Please do not post any new comments on this page.
This is a discussion archive first created in July 2013, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.

Announcements

Proposals

BOT approval requests

Help

Other discussions

Help test the new account creation and login

Hi all,

After many weeks of testing, We (the editor engagement experiments team) are is getting close to enabling redesigns of the account creation and login pages. (There's more background about how we got here and why ‎our blog post.)

Right now are trying to identify any final bugs before we enable new defaults. This is where we really need your help: for now, we don't want to disrupt these critical functions if there are outstanding bugs or mistranslated interface messages. So for about a week, the new designs are opt-in only for testing purposes, and it would be wonderful if you could give them a try. Here's how:

Go to account creation and add &useNew=1 to the URL, or just use this link
Go to login and add &useNew=1 to the URL, or just use this link

If you have questions about how to test this or why something might be the way it is, I'd definitely check out our step-by-step testing guide and the general documentation.

Many thanks, Steven (WMF) (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Quick heads up that we enabled this today. There is one red link to fix, but I assume someone will notice it who knows whether Wikisource either has an appropriate link to redirect to, or wants to comment it out. Steven (WMF) (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

The red link is in Special:UserLogin and goes to Help:Logging in, not sure if we have an appropriate page or not. Does anyone know if we have a good redirect or if we need to create this one? Jeepday (talk) 00:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

If you don't want to create it (even a simple page helps, I think, and you can crib from another wiki if you like), you can always "blank" the message by creating it with a hidden comment as the only content. Steven (WMF) (talk) 01:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I have amended the underlying link to point to meta's equivalent page, which may not be perfect as it takes them off our wiki, though is better than a red link. We probably want to look to some minimal text, and then point them to meta as a better solution, though I hate the idea of having to maintain the text. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I did think about that, however, I did create a simple page that points to meta for the general information, and then through in our 4 general quick links. People can hack away. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:23, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

GLAM query

Hi, I'm Wikimedia UK's GLAM organiser, (that's Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums in the real world) and I've had a query from one of our potential GLAM partners. Would we be willing to accept a publication of a museum's digital catalogue? That would include what it has and hopefully the metadata or at least the part that was digitised? Obviously it would have to comply with our licensing requirements, and I think it would fall within "source documents of historical importance; in this case Wikipeda-style notability requirements apply". I'm pretty sure that if such documents were published here then they would be cited as sources on other wikis. But I'm also confident that only a subset of any such catalogue would be physically printed, hence my query. Jonathan Cardy (WMUK) (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I am not certain that I understand what is being suggested, or what is being envisioned. Our scope is at Wikisource:What Wikisource includes, so if it fits within that, I don't see an issue with it being housed, and if it doesn't fit there, then we need to talk about how it is or isn't there. How useful, functional, navigable, relevant, and interlinkable it becomes there is no way to know without more details and understanding. If it is needing volunteers, or needing work, will depend on how sexy it may be, and whether it will entice contributors, and/or operators from other wikis. OR whether it is just going to be bot applied, and becomes set and forget, and a resource for people to use. <shrug> For me, I need more information before venturing into comment. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. My view is that it would fit into "source documents of historical importance", but I'm a near novice on WikiSource, even my volunteer account has barely enough edits to be autoconfirmed. I'm hoping that having such documents online would be useful to Wikipedia as some information could be sourced to these. also I think there would be interesting opportunities in linking them. Jonathan Cardy (WMUK) (talk) 17:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you have an example? It might help. I think something slightly similar was proposed (by The Land as it happens) a few years ago. That was a catalogue of ships compiled by the National Maritime Museum, rather than the museum's collection, but there were objections because it had not been formally published. Personally, I think that catalogue and this one would be OK, especially as I would count museums themselves as publishers, but community consensus has been undecided so far. One thing in your favour is that museum catalogues have been published in the past and could, in theory, be transcribed onto Wikisource as well (eg. Louvre 1883, Met Museum of Art 1905, etc); your documents would not be out of place in the grand scheme of potential content. NB: They would probably need to have fixed dates, both because Wikisource does not host "living" documents and to improve their historical value for the future. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I will look into getting an example. May I'm assume that one of the publication issues is the extent to which the museum has checked their metadata? I had hoped that people would consider these "source documents of historical importance" and therefore welcome these into WikiSource, if this isn't the applicable project for such source material can you suggest one what is? Jonathan Cardy (WMUK) (talk) 13:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

The accuracy of the original source material is not a problem for Wikisource (the accuracy of the transcription or equivalent is, of course). For example, if this page of the Louvre catalogue claimed the Mona Lisa was painted by Michelangelo, that would be the publisher's problem. Wikisource will not correct it and if it were transcribed here it would show Michelangelo as the painter of the Mona Lisa; even though it is obviously an error, we would be faithful to the original and host the error.

