of wikicode tips to format the text.
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/ says hi, likes the links to their images. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 13:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Check validationEdit

https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page:The_Development_of_Navies_During_the_Last_Half-Century.djvu/120&action=edit —Maury (talk) 01:14, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

p.108 —Maury (talk) 02:57, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

EB1911 markupEdit

I see you have joined me in including and proofreading EB1911 in Page space. Thanks for joining this effort! A few notes, some of which are in Wikisource talk:WikiProject 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica:

  • There's a conventional format, using x-larger and em-dash, for the page headings. I've encapsulated them in {{EB1911 Page Heading}}.
  • Also by convention, {{EB1911 Fine Print}} for the small-type paragraphs, and {{EB1911 Footer Initials}} for the contributors. Actually, you can scan Category:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica templates for other useful shortcuts (ETA: although some editors disapprove of the per-contributor shortcuts).
  • I've been taking care to use en-dash on things like date ranges (it's a Wikipedia guideline anyway), curly apostrophes, and hairspace em-dash using {{}} (that's an em-dash template, but easy to insert using the toolbar).
  • And, of course, fidelity to the original, without trying to modernize the English.

Feel free to ask questions or express opinions on that talk page. PBS and I, at lest, watch the page. And happy holidays! DavidBrooks (talk) 17:24, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

yes, should have sections added in red by end of next year. volume 1 and 4 need copying over from article space to page space, with transclusion. the adding of sections as in volume 1 would be helpful on the other volumes as well.
more concerned about the references and greek & latin character-sets; and adding references to english from WS. nice refuge from the GGTF nonsense. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 18:57, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'd be wary of calling article copies proofread, because there are instances of corrupt text (modernized spellings and rephrasing). For Greek, I use the toolbar with a rudimentary knowledge of the alphabet and pre-monotonic accents (and {{Polytonic}} for the right font). For Latin, I use the Windows 8 onscreen keyboard and press-and-hold for the extended character palettes. This can also give you curly apos and quotes, and em-dash and en-dash. We aren't bothering with links to WP these days, but there's a standard way of handling "See FOO" and "Foo (q.v.)" using {{EB1911 Article Link}}, with nosc=yes in the second case. DavidBrooks (talk) 19:58, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
oh sorry, by enWP cleanup, i mean going there and fixing the 100k links to http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/ and ilk. some of which are dead links. major reference effort mainly done by user:PBS. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 20:06, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
I think the first thing that needs to be done when "See FOO" is found is to change it to "See Foo" which is always what is meant in my experience. {{EB1911 Article Link}} with "Foo" as an argument will do this. I see you are proofreading a lot of articles, and I thank you for this. I don't see the point in linking them into Wikipedia articles until they are proofread. Better to link to some external website. Library Guy (talk) 20:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

New Proposal Notification - Replacement of common main-space header templateEdit

Announcing the listing of a new formal proposal recently added to the Scriptorium community-discussion page, Proposals section, titled:

Switch header template foundation from table-based to division-based

The proposal entails the replacement of the current Header template familiar to most with a structurally redesigned new Header template. Replacement is a needed first step in series of steps needed to properly address the long time deficiencies behind several issues as well as enhance our mobile device presence.

There should be no significant operational or visual differences between the existing and proposed Header templates under normal usage (i.e. Desktop view). The change is entirely structural -- moving away from the existing HTML all Table make-up to an all Div[ision] based one.

Please examine the testcases where the current template is compared to the proposed replacement. Don't forget to also check Mobile Mode from the testcases page -- which is where the differences between current header template & proposed header template will be hard to miss.

For those who are concerned over the possible impact replacement might have on specific works, you can test the replacement on your own by entering edit mode, substituting the header tag {{header with {{header/sandbox and then previewing the work with the change in place. Saving the page with the change in place should not be needed but if you opt to save the page instead of just previewing it, please remember to revert the change soon after your done inspecting the results.

Your questions or comments are welcomed. At the same time I personally urge participants to support this proposed change. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:04, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Proofreading doesn't look complete for Page:EB1911 - Volume 04.djvu/22Edit

This page is marked as proofread. Certainly the material on Otto Bismarck ("Bismarck, Otto Eduard Leopold von," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)) has been proofread, but the material on Bismarck, ND ("Bismarck, North Dakota," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)) looks little touched from the OCR - there are spelling errors and all kinds of periods missing, and the for Bismuth ("Bismuth," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)) the formulas haven't been rendered at all the way one would expect. I think marking a page as proofread should mean the whole page has been proofread, not just portions. Otherwise article like Bismuth are going to display as if they are proofread when they are not. I admit this is inconvenient, and that is the reason I didn't transclude the Otto Bismarck article: I didn't want to proofread the other material on this page. Please don't mark a page as proofread until the proofreading is complete for the whole page. The time for that will be when all the articles on the page have been proofread. In the meantime, the old non-transclusion approach can be used for portions of the material that have been proofread. Library Guy (talk) 20:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

quite right, that’s definitely a red. i’ve since been adding sections to match and split, as red only, but i may have rounded up, in a fit of absent mindedness, in some cases. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 20:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

So my fix will be to take Otto Bismarck and Bismarck ND out of transclusion and mark the page as not proofread. There is another problem here, which is that, for this DJVU rendering, a lot of the periods don't show up on the abbreviations. I am used to this, and put them in where they belong. The period placement can be verified at https://archive.org/stream/encyclopaediabri04chisrich#page/8/mode/2up where all the periods show up. The British seem to omit periods in places where a U.S. resident like myself would put them in. But perhaps this takes getting used to. For Bismarck ND this wasn't an issue. So the scan at archive.org is the final arbiter I think. The DJVU material seems be lacking in detail. Library Guy (talk) 20:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

i wouldn’t un-transclude, but rather improve the transcription to proofread (yellow) status. transclusion is more important than the status of the transcription & shouldn’t take long. woundn’t over think punctuation. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 21:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I guess that's a matter of opinion. I have other things I want to get to. Handling a chemistry article correctly is not a negligible piece of work, but feel free to go at it if you are so inclined and know what to do. I think the most important thing is to correctly represent what text has been proofread and what not proofread. It's just a matter of patience really. I don't think I am overthinking the punctuation. It really looked strange in the Bismarck ND article, and I found it distracting before I fixed it, and it clued me into the fact that there might be other problems, like the spelling/capitalization error. That is pretty minor proofreading, but the DJVU scan can make it difficult with its omissions. Library Guy (talk) 21:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Actually Gutenberg has already handled this page, but text suitable for Wikisource is not automatically provided. I am currently using Gutenberg text for Japan, but anticipate a long haul, what with the tables and illustrations. Even plain text takes some time, but that would go faster if I were more automated. Library Guy (talk) 23:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Page:EB1911 - Volume 28.djvu/349Edit

Thanks for the email, I will be acting on it at some point. Thanks for the thanks. However I have altered you edit to Page:EB1911 - Volume 28.djvu/349 ‎because I think it better to keep the original lines as it make diffs easy to see (with the exception of fixing a hyphenated words) against the original OCR, and for that matter the actual hard copy -- it makes finding and fixing errors easier. As the text appears correctly concatenated when view in an html page it make no difference for the reader, but is I think a great advantage for the editor. -- PBS (talk) 18:33, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

no problem, i’m mainly cruising by trying to get a red version down, before the ocr rot sets in, like volume 1 and 25-27. i’m used to deleting carriage returns, flowing paragraphs so it looks better on page (phantom line break); italics are easier. tend to do it before validation though.
sorry to take down your black page break numbers for the blue page transclusions. it seems to me easier to build out the links.
and i’m accustomed to admins with control issues. i’ll eventually fix those reference removals. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 22:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
The black page numbers are only an interim step before page transclusions, its just that I think it better to spend time filling in the gaps with page transclusions of new articles first rather than converting already formatted pages to transclusions, particularly when an editor has left hidden page numbers in the text -- which is something the prolific Bob Burkhardt aka Library Guy tended to do before more recently moving on to creating articles with transclusions. Not only is it convenient for the reader, having the page number on these previously formatted pages makes in a little quicker to find the right page when converting the page to transclusions. I have just posted a comment on this to Wikisource talk:WikiProject 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica#Intermediate step before transclusion. -- PBS (talk) 13:03, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


Slowking4, please look at this page and fix whatever I may have messed up. I formatted the page and marked it validated before saving but it does not look correct. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

User:William Maury Morris II seems to be ok now. there is an intermittant problem with the ## xx ## section code hack. sometimes need to use <section begin="xx"> some griping on scriptorium about it in december [5]. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 00:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

section tag "sl" should be "s1"Edit

Hi, firstly thanks for the huge effort in creating a large number of pages in EB1911. I wanted to say I found a few articles you converted to transcluded versions where the section tag for “tosection” has a typo, "sl" should be "s1". It means some articles had text from following articles displayed, I've fixed up these ones: Algol, Alhambra, The, Ali Pasha, Alice Maud Mary, Alimentary Canal, Alismaceae, Alizarin, but tthere may be more. Just a copy and paste error really, but I though I'd let you know. Also, the Template:TextQuality shouldn't be added to transcluded pages, I've removed that from a few of the above pages where I found it. Keep up the good work in creating pages! — DivermanAU (talk) 03:34, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

thanks, for all the verification. yep, sorry about the bad cut and paste. i’ve been pasting those over randomly, but will double back thru to incorporate all the articles not transcluded. we will need to have a fix to vol 26 & 27 for a complete work. Slowking4 04:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Variations of an Associated Press storyEdit

