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

HotCat not functioning?

I have HotCat selected in the gadgets but it's not working on WS but works on the commons. Have I missed something? — Ineuw talk 18:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I may not have asked the question properly. Is anyone using HotCat on Wikisource and is it working? — Ineuw talk 11:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TOC Formatting

I am attempting to create / proofread the Table of Contents page for A History of the Australian Ballot System in the United States. My questions are as follow: 1. Is it appropriate to use the RunningHeader template for the page and chapter headers, as I have done? 2. I do not yet fully understand how transclusion to the final namespace works, and as far as I know, "chapters" have not yet been created for this work. Do the chapter links point to the right place? 3. Where should the individual page numbers link? 4. What would be the best method for including the indented chapter sections? These are numbered, but I'm assuming they shouldn't be considered "chapters." 5. Did I use the RunningHeader template in the footer correctly for the page number? 6. Should this page be called "iii" or "Table of Contents" on the index page? 7. This table of contents spans two pages, but I'm not sure how to use the templates to do this. Can anyone point to information on how to do that? Squideshi (talk) 20:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You made a great start! The details can be confusing. I made edits to show you one way of doing it. The main article page refers to the three page scans: #6 with the cover, and #8 + #9 for the TOC. On scan page 9, we can move the column headings for chapter and page into the no include at the top. The table will appear continuous with the previous page of the TOC, so only one set of headings are needed. For the page numbers on the right column of the TOC, they do not need to link anywhere. Page numbers are less important for the on-line reader. On the pages, I replaced the <references/> with the template {{smallrefs}} template at the bottom of each page. This formats closer to the original scan. Within each chapter, I added sections which can be used from the TOC. See documentation at MediaWiki Labeled section transclusion -- DutchTreat (talk) 12:01, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inclusion guidelines for American poems published 1881.

Is more searching needed? -- unsigned comment by User:Twigs_Vorron (talk) .

Going by as much detail as was given, I'd say they are OK for inclusion here. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Songbook transclusion help

Looking for help properly transcluding a songbook to mainspace. This will supersede the current extract now in mainspace, although it might be best to use a different title. I'm not even sure if I'm not even using the proper series title for these songbooks, they seem to have multiple.

I have a later edition of the songbook already done, that can be compared to, though I'm not sure if this is entirely done properly. I just went the route most obvious to me.

Possible, though minor, issues may include choosing how to name the subpages, as well as whether the little notes spread throughout the book, not directly related to the songs they follow, should simply be transcluded along with the nearest song or given a separate subpage. Some of these notes have titles, EG being little poems themselves, but are not listed in the book's index. I have the songs, at least, prepared with section labels.

And if that's not enough, working through the versions pages for each of these songs will be quite a feat! djr13 (talk) 23:08, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Index page TOC and length

According to Help:Beginner's guide to Index: files, the table of contents field on the index page can either be type manually, or transcluded from the book itself if there is one in the file:

A table of contents for the text. Usually this will link to the chapters as they are in the main namespace.

The table of contents can be typed in here directly. However, if the text includes its own table of contents, this can be shown instead by "transcluding" the pages from the text (use the name of each page, wrapped in two curly brackets—or braces—at either side).

What, however, should be done when the table of contents is too long for transclusion? There apparently is a limit in the MediaWiki software on transcluded length, and if you trip that limit it blanks the page unhelpfully.

See, for example, Index:An introduction to the early history of Christian doctrine to the time of the Council of Chalcedon.djvu. This text has a 10-page table of contents. (The table of contents is also ridiculously detailed, which accounts for the length. It could double as an outline of the work.)

What is the appropriate thing to do in this situation? Would it be better to not include the entire table of contents on the index page? Or perhaps to manually enter a short-form table of contents with just the chapter titles?

Thanks. Mukkakukaku (talk) 00:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

With overly detailed TOC, I just put a cut-down version on the Index page with just the "chapter" names that I'm going to create as sub-pages. e.g. Index:A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah.djvu and Index:History of England (Froude) Vol 5.djvu, which are two most recent ones I've done this for. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A huge part of the "bloat" there is the application of the Greek missing template. Its possible if somebody properly replaced those missing characters and removed the missing template in the process, the overall post-expand template size might come in under the limit. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:21, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another option is not to use {{TOC row}} but directly table markup.--Mpaa (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you everyone for your suggestions. I decided to just hand-craft a shortened form of the table of contents using just the chapter titles. Thanks. Mukkakukaku (talk) 19:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've inserted the missing Greek. Angr 17:29, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Why does it say "Error: No Such File" on Index:Farewell letter to Soviet Russia.png? --Wylve (talk) 07:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because it’s an image file, I think you have to give the pages in the work as separate links. The <pagelist/> tag won’t work here. I’m not too sure about the technical side of it, though. —Clockery Fairfeld (talk) 07:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, thanks. --Wylve (talk) 08:37, 11 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sidenotes pointer request

Can someone please point me to a work that uses left and right (inset) sidenotes so I can copy the formatting for this work? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks... How will that transclude into the Main? Will inset headers be on one side or both? Seems one side would be preferable. Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Of course I realise this is not what you were asking for at all, but recently I made a template for use in Mexico of the Mexicans which I think could be fairly easily "bent" into what your work needs without resorting to actual side-notes. What do you think of the possibilities of this? Yes: the bolding and centering of the note need more work. Viewer2 (talk) 19:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The text of the inset headers are not centered in the original. Ideally, text would be left-aligned (as opposed to centered), and have less padding space. I'm not against using "raw" formatting/markup as opposed to a template (something similar to this—only better still), but I am wiki-markup challenged. Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:06, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I took you quite literally and converted it to direct mark-up which I think is pretty close. To achieve the mirror effect (a left inset) would require use of <span style="float:left;font-size:smaller;line-height:70%;margin:0.7em 1em 0.7em 0;width:7em;">"The force of heaven-bred poesy."</span> (Note: the only changes are to float:—left or right; and to margin:—the 1em and the 0 swap places.) Viewer2 (talk) 20:24, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Further note: you may need to experiment with width:—try to find the lowest amount which achieves the wrapping you desire (or you could cheat and insert <br/>s wherever you want.) But for consistency throughout the work I would recommend choosing a common value for all (of these) spans. Viewer2 (talk) 20:30, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is much better, thanks! I took the liberty of increasing line height to 100% and making the text bold. Thanks also for the note/tips above. Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:37, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Always forget to mention one more thing! Worth remembering (particularly later in transclusion); if you find two notes overlap because your screen is wider than the printed page, adding a {{-}} between the lowest possible paragraph (if there is one or more) between the overlapping notes will space the paragraphs apart automatically and avert the overlap. (I know I did not express that well—if you notice it happening and can't figure out the foregoing please remind me, because I assure you the cure is simpler to show than it is to explain!) Viewer2 (talk) 20:55, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. That happened to me when I tried {{float left}} on the following page; another reason why I went looking for another option. I'll make note of your {{-}} tip, thanks. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
if you are interested, I recently learned about {{float box}}, see Remarks_on_Some_Late_Decisions_Respecting_the_Colonial_Church.--Mpaa (talk) 21:51, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. Question: with either option, what is the layout like in the Main? Preferably, the inset headers will only appear on one side. Is there a way to make that happen? Do we want the headers to be on both sides in the Main? Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If I got your question, I would put all the notes on the same side. Left/right on paper is to have the notes always on the outer margin of the page (depending if it is even or odd). As we do not break pages, might as well put them on the same side. Would be interesting to see how it renders on EPUB or similar.--Mpaa (talk) 22:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll place all of the notes on the left then. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did not know about {{float box}} before. Looks very slick, and makes my suggestions look properly clunky. Viewer2 (talk) 22:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This looks very messy; while I don't think {{float box}} would be any better(?) Unfortunately, no paragraphs are handy to make use of {{-}} Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:37, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Whilst obviously not a brilliant solution, how about this? I narrowed the top and bottom margins on the two single-line insets, and probably more controversially, moved the positioning of the lowest one on the previous page a little higher. This happens to work on my settings: hope it does for you too? Viewer2 (talk) 02:39, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A bit better: Two tiers as opposed to three in the Mainspace (from my viewpoint). I plan on setting the Mainspace pages to Layout 2 (if I can get it to work...see Help request below), which will help output some more. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:59, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How about now? Like a fool I forgot a styling in the original specification. It should have read (for the left-inset case you are using throughout this work): <span style="clear:left;float:left;font-size:smaller;line-height:70%;margin:0.7em 1em 0.7em 0;width:7em;">"The force of heaven-bred poesy."</span>

The addition of "clear:left" instructs HTML to move the floating element down to where it will next fit automatically (literally: "keep my left margin clear".)

This is only worth reworking on problem transclusions, as it will have no effect on most cases. Viewer2 (talk) 03:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I applied the change to other problem pages (cases). I'll use the new markup from now on. Seems to be only one hard case now (page 27 [DJVU page 57]). Thanks for all, Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:58, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think I can help with 27(57), because it looks correct from my perspective. What is misbehaving for you? Viewer2 (talk) 04:06, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Page 27 seems to work now. Must have been a lag in my system. All good. Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sehr gut! Viewer2 (talk) 04:08, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Layout display question

I have The poor Sisters of Nazareth set to view with Layout 2 using {{default layout|Layout 2}}, but it doesn't seem to be working. It used to work. Any thoughts? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The override code currently only affects users who have never selected a layout manually. Users who picked a layout on any page via the sidebar will continue to see that layout on all pages. There has been discussion of adding a gadget or preferences setting to make this adjustable. For now, clearing cookies should reveal the behavior you want to see. --Eliyak T·C 10:22, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What's the template for a language transfer? - Non english work. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:03, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The ongoing saga of the sidenotes

Template:Sn-paragraph/sandbox and {{sn-note}} where my current efforts on this.

A logic check of these would be appreciated. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:40, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

help with formatting table of contents

I tried to do some formatting using template dottec toc page listing, on this page. Is there an experienced editor who can check this, before I continue? Thnx, Dick Bos (talk) 19:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Check it now. Better? If you see the changes, you can get the gist of it.--Mpaa (talk) 20:40, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for helping. I again made some small changes. Your solution created rather a strange effect on the index-page. I think it will do now. But before I continue, could you please check it again? Greetings, Dick Bos (talk) 19:40, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to add "as of" date?

Hello, I've found my way here from Wikidata and I'm trying to figure out how you handle amended documents. You have British North America Act, 1867, which is the original 1867 version of the statute, and Constitution Act, 1867, which is the same document with all of the amendments made over the last 147 years (including the name change). However, The latter document is missing the most recent amendment, which came into force in 2011 (the last amendment your page contains came into force in 1999). Until I get a chance to update the page, I want to add "as of 1 April 1999" to the header, but the Template:Header doesn't seem to have an "as of" parameter. What's your standard practice for tagging something like this? Even after I make the updates I want to mark it "as of 2011" in case no one updates it next time a Constitutional amendment is passed. --Arctic.gnome (talk) 00:45, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Information such as that would normally go in the notes section of the header template (currently bloated by a snippet taken directly from Wikipedia - a practice no longer really practiced anymore btw). Technically, we operate under the assumption that hosted works are static and not subject to any future changes so we don't have anything like the field you describe by design - but this instance seems to have been grandfathered in due to its creation preceeding the policy nevertheless. Otherwise, info such as that could/should also go in the "notes" section" of the textinfo template (when one exists) located on the article's talkpage. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If we prefer stable versions, should I move the existing Constitution Act, 1867 to Constitution Act, 1867 (as amended in 1999) and create a version with the new amendments at Constitution Act, 1867 (as amended in 2011)? --Arctic.gnome (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No there is no point in doing that at this stage of the work's timeline & modifications. The best thing to do is make it current & complete by adding the since ratified amendment(s). -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your quick and helpful replies. I have one more question. We have Constitution Act, 1867 (annotated) (plus several other annotated Acts). These annotations give important information like the date a given section came into effect. I have two concerns about these pages. The first concern is about copyright. These annotations come from versions of the statutes published by the Canadian Department of Justice (e.g., see here), and I can't tell whether the annotations may be freely distributed like the laws can. The terms of the DoJ website suggest that they can be redistributed, but it's under a different licence than the laws themselves. My second concern is that we don't really have a firm publication date for the annotations. The website has been updated more recently than the date of the last amendment, so it might be necessary to cite the annotations to a print version of the annotated laws. --Arctic.gnome (talk) 18:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well our policy on annotations isn't set in stone quite yet.

Regardless, I don't see any links to an "annotated" version at the DoJ site you linked - are we sure these are published annotated versions or are they User: created annotated versions based on the published DoJ versions? The latter would be fine for inclusion on en.WS per the previously linked policy but the former would need to have an acceptable license of some sort in order to be able to host them here. If you are thinking of material linked from the "notes" section(s) or similar, which appear to be in footnote/reference form - those are fine to reproduce and are covered by the same license as the rest of the content (afaict).

As far as the publication date goes, again depending on if User: generated or if DoJ published, we try to do the best we can when ascertaining such dates only in the case of formally published works. Whatever the site's "last modified" date is would be what we use in those cases I suppose. For User: created annotations, a review of the article history should help nail down the date of the last edit concerning creation of the annotated content. Hope that helped. -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:27, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Newspaper reports

I have a short (35 line) newspaper report from 1920 that I would like to refer to on at least two pages of Wikipedia. The original is microfilm to which I have limited access, in other words I can't easily get it scanned. I'm quite happy to copy type it. Is Wikisource the appropriate repository or if not, where is? Thanks, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, we are the appropriate repository. In terms of titling the page, so that it can be linked into any future use of the particular issue, use Newspaper name/Year/Month/Day/Article name. An example is at The New York Times/1915/10/04/Correction by Mr. Tesla. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, I've done my best, please see The_Chatham_News_1920-12-20. It's my first edit in Wikisource, so please let me know if I've messed up somewhere! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will second Beeswaxcandle's suggestion of using subpages for issue date and title of article. When we have the publisher The Chatham News as the parent article, then it allows for a description of the source with room to easily navigate between multiple issues. If you need help moving the article into subpages, please let me know. -- DutchTreat (talk) 01:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to mark a duplicate for deletion?

This and this are the same work, same edition. One could even argue it's actually the same file uploaded twice to commons with different names. How does one go about marking one version for deletion as a duplicate? Mukkakukaku (talk) 23:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here (enWS) you can mark one with {{sdelete|G4 "reason"}} and in the reason put a link to the one you want to retain. G4 indicates that the page is redundant. As part of deleting an Index any pages in the Page: namespace need to be deleted as well, so make sure that anything useful has been moved across to the version being kept before request a speedy delete. On Commons, once there are no pages anywhere linking to the redundant version, you can request deletion under their deletion process. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. I found yet a third index for the exact same work, so I tagged two as duplicates. Hopefully there aren't any others lying around. The work itself has a 'ready for match and split' status, which doesn't appear to have started yet, so speedy delete should be OK. Mukkakukaku (talk) 23:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Toolbars shift their position in the editor

Everything is working fine with the minor exception that the user defined and the predefined toolbars alternate their positions in the editor. I was wondering if there is a .js solution to keep their loading order consistent? — Ineuw talk 14:07, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ineuw, that happened to me also. I still used it like it was and within 2-3 days it corrected itself except for one item (View History) disappears. Perhaps George was experimenting. —Maury (talk) 15:00, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Maury, this problem has been around for a very long time but since there were other more urgent issues, I never bothered with it. I vaguely remember Inductiveload experimenting with this issue but since he's not here for the time being, I was hoping someone resolved the issue with some "wrapper".— Ineuw talk 15:21, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not this time fellas. The shifting toolbars thing has been around forever - has something to do with the way or the order resources are being loaded but I couldn't tell you what or how to fix that if my life depended on it; sorry. And there is so much going in Maury's common.js file, that I wouldn't know where to start.

The only thing I can recommend trying is to first see if you can reproduce the "quirk" when you are not logged in. If the problem goes away, its likely the bug has to do with something within (or some combination of) your User: preferences and/or gadgets selected. If its still there when you're not logged in, then its something far more complicated.

Of course, this is over simplified when it comes to troubleshooting and won't apply to something like custom toolbars where you need to be logged in to enable that in the first place. Nevertheless, experimenting with your preferences can only help isolate the cause. Finally - some stuff just goes bad because its obsolete code-wise and is no longer being developed/maintained (hint, hint). -- George Orwell III (talk) 16:44, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have no problems with my minor change after the initial problem. Even then I just kept going with the flow. All I have to do now it click on "reload" to see "view history". We love ya George, you keep things going so that what we have is due to you. You've helped us a hundred times over. I have no complaints. It works fine as it is. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This happens to me at other Wikisources too: French, Multilingual, and Welsh. Angr 17:31, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For me too, it has been like that for a long time here and in other Wikisources as well. --Zyephyrus (talk) 19:37, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You folks must be aware that the "old" toolbar scheme has been deprecated for some time now. Just because you can manage to pull something into existence around here doesn't really mean that its truly supported. If you don't like WikiEditor (or its eventual replacement, VisualEditor) then at least dump this toolbar nonsense and move those characters and inserts to CharInsert already. All you need to do is add something like this...
// CharInsert specific
window.charinsertDontMove = false;
window.editToolsRecall = true;
window.charinsertCustom = { User: ' Æ  æ  Œ  œ  à  á  â  ä  è  é  ê  ë  î  ï  ñ  ô  ö  û  ü  —  ␥‽  #REDIRECT.[\[+]] ' };
if(window.updateEditTools) window.updateEditTools();

.... to your common.js file and your done. Those characters can then be found on the User menu of what use to be EditTools (deprecated -- replaced with Char[acter ]Insert).

At the very least, please consider porting your buttons over to CharInsert - you're just prolonging the agony for everybody else by artificially keeping this 'monobook-love' around for really no good reason anymore. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suppose I use the "old" toolbar because I have never changed anything with it. I use Vector which is default. I never add to or remove common.js because you, George, have always adjusted that by adding to or removing portions like you did earlier today. I do have a wonderful java script created by InductiveLoad that allows for color background (I use grey) and text (I use black text) which allows me to work. Otherwise all white background hurts my eyes (eye strain). CNN reported on this subject just a few days ago and I have been asked how can I look at the computer so long by friends who can't. I am not opposed to using WikiEditor but it appears, from statements above, I may as well as wait for VisualEditor. How are we to know when these newer editors come along? I don't spend much time reading in this area. I prefer to work on images and text not set up a new editor which should be done automatically as "default"--or at least alert every individual the option is there and have a screenshot of what it looks like. I do nothing fancy so I haven't had a need to have a different editor. This "old" editor does all I need. I don't bother going to other areas with different languages and this old editor works on WikiPedia. Simplify, Simplify, Semper Fi --Ben Franklin. —Maury (talk) 00:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't use the toolbar to insert characters, I use it to zoom in and out of images and to open and close the noincluded headers and footers. Angr 08:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Useless Toolbar Buttons vs User defined buttons

The following toolbar buttons are on my editor and I never use them. They are a waste of space where preferred buttons could be added. Toolbar buttons should be easily chosen and removed by users. B, I, Ab, image of world for external link, image of frame for Embedded Link, image of a yellow trumpet for "file link", Square root of N, letter W inside red circle for ignore wiki formatting, Your signature with timestamp, horizontal line, Abc for small caps, poem & /poem, Hws, Hwe. —Maury (talk) 01:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can disable these buttons to gain extra space. Copy the code from HERE and let me know which other buttons you wish to disable but not on my list.— Ineuw talk 12:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, Ineuw. It didn't work though. The useless buttons were retained. It removed my ae AE oe OE which I do use and kept the useless buttons. No problem though, I never use those useless buttons previously described. They are just extras that are never used. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 22:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

/* Hide unused buttons */
#mw-editbutton-link { display: none !important; }
#mw-editbutton-extlink { display: none !important; }
#mw-editbutton-image { display: none !important; }
#mw-editbutton-media { display: none !important; }
#mw-editbutton-math { display: none !important; }
#mw-editbutton-headline { display: none !important; }
#mw-editbutton-signature { display: none !important; }
#mw-editbutton-hr { display: none !important; }
Did you place the above in User:William Maury Morris II/common.css? — Ineuw talk 18:13, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am sure I did. It looks very familiar. I looked it over before placing it at the bottom of the java script. In looking at it now I do recall seeing "math" but I will try again. However, it is just an experiment because those buttons do not bother me in any way as I stated above. The idea was not to just remove them but to replace them with other buttons that could be of some use. I have no idea what any other buttons would be worthy though. I did not use
 and do not believe that is to be included.  Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 21:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, identical outcome Ineuw. But it does not matter. I don't use the buttons. They're all worthless. Are there any good ones to be inserted? What buttons do you use? The best script I have is the "eyestrain" color code. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My tool-bar has 24 buttons totaled and I use none of them. There is no need for them. I can and do type in the codes instead of clicking on buttons. e.g. small caps sc, bold, italics, et cetera can all be done by hand. I have no problem with this, they're just there. —Maury (talk) 22:05, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please correct me if I am wrong, but from what you wrote I must assume that you placed the code in your .js (javascript) page. That's not the same as the common.css page indicated above, because it was not yet created. The User:William Maury Morris II/common.css needs to be created, the above code pasted and this makes the listed buttons disappear. If this works, I will fish out the other codes for the rest of the buttons, and you just add them to the list. At this point, this is the only way I know how to hide the toolbar - by hiding the individual buttons.
I also noticed that you already have some custom buttons declared in your .js file. Do they show up along the 24 standard buttons? — Ineuw talk 22:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah! so there is the difference. You are correct as usual, Ineuw. I added what you posted to my common.js which made my custom buttons disappear and left the original old buttons listed above. As you state, I do not have a common.css I thought .css = cascading style sheet. Beeswaxcandle created a couple of custom buttons for me that I asked for but no longer use. The English pound button is important to me and I use that when I encounter it in texts but it is also available elsewhere. There is an old saying my friend, "If it ain't broke don't fix it" and I have nothing on my toolbar that doesn't work. If I tinker I may lose my eyestrain color code which could be retrieved but this situation is a code person's exploration. It serves me no purpose that I am aware of to just remove all buttons. Let them sit there. Our mutual friend, Raul, has returned from a long trip and we have books we want to start working on. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 23:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Overfloat image

A fix required here. Thanks in advance. :) —Clockery Fairfeld [sic] 17:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've split the image in two as it should be, but again my HTML is lacking. Perhaps someone can add the proper code to complete my efforts.— Ineuw talk 21:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is exactly how I wanted it to be. Thanks a lot, Ineuw, Eliyak and Mukkakukaku...  Clockery Fairfeld [sic] 06:11, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can someone please help with some basic HTML?

Cannot center a <div> caption of an image on a main namespace page. The image originates here Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 87.djvu/208 and is diaplayed HERE.— Ineuw talk 20:09, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I fixed the issue using the {{img float}}. Hope that helps. --Xxagile (talk) 20:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your quick response, but unfortunately this is not what I was looking for. The images & captions (some 8,000+ of them) have various standardized formats throughout the PSM project. The images and their captions vary in size independently. I used this page as an example (and a bad one at that because the image and text are both 430px), but there are many images using this independent caption style. What I was looking for, is how to center this specific non-template HTML <div> code.P.S: Just as it formats this response.— Ineuw talk 21:02, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh ok. I think I understand what you mean, but unfortunately I don't know how to solve that problem (easily) either. Good luck. --Xxagile (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ineuw, if you'll forgive me for messing with the format of your reply -- is that what you intended? I added margin:0 auto; and changed the align:center-justify to text-align:justify;. Mukkakukaku (talk) 04:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mess with it all you want   . . . . and thank you. This is exactly what I needed.— Ineuw talk 04:41, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

page break and left margin

Hi there. Can anyone please help me with a paragraph that crosses a page break, and that should have a left margin (it has a fine block as well, by the way; but that runs without a problem). This is the example. Thanks, Dick Bos (talk) 20:14, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See if it is OK. I leave to the template experts to see if we need to have a {{left margin/s}}, {{left margin/e}}.--Mpaa (talk) 21:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've been doing this sort of thing with blockquote tags. They seem to work in the footer of the first page and header of the second page. See Page:A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah.djvu/61 and the following to see it in action. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:43, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanx, Mpaa and Beeswaxcandle! re Beeswaxcandle: I used the blockquote for testing in your book: Page:A_Critical_and_Exegetical_Commentary_on_Haggai,_Zechariah,_Malachi_and_Jonah.djvu/49 and the following. That works good. But..... When using it halfway the following page in a block the space between lines is not small, but the same as "normal" text. What's going wrong? Dick Bos (talk) 19:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you mean the list of people on /50, that's a series of paragraphs, so it has paragraph spacing. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:14, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think he's commenting on the perceived spaced between the lines, not between paragraphs. (Eg. if this was in a word processor, the property called 'line spacing.') Indeed, on page 50 of the above work, the top blockquote (which, by the way, contains a <p>aragraph) has line-height of 1.2em and the second blockquote has a line-height of 1.5em. The point I believe he is trying to make, that I agree with, is that within a paragraph, the line heights should be the same. The problem is that the {{fine block/s}} template declares class="fslhInherit" on the surrounding <div>, while {{fine block}} does not. This class causes the second set of paragraphs to inherit the line-height from a different declaration. Mukkakukaku (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A "paragraph" (i.e. the wiki code mark-up variant) normally won't inherit such attributes, being block level elements themselves. The class definition forces any & all of the "paragraphs" wrapped within to inherit the containing div block's values. {{fine block}} is for one block of text (one paragraph, or one div acting like a paragrpah). Multiple paragraphs = multiple block elements so {{fine block}} (singular) is always the wrong template to use in those cases. Use the start & end variation instead. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:42, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's still not quite clear to me. See my latest test on this page: Page:A_Critical_and_Exegetical_Commentary_on_Haggai,_Zechariah,_Malachi_and_Jonah.djvu/50. I now used fine block on one paragraph (two times), and the spacing is still different from the paragraphs below that are done with fine block/s and .../e. So even when I apply fine block to one paragraph, the line spacing is not altered.

Apart from that my objection to using the blockquote tag is, that it creates a left margin, and a right margin too. I only want a left margin. - Dick Bos (talk) 13:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

oe or ae?

On this page, toward the bottom, in italics: Is it "cum fœnore" or "cum fænore"? Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikitionary says that fœnore is an alternate spelling to fænore (wikt:foenus). I'd go for æ. In either spelling it means "with interest". Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Much thanks. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I reckon it's an œ because (a) why would a font use the double-storey lower case a, then revert to a single-storey lower case a within a ligature?; and (b) in my experience when a font uses single-story lower case a in the ae ligature, the bottom of a's vertical may be lost but the top of the vertical nearly always presents as a small bump nestled between the letters. There's a good visual example at File:Ligatures.svg. Hesperian 02:43, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See page 12 for an æ, which, as expected, uses the double-storey a. Therefore this is an œ. Hesperian 02:46, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In many (most?) serif typefaces, both a and æ use the single-story a in italics but the double-story a in roman. Angr 08:17, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A note about Wiktionary. When Wiktionary says "X is an alternate spelling of Y", it does not necessarily imply one or the other is the primary spelling. It is simply indicating that both X and Y are possible spellings found in print. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's actually an example of an italic ae (Anima Poetæ) on the page in question as well... I didn't realize it until just now... Definitely a distinction between the two in the original. Noted. Thanks all, Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missing images?

Using the 'Random transcription' link, I ended up at Index:A Glimpse at Guatemala.pdf. However, it appears that there's something glitching with the file, or perhaps with the software -- none of the pages have images (which makes it rather hard to proofread.) I opened one of the images in a new tab (via 'image' tab at the top of the page) and was greeted with this lovely error message:

Error generating thumbnail

Error creating thumbnail: convert: no decode delegate for this image format `/tmp/magick-E0sH8bmV' @ error/constitute.c/ReadImage/532. convert: missing an image filename `/tmp/transform_ec0b6ee14dd3-1.jpg' @ error/convert.c/ConvertImageCommand/3011.

I even tried going to the File:A Glimpse at Guatemala.pdf page, and that has broken thumbnails too. It's worth noting that the thumbnails are broken on Commons too. I can open the raw PDF file, so the file works. But I'm not sure what's wrong with the software's interpretation of said file -- or how to fix it.

Has anyone seen this happen before, or know of a fix or workaround for the problem?

-- Mukkakukaku (talk) 06:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(see File:Cox and box.pdf) According to Commons, that file is "affected by MediaWiki restrictions". What exactly are those restrictions, I have absolutely no idea, but maybe you could upload a Djvu version of the file using another title...? Apart from that, I have no clue as to what could be done.

Of course, someone else might know better... —Clockery Fairfeld [sic] 06:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Documentation seems to exist only in the relevant bugzilla bugs. You'll find links to these bugs at the top of Commons:Category:PDF files affected by MediaWiki restrictions. Hesperian 06:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looks like the server is running a very old version of ghostscript, but the devs are reluctant to update. Or maybe I read the bugs reports wrong. The official solution appears to be to "fix" the PDF file. Mukkakukaku (talk) 06:55, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In addition to the PDF "bug" thing, something else is clearly off. The PDF on IA is ~24Mb and the one uploaded to Commons is ~33Mb. Seems corrupt to me - I'd try re uploading the PDF from IA again over the one currently on Commons for kicks. -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I re-uploaded the version at IA and while the filesize is now right, the current version has 10 fewer pages. And appears to be still broken. Mukkakukaku (talk) 07:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Viewing page links in a sandbox

I am using one of my sandboxes to view the progress of a work. Is there some way I can view page numbers so if I find an error I can link directly to the affected page instead of having to search for the correct page page-by-page in the Index? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Try tacking this on the end of your your common.js:
if ( $.inArray( mw.config.get( "wgAction" ), [ "view", "submit", "purge" ] ) !== -1 ) {
    if ( !self.debug_page_layout
      // don't do anything on DoubleWiki or difference comparison views
      && document.URL.indexOf( "match=" ) === -1
      && document.URL.indexOf( "diff=" ) === -1
      && mw.config.get( "wgNamespaceNumber" ) === 2 ) {
        if ( $( ".pagenum" ).length !== 0 ) {
            if ( ! $.isEmptyObject( self.ws_layouts ) )
                $(document).ready( layout.init );
            $(document).ready( pagenumbers.init );
            $(window).load( pagenumbers.refresh_offsets );
It should make pagenumbers and dynamic layout work on userspace pages that are transcluding from the page namespace. Prosody (talk) 03:48, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unless I applied incorrectly, I'm still not seeing page numbers... Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, sorry, I didn't really test that through the normal methods. It looks like the user javascript loads before some of the system stuff so it doesn't know about it. Try this one instead. I tested it normally and I got it to work.
$(window).load(function() {
    if ( $.inArray( mw.config.get( "wgAction" ), [ "view", "submit", "purge" ] ) !== -1 ) {
        if ( !self.debug_page_layout
      	    // don't do anything on DoubleWiki or difference comparison views
      	    && document.URL.indexOf( "match=" ) === -1
      	    && document.URL.indexOf( "diff=" ) === -1
      	    && mw.config.get( "wgNamespaceNumber" ) === 2 ) {
            if ( $( ".pagenum" ).length !== 0 ) {
                if ( ! $.isEmptyObject( self.ws_layouts ) )
Prosody (talk) 22:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Still not appearing. Thank you though, for and while you are making the attempt! Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe this feature was pulled from other namespaces in order to have it work in the Translation: namespace a few months ago. Eliyak would be the one to tap to see if User: namespace can be included back again. Otherwise I'd just test in the mainspace for now and request a speedy deletion if the test page can't be recycled for final/finished tranclusion. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. Thank you, Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:39, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A problematic PSM Volume

This PSM volume has some pages marked problematic because they are too fuzzy to proofread, and now, in edit mode, the original is shrunk to a tiny image. I cleared all caches (WS page, volume & FF) but the problem didn't go away. Do others see the same problem as I do?

Furthermore, with all the pages I marked problematic, in the AI source of the Commons copy, and the two additional copies I found on AI are all clean. This makes me assume that the problem may not be with the originals. Can someone please help? Thanks in advance.— Ineuw talk 16:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know about the shrinking-image problem, as I don't find it affects me (I use FF 26.0). But maybe the fuzzy-page problem can be fixed by reuploading the file from AI...? Or you can try checking the copy you've downloaded, to see whether there's a problem in that file. —Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 17:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure what's causing that. I'm not getting a tiny image but I am getting blurred text (and the zoom function doesn't change that). However, when I click on the "Image" link, I see the page image clear text. Purging locally hasn't helped. I've purged at Commons as well but I think that might take a while to take effect here (if it changes anything at all). Failing that, as I mentioned, the separate "Image" link works, so you could proofread from that for now (even if it is a little awkward). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for all the input. Here is the image of a page with the shrunken scan. Earlier, only a few pages were so, but now the whole volume is like this. I have no problem downloading and uploading other copies from IA. I counted at least two more identical versions, but my concern is that I don't destroy the pages already proofread. Already posted a Help request to my DjVu Guru about how to protect the text layer, and will wait until he replies.— Ineuw talk 20:02, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Randomly checked Vol 18 and the scans are OK, BUT someone changed the text layer width in Read mode. For the past years the text width was always 430px and now it's 520px. I monitor this using a pixel ruler so that inserted images are in proportion to the Page namespace text width. Can someone check on this please? Thank you.— Ineuw talk 20:09, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While discussing these issues with myself, I suddenly remembered that there may have been new software update.  Ineuw talk 20:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Check those problematic pages now. That default ~430px has indeed been changed in one of the recent PR core updates (which more often than not will now "conflict" with any manual scan resolution settings added near the bottom of the Index: page form in edit mode - as was part of the problem here).

The other part always has to do with once such a conflict has been cleared and then trying to get Commons to refresh the entire File: --> Index: --> Page: framework properly. I find that unless you keep hitting purge there until a refresh is "instantaneous", wait up to 45 seconds afterwards and then look for Commons to refresh the File page once again on its own - only then is true Purge & refresh accomplished. Your mileage may vary. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May I share a document with Wikisource?

My new manuscript, titled Knowledge For The People, has already been listed in the United Nations Public Administration Network online library. I would like to share it with Wikisource. I am not seeking remuneration, just to share important ideas. I am the sole copyright holder of the document.

My email provider sets limits on the size of uploads permitted, so I have placed a copy of the document in Dropbox. The document can be located and uploaded by going to the following link and logging in:

If you accept this offer, please let me know if it works, at

I am not knowledgeable on copyrights but THIS SECTION may be relevant to your posting material here. In fact, the whole article is relevant. — Ineuw talk 15:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I tried to open the link, but it requires sign in or something, in any case Wikisource:What Wikisource includes is also relevant. Based only on the title of the work, I would say it probably does NOT meet our inclusion criteria. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:42, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Digraph issue

I'm having issues with a digraph on this page, near the bottom with the word alltud. In Welsh, this is a digraph l with a tilde going through it. I'm having issues getting the tilde to look right. For one, I have no digraph l on my computer, so I used two ls, each with a combining tilde on it, and for two, the tildes are close to the bottom of the letter, even though I used a middle combining tilde. Has anyone else had this issue and found a way around it?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 14:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just curiosity to know the unknown led me to to this wiki link and found and replaced the missing Unicode character ỻ. Apart from that, I think that the references are {{smallrefs}}— Ineuw talk 15:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you need any more weird Welsh characters, you might find some ready for cut-n-pasting toward the bottom of User:Angr#Toolbox. Angr 17:52, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My computer can't view the character. Is there any way to make it visible using the nifty font thingy we've got going on Wikimedia sites?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 03:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ɬɬ <--- what about now? -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That I can see.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 04:31, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great, but that's not the character the page is using. What GOIII typed above is two copies of the IPA character ɬ (U+026C) next to each other. What the text is using is (U+1EFB), which unfortunately has very limited font support, meaning a lot of people can't see it. Nevertheless, I think we ought to be using the correct characters as far as possible, rather than workarounds. Angr 14:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Correct of course. It's odd because I thought the DjVu Sans package supported both (among many other eclectic fonts), so if one could see mine, I thought there might be a good chance it's already present. Oh well; when a solution presents itself - please report back so I can see if it can't be added to CharInsert somehow. -- George Orwell III (talk) 15:49, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Table transclusion/formatting help

I need an extra set of eyes... Can someone please take a look at the table formatting on DJVU pp. 352-355 and see why it is not transcluding correctly in the Main? Thank you! Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:47, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seems to be okay now... Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Formatting error

In the page The Burglar, where pg. 111 begins, the formatting is broken (appearing as it would on Wikipedia if the line began with a space). I have no idea how to fix this, as I'm not an editor on this project and the interface is different, so I figured I'd mention it here instead. Sven Manguard (talk) 05:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, fixed. Hesperian 05:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I upload these scans to Wikisource?

Can I upload a copy of a scan that someone else made to Wikisource so that I can make a searchable version of it? Specifically, I'd like to upload scans of some orders-in-council amending the Constitution of Canada, such as this one and make pages for the documents under the Template:Legislation-CAGov licence. --Arctic.gnome (talk) 21:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The last time I tried uploading a Government of Canada document & image, it was rejected by Commons because, while the Canadian Parliament Archives emailed me the permission, it was not in the format demanded by Wikimedia Commons. It's best if you get the proper format from Wikimedia Commons and forward it to GoC archives for permission.— Ineuw talk 23:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Arctic.gnome, if the underlying material may legally be hosted (it's not clear to me from {{Legislation-CAGov}} that it may, but I'll leave that to you) then the fact that someone else made the scan is of no importance: no copyright arises from "a mere mechanical scan or photocopy". Hesperian 01:17, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Being able to use another's scan solves one hurdle. The other is where I can upload them. As I understand it, I can't upload them to Commons because they have two additional conditions attached to the licence beyond cc-by-sa--namely the requirement to be accurate and the requirement to state that they aren't official. If these requirements are acceptable to Wikisource but not to Commons, what are my options? Can I transcribe the texts to Wikisource without uploading an image to Commons? Can I upload the image to Wikisource instead of Commons? --Arctic.gnome (talk) 03:20, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Arctic.gnome:We work on a priority order. 1) Host them at Commons if at all possible [this makes them available to all wikis, not just ours] 2) if Commons cannot take them, and they are public domain documents (or equivalent) in the US and fit within WS:WWI, then they can be hosted at English Wikisource. That said please ensure as part of the WS:WWI that you look at the licensing and also Help:Copyright tags.

Re the scan type, it is what works well in our side by side system. If we have PDF or DJVU they have text layers that can be scraped and imported. If it is a jpg or something else the system recognises then you have typing or copy and pasting to do. If it is something not recognised, then we a problem, though that doesn't mean that we cannot host the text, it just means that it is unsupported by the image (which is not our preference). — billinghurst sDrewth 11:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File upload help request


Seasons greetings from Marathi language wikisource(mr). We tried to upload a India public domain book in PDF format. It showed upload completed but PDF document commons:File:Chhandorachanaa.pdf was not readable at all . We want and request some one upload document for us either on or on commons. We need it for a collaborative wikisource writing project.

  • Reffered and requested upload book is Chandorachana (Marathi:छन्दोरचना)
  • Is writtern by : W:en:Madhav Julian (Marathi: माधव जुलियन) (January 21, 1894 – November 29, 1939)
  • It is Public Domain copyright free due to expiry of copyright period in India Please refer licence commons:Template:PD-India {{PD-India}}
  • The Book is available online at

Earliest help will be apreciated.

Thanks and Regards Mahitgar (talk) 14:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does this work for you: Commons:File:छन्दोरचना.djvu? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:33, 7 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This has worked. Lot of thanks Thanks and warm greeting. For some technical reasons i have not been able to use djvu on PC. This has been very valuable support from your side. Regards

Mahitgar (talk) 08:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for help with TOC page listing

Can anyone pls help me with this little nasty problem on Page:The_Economic_Journal_Volume_1.djvu/7. The problem is at the lower part of the page, just above “NOTES AND MEMORANDA”. There is a link to four pages there. I can't get them in one row. This is how far I got. Thnx. - Dick Bos (talk) 12:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The secret is parameter col3-width of {{dotted TOC page listing}}. The default width is only 2em, which is just about full with 3 digits, let alone four references + ancillary spaces and commas (which is why they formatted vertically.) I gave it 12em for the sake of this trial, but feel free (of course) to tweak that as you want. AuFCL (talk) 12:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks a lot. I'll soon try it in another spot. Dick Bos (talk) 13:50, 8 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I forgot to mention: to make the page-numbers column completely "set-and-forget", try setting parameter |col3-width=auto. The price you pay is ragged ends to the dot leaders, but you might find it the simplest option. AuFCL (talk) 00:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Last suggestion retracted, as it does not appear to work well in some browsers. AuFCL (talk) 16:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Non english charecters...

Can someone that's familiar with the relevant languages look over this and insert the appropriate characters?

Index:Adapting and Writing Language Lessons.pdf

I've tried to make intelligent guesses in places, but would appreciate someone else taking over.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:31, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've looked a few random pages and can't see any non-Latin characters. Could you give some pointers as to what the problems are (page numbers, particular language, &c.)? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply] - Thai. For starters.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
First, that's not Thai, or else I would suggest you don't touch it. Hehe. However, as far as I can tell, it is IPA for Thai words, so you can just use that alphabet for it. For example, using text from the page:
nîi ʔaray
nîi mîitkoon

OK It looks like IPA, but in places it's accented, and the accented versions are not in the Charcters box, I stil think it requires a specialist. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:18, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Weird typesetting issue

I just worked on this page, and it has an unusual versification in it. Does anyone have any idea how to transcribe it? Would it be best just to use an image in its place?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 14:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes.. Given its an inscription marking? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I took a shot at transcribing it in Unicode. Given that it's not like an etching or something I think it might be more appropriate to render it that way rather than with an image, even though I think most/all Ogham fonts are going to have that center line which isn't present in the text's typeface. Prosody (talk) 22:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Erm, what font did you use? All I see are little boxes... Mukkakukaku (talk) 03:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, damn, that hadn't occurred to me. It's Segoi UI Symbol on Firefox on Windows 7. Default Windows 7 font, but it's not going to be available everywhere. Chrome on the same machine doesn't even use it. I don't think there's any support in Universal Language Selector even if that gets turned back on. I guess we'll have to fall back to using images. Prosody (talk) 03:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wait, the DejaVu family has Ogham. Anyone know what the list of fonts on the Universal Language Selector is? Prosody (talk) 03:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Integrating plate images into mainspace

I just finished proofreading The Indian Dispossessed (index), but before announcing its completion (however that's done), the book has a few plate images which don't have any obvious location within the chapters and text. How might these be best included in mainspace? djr13 (talk) 00:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They should be included in the text as I did one formatted sample Page:The Indian Dispossessed.pdf/112, Main mnamespace = The Indian Dispossessed/The Nez Perces. Please look at the changes in the "File" image wrapper and caption centering. For some reason, when wrapped as before, the caption becomes noticeably offset. I also reduced the image size to 430px. My reasons for this are complicated, but primarily it's because the text width of the Main namespace Option #2 is about ~450-460px. An oversized image may lack esthetics.— Ineuw talk 03:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your help. I had thus far avoided doing it that way, as breaking paragraphs (usually unrelated to the image) for full-page plate images seems sub-optimal. And what to do with the frontispiece image? Sure there isn't another way? (Hmm, it looks like I was possibly supposed to name each mainspace subpage a generic "Chapter 1" etc....) djr13 (talk) 07:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just picking up on a couple of your questions:

For the chapter numbering, the generic version is only when the chapters are numbered either in the TOC or in the chapter headers. If the chapters don't have this, then the way you've named them is fine. It's really about linking to them from other works.

In re your other concern, have a look at Picturesque Nepal where we put the images in wherever they came in the book. The alternative is more complex, but can be seen in the earlier chapters of The Conquest of Mount Cook. The proofreader here chose to move the images to the end of paragraphs in the mainspace but left them where they are in the Page: namespace. This was done by using includeonly and noinclude tags. Both of these books have frontispieces that have been done slightly differently. Nepal has the frontispiece as the opening page before the title. Mount Cook transcludes them the other way around, so that the title page is up-front. If the cover image is a good one, then that can go in first. A recent example of this is On to Pekin. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Beeswaxcandle is correct and I should have been more specific in regard to images. In the main namespace, one has the latitude to place images, especially full page images, at the beginning of a chapter. It's your choice. Already moved the image in The Indian Dispossessed/The Nez Perces to the beginning since it's the only image in that chapter. — Ineuw talk 17:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've gone with including the images at the beginning of each chapter, and including the frontispiece where it otherwise would be plus including the half-title before it where otherwise I excluded this as redundant. It's still a bit cludgy but seems workable. It seems like there's no good way to include such large, text-breaking images in mainspace due to format limitations. The most obvious alternative to me would be either folding them into thumbnails or offsetting them into the side-area in a similar way to what annotations are heading. I'll look into announcing the completion now. Thanks both. djr13 (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think it looks great. — Ineuw talk 21:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oversized mathematical operators in print

I've been looking for oversized mathematical operators used in 19th century printed matter: like double length = signs, double size + signs etc., but have not found in any UTF-8 reference tables. Do they exist? — Ineuw talk 02:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think they exist as unique symbols per se, but perhaps try wrapping them in {{larger}} or {{x-larger}}? Eg. to get an affect like so: 7 ÷ 2  π .
Alternatively -- does the wikisource software support LaTeX? If it does, there are some commands to support resizing of portions of equations that may be possible to use. Mukkakukaku (talk) 04:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I believe WS does support LaTeX.— Ineuw talk 05:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would you please be so kind as to supply context/examples? I expect these are not quite what you are looking for, but there do exist UNICODE for (say) double- and triple-equals (&#10869;:⩵ and &#10870;:⩶ respectively), and so-called "heavy" plus (&#10133;:➕), minus (&#10134;:➖) and division signs (&#10135;:➗); and the dual-purposed "cross mark" (&#10060;:❌) paired with "heavy large circle" (&#11093;:⭕).
Thanks for your help. The start of this page is a perfect example of the hundreds of times it's used. Unfortunately, the above symbols are not the ones I was looking for, but the LaTeX symbols are.

WS does not support all of Latex, only the texvc subset (see mw:Extension:Math, but that gives you   at least. AuFCL (talk) 14:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
These are the very symbols I was looking for since 1872 - when PSM started publication.  . As for the LaTeX support I was only aware of {some] math, but didn't know that they can be used for just the symbols. My thanks to you both.— Ineuw talk 17:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The first line of that page might be produced by something like:

<math>\scriptstyle{+,~-,~\sqrt{}}</math>. In the same century Vieta…
—with result:
 . In the same century Vieta…

Notes and hints:
  1. Make sure that is a "normal" minus sign; dashes or mdashes send <math> into (lexing error) sulks!
  2. Tildes (~) may be used to add spaces inside the <math> string. Normally spaces are stripped out as if they were never there.
  3. Although <math> doesn't seem to analyse the command string too closely, thinks like \sqrt are considered to be functions and won't work (syntax error)) without at least empty {}s following.
  4. I routinely enclose <math> strings in \scriptstyle{}, mainly because I find the text is too large to match surrounding text. Of course your aesthetics and the situation may differ.
  5. Be aware that <math> produces its output as an image, with the side-effect it will not "split" when line-wrapping occurs. It is often wise to make several short <math> blocks (say between commas) rather than one long one and risk later disappointment.
Hope this is useful, and I am not merely repeating stuff you already know. AuFCL (talk) 22:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Could {{FI}} be of any use here?
 | type  = math
 | width = 25%
 | file  = <math>sin x = {e^{ix} - e^{-ix} \over 2i} </math>
Just wondering...... -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
AuFCL, thanks for those very important points, of which I was only aware of \scriptstyle. If you haven't done so, please consider including your instructions on the Math help page. Otherwise these will be buried in the Archive.
Wonder no longer GO3. I will be using {{FI}}. There are hundreds of formulas need to proofread/updated in PSM.
Many thanks to all for the above info.— Ineuw talk 04:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Point of Order - please use math instead of user for FI's type= parameter. Both should produce the same output but one day User might be needed for a 4rth application or something. Thanks. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note that the {{FI}} above produces quite blurry results, and evidently doesn't even work outside PNG mode. (I don't think it will show up at all in PDF output, for example.) —SamB (talk) 03:12, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quick access icon link to the Commons is gone from WS images

Can someone please restore the quick link icon to the Commons image source. In one of the recent mw software updates, it disappeared. Thanks in advance. — Ineuw talk 03:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Odd. I still see the icon linked to Commons on my File: pages (inline with header text to the top-right). Can anyone else replicate? -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:05, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can confirm the Commons icon is visible on for example, say, here. AuFCL (talk) 01:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK then - back to basics....

Ineuw, can you see the icon on

at all? -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I can see both.— Ineuw talk 17:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To further clarify, I can see the two icons GO3 has included, but there is no icon on the smiley image, nor on any other image from the commons.— Ineuw talk 17:05, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I inverted the order in MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-here; see if that made any difference on any File: namespace page for you & report back. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the effort but no go. Here is a screen image File:No icon link to the Commons.jpg I've taken earlier. This issue is an old one. Haven't had a commons link for many weeks. Would this be controlled in Preferences? — Ineuw talk 01:32, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ineuw: GOT IT - Apparently (& Sadly) you are always going to be "less than whole" when it comes to certain defaults because you are in Canada but use [American?] English in your settings. Without your own Canadian MediaWiki message base, your "setup" surps from the US set when it can but fails unless a proper subset(?) is created in certain instances (or at least that is how I've come to observe this behavior to date).

Added MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-here/en-ca and that should "rectify" your missing icon issue. I guess it comes at the expense of what amounts to a "redundant" MediaWiki message.

Anyone have the same problem but is a "closer" subject of the Crown than Canada? -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:48, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

O.K. Now you point that out, en-gb (which would normally be my preferred choice; my earlier "working" observation was made as Preferences/Language/en—now [temporarily?] retracted) exhibits the same issue (i.e. missing Commons icon). Regards, AuFCL (talk) 02:33, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AuFCL - can you verify both of your prior observations still hold now? I just discovered [:MediaWiki:Sharedupload] (created 2005 & made a redirect in 2012) might be involved in this & just deleted our local copy of it to see what happens (if anything). It would be great if that restored everything but I'll add the gb if it didn't. TIA --- George Orwell III (talk) 02:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, only MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-here shows Commons icon (which should not be a shock, because that is what it really does) here. The others, all nada, since changing Preferences from 'en'→'en-GB'. AuFCL (talk)
Thanks. IMO - It's a bit crazy to add something like the Commons top icon to a MW message that isn't working across the board in the first place. I'm going to try finding a better MW message to host the icon so the crippled message [in theory] really is separate from the icon. Back in a bit. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:13, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK @AuFCL: - {{Commons top icon}} is now hosted via [:MediaWiki:Filehist-help]. Please check any File: page to see if the icon appears (& works!) like it should no matter the language setting in use. Only difference, now, should be one has a FMbox (for the blind?) for a default message while the other(s) use the system standard default, plain-text message w/ link to shared file description info back on Commons found just below the file-size/mime type, etc. info (The icon should appear in the top right corner regardless!) -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scratch all that attempted 'moving around', en-ca & en-gb created but all 3 call Template:Sharedupload-desc-here instead of hosting the same stuff 3x in the MW namespace. Please report in now that this seems like the "final" solution moving forward. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:10, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Many pardons for delayed response (Real Life™ interfered.) All O.K. re: Commons icon again this side now. Thank you. AuFCL (talk) 04:15, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My hero. Just another heartfelt thank you GO3. It works! — Ineuw talk 05:36, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PROOFREADPAGE - Both the default and auto edit-summary texts based on status no longer being populated

originally titled: On Page creation, "Not proofread" is not showing up in the Summary

Since I've been on a roll of success today, would it possible to display the default "Not proofread" in the Summary field when the page is created? This used to be so several software updates ago. I request this because most pages need proofreading.— Ineuw talk 09:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Verified (XpPro, IE8).

    In addition, when opening edit mode on existing pages already given a PR status, the corresponding edit-summary text matching that current status once was pre-populated in the summary field upon entering edit-mode by default & remained that way until/unless the Editor manually 'ticked' a change in status prior to adding additional comments and saving. That "function" has also stopped working (under edit or preview; no difference) and a blank field is now the default instead (of course, until/unless a ststus is manually ticked &/or edited before the final save). -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:03, 15 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unpublished works of unknown authorship

I found in some family documents a carbon copy of a poem or song from c. 1918. Based on the POV of the narrator, it pretty clearly wasn't written by the family member who kept it, but rather by an enlisted man stationed at the same air field. I googled some of the lines in case it was published, including more generic lines in case it was just a local take on a more widespread song, but if so it's certainly not on the Internet yet. (And honestly, I don't think it was terribly well constructed.) I'm really not sure whether to use {{PD-anon-1923}}, which says it's for published works, or {{PD-US-unpublished}}, which requires knowing when the creator died, or whether it's just not kosher at all. It seems like something that would be of some interest historically, so it'd be nice to make it available. Laurascudder (talk) 18:29, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Neither of those will work, you don’t know it was published and you don’t know when the author died. Jeepday (talk) 00:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And that's why I'm here. Any solutions? Laurascudder (talk) 03:24, 15 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's a copyright issue. Unpublished works aren't subject to the 1923 thing as you might otherwise expect. See here: Help:Public domain#Unpublished works See if you can find if the author died in 1943 or earlier. djr13 (talk) 03:45, 15 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
According to this table, unpublished works with no known year of death are under copyright for 120 years from the date of creation. Assuming 1918 is correct, it won't be in the public domain until January 2039. There seems to be some clause involving certification by the Copyright Office but, otherwise, legally it cannot be hosted here. Sorry. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:58, 15 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to prepare this text from for proofreading

I'm thinking about trying to prepare for upload (it should be obvious why), which was scanned from microfilm and has two pages on each "page", and looks not to be very thoroughly OCR'd. What approach would be simplest? Tell @Inductiveload I might be willing to let him tackle it? (It's quite huge! On the other hand, the scans are neatly bundled in a PDF, from which they can presumably be losslessly extracted quite trivially.)

See also w:Federal Register for bibliographic information, including the usual citation convention. —SamB (talk) 02:58, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forgive me, but the 'obvious-ness' escapes me. What exactly is it that a partial FR volume "gets us"? -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Showing thumbnails of pages

Hi wikisorcerers,

Can you check this template: {{PageFile}}. It is used to show thumbnails from the pages in the Index Talk page (example here), so we can locate more easily and quickly a page. Is everything correct? I have imported and translated it from French Wikisource (history here). Please don't hesitate to improve it! --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:35, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very neat, ty.— Ineuw talk 22:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed, though I'd much rather have Book2Scroll (2nd Icon at the top-right of every Index: Page) "refined" a bit further so it loads/renders properly under our current code environment. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category for materials under CC0

I am wondering why CC0 is not mentioned in Wikisource:Copyright policy, nor in some category similar to Category:Works by license. Any pointers? -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 22:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons has a template and category. I suppose we should follow their lead if there's any works we have which it's applicable to. Prosody (talk) 23:02, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thanks - I created Template:CC-Zero and Category:CC-Zero. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:18, 11 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

text formatting help

Forgot to ask for formatting help here, if anyone has a good idea how to best format the text in caps. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A possible hint in the first paragraph.--Mpaa (talk) 22:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I tried to understand the markup, but with little success. I think the text should be recreated exactly as in the original (breaks where there are breaks, etc.), for I think it was transcribed as found "scratched upon the walls" (if I read correctly). Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've had a go. See what you think. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 23:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Permit my 2 Canadian cents' worth of input but tables are superior - and never fail. I won't revert the most recent edit by Beeswaxcandle, but pasted my enhancements of Mpaa below

IneuwPublic (talk) 23:44, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree about the stability of tables, but I think BWC's rendering is most faithful to the original, and what I was looking for. My first thought was tables too; I didn't at first consider gaps, but unless one can recreate BWC's rendering with a table, I think I'll keep things as is. Thanks all for your input! Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure, it can be done as a table. But you still need gaps to match the alignment of the inscriptions.
1607. ADI 2. GENARO. FUI RE-
Alternative methods would be to nest a table with the indented lines within the larger table or to set each line of the inscriptions as a line in the table with 8 or 9 columns and lots of colspans. But why complicate things? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:31, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looks good as well. I would not be able to complete the page with my 'skill set', however. I'll leave that to those familiar with the markup, or I am happy to keep things as is. Thank you all for taking the time to help; and BWC, thanks again for checking/amending my Greek. There are two more pages that I forgot to add the Greek missing tag (now added), and then the text can be marked as proofread! Thanks again for your help! Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Couple minor works pending help

I have a couple works I have proofread which are pending some assistance. One of these I had posted about last month, a songbook, thus needing relatively heavy transclusion work (I've done this with another edition, but could use review on if I'm doing it right such as choice of page names). The other is Evolution of American Agriculture (index), for which I have three things I am hindered by: tables (full pages 62, 63, 64, and 65; smaller tables pages 47 and 48), what to do with the heavy illustrations which mix with text, and whether I should interpret the last listed chapter (see index) as "Chapter 11" despite it not being listed as such in the TOC. Thanks, djr13 (talk) 16:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I got the smaller tables on pp 47-48 working by (ab)using {{dotted TOC page listing}}. The images that are the chapter headers should be done by carefully splitting the images into parts and then using floats. (See, this as an example of what I mean by that.) As for the full-page tables, or the mysterious "Chapter 11", I have no idea. Mukkakukaku (talk) 05:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it possible to use either the split or "flow under" method without breaking the drop caps, eg, alt text? djr13 (talk) 06:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've had a go at the table on p62 for you. If it's OK, then copy that formatting onto the other 3 pages and drop the text into the appropriate spots. AuFCL is currently working on the flow under technique, so he'll be the best to answer that. In re "Chapter 11", there are no particular guidelines on how to deal with this situation. We just need to be able to link to it should another work refer to it. The way I personally would do it would be to name it (i.e. Evolution of American Agriculture/Development of the Agricultural Workers Union No. 400). This maintains the authorial intent (or the publisher's intent) as I'm guessing it's really an appendix to the main work. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Regarding use of {{flow under}}, I would be inclined to set the image alternate text (i.e. File:...alt=) to reflect the drop capital which the chapter image effectively represents. Apologies for not doing this on the first edit (hope this is a bit more to your liking?) Actually clicking on the image still works and takes you to the background image as before (and may be controlled at need by resort to the native parameter.)

All of these remarks should apply equally to the "split" image method if you choose to go that way.

Specifically regarding "breaking the drop caps," what exactly would you like to happen? Certainly wrapping {{drop initial}} around the chapter header image will fail using either image approach, but would you really need or want to do so?

Oh, and please don't give me credit for the technique: the more I look into the idea, the more previously existing instances keep turning up. I am, however guilty of trying to shoehorn it into a template (set) [hat tips to GOIII Beeswaxcandle & Eliyak for valuable advice], which of course I hope you may find usable/useful. AuFCL (talk) 09:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After you made the first edit (which I'm still pretty damn impressed by as is) I did dig into it to try learning how it was's obviously still rather experimental, for better or worse. I'm still at the point of being intimidated by the simplest wiki tables. :-) By "breaking drop caps," I mean, to put it in the most easily testable terms, ensuring that given degradation of images (whether by technical limitations or nonvisual reading devices), the text will still render clearly. For example, you can check this by seeing if the text otherwise represented in images displays as would be expected when you copy/paste into a plain text editor. I appreciate all the help, I am trying to learn from all of it. djr13 (talk) 10:38, 27 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A perfectly valid point, and that last edit of mine fails; as the alt-text on the image "cuts" before the "Development of A.W.I.U. 400" title, even though ideally it should come afterwards. Some (more) things to check for! AuFCL (talk) 12:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Poems and page breaks

I'm trying to transcribe a poem that has stanzas (or whatever the "paragraph" equivalent is called in poetry), and I'm having a problem with their transclusion into the main namespace. Namely, there's a stanza break at the end of one page, and the next page starts with a new stanza, but when transcluded into the main namespace it's all clumped together into one long double-stanza.

The pages in question are pages 5 and 6 of Index:Morning-Glories and Other Stories.djvu. Their transclusion is here.

I tried using {{nop}} like I would use if it were a paragraph that ended at the page break, but that didn't work. Nor did using a second {{nop}} at the top of the second page. I also tried inserting an extra few lines of whitespace within the <poem> tag, since those tags are whitespace-sensitive, but that didn't work either.

What is the appropriate template, tag, or structure to use to get this stanza-break to show up in the main namespace transclusion? Mukkakukaku (talk) 15:40, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I tried using an {{nop}} inside the <poem> tags at the bottom of the first page and the top of the second page; for some reason, it seems to have worked. Could you please check whether it works now? —Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 16:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yep, works now! Thanks, Clockery. I'd like to say that I would have figured it out eventually, but I'd never have thought to put the {{nop}} inside of the <poem> tags themselves. It seems like a very convoluted solution to what appears to be a rather imple problem. Thanks! Mukkakukaku (talk) 16:12, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure, but I seem to have inadvertently avoided this in my poems-across-breaks endeavors. I've been adding little passive-aggressive hidden comments onto poem tags that should ideally wrap gracefully, the presence of these extra tags being that which may or may not be related to the joining behavior. For example, see the page breaks between 22, 23 and 24. Might be another option in your arsenal, especially if you want to blow off steam while at it. :-) djr13 (talk) 21:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I rather like Djr13's approach. Almost psychotherapy: "How does young madam Poem feel about behaving today?"

Please pardon my mucking about thrown into the mix. Apart from the centring I don't think I've added anything much useful.

I am aware of editors who avoid the use of <poem> entirely. Enclosing the whole passage inside (say) {{block center/s}}/{{block center/e}} pairs (which cross pages O.K.) and then using <br/>s at every line-break is much more robust, but of course the raw source is then quite ugly. AuFCL (talk) 22:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paragraph break not visible

On this page A break between two paragraphs is not visible in read mode and they appear as one continuous paragraph. The text is enclosed by {{fs90/s}} — with {{fs90/e}} embedded in the footer. Since I am using the Modern skin, I also checked if the problem was skin related by switching back to Vectra, but the result is the same. Can someone please point out what's wrong? Thanks. — Ineuw talk 18:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The first sentence of the {{fs90/s}} template page says "This template renders the text of a single paragraph at 90% of normal size." (emphasis mine) Mukkakukaku (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  The text was copied from {{fs90}} which I created. {{fs90/s}} was created for multiple paragraphs. (I should correct that). Also, the paragraph break has nothing to do with the font. There is something wrong with that page. If you look at subsequent pages, the paragraph breaks work fine.— Ineuw talk 19:33, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mukkakukaku: Thanks for pointing this out. Two different templates share the same documentation which technically shouldn't happen. I posted a request on GO3's talk page, to help me sort it out.— Ineuw talk 19:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I kicked it, and it seems to work now. djr13 (talk) 20:22, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, a good kick. — by Ineuw earlier this afternoon.
I cannot necessarily give a lucid explanation, but {{fs90/s}} only works for a single paragraph unless:
  1. You separate the last "}" of the template from the text you want it to affect by a new line; or
  2. You enclose the following paragraphs in <p>/</p>s (or some template (like {{p}} which generates them.)
Mediawiki appear to "shoehorn" <div>s (upon which the operation of e.g. {{fs90}} relies) correctly in only at certain points. This is not the problem; the real problem is that if it cannot find a suitable "spot" (<p>s being one, there may be others..?) it silently refuses to process "double-new-lines" into proper paragraphs up to the end of the enclosing </div>. I can only assume this is a still-extant parser limitation of some antiquity. AuFCL (talk)
To be clear, in the above example I used {{fs90/s}} and not {{fs90}}, which was my own rudimentary & elementary contribution - functioning on single paragraphs and I no longer use, having switched to GO3's version of {{fs90/s}} & {{fs90/e}} hundreds of times, but never came across this problem beforehand.— Ineuw talk 00:58, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
<generic expletive>I mistyped. The earlier discussion was meant to refer to {{fs90/s}}, not to {{fs90}} as originally stated. The rest of the discussion, however clumsy, still stands. AuFCL (talk) 01:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Understood both the correction and your explanation. I just wanted to clarify the history for those who still use {{fs90}} to span multiple paragraphs. In any case, I replace them when I come across them, whether they are used on single or multiple paragraphs.— Ineuw talk 02:32, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Google page removal

Could someone remove the initial "Google" page for Index:A Hundred and Seventy Chinese Poems (1919).djvu? This transcription project seems to have gone fallow, and I'd like to take it on, but not until the pagination is corrected from removal of the Google notice. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  DoneIneuw talk 20:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it really necessary to do that? I usually just mark the page 'without text' when I find them. Mukkakukaku (talk) 20:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes we should, because it appears on the Commons. Others can give you other and better reasons as well. It's not a big deal and several people here can do it for you, or tell you how it's done before uploading.
The fundamental issue is that we should look on IA for other copies NOT donated by Google because they tend to damage the works deliberately to their advantage, a topic sometimes discussed in the past.
Another downside of using Google copies with the disclaimer page, is that we can't use the direct IA to Commons transfer tool because it must be downloaded to remove their disclaimer. — Ineuw talk 21:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another issue with leaving the Google page in is that it often displaces pagination by one so that left hand pages become odd-numbered and right hand pages even-numbered. This messes up automatic heading creation. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Beeswaxcandle, in such a case just remove a page at the end of the book which is often a back cover or library card - some useless page for our purpose. I believe that brings the book back to the correct pagination. Cheers friends, —Maury (talk) 04:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quick poll on Unicode use

Greetings all. I have come across a number of pages (e.g. here and here) where the authors make use of an upside-down Greek iota. Whilst I have found Unicode &#8489; (℩), I am not confident it will work in all cases (i.e. does the dreaded blank box appear here →℩← for anyone? Microsoft browsers?) and would appreciate any feedback.

Alternatively has anybody got any ideas as to how to express this more universally? (I've temporarily given up on finding a <math> solution, but one would be really nice bearing in mind the nature of this particular work…) I note that even a related Wikipedia article seems to have given up on this, and simply uses the normal (unturned) Greek iota. AuFCL (talk) 01:39, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, all I see is the dreaded null-box (though i'm still @ IE8 fwiw). -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was afraid of that. Please consider every single other syllable I am thinking or uttering currently to be swearing. AuFCL (talk) 03:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right. This makes me feel quite nauseous, but does this ← work everywhere, please? AuFCL (talk) 04:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both work for me (FF 27.0.1, Vista). —Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 04:55, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both also work with (FF 27.0.1, Mac OS X Mavericks)--kathleen wright5 (talk) 11:22, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
P.S also works with Mac Safari --kathleen wright5 (talk) 11:27, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see both of them (FF 24.3.0, Debian GNU/Linux sid). I think it probably better to use the right character and assume that it will be supported in the future then to stress about every system today, especially for a work that will take forever to process and has a limited but continuing appeal.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:34, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I "see" the second example (IE8, XP-Pro) but its not being rotated 180 degrees in the rendering, leaving me with the expected greek small letter iota (U+03B9) instead of the faux desired turned greek small letter iota (U+2129). -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Any help? The {{Unicode}} template was in the Symbols set of CharInsert all this time btw. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Absolutely it helps!
O.K. Once more for the dummies (me.):
  • Does this mean →← works for everybody?
  • It should but only another survey would verify that. I'll start - works for (IE8, XP Pro) -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Works here as well (FF 27.0.1, Vista Basic). —Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 08:30, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Responding to my own poll feels weird, but) I had an unexpected opportunity in my "other life" to have a quick look at these pages using bog-standard Internet Explorer 11. No problems with anything (symbols or rotations.) In fact it rendered more cleanly than it did under Firefox. Almost embarrassing! 10:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  • If I go back and enclose any "raw" character entity inside a {{Unicode}} invocation Internet Explorer will finally get into line with the other browsers and actually make use of the correct fonts?
  • Just for my own curiosity, I wonder if Internet Explorer correctly rotates this: → ←—if so: time to consider updating {{rotate}}…
  • Not here (IE8, XP Pro). The version on WP explains why IE8 needs a LUA version for that to work. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Aside/Rant—please feel free to generally ignore.) So the fonts were there all along? And not pulled in when needed? Why do we bother? Who writes sensible software any more? Pardon the sarcasm; but this seems to have been unnecessarily painful for such an apparently trivial issue. AuFCL (talk) 01:56, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not quite. A "patch" for Unicode & IPA was added some time ago to common.js in order to get the {{Unicode}} template to at least do that under XP. And, again compare our outdated version to what WP uses - still not the latest & greatest if we go by them. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
UPDATE: I decided instead to change my IE8's 'webpage font' selection in IE's settings to "Lucida Sans Unicode" and, lo-&-behold, even &#8489; (℩) renders properly now - no {{Unicode}} template or class definition needed, PLUS "sans-serif" (the wiki-code, load.php defined, default font) resumes being the "fall-back" core font being rendered just like it always has for me. This is OK by me until somebody comes up with a way to reproduce the same behavior I just did without altering IE's settings since this station is almost dedicated just to accessing wiki-whatever domains anyway. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Das ist gut, ja! AuFCL (talk) 05:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proofreading alignment issue

Is anyone else having problems proofreading texts? When I click on a red link, the page loads but the image and text box are not aligned as normal. The text box stretches the entire length of the page and the image is underneath it. I'm using the vector skin.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 13:45, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nevermind. I figured it out. The column editing size in Preferences somehow got blown up to 80 columns for the text editor.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 13:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It only worked for one image. Now the problem is back. Is anyone else having this issue on Chrome?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 13:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Does hard-refreshing work? —Clockery Fairfeld [t·c] 14:13, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am going to really, really regret pointing this out, but you seem to have accurately described the behaviour resulting from checking Preferences/Editing option "Use horizontal layout when editing in the Page namespace." AuFCL (talk) 17:11, 13 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's unchecked for me. I tried checking it, and I got a different layout, but one which was still possible to do proofreading. The behavior I'm having issues with is that the text box extends the entire width of the page, which pushes the image to be all the way below the text box, meaning I have to scroll down below the text box in order to see the picture, but then I can read the text unless I scroll all the way up. I wonder if there's a CSS issue on one of my pages that's messing with it...—Zhaladshar (Talk) 01:38, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I looks like it's a Chrome issue. FireFox doesn't have the problem.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 01:44, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh well. Unfortunately I'm using F/F so my (lack of) observations can't help any further. Good luck and please let us know if you find the answer! AuFCL (talk) 04:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zhaladshar: Could you please add here the work / page that you were having problems with? I am exploring various browsers (with the exception of IE), and have Chrome as well. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 17:34, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This page exemplifies my problem. However, I've noticed if I'm signed out, the proofreading extension displays just fine. I'm led to think there's either a preference or a CSS/JS issue with my account.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 13:16, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pardon this thought: I can get a similar effect to that which you describe by fooling around with the "width" style within class "prp-page-content" (e.g. by setting it to pretty much anything larger than the default of 50%.) Now as you point out the issue goes away when you are logged out, have you considered (carefully) disabling, say, your Special:Mypage/vector.css or (less likely) Special:Mypage/vector.js and seeing if something in either of these affects the problem? (Obviously please restore configurations after the trial.) AuFCL (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If the above didn't correct the problem, then the settings may be stored in the cookies . . . as I have learned some time ago. Delete the cookies and create a fresh login.— Ineuw talk 19:02, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Zhaladshar:Is this still happening in Chrome? For about an hour or so around midnight (my local time) precisely the same behaviour as you originally described was happening to me in Firefox... and then the problem went away all by itself. Was there another software upgrade? Right now it is [1.23wmf19 (bbbc0b8)] however I have no idea how to check how long this has been activated. AuFCL (talk) 00:55, 29 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See the deployment Roadmap for that info. Although "we" weren't directly scheduled for "enhancements", changes elsewhere still can creep in and mess with us - especially cookie/caching wise. This has been going on for as long as I can remember but has become worse in the past couple of months. I managed to rectify some of this "weirdness" by localizing & tweaking the rest of the .js scripts previously loading from old.wikisource. That cut down on the amount of unneccessary cookie "refreshing" going on with anything related to the navigation sidebar (primarily under vector; stuff like Dynamic layouts' Display options, EPUB, BookMaker and similar gadgets that "build" additional menu choices in the sidebar).

It (MediaWiki:Base.js is still not perfect when it comes to "loading" & cookies -- and it might not have anything to do with the alignment issue at all -- but its the most obvious issue at the moment. The obvious test is to try loging in using some other 'puter but your own. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:16, 29 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for that. I was aware of the Roadmap (and in fact checked it and the "mediawiki/core" list.) However I still don't know how to determine when (say) version bbbc0b8—which I assume is a git submission id?—was made active upon enWS. This may not even be a pertinent issue, and should be considered a most casual enquiry.

At the time the system malfunctioned for me I checked at least a subset of modifications (incidentally including Base.js; since you had mentioned it recently) and found no relevant changes whatsoever. This only confirms whatever did in fact change was outside of my normal "view" and in no way should be considered comprehensive. AuFCL (talk) 02:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AuFCL - Not too long ago, the "roll-out" of a new version was clearly marked in the log/tree with a small graphic banner like "Head" & "Master" currently are. For some reason that stopped working so the only thing I can point to is the switch in the naming of static bits normally changed during an upgrade & stored in your browser's cache. You'd look for the first instance of something like....'wmf20/extensions/blah blah bah
...for the "next" release. If we go by that (not proven), the bump up happened around 6 pm Eastern standard time (-4 hours behind UTC ?) on the 27th.

Here's an oddity- anyone have a cached cookie from the wikidata domain last-modified two months in the future from now? -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:12, 29 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nice technique. Obviously I hadn't thought of that before. My browser here first "sighted" 1.23wmf19 about 3½ days ago; and has not "seen" 1.23wmf20 at all yet; so on the strength of this those upgrades seem unrelated to this matter. (No apparent future dating; I won't install the "prescient" extension here until it pre-emptively passes the Turing test.) AuFCL (talk) 11:00, 29 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AuFCL:, I restored my vector.js and vector.css and it seems the issue is now working. I am not sure why but I no longer have any problems. Thanks for the help.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 13:31, 2 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tables broken in MULTIPLE works

I went to continue proofreading on a work and discovered that lines from a table were not transcluding.

The discovery was made at A History of Japanese Literature. The header for "BOOK THE FOURTH" is not transcluding in the table of contents, and neither is chapter VI. of BOOK THE SIXTH. These items used to appear in the transcluded table, but no longer do so.

I found the same problem at Chapter 3 of An Introduction to the Study of Fishes, where line item "67,68" does not transclude either.

In both instances, the problem is that the first table row from a page is not transcluding when a table spans multiple pages. Neither instance of this problem existed when I first set up the pages.

Has a change been made in the way tables must be formetted for transclusion when they span multiple pages? And does this mean we'll have to search our entire library for other instances in order to fix them? --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:39, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've just had a look at the first of these. The {{nop}} was missing from the beginning of the page body on the second page. I've fixed that one. See Help:Page breaks#Tables across page breaks. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, so it has changed. The {{nop}} wasn't required before when I was setting up those pages. We may have to go back and correct a large number of works proofread before March 2013.
The {{nop}} creates an additional transclusion problem, however, as now the page number is not displayed to the left of the text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:04, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@EncycloPetey: There is nothing new about needing a starting {{nop}}, it has been that way for many years to get MediaWiki to see the table component as a new line and table formatting. I am not sure how you have avoided that previously. I know that some used to avoid it by putting the new column starter on the end of the preceding page. If there are multiple works, you may find it more relates to your works, those that I have/seen edited should be okay, and I would think that for numbers of others it will be the same. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you are having issues with nop which I haven't seen before, you can always try
|text text text ...

at the top of the body part, which is a workable solution and what I used to use before nop. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Um, if it's been that way for "many years", then why wasn't that information mentioned in Help:Page breaks#Tables across page breaks before last March? That's when an edit was made to insert the information. Either way, it doesn't solve the current problem of the missing page number links. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:53, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The information to use nop has been there since InductiveLoad wrote the page in 2011. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It cannot be "fixed" as long as wiki-markup for tables is in use. Even with straight HTML, the proofreading page extension with transclusion won't allow an embedded page number to be inserted at the correct point (the begining of a new Page: rather than the end of the previous Page:). This behavior has been that way since I can remember. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Two pages per image

I uploaded from the Internet Archive a DjVu file which has two pages per image: Index:Casement Report.djvu. Does anybody know of an easy way to split each image into two so that there would be only one page per image? Thanks. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 21:28, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TOC formatting help

Can I bug someone to format the first page of this TOC for me using a "simple" table as opposed to templates? and then I can copy the formatting for the remaining pages myself. I'm just not sure how to format the titles with Roman Numerals (indentation). The text has already been proofread. Sorry if the pre-wikilinking makes things messier and more complicated. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 05:09, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Formatted the TOC but couldn't finish it because I ran out of steam. I can continue tomorrow if it's OK with you.
For anchors, I ALWAYS use the DjVu page number because they are unique! This is the most logical way (to me) and I don't need to think of what I did, and where. My anchors are always use this format: anchor=D32-1 The "D" is necessary because anchors must start with an alphabetic character, the number following indicates that it's on DjVu page number 32, and -1 indicates that it's the first anchor on the page. If there is more than one anchor on a page, as there are in this case, I number them sequentially as . . . D32-2, D32-3, . . . etc. The Roman numbers mentioned above are only for display, but the only true reference in the Page namespace are the DjVu numbers, in the main namespace the webpage names. — Ineuw talk 06:52, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for helping! I will be away from the computer for a bit as well. When I return, I have a couple comments/questions about your adjustments to formatting of the poetry. Till then, thanks much again, Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow! You have done the whole TOC... Thank you! With regard to adding {{Dhr}}, however, between stanzas... I use a double carriage instead. I don't plan on using Dhr with the rest of the work, for that is not how I have formatted the remaining 200+ pages so far, and I don't plan on changing every page/instance. For formatting uniformity's sake, I am considering removing the ones you have added, but I am hesitant thinking you might take it wrong... Also, I have been noincluding the rules, but I noticed you have re-included some of them. Again, for uniformity, I don't plan on including them for the remainder of the text (formatting decision since the separation between poems is not necessary for our page layouts like it perhaps was in the original), so I believe I will undo what you have done there as well. Hoping you won't mind, and thanks again for your help with the TOC; you have done more than I expected/asked, and it is much appreciated! I hadn't considered linking the page numbers to anchors; it seems more work than is necessary, since the poems are already linked to by their titles. So I'll have to add anchors from now on when proofreading then, right? Thanks again, Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:03, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can I actually undo the anchoring system? I just don't feel it is necessary since sectioning is already used in the titles, and it is more (complicated) work (for me) than I would like to take on. Would you be offended since you already put in the work you had done? I won't ask you to make the changes... I can do it myself. Would you be too disappointed? Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:16, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. First, you're most welcome and I apologize for the implemented, but unasked for changes. Please feel free to make any and all changes. Even I wasn't sure about all the anchors, with the possible exception of a few. The {{Dhr}} was used because I wasn't sure that you were aware of the template. It would be proper if I reverted the changes to save you from doing the extra work. — Ineuw talk 20:15, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just feel bad with all the work you have done (which I do appreciate). I would carry on with anchors, etc. where you left off if I was feeling more ambitious, but alas!... I was aware of {{Dhr}} and have used it on certain occasions, just not between stanzas. I feel a double-carriage is sufficient (and easier!). But thank you! Don't worry about reverting anything for me; I don't mind going through the pages, as I have already taken note of which pages you have adjusted. No problems there! Again, thanks for the TOC formatting, and thanks for being gracious about any reversions/adjustments I might make with your work. I am always open to suggestions, however, even though I may be stubborn and set in my ways on occasion! Sincerely, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:39, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed all the Dhr and reverted the noincludes. I feel about my work in the same way, and appreciate your sense of consistency. When making the changes, I was also ready to revert them for that very reason. . Just as a qualification, I designed the {{Dhr}} because over a year ago, my work was edited and double rows were reverted to single rows. Having some knowledge of database storage, I assumed that they were removed because empty lines may contribute to data corruption. (To be certain, someone in the know would have to clarify this.) The anchors need only to be removed in the TOC, but they can stay in the text. This really depends on how you visualize the transcluded material - in case you want to place more than one poem on a page. Again, sorry for the unnecessary extra work.— Ineuw talk 21:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You need not apologize. You made things easier for me, and I have learned some things to boot! All is appreciated, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:19, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ineuw: made it easy for me by establishing the basic indent structure, however I have just added a simple span to each of the (relevant, i.e. not all) Roman numerals to pull them into alignment more closely mirroring the book. I was a little surprised that an explicit width styling does not appear to be required when applied inside a table cell, but it most certainly is for standalone use. In case it is needed here is the (fuller) version:
<span style="display:inline-block;text-align:right;width:2em;>XVI</span>
N.B. Adjust "2em" above to be just wider than the longest number in the whole sequence; vary XVI as appropriate. Eggs. AuFCL (talk) 23:56, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for that, AuFCL. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:10, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Noticed this too late but I am ready to add a third column with right aligned text if you so desire. That's the only way I know how to resolve this issue.— Ineuw talk 02:15, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have an unusal problem with this.

It previews Ok, but then doesn't render OK once saved.

Can someone please sanity check the transcluded pages and templates, to make sure I haven't overlooked something obvious? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've done some work on the 1st table on top of the page, but I am not familiar with your coding style for the rest and it's best that I don't touch it.— Ineuw talk 17:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What titles to use?

I'm probably going to transcribe (eventually) Medical Inquiries and Observations, by Benjamin Rush. The problem is, the work is in 5 volumes, with each one having a different title. Should I create a separate page for each volume, or should I create one "master" page?--Frglz (talk) 05:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because they are volumes of the same work, the preference would be have them under one main page with a sub-page for each volume. (See History of England (Froude) for an example of how this works.) By the way, I note that the links on the author page are to different editions. Best practice is to have all the volumes from the same edition. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A couple of questions from a new person.

A) When a document has stamps on it, how are those to be transcribed?

B) When a page is missing an image, is it okay to crop a copy of the scan and remove the background?A480641 (talk) 22:21, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I checked through your contributions and the following reply is based on the pages you worked on:
By stamps, if you mean the library stamps, etc. - The answer is no. We don't copy them.
By missing image, if you are referring to the main page of the 1931 "The Highway code", (or any other image) - we try our best to use high resolution images because the .djvu image is very low resolution. If you can find a higher resolution image on the web and need help, send me the link and I will explain what can be done. FYI - most, but not all, of our documents & projects come from Internet Archive and they also have high resolution .JP2 versions of the same .djvu files. That's where we get our images from. In your case, the document comes from elsewhere, and that's why I recommend that you look for a higher resolution image. I hope this helps.— Ineuw talk 23:55, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Transclusion limits", etc.

Looking for advice on what to do about the TOC's (there are two sets) for the PotM. In the second set, to quote ShakespeareFan00, "The original format is in the early revision, but I went back to a simpler template formatting because the transclusion broke, due to the use of a lot of templates. Feel free to put the formatting back, but the transclusion limits will need to be looked into."

Question. Should the template formatting for all the TOC pages be simplified (that would mean changing 5 pages of TOC formatting), or can something be done about the "transclusion limits" for the two 'problematic' pages instead? This is beyond my ability. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The only way to come in under the limit is to reduce the overall amount of templates and/or per-template parameters being applied. I know the root of the problem there is most likely the "resource expensive" {{Dotted TOC page listing}} template but Shakes has embedded it in some custom cascading template scheme that I just cannot follow.

I did try to make a less "intensive" dot-leader template based on some previous testing done with the help & input of fellow contributors - its in Template:Td/dot/sandbox if that helps him any. Other than that, and if reducing the amount of overall template-mass at play does not solve the problem, it looks like you'll need to split Pt 1 and Pt 2 into separate sub-pages. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GO3: Would it not just be 'simpler' to simplify the formatting? It might take me a while, but I could manage (tackle) it. It doesn't seem desirable at this point to split the Parts up (if I understand what you mean). @ShakespeareFan00: Do you have any objections to my simplifying the TOC pages, or do you want to follow some other course suggested by GO3? My opinion is to keep it simple, but that is because I am simple minded. Londonjackbooks (talk) 03:06, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No objections here & of course "simplifying it" is the easiest way to go. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:11, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
{{td/dot}} is where the problem arises... Simplify that template and thigns become easier. No objections to simplifications. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:32, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1936 posthumous British text might still be copyright in the United States - please check

I am confused about the US copyright status of the English translation of the poem L'après-midi d'un faune by Bloomsbury Group artist Roger Fry. Would someone with clearer understanding of US law please review the tags I posted there, and come up with a suitable US tag? Although it became public domain in 1984, I think the URAA might have put it back in copyright in the US, and it may have to be taken down from Wikisource. --Hroðulf (talk) 09:24, 4 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is complicated but British law might be the main problem rather than American. In 1995 UK statutory instrument SI 1995/3297 harmonised British copyright with Europe, which both extended the copyright period to 70 years pma and retroactively revived copyrights that had entered the public domain. So Fry's work The Poems of Mallarmé would have been in the public domain in 1985 but back under copyright from 1995 to 2005 in the UK and the rest of Europe. That's when the URAA becomes an issue. The URAA would only have brought the translation back into copyright if it was in copyright in its home country in 1996 (the URAA was the US response to the international community pressuring them to get into line on international copyright law, similar to the British SI). If it had been in the public domain in the UK in 1996, it would not have been affected by the URAA. However, as it had been brought back into copyright in the UK one year earlier, the URAA also brought it back into copyright in the US. Then a completely separate US law extended the copyright term to 95 years from publication, so it is probably still under copyright in the United States. The posthumous publication would have probably only affected the copyright if it had been published after 2004 (70 years pma). I'm not sure if I've got all of that right, so Im going to attach a {{copyvio}} and copy this thread to Wikisource:Possible copyright violations. Please note that the original French version is in the public domain so, if your French is up to it, a Wikisource translation is still possible. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:59, 4 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Things have changed... need some help

Hi all! Things seem to have changed a lot since I was here last, and I'm having a bit of trouble. Perhaps I'm being a bit dense, but I am attempting to follow the instructions on Help:Adding_texts and other pages linked, and am having major issues. The Help pages lead me to believe that after having created Index:Address as the ABA president.pdf, I should be able to start entering text by going to, for example, Page:Address as the ABA president.pdf/3. All I'm getting is errors. I can't enter any text (only the edit summary box is coming up), and if I click on "Image", some background process seems to die. There's also no   button. Any help would be appreciated, thanks. Storkk (talk) 15:01, 4 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Everything you've done looks right. I'm afraid I can't tell what the problem is at the moment. There is a known problem with PDFs that affects Commons' thumbnail generator but the file appears to be working on Commons itself, so I don't think that's it (besides, that bug still generated the page image only without the words, which was weird). I also get an "Error generating thumbnail" message from the "Image" link:
Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: 24798 Done 'gs' '-sDEVICE=jpeg' '-sOutputFile=-' '-dFirstPage=3' '-dLastPage=3' '-r150' '-dBATCH' '-dNOPAUSE' '-q' '/tmp/localcopy_222d13c1788b-1.pdf'
24799 Killed | 'convert' '-depth' '8' '-resize' '3743' '-' '/tmp/transform_ee2e1b9e46a5-1.jpg'
The problem may lie with the Proofread Page extension. Someone with more knowledge of the software might be able to give you a better answer. It might even be worth a bug report.
I'm not sure about the OCR button; I never used it and it might have been removed. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:03, 4 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've fixed the problem with the thumbnails—for some reason the scan resolution had been set to 0. WRT the OCR button, the default is disabled. You can enable this through the gadgets in your Preferences. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:08, 4 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks very much, AdamBMorgan and Beeswaxcandle... it is working now. Wrapping my head around the "new" (ha!) way of doing this here is proving a little challenge, but the changes over the last seven years seem on the whole to be extremely positive. Thanks again, Storkk (talk) 19:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On the use of long s

When a page uses a long s (ſ) (e.g. Page:Selected Orations Swedish Academy 1792.djvu/82 should I use the long s symbol or a normal s? A480641 (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The {{long s}} (shortcut: {{ls}}) template will switch between them (displaying the long s in the page namespace and a normal s in the main namespace). The original idea was to provide a switch, so that the reader could choose between long or normal, but the code didn't work properly and it hasn't been implemented yet. In theory, in the future, someone will make that work and the template will be used as part of that. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:42, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Historical scientific papers and monographs?

I'm a contributor to Wikiproject Paleontology on Wikipedia and I thought it would be cool if Wikisource could archive historical scientific papers and monographs about prehistoric life. However, while the introduction for new users refers to popular science articles, mention of the peer-reviewed literature is conspicuously absent. Does this reflect policy? Are technical works outside the scope of Wikisource or under a special copyright situtation that prevents their inclusion? Abyssal (talk) 02:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Definitely in scope. We have examples, though not very many. For one example see Character and description of Kingia, wherein is articulated for the first time the fundamental division between angiosperms and gymnosperms. Hesperian 03:50, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Glad to hear it! Nice to see a familiar face around here, too. Abyssal (talk) 14:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An Index move/renaming help is asked for

This file Index:Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and Republican.djvu needs to be moved and renamed as Index:Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and Republican, Vol 1.djvu because it's made up of two volumes. For this, the commons source file Commons:File:Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and Republican.djvu also needs to be moved/renamed. How this affects the WS Index is unknown to me, especially the order of renaming is my concern. I am also no clue as to how the move on WS affect the pages. The book is validated.

I would like to do it but need knowledgeable direction. Thanks in advance.— Ineuw talk 03:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can move the Commons file and everything here will continue to work via the redirect. When you move the Index file, all the pages will break until they are moved too. You can post a Wikisource:Bot requests for someone to move all the pages. Hesperian 09:24, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the information.— Ineuw talk 15:19, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Transcluded page is not linking to moved Index pages.

Cleared all caches that are user accessible, but this page still doesn't recognize the source index. Could someone please help? Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and Republican, Vol 1/Book I/Chapter 1 For my own knowledge, is this a cache issue, and if so, do users can manage this? Thanks.— Ineuw talk 23:11, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Typo in the Pages command line - its volume 1 (the number one) not volume I (capital letter i). -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks GO3.— Ineuw talk 01:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anyone? Nice quick task. Can't self validate for obvious reasons. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:13, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. —Clockery Fairfeld [t] 13:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Way back before i got to know about m-dashes I used {{bar|1}} a lot. Ideally these should be replaced. with m-dasheses, i.e "—" Any ideas on how to do this?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:39, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A replace bot can run; it should be about 600 pages (test edit).--Mpaa (talk) 22:53, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done.--Mpaa (talk) 20:18, 11 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I'm in the process of slowly depreceating these over concerns about parser load.

The assistance of the regulars in re-engineering the tables using them would be appreciated. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re validation request

Page:A Basic Guide to Open Educational Resources.pdf/109 Had a stubborn URL that was making trouble. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Costly templatws

Found this one - Template:Table row 1dot-1 which needs to be replaced. 19:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

And now deprecated and tagged for speedy deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Table rowspans won't format as intended. Can someone beat mediawiki into submission please?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Edna W. Underwood has a collection of translations entitled Moons of Nippon, translations from poets of old Japan. Should the Wikisource page be Moons of Nippon, or Moons of Nippon, translations from poets of old Japan?--Frglz (talk) 22:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I usually just use the main title and only add the subtitle if needed for disambiguation. So, I suggest Moons of Nippon would be fine. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thank you.--Frglz (talk) 09:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Robert Fortune page

It would appear that a couple of the dates on this page could be suffering from a typo. The list appears to be in chronological order but from date of 1820 or so there is a jump to the 1850s or so. Can this be correct?


Good catch, Anne. Indeed the dates were incorrect. Fixed by @Clockery: -- DutchTreat (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Anne Mac: Next time, you can try fixing typos like that yourself   Best regards,—Clockery Fairfeld (ƒ=ma) 04:38, 19 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need help with a TOC design problem.

In the process of adding wiki links to the TOC design OF THIS PAGE I found that the text often runs into the page number. Changing the font size and/or the column width fixes one paragraph but another gets messed up. I copied the first entry to THIS SANDBOX and ask if someone can suggest how to prevent this from happening.— Ineuw talk 03:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One possible solution in two halves:
  1. Note you have used {{float right}} for page numbers. This is O.K. but may I suggest adding suitable margin-offset (parameters 2,3,4 are respectively: offest, top+bottom(combined) and left.) Recommend setting left margins to (say) 1em?
  2. Above half solution can itself cause vertical line collision effects. To counter this may I suggest separating each "paragraph"/sub-block with some variant of {{-}} to ensure proper clearing completes before next block begins?
I have added one possible layout method to your sandbox. If you find the paragraph marker usage too confusing then try substituting with {{clear}}s per above? AuFCL (talk) 08:20, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've added a different solution to your sandbox without an explicit table. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Interesting use of negative-right-offsets. Good idea! AuFCL (talk) 10:54, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A belated thanks to all for the examples.— Ineuw talk 03:37, 29 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status of scientific paper

This work seems to be a public domain government document. Is it?--Frglz (talk) 20:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, this PDF contains Google watermarks. Do the watermarks make the work non-PD, and so have to be removed, or can the PDF be used for transcribing even with the watermarks?--Frglz (talk) 20:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For the first one, it is hard to tell. I expect the Montana State Library would have checked before uploading it but I can't see anything to explain why or in what way it has been released. If you want to do so, you could contact the Montana State Library or the Montana Natural Heritage Program (the publisher) directly and ask if, and how, it has been released; there is a process over on Commons for getting that documented by e-mail. (The author's e-mail address is actually on the title page but it's from 1997 so it may no longer be valid.) That might be the only way to now for sure.
For the second one, the watermarks do not affect the PD status (and they are not transcribed into our version). Google adds watermarks to everything regardless of whether the text is in the public domain or not. I think they can be removed but I have never tried to do so myself. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • AdamBMorgan, User:Frglz is going to have problems with that "second one" shown as a PDF file because the page images did not come into the right side and some have scattered text on the left side to edit. He should have used a .djvu file, as you know. There are both Google watermarks and a University marks on the pages when one looks at "image" at the top and as I have encountered in the past there will be many times he will never see any image that should have come in either as a thumbnail image or the full image we sometimes view. George Orwell III once corrected an identical situation for me. I think he used a purge tool. —Maury (talk) 20:05, 29 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

mistake in validated page

I am a newbie, have just done 2 pages, and I noticed an obvious spelling mistake in a page that is already validated. Is it possible to correct this mistake? I can't see how to get the page into edit mode. Thanks

@Pixelwarrior: I think you can get back to correct the pages now. If not - post here and please sign your post with ~~~~ — Ineuw talk 02:58, 28 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pixelwarrior (talk) 02:55, 4 May 2014 (UTC) — Ineuw talk I did not see the "edit" tab at the top ... Fixed now! Thank you!Reply[reply]

Does this project have a highlight / hilite function?

Hello! My text document has highlighted text. How is highlighting done in this project? English Wikipedia has wikipedia:template:hilite. This project does not have that in place at Template:Hilite. How is highlighting managed here? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Use html tags (your sig is a clue). <mark> produces this or this. Moondyne (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Getting texts validated

Noob question: once you have proofread a submitted text is there any way to speed up the validation process? I've had a few proofread texts waiting around for a couple of weeks without being validated and I want to make sure I wasn't supposed to do something else afterwards to keep the submission process going. Abyssal (talk) 17:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not really. There's nothing institutionalised but some people engage in social contracts i.e. make deals with other users to validate each others' works. You'll find that most of the long-term contributors here have a long list of years-old proofread works awaiting validation. Most of us have learned to accept that — to see 'proofread and awaiting validation' as the goal, rather than aim for 'validated', which is out of our control. Hesperian 23:52, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Abyssal, I with many others here help each other in both proofreading as well as validating. I have done this for many years now and with no one specific person until recently where three of us work together on books about Mexico. Hesperian (above) posted a list of pages he needed validation here on his talk page. I helped him by validating those pages and he thanked me. Good manners help a lot. We all try to help each other and especially after we get to know others for awhile. For now, if you know someone that is working on the same project, or different projects, ask him or her if you two can swap helping each other with proofreading or validating. Expand this as time passes into years. Make yourself well-known to others and that can be done also by posting information about yourself on your personal page and your talk page. That way you become less of a stranger to others. Oh, also when asking a question like you have, please post the location of your project so people can see it. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 03:30, 4 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On a note related to Hesperian's comment has the Wikisource community ever actually considered formally creating a place for active editors to validate each others' work in a quid pro quo fashion? We could start a page or community portal subpage where active members can list their current projects in need of validation and then we could go about validating each others' work. The current system of lumping all unvalidated works together in one category isn't too helpful because even if you start validating random works you have no idea of the user who submitted it is even around any more much less going to validate some of your pages in return. But if we had some kind of centralized exchange I think it would accelerate the process of getting works validated and transcluded into the main space, and I believe that acceleration would do a lot for community morale, because let's face it, substantial waits between submission and transclusions are rather discouraging and drain contributor motivation. Abyssal (talk) 23:43, 5 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think it is a good idea but some editors just exchange favors as suggested above and move forward while the book remains unvalidated (4-ever) and just transclude the projects. What should be "validated" thus becomes? - Ignored and it continues. Therefore probably some of the older non-validated works are like orphans. We do have a list of older works that need proofreading / validating - and that grows. I think for the most part they get no present activity. I and others worked on some one when the list idea was new. In the not so distant past, I myself would ask openly "is validation important?" Basically the answer was absolutely but as you point out and most of us know, it does not always happen. Some just skip validations or validate a few pages and then go straight to transclusions leaving behind unvalidated books as they go straight to another book. For me, unvalidated means incomplete due to my asking about it and getting a confirmation on how necessary validations are. But what can be done with everyone as volunteer workers? Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 04:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Few clarifications and doubts on Wikisource

Hi I am from Telugu community. I am writing here, so as that I can have some more clarity on how Wikisource works. We have been facing some internal friction among members on few issues pertaining to copyright status of the books that are being uploaded to Wikisource.

  1. The first concern is regarding books that are on DLI ( The website claims that the books are out of copyright and that the authors have been consulted about it. There are many books that are public domain by definition of Indian copyright law, which assumes a book is in public domain 60 years after the death of its author, if the author doesn't specifically release it into public domain. Also, there are some state owned works which the author has "sold" to the Government ,(though their count is too less) where the Government is supposed to release them in a publicly open free license (which the Government doesn't actively look at). So, the assumption is that every book on DLI is copyright free. Thats what one of the member from the community strongly feels. Upon closer examination, DLI has never sent individual requests for releasing books into public domain. It made a public announcement in print media and inviting objections on any works that may be under copyright but could have mistakenly made into the listings on the website. Now, that the internet penetration is too low in India, most of the authors are not aware that their works, which may be selling in market under copyright, might be put up into public domain without their concern. This came to light when one book was being put up, and I, who knew the author and the book being published first in 1994, got a smell of something fishy happening. The author expired on February this year. So, I wanted to know how DLI works, and I found that out of thousands of books available there which are published in current times, only 6 thousand something are having a fool proof declaration on Copyright status. There is no such data avialble for rest of the books. Reference : slide number 21.
    Now if the community works on such doubtful books, which do not have a clear copyright information and tomorrow if the author claims the copyright and asks the community remove the book, the efforts put up by the community are wasted. Also, there are hundreds of other books that are essential to be put up on wikisource. Could any of the knowledged people here guide our community in the right path?
  2. The second concern is about using public domain books which are hosted on sources like Google. Can we upload such books? Because they contain a google watermark and some of them are being sold by google, does it have any problem?
  3. The third concern is about how to work on multilanguage books? For instance there are trilingual dictionaries, of which one language is Telugu. should we reproduce the book as it is? Or can we have translation of the other language?

Thank you for reading and engaging with above questions. --Rahmanuddin (talk) 11:28, 7 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  1. Hmm. I can't think of anything which can be done except to remove the books which are clear copyvios, and discuss the doubtful ones. Following the rule of life+60 years might be the best course to follow for now. If it's possible, you could also contact the DLI to obtain evidence of PD. Any other ideas, anyone?
  2. There is absolutely no problem if books digitized by Google are uploaded (that watermark is misleading), provided the books themselves are in the public domain.
  3. I believe the book can be transcribed as it is, with all languages as they originally were. At the same time, transcribing the book on each language Wikisource (or mulws if there isn't a specific language subdomain for any language) the book has definitions in might be a good idea (see Index:A Malayalam and English dictionary 1871.djvu and ml:സൂചിക:A Malayalam and English dictionary 1871.djvu for an example).
I'd appreciate it if anyone else could expand on my reply. Best regards,—Clockery Fairfeld (ƒ=ma) 14:37, 7 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Asking for help in correcting a template

This PSM project template was intended to be used inline but I am unable to make it so. Can anyone please help in resolving the issue (if possible)? Thanks in advance.— Ineuw talk 17:59, 9 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And now? -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perfect, just like everything touched by your hands and mind. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 20:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Multiple documents in one source file

I have a procedural question regarding what to do when a file is actually two separate documents collated. In this case, where I am transcribing the first part, the second part is an extract of an unidentified volume of the Northwestern Reporter discussing the same case. Obviously, the ideal solution would be to split the PDF, and upload the second part separately - however I can't find enough information on the second part to upload it to Commons (a few volumes have been digitized by Google and the Internet Archive, but this doesn't seem to be one of them). Should I just ignore the second part here on Wikisource, assuming the original uploader doesn't respond? Storkk (talk) 10:11, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missing Colours

In Index:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_30.djvu I can't see the validate/proofread colours anymore. When you open a page of the book, everything is fine, but on the Index page the colours are missing. Can someone help? WeeJeeVee (talk) 10:21, 13 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Purging the page generally fixes that. Easiest way is to add the clock gadget (preferences, gadgets, interface, clock and purge) and click on the time. Moondyne (talk) 10:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ditto, the clock/page purge gadget is the best way to go.— Ineuw talk 17:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks SO much for that advice; the repeatedly disappearing colours was driving me batty. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:47, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References to Wikisource from Wikisource

When one work on Wikisource cites another that is also available here, is there a way to mark that connection between the two? I found Wikisource:References to Wikisource but this and all the citation templates I saw seem to be solely about external references to Wikisource. Is there an equivalent for "internal" references? -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:18, 18 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See WS:LINKSTYLE. Is that what you mean? Moondyne (talk) 23:38, 18 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's not what I had in mind, but largely equivalent. Just haven't seen many wikilinks in texts around here yet. Thanks! -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:47, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This work has multiple internal links to Wikisource. The volume is higher than other works, as the original work lists multiple authors and works that are in, or are appropriate for Wikisource. It is probably the most extreme use of Wikisource internal referencing that would be in scope here. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's an instructive example - thanks! -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:50, 28 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Daniel Mietchen: just not looking in the right works. We have Category:Internal link templates and there are some good base templates there for which you are encourage to use for nesting. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:11, 29 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Table formatting

Hello! I need some help with formatting this beast. My two main problems: 1) right floating price and 2) vertical alignment when template:hi is used. Thanks a lot in advance! Cheers, Captain Nemo (talk) 02:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Hi. The table is done and if you have any questions, please contact. - aka "Table man". — Ineuw talk 03:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks a lot, the table man:)! Cheers, Captain Nemo (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Extra headings

I want to add some extra headings to a text for better organization and for finding my place in general. Adding section tags does not seem to help because it does not automatically add any ID attributes for anchoring, and I have no text to exclude anyway. I could just put in ID's manually, for bookmarking, but I also need some way of distinguishing extra headings from the text in the printed edition. Do I add headers right in the Page namespace? Is there a common way of doing it? Heyzeuss (talk) 11:30, 30 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is {{anchor}} what you're looking for? I use them when multiple small sections will be transcluded to the same page, but there still be reference to those smaller sections. An example of their use is at Ante-Nicene Christian Library/Volume I/Epistle to Diognetus where each chapter has an anchor (inserted in the Page: namespace). By the way, the page numbers in the Mainspace also act as anchors. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thanks. ː) Heyzeuss (talk) 08:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A linking and transclusion problem to server caching?

I had to move the subpages of Nye's History of the USA to correct the main ns page structure, and aside from the first Contents entry to Chapter I, none of the subsequent links work. I checked the spelling, cleared local caches, but still no luck. I suspect it's a server cache, but still would be nice if someone could check if and what I did wrong. Thanks in advance.— Ineuw talk 01:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed - the entries used "smart" (or "rich text") apostrophe in Nye's instead of plain (keyboard) ones. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's fixed. You're my Tlatoani of Wikisource. Feel free to sacrifice anyone you want.— Ineuw talk 02:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(You gave you insane? We shall all be murthered in one another's beds! AuFCL (talk) 02:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC))Reply[reply]
tsk... sacrifices don't work - you're all back the next day no matter how many I perform.

Still looking for answers...

... <sigh> George Orwell III (talk) 02:47, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think Ineuw's discussion just got mugged; however:
(Re: tsk: then you are not following through adequately. Not my place to teach you your business.)
  • {{center block}} and {{block center}} are not quite the same beasts; but more could be done to amalgamate them.
  • dotted TOC... spaces is not and never will be fillsp. Don't break your brain trying to fit  : Why not implement two nested calls to #invoke:String|rep|, the innermost adds spaces number of &nbsp;s to symbol; then feed the result of that into another #invoke:String|rep|((that))|244?
  • {{aligned table}} interesting... still looking for an actual consumer of its services though...
Mugging completed. Back to your usual scheduled program? AuFCL (talk) 05:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can someone do a syntax check on the sandbox version of this?

It was an attempt to generalise the cl-* series of templates into something that was usable for any sidenoted work. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:05, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re-indexing of djvu-file necessary?


I am a newbie and currently working on a small project of my own, Index:Savagetribesofformosa1926.djvu. Everything seemed fine up to now and I already finished a larger amount of work until I found out, that I missed to scan one of the 23 pages, page 7 ... *blush* - I fixed the djvu ([3]) and hoped everything else would work automagically, but of course it didn't. As you can see in the Index the missing file is not shown. Will I have to create a new index? And how do I? And will I lose any of the already done work? Please help, any hint is much appreciated ..... Thank you, Denis Barthel (talk) 12:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Denis Barthel: Please place a request for page moves (start and finish pages, and by the required increment and direction) to Wikisource:Bot requests and sks will take pity on you (as they have done with us previously). :-) On the index page, you will also see a link to the top right that will purge the File at Commons, and that should clean up the file images, and we may have to change any page numbering, though please start with the request. — billinghurst sDrewth 17:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was a short doc with only a few pages to realign. Please, check my corrections - but I don't think there are any remaining issues. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you both for your help, everything is working fine now. Your help was very encouraging. Denis Barthel (talk) 07:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On the above pages small squares show up in various places which are not visible in edit mode and only appear in Firefox 29.0.1 AFAIK. They don't appear in Safari 7.0.4, but I can't test with Internet Explorer because I'm using Mac OS X 10.9 Mavericks. Could someone please test the above with Internet Explorer and if possible get rid of this formatting problem. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 00:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also there are two duplicate pages scanned, (I noted on the Index talk page). Kathleen, you probably do not want to proofread this until the source file is repaired. I think the work may be lost when all the numbers move.--BirgitteSB 01:00, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oops. I hope I haven't just made somebody's life harder. I validated Kathleen's problem pages before realising Birgitte's warning. FWIW I am using FF 29.0.1 on Linux, and can see the "boxes" both in edit and normal mode so can remove them. Looks like OCR-gone-mad and nothing more, as there does not seem to be rhyme or reason as to their occurrence. AuFCL (talk) 12:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Braces spanning two rows in a table?

Hello, I am having only four more pages to transcribe in my project, but I can't go on, as all of them cause the same problem: these pages contain tables wherein there are braces ("{") spanning over two rows


(Upload an image to replace this placeholder.)

. And as I can place the symbol only in one row, I don't know how to solve this. I'd be so glad for your help, as I would love to finish the project. Greets, Denis Barthel (talk) 23:16, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which table? What page?— Ineuw talk 23:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I found the table and can help you later in a few hours if you wish. — Ineuw talk 23:54, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi folks. I proofread Page:Savagetribesofformosa1926.djvu/19 as a sample. Feel free to tweak/improve as you see fit. AuFCL (talk) 02:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AuFCL: Another Canadian job gone to Australia. Well, at least it's still in the Commonwealth. BTW, good job. We of the north, salute you.— Ineuw talk 03:42, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't so much think of you guys as being in the "north", so much as being on the wrong side of the date-line! AuFCL (talk) 03:54, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
However, it is nice to have a night crew to look after things while we take our well-deserved rests. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:01, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A minor correction of your perceptions. First, we happen to be the "day crew," and not the "night crew." . . . and from where we sit (upright) you guys are upside down, and on the wrong side of the dateline. — Ineuw talk 05:09, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yawn. That remark was so yesterday. (Poor Denis is going to be wondering what on earth is going on. Please ignore us.) AuFCL (talk) 05:36, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AuFCL: and @Ineuw:: Thank you very much for your help, and I appreciate a nice derailing of a thread :) - I have tried my very best to solve the problems and could help myself twice, but my attempts shipwrecked twice too. I allow myself to ask for your help in these two cases and marked them as Problematic such, especially as I am finished else with the proofreading of the project: Index:Savagetribesofformosa1926.djvu. I hope this is not to unreasonable? Greets, Denis Barthel (talk) 20:39, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Denis Barthel: The only thing I can do for the missing three pages is to insert high quality images. Again, this will take some 24 hours. — Ineuw talk 21:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ineuw:, sorry, this is unclear to me, it's only two pages we are talking about and it only relates to the tables in the text, which are much to complex for me to cope with. If inserting high-quality images of these tables would be good enough, I'd make it by myself; but I admit, I'd be surprised ... :) Denis Barthel (talk) 21:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Denis Barthel: It's not at all unusual. I've done hundreds of tables but when pressed by time, I do turn to images. The choice is yours. In any case, I uploaded the booklet to IA for generating JP2 images, and this takes some time, depending on the queue in which there are 225 documents ahead of us.Ineuw talk 21:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ineuw: - ah, now I understand. As I uploaded the brochures pages as single jpgs to the commons in higher quality (File:SavageTribesOfFormosa1926 12.jpg, File:SavageTribesOfFormosa1926 14.jpg), would it be sufficient to integrate these images or the excerpts, respectively? Denis Barthel (talk) 21:38, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Absolutely. I also recommend (if possible) that you convert it to .png format which seems to be somewhat clearer for line graphics and drwaings. Also, in case you don't like the results, we'll have the IA version latest by tomorrow.— Ineuw talk 23:40, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
After the last faux pas I should not dare to take bread out of the mouths of hard-drinkingworking Canucks. Just let me know if there is anything I can do to help once the dust settles again. AuFCL (talk) 07:14, 11 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

lead words

It's ages since I edited WS and I've forgotten the recommended treatment of lead (link?) words at the end of pages; example. Are they simply left out or is there a template that records their presence? Can't find it in the help pages. Chris55 (talk) 09:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Chris55.

I believe the inclusion of these words is strictly a personal choice; however if you chose to do so I consider including them in the footer exactly as you have done is definitely the nicest way to go about this. To the best of my knowledge there are neither tracking templates or indeed "official" guidelines.

Regards, AuFCL (talk) 11:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Floating page link page breaks incorrect

I created a main page from these pages to preview what it will look like, but I noticed that the floating page links on the left-hand side of the text are incorrect for the Autobiography and Contents. If you hover over the links on the main page, notice that the page break between the two pages is incorrect (i.e. the Contents is starting mid-way down the Autobiography page). Is this something I did wrong or is this a bug? Looking at the generated HTML, I'm noticing that the second paragraph from Autobiography is not inside of <p>...</p> tags. Perhaps this is causing it? Still not sure what the root cause is though. Ryanbrainard (talk) 07:00, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is by no means a complete answer; more what I suspect might be going wrong.

If you look on the left-hand side of your screen whilst viewing the misbehaving page, you ought to see a menu heading (beneath "Help", "Donate") reading "Display options". Immediately beneath this again ought to be a clickable link which in your case I expect reads "test layout".

Please click this item, which should cause it to change to "Layout 1" and the main text will redraw. I now think you will find your "floating page links" will be working correctly?

For what it is worth, "test layout" behaves like this for me as well, but "Layout 1"/"Layout 2"/"Layout 3" and "Proposed Layout" are all fine. AuFCL (talk) 09:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I tried toggling the layout, but no luck -- they are all broken for me. I did some experimenting, and it only happens on the last paragraph of that page (i.e. adding a third paragraph makes the second one ok), so I was able to workaround the issue by adding a trailing &nbsp; in a new paragraph. Its not ideal, but it fixes the issue for me. Ryanbrainard (talk) 15:50, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
O.K. It looks like I was barking up the wrong tree. Apologies for misleading you. I hope somebody else has an answer because I'm out of ideas at present. AuFCL (talk) 23:25, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about now? I added a line-return at content start and nop at content end for the first few pages. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can someone look over this, and convert the old-style {{sidenotes begin}}{{sidenotes end}} over to the new style {{sn-paragraph}} as I've done later in the work? The latter gives a much cleaner layout (albiet at the expense of slightly higher complexity.)ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:45, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Table help - how do I do it?

I am an experienced Wikisource user, but I cannot seem to format this table in a way that works. Page:Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2002.djvu/82

Can someone look at this and correct the format for me? I would very much appreciate it!

- Tannertsf (talk) 20:05, 15 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I formatted the headers and the 1st two rows. When you complete the data we'll know if space is needed between columns. If so, send me a message and I will insert spacing columns instead of padding each cell.— Ineuw talk 03:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]