Wikisource:Community collaboration/Monthly Challenge/Nominations

Monthly Challenge

2021

  • Each month, the Wikisource community selects a few texts to proofread and validate.
  • The texts are featured for a maximum of three months with a few exceptions.
  • The challenge builds Wikisource's core collection and helps introduce new users to Wikisource.
  • Wikisource seeks to make free, scan-backed ebooks accessible to everyone.

Suggest nominations below. When successful, the works can be added to a monthly data table (e.g. Module:Monthly Challenge/data/2021-06, or a future month) and they will be included in the relevant months' challenges.

2021 NominationsEdit

WorksEdit

For each nomination, please provide an author, title, publication date, link to the index and the reason why the work should be featured. If you cannot create an index, please leave a full citation. Remember, Wikisource only allows works in the Public Domain in the USA.

  1. Henry James, The Golden Bowl, 1904 (transcription project) A major work of US fiction commonly featured on best of lists.
  2. The Yale Shakespeare works, with PD works from 1916 up to 1925, particularly Hamlet (1917) (transcription project), Romeo and Juliet (1917) (transcription project), King Lear (1917) (transcription project), Tempest (1918) (transcription project), etc: all not proofread significantly. (Though should Yale Shakespeare works stay to the their own project?) EggOfReason (talk) 18:56, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
    • @EggOfReason: I think this is an important series, but has a very specialized formatting guidelines. It my be too difficult for new users. Languageseeker (talk) 00:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
  3. Various, the Eastern North Carolina Encyclopedia, 1924 (transcription project) A small-ish encyclopedia I found on the IA about Eastern NC. Reboot01 (talk) 18:32, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
    •   Support Sounds good to me. In general, we should be vary of overloading on US stuff (e.g. at least get Chesterton done first), but this is short and a little unusual. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 18:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
    •   Support probably overlooked elsewhere, I see many uses for little tertiary works once available here. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 12:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  4. Various, The North Carolina Historical Review, started in 1924, only Issue 1 is created thus far (transcription project) A still running publication that talks about different parts of NC history. Reboot01 (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
      Neutral It's short, but perhaps a little dry for non-NCers. Unless we have nothing else to fill in for US regional works, I'd be inclined to change the state (assuming we do E. NC Encyc., above. Though never any objections if there's appetite to actually proofread it. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 18:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  5. Index:Can a man be a Christian on a pound a week? - Hardie.djvu Short, Socialism. Probably worth having a rolling slot for "ideological" works (so economics, politics, social policy, etc.), though over time hopefully we could branch out from US/UK works. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 19:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
    • Support: This work looks fine. I do not think it necessary to formally nominate works of this brevity, as they would only require a minimal amount of effort to fully proofread and/or validate. (I believe that The Happy Hypocrite would fall into this category, as well, though not the Eastern North Carolina Encyclopedia, owing to the double-column formatting.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
      • The nomination process is kind of informal (there are no hard-and-fast acceptance/rejection criteria). I think it's nice to list all nominations here regardless of "triviality" because then we have a decent list to pull from into the staging area towards the end of each month, ensuring a good spread of works (e.g. if I nominated another Hardie work, we might choose one for next month and one for the month after). Also means people can see what's coming up and propose better ideas if they know of one. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 11:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  6. Index:The Elder Edda and the Younger Edda - tr. Thorpe - 1907.djvu Norse mythology, Medieval Very important Medieval Icelandic works. This edition contains both the Prose and Poetic Eddas and is actually fairly straightforward in terms of orthography and formatting. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 23:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
    • Support: This looks like a great work. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
    •   Support Our current version of the Poetic Edda is unsourced and incomplete so this would be a great add. MarkLSteadman (talk) 13:49, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  7. Index:Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622.pdf and Index:Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571).pdf. Hong Kong, Business law As the current company and stock market law of Hong Kong, a major financial hub in Asia, I believe that these business laws have their legal significance. I also observed that Wikisource editors pay less attention on law-related texts, so I hope this nomination can also raise WS's attention on law-related texts.廣九直通車 (talk) 08:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
    • Also, these texts are well OCR-scanned as electronic gazette version. I believe that the workload on proofreading (but not transcribing, though) will be less than other older scripts.廣九直通車 (talk) 08:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
    • 廣九直通車: The first work of these two needs its name corrected: the closing parenthesis is missing. While I am not necessarily opposed to proofreading law works, laws in general are quite formatting-heaving (and rather dull). The two laws shown here are 1428 and 587 pages, respectively. The latter of these is on the longer end of works (without formatting) that would be completed normally, and this being a law, I believe that the time which would be expended on formatting would be undue for a community-orientated project such as this—to say nothing of the longer work. I think that another work (perhaps some court opinions or other general legal text) of a more contracted length, and not requiring so much formatting, would be better.