There are variations of an Associated Press story, they get updated during the day with additional details or the publishing paper removes sentences to make it fit the space on a published page. 1) Do you think the versions should be grouped on a single page and each version have the publication source noted. 2) Just store the longest version on a page and maybe have the alternates stored as hidden text. 3) Give each version their own page. Which one sounds the best? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 06:14, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

wow, speaking of the rough draft of history. they have been transcribing unpublished manuscripts over at smithsonian, but there is a canonical text there (even if there are strikethroughs). we have different versions of EB, but they were printed. i’m agnostic: maybe longest version, and printed version? if we had galleys of a novel would we transcribe it? seems like a pseudo-problem. i.e. hard to get AP wire copy that is PD to transcribe. even if [6] Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 11:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

do you think that the stories authored by a news-agency should be named for the news agency or one of the newspapers the story ran in? I think it should be categorized by the author. See Washington Post/1937/Aviator Says New York Attorney Is Leftist Agent as opposed to Associated Press/1937/Aviator Says New York Attorney Is Leftist Agent. The article can run in a hundred different papers, and we really should be sorting by the author not the publisher for news agencies. Obscure papers may have one or two entries, but the agency can have hundreds. What do you think? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 14:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

with categories you could do both. you could do author page + article page. i tend to lean to Associated Press/1937/Aviator Says New York Attorney Is Leftist Agent since the papers credit the AP, implying the printing is a derivative work. you could also add a category or portal for each newspaper. and you might want to creat a wikiproject AP. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 14:40, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Would it be Portal:Associated Press or Author:Associated Press, does anyone have a preference? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Annotating textEdit

Your comment on the Harpers article would fit better in my section on emendations and annotations, can we move it there? How did you write it before I even asked the question, that is spooky. I asked the question, then was reading and scrolled up and there was a comment to a question I had not posed yet. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 15:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I hope you do not mind, I moved the text to the relevant area, move it back if I was impertinent. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:02, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

External links at PortalsEdit

Do we add external links to portals? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:48, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

we don’t normally have an external links section. normally the links are in the title header; and the portals is a list of links to wikisource articles. for example Portal:Biography. there is also a review on portal talk.
external resources tend to link to library bibliographys for example Portal:Sciences of History Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 02:19, 29 June 2015 (UTC)


I am working on User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Wikisource:FAQ to answer the question I had when I started contributing. If you can think of others, please add them, and we can answer them together.

EB1911 footer initials templatesEdit

Hi Slowking4 — keep up the great work you’re doing on the EB1911 project. I just though I'd mention (or remind you in case you forgot) that the EB1911 footer initials templates can be used to simplify adding authors - the template also correctly adds the initials to the end of last article line rather than a line below if just using the {{right}} template. e.g. instead of

{{right|([[Author:Christian Pfister|C. P{{sc|f}}.]])}} you can use
{{EB1911 footer initials|Christian Pfister|C. Pf.}}

The small caps for the initials are taken care of by the template, which also uses a style="float:right;" so the initials align on the last article line.

To see the difference see:
https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page:EB1911_-_Volume_05.djvu/296&oldid=5772667 and

There’s also a Template:EB1911 footer double initials for two contributors to an article. — DivermanAU (talk) 04:19, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

you might want to fix your template for only one set of parentheses, and add documentation. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 01:42, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Index:Wanda, by Ouida.djvuEdit

You appreciate these and other works are multi volume? The DJVU's uploaed appear to be only part of a set.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

thank for fixing those, i will circle back and get the other volumes, tweak the index; create work page, promise. the incomplete metadata is at internet archive. slowking4 15:19, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


i'm new any tips? --Fdena (talk) 02:13, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

How does the entry look that i submitted? --Fdena (talk) 02:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Mentorship would be great! also google books is blocked on my computer will that be a problem? --Fdena (talk) 02:35, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

vols 2 & 3Edit

I see that you have uploaded the file and then created Index:Idalia, by 'Ouida'.djvu. It is one of 3, did you manage to get/find the rest of the work? — billinghurst sDrewth 08:24, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

oh hi, user:billinghurst, i see you notice the one i missed. the metadata at IA is worse than i suspected. i have been lollygagging with your colleague C. Matthews, but will resume when i get stateside. cheers. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 14:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Wasn't sure what was happening. I was on my usual grab a few things from Special:LonelyPages and tie them in maintenance run. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
we really need to figure out a way to mitigate the metadata mess at IA. an unwary uploader could do lots of one volumes without noticing, since the metadata is prefunctary. we need to make it easier to get the completest, earliest edition. could it be a property at wikidata? Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 14:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
There is an edition field, however, I am not sure how you pick up that an edition has multiple volumes for an edition. @Jura1: can you assist with that matter? (hoping that listening). — billinghurst sDrewth 09:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
the problem is less with the tool, but that the IA metadata is bad, hard to grab what they did not put online. maybe we need some IA curation tools. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 03:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
ok done, i see there is a one volume earlier edition, but the ocr is worse, chapter layout appears the same. thanks oxford for the nice scan even if the metadata stinks (language = spanish, lol) slowking4 20:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


I've asked, but gotten no reply as to the community feelings about that. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


I shall let you get away with this unopposed this one time. However I choose not to believe you are so naïve in general. If in fact you are there then is simply no hope for you· and accordingly I wash my hands… Only time will prove who is right. AuFCL (talk) 02:58, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

[7] Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 03:35, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
A good point; neatly made. I just hope you don't consider I am in any way convinced? AuFCL (talk) 03:43, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
tl;dr: hope over experience; the WMF are trying, we need to encourage better behavior, even as we plan for the bad; the recent conference is a hopeful sign; i save my cynicism for the arbcom election. but yeah, hard to be enthusiastic for the wishing for more blocking tools, and blocked cookies. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 03:48, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Aha! There we find ourselves in total concord at least. I, personally, am totally and irrevocably pessimistic but at the very same time hope I am wrong. We shall see together. AuFCL (talk) 03:55, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
i’ve given up trying to convince; rather, i work with the willing, and try not to fight with the unwilling. no one changes their mind around here, it’s just there are so many gatekeepers who would rather fight to prevent good edits. management by drama. one nice thing about WMF neglect, you can get a lot of work done. and the community critique of WMF finance is hilarious. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 04:00, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I am sort of taking a chance here: Ross? (delete if true; or indeed even if not.) I think I may have had dealings with you under a different alias (both of us; in a different forum.) AuFCL (talk) 04:14, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
sorry different sock, lol Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 04:16, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Phew, at least you weren't the electrocuted one. AuFCL (talk) 04:20, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Compendium of US Copyright Office Practices, II (1984)Edit

Thanks, but should really be Chapter based..ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:46, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

right, i will go back and change. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 20:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
ok done, although don’t know how to handle the revised chapters at end that are not in TOC. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 03:21, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, The index might need to be split as it's hit a transclusion limit seemingly. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Please re-check underlying pages, I'm finding a lot of layout errors I can't pin the cause of down. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:08, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Index:Compendium of US Copyright Office Practices (1973).pdfEdit

It would be appreciated if you could enourage others to help get this transcribed as well :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:59, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

hmm, well the nested templates might be a little off-putting, maybe we should do it. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 02:10, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't use nested templates as far as I was laying it up. It use one level of {{numbered/s}}{{numbered/e}} with {{numbered div}} 's inbetween, the indentation is set by params at the end of each {{numbered div}}. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Morphing your sig to something templateableEdit

Are you up to having your sig to be structured on template rather than something of the existing length? It does get a little long in some forums and if you would consider a simplification, then I am happy to build the template for you. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:01, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

well, the blackletter template does not work very well; we need a blackletter font, although german wikisource is transcribing blackletter into latin fonts. also the preferences, saves, but purges saved sig on opening. Slowking4₮₳₤₭ 16:23, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


Please refer to the talk page associated with January's PotM for information about formatting poetry and quotations in the work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Glasse transcriptionEdit

Thank you very much for lending a hand with The Art of Cookery. I noticed that you seem to have been using our own OCR tools, so I thought I just point you to User:Peter Isotalo/Glasse. There's already a transcription of the whole text.

