Archives. 2008. 2009. 2010. 2011, 2012.

Awards for participation
Featured article star - check.svg
Proofread of the Month
November 2011

Special: Validation month

The Five NationsEdit

Did you want to still work on the above text, or do you mind if I have a go at it? Wanted to ask before I dug in... Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Oooo, forgot I started that. It's all yours :) Let me know if I can assist with anything. - Theornamentalist (talk) 02:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I too have tossed a "MS in a Bottle" into the Sea & more than once from my Destroyer, USNEdit

Chris, it appears that you have not been editing for a long time. If you do have some time I would like to ask a favor of you and if you do not have time for this I can understand your prefer becoming a hermit. I am still editing so I ask this of you—would you set up a book for me to edit or do you not have the time? It's okay if you do not want to. Well, that's a given isn't it!? Here is the book and I prefer the old colored pages of the stark white pages that hurt my eyes. Also, take the time and write to our friend, Raul. He is a good man as you well know and it would make him feel good to get a note from you. The following history of "yachting" takes place 1600-1815. It sounds like "yachting" is a misnomer! These are very large and old "yachts"! —Maury (talk) 09:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The History of Yachting, 1600-1815 (1904)

Author: Clark, Arthur Hamilton, 1841-1922; New York Yacht Club
Subject: Yachts; Yachting
Publisher: New York, London, G.P. Putnam's Sons
Language: English
Call number: 9607282
Digitizing sponsor: The Library of Congress

Hey Maury, glad to help how I can:) here is the Index, and here's the Category at commons. - Theornamentalist (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
May God forever bless such souls as yours - watch over them and their loved ones! Thank you my friend. Prepare for that weather snow-storm warning. I don't think God tries to control his "weather machines" and their are many of them.

If my title of this topic amuses you, know that as I remember really doing it, it once again amuses me. Poe had nothing on me with his fictional "MS In a Bottle" because mine was a flurry of bottled messages thrown into the sea--fully, truly, an absolute reality.

USS Stickell DD 888 put into ports around the world including Viet Nam.

I once was a sailor
and far from my home
and in a strange country
a'way o'er the foam

As I sat a-waiting
the time for to pass
there came towards me
a strange native lass

She sat down beside me
and held out her hand
To give me welcome
to her beautiful land....

—Maury (talk) 01:57, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Ford ManualEdit

If the last few image layout issues can be resolved , this can be upgrade to needing validation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Seems like you guys handled it :) It's a neat addition wikisource. - Theornamentalist (talk) 23:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

What does image: parameter "upright" do?Edit


It is (almost) a year since I last bothered you with a silly question; but here I am again!

I recently noticed Londonjackbooks used a parameter "upright=.3" on the File:/Image: element here. Curious about this (because I had not seen its use before), I found and read w:Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial#Upright_images, but somehow the concept isn't getting through to me.

When I quizzed LJB directly she referred me to you as most likely expert. Would you please take pity and offer some guide? Chances are I may never need to know, but... well?

Thank you. MODCHK (talk) 00:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Never a bother :) The use is mostly preference, and doesn't always work for sizing. An explanation beyond just the upright= is necessary.
I was once viewing a text I was proofreading on my girlfriends phone and an image's width had forced a horizontal scroll bar, making reading the text very annoying to move back and forth per line. I had occasionally used just the frameless parameter but didn't know what it sized to or why, just that it left the image without a frame. After reading up on it at the same page you pointed to above, I saw that it used 220px as the default width, but allowed the user to go into their preferences and change the width if they wished to. So in essence, it removes my preference from the image width (as a hardcoded 400px will do) and gives the reader the ability to set it to a size best for their device. Additionally, because the width is on the smaller side, it didn't cause the horizontal scroll bar on her phone, so I was happy and started using it. Beyond the use of frameless is the parameter upright= which changes the width of the image relative to the width setting on frameless. So using frameless=.5 will create an image that is half of the width of frameless; by default 110px. Similarly, using frameless=1.5 will create an image of roughly 330px.
What I began doing was basically saying that the printed page width of a given scan was the equivalent of the frameless parameter, and the images appearing on would then be related to that width. So if you look at this page I recently worked on, you'll see that the images width appearing in print decides what upright value I choose. They're all just approximations, like "Ummm, looks like about a third of the printed page width.... upright equals point three..."
To quote from the Picture tutorial page, "Where size forcing is appropriate, larger images should generally be a maximum of 500 pixels tall and 400 pixels wide, so that they can comfortably be displayed on the smallest displays in common use." So, if an image appears in print landscape, I assumed it was about 1.5 the width of the portrait oriented image or something, which would then create an image that was about 330px, which still falls under the suggestion from the tutorial about the width. Like with frameless, these widths can change depending on what the user has set in their preferences. - Theornamentalist (talk) 01:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the explanation. So if I understand, "correct" use enables choice of an aspect ration that is still dependent upon the users preference for overall image size?
This has also drawn my attention to my personal (unthinking!) habit of specifying both "frameless" and an absolute image size (say "400px".) I wonder if this pairing is internally contradictive, and perhaps the "frameless" is really being silently ignored in these situations? MODCHK (talk) 01:53, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You have another mailEdit

