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.
Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion
This is a text with over 150 pages. It is a good candidate because it has fractions in it which are time consuming. In addition, the text has the complete OCR text. --Mattwj200205:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I think this would be a good candidate to be next, and promoted on our front page. It doesnt appear in the PG catalog, and isnt an outstanding project being worked on by PGDP.
Every page contains a few simple recipes, and most readers will find this topic at least a little bit interesting.
This work has not progressed as fast as some others (ok, one other). I had thought the short segments and non-modern cooking directions would prove helpful to getting volunteers. I find that for myself the darkened background of the paper makes it to challenging to read comfortably (I must be getting old) and detracts from the enjoyment of reading the work. I think that is one thing that most makes me not proof read this text everyday. Jeepday (talk) 00:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
With 124 remaining pages to check and (in theory) 10 members of the group, we only need to proofread two pages a day to get it (damn near) finished before the end of the month. It's doable... EVula// talk //01:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Horsemanship
Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
I think this would be a good next PotM. We haven't done a philosophical work yet (obviously) and we haven't ever had one featured as a featured text, either.—Zhaladshar(Talk)13:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I would love to see this be the next PotM. For whatever reason, it just "feels" like a good one to have completed. I apologize for the incredibly vague and hazy phrase. :) EVula// talk //20:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
I would really like to see a Popular Science Monthly volume proofread for next month. I am not sure what volume would be best, but it has been suggested a later edition so we could link back to older editions. I know there has been a lot of interest in having more scientific works on Wikisource and that is one of the reasons, I would like to see one of these volumes proofread. Also, this is a new project I have started and I could really use some help. Anyways that is my two cents. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 06:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
The first issue would be interesting; I've already started on it. —Pathoschild 06:39:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
That's already proofread, so there's little point to proofreading it further. —Pathoschild 07:31:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
One of these should be selected for next month. I would prefer to do the copy&paste&fix job of issue 86, but the first issue would also be a great addition. John Vandenberg(chat)08:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Our current text is a mish-mash of an a terrible OCR and some lightly cleaned up text. User:Billinghurst has, on my request, converted the original PDF format into a DJVU (File:A Brief History of Modern Philosophy.djvu). I'm not sure what our policy is for replacing bad works with proofread in-progress works, but I'd like to suggest this as either this month's or next month's POTM. I'm not sure if we've already picked this month's or not. Jude (talk) 04:18, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
My only concern with choosing this text is that many of the pages require the additon of images. This is a relatively complex task which may be too much to expect for proofreaders. What do others think? Would it be possible to put a step by step guide for adding images on the Index talk page (ie. get image from page, crop, name blah blah blah, load to this category in commons, etc.) Suicidalhamster (talk) 18:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Well it probably averages over one per page. The book proper starts on page 25 and page 26 needs 4 images and the pages following need: 2, 8, 2, 0, 1, 1, 2, 1. Hopefully that gives you some idea. Suicidalhamster (talk) 20:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes it does, thank you, Suicidalhamster. I don't think I can help much for the how-to, but I think I can try and do some images, if not alone to do it. ---Zyephyrus (talk) 20:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
PotM June 2009?
Latest comment: 14 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion
I think that the Dictionary of Music and Musicians is a useful book and it would be a useful work to do; Omnibuses and cabs on the other hand are pleasant and easier to work on so I'd like to chose it too... so, both choices are good for me. Which one do you prefer? --Zyephyrus (talk) 20:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I love quirky and would like to see how we go with Index:Omnibuses and Cabs.djvu. Interesting to watch what happens with the response to the quirky. Music and Musicians can be in the mix for a later period, and I think would better be served by having some information and support behind it. -- billinghurst (talk) 21:48, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Latest comment: 14 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Do we want to do Index:A Dictionary of Music and Musicians vol 1.djvu for July? It has a level of complexity, and may be one of those works that sits around, though it may be good for drumming up some interest.
NOT FAIR! I think that the latter is sexier, and achievable for the month, and the former is of personal benefit. Someone else can have an opinion too -- billinghurst (talk) 22:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Does a book exist about singing a Constitution in a church? ;-) If there is no such book we will have to choose. Which one is the most different from the previous ones?
Omnibuses and Cabs by Henry Charles Moore - A Brief History of Modern Philosophy by Harald Høffding - Fables of Aesop and other eminent mythologists by Roger L'Estrange - Popular Science Monthly #86 (1915) by Various Authors - Lays of Marie de France by Marie de France. - Our American Holidays - Christmas (1907) by Robert Haven Schauffler. - Poems (1890) by Emily Dickinson. - On the Vital Principle (1855) by Aristotle. - The Pilgrim Cookbook (1921) by Pilgrim Ladies' Aid Society - - Equitation by Henry L. de Bussigny - The Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame
The Constitution one seems more different, don't you think so? I would suggest this one first, and keep the other two for next months. What do you think of this idea? --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
There were a couple of nominations left over from August. Either suits me, though my juvenile vote is for One Hundred English Folksongs (1916)' (as above) - cute and manageable, broader appeal. Happy to go and grab it billinghurst (talk) 04:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I would enjoy working on One Hundred English Folksongs. For all of the songs only about a few minutes is required for each one to proofread it, so it's definitely doable for the month of September.—Zhaladshar(Talk)13:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
That should teach me to not peruse the actual file. That seems extremely tricky to do, especially since nothing like Lilypond is actually enabled here on WS. I personally think we'd have a more successful PotM if we got a work that didn't require typesetting features we currently aren't equipped to handle.—Zhaladshar(Talk)23:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Suggestion. That we work on the text, get it to proofed stage, and we can come back and worry about the music at a later time. The only issue comes down to how well we can OCR (probably badly) and whether a TYPING PotM is acceptable. -- billinghurst (talk) 03:28, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
btw, Cecil Sharp censored most of his work for publication - if you add that, you might want to look for his private works where he wrote down the real words for the songs.
”
Hm, that's one suggestion. And not a bad one. I could go for proofing text now and then adding music later. Would the ABC extension be able to typeset all the music on the sheet or does it have limitations that would prevent it? (I just don't know how fully featured ABC is compared to other typesetting software.)—Zhaladshar(Talk)12:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
ABC's been available for months though. If they haven't enabled it by now, who knows if they ever will. I tend to think that is dev was willing make it live; we would have already. I think this work is not desirable to do without music notation available.--BirgitteSB00:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, this seems to be the best solution for me too. We'll take the songs later when we have further information about the music transcription; for now, welcome to Kent, Surrey and Sussex churches! --Zyephyrus (talk) 07:13, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
October 2009
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
In general, for this text, is it preferable to use Small caps for the last names, as done in this validated page, or regular MAJUSCULE, as done here? Thanks, Wrelwser43 (talk) 06:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
As per the look of the page. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, I have run a script through the page and corrected it. Shhhh! We want say how many iterations I had to go through to get it right. <eyeroll> billinghurst (talk) 07:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
For any subsequent readers, the answer for this project is: Small caps. (Thanks, Billinghurst for the fixup!)