Peter Isotalo (talk) 20:25, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

thanks, i’m also using this scan [8] somewhat better than OCR but less than your text. Slowking4RAN's revenge 22:37, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Ah. Surprisingly bad OCR for a text in Antiqua, I must say. Even Fraktur tools on de.wikisource produce better results than that.
Well, feel free to edit out text from User:Peter Isotalo/Glasse once you've transferred it to the page structure.
Peter Isotalo (talk) 13:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
the before 1870 scans are messy, and ocr’s bad. and our "open" ocr software not much improved. if you have a better solution, let’s work it. we could get the scan from internet archive, the ocr from elsewhere, and cut and paste as we go.
there are a few mistakes in yours (reversed characters, spaces, repeated titles) i think i got them. Slowking4RAN's revenge 14:35, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
you are missing 2 pages in the scan 330; 331. i will take a break and review recovery of fixing scans. Slowking4RAN's revenge 14:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

NIE text qualityEdit

Please retain {{TextQuality}} on transclusions for proofread articles where the underlying page is not completely proofread. An example where I have restored tq: "Anquetil, Louis Pierre," in The New International Encyclopædia, New York: Dodd, Mead and Co. (1905) Library Guy (talk) 20:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

oh really. i thought that was deprecated. and wouldn’t you say that is now 100% now that we all looked at it. how is this different from all the transcluded articles with no percentage? when the transcluded page is proofread then the color will turn green. Slowking4₮₳₤₭ 22:58, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't see any other way to correctly indicate the state of the text when parts of a page are in different stages of preparedness. I realize eventually it will show green, but that could be a long time. I have updated the documentation accordingly. I thought this point had been made long ago. Library Guy (talk) 16:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
it does not add much value to me, beyond the color code. and may periodically be disfavored by filters. see also Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2015-03#Cannot_put_hatnotes_etc_above_header but if it works for you, it’s all good. Slowking4₮₳₤₭ 00:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
I think its good for people coming from outside to be able to tell quickly what they are dealing with. I spend most of my time proofing text and making it presentable, and the unproofread stuff doesn't seem all that readable to me. It is frustrating to proofread text and see it presented as unproofread as would happen without TQ insert. Also to see formerly well organized text like The New International Encyclopædia/Africa now transcluded without the formerly careful placement of figures I don't find desirable. It is possible to transclude things without the jumble. See The New International Encyclopædia/United States. It takes some time, but perhaps its better to leave the transclusion until someone wants to take the time. Library Guy (talk) 17:14, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
i find new people grasp red light - green light, although maintenance categories by template work also. i add red pages with article sections on first pass, so i can add articles copied on wikipedia w:Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the New International Encyclopedia and then infill proofread. only 1361 to reference, as opposed to the 5900 for EB1911; but WS push to WP works also. Slowking4T A L K 16:28, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Many EB1911 pages converted to transclusion not displayingEdit

Hi, I noticed many 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica pages converted by you into transclusions weren't displaying article text. They would just display the "pages" line e.g. Buonafede, Appiano - which I haven't fixed shows:
<pages index="EB1911 - Volume 04.djvu" from="829" to="829" fromsection="s3" tosection="s3">

The line needs a slash / before the final >

I've fixed some of these e.g. Buccina, Buccari, Buccaneers, Bucaramanga, Bullock, William, ... Bunsen, Christian Charles Josias. Did you use a bot to convert these pages? Are you able to fix others you converted using a bot? Thanks. DivermanAU (talk) 12:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

hmm, that is distressing. i will review. happily with VE it won’t happen again. no i don’t use bots. Slowking4₮₳₤₭ 13:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
I’ve fixed several more, from Buoy ‎to Burgas; some articles display OK with the the missing "/" (e.g. Burgdorf) and others don't. Not sure why that is. e.g. Burgee (not fixed by me) doesn't display properly; I used Chrome, Edge and IE11, it didn't display properly in any of them. DivermanAU (talk) 20:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
ok it appears i cut & pasted wrong pages code that day. i will review that volume. Slowking4₮₳₤₭ 23:17, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
half thru, all the transclusions missing "/" ; it breaks only about 1/4 the time. will then review transclusions only 7000 to go. apparently not breaking when /pages is appended. hope it does not break <br>. Slowking4 15:26, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Index:Catalog o‌f Copyright Entries 1977 Books and Pamphlets Jan-June.djvuEdit

Why are you creating all these pages of raw OCR gibberish at Index:Catalog o‌f Copyright Entries 1977 Books and Pamphlets Jan-June.djvu? -- Outlier59 (talk) 00:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

because the Library of Congress Copyright Office will not digitize their records. project Gutenberg has done the renewals only. if we are going to research orphan works between 1923 and 1977 then we will need all this gibberish proofread. hathi trust librarians are currently researching orphan works, and we need to give them the tools. 1 ½ volumes down; 673 to go. [9] better than poetry. Slowking4T A L K 02:20, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Is there enough useful text in the raw OCR for hathi trust to search that? The reason I'm asking is that it's an enormous volume of proofreading, likely to take years to complete here -- unless we have many more volunteers working on it. Maybe you could start with proofreading a couple of volumes, see how it goes. Are there some volumes more important to them than others? Outlier59 (talk) 22:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
hathi trust, or IA only have the pdf’s; i.e. you can’t search it for names via browser. gutenberg did the renewals 10 years ago. the IA text layer is ok, but it gets corrupted going to dejavu. the large file size creates problems. of the 1000 pages per volume about 5 or 10 need a complete redo. if we could automate a bot to create pages and grab the text layer, that would be a big leg up. i kinda gave up waiting. time to get some work done, and maybe the librarians will pitch in. a librarian from Penn requested some obscure music volumes, need them all (at least by year) to search and prove a negative. Slowking4T A L K 23:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
If the IA text layers are reliable, maybe they could be copied directly to hathi trust or Commons -- or at least the Name Index section of the text layer for each volume. These volumes are more database than prose. Their main use is for searching for names or numbers. Does IA know the OCR accuracy for the text layers of these volumes? If those text layers are 99.9% accurate, the original printed volumes probably contain more human errors than the computer OCR generates.
I think the best way for Wikisource to help hathi trust is to proofread a sample of pages from IA text layers for these volumes -- if IA doesn't already know the accuracy of the text layers. But I bet IA knows the accuracy. Maybe you could ask hathi trust to look into using text layers rather than pdf for copyright searches? If the text layer is more accurate, I'm surprised it's not being used. Outlier59 (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
the problem being, that the loc database has a different standing from Hathi’s - they would need also a link to the pdf hardcopy. and outside researchers would not know how to search on their own. here is their manual - http://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/crmstoolkit/images/14616082.0001.001.pdf. Slowking4T A L K 18:05, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't understand what you said. Can you re-phrase? Outlier59 (talk) 01:22, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
hathi trust is working their text layer, but a web searchable version is better. and they are working books only - not music or pamphlets. and they released their manual of how they do copyright searches, it is very complex. and the LOC web searchable database after 1978, is qualitatively different from the offline search of hathi. Slowking4T A L K 01:28, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I guess this is something I just don't understand. The "not proofed" pages look to me to be too error-filled to be useful in an online search. Outlier59 (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
for example look at the random search "Horton T. Kelsey" [10] - first result is the catalog. if the text layer can get carried over from the pdf, they should work this way. Slowking4RAN's revenge 12:42, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for trying so hard to explain this to me. I think it's just something beyond me. I'm sorry. Outlier59 (talk) 14:45, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Inspire campaignEdit

Hello Slowking4! My name's Joe Sutherland and I'm helping to run the Inspire Campaign on addressing harassment currently running on Meta-Wiki. I'm interested to know a little more about your motivation for proposing your Idea about training reviewers to become ambassadors. What was the inspiration for this proposal? And do you think the feedback you have received so far has been useful to you in improving it? Thanks! JSutherland (WMF) (talk) 17:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Proofing EB1911Edit

Hi Slowking4, nice work on Volume 28 of EB1911. Have you considered using the mostly-proofed Theodora version as a basis for proofing? e.g. on "Page:EB1911 - Volume 28.djvu/665" I used the webpage "view-source:http://www.theodora.com/encyclopedia/w/sir_david_wilkie.html" and pasted that in. It found two fixes in the first 1½ lines alone: "WaIter" had capital i (I) not lower-case L (l) and "£gures" should have been "figures". Exapmples of other fixes found with Theodora text were: "WiUcie's" → "Wilkie’s" (I added the curly apostrophe myself) and "facihtating" → "facilitating". Also most scans (including the gutenberg.org version) don't pickup the ndashes (–) for year ranges and have a hyphen instead. I made such a fix on the page above.

Would you consider leaving pages in "Not proofread" status until it's had proofed text from another source or a solid proof? Makes it easier to know which pages to target then.

I also use the "clean up" script to remove line-breaks, (tick the box for "Add a 'regex editor' sidebar link which lets you write, apply, and save regex patterns" in "Preferences, Gadgets").