You should have an email from me (using my address). Just thought I'd prod you on-wiki in case it ended up in a spam folder or something. Thanks! :-) Dominic (talk) 20:55, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. Did you see my reply? We really need your confirmation and personal details (like by tomorrow, if possible) so we can book your travel. Thanks! Dominic (talk) 20:29, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
"Doug and I may give a presentation this weekend on Wikisource...." My old friend <smile> -- will you fellows videotape it? Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Maury :) I don't think it's being recorded, luckily for me... - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello again, young fellow who plays the guitar and lip synchs songs for his supper -- The following area was done by you but the few links are red hyperlinks and AdamBMorgan has this work listed on his Tumblr website advertising wikisource. Will you please fix these? They are few and I don't know how to make them hotlinks. Kindest regards my friend, —Maury (talk) 22:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey Maury, I leave them relative like that, but they'll still work in the mainspace. In the case that I one day upload another book called "Power of the Dog" and need to disambiguate, I won't need to go in and change the links to the subpages. Pointless in this case, but just a practice. - Theornamentalist (talk) 12:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Chris, you used dhr but I think it is supposed to be Dhr so I changed it. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 22:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Hey Maury, no problem, I think both redirect to {{DoubleHeightRow}}; either way, I don't mind :) Thank you for going through the work and validating - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

just an orange bar creatorEdit

orange bar ping - if you happen to be on IRC, I have a question--Doug.(talk contribs) 01:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Well, you went away again, so the other issue was the use of {{dhr}}, why? It seems to be creating extra space that we don't want. I think we should be use {{nop}}; if you agree, don't bother to fix it, I'll just bot in the substitution when I fix the dashes.--Doug.(talk contribs) 02:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I think I got all the {{dhr|3}}'s done; I haven't finished the dashes yet though, I'm just doing them by hand as my bot code is stale and I need to update it and test it.--Doug.(talk contribs) 02:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I believe it's done. I had nothing better to do and even without access to my normal scripts I just went through each page manually and replaced — w/ {{}}. I also fixed up all the headers and footers to make them use css as GO3 did on the index page instead of {{c}} (I've seen issues with that before, though in pagespace it doesn't matter much). I've also linked all the titles in the headers to the mainspace. We need a solution to that issue (i.e. it takes two clicks to get from the pagespace to the mainspace (either via the index or what links here). deWS has that issue dealt with much better. Anyway, I think every thing is hunky-dory. I'm going to add this work to recently completed texts on the mainpage.
  • I see that you haven't put anything on WS:S yet about it being on the signpost, do you think it should go at the bottom or as an announcement? I have something to add to it (or I'll just write it if you don't get to first). Hopefully, you have seen the discussion on the talk page for the signpost entry.--Doug.(talk contribs) 17:43, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks Doug, I've been busy for a little, I might comment at the Signpost. I'm surprised that someone in the WMF is so disinterested in this project.. - Theornamentalist (talk) 22:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

line splitEdit

Theornamentalist, I would like to validate this page but the line is split. I suppose that will be corrected at some point but I do not know. Does this page qualify for a validation or can you better it? Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 12:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey Maury, I think I did that because I wanted the text box to be the same size as the image box, and since it appeared in print like that I figured it was okay. Does it display as the same width for you? I checked on IE and Chrome (my IE settings have a much larger font size) and it looked good. - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
I found another one, both are illustrated, and knowing your professionalism and perfectionism I concluded they both have to correct. That entire book is now "Done" as is another I finished up today. Alas! It was such a struggle finding any mistakes you made but when I found one I was very happy to correct it.<smile> Kindest regards my friend, —Maury (talk) 13:29, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Maury :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 12:38, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

container funEdit

Your adherence to leaving the 220px default untouched already overrides & nulifies what you seem to believe is a straight image rather than a thumbnail of the striaght image. Take an input of....

[[File:The fall of Ulysses pg 6.jpg|frameless|center|link=|alt=]]

... and you'll see in the resulting html that you get a thumbnail based on the original (not an original with a forced height and width). note the word "thumb" in the file path.

<div class="center">
<div class="floatnone"><img alt="" 
width="220" height="311" 
// 1.5x, 
// 2x
" /></div>

We have to free ourselves of the 220px restriction because it seems to govern every aspect of the image rendering.

For me & my class definitions an input of...

<div class="center">
<div style="width:220px; height:311px;">
<p>[[File:The fall of Ulysses pg 6.jpg|link=|alt=|class=freedImg]]</p>

...results in the container dictating the rendering.

<div class="center">
<div style="width:220px; height:311px;">
<p><img alt="" 
width="1194" height="1686" 
class="freedImg" /></p>

The image file has its original height and width (no thumb in file path either) - so it can be resized across all the possible combinations of heights and widths if you follow. I wind up getting the same 220px centered image as you do your way with the above; but I can remove height and width altogether to get full dynamic resizing (at least in IE8 that is). -- George Orwell III (talk) 17:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

If there was some template to show images that didn't rely on the thumbnail approach, I would use it if it meant more control. - Theornamentalist (talk) 22:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Talk about WikiBrainwashed. On no other planet is the practice of an on the fly thumbnail ( .../thumb/8/8a/The_fall_of_Ulysses_pg_6.jpg/220px-The_fall_of_Ulysses_pg_6.jpg ) desired over a self adjusting original except here. I understand it was done to keep people from turning Wikipedia into Flikr but for our 'faithfully reproducing an original as close as published' purposes, its not very helpful so you have to get out of that mindset.
Besides, I have it working on IE8 thru IE10. all I need is feedback to see if the latest works or not in other browsers so I can go on testing (and before anyone asks - yes 'automatic image resizing' is turned off in IE here & it still works for me). -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
With it self adjusting, how would we define what contained it? I ask because I wouldn't want an image to necessarily span my entire monitor. Could we define a width by something related to the printed text, like an em width? Sorry if I am again getting off track.. - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
It should be following dynamic layouts in the mainspace (Temp Image Testing<-- does it work for you?) already and in the Page: namespace, whatever the thumbnail of the scanned page on the right doesn't use should be available to the File: on the left. For those not transcluding, you'd set a width like most people do now. What am I? Not speaking English or something? -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
No se. This looks great when contained in something like Layout 2 which if you recall I am a big supporter of something like this by default. But it would certainly be too big in Layout 1. Also, if I wanted an image that was roughly half of the space it was contained in, is that something that could be achieved? Like a publishers mark or something.
Yes, it works. - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

As you can see... I got as far as getting 100% of the container width to resize proportionally. Any other percentage will need more input to help me figure out how to "hand down" that size (inherit) so it renders as percentage of the container that matters. As you can see above, 50% works on the caption part but (in IE) it makes the image kind of tiny.

Please draw attention to the WS:S piece on this so other (browsers) can test it so we can move on to tweaking it, ending in a universal template or two. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I will from now on, and will test out your examples. Though I'm sure you have many examples, I offer up The Story of the Three Bears, because I think this benefits from layout 2 (which I will make default) Also, if you are successful with this, I was wondering if it seems possible to run a bot which would convert books I've worked on to use this auto-scaling feature, hopefully taking advantage of the upright parameters I've set up. Example being ...upright=.7 into ...70% or something... - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Well that wasn't too bad; 50% of full page (of the container[=100%]) seems to work now (above & linked test page)). Rather than screwing with the 100% setting (which winds up dividing by fourths for some reason), I just wrapped the 100% div container with a 50% div container -which gave me 50% of the "screen". All I had to do was center it from there.
... and I'm not sure you're applying upright correctly. I didn't fully check but it seems like you're taking advantage of manually input-ing the values incorrectly to force a desired outcome. All 'upright' does is round off the pixels to the nearest tenth (or vise-versa?) if I remember right. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Image cleanupEdit

If you can improve the images,  please do!  Thanks in advance. Curly Turkey (talk) 12:46, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

ref: Padding -- " Dash It All "Edit


Hey Maury,

When I look at the pages in the Poe work (like this one) the dashes don't appear to have much of any padding, which is why I was using {{--}}. It is tough to tell on some of them, but either one that it should be, I would like for them to be consistent throughout the work. If you're going to validate the pages and change them to {{}}, make sure to do it to all the pages (did I just volunteer you to validate the entire work?) Let me know though before changing them next time so we can talk and I can start to proofread using them or something.