For Dec PotM
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
A note to say that I just did a part-proof-read and correct of Principia section 1.12. The comparison text is the printed version of 1729. There are some non-modern things (spelling, punctuation, use of apostrophes) in the original, and I've kept to the original forms in the proofreading corrections. Is there any risk that a bot will revert them to modernized form? How to protect against that? With good wishes, Terry0051 (talk) 15:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
We don't run bots for spelling errors, so it should be okay. We occasionally run bots under controlled conditions for OCR errors, however, they are things like tiie for the. Thanks for your efforts and your interest. Welcome. billinghurst (talk) 21:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
PotM Adding Text To Be Validated Proposal
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
How do you guys feel about replacing the spot where we currently have last month's text shown with a text to be validated? Since the validated text idea has been such a success we were thinking about continuing that. How does everyone feel about this? This would show up with the PotM template and the Collaboration template. This would really help to get are validated text count up. Please share your views on this. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 08:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
PotM January 2010
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
More quirky selections
Index:The Passenger Pigeon - Mershon.djvu (1907) ~250pp, about pigeons, and it seems to be a compilation of authors writing about pigeons from various 'authoritative' perspectives. Has some nice colour plates that would make some good illustrations. Text looks in good condition, and been botted into place. billinghurst (talk) 11:21, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good and unique. I think it would be great to have a text based around the subject of pigeons.Angelprincess72 (talk)
I've just noticed that the text is still copyright in my country, I think. The author died 66 years ago and the copyright term in the U.K. is 70 years after the author's death. Is it still copyright for me? Can I still contribute with that text? Angelprincess72 (talk) 20:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
You can work on it. You would be unable to print it out and sell it in the UK without permission until it goes out of copyright. billinghurst (talk) 02:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I am leaning with you Zhaladshar, though that is because we threw in the second text for January, so it is nice to be having something different. billinghurstsDrewth22:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Slightly roguish suggestion for November
Latest comment: 14 years ago14 comments6 people in discussion
I absolutely agree Billinghurst. There are lots of works out there that are Proofread but need to be Validated. I think your idea of a 'catch up month' sounds like a good idea. Angelprincess72 (talk) 14:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Alternatively, things that look quirky that we have already are
I love that little nursery rhymes book, but I think the number of pictures will make that book a pain to do. I actually think it might be a good idea to do a clean up month and get some indices validated. Since we've had some trouble finishing a larger works, I've picked some short works that I think we could do:
Okay, I have selected eight titles and they are on a three hourly rotation. As we start to put them away, we can put in other options from Special:IndexPages
{{#switch: {{#expr:{{CURRENTHOUR}}/3 round 0}}
| 1 = [[Index:The Martyrdom of Ferrer.djvu|The Martyrdom of Ferre]]
| 2 = [[Index:The Marriage of Heaven and Hell - copy D.djvu|The Marriage of Heaven and Hell]]
| 3 = [[Index:The Idea of Progress.djvu|The Idea of Progress]]
| 4 = [[Index:The Origins of Totalitarianism.djvu|The Origins of Totalitarianism]]
| 5 = [[Index:Plato or Protagoras.djvu|Plato or Protagoras]]
| 6 = [[Index:A study in scarlet.djvu|A study in scarlet]]
| 7 = [[Index:Transactions of the Geological Society, 1st series, vol. 2.djvu|Transactions of the | 1 Geological Society, 1st series, vol. 2]]
| 8 = [[Index:Index:MKGandhi patriot.djvu|M. K. Gandhi]]
}}
I have prepared the files, we just need to reinstate
As a note in response, we have already completed at least one work and by 2 Nov., and I have had the pleasure of modifying the rotation already ... +1 / -1. billinghurst (talk) 15:17, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
This work Documents from the Den of Espionage was added to the rotation. I have removed it as the general proosal was to work upon fully proofread works, and not to work upon not proofread. I would suggest that we could probably add this work as something for a future PotM. billinghurst (talk) 07:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
May I request that Index:Fair Circumvention.djvu (50pp) be added to the rotation at some point? It does not have to be this month, but I am giving a talk at a legal education conference in January that will refer to it and direct readers to this source, so having at least a few pages reach Validated status by that point would be very useful. Tarmstro99 (talk) 15:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Done
List of little works that need validation
Latest comment: 14 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion
Would editors please add works below that are 10 pages or less, and are at listed at Category:Index Proofread.
My plan is to construct a list, and to use it when we have completed the PotM, and still wish for users to be encouraged to assist to validate. billinghurstsDrewth15:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Actually I was looking for Proofread works, that needed to be validated (the last step). I was also wanting them to be small so I could get a number completed. It is otherwise difficult to get small works some attention. So neither quite fall where I was looking. Both works could fill gaps at the end of a month when we finish early. Moondyne, that is just plain nasty putting that level of Strine onto our proofreaders! <g> billinghurstsDrewth15:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I support this nomination and will work on it. I suggest using hair spaces around the em dashes (using template:—) and using typographical quotation marks/apostrophes (“ ” ‘ ’). See this page for an example. Psychless00:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have made an edit to Template:PotM to allow us to easily roll between the PotM and the mini-list of works. In the template, there is a #lst transclusion that grabs text with this #lst being commented out. To swap from one to the other, we just need to remove one set of comments <!-- --> and comment out the existing PotM text. I haven't yet amended the same text in Template:Collaboration, however, it is on the TO DO list. billinghurstsDrewth17:11, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
A good text for a PotM
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hi guys, I would like to suggest doing Index:The Time Machine.djvu because it is a featured but we don't have a proofread djvu file for this text. It is a classic text and one of the best H. G. Wells' works. What do you guys think? This might not work for December because of Christmas but what do you guys think of this for January? --Mattwj2002 (talk) 04:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
For Steamy goodness I'll always prefer 20,000 Leagues to Journey/Machine, but I'm sure I'm game for 5-10 pages anyways. And frankly, I'd consider the idea of getting rid of "Featured" texts in the traditional sense and using "Validated Texts" instead; so it's one category, not two. To be "featured" you have to be validated. SherurcijCollaboration of the Week: Author:Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din.23:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
The version of TM that Matt brought in does not align with our version. :-( So I am not in favour of this proposal until we have sorted the nitty-gritty. I am also not in favour of making a second version of an existing text as PotM. Also, with TV's new match and split technology, I think that we have a better means for handling works that exist on WS without scans. billinghurst (talk) 23:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
listed as suggested
Works: Short and Interesting
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
About The Story of Alexander's Empire, the address above links to an incomplete book, only a Preface, doesn't it? The whole book is here:, 378 pages. --Zyephyrus (talk) 10:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
This is at the TO BE VALIDATED stage, which generally we don't look to use as primary POTM material. For a prime POTM is there something new (at archive.org?) or early in its creation that we can use? [Did you hear the mutter that even if it is literature ;-) ] For this work, I would feel that we would be adding it to another Validation month project (presuming we have one), or I sneak it in at month's end like I just swapped in Mars as Mike Peel asked so very nicely, and as a reward for his UK project. <g> billinghurstsDrewth01:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
With the number of problematic pages, I'd rather not have to put up with that for a PotM. BulldogDrummond seems like the best choice so far.—Zhaladshar(Talk)14:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm only expressing my own desire. I'm not going to throw a fit if you (or others) really want it to be done. While it's not my first pick, I do see the value in such a work, and we haven't yet done a work quite like that. At the least it will break up the monotony.—Zhaladshar(Talk)02:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Sherurcij, that is a different interpretation than I see. You added it to the rotation of items requiring validation in November, of which is was not of the set. There was no promise after that it was going to be selected, and sticking a work as PotM that is laden with problematic is not one that I feel favourable to recommend. To me it also holds little interest, so I am hardly going to jump at it. It is still not my preference. — billinghurstsDrewth00:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Pick a work from above; or
It was suggested to me that we could look to have something akin to journal papers month where we could collate a list of papers from journals that we would like to have transcribed and made available to the main namespace. Examples of the sorts of articles could be Philosophical Transactions, PSM, and may align well with Academic papers project. I know from a recent tussle with a work on Matthew Flinders, that there were quite a few referred papers that I set as links that would be nice features.
All for easier addition of works. Additions can be made to relevant pages, though the latter is the page with the greater turnover). You can ready access to see which parts are active from Wikisource:Proofread of the Month/notice which is effectively a control panel. Each has light protection as they are not pages where we would be encouraging the uninitiated to play.— billinghurstsDrewth10:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Neither particularly cracks my whip, however, if we came down to the choice of the two, I would prefer Crainquebille, Putois, Riquet and other profitable tales so I am saying it will be May, and from the list at the top, I have picked a non-fiction for June.
Looks like May is going to be finished mid month. Does anyone have a suggestion for the remainder of the month. If I hear nothing over the next couple of days, I will do a lucky dip on something that it semi-advanced. — billinghurstsDrewth15:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion
If you have suggestions for these months, please contribute. Even if you have a topic area of interest and we will see what we can find. — billinghurstsDrewth15:42, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I like the idea for July as we can align it with Independence Day, and give it a level of play. Though I doubt that we will get it complete in the time, though it would give it a good hit. — billinghurstsDrewth16:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Sounds great to me. The thought of me doing it as a solo effort was enough to keep it untouched on my to-do list, but I'd really like to see this validated. —Spangineerwp(háblame)17:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
(Bit of a no-brainer) I like the idea that we grab works from Wikisource:Requested texts and think that we should be ensuring that we do that at least twice a year. The work itself has some length, and quite a few illustrations, has good OCR, so sounds like a work we can progress. Note that we need to move it from Commons as it is still copyright in the UK. Note on the Index talk page. — billinghurstsDrewth01:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
We are probably back to a fiction work again, and something to give us a break from extracting images. So looking around for something that might provoke some interest or something that is different, and I was going to suggest some works by Author:Henry Lawson though I see that PG has done quite a few, though not
I like the idea of doing one work from Lawson which PG doesn't have; if we finish early, we can do a copy&paste job on some his works which are on PG. --John Vandenberg(chat)01:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I like that idea, and we probably should mark it as a CotW task for some time. Even if we can look to do some research to match PG versions with archive.org/Google versions. — billinghurstsDrewth04:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
There is also some suggestions at #Proposal for Dec 2009 POTM. Some of the music stuff I see as problematic due to us not being able to reproduce the notations so then are they proofread/validated or not, so until we get better tools (as per discussions at WS:S) I would prefer something non-musical. — billinghurstsDrewth01:29, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Think that December calls for a shorter work, everyone is busy! so I have selected Index:Florian - The Fables, 1888.djvu in lieu of other noms. We can throw in some works for completion if we complete early. This one will need a bit of transclusion. — billinghurstsDrewth 13
15, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
November 2010 is Validation month
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
A quick note about Validation month, the files in play and how to change them.