Thanks again and keep up the good work. DivermanAU (talk) 06:11, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

hmm, well should not have proofread that. yes, i have on occasion copied over better text layers from other sites like IA or gutenberg, and thanks for that work at EB1911. but now, i’m mainly cruising through and linking from wikipedia, and doing minimum proof to make readable. i will mainly leave them "unproofread" - only six thousand articles to go. the links will get us views and improve references there, some of which are rotting. i may swing by again to proofread later. Slowking4RAN's revenge 15:35, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I've also been working on Wikipedia articles with links to Wikisource/EB1911 with no citation over the past 18 months. I've created a table of numbers in the category if you're interested; see w:Category_talk:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_a_citation_from_the_1911_Encyclopaedia_Britannica_with_no_article_parameter#Number_of_articles_over_time. DivermanAU (talk) 10:07, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
yep, having made some steady progress, maybe a sustained effort can knock it out. unless i get distracted by another europeana art challenge. Slowking4RAN's revenge 12:32, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Discussion about OCR workflowEdit

Hi @Slowking4:, I was looking into the OCR workflow on Wikisource for a project for using it on Indic wikis. I saw that there seems to be proofread text on the page when the page is created. Could you tell me where this proofread text comes from? Is it from Phetools? I'm also interested in hearing of any ideas you have for improving this workflow. Thanks for your help! -- NiharikaKohli (talk) 23:32, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

there is an OCR open software, which is not as good as the pdf version, or google workarounds. you might want to ask around at scriptorium, or at armenian wikisource who have OCR problems. Slowking4RAN's revenge 07:49, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Proofreading 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/TemplarsEdit

@Slowking4: Thanks for the message. A happy new year to you. If I can distract you for more than a moment from "volume 16 / letter L", There is a page that you created, that is full of OCR errors (mostly due to the original format of the page). It is 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Templars. It could do with some TLC involving a remake with Translucences.

@DivermanAU and EncycloPetey, perhaps the four of us could work on two/thee pages each? -- PBS (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

User:PBS ok, i have inserted the footnotes, i leave the cleanup to you. (that was a blast from the past - the broken volume, which i cut and paste from IA, just when they fixed the index). cheers Slowking4RAN's revenge 15:25, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
I've done some proofing on most of the Templars pages, looks more usable now. Thanks to PBS and Slowking4 for also proofing. DivermanAU (talk) 22:54, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
yes - you picked a good critique of my practice of linking unproofed ocr’s. it does not work for articles with references, images, greek or latin. but for 80% it is readable. Slowking4RAN's revenge 00:35, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Thirty Years' WarEdit

Please could you look at 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Thirty Years' War I have recently transluded it, but for some reason the first page of the article is not showing up in my display. Please could you have a look at it and see if you can fix the problem. -- PBS (talk) 00:03, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:PBS when a page does not show, that means the section tag does not match. i tend to cut past the exact code, from the page - and it worked here - you had the "&#39" in there, and for some reason it did not take. i have a problem with ’ and ' (flavors of apostrophe) also. hence my tendency to use "s1", since it is easier to match. Slowking4RAN's revenge 00:29, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the help and the advice. -- PBS (talk) 09:16, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Page nomenclatureEdit

Not sure why we would want a page named "The Poems of Emma Lazarus volume 2", surely it would be "The Poems of Emma Lazarus" or if required to push to subsidiary level "The Poems of Emma Lazarus/Volume 2". Either way, creating empty pages is something that we have been discouraging. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

i’m lazy and it a 2 volume work. was working on index. slowed down by volume 1 which has a corrupt page - so i’m stumped. the page is good at google books but not IA ? Slowking4RAN's revenge 01:46, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
When I had a corrupt file at IA, I have usually just asked them to rederive it, though I haven't had to do that since they have stopped doing djvu files by default. If it has a corrupt page only, I would just separately upload the missing page from an alternate source, and transcribe it separately. Sure it means that the djvu at Commons is incomplete, but in the end I am more concerned with having a full work here. [This hang up about putting text back into djvus is a pipe dream that will never happen, we cannot get resources for important things, let along unimportant things] — billinghurst sDrewth 10:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
ok thanks i will do that. Slowking4RAN's revenge 15:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

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

The Maine WoodsEdit

We are saving this selection as PotM for July. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:55, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

br tagsEdit

Hi Slowking4. I'm new here so please let me know if there's been discussion about this elsewhere, but as far as I understand <br> is incorrect HTML and should not be used in favour of <br/>. I think the software does some behind the scenes work to replace br with br/ but that function will be deprecated soon. I've been replacing the former with the latter at The Book of Scottish Song, so would appreciate if you could use br/ in the future (unless, as I said, there's some discussion about this I'm not aware of!). Sam Walton (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

well in the w:Wikipedia:Line-break handling they treat them as equivalent even if they will break mw:Parsing/Replacing Tidy. it is the same effort so ok. a bot should be run to replace. Slowking4SvG's revenge 23:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Ah, that's the kind of documentation I knew existed somewhere! Cheers, Sam Walton (talk) 23:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Though maybe it's not an issue... Still, seems like if it's little effort to do one or the other that <br/> is preferable. Sam Walton (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
well to quibble it is <br /> all others are hacked by the parser. i had a lot of <pages> break, so less inclined to stay lazy. although happy to agree with tim starling to prefer the shortest character version. love the wikipedia coder love fest.Slowking4SvG's revenge 01:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


Hello, Slowking4! I looked over six of the pages you proofread for the PotM, and found several consistent errors. You might want to have another look-see of the pages you proofread and make corrections. There are several OCR errors remaining, spaces surrounding emdashes &c. need to be removed, some gaps need to be added to one stanza... I fixed some errors that I found on page 253 (I was not ultra thorough), but did not make any adjustments to pages 254-258 -- if you want to look them over again. If you can't get to it, I can look them over tomorrow. Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

very well i will stop validating. Slowking4SvG's revenge 02:35, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
It's no problem... It is difficult to spot some of the OCR errors, among other things, in this work. I can only take so many pages per day! Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Morning! I was a bit more thorough looking at proofread p. 255. After I made changes to formatting for consistency, I went back to fix ocr errors, etc. You can take a look at the Revision history to see what sort of errors, etc. you should look for when proofreading. I chose not to validate, for I am not confident that I have made no oversights myself. P.S. Pages 256-260 will need a look-over for errors, if you are willing. I only made adjustments for formatting consistency on those pages, but did not check for errors. Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:51, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
I was going to ask about 271 too - it seems like you didn't look at the page at all before marking as proofread. Sam Walton (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Let me know if you plan on revisiting pp. 256-260. If not, I can re-proofread them. Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:37, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

either way. i can see this has many more problems than i am accustomed to. i can spend all my time adding line breaks and titles. Slowking4SvG's revenge 01:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
No problem. Find where you're most comfortable contributing! Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:23, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Index:Representative Women of New England.djvu needed?Edit

Hi. I see that we now have Index:Sketches of representative women of New England.djvu which seems to replicate the other work. Are we clear to delete the first identified work, or is that needed for some purpose. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:52, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

yes, "missing page 358 and 359" it took me a while to find that and look for a better scan. a tool to check internet archives pages, and a tool to check for works with similar title already uploaded, would be nice. Slowking4SvG's revenge 11:54, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Typo templatesEdit

Is there a Quarry query for redlinked templates from Page:Namespace? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

There is no such requirement. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:34, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
no but i can dream. if there were a query for certain template strings or text strings, then we would have a powerful work flow. watchlist and contributions do not work for numbers over 1000. Slowking4SvG's revenge 02:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
I am not sure what you mean by redlinked templates unless you mean Special:WantedTemplates. As for Typo templates, would the Typoscan.js script do?Ineuw talk 04:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Index:The Melanesians Studies in their Anthropology and Folklore.djvuEdit

Thanks for your enthusiasm, but a small number of scan errors and formatting are apparently being overlooked. Please consider reviewing the changes I've made following behind your good faith efforts. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:56, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

just as well, have a presentation to revise. Slowking4SvG's revenge 10:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Source of contributors for Woman of the CenturyEdit

At Special:Diff/6632213 you added a list of people and a list of contributors for the work. What is the source of the contributors, as I cannot find it in the work itself.

We probably should be maintaining that list of contributors outside of the work if it is not published in the work. Probably stick it on the talk page, and utilise the list to add to author pages, and to wikidata for the contributors. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:38, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

here you go https://archive.org/stream/womanofcenturyfo00willan/womanofcenturyfo00willan_djvu.txt & https://archive.org/details/womanofcenturyfo00willan do not think there are attribution of articles by contributor, but maybe you can find that. Slowking4SvG's revenge 10:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Hmm, as a separate publication. Now do we upload it separately and reference; upload it and transclude it within the work; or just scrape it and ignore that fact that there is a scan. @Beeswaxcandle: do you have a thought to this? — billinghurst sDrewth 12:40, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
and the end matter got separated from the book - as you saw i did the latter. colored by the american "lists are PD". it would have been a little harder to do from scratch, but not impossible. Slowking4SvG's revenge 12:53, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
you think that it is just the same work though separated? independent binding, not something with which I am familiar. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
It looks like it was published separately, maybe as a removable insert. Some of this was the prospectus that was used to raise the capital necessary to set up the plates and do the print run for the full book. I recommend uploading it and transcluding as the TOC and contributor's list. The outer pages, which contain the prospectus could be transcluded as a subpage. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Index:Woman of the Century (prospectus).djvu as a start — billinghurst sDrewth 04:04, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Open LibraryEdit

Hoi, can we talk about what we could do when we are to collaborate with the Internet Archive and its Open Library. I am aiming to get all the books with identifiers external to OL for all the authors where Wikidata has an OL identifier.. The next step would be other books with freely available content as well. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