The inclusion rules are mostly to stop vanity publishing. However, if it is just metadata, you might have a problem with another of the exclusion rules, on reference material, and as far as I know there is currently no Wikimedia project that would host it (this has been a problem with deletions in the past). I think the debate on reference material was mostly about excluding things like stand-alone tables of prime numbers. Without seeing the example, it is hard to tell but I think a catalgue should be alright in that respect. Talking of metadata, it might help to think that the catalogues themselves should have their own metadata: title, author, publisher, location, date of publication, etc. They should be distinct, fixed publications; so if you get a new one in a year's time, that would be a completely different catalogue with its own metadata and page on Wikisource.

Regarding "source documents of historical importance", I agree. For example, the history of artefacts can be tracked between collections using old catalogues. An amateur historian recently claimed a viking map was a fake based on similar material and the descriptions they contained. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Translation

Is it a common thing between Wikisource users to translate source materials of other languages into English? Are there any guidelines for that? Could you please show me an example? --Yoosef Pooranvary (talk) 11:42, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Translations are permitted and encouraged in Wikisource. We are just finishing up discussions on the topic at Wikisource:Requests for comment/Annotations and derivative works. Here is the basic expectations. I don’t think we have the separate name space set up yet, but translations can be created in the main space and moved later. The works Here have been translated by Wikisource, many of them may not meet our current expecations for new work, if you have any questions just ask. Jeepday (talk) 21:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource user translations are appropriate for Wikisource. They will be hosted in their own names space (per Special_namespace). There should only be a single translation to English per original language work. A scan supported original language work must be present on the appropriate language wiki, where the original language version is complete at least as far as the English translation. There was much conversation about language competence, but a clear definition and measure was not achieved. Lacking a clear guideline for language competence, the general expectation for accuracy of translation here, is the same as it is at any sister wiki work.

And of course Wikisource:Translations — billinghurst sDrewth 05:03, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Extract illustrations by OCR software

Has anybody been able to use the page layout analysis in ABBYY Finereader to extract illustrations (or their coordinates) from page images? The program does detect (not always correct, but still) where text columns and illustrations are. From this, I only save the text, for future proofreading. But often you also want to extract the illustrations, like I did in Eskimo Life/Chapter 3 and Page:Eskimo Life.djvu/66. Could the OCR software assist in this? Have you heard of anyone trying that? --LA2 (talk) 01:55, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

LA2, I know this is off course with your question. However it may be helpful to someone. Using Adobe Acrobat one can take a PDF file and save every page to an image of a chosen format. I extract all pages as .jpg and do whatever cleaning of text pages I want and/or gather all images to work with. George Orwell III (a WS wizard) can also do this-and anything else. —Maury (talk) 13:57, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Edittools

Can someone please explain why my edittools customisations have stopped working, or where the current manual page is for this beast of a thing. Moondyne (talk) 13:41, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you have them set in your gadget? — billinghurst sDrewth 13:55, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

"Edittools: Enhance the existing edittools with additional groups of insertable characters as sections of a dropdown menu." is ticked. Browser cache purged. Moondyne (talk) 14:03, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Universal Language Selector to replace Narayam and WebFonts extensions

On June 11, 2013, the Universal Language Selector (ULS) will replace the features of Mediawiki extensions Narayam and WebFonts. The ULS provides a flexible way of configuring and delivering language settings like interface language, fonts, and input methods (keyboard mappings).

Please read the announcement on Meta-Wiki for more information. Runab 14:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC) (posted via Global message delivery)

Maintenance of the Month (June 2013)

The current Maintenance of the Month task is:

Work index revision

Revising the purpose and structure of Wikisource:Works

Previous maintenance: Categorization

The current MotM task is about Wikisource:Works. It should be our work index, but it is actually an illustrated subject index today. You are encouraged to share your ideas for improvement on the relative thread.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 15:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Index:CIA World Factbook(1982).djvu

Any Volunteers to help get this OCR clean? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

No offence but why bother? Its out of date and will always be way inferior to the official website[1]. Per WS:SCOPE: "… works whose content is expected to constantly change over time, for the purpose of keeping the work updated, to improve the content matter of what has already been published, or to make the text more comprehensive, are excluded from Wikisource's scope." Moondyne (talk) 04:02, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I count 1982 as Historical archive... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 04:31, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Was 1982 a significant edition? Moondyne (talk) 09:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Everything becomes significant if it survives long enough. I can see where there could be interest in these as historical reference. The web page is always in flux, while the print editions are time capsules. I don’t have enough time/interest to actual work on the book, but I can see it’s appeal. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

This happened to be the earliest available edition I could find on archive.orgShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:00, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

This is a parallel to the similar British publication, Category:The Statesman's Yearbook. Even if we can't handle every year's issue, a good sample should be interesting. --LA2 (talk) 13:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Wiknic

I know that not everyone stops at Wikipedia on a regular bases, so for those that don’t check out w:Wikipedia:Wiknic

The Great American Wiknic is an annual wiki-picnic held in cities across the United States on or around a common day every summer. This year's Wiknic will be on Saturday, June 22 and nearby dates, with a local raindate generally the following day.

Having attended several, I can tell you that you need not be a devote Wikipedian, anyone who lives anyplace in the Wiki family will be welcomed. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:35, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Tech news: 2013-24

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes.

Recent software changes: (Not all changes will affect you.)

The latest version of MediaWiki (1.22/wmf6) was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on June 6, and to non-Wikipedia wikis on June 10. It will be enabled on all Wikipedias on June 13. [2]
An alpha version of the VisualEditor was enabled on all Wikipedias on June 6. Please test it and report problems. [3]
Several VisualEditor bugs have been fixed; users can now add, edit and remove categories using the editor's "Page settings" menu.
Wikimedia error messages will no longer link to the #wikipedia [[<tvar|meta-irc-chans>:m:IRC/Channels</>|IRC channel]] on Freenode. [4]
The logo of 16 Wikipedias was changed to version 2.0 in a fourth group of updates. [5]
A test instance of Wikidata is now available at test.wikidata.org. [6]
Users can now patrol the first version of a newly created page if they visit it from Special:NewPages or Special:RecentChanges. [7]
Translation pages will no longer include edit section links (bug #40713). [8]

Future software changes

A report on mobile upload errors was published, and software changes to reduce their number will come soon. [9]
A request for comments on updating MediaWiki to use RDFa version 1.1 was started on MediaWiki.org (Gerrit change #67608).

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Unsubscribe.

20:05, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Casper's Keyboard

Since yesterday I have encountered Casper the friendly ghost's Keyboard, including now to my right and colored white whereas I have a soft grey background (for serious eye protection). Casper's Keyboard is around every place I go and in every page I edit. I myself do not need nor want it the bloody thing. It is highly similar (to me) to "pop-ups" that people try to avoid and will purchase programs to negate the annoying pop-ups. In the honourable name of Henry VIII please do away with it. —Maury (talk) 02:23, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I expect you have just encountered this. If it is really bothering you, may I suggest you:

Select the "toothed gear" symbol beside "Languages" in the left pane;
then select "Input" in the panel which should pop up;
click on "Disable input tools" and
Finally "Apply settings".

That should put paid to your "Casper" problem (at least until the next time the software changes...) MODCHK (talk)

Hello, MODCHK, and a hearty thank you. It worked! You use a moniker here but is your real name, and vocation, Bill Nye —— the Science Guy? After all, that program won nineteen Emmy Awards. Seems like the same fellow to me! Thanks again, Casper's Keyboard was popping up everywhere—more than Popeye's Popcorn. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 03:45, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

No; but curiously I was a fellow student of one of the subsequent co-hosts of Sleek Geeks. Not exactly sure how happy I am about that. MODCHK (talk) 04:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Rather late, I have just stumbled over the "official" answer to Maury's question. Here is the reference: FAQ #16, if anybody wants to make use of it. (Hint hint: see also FAQ #21 on the same page.) MODCHK (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

<re: FAQ#21 Where can I report a problem? Please report problems and suggestions in Bugzilla. Please ensure to report as much detail as you can.>

(1.)I don't know anything about MediaWiki. I come to Wikisource to edit books and do not spend time roaming about looking at everything elsewhere. I knew of no FAQ there since I work here.

I am familiar with Wikipedia and Commons but I started in Wikipedia in 2006 and Commons became a necessity for uploading images -- after they were no longer to be uploaded to Wikipedia.

(2.) I would have had to wait a long time asking for help by following FAQ#21 and *perhaps* eventually getting an answer from Bugzilla. (3.) There is no social interactions with sending a message to people unknown to me. Look to the social areas on Internet (Facebook) &c; &c. to learn how important social interaction seriously is. However, we here have very limited social interactions due to the many problems we encounter and work out together. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 11:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I quite agree. The point I thought about making earlier but held back on was that I feel introducing new "features" which apparently have no controls under the centralised "Preferences" (and I looked here and on wikipedia without success!) menu spanks of poor(ly thought out―read this both ways) interface design. The tool may be pretty, but if it quacks like a (Prefences/)Gadget(s), why ever cannot it be switched on/off like a gadget?

There I've said it. Now somebody embarrass me by proving me wrong. MODCHK (talk) 12:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I agree too. Further, there's a rather serious Commons/Wiktionary linking problem that I posted on Bugzilla two years ago, that has not been resolved. The bug was caused by someone implementing another of those bright ideas that wasn't fully thought out. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

"Two Years"? EncycloPetey <--which of your parents named you that? write once again to Bugs-villa and complain that you are still waiting just to see what, if any, answer is given--perhaps something like, "We're still working on it". My take with places like Bugs-villa is that I would have a much better chance of getting President Obama's digital signature immediately from him.—Maury (talk) 19:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm in full agreement as well. The theft of valuable screen real-estate in the left bar for something I neither need nor want (and cannot turn off) is frustrating. One wonders if the designers of these things all have 30" monitors and assume that everyone else does as well. Alternatively, they enjoy constantly scrolling up and down a screen while editing. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Blackletter is broken

{{Blackletter}} is broken. I reckon it has something to do with the announcement above: #Universal Language Selector to replace Narayam and WebFonts extensions. Any volunteers to sort it out? Hesperian 14:30, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Same for me. I installed UnifrakturMaguntia font and worked. See {{Blackletter}} doc page, there is the link where to get the font.--Mpaa (talk) 16:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Likewise, the template was recently broken for me (Mac), but now works after downloading per Mpaa. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Reported as bugzilla:49499. I checked this yesterday but forgot I had downloaded the font to test it a while ago (I didn't see a problem). It shouldn't be difficult to just add it to ULS too, so it should be back up and running soon. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:24, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this. I similarly checked yesterday, but already had UnifrakturMaguntia installed locally so saw no problems.

If/when ULS incorporates the font, would somebody please also make a note to then check if turning off ULS per my hints above to Maury Casper's Keyboard above ends up re-breaking it... It would be a shame if the two functions (keyboard and fonts) turn out to be toggled inseparably... MODCHK (talk) 22:14, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Not fixed yet but apparently it "will be in 1.22wmf7." - AdamBMorgan (talk) 09:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

In case anybody missed it, 1.22wmf7 is now installed. Is anybody still having problems (with {{Blackletter}}) who doesn't have UnifrakturMaguntia installed locally? Unfortunately, my set-up here is too non-standard to be a representative test. MODCHK (talk) 22:22, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Works for me; thanks folks. Hesperian 00:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-25

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Translations are available.

Recent software changes: (Not all changes will affect you.)

The latest version of MediaWiki (1.22wmf7) was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on June 13. It will be enabled on non–Wikipedia sites on June 17, and on all Wikipedias on June 20. [10]
The Narayam and WebFonts extensions were successfully replaced by Universal Language Selector on June 11. [11]
VisualEditor news:
- VisualEditor was temporarily disabled on Wikipedia sites on June 14 due to an issue that inserted a lot of HTML code. The issue is now fixed and VisualEditor works as before.
- Users can now use VisualEditor to add images and other media items from their local wikis and Wikimedia Commons. [12].
- VisualEditor also allows editing references. [13]
The new Disambiguator extension, which was previously part of MediaWiki itself, was enabled on test wikis. It adds the magic word __DISAMBIG__ to mark disambiguation pages. [14]
The newly enabled Campaigns extension allows Wikimedia Foundation data analysts to track account creations that result from a specific outreach campaign.

Future software changes

Universal Language Selector will be added to the Catalan (ca), Cebuano (ceb), Persian (fa), Finnish (fi), Norwegian Bokmål (no), Portuguese (pt), Ukrainian (uk), Vietnamese (vi), Waray-Waray (war) and Chinese (zh) Wikipedias on June 18. [15]
Starting on June 18, VisualEditor will be randomly enabled by default for half of newly created accounts on the English Wikipedia to test stability, performance and features. [16]
Two new webfonts (UnifrakturMaguntia and Linux Libertine) will be added to wikis that use Universal Language Selector. [17] [18]
It will now be possible to hide the sidebar while using the Translate extension to reduce distractions (bug #45836). [19]
A patrolling link will now be visible for un-patrolled pages, even if users don't visit it from Special:NewPages or Special:RecentChanges (bug #49123). [20]
A request for comments on enabling a new search engine for MediaWiki was started.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Unsubscribe.

EdwardsBot (talk) 22:27, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:Documentation

Does anybody know why top links are shown now on the left side? --DixonD (talk) 05:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Because they are defined (by Template:Documentation/start box) as belonging to class "editsection", the same class that Mediawiki uses to handle section edit links. That class was recently restyled, and you're seeing a side-effect of that. I'm inclined to think that it is not correct for us to be applying chrome css classes to content. Hesperian 06:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

World War One

2014 is the centenary of the start of World War One. I know there will be lots of events to commemorate the anniversary in the UK and I suspect the same will be true elsewhere. I think some of the Wikipedias, and definitely the Wikimedia UK chapter, are trying to do something for the event too. So, do we as a community want to do anything for WW1?

I don't think whatever we try should be that ambitious as that would probably mean it doesn't actually get done. The easiest commemoration would probably be timing some appropriate featured texts and proofreads of the month. A slightly more ambitious plan, but one that I think might work, is to use the Community Collaboration section on the main page as a duplicate of PotM, running concurrently with a WW1 theme (and organised via a new WikiProject). It is simple enough to set up and we have the existing precedent of PotM to use as a template. There is a danger this could dilute user attention, so that neither regular-PotM nor WW1-PotM get completed, but I think it would be OK. More ambitious collaborations are possible if this seems too conservative. WW1-themed featured texts could either way.

Of course, we don't have to do anything for WW1. I don't think we have ever done anything similar for any other historical event. However, WW1 is useful as it is still important, this is the first centenary, it is in a period when a lot of works are in the public domain, and it marked a period of increased literacy, so there was a lot written about it at the time. So, what do people think? Should be do something and, if so, what? (There's no rush just yet, we have a year, but it would be useful to at least get some rough ideas sketched out.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

A few thoughts:

Remembering that the war extended from July 1914 through to November 1918, we've got over four years to cover this event.
The PotM works could easily include works that are related to WW1 without being explicitly there. For example, one of the Geography months could cover the Balkans and another could do Belgium.
We could also use the excellent collection of WW1 poetry that LJB has done (I'm gradually working through the validation) with, say, Poem of the Week on the Main Page.
Now that the score extension has been implemented (and hopefully shortly will work fully) we could also add some of the songs of the war (Run, Rabbit, Run; It's a long way to Tipperary; Pack up your troubles; &c.). I have scannable scores of several collections of these, if they're not already available.
We should certainly try to host copies of all the declarations of war and of the various armistice documents.
w:WP:MILHIST may well have members who would be willing to assist, both with suggested works and with proofreading. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thoughts about thoughts:

I had wondered about the period (and we might want to start a little ahead of July 2014; possibly extending into 2019 too). It could be too long for a dedicated project on a monthly scale (if mimicking PotM). If it does go ahead as a WikiProject, however, it could change scale over time, if necessary, and it doesn't need to be on the main page (at least not constantly). I don't think we will run out of material; volunteers are the scare resource.
My concern with PotM is that WWI material could interfere with other projects. I doubt we want to be all WWI, all the time; users may get a little fed up with the topic. At the same time, there is a lot of potential material of various kinds. There's a lot we could do and I don't want to overwhelm other functions. Volunteer enthusiasm will be a big problem (and currently, a big unknown) either way.
I've already thought about the Treasury of War Poetry as a potential Featured Text, maybe highlighting a different poem per day (technically possible but could be over-complicated).
Hopefully the bugs are worked out of Score by 2014. Over There was already on Wikisource and I tried to update it but hit a Rose-Tinted Box of Death.
I've thought of a few potential works and categories thereof but I think we should work out what we are going to do before selecting subjects. I thought of MILIST but, again, it's probably best to work out what we are doing first; many pedians don't understand other projects very well, so we should make it as simple as possible for them. Speaking of en.wp, I've been working on w:World War I in literature, partly with this in mind. I need some more sources but it should be ready, and useful, by the time we need to start on this.

The alternate PotM concept is just an idea based on something I know that works, which is also quite simple and straightforward. We don't have to do that but I think a WikiProject of some kind may be useful. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:38, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Very modern authors

What is our policy on author pages for authors whose works have no chance at all of being in the public domain, such as those who have written in the very late 20th century only? I ask because of Special:Contributions/2.33.233.47, who is creating author pages that, although they are well-formatted and contain no links, list works not likely to be hosted here in my lifetime. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:43, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I would say delete them. Their works can be listed at Wikipedia, and can be recreated if they are released under CC. - Theornamentalist (talk) 02:54, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

We don’t have a WS:CSD that covers this, but previous deletion discussions have generally lead to deletion in these cases. First talk to the user and explain they are out of scope, and possibly delete Speedy G7, else post at Wikisource:Proposed deletions as a group. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:46, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

The previous created batch of Canadian authors of mid to late 20thC had a deletion discussion (result deletion), and as I still stumble over them I am deleting them. Unless they have free works, there is no value in listing them UNLESS it is basically a prevention measure to have something of a small list and {tl|copyright author}}. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

In the current case, they appear to be mostly Persian authors, and there isn't even evidence their works have been translated into English. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:08, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd have to agree - there isn't much value in adding Author: pages for authors who have created works that aren't likely to be excluded/waived from their likely copyright protections. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

An exception to the above - If the Author has work hosted on another language wikisource where the work is in the public domain, it would be appropriate to host the author page here with the language link. Even if it would be multiple decades before we could host works on English Wikisource. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 14:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
I technically agree but I can't see how that would happen. English Wikisource already operates at the bare minimum legal requirement and other Wikisources have to obey the same laws. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:59, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
I was actually thinking more of Wikilivres, I also assumed that native language works would tend to be PD long before translations to English. Jeepday (talk) 23:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
OK, that's fair enough, and I still agree. (Also, technically any non-English work on another Wikisource is within scope for Wikisource-tranlsation, so their authors would be in scope as well.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 23:49, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Custom Regex Unicode char search.

Using the Custom regex search and replace tool, I would like to remove the Unicode ￝ characters prior to proofreading. My Firefox is set to UTF-8 encoding, and this may be the cause of the difference from the diamond displayed when using the ANSI encoding.

When I copy and paste ￝ as an image, the search and replace tool works fine, but not when I specify the character as uFFDD. Before posting this question, I studied the external Help reference, but found no clear answer. Thanks in advance for any enlightenment.— Ineuw talk 01:10, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Done Problem solved. Created a toolbar button which inserts /�/g in the Custom regex search box. — Ineuw talk 07:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

X!'s Edit Counter

(Sorry for writing in English. You can translate the proposal.)

Should X!'s edit counter retain the opt-in requirement? Your input is strongly encouraged. Voice your input here.—cyberpower ^Chat_Automation 04:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Distributed via Global message delivery. (Wrong page? Fix here.)

Tech news: 2013-26