The files in play are listed in Wikisource:Proofread of the Month/Coding and there are eight that are active on a rotating basis (3 hourly). The file has a light protection. All that needs to be added is the central component of the file, so NO Index: nor .djvu is necessary. No need to change the overarching template. — billinghurstsDrewth12:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Seasonal, short stories, multiple authors new to WS
Done
February
How about Audubon's Birds of America? This classic has lots of nice illustrations, and recently became the most expensive printed book ever sold at auction. Google scan: [2] --EliyakT·C03:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
I had already allocated a January text ^^^ though we can reopen that discussion, or consider it for February. I have no issues with it as a work though some questions that I have
can we get it converted to a djvu file and see how big it will be? I would like to see how well it converted to other formats to see if we get good quality images, as this work relies on quality images.
were some of the diagrams black and white as shown?
Just to throw it out there, I am concerned with this picture. The dithering makes it appear awful, and it was likely a color scan as well. Do we know of alternate versions of this work (that weren't derived from this PDF scan)?—Zhaladshar(Talk)23:35, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
I have found several possible sources for the images online. These are all for the Octavo edition, as is the Google scan. (unfortunately, none of these seem to have all the images in one place):
I have noticed that this book is Volume 1 of 7 ([6]), though I don't think that should stop us from at least starting in with volume 1. --EliyakT·C05:45, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
If you tell me which pdf book is the chosen one, I can proceed to the conversion from a pdf into a djvu (it takes about one hour or two). --Zyephyrus (talk) 07:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
It turns out the Commons have the original Havell edition images, in very high resolution (so high that this one in full res necessitated killing my browser). According to Wikipedia, these images were originally published separately from the text, which was titled Ornithological Biography, and published in five volumes. The full text of this original edition is available at the Internet Archive: [7][8][9][10][11]. I think we should go with this version, since we have a complete set of text and images. We can insert the images into the text on the finished main-space pages, such as at User:Eliyak/Birds of America. --EliyakT·C15:15, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
@Eliyak. Do you have a preferred volume or a specified version that you would like to propose? Were you also going to organise for it to be uploaded to Commons? — billinghurstsDrewth12:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
The images at commons, in commons:Category:The Birds of America, are the original ("Havell") edition images (they are numbered by plate). The original accompanying text of "Ornithological Biography" is at the 5 Internet Archive sites I mentioned. I think we would want to use these original images and text. On looking at the images at commons, I see that most of them need to be cropped (some of them already have been). The text is also much longer than I originally thought, so we would probably want to limit a project to the first volume (564 pages). --EliyakT·C14:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
We are going to finish the body of the work this weekend. We have a choice of putting in another book, or undertaking validation of proofread works. Thoughts? Billinghurst (talk) 05:42, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
This page might be a bit tough, but we wouldn't necessarily have to complete it ... just work on it. Other than that I would think validating stuff would work. - Tannertsf (talk) 05:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
April
Probably a time for a work of fiction. Anything different or worthwhile for feeding the masses? Anything special that we can tie in for April 2011? Billinghurst (talk) 15:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I would agree with BWC that Photography is a little big for PotM, and though we haven't had a biographical work we have previously had Roland works as PotM. Looking at its size and knowledge of the works it will be finished early and then we can throw in Photography as the overflow item. — billinghurstsDrewth10:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
::Michael Angelo has turned out to have an unworkable djvu scan with no viable replacement available. Need to change to something else.Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
A couple of books covering areas of the world that we have very little on. The Guatemalan text, although 588 pages, looks reasonably straightforward and the pages are small text-wise. The Nepali text has some good illustrations and seems to be a kin to the Picturesque New Zealand we did in September 2010. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I haven't looked at the offerings, however, the Nepali works sounds interesting, it is good to do a geographic work a year, and it addresses a gap, and Toronto texts are usually excellent. Are all pages present? — billinghurstsDrewth14:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
IA states that author died in 1955, so we are going to need to put the work locally (on enWS) rather than at Commons. For any images, one would presume that they were commissioned for the work, though as these seem to part of a series put together by a publisher rather than all by the same author, they are probably not of the same copyright term. Having said that, I doubt that it is one that we would want to push, so we should probably get those uploaded locally too. — billinghurstsDrewth05:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
In place and running. If we zoomed through this volume, aka "did a July", then we could consider one of the other volumes of the work. — billinghurstsDrewth14:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
September
The top of the page asks for a list of works to do in future, and I've found a few I like:
Index:A narrative of service with the Third Wisconsin Infantry.djvu Looks at least mildly interesting- I'm a fan of military history, and I suspect US Civil War might be of interest to people.
Personally, I would like to see more fiction on the list- Things from pulp magazines, weird fiction and whatnot.--Canageek (talk) 15:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Valuable feedback. We do like to have a spread of themes to attract a wide range of works, and you will see our calendar above for 2011 has some of that information. We are indeed due for another work of fiction. — billinghurstsDrewth01:30, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Another option is we could look to replace an unfinished text like Vanity Fair (1847) by William Makepeace Thackeray, and to replace it with a transcribed version. Vanity Fair is around the place, so it depends on whether we want a new work, or feel that an incomplete text unbacked by scans is sufficient. — billinghurstsDrewth11:51, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
I recently (hopefully) sorted out a mess at The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. There, the original edition text was being partially sourced with a scan from a later edition (edited by Bury). Decline & Fall is a worthy work, although too large overall. One volume would be good, though. The 1897 Bury edition is (or at least was for many years) the most respected version, according to WP and elsewhere. So I suggest Index:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 1 (1897).djvu. Make sure to transclude it to The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Bury), not the other. Plus, the text of the original edition of volume 1 is about 1/2 done (not sourced though), and perhaps we could start by match & splitting it, though as I noticed, changes to wording were made at some point.
I object the Decline and Fall - too much, too confusing, and it is a personal project of mine ... I just don't want to see it go to waste in PotM. Please pick something else. - Tannertsf (talk) 10:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes, though I just had to go and kick it loose at Commons, which is a little weird as it shouldn't have been necessary, though it was easily achieved. — billinghurstsDrewth
The OCR doesn't look too bad, so OK with me for October. I see it has side-notes. I don't recall doing these in a POTM before. I suggest that a note on the Index page (maybe in the Volumes field) on how to do these would be a good idea. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:27, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
I say pick one of the more 'complicated' pages w/ sidenotes, etc.,—proofread it & have someone else validate it, then link to it on the Index:page to serve as an example for proofreaders. The same can be done for any other of the more complicated pages...? Raising the bar, I think, tends to inspire ingenuity... No need to 'dumb down' here! Londonjackbooks (talk) 05:20, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
There are some pages done. We may wish to further format the notes, however, that is probably easiest just to bot them. Being able to set the header and footer was nice. — billinghurstsDrewth08:14, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
They add an element of complexity, so if you think that it raises the bar too high, then I am happy to cede. Or would you like to see and how it goes, and pull out if it isn't working? — billinghurstsDrewth04:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
For the past couple of years we have used November to complete texts that have already been proofread, and we are looking to move them to the validated state. Is this seen as valuable and should be continued?
Absolutely. As I write this only 9.3% of our Pagespace is validated with a further 28.3% in proofread status, just waiting to be looked at a second time. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Looks like a nice idea, various authors, non-especially renowned, so adding to the corpus, a range of images. It is long, which may mean incomplete as we have a busy December. — billinghurstsDrewth23:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
DoneThe fairy tales of science: a book for youth, an eclectic book where trying to educate about science through allegory of fairy tales, has some cartoon style drawings of monsters. Author died 1872. Very quaint. 470pp though smaller, OCR is good. — billinghurstsDrewth
I've had a look, and like you said, this is a charming mixture of children's fiction and science. I'd love to do this one come May. MichelleG (talk) 00:09, 24 April 2011 (UTC). May^^^
DoneBurns'sThe merry muses of Caledonia : (original edition) a collection of favourite Scots songs ancient and modern : selected for use of the Crochallan Fencibles (1911) [14] We have some of the works, however they are often unsourced and not backed by images. — billinghurstsDrewth04:15, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Support It would be nice to get a scan backed and complete work in the Burns area. We have a big mishmash of individual unsourced works, a compilation of the big ones (and racy ones ;-), with a little commentary, would be great. Not too long, but plenty of content. Inductiveload—talk/contribs18:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Support (but not for a couple of months - biology was just done) Sounds like an interesting one for a biology theme: not too long, aimed at the layperson and in depth on a specific subject (as opposed to broad one like Molluscs), and in the plant kingdom. I would suggest a better (non-Google) scan such as [16], though. Inductiveload—talk/contribs18:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
My support too, of course! Agree with Inductiveload that it would be a good one for a couple months to come. We're getting quite close to half a year now. - Dick Bos (talk) 12:42, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
The double works sound good to me. Do you think sequentially or were you thinking simultaneously? And I think that I resemble "social stationary". — billinghurstsDrewth09:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
I've noticed that we have no works on molluscs (or sea shells for that matter), so I've had a dig around on IA and have found Natural history, mollusca[18] as a possible beginning. It's part of a series from SPCK on Natural history and seems to be written with the lay person in mind. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
While I prefer other works in terms of their content, I like the cheekiness of the title of Sawdust and Spangles and feel that it works for a PotM. — billinghurstsDrewth23:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Billinghurst's suggestion below of the The merry muses of Caledonia set me thinking that we haven't done poetry as a POTM for some time. So I would like to propose a Poetry Month. I suggest we select a couple of books to do as poetry is often proofread quicker than prose. Here are two initial suggestions.
Burns'sThe merry muses of Caledonia : (original edition) a collection of favourite Scots songs ancient and modern : selected for use of the Crochallan Fencibles (1911) [24]
Why not try and capitalize on the John Carter of Mars movie by doing A Princess of Mars? We don't have a copy, but Google Books has one: [26] --Canageek (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I just gave that one after someone gave it to me on the wiksource IRC channel. I’m wondering if this would be a good month for it, as it will be most of a month since the movie when we start, and we already have the text of the first book, so it wouldn't take long to proofread it. On the other hand, I'm always in favour of more fiction. --Canageek (talk) 17:26, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking of the South African book I listed above. Htonl has been doing stirling work with RSA law and we have several history books, but no literature. So, I thought this would be a start on filling a gap. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
For May, I would like to swap the suggested topic matter around and bump fiction to June. I was hoping that we could have one (two?) of the works of the British social activist and author Octavia Hill undertaken. This year marking the 100th year of her death, and if we can get done and tidied, I was hoping to nominate a work for Featured Text for August, the anniversary of her death. Works that I can find:
I sometimes dislike letters as they can be a bit fiddly to typeset, though that is a type of work that is not well covered in our corpus. — billinghurstsDrewth15:07, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
The 85 page one would probably be the right length for a PROTM, doubly so if it is a bit fiddly. We should probably have a backup work, but 220 pages sounds a wee bit long to me.
I'm always in favour of matching local events, so that when people google her name we have a chance of poping up. What if we found a fiction short story to do as the second work? Then we could do both. —unsigned comment byCanageek (talk) 15:56, 22 April 2012.
How about somewhat of an obscure work from a well-known author? That would be interesting; although nothing comes to my mind at the moment... But I had never heard of Hugo's Ninety-three before it became a PotM, nor had I heard of Poe's Eureka (not a PotM, I don't believe) but that owes more to my not being as well read as I'd like to be than anything. I don't think level of difficulty or number of pages should be a factor. Just let it be inspiring and challenging—otherwise folks will just get bored with it. But I am beating a dead horse, and have said all this before once or twice. Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I went that direction to start with by looking for different fictional works, then worked out that I was going to need a little more time to get Hill work in order, so my request for a swap-around. One of the things that I like with our works is picking up illustrations as that is one of our specific selling points over something like PG, similarly unusual works, or something that is quirky. For me part of the joy of PotM is doing things that are not one's usual working area, something out of the ordinary. In my opinion I find that doing something different also interests our PotM contributors and brings in newbies. — billinghurstsDrewth
Remember how Beeswaxcandle had a number of texts listed on the WS Main page for validation month last November in rotation? Why don't we do that with the first two books Billinghurst suggested above—killing two birds with one stone, so to speak. Users can pick out which work they would like to work on, and as they familiarize themselves with her life and work, they may wish to eventually take up her Life [and] letters (1913). Who knows? Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:55, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Support Billinghurst's proposal. I've got no problem swapping biography with fiction around, particularly with the purpose of getting some works for an anniversary. Makes it doubly interesting. The 220 pp work looks to be quite straightforward with ca. 150 words per page, so the 84 pp work should easily be done as well. I think the letters book would be too much of a stretch for PotM. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
June 2012
Open for suggestions for fictional works.
Vanity Fair has been suggested a couple of times. Our copy is incomplete and not backed by scans. There are several editions on IA that would be suitable.
The Adventures of Philip[27] would be an alternative by Thackeray, which would appeal to LJB's idea of doing little known works. This copy is 1864, only two years after original publication.
Twilight is there and ready to go, and its ongoing presence and good OCR to me makes it my preferred candidate. I know nowt about the work itself. — billinghurstsDrewth14:36, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
I'd prefer Jamaica. Christmas Island is quite difficult for a community proofread, Mongolia has copyright issues (if it has not in the US, it certainly has in other countries, because the author died in 1991).--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 15:23, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
"Christmas Island" looks far to complicated, to my opinion. "Jamaica" does not really look like a good community project, although the plates are beautiful! "Mongolia" is really a lot of work, but fits well in the PoTM profile. Is it in Public Domain???? - Dick Bos (talk) 12:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Jamaica is my choice among those works. It has a few pages of fiddly formatting, but it doesn't look impossible. It won't very last long, so a plan for what else we are going to do within the month would be an idea. — billinghurstsDrewth13:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
It has 400+pp though not intense pages, some illustrations, so it is not insignificant, though does meet the criteria of diverse places. In lieu of any other brilliant ideas, it looks reasonable to me. — billinghurstsDrewth17:46, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
At the rate A Wayfarer in China is going, we may need a third work for the month. Across Patagonia by Florence Dixie (1880) [28] looks interesting as does A Residence at Sierra Leone by Elizabeth Colville (1849) [29]. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Just an observation within the last few months: it seems to me that we have been quick to validate PotM's while still in the middle of proofreading. In my opinion, this may contribute to more errors/inconsistencies within the work in the end. I have also noticed that some editors are able to validate a page-per-minute (not just PotM works)—evident in scanning past Recent pages; unless they are speed-readers or have more than one window open at a time, etc., it also seems to me that many errors may remain as a result of hasty validation. Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:33, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
A Wayfarer in China has been completed. I've gone with LJB's suggestion and set up a rotation of a few works including the Octavia Hill. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
August 2012
Suggest we return to the sciences for August. There's the suggestion of The Oak: A Popular Introduction to Forest Botany from below [30]. It's reasonably short, so we'd probably need a second work of similar length. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
There are also often a series of small(er) works that we can look to add in, things like
We're pretty close to the end of The Oak, so will need a decision on the replacement work. Physics has never been a favourite, so I'm not inclined to those three works. The London Journal of Botany would be challenging, but possible. Another possibility is Index:Climatic Cycles and Tree-Growth - 1919.djvu, which is topical with respect to climate change. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:19, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Nicaragua is probably of more interest to proofread; the treaties is probably more resource rich as a reference. Toss up, though we haven't done a historical resource this year, though the formatting is more complex. — billinghurstsDrewth15:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
We haven't done anthropology for a while and I can find very little about the American First Nations here. What about The American Indian: an introduction to the anthropology of the New World[34]? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:26, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Another American history alternative is the historical novel: Bald Knobbers. It's a Google scan (bleh), but concerning a little-known period of American history (see: w:Bald Knobbers, but the article is about the historical movement, not the novel). I first became familiar with the book when I picked up a copy in a small used bookshop in the Ozarks. From the cover art, and my knowledge of local geography, I first assumed it was a post-apocalyptic sci-fi novel set in Bald Knob, Arkansas. In fact, it was a historical novel about a vigilante movement in the Ozarks during the 1880s that developed as a reaction to the strong partisan justice of post Civil War Missouri. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:28, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
If we're going to do fiction in December, and I'm more than happy with that, I'd prefer to do something else this month (there'll also be be fiction in the rotation for November). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:49, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
That's fine with me, of course. On an additional note, I've located my copy of the novel, and was surprised to find that it's a different historical novel entitled Bald Knobbers. Apparently, there was one published in 1910, and the one I have published much later by a different author. Weird. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Proposing a bit early, but I'd like to see us tackle a major work of English literature from a first edition copy. One possibility is George Eliot's The Mill on the Floss, for which we have a text but no source for verification. Possibly, the existing text can be matched and split, but that depends on the similarity of the current text we have to the original publication. The original was published in three volumes in 1860, and it looks as though all three volumes of the 1st edition have been scanned from the Oxford Library by the same individual and uploaded to the Internet Archive: vol. 1vol. 2vol. 3. The downside of these scans is that they're Google scans, however, there are several other scans available that I have not investigated to be certain they are 1st edition.