User:GerardM well, we have Wikisource:WikiProject Open Access; i thought we were waiting on wikicite thought leaders to provide a wishlist / implementation plan, about bibliographic metadata. i would make a project internet archive as a landing page. IA has engaged with us at wikimania, but we need to think through an action plan - what would you want them to do? what can we do for them? Slowking4SvG's revenge 21:41, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Anne BradstreetEdit

What's the reference about Anne Bradstreet (Twitter)? Wasn't clear... Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:47, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

sorry, yet another poet’s collected work to do Index:The_works_of_Anne_Bradstreet_in_prose_and_verse.djvu. i will add it to the list. Slowking4SvG's revenge 23:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Oh, I see. Finishing up Wordsworth's 2-vol. collection hopefully tonight. BTW, thanks for the recent RT's. Have a good night, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Modern poets and poetry of SpainEdit

The second page "388" is the same as p. 388, but block by having the "ad" turned over. The "Ad" looks like an insert that is only a partial sheet, and there allows some of the previous page to be viewed when the leaf is turned in the book. The page is, effectively, blank. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

The Life of the FieldsEdit

Saw that you worked on much of Jefferies' The Life of the Fields. Seems to be proofread (but for missing title page image), but not yet transcluded. Mind if I do so at some point? Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:58, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

fine, i am pre-occupied with Women of Distinction for a while. Slowking4SvG's revenge 16:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Hola. There is something fishy about the TOC for this text. I am not familiar with the TOC formatting, but perhaps something is needed to keep it from breaking? Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Think I fixed it with a nop. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
hola, yeah, i struggle with the TOC templates. there have some complicated table code in there, tricky across pages. Slowking4SvG's revenge 02:55, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Moving two new pagesEdit

Hello, will you be able to move: A Statistical Account of Bengal/District of the 24 Parganas
A Statistical Account of Bengal, Volume I./District of 24 Parganás/Geography and General Aspect
A Statistical Account of Bengal/Preface
A Statistical Account of Bengal, Volume I./Preface to A Statistical Account of Bengal, Volume I.
Thank you.
Samiur Rahman 2017 (talk) 17:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

where is the index? Index:A Statistical Account of Bengal Vol 1.pdf ? i would suggest creating the match and split page and cut and paste rather than use move key here. Slowking4SvG's revenge 17:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Hints from HoraceEdit

Sorry to interrupt... Will you be proofreading Hints from Horace or merely turning pages red? Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:44, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

well i find it useful to add line breaks. the arcane footnotes there will require more resolution, might turn to that later. Slowking4SvG's revenge 14:46, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Oh. The line breaks are not formatted the same as in the rest of the text, which uses <br />. I think it would be good to keep things consistent. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
ok, but see above at the br tags section. the parser sees them the same way. Slowking4SvG's revenge 14:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Not that it won't render the same, I am just a stickler for keeping things uniform...

Also, as far as references go, refs & notes are combined in the rest of the text as mere refs. You can refer to previous formatting examples. I did much proofreading from these volumes. I merely got burned out. Let me know if you would like help at any point. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:56, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

yes - i salute your fine work there, it will take some study for me to replicate in the remainder. this volume is close, if i can help push it over the top for poetry month, that would be great. Slowking4SvG's revenge 14:58, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Had I to do it over again, I would have been more faithful with differentiating between refs and notes. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:04, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
you can always sweep back through with "ref group" to split them. Help:Footnotes_and_endnotes#Grouped_footnotes, and change label to roman numerals w:Help:Cite link labels + i’m confused by the block center behavior, will need to study that. Slowking4SvG's revenge 15:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I will "bookmark" the page. Let me know if I can help with block center at all. I can't necessarily speak technically, but perhaps about behavior. Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
i think it will sort out when footnotes get done and the block gets narrower. Slowking4SvG's revenge 15:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

This [11] Byron page was particularly fun; and a good reference for formatting the volumes, touching on nearly every issue but for {{pline}} Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:01, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

wow, you have an interesting view of fun - nested footnotes ; although need to sort roman from numerical? Slowking4SvG's revenge 23:35, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Ugh. For all the pages/volumes that would be involved, the prospect of sorting strikes me as particularly not fun. Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
let me find a simple one to experiment on - maybe the elegant outcome could change your mind? Slowking4SvG's revenge 01:30, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
ok User:Londonjackbooks here is an example [12] - need to see if can tweek label and ref follow. Slowking4SvG's revenge 01:49, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
I am here... Just with half a brain. This is stuff for my morning brain. Will "lower-roman" and "decimal" be spelled out like that in the Main as well? It is distracting from the poem/text, in my opinion. Not to be picky... Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:58, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
yeah - i need to sleep on it too. how to get the "i" and "1" - the ref follow work with it - i.e. [13]. will research the label issue. Slowking4SvG's revenge 02:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
delayed response, yes "lower-roman" and "decimal" is the fallback, because we do not enable the symbol footnote functionality (admin locked), because "we" want to force numerical footnotes. don’t look on scriptorium, for the drama. Slowking4SvG's revenge 21:34, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
I am experiencing multi-project burnout at the moment—RL as well as here at WS (tis the season!), but will leave myself a Horace reminder at my to-do list. I would like to at least complete that volume sometime early in the New Year. Happy Holidays to you! Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:07, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
quite all right, maybe i can help a little. i find going to meetups can help with burnout. i would recommend the Art + Feminism at National Museum of Women in the Arts, so watch that space [14]. cheers. Slowking4SvG's revenge 03:10, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Hopefully I will be fully recovered by March :) but will keep an open mind about attending the edit-a-thon. While I appreciate the role WP plays, I much prefer editing Wikisource. Cheers back. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:10, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

fwiw: I compiled some notes on footnotes etc. based on direction I was given at the time when I was working on these volumes. Don't know if you can make anything of them or if they can be helpful. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Also, I will not be at the helm much this week, but will take a look at Horace's progress in a few days (not that you have requested I do so; merely in regards to "ownership" issues I have—half kidding). Have a good Thanksgiving. Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Will try to make a concerted effort to complete this volume soon. Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Page:The Works of Lord Byron (ed. Coleridge, Prothero) - Volume 1.djvu/452 Slowking4SvG's revenge 11:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Mmm, yeah... I would have to object. The reflinks look bulky and distract (imo) from reading, and even if they could be simplified, you would have to apply the formatting to every other page in the volume (volumes, if you want to keep things uniform). I am not personally willing to implement the practice. Not in this case, anyway. Apologies if I undo... :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
ok, i agree, but its the only way to get the grouping as seen on the page. we could do roman numerals, but for some adversive style enforcement. Slowking4SvG's revenge 13:15, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
I know... I'm sorry I am not keen on it; some pages which contain footnotes within footnotes, etc. are quite complicated enough, and perhaps if the practice was presented when I started on the volumes I might have been more open (my brain was slightly more active during that time). I hope I don't come across as unappreciative, I do appreciate your time and desire to replicate the original. Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
quite all right. i would go through and group references if i could. it is amazing we can actually replicate text that close, but we need a VE dashboard that makes it easier. Slowking4SvG's revenge 13:36, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Finished Volume 1. Thanks for the prompt—it is rewarding to have completed it. But please don't do so again any time soon ;) Phew! Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:54, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Help requestedEdit

Hello Slowking4,

I’m not sure if you’re the person to ask, but I want to import a book, and as a test page I had created User:Donald Trung/Annam and its minor currency (Toda)/Section I to see how I can best convert the book into wiki-format, however I am not really familiar with templates here, and I can't really use Wikitables for imported works. Also the source book is here, based on this, should I be calling the subdivisions of the book “chapters” or “sections”, I mostly tried to emulate the style of The Art of War (Sun) but I realised that that wasn't the only book here, and Annam and its minor currency doesn't seem to name it's subdivisions as either “sections” or “chapters”. I also saw that the reason why Sun Tzü’s book has “(Sun)” is because it could be ambiguously confused with a Machiavellian work of the same name, so when I’ll (re-)publish the book I'll be dropping the “(Toda)” part, as I am not planning on actually working on the import until February I just want your feedback on it, as of now I mostly plan on using “Donald Trung/Annam and its minor currency (Toda)/Section I” as a sandbox before I'm done on Dutch Wikipedia (I still have 3 articles to finish there) and import more museum 🎨 works from Flickr to Wikimedia Commons, but I don't want to leave that sandbox in bad quality.

I’ve already searched through most style guides but information on templates seem largely omitted. Also I would prefer for you to leave feedback on my talk page (see the “討論 🤙🏻” part of my signature), as I would probably check my Wikisource talk page more than yours. 😜

Sent from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. -- DonTrung (徵國單)  (討論 🤙🏻) (方孔錢 ☯) 10:31, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

FYI Template:Woman of the Century linkEdit

Just wanted to let you know that this template exists for author page links to the work, and I am updating these now. If we have internal linking within the work, I will template with the lkpl equivalent tomorrow. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Removing a copyvio noticeEdit

If someone adds a copyvio notice, do not remove until the discussion is over. If the consensus is against me, then it will be removed, but until then the copyvio notice needs to continue to provide a link to the deletion discussion.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:44, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

do not edit war. seek a consensus. how many edits do you have here? or are you here to delete texts you cannot delete at commons. Slowking4SvG's revenge 12:27, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Umm, that is not a good approach to take, quite provocative. Nominating something is putting it before the community for discussion, nothing else. So, please leave nominations in place, and take part in any conversation. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:55, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
yeah, about as provocative as blanking a page not under deletion discussion at commons, (and no prospect of a nomination). are you going to countenance, the "holier than commons"; "blank first and ask questions about the false positive later". this is the behavior of a commons admin or english admin. consensus trumps URAA enforcement. this editor needs to be shown the door. he does not add much value. Slowking4SvG's revenge 03:36, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
If you have concerns about an user's or an administrator's actions, then you should address it with them on their talk page, not repeatedly revert.

Every administrator undergoes an annual confirmation process, and if you have concerns about me, or others, you can express those concerns during those respective confirmation processes. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

sorry, i would just as soon not interact with this low edit person. i find his and others exporting their toxic behavior quite sad. it is the same old "do what i tell you to do" form of "collaboration". and rest assured, it will be demotivating for my further work here. if i were to say "no confidence", would it make the slightest difference? i’ve never seen it before. Slowking4SvG's revenge 04:36, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
11:28, 1 January 2018 - commons village pump Radio Times discussion
12:04, 1 January 2018‎ - wikisource radio times transcription page started.
15:25, 1 January 2018‎ - wikisource page blanked
17:23, 1 January 2018 - wikisource copyright discussion started
19:35, 2 January 2018 - wikisource ANU discussion started

EB1911 deemed "deprecated"?Edit

See my edit on the Wikipedia page w:Romesh Chandra Mitra of [23 March 2018] where I added in-line citations to EB1911. These edits were reverted because they were "... unnecessary citations from a source that we deprecate for Indian stuff." Do you know who the "we" is that decided EB1911 citations are not worthy? The citations I added were just deleted, not replaced with another source. I believe ones of the aims of Wikipedia is to include citations to statements, not delete them. Your thoughts? DivermanAU (talk) 20:56, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

user:DivermanAU btw thanks for cleaning up the EB1911 backlog. (now on the NIE and Appletons) this editor is making stuff up again. this is becoming more prevalent on english: rather than curating the references and links, and collaborating, they just edit war, and will not engage on talk. and an admin is worse than this, i.e. removing references and blocking. pity. if you wanted to call him on it, you could talk to the copyright police about "close paraphrasing" Slowking4SvG's revenge 21:58, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Block center & poetryEdit

Just a mention that when block center with breaks is used for poetry, poems that span more than one page require {{block center/s}}/e otherwise poems will not be aligned properly. I was going to do some editing of the PotM with some spare time, but noticed multiple formatting methods were being used and so held off until one method was agreed upon. I likely won't be doing much editing of the work, so I'll leave the decision to other editors. Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:22, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

i was block centering by page for a red status. the formatting across pages does not work well. maybe i will return to potm when i get done with appletons. Slowking4SvG's revenge 03:09, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
No need for a red status. It's practically proofread as is. Why not just proofread? My thought is that if someone new comes along, they might think block centering by page is the way to go after looking at a page.What is it that does not work well formatting across pages? Londonjackbooks (talk) 08:34, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 00:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Slowking4Edit

This is Artix Kreiger. Can we talk?

sure User:Artix Kreiger - logging in would help, or email me. Slowking4SvG's revenge 11:06, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


Hello. Just to say I doubt at this point I'll be able to make any more WMDC edit-a-thons, but perhaps if we ever move back to the area. It was good to have met you. See you here at WS otherwise! :) Best, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:57, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

we will miss you User:Londonjackbooks. please consider organizing meetups or salons with your local librarians. show them the https://webjunction.org/explore-topics/wikipedia-libraries.html - you will be a rockstar. cheers. Slowking4SvG's revenge 00:23, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Overseas move this time. A whole new ball game! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

See PBS's talk pageEdit

I just posted a funny EB1911 discovery on PBS's WP talk page and pinged you, but I don't know whether you are more active there. No action required, just a curiosity. DavidBrooks (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

yes, thank-you, User:PBS the notifications are a lot of noise for the signal, but i am keeping up for now. i was gonna say duplicate work is better than "Fictitious Entries" Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Fictitious Entries +1 Brits -- just call me "Roger de la Pasture" --Slowking4SvG's revenge 21:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Cuningham, James McNabb (DNB12)Edit

Hi, Slowking4, I came across this category on commons and I was wondering if one of the images might be useful here. Lotje ツ (talk) 15:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

hmm, well not wikipedia article yet. which would get a wikidata image. we don't really do article subjects, more like author pages, and don't have his medical works uploaded to transcribe. Slowking4SvG's revenge 03:19, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
here is a book, but not scanned [15] Slowking4SvG's revenge 15:21, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Are you lonesome tonight?Edit

Just found Index:The collected poems, lyrical and narrative, of A. Mary F. Robinson.djvu sitting there with amounts of transclusions awaiting it. I was going to poke it under the nose of LBJ then I saw that you created the index. Is this still something on your agenda? — billinghurst sDrewth 05:37, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I will try and have a hack at the ToC for work. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
well, i will be less productive, as wikiconference north america looms. but it will be good to see rosie again. Slowking4SvG's revenge 12:14, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Not an issue, I will give the first part a poke, then we can see how we go. Wanted to make sure that I wasn't rocking boats. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:18, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
no problem. i tend to do the minimum table work to make it functional. feel free to edit toc’s as you will. Slowking4SvG's revenge 02:10, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Please don't do this.Edit

Please don't format and wordwrap half of a page and leave everything else. It is not helpful for people who rely on the text to follow the original line by line. In addition, using slanted quotation marks makes others' work harder when they are not matched. The slanted quotation mark is not an accepted quotation mark in English Wikisource, and is not even listed in Wikipedia under quotation marks.— Ineuw talk 19:18, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

the punctuation is how the keystroke comes out, cannot type straight quotes it "auto-corrects" to slant, except if using old editor toolbar which is now disabled. you need to provide a page and example if you want to discuss. Slowking4SvG's revenge 00:12, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
i see you have taken ownership of Index:The War with Mexico, Vol 1.djvu, i will leave you to it. Slowking4SvG's revenge 13:02, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to a kind soul.Edit

Your kind act of proofreading the page titles when you created the pages of the whole volume, leaves me humbled.— Ineuw talk 18:58, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

The DreamerEdit

As you have volunteered to clean up copydumps, here is The Dreamer: A Romantic Drama In Three Acts (Mary R.P. Hatch), which also has some subsidiary pages (unlinked from the main page). --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

i see you persist in targeting recent uploads. another method would be to target oldest or biggest. i should take a road trip to cambridge maryland to buy this editor a coffee. they could use some help.
here it is in worldcat [16] but i do not see any scans at IA.Slowking4SvG's revenge 22:02, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
This IP is our regular copydumper for drama. Never formats or improves, just dumps unformatted text and never interacts with the community. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
if you want me to put this ip at the front of the queue, ok. still working on Index:Thirty-One Years on the Plains and in the Mountains.djvu -- Slowking4SvG's revenge 11:40, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikisource:News (en): April 2019 editionEdit

Page:American Seashells (1954).djvu/1 and othersEdit

The work these where nominally transcribed was deleted on Commons (see c:Commons:Deletion requests/American seashells (1954),

IA said "no known copyright." may be PD not renewed, not here [17]; [18]; [19]; [20] -- good one for a DRV. Slowking4SvG's revenge 16:28, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to test ScienceSource in betaEdit

Please come to http://sciencesource.wmflabs.org/ and help out. You should be able to create an account allowing me to track your edits - let me know soonest if that doesn't work out.

On the main page, the "data schema" link is for if you want to know what happens backstage. But the "Review tool" sidebar link is where the main action is. (This Wikibase site is like Wikidata in some look-and-feel ways, but much less of it is really human-readable.) If you follow a linked Q-number, you get a page about a paper, and instructions.

The results and display for a paper vary a lot. The aim of the game is to find a drug and a disease and a place in the paper where it says that the drug is a treatment for the disease. The MEDRS guideline standards should be applied. Obviously I'll review any edits you make.

Good luck! At the moment the idea is to test the mechanism. Shortly I'll do some work on how to find plausible places to look. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikisource:News (en): May 2019 EditionEdit

Manual of the New Zealand floraEdit

  • IA 1906 edition [21]
  • 1925 worldcat entry [22]
  • not registered 1925 [23]
  • not renewed 1953 [24] and ??
Just for your info, Index:Manual of the New Zealand Flora.djvu is on my InProgress list. Been a while since I worked on it, but I do intend to get back to it at some point. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
1906 edition. there is an inquiry about the 1925 edition. worldcat appears to confuse the two. it would be nice to have a scan to see if there was a substantial amendment. Slowking4SvG's revenge 11:26, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Uploads to be transferredEdit

Hi. With your inability to upload to Commons, if you do upload in-scope works (djvu, pdf, or derivatives of these) here, then users can move them to Commons using the beta transfer tool. Feel welcome to have a list page of works that need moving. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

english wikipedia automatically transfers them over. Slowking4SvG's revenge 14:24, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

template:Woman of the Century linkEdit

… or {{WotC link}} exists for easy linking of those works from author pages. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikisource:News (en): July 2019 EditionEdit

polish wikisourceEdit

uses lua template rather than section markers for dictionaries.
for sharing best pratices, see also [25]
Subtitling the Chaos Communication Congress Slowking4Rama's revenge 10:10, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

wikimania 2019 articleEdit

Wikimania 2019 included a Wikisource track. There was an education panel on using wikisource and wiktionary, Wiktionary & Wikisource in EduWiki Initiatives: Challenges and Opportunities

Wikisource trackEdit

We started off with a survey of annual progress Wikisource Year in Review 2019

Next we had a presentation from Polish wikisource. Using transcribed content for community building

Next we had a presentation about Bengali Wikisource. Sharing best practices among Wikisource communities

Next we had a presentation about annotations. A general annotation service

Next we had a presentation about video transcription at Chaos Communication Congress, Subtitling the Chaos Communication Congress: An Experience Report

Next we had a presentation about Armenian , Italian, and Indic Wikisource, Building Locally Relevant Knowledge with Wikisource

Finally we had a summation session, Wrap-up

Other blogs covered wikimania. Wikimania 2019 – a Wiki perspective for GLAM institutions

Wikisource:News (en): September 2019 EditionEdit

for VE not being user friendly see also [26] -- Slowking4Rama's revenge 01:22, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
I probably should have given a bit more context to that story. The general complaint was that we need a new visual editor made for Wikisource in mind, and this was just one instance of a long pattern of Wikisource being ignored by the WMF. It's certainly true to a large extent, but I decided to focus more on VE-aspect of what Satdeep Gill was talking about. –MJLTalk 16:31, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
no, you did fine. as usual, the story is a long complicated one. we asked for VE on the wishlist for ages, and they gave it to us (along with the wikipedia menus). but the general failure to do good UX design is across all open software design. the "custom change on your CSS" is the symptom solve way rather than systemic change. small projects have always been ignored by WMF (wikisource may be better than average based on WMF emphasis on global south - Indic languages) maybe they will listen to Satdeep Gill. cheers -- Slowking4Rama's revenge 14:13, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights SurveyEdit

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

A modern history of the InquisitionEdit

I earned some foes among global sysops, see e.g. [27]. They meanwhile defend civility, cool…

Good luck with the job in Wikisource. BTW, I didn’t know that you know Latin. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

as i said elsewhere, i adopt the standard of civility that is enforced. the fact that civility is used to shut people up when enforcement is non-existent, is a miscarriage. and ironic User:Ajraddatz is being civility police, but i guess he has mellowed from 2016. [28]. it’s fine they want meta to become phabricator, and it will get as much traffic. Slowking4Rama's revenge 22:31, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Do you exist in social networks? Or somewhere outside this holding at all? Not to say I distrust many of Wikimedian stewards individually (for their personal trustworthiness), but they may be compelled to do things in interests of the mob of hypocrites and bigots. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

yes, i have refrained in using social media or involving allies. it just maddens the mob. the open letter method of negative feedback does not work, as we see with Donna Strickland (which is lesson not learned, because it implicates sacred cow AfC) its not that the stewards are compelled, but they are repelled by the emotional labor required to govern the mob. (which allows the rule by drama conduct to flourish and deter.) we need to organize a critical mass of civil people to stage a hostile takeover. Slowking4Rama's revenge 17:49, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
I despise “civility” discourse at all. There is a minority for whom it actually matters and they are never able to agree with each other (e.g. you vs Ajraddatz). For the majority, indeed, “civility” means low level of criticism. Perhaps you know a bureau on Commons who makes serious edits (such as of user pages) without ever providing a summary, but this same bureau speaks in a very polite manner. I don’t value polite verbosity in user_talk or so if it is not supplemented with accountable editing. In “my” world the person could never rise above the rollback privilege. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:58, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

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

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

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

block and span size templatesEdit

Hi. If you are using {{smaller}} and similar <span> templates, they need to be kept to inline editing (up to a paragraph). If you are covering text that is more than a paragraph, then we need to use a block template {{smaller block}}, or multiple uses of the span templates.

Here due to special:permalink/9660323. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:31, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

ok, i take it you mean, "across a line break." i have recently been using "smaller" for each line as required, unlike "center". there may be some older instances where i did smaller across lines. i was confused by this text image, which will required inserted image.
yeah, and several volumes of PRS ocr buttons work, while text is not there initially; maybe a bot run would save some time. Slowking4Rama's revenge 18:03, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, it is all a bit of a nuisance. I think in terms of paragraphs. less than and equal to a paragraph, then span, and the formatting needs to be on the inside. greater than and equal to is a block, and that needs to be on the outside. So if mediawiki turns it into multiple paragraphs, eg. two hard returns, then it a block. You are correct that you can use multiple formatting. And NO, we haven't been the best at making our templates well named, though if you see "block" then it is pretty certain <div> formatting. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:44, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Fram Expedition Reports...Edit

4 Volume set?

Vol1 - https://archive.org/details/cu31924012281063 Vol2 - https://archive.org/details/cu31924012281071/page/n6

Volume 3 and 4 are already Locally uploaded ( due to copyright concerns.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:39, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

yeah, i would just as soon blacklist and filter anything with "Fram" in it. so sorry not on my to do list.
don’t know why local upload, since images from work are stable on commons [29], but maybe there were some deletions of anonymous not 120? Slowking4Rama's revenge 14:52, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Index:The gift of black folk.djvuEdit

Did you see that I already had Index:W. E. B. Du Bois - The Gift of Black Folk.pdf and linked it at Author:W. E. B. Du Bois? Should we have two transcriptions? Is one of these files preferable? Ping me and let me know please. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:05, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

i see you jumped the gun. those are the same scan. i leave you to it. please update Wikisource:Requested texts/1924 -- Slowking4Rama's revenge 00:00, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm with youEdit

"this is a group action/decision by the Commons CU team."

According to meta this is your home wiki. Is it nice(r) here? I mean, plenty of users on Commons are nice, but I don't like the CU team very much now. Alexis Jazz (talk) 20:29, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Alexis Jazz yes, and get more work done. (for me 150k edits versus 100k edits on commons). check out Wikisource:Proofread_of_the_Month,or you could try [30]; since you know wikicode, it should be easy for you. they do not follow policy; it is not rule of rules, but rule by rules - i.e. rules weaponized to vindictively settle scores. i would not engage with the assholes. it only gives them excuses for their behavior. taking a break from commons would be prudent self-care. cheers. Slowking4Rama's revenge 21:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
You may be right. I wish you weren't. Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
User:Alexis Jazz, my, that escalated quickly. you see how indef is used to exert power only, i.e. "i blocked you now convince me to let you back." i wouldn't bother with any discussion on any wiki. it serves no purpose, with the unreasonable. rather i might wait a year, and ask for an unblock as clean start (although we know that is a false promise.) plenty to do here or on wikidata. Slowking4Rama's revenge 01:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Trouble on CommonsEdit

Jim, There is a lot of activity lately trying to delete some of your photos I uploaded last November. Apparently some of those are marked as Public Domain and there is a few editors very eager to delete them. You can see some of the discussions, here and here. I do not know if you care one way or the other, but I think it would be humorous if you change a license on flickr of those few images to CC-0 (or is you feel mischievous to CC-by-sa), so there would be no policy one can use to justify deletions. --Jarekt (talk) 02:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

yes, malignant assiduity. commons had previously deleted PD-mark transferred from english wikipedia, and OTRS declined to honor my email claim of authorship. in this case, no notice of deletion, but communication on flickr. no consideration of files in use. apparently, nominator is misrepresenting consensus, for considering the intent of good faith uploaders to flickr (i.e. [31]) rather they would prefer to destroy knowledge that does not check the boxes, and rules by the unaccountable OTRS. i would not recommend interacting with this editor. here you go- [32] cheers Slowking4Rama's revenge 12:10, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes I find the whole affair with PD from flickr kind of absurd. Thanks for fixing that one file, can you also "fix" [33], [34], [35], [36], [37] and [38]. --Jarekt (talk) 04:34, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
ok, changed the 2 in use [39], [40], the others can go - i really laughed at the warning template "It is disputed whether the copyright tag on this file is correct" - such is the pique of the thwarted deletionist. you have my utmost sympathy, but you realize how the farce tends to reinforce the bad attitude. Slowking4Rama's revenge 16:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

KJV queryEdit

You did the work to get a source for the KJV bible, and I've been working towards replacing the previous texts for the Psalms using the source, e.g. Page:KJV 1769 Oxford Edition, vol. 1.djvu/586. I'm almost ready to transclude into Bible (King James)/Psalms but for some technical problems with marginNote's messing with droppedinitial's.

While working on Psalms I came up with ideas/techniques that seem applicable elsewhere, e.g. Matthew. I wanted to get your impressions of a couple example changes to a random page, Matthew

Little tweaks, but I think they help. Do these tweaks seem reasonable to you?

I'm finding so many differences between the previous text we've had for years and the source. In the example page above, the old text had 'Judaea' and the source has 'Judea'. Poking at the 3rd page of the preface found re-ordered words, reinterpreted abbreviated words, and other oddities. All these years with some weird derived text. Yikes!

BTW: Do you know of someone expert at {{marginNote}}/{{dropinitial}}? I kinda hesitate to throw my arcane problems into Scriptorium. Shenme (talk) 08:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

it is a perennial problem. i would ditch the margin note, as too hard. but raise the issue at discussion. and yes, compromises were made at gutenberg, hence the impetus for scan-backed work, so readers can see the compromises made. cheers. Slowking4Rama's revenge 10:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Slowking4Edit

Naleksuh (talk) 01:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

POTUS Tweet Archive DiscussionEdit

You asked me a few questions about my idea for archiving POTUS tweets back on 10/12. I appreciate your doing this. I was slow to answer them - for which I apologize - but I did post a reply on 10/24 which may have escaped your notice. Any further feedback on the proposed project would be greatly appreciated, thanks. Dennis the Peasant (talk) 03:26, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

WikiConference North America 2020Edit

Hello! I missed your demo and talk yesterday at the conference. I have been using enWS for a few years. Was looking forward to meeting you and others interested in the topic. Wishing you well. Maybe in a future conference we'll get to meet. Cheers. - DutchTreat (talk) 15:03, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Font tag in signatureEdit

Hi! Would you mind changing your signature to avoid using the deprecated (not by us, by the HTML spec) <font> tag: use of that tag sets off Special:LintErrors/obsolete-tag. <span style="font-family:Vijaya;">Slowking4</span> is the equivalent. Thank you! Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 10:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Gospel of RâmakrishnaEdit

How does it go on with book. I think I can't do it anymore because someone else has to read it for the second time (green).https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:The_Gospel_of_R%C3%A2makrishna.djvu Thanks --Riquix (talk) 04:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Riquix you can edit validated, green pages. - on to other texts. Slowking4Rama's revenge 13:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
At the beginning you gave me some tips through preliminary work. But if I want to edit my side (yellow) I can choose a maximum of yellow, no green. But in order to make the book finished, this is necessary. On the help page, as I understand it, it also says that it should be done by two authors. I'm from Germany so maybe I don't put my word so clearly. --Riquix (talk) 15:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
right, we need to team up, to validate a text. hence our use of proofread of the month, to raise visibility. or there are always other texts to proofread. Slowking4Rama's revenge 15:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Is it possible to enter the book "The Gospel of Râmakrishna" in the Proofread of the Month? --Riquix (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
User:Slowking4 I don't want to annoy you with my questions but maybe you didn't see my last questions. --Riquix (talk) 06:32, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I saw on the linked pages that you have already put it up for discussion. Thank you!

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource_talk:Proofread_of_the_Month#July_(Anthropology,_Mythology,_or_Religion)--Riquix (talk) 06:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

yeah, sorry finding partners to validate can be hard. (i tend to prefer proofreading) and the POTM can be a little slow, as the validation backlog is large. Slowking4Rama's revenge 18:15, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

A Century of DishonorEdit

Hi. I noticed you've taken an interest in this work again, or maybe I didn't look carefully. When I found it it looked like it was abandoned over a year, and I took it up as the theme was of interest, at first the Poncas and later I decided to do the whole thing. I use a different style: curly quotes and line breaks preserved, I notice are the main difference from your style. The original text layer I found was pretty disordered, as I think I've found previously with PDFs, so I've just been doing the OCR from scratch using the Wikisource OCR button, and this was much easier to work from. Would you like to cooperate on this work? I'd like to keep my style. Library Guy (talk) 15:47, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for helping; and a noteEdit

about formatting. I have validated the pages you proofread (thank you!), but I updated the formatting to what I have begun using for the work. I realize technically speaking that some of the changes are insignificant, but I am a bit obsessive about uniformity. So please do not take it personally :) Help out as you please! Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

ok, those yale kids have small books, Carl Sandburg has twice the pages. (still looking for Tulips & Chimneys) Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 00:32, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Oh yes! I remember! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:40, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

dotted crap and scottsmenEdit

Weird. I was kind of iffy about using the template and I saw one that you made. So, I decided to keep using it based on that one sighting alone.

Do you have any plans for publishing the scotsmans volumes? Like, unified templates, ways to link to others within the set, cite for 'peds?

Also, you are my very most favorite in the Scriptorium. Thank you for that. Once a favorite is acquired, it is all downhill from there....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:41, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

yeah, i tried to use dotted template a time or two, but it is cranky, does not work well.
i was just working the red pages, given all the whinging at "non-proofread" - apparently i'm the only one, with a million page backlog; everybody else is proofreading their own works. we are keeping up with the French, except for all the red pages, which some generate with bots.
yes, eventually we could make scotsman like eb1911, cruise through and create "articles", and use as a source for wikipedia, but it will take years. not really a plan but a direction. --Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 01:53, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
We can set up something through the Index:'s css files, so if you need a hand in that regard, chat to me or Inductiveload. Typically if you can format the first line to how you want something to look, we can transfer through to the css file. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

The Sun Also RisesEdit

The community consensus is that we're no longer accepting editions of books created by distributed proofreading (such as at Project Gutenberg) that has been turned into scans. The copy you linked of The Sun Also Rises is a distributed proofreading copy that was posted on the internet in 2015, and then turned into a scan. These sorts of scans are now frowned upon here. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:01, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

yeah, thanks, i was fumbling around looking for the first on IA. if you have better scan links please link them in preparation for public domain day. cheers. --Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 12:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)


I have removed it fro the blacklist as it is less spammed these days, and we can revisit it if it reappears. With all of these additions, the removal is simply making a cogent case for the removal and having the argument showing that there is more value than less value in having the domain available. Cogent case is more than "I don't like it being blocked." — billinghurst sDrewth 21:54, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

thank you. i agree not necessarily a reliable source, but there are these olds documenting their digital practice on blogs. in this example, on point and cautionary. --Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 21:01, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Mr. Juwan Usang LyEdit

I saw that you were working on Index:Who's who in China 3e.djvu; I got p. 450 fixed up, if you’re still interested. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

nice. i’m not using crop tool over on commons, which is the task to add the image to the page, but you should try it. (go to page on commons and crop image, which can then be transcluded at wikisource) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:CropTool - the tables in the index there will be a formidable task. --Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 23:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Noooooo, never use CropTool to extract images from compressed files like DjVu or PDF unless you literally have no other choice. See H:EXTRACT for what horrors text-centric compression can do to images.
In this case, there's a nice high-res image at the IA. The jump to file script will give you a direct link to it if you have it enabled. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 23:37, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
it is great you have a custom script to do it better than crop tool. care to move that to toolserver, and make a gadget, and move to menu ? --Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 12:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Just to let you know Katherine MaherEdit

Hi Slowking4,

I was checking some old stuff and stumbled on your userpage and saw to my delight that you maintan a list of quotations on it. I used one of those and added it to q:Katherine Maher. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 14:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

there are a bunch more over here [41] cheers.--Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 23:17, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. What got my attention in the first place was the reference to "SARS-CoV-2" and "coronavirus" on your user page (plus the fact it was right on top of the quotes :-). Also since I am interested in topics to do with wikimedia history. Nice sig btw. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:23, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

News from the West Coast Task ForceEdit

ELLO from our West Coast Wikisource project. There's been quite a bit uploaded recently, so a quick list of things you might be interested in helping with.

  • Baughan, Blanche Edith. (1898). Verses. A medium-sized poetry collection; the table of contents has been created but otherwise lots of poems to transcribe.
  • — (1912). Brown Bread from a Colonial Oven: Being Sketches of Up-country Life in New Zealand. Short stories evoking colonial life, easy to transcribe but lots of apostrophes (which we should try and do as curly single quotes). I love the little illustrations in this one—it would be great to get them in Commons in high res.
  • — (1923). Poems from the Port Hills. Very short poetry book; try out your poetry formatting.
  • Drummond, James. (1907.) The Life and Work of Richard John Seddon. We've solved the problem of the missing page, so it's now a matter of proofing and validating the text. I need to upload the plates into Commons.
  • Faris, Irwin. (1941). Charleston: Its Rise and Decline. The photos are all in Commons and just need to be inserted into pages, and validated, and then we're done.
  • Hickey, Patrick Hodgens. (1925). "Red" Fed. Memoirs. Fascinating and short labour history, almost all just text. A quick proofread.
  • Reid, R. C. (1886) (2nd Edition) Rambles on the Golden Coast of New Zealand. I've uploaded all the ornate capitals and page ornaments (which include the ones in this post) to Commons, so all that's left to do is add them to pages.

Lots more books coming, but some of these we can polish off quickly so they can be loaned out as library books. Drop me a line if anything's not clear or leave a message on the book's Talk page. Happy proofreading! —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 09:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)