  8. Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania (external scan), a major work in the foundation of the U.S. (and a precursor to Common Sense). TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
  9. The Works of Charles Dickens (Gadshill Edition). Collected works by the greatest novelist. Ratte (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
      Neutral; support in principle, but we do have quite a lot of Dickens already so a lot of the collection will be duplication. @Languageseeker: you seem to have a handle on the value of various Dickens editions: do you think we'd be better served with a "complete works of" collection like this or targetting a list of individual editions to fill the gaps at Author:Charles Dickens? Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 12:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    we do have quite a lot of Dickens already — you mean, not scan-backed like Our Mutual Friend or Barnaby Rudge? Ratte (talk) 12:08, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    The majority of Dickens are not scan backed. The Charles Dickens editions (from which this edition takes it plates) is the last edition revised by Dickens himself. However, the general consensus is that the quality of the printing declined throughout the editions because the printers introduced more errors than Dickens did corrections. I think it would make more sense to start with either the first editions or the serials. For me, the serials would provide a new and unique way of putting Dickens online. They're also exceedingly rare, so having them here would be quite a feather in our cap. Languageseeker (talk) 12:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    According to The Cambridge bibliography of English literature [1] [2] Gadshill Edition is the fullest standard and authorised edition of Dickens' works. It also contains all the original illustrations with many additional ones. Ratte (talk) 12:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    @Ratte: Obviously I don't include non-scan-backed works, but some Dickens is scan backed. I don't have a handle on how much, but it seems a shame to use MC effort to duplicate editions. Just a thought that a hand-picked list of editions might be a better list to work from that a collection, even if the collection is convenient. Also, I am vaguely aware that Dickens editions are not all created equal. If Gadshill is the edition to use, then great, but I still suggest picking the "fresh" volumes rather than just starting at 1 and grinding though all 34 volumes regardless of if that work is adding new material to WS. Certainly we can loop back and fill in gaps as a follow-up, but I'd rather see a new blue link on another author than spend the effort on re-proofreading a work we already have. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 13:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    @Ratte: I'm not sure that the entire Gadshill Edition would make sense. Dickens died before it was produced and it seems to a combination of the Charles Dickens edition that Dickens revised in 1867/1868 and another edition. For Dickens, there is no definitive edition before the Clarendon Dickens which are in copyright. The Clarendon and Norton editors agree that the first edition/serial version are the best and I would start with those. Maybe, we can do the serial of The Pickwick Papers. Languageseeker (talk) 20:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    According to The Cambridge bibliography of English literature [3] [4] Gadshill Edition is the fullest standard and authorised edition of Dickens' works. It also contains all the original illustrations with many additional ones. Ratte (talk) 10:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    that is persuasive to me, with grudging respect to Lang for compiling illustrations [which reduces the desirability of creating another edition for those, again, for me] CYGNIS INSIGNIS 18:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    @Ratte: I think I would like to see individual volumes rather than the entire series. I understand what the Cambridge source says. Yes, Gadshill is the most complete edition published by the publishing house that held the copyrights to his works, but I don't think that it was the result of careful curation of the existing material. Rather, Chapman probably used the sterotype plates for some of the works and reset others to make some money off a deceased author. At best, Gadshill is a combination of editions. I'd rather proofread an edition that Dickens directly contributed to. From the Gadshill, maybe we can do volumes 35 and 36 that Cambridge identifies as being unique to this edition? Languageseeker (talk) 00:43, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
    "I don't think", "rather", "probably"... All I can see that you refuse to include a good source to MC because of contrived excuse. I had a better opinion about this project. PS. Scans of vols 35 and 36 are not available at the moment. Ratte (talk) 10:59, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
    @Ratte:   Oppose I'm sorry that you feel that way. I care deeply about this project and I am trying to support most proposals and be polite which is why I used such language. To be clear, the Gadshill Edition is the most complete edition, but it is not the best edition. It's best described as an attempt by the publishers to make a pile of money off one of their most important assents. The Clarendon Dickens, the standard of the field does not use them. Instead, they base their editions on mainly first editions. For David Copperfield, they used the 1850 printing; for Dombey and Son, it is the 1848 text; for Great Expectations, it is the 1861 text; for Dombey and Son, it is the 1857 text; etc. Nobody uses the Gadshill editions anymore and they sell for next to nothing. I would love to have more Dickens, but I'm against this particular edition. In general, I'm opposed to the idea of adding a long-term series that would run for several years for something that is at best a mere reprint. Languageseeker (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
    Note: there is no requirement that we have to use a single collection as source material for an ongoing MC "series" - we can pick from multiple different editions as we please (and go in any order). It's my understanding (from Languageseeker) that Dickens is somewhat unique among authors in that there are many posthumous editions and there is some feeling that the works he personally "authorized" while living are in some sense superior to some later editions. For me, personally, I don't really care which edition of each work we use — I'm more concerned with avoiding blindly chunking away at thousands of pages of books that we already have equivalently-useful scan-backed editions of (e.g. Index:Nicholas Nickleby.djvu, 3 vols of Index:Oliver Twist (1838) vol. 2.djvu, Index:Christmascarol1843.djvu, etc. I'd only really support use of MC slots for different editions of the same works if the editions are substantially interesting in their own right.
    I do not attach much special attention to completing collections like Gadshill just because we can if the effort required to do so is mostly reduplicative for the average reader. Anyone extremely interested in the typographical minutiæ should probably be looking at scans anyway. If there were no other works left in the world, then sure, but the work to do is functionally infinite, so we should act accordingly. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 18:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
  10. Virginia Woolf, The Common Reader (transcription project). If we finish the To the Lighthouse, it might make sense to add another Virginia Woolf work. Celebrating the Public Domain, Women Writers. Languageseeker (talk) 12:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
      Support as a follow-on to Mrs. Dalloway. (FYI Lighthouse isn't PD until 2023, according to the author page). Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 13:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  11. Shen of the Sea: Chinese Stories for Children (transcription project). A collection of Chinese stories for children with woodblock carvings. Celebrating the Public Domain, Children's Books Languageseeker (talk) 12:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
      Support We have nothing about China so far. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 13:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    Also support, but are the silhouettes throughout the work going to be derivable from the pdf or data at hathitrust? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 18:43, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    Sure, why would they not be? The HT scans are full view even outside the US. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 19:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    The pdf is from the maximum resolution images at HT and they are also uploaded as separate files. Languageseeker (talk) 04:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
  12. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (ed., with E. V. Gordon, 1925) (transcription project) Might be hard because of the Middle English characters, but it is the first major Tolkien work in the PD. Languageseeker (talk) 20:17, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    It might be too late, there is a contributor here who thinks it a better tale by Tolkien :) CYGNIS INSIGNIS 18:43, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    I don't understand what this means? Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 19:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    I continue my opposition to this nomination, on the grounds of formatting (of a similar difficulty to the York Shakespeare editions) and the great use of Middle English text and letters. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    @TE(æ)A,ea.: I see your point. Do you think the new Old English toolbar that Inductiveload would help? Languageseeker (talk) 01:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
    • I am not aware of it, but I don’t think so. If there were only a few foreign characters in the entire work—or a line or two of Greek interspersed—that would not be too prohibitive. However, there are many of the Old/Middle English characters on these pages, and I believe that such a quantity (and on so many and such a large proportion of pages) makes this work ill suited for efforts by multiple people. I would not necessarily be opposed to the inclusion of this work for this project (as opposed to the other proofreading project), but I believe that the proofreading would only work if one person, with a knowledge of and patience for using the characters, proofread the entirety of the poem proper, with a collaborative effort for proofreading the preceding introduction and the succeeding notes. I think that a similar problem exists as to the creation of images, especially in a work where there are many images, such as July’s When We Were Very Young. (While a collaborative effort could proofread the text, it would be better if one person created all of the images.) I believe the two situations to be thus analogous. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:56, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
    @TE(æ)A,ea.: Points very well articulated and I agree. This is probably left to a more experienced user. Languageseeker (talk) 11:14, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
  13. Index:Manufacture Of Soda by Hou Te-Pang.pdf (1923). Chemistry, China. A book by Chinese chemist Hou Te-Pang/Hou Debang who described his Hou's process, an improvement on the existsing Solvay process on sodium carbonate production. I concur with Inductiveload's view that we have little text about China here, and the book's large amount of images, tables and technical challenges (like the chemistry equations inside the book) also makes collaboration helpful.廣九直通車 (talk) 13:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
    The images in this scan are awful. Is there any other source available? If not, I must oppose, because those images are effectively useless in their current condition. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

SprintsEdit

May 2021Edit

  • Sprint 2:

Staging for future monthsEdit

This is the staging area for the next challenge. Works are added to this list based on nominations, current long-term series or filling in missing topics. This list is not "official", it's just designed to make it easier to set up the data table for the next challenge more easily. Nominate works above.

July 2021Edit

  • Index:Eastern North Carolina Encyclopedia.djvu Regional
  • Series to be continued:
    • Carlyle
    • First Folio
    • Orley Farm
    • HG Wells
    • Ruskin
  • Series to be continued, but may be stalling:
    • Philippines
    • Verne
    • Clarissa
  • New series:
    • None (no slots freed)

Long-Term SeriesEdit

This space is reserved for nominations of a long-term series consisting of multiple volumes of an author's work usually referred to with titles such as "The Complete Works of X" or an encyclopedic work. Such nominations require serious consideration because they will require many years of work. Therefore, the edition proposed should be a definitive edition that does constitute mere reprints and would make a substantial contribution to Wikisource.

Long-Term NominationsEdit

Current Long-Term SeriesEdit

  1. The Works of H.G. Wells (Atlantic Edition)
  2. The Works of Thomas Carlyle (Centenary Edition)
  3. The Works of John Ruskin (ed. Cook and Wedderburn)
  4. The Philippine Islands, 1493-1803 (ed. Blair and Robertson)
  5. Works of Jules Verne (ed. Charles F. Horne)

Past NominationsEdit

June 2021Edit

  1. Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776 (transcription project) Landmark pamphlet during the American Revolution, not yet transcluded from an index, partially proofread EggOfReason (talk) 18:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  2. Author:Max Beerbohm The Happy Hypocrite (transcription project) Short A thematic inversion of The Picture of Dorian Grey. Inductiveloadtalk/contribs 06:17, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  3. Thomas Carlyle, The French Revolution: A History, Volume II, 1896 (transcription project). Volume I is almost done. Ratte (talk) 18:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
    • The idea is that when the previous volume finishes the next volume will auto-advance. So if Volume 2 is done, Volume 3 will be added. Languageseeker (talk) 01:36, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
  4. John Ruskin, Modern Painters, Volume I, 1903 (transcription project). One of the most influential works in art theory. Ratte (talk) 18:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
    • I've very conflicted about this one. I absolutely think that we need to do this series, but we already have Caryle, The Philippine Islands, Wells, and Verne. I'm worried that it might be too much. However, I'm happy to say yes, if this gets a second. Languageseeker (talk) 01:36, 27 May 2021 (UTC)