Thank you for validating :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 11:15, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


I didn't change the padding myself (by hand) in any manner. When the pages using the "padding" gets "formatted" using shift-alt-x, like we always have done except recently, it is then that that those changes took place. Formatting as you know is the last thing we do on any given page and then we move to the next page never knowing the new style you use has changed. When I saw those changes I stopped formatting pages in that book. It is a matter of formatting changing the padding to what you saw. Otherwise I would have validated the entire book as I always do as in the case of Hesperian's Three volumes I have been working a lot on and those volumes, page by page as they are validated, show in the watchlist where we place comments of any changes we might make. You cannot use shift-alt-x to format on the pages you create. One would have to avoid all formatting as we have known it. Formatting a page was once a big deal but now one has problems with formatting a page in the manner you use with "padding". No page can be formatted as in the past. As stated, I stopped completely when I noticed a change after formatting pages. Still, I regret and apologize what has happened. The only thing I knew was to leave that book and format no more of the pages. I would never try to harm your work and I think you know this. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 03:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I know you never meant to harm, and really it's no big deal. I just want it to be consistent throughout; fortunately, there is still a lot to be done with the work (I think I have 3 completed sections out of the entire collection) I just wanted to reach out to make sure we were on the same page Sorry, that was bad. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Nah, there was and is no "bad" to any of it. It was simply a situation to be worked out. I fully understand being consistent. As stated, when I saved I formatted before saving, and never knew I changed anything by the use of shift-alt-x. I am curious as to the remedy of that--never format a page using shift-alt-x when there is padding? I also know it actually is a "big deal" because of knowing you over the years as professional in your workS including when working with Raul and Spanish and through e-mails. I learned long ago that you are a professional in your work and very meticulous and I like that. Oh!, I would like to ask a favor of you, a simple favor for you but not for me. Would you please validate one page of my book and "transclude" the blasted thing? It is only 32 pages and all pages have been validated except one for over a year now. I'm presently hyped and exceedingly happy that I just heard from my cousin presently on vacation in Florida but she is a professional model whose home is in New York. Actually her home is all over the world as a pro. model for the Ford Company. We have always been like brother and sister. Anyhow, I am aware I chat too much. It's a genetic thing within me, sorry. Take Care and visit NJ sometime. :) Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 22:46, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Professional? I try to be in the works at least... thank you though Maury. I will certainly validate that work; however the page scan is all messed up and should be marked as problematic. Luckily (and maybe you've found this yourself in order to proofread the page) there is a good scan available at google books in PDF format. They are the same edition, so I can upload over the existing DjVu file if you'd like. Let me know - Theornamentalist (talk) 01:05, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes and thank you for the willingness to upload that one bad page scan. I have long been aware of the bad image and have a perfect replacement on my hard drive for a year. I don't know how to replace an image or I would have done it long ago.

You are a professional "in your works". Perhaps you even are an "over-achiever" perfectionist in your works. I have no idea because I know so little about the rest of your life except that you play the guitar, know Spanish, and have, or had, a girlfriend and a terrible monitor that makes WS images "look huge". Your monitor must have the length, height, and depth of field greater than the best of fish aquariums--plus recently you have adopted "padding" in your works which is terrible when it comes to those who try to help by validations of your work and the use use shift-alt-x to make sure the page is formatted. I don't understand the reasons for this new use of paddings. Hesperian is very smart but he doesn't use the paddings so that his works are a lot easier to proofread, validate, and formate the page. This last statement means you are likely to have no validators due to that padding disappearing when the page is formatted unless they touch nothing, alter no spellings, and leave the page un-formatted. You're cool but way too smart for me in this "Brave New World" of padding and codes. I can only hope that it is "progress". I don't know the fancy things on WikiSource. I just transcribe, edit, validate, and format. —Maury (talk) 01:46, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

You pretty much got all the important stuff about my life, and the girlfriend is "have" still :) Regarding the padding, I thought everyone used the dashes without any just so we all worked the same way. It wasn't until recently that I started using others—work dependent. - Theornamentalist (talk) 01:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I suppose I do know enough personal information about you as well as the professional working side of you. But I never have seen that girlfriend yet though! <smile> Also, do not let her talk you into selling your musical equipment to buy her a diamond ring. I am experienced in these things!

Thank you for the validation and do you want me to upload a good page to replace that torn page? Too, your double dash above didn't show when I looked here -- a testament to the value of everyone using n-dash and m-dash without any double dashes inside of braces aka "padding." Regardless, have you tried to format one of your own pages to see what happens to the padding? Answer: "nop"e! Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 04:41, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Lol, no I haven't I'll check tonight to see what happens, though I wonder if it is something custom in your js... She wouldn't ask me to sell my stuff (she just bought me a diy ukulele for our anniversary) I think she knows she's stuck with it all.
I've already uploaded the new page and validated against it. It's all done :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Just noticing what Maury said and I'm surprised to find that {{--}} has padding, it isn't supposed to, only {{}} - However, I see that this is not the case. BTW, these can probably be substituted just fine and probably should be at some point. That can be a requested bot job.--Doug.(talk contribs) 22:46, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Doug, you have the eye of an Eagle in spotting these things. Chris, although you uploaded page 14, it does not show beside the text. I looked at [image] and saw the page you did upload and that image is correct. However, it doesn't replace the image beside the text on page 14. Please let me know when you format your page and find out that something is wrong when your pages get formatted using shift-alt-x although it may well be my javascript but then would that not be the same for the rest of the editors using that same script? Kindest regards to you both. —Maury (talk) 01:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
George uploaded one without the watermarks too, I think the text is pretty much as complete and proper as we can make it :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


A while ago you suggested some collaboration on themed featured texts. As part of that, I've created Wikisource:Anniversaries (I sometimes get around to things eventually). It won't cover everything but it's at least a way to find upcoming anniversaries to coordinate with featured texts (or PotM), or to park dates in case someone else might find some use for them. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Awesome, I would be glad to work on one of them, if you had any preference. They mostly look like works that might benefit from a PotM because of their lengths. Jean-Claude Dusse has recently uploaded the third edition of Pride and Prejudice. I want to finish a couple of Poe collections (which I see you've been working on too), and I think I should be done in a month or so.
I've mentioned Queen Mab on WS:POTM but I'm not sure if there is an available slot this year. I haven't looked at all the potential featured texts yet. I know we're not even half way through 2013 but planning for next year might be useful as we have birthdays for both Shakespeare and Marlowe (amongst others) as well as, of course, the centenary of the First World War. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:52, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm game, let me know if/when and I'll help :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 01:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)


Theornamentalist, would you please "rename" this file on WikiCommons to   which is its original title? Also, what happened when you experimented with shift-alt-x to format your pages? —Maury (talk) 03:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. You went far beyond what I expected. It is such a small book and while all text appears no images show. All of us here had that problem at one point on a book and George Orwell III stated that something had to be "purged" as I recall. Perhaps this is the same situation. I have a wounded right eye and even now am pushing my luck. It's from being in front of my computer too much looking at white pages. This happened once before and it was then I asked InductiveLoad to create a javascript for editing to prevent eye strain. I cannot use my right eye at this point but the left one is still good and I am in that color (grey) code now or I couldn't type this. I think I will try to type out all text offline with a grey background and come back to see if any images are showing. Bless ya young dude for all your help! —Maury (talk) 18:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

George took care of it. No problem Maury, uploading is the easy part :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 23:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


Found a missing page whilst doing some inital page list construction :(

Appreciate you confirming if this is an issues, and hopefully fixing it.. 19:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll check it out this weekend, there is another scan we could use. - Theornamentalist (talk) 22:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Three bearsEdit

Hi, Chris. Just to say that I have uploaded the seven "Problematic" images from Index:The story of the three bears 1839.pdf on Commons. If you can improve the images, please do. I have cropped the images, but I haven't been able to clean them up. Sincerely—Clockery Fairfield (talk·contribs) 14:55, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Clockery :) I'll fix them, which will probably only include improving contrast a bit. - Theornamentalist (talk) 22:27, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Don't understandEdit

... what set of guidelines you are operating under lately.

What's the deal lately with the upload of stuff that turns out to be missing pages, etc. prior to proofreading and not addressing it (the Bible volumes - which I had to fix blindly)?

Now you uploaded Frankenstein without a text layer and Google's fingerprints still all over it - what gives? Do you not know how to utilize in these cases or something? -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:49, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the Bible Volumes 2 and 3, I had only hoped that they too were like the 1st volume. I was asked to upload them, but never checked the nearly 3000 pages for completeness. I never meant for the task to fall into your hands. This was done quickly.
Oh. my bad. I didn't realize you were just lending a hand for somebody else. Its their responsibility to insure completeness as far as I'm concerned. Sorry about that. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
On Frankenstein, yes, I know how to utilize IA for text layers. I mean, you know I've done it before... Even with our OCR button, I could do a quick run over the pages for some output. So to explain, I've found that using Google's text layer saves me time. Look at their transclusion of the beginning of Chapter 1, it is clean, line breaks are removed, hyphenated words joined. There is a reason for this, not laziness. Now if there was a way to include that in their PDF, or bypass IA's OCR I am unaware how to. - Theornamentalist (talk) 23:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't know about that manuever and if the community sees copy and pasting the same as having a text layer (you make no note of this afaict either) - I'll leave all that to you at any rate.
But at the same time, I know the work is incomplete just be spot checking the source file... first, it seems to jump from scan page no 330-something to what appears to be p. 336 (the end) with not enough pages in between - but I could be wrong. I know for sure, however, scan p. 271 & 272 are missing and replaced by dupes of 270 & 273 instead. Again, the whole reason of doing the pagelist before any page creation is to nail things like that down and address them prior to creating any pages at all so we don't have to do tons of bulk moves later. I found those two (or at least the one) in a couple of minutes at most btw. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm ordering my crow right now. It seems the original printer screwed up because while those pages might have duplicate numbering - they do not have duplicate text content. How about I just shut up and move along; leaving to your business? Sorry, I just thought I had another source file to fix and its pretty clear I don't. - George Orwell III (talk) 00:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
It's no problem, thank you for double-checking. Regarding the Google watermark, I would remove those had I the software or programming, or whatever it is that you and others use. I don't have Adobe installed on my computer. - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:44, 19 June 2013 (UTC) I see you removed the watermarks, thank you.
Damnit George! I missed those two pages in "Letters," and I can't find a complete version online. - Theornamentalist (talk) 02:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

re: Page:Gems of Chinese literature (1922).djvu/96Edit

Thanks for fixing this page. I must have been so narrowly focussed on the "bigger than expected" image issue I never even noticed the unnecessary template closure. I now wonder how long I had been looking past that? MODCHK (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem :) Interested to see when/if the {{p}} is explained or expanded on in its doc page. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:16, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again. Regarding {{p}}, I consider it GOIII's baby and have already twitted the poor guy about it here. I get the impression it was another of his "good idea" projects which doesn't seem to be getting the love it deserves. To tell the truth, I am not entirely sure the way I am using it scores terribly highly on the Purity Test; however on the basis nobody has yelled at me recently… MODCHK (talk) 23:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I've seen you use {{Fi}} for scores, which I think is great. I felt the standard width was way too large. Yeah, he has a lot of those, but I think all they need is time to get worked into common usage... - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Please don't give me too much credit. It was a long story, but the original idea for using FreedImg to resize scores was, once more, GOIII's. I merely "bent" {{FI}} to cover the new case, and in the process (yep, you guessed it―I messed it up!) caused George to completely rework the thing again. So, catalyst maybe; but certainly not originator! MODCHK (talk) 04:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


C., I validated that delightful little book that you worked on. I especially love the illustrations. But the main reason I am writing is to ask you to please email me in private and send Raul's email address. Somehow it has disappeared from my address list. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 03:20, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear C, I am wondering if you are still alive and if so why are you not posting on However, if you have passed away there is no need to reply.   Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 17:28, 22 February 2014 (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)

Pride and Prejudice ogg filesEdit

Hi, one of our newer editors (Susanarb) has just proofread and transcluded Pride and Prejudice (replacing the naked text we did have). She tells me that some of the audio file links on the chapters don't do anything. As this is well outside my knowledge or comfort zone, I was wondering if you might be able to have a look. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Your expertise with sound mediaEdit

Hello, Theornamentalist. You have new messages at Lankiveil's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Any assistance that you can give from your experiences when working on the films would be most welcomed. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:29, 12 September 2013 (UTC)



Just to let you know that you've failed annual admin confirmation due to inactivity, and I have requested the removal of your admin bit. Thanks for your years of admin service here. I hope to see you around here again in future. If not, then I wish you good fortune and enjoyment in whatever you're doing these days.

Hesperian 09:30, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikisource:WikiProject FilmEdit

As you were the original pioneer of films on Wikisource, I wanted to let you know that I now have created a WikiProject for film, and film activity here is rising once again. If one day you return to editing this site, you are free to join the WikiProject. PseudoSkull (talk) 18:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)