I wouldn't mind doing some other comparable work, and would even prefer to have us do Middlemarch, except that it's hideously lengthy. The Mill on the Floss is of a more reasonable length. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Generally we have been trying to do a seasonal work in December. It hasn't seemed to be the time for either complex or intense works. Generally, we have also found that the uptake on an existing work has been lesser, so at any time, if that is our intent I would think that our selling point is the uniqueness of the offering. — billinghurstsDrewth12:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
But if a seasonal work is done every December, won't that overly bias the quality holdings of Wikisource? I do understand about having unique offerings, as I once worked at a website for which we found that the site pulled in far more people with our weird and unusual information than with the mainstream information, but on the other hand, the public thinks a site is weird if it lacks the common and everyday in favor of the unusual. It's like a natural history museum without dinosaurs.
An English novel shouldn't be complex or intensive, as there won't be fancy formatting, notes, or illustrations to mess with. I also (as a teacher) have far more time to devote to projects around the holidays, when I don't have teaching responsibilities, and so look forward to tackling something bigger. Of course, if we don't end up selecting a core novel, I suppose someone could help me to set up a project of my own, as such. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm more than happy to put up a major classic for December. Another possibility is Vanity Fair, our copy is incomplete and unillustrated. IA seems to have a first edition here, which although IA has it listed as Volume 2 appears to me to be complete in one volume when I compare beginning and ending with my Penguin edition. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:06, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
I'd be for doing that, if it's truly complete. I know Vanity Fair has been nominated a number of times, and it's certainly a well-known work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:02, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
It's complete, except for two pages of the table of contents (drat). And the file's too big for easy manipulation. I prefer to stick to first editions if possible (and to avoid google scans as their illustrations are usually crap). There is a non-google set of first edition The Mill on the Floss[35], [36], [37] as a possibility. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:41, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Another possibility is The Moonstone (1874) by Wilkie Collins; the work is considered the first detective novel in the English language, and laid the ground rules for future such novels (according to WP). We have only an incomplete copy, and an unproofread source text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Beeswaxcandle, is there anything I can help with? Vanity Fair on IA is *beautiful* and has a good number of illustrations as you already know. Is the text on WS identical to the text on IA in Vanity Fair? If so is it possible to add the images to what we have on WS? When I was looking at those illustrations of the Victorian Era those top hats reminded me of "Mr. Scrooge" :) What about discarding the text of Vanity Fair that we have and getting that illustrated version -- it's superior because illustrations are pleasing to the eye plus they show historical content -- (period) clothing, the way people lived and what they did and what they used, et cetera.
Maury, it's this copy that I really want to have on enWS. It's the best copy of the illustrations that I can find on IA. What needs to happen is that the two pages get inserted and then the file re-uploaded to IA over the top of the current one (if that's possible). There is a google copy with the two pages ([38]), but it's incomplete in other ways and the illustrations are hopeless. It's the sort of thing I would normally ask George & Ineuw to help with, but it's such a big file (> 30 Mb) that I don't want to impose on their kindness. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:19, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Beeswaxcandle, we are all friends working together here. You have helped many and continue to do more for many of us in working and helping others on en.WS Personally I think the two pages can be inserted. I think I have seen AdamBMorgan handle a situation like that but Ineuw is the best here that I know of with handling images & more as with text layers. As
we both know GEO III is excellent at most everything. I do understand your point about not wanting to impose upon any of them but there are times when friends, or just people who work together should at least ask others for help and this situation is for all of en.WS as opposed to something personal. I looked on HathiTrust and there are many versions there but your link above points to the 1848 edition and there are three of those and illustrated (Vanity Fair A Novel without a hero by William Makepeace Thackery) (1848) on HathiTrust. I will see what I can do to help. *I* will ask for help out of a believed necessity for the sake of en.WS via private mail. Most Respectfully, Maury (—William Maury Morris IITalk23:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Beeswaxcandle, WMMII emailed me regarding this, but the issue is unclear to me. First, regarding file size, 30MB is nothing :-) One image file of PSM ranges from 350MB and greater (and had to download some twice). My concern is that I am still very weak in page insertions while safeguarding the text layer. On the other hand, if one try fails, I have no qualms about doing it again, as practice makes one better. I am happy to contribute but need to know exactly what is needed to be done. I would like to look at the existing and possible versions as well. — Ineuw talk00:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
FWIW, the only version we currently have is incomplete (about 30%) and was done from a Project Gutenberg source, so as yet there are no original page scans uploaded. From the discussion so far, it sounds as though 2 pages of the contetns are missing and need to be inserted, but it might be a good idea for someone to peruse the entire work slowly, to check for any other possibly missing pages. I know that Mpaa has done a similar insertion, when we found that P.G. Wodehouses's Mike was missing 9 pages of illustrations. In that situation, the revised upload preserved the original text layer, so I know that Mpaa can handle such a task successfully. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:39, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Sorry - forgot to mark the post for my watchlist. (Thanks WM2 :-D) Also, I was away from the computer. I will gladly replace the old version with any version desired. I have NO problem with that. I already looked at the IA Google version, but admittedly it's quite poor, partially because of the printing technology (1848) and in part because Google scan destroys the flavour of the original. I also copied the first image to check for quality and it's also quite poor. Nevertheless, if someone points me to the desired copy, I will gladly do the right thing. :-) — Ineuw talk01:52, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
(e/c)I forget that there are places in the world with fast unlimited broadband. When one has 30Gb a month at random speeds with a maximum of ca. 250 kbits/s one is careful about how one uses it. I've gone through the first 130 or so pages of the good IA file in their "Read online" mode and the only pages missing are print pages xiv and xv, which are the two I found in the google text and pointed to above. As those pages don't have illustrations on them, maybe a simple insertion into the djvu file before uploading it to Commons may be the most practical. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I will look at the issue immediately an in the future, if anyone has a limited Internet service and I can be of help, please ask. I have no limit, and my (small) ISP is aware of my contribution & work and is very supportive. — Ineuw talk02:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
P.S: I understand the issue, and will prepare and upload a new version, just please bear with me. Also, do you need high quality images? I can download the .JP2 file as well. Please let me know. — Ineuw talk02:19, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I usually rip images from the IA "Read online" view. I'm not sure what our regular PotM image people (Laverock, Slowking4, Theornamentalist) do, but we seem to end up with high quality images. Might just leave it to them to decide what they want to do. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:31, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Inserted: Beez, it is best if Ineuw downloads those image formats he has mentioned. Seriously, he is excellent doing quality images and if I am right he can do batch loads and he has uploaded way over more than 1,000 images to commons. It is vague on recall for me but I think his count is around 55,000 images on commons! It appears to me that Ineuw is the best option over anyone else and typically he is exceptionally helpful. As he states, "just ask" whereas the others, at the present, will have to be asked. I know for a fact that Ineuw loves to do image work and using his preferred format of JP2. We once clashed over wanting to do images because we enjoy them so much. I'll ask for you, Ineuw, what do you prefer to do? Do you really want the image work or should we ask someone else with the hope that they like image work and can do it as well as you do--which I think is impossible. Ineuw, what is your present image count on Commons? Respects to all, Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk00:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi again. Inserted the two missing pages and uploaded the new copy HERE It's being processed now which can usually take anywhere from a few to 24 hours depending on the time of day and the day of the week. If I forget to monitor the page, which can (and does) happen as I get involved with something else, just let me know and will upload it to the commons. I also downloaded the .JP2 images and FYI, there are 191 illustrations. I hope this helps. :-) — Ineuw talk04:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Given that we're still waiting for IA to process the newly uploaded file and there are still problems with getting the text layer on newly uploaded works and there is also the very kind offer of Ineuw (below) to deal with the images in January, let's delay Vanity Fair into the new year and use December to work on something that has already been uploaded. Some possibilities:
Ugh, none of the above are good for December. December is known for Christmas themes. None of the above are about Christmas themes. I looked at each of them. The 1st shown is too long to edit in time, and has "the mob fired on the and the musketeers fired on the mob [?]; another Law and Cross-examination, yet another is about The Boy Scouts and that last one is about Australia! How are any of those related to Christmas? That doesn't matter? Then what about "The Devil's Dictionary" for December? Most everyone knows about Christmas in December including the people of Great Britain and "Dickens" was born in England. I suggest we look to see if we have or can find that Christmas Classic, an illustrated version of "The Christmas Carol" by Dickens or *something about Christmas*. Those others you've mentioned are more like something for Proofread of the Month. —William Maury Morris IITalk23:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I also can't say that any of those new nominations stand out for me, but I also don't think that 8% of our annual PotM output needs to be Christmas themed. Don't forget that The Moonstone is a PotM nomination that's been hanging around for a while (see top of this page), and it does already have a Source uploaded, with the OCR layer already pulled and Index page set up. The only complicating issue is that there is an (incomplete) existing text at The Moonstone that will need to be replaced as a result of having the full source now. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:14, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict with the immediate above)
What do people think about in December. The following are what people think about in December.
There are many choices already completed on Wikisource under these areas including an en.WS book. OR gather the smaller ones and rotate them.
I agree with EncycloPetey on the progress of The Moonstone but when I looked through the book I saw nothing orientated towards December nor of Christmas.
I next searched Internet Archives and MSN provided me with a combination of December, Christmas, and Santa. It is entitled as, St. Nicholas; his legend and his role in the Christmas celebration and other popular customs (1917) [155 pages and illustrated]. I also doubt that many people even know of this history and believe it should be known. There are also a few poems which LondonJackBooks might like. It is an attractive and historical book that hopefully will attract our editors.
It is located here: http://archive.org/details/stnicholashis00mckn It seems to me that both works could be completed in the month of December. What we do not want, Beeswaxcandle, is a repeat of an unfinished work due to a lack of interest by our editors such as that long one you thanked me for completing recently after the POM was over. Kind regards to all and Happy Holidays! Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk00:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Why focus on English-speaking views of this season?--ep
Ouch! Well, why not or as Lafayette would say, "Cur Non?" since it was his motto. Too, probably because I myself am an English-speaking person and this is anEnglish WS area (EN.ws)-wmm
The upper image (Adoration of the Magi [by the Magi]) you posted would be a January topic--ep
That upper image you refer to was already in that area of already completed works as was the Santa image. I placed those en.WS links of areas on Christmas here along with the 2 images for emphasis of Christmas-wmm
for Catholic and Spanish-speaking countries.--ep
The United States of America has lots of Catholics including some my own families and the USA is also a "Spanish-speaking" (ES.WS) nation along with many other ethnic groups and their languages such as "Little Italy" in New York or Chinatown in San Francisco.--wmm
And few of my Jewish friends ever focus much on Christmas or St. Nicholas, except to fill in shifts when their co-workers want time off.
Then why do you not suggest something for your Jewish friends? Moonstone isn't in Hebrew either. Jesus was a Jew. But I do not know Hebrew, I cannot speak nor read nor write in Hebrew. How and why would any Hebrew work be transcribed here on EN.ws? (English Wikisource)--wmm
Again, it's nice to do a holiday theme every couple of years or so, but if we do PotM for a holiday every month or every year, then we short-change both ourselves and our readers by focussing too much on one theme.--ep
"If" is a small word with a great connotation; a set of associations implied by the word in addition to its literal meaning, and your use of it above indicates an assumption that what you state is something that will be. Fact is, I am not familiar with past POMs. I learned of it recently and and only recently learned of "Featured Texts" where I an others, including Beeswaxcandle, worked on a book on Mexico that became a "Featured Text".--wmm
And we can't upload a new file for PotM; that's the primary reason we've had to consider abandoning the community first choice of Vanity Fair—it likely won't be loaded in time.
I only suggested a book and it is a good book. It is totally uploaded on IA and it is related to the month of December as well as several other nations and their history of Santa. It is also a short work of 155 pages. What have you suggested other than Moonstone which has any connection with the month of December?--wmm
So, suggesting something else that isn't loaded yet does not help.
I have known even you to pull a book from IA for me and set it up in just a short while, not even a day. AdamBMorgan has done the same for me with many books and less time. At least I am on topic with the month of December that much of the world can relate to.--wmm
We wouldn't be able to do it anyway. Since we did a Christmas theme last year around this time, and the year before,
I would not know as I was not involved. I was working on other books. Still, in those links I brought here that are shown above I only saw one "book" but again you do say, "Christmas theme" which doesn't seem like books were involved much less more than the one book I saw amongst those links I have placed here.--wmm
I personally feel we should do something else. Otherwise, one in twelve of our PotM collaborations will be on a single Western holiday. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I personally feel too and Moonstone isn't it for your Jewish friends on EN.ws where "English" is spoken, read, and edited. Your friends have their own WS area and I do not think they do POM works for others to read outside of their wiki area as you suggest here for them. Pause and think of which Wiki area this is.
Aside from all of this as your statements and my replies your suggestion and my suggestion are only "suggestions". Others will decide what to do one way or another. Since Moonstone has been here unfinished for a long time then why is that? Popular? --wmm
—William Maury Morris IITalk03:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Maury, please don't split up my comments; it makes it very hard for others to follow the flow of what I wrote. I repeat, we cannot do a work that is not already uploaded here or 'on Commons. The fact that something exists on IAdoes not help right now because we currently have a software glitch that is preventing us from accessing the OCR layer of any texts uploaded in the past week. So, a work must already be uploaded to Commons in order for us to be able to work on it for PotM in December. Because of this, your suggestion of a work that has not been uploaded on Commons cannot be selected for December. Is that clear now? --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the point about a software glitch makes it all clear. I wish you had stated that in the beginning. But The Moonstone is a terrible choice (for me) for the month of December. It is heathen/pagan -- about a diamond aka the "moonstone" stolen by a corrupt British army officer, greed, three Hindu priests have dedicate their lives to recovering it, murder, embezzlement, diamond finally returned to forehead of a "idol" in India. I liked Indiana Jones but the choice of that book is not a good choice for December when we focus upon One True God who isn't made of stone, faith, and Saint Nicholas, family and friends gathered together. I think I saw "not completed" when I looked that book over. It's okay as fiction for some other month (Indiana Jones' birth month perhaps). Even he had to gather sacred stones that glowed yellow when he placed them back in an idol -- can we say "idolatry"? I prefer to vote for what Londonjackbooks has suggested. I do not think her dad would choose something bad for his daughter. Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk14:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Whatever is selected must already be available as an Index. We cannot at present select a work that is entirely new to enWS, because of the text-layer problems. The Moonstone was rejected as a PotM due to us already having a copy. I see that I rejected a Match and Split request on the grounds that the editions appear to be different (based on dates), and so when it eventually gets proofread it will need to be transcluded to a new set of pages. Also, if we still have a major fiction work in December, we won't be getting to Vanity Fair for some months.
The list of suggestions above were only that, and I am happy to look at other suggestions from Category:Index Not-Proofread, but those suggestions need to be made in the next 12–24 hours as I don't expect to be able to be involved in the decision after then. [That's not to say that I have to be involved.] Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I agree with what Londonjackbooks has posted above. She is strong in her faith as far as I have been able to determine and can also make her Dad happy at the same time to look at en.ws and see that he was not forgotten in his request of his daughter. Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk14:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
(OT) Not sure where my faith comes into play where WS is concerned; but I hope at least to be a faithful renderer—as in this 'business', "ability [is] more valuable, because less easily pretended, than piety." Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:14, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Part of the point in choosing a novel for December is that the formatting would be minimal, and therefore make work editing it easier. This book has lengthy footnotes, which sometimes cross multiple pages, different sizes of text, and other advanced formatting issues. Would we really finish a 500 page book in December with such advanced formatting? --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:16, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
There are (roughly) between 25-30 instances where lengthy footnotes span multiple pages (I'll personally claim these if it would help). Different font sizes involve mostly quotations in the text. Otherwise, formatting issues are actually minimal. If we concentrate primarily on proofreading vice validating, an average of 20pp per day would do it. But there has to be a desire to do so on behalf of editors, and I'm game for whatever! Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Where are all of the other editors in this? What choice do they want? Will they assist or are they going to be away for the holidays? Whatever we choose to work on I believe we should be united to get the work completed. Thus far we here conversing over this are only three. Therefore, I am willing to go with either of the two works mentioned by EncycloPetey or Londonjackbooks. I will assist as best as I can on either choice they make. But will the both of them do the same and work on whichever book is finally chosen? That would give us at least three editors. Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk21:21, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
My key criterion is for an important work of English (language) literature, preferably a novel of some literary or historical importance. The specific book we select is less of an issue for me. December is my longest holiday of the school year, during which time I'll have far more time to volunteer here, and I want something to read, not something to format. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:18, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Regarding "The Moonstone", it shows on its Index page, "(Incomplete) text has been posted at The Moonstone. scans from Google Books, with blank front- and back-pages and matter that was not part of the original published text deleted."
So, how would we handle that "Incomplete text"? What I personally do not want is an unfinished book. I believe that we can finish a work if we work together—at the very least we can try. Kindest regards to those who care. Maury ( —William Maury Morris IITalk16:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I have just gone through our maintext copy of The Moonstone and compared it with a copy on IA. Our current copy is complete and all we would be doing is adding another edition (albeit scan backed). This definitely puts the work out of contention for any PotM and I will remove it from the list at the top of this page. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I had been wondering why Hallelujah by the choir of King's College, Cambridge -- a performance of Handel's Messiah -- kept playing in my mind while I have been editing "The Moonstone" today. Now I know. "The Moonstone" wasn't meant to be (again). Maury (—William Maury Morris IITalk19:08, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
December POM redux
I feel somewhat touched by WMM2 volunteering me, but December is a short and busy personal month for everyone and thus it's
an unrealistic target for a book of ~700 pages and 191 images, and which is not even in our possession. January is a more realistic target by which time I will prepare the images. This means that I am volunteering to do them.
Re my image contributions, the above mentioned figures are very kind and "wildy" incorrect. I have no idea how many images I contributed and it's irrelevant. To clarify, I download the .JP2 hi resolution file from IA, but the software useed (Irfanview) converts them to .JPG or .PNG (my favourite format). I was forced into using .PNG some time ago and it turned out to be [somewhat] superior to .JPG where drawings are concerned. For photos, it doesn't matter. — Ineuw talk19:33, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
<quote> It is vague on recall for me but I think his count is around 55,000 images on commons!" </quote> I said, "it is vague on recall". However, I do remember it is a high number and the relevancy behind my statement is that Ineuw likes (once liked?) image work and is very good as well as fast through working on so many images while perfecting himself and his methods with each new bad image as a challenge. I also did not know how many pages and how many images are in that book. I had no reason to seek out that information. Happy Holidays to one and all, "Maury" -- (aka WMM2, WMMI, WM2, WMII) ( —William Maury Morris IITalk21:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Calendar 2013
Latest comment: 10 years ago151 comments14 people in discussion
I have reservations about selecting the fist one. Not only does it include long-s font, which will slow things down, but also it recommends poisonous compounds for ingestion. I've not looked at the other two, but the topic for either seems agreeable. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:11, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
A couple that I bookmarked at a point of time
The show folks! (1831) bit of prose, some nice colour images, small work, 130pp but octavo
The Early English Organ Builders looks really interesting. When did we last do something on music? It's short, though, and so might last only a week or two, depending on the speed at which the community works. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:07, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
The three transcriptions endorsed by EncycloPetey—Evolution of the thermometer, How to write a short story, The early English organ builders and their work—may be done in succession. They are very short, but the last one/two may be postponed if a month isn't enough to proofread them. Here is the first one: Index:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 11:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan. Adding a few smaller quirky pieces works for me, actually good in my opinion, as people like to get a touch on all of them. — billinghurstsDrewth11:55, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
How about Tensing Exercises (1913) by Edward Barrett Warman [114 pp]. It's a little volume of physical exercises (all illustrated) from the turn of the century. At the rate we're crunching through the nominations this month, we may be done by the 10th! I'm therefore suggesting another quirky little book to follow the previous suggestions (if indeed one is needed). --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
How about a book on how to play chess? There is a short, 36 pp. book on Google Books that is not at Archive.org, and there is a longer 160+ pp. book on Archive.org. After only a quick look, I would prefer the shorter version, but being that it is less easily accessed(?) not yet being on Archive.org, time constraints may be an issue? Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I think length may be an issue (time constraints?), but others can decide that. Maybe for a future PotM? Just a thought. I don't know how to play chess, so I would lack insight into an 'appropriate' book. Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
...so we could even do more than one of these in a later "Chess Month", if we don't have time this month. That sounds like a good suggestion. Note that there is wikicode developed specifically for the display of chess board arrangements, so any board position diagrams in the book could be rendered in wikicode as well as (or in place of) an image file. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Or even just a "games month," one chess book with a book a on a card game (whist, bridge, cribbage)? or a book on go or backgammon or dominoes? I would only suggest to avoid a chess book that is too encyclopedic of chess openings/endgames which might be tedious to some. MarkLSteadman (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Just one month, though,—not the same month per annum, right? I agree that the book/s should be instructional, yet easy enough for me to 'get'. I like the 36pp. book's philosophical take on the game. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, that one didn't last long. Some more possibilities (I couldn't find a book on Bingo, sorry Maury):
ROFL ! Sorry Beez, I apologize for my freak-out on those two goofy books but I did do some edits on them. There were just too, well, I don't know any other way to say what I already said and feel to be true. You fellows down there in New Zealand need a better library. Do they ever let you off that island? How about international interlibrary oceanic loans? Why not one of those two Asian books that EncycloPetey suggested? —Maury (talk) 01:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
The book choices of Evolution of the thermometer and Tensing Exercises are both bland and UGH-able boring books. The quality is lacking. What happened with the better books like the two Asian books that someone else mentioned and I agreed with -- those aren't bland and UGH-able boring books! Have you all become old and just seeking wee short so-called "books" because they were printed -- for the sake of getting wee books completed fast? Quality not quantity or better yet both quality and quantity for WS. Chess, cribbage...and how about a hot game of Bingo in the old folks home at 20 cents per piece of winning corn for an fast-paced and lively-entertaining-everlasting wonder? —Maury (talk) 20:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
The two Asian books you refer to are for March. This month is for books that are a little off the usual beat, or a bit quirky. So far, they seem to be quite popular with 24 different editors taking part. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
"Care and management of rabbits" might work, but it's a bit text heavy, and might offend a few animal-rights folks. It's also a bit longer than the successful selections we've had so far this month. I believe part of the reason PotM has been so popular this month is that, not only are the selections quirky, but they're short enough that we have constant novelty of new works without the tedium that sometimes sets in when a work drags on for a full month. So, if we can keep the selections this month on the shorter side, as well as being quirky and varied, we may pull in a lot more new participants. In any case, I suspect the rabbit book would be worth having on Wikisource, and we could choose it if we need to. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
SUPPORT—I like the immediate above on "Japanese flower arrangements...." I love/like almost all things Asian. My computer room is fully decorated with an Asian theme. There are two of these books and both have 88 illustrations; one shows 1st edition with 401 pages while the other shows 88 illustrations with 663 pages. I would be willing to work on the images, perhaps all since there are only 88 illustrations. My work with illustrations can be seen in present works such as The Clipper-Ship Era and John Cassell's Illustrated History of England v 1 and other works before these I am presently working on. I shift back and forth between these two works but I also always assist in "proofread of the month" —Maury (talk) 04:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
My thoughts on the books suggested above is that I wasn't particularly impressed by the shorter ones, and while the cat's cradle looks interesting, 400 pages of figures might be too long... I thought that since there seemed to be interest in Asian and instructional works, it looked like a somewhat off-beat topic, and had lots of nice illustrations it would make a good candidate for PotM. MarkLSteadman (talk) 05:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I looked this book over once again and I saw only 218 numbered pages inside. Therefore, there are others on-line and using the same illustrations or I did a miscount but I don't believe I did. Whatever, we can take the cards dealt to us. Anybody got a book on poker? The Asian book cited above is a good book "to my liking". I like the Asians art of "bonsai" when they grow dwarfed, ornamentally shaped trees or shrubs in small shallow pots or trays. They are a highly creative people. Uh Oh! Mark, two other Asian books are ahead of this one. Well, it can still be done even if not a proofread of the month (POM)(PotM)<-Pot!M_ary Jane". There is an old but interesting topic of the 60's and 70's many people will now deny. Wild Times & Hard Times. Any 1800's books about it? Ships once used "hemp" for docking hawsers. —Maury (talk) 06:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
SUPPORT— Busy as Bees can possibly be, right Beez?. Only about 195 pages not counting blank pages and Library Card.(When is it due back?) I got several "chuckles" just looking the pages over. The illustrations are grand and with no bingo. :) —Maury (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Japanese flowers is finished. I've selected English as She is Spoke as it's already loaded and it's the middle of the night here. We can swap to Punch or the Cycle Industry when they're loaded. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh, Lordy, please save something for another day. English as She is Spoke? I am already sleepy from being up all night and into this morning. How did it come about that British spellings are so often (or vs our) (z vs s ) different than American English? When did this start and by whom? I suspect Americans at some point after the American Revolution against being 13 more of Great Britain's Colonies. BTW, the little island of England (aka "Angland") learned about gaining power from Rome conquering her and remaining about 500 years. We are all descended from Germanic tribes and Romans! Why didn't more of England's colonies rebel? And why not the humor(our-our) y col-'our'-ful book above, Mr. Punch's Book of Sports Probably everyone (including our 24 editors) knows how to ride a bicycle or tricycle plus the people in China and Japan where every household made of Adobe bricks has unique flower arrangements. Let us all validate my work on The Clipper-Ships Era first. I like it here on WS. It's a lot of Goodwill and lighthearted rapport amongst 24 WS editors. --Signed, Saint George the Dragon Slayer—Maury (talk) 17:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Take a look at the book. English as she is Spoke is not the sort of book you'd expect from the title. It was written by two Portuguese who wanted to prepare a useful introductory phrasebook for English learners, but they botched the job horribly. The result is unintentionally comical, and the book has had a cult following ever since. I suspect that it was the inspiration behind the Monty Python sketch in which a Hungarian tourist visits a tobacconist, consults his phrasebook, then exclaims "My hovercraft is full of eels!"
EncycloPetey, I did look at the book and I like it. I also saw the authors names and I know I edited 1 page but on recall it was about 2 or 3 pages. I like Monty Python a lot.
I was missing sleep in that message above. That happens sometimes because bad dreams awaken me and my instinct is to come here to forget the bad dreams. I have often wondered throughout my life about why the differences in British and American English spellings though. I have never heard anyone say nor have I seen anything written that covers it. I even liked that fat man exercise book. Factually, it is a good book for those out of shape to start getting in shape. I have been a health person all of my life and I stay in shape and visit my primary physician every 6 months after I have had blood drawn to be inspected. There is a very _hardcore flu in this nation at this point_ and I cannot get a flue shot because in my old age I am now allergic to something in that particular shot. In the military you get mixtures of germs in each shot and you get a shot in both arms at the same time over several days. It protects you from _everything_ but now I find myself getting a bad reaction from just one civilian flu shot! I am invincible no more. Go figure.., body changes with time and age. The books chosen recently are fine and I always have backup projects I can work on instead including the one I think you set up for me on Clipper Ships! I like that book a lot. I also like my book on England a lot that AdamBMorgan set up for me to work on and Beeswaxcandle has helped me with in setting up multiple volumes. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 00:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
I've uploaded "Mr Punch's Sports" to Commons, but haven't yet set up an index page. I'll do that, and also upload the cycling book and the one on raising bunnies either tonight or tomorrow. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. This is a great work of English literature that has been requested several times, and which we've never gotten around to having complete. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:06, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
March 2013
For March, I'd like to see us do something on Japanese drama. Almost all of the works we currently have pertaining to Japan concern World War II. We don't have their art, culture, literature, language, history, etc., so a work covering dramatic performance will fit into a very large hole in our topical coverage. I find two good choices on IA:
The former work is slightly shorter and covers more the history of actors and stage performance in Japan, while the latter work covers the plots, themes, and stories of Japanese drama. Neither one contains any Japanese script that I could spot, which would have increased difficulties in transcription. Rather the Japanese words are rendered in romaji (Roman script), so the only oddity will be the macrons over certain vowels. The latter book is also richly illustrated. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
I like them both! I have always admired Asians and their cultures. I also am an art lover and have visited a fair number of art museums. The 1st listed shows colored images. How colors are used is an art form in itself. The 2nd has more illustrations but none are colored (alas!) I hope that we can start with the 1st and then we will know if we can add the 2nd one. If we cannot do both for March then let us do the other anyhow even if it is not for any specific month. "Please" They have a fantastic history. Are others here aware of the origins of martial arts? I was raised with Judo (some brought back by American soldiers from Korea; my uncle was a POW there and so he taught me some years after he escaped and came home. He had been declared "dead" and my grand-mother was given such notice plus my uncle's "Purple Heart" although unknown that my uncle was alive. He and many others were on a death march but hundreds "ran for it" (freedom or die). I studied 6 other forms of martial arts in my youth. It came in handy during Vietnam. My father and uncle knew there would be another war waiting for me and my generation as there are always wars. I cannot remember not studying Judo under my father and his brother or not practising targets with a pistol and rifle. These have always been in my life. In the old days warlords who ruled areas would not allow the farmers to have any weapons but they devised weapons from the tools they worked with and appeared to be helpless but they were not helpless and thus entered martial arts for self-defense and defense of family against warlords and their men with swords. Anyhow, I like both books. —Maury (talk) 00:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
" For March, I'd like to see us do something on Japanese drama. Almost all of the works we currently have pertaining to Japan concern World War II. We don't have their art, culture, literature, language, history, etc., so a work covering dramatic performance will fit into a very large hole in our topical coverage. I find two good choices on IA:
There having been no objections, could someone please create the Index pages for these two works? We'll work on them one at a time. We may need a third work to cover the month, but let's see how we go. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
In the event that a third work is needed, we could do: A History of Japanese Literature (1899) by W. G. Aston. We have a woefully incomplete copy right now. The only downside is that the book is mostly text, not images. If people think we'd rather like to do an image-intensive work, then I have some suggestions set aside. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:39, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Also "Things Japanese: being notes on various subjects connected with Japan for the use of travellers and others" by Basil Hall Chamberlain (1890) (1891 ed.). Reprints up to 2007. Its a nice A-Z encyclopaedia type book which I imagine would be a worthwhile reference. Everything from Abacus to Zoology. Lots of text, no images (save for a map) and hardly any tables. Moondyne (talk) 06:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Note: Most of the formatting is in the introductory chapter (short) and in the page headers, with some italics and ō characters, as in the previous work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Looks good to me. However, as it looks a bit short and therefore might not last the whole month, I'll suggest The Ballads of Marko Kraljević (1922) as translated by D. H. Low as a back-up. Prince Marko is a Serbian folk hero, and this epic poem about his deeds is a cornerstone of their literature, as well as being popular in Bulgaria and Mecedonia. (See the Wikipedia article about Prince Marko in poetry.) --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:15, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
It would be nice if we could determine in some manner as to how many people are willing to work on which books that are chosen as proofread of the month -- or perhaps have a backup book. As is, there is a possibility that Prince Marko, or whatever else, may be chosen but the work could easily remain unfinished or worked on by one person and the book would be left with other unfinished works. Perhaps two small books could be finished? I myself like the basics of what I looked at in Flower Seasons Illustrated shown above but not Prince Marko of Serbia. —Maury (talk) 05:33, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't think you understood my nomination. I suggested Prince Marko as an option to followThe Romance of Nature only in the event that it does not last through the entire month. I did this because the origina nomination has relatively few pages, with little text on each page. It is quite likely we'll be done with it in a short time, so I want there to be an option for us to continue on to in the event that this happens. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:40, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
I think you are correct, I didn't understand your point as stated in the immediate above with one following the other. However, anyone who looks at "Prince Marko" will see that it has sidenotes and footnotes and uses a lot of symbols. Because of this I don't know if we could finish that book. This is why I mentioned "two small works". I think the difference is this; some people here can handle sidenotes quickly whereas others like myself cannot. I have only expressed my opinion and yours is just as valid. We're all different. I see Prince Marko as being nothing but boring, long, and with all text and symbols whereas I love illustrated works regardless of length of text. But your nomination really does not matter a lot to me either way because I will continue to busy myself with the Illustrated History of England volume 1 of 9 volumes which will take 4-ever. Best wishes to all, —Maury (talk) 18:26, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Where did you see sidenotes? There weren't any that I found, unless you mean the line numbers for the poetry, which has its own template here. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:51, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
I think The Ballads of Marko Kraljević is too complex for POTM. I see lots references as well as foreign words which newbies will find intimidating. Poetry line numbers (eg. {{pline}}) aren't hard but add another layer of trickiness. NB, I noticed a duplicate scan on pages xvi and xvii. Moondyne (talk) 06:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
There having been no objection to the Meredith work, it is selected. Could someone please upload and create the index (I have limited bandwidth at present)? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
I've now uploaded the file from the linked source above, but Google Books had only a PDF, and no DjVu version of the file. It seems to have no text layer. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:02, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Last year when we had a poetry month Index:A Treasury of South African Poetry.djvu was going to be the second work. In the end we didn't need it. However, it looks like we will need a second work this year. I propose this again as, while we have quite a lot of South African works there is no literature amongst them and this will go some way to fill a gap. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
May 2013
Handbook of Birds of Eastern North America (1905, 7th ed., ca. 500pp) by Frank Chapman might be a good choice, if we're going to do natural history this month. I couldn't find any general book of birds when I looked around here, which was surprising. The book I've selected has lots of color plates, black-and-white plates, as well as a number of line drawings in the text. The only tricky bits are some of the special symbols (such as ♀and ♂), which we might load into the standard editing tools, should we choose this work. The book went through many editions (one of which my grandmother had), but the seventh edition is by far the most downloaded from the Internet Archive. With scientific works, a later edition is usually superior to an earlier one, unless a later and inferior author mangles it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
While I don't have a problem with the selection, I take issue with the archive selected. It was created in 2007 (both jp2.zips still show 2007), the source PDF was replaced in 2011, the black and white PDF is from 2010 and the DjVu is from 2010. In short, nothing matches the parent it was derived from anymore. Now this doesn't necessarily mean the DjVu is flawed or less than optimal - but it does indicate closer scrutiny should be applied in selecting an archive imo than just "it had the most downloads".
... and as a second point, the 1912 & 1916 Google Books copies of this book have straight "color" images - this selection has color images only to the degree allowed by the skewing added by the fake "tan" backgrounds applied post imaging to mimic old or yellowed pages.
Personally, I'd like to see a better selection for use as the base source file for this work; otherwise, some other work might be a better choice overall. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I take George's point. However the 7th edition is the last edition of the original version. The 1912 edition seems to be the first of the revised versions. At some stage we will want both versions. IA has a quite a few copies of the original version from 1st to 6th edition. The Revised Version linked to here is the most recently uploaded to IA. Why don't we go with this? That is, unless the 1916 edition is superior in some way (there's no copy of this on IA). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
1912 Revised Edition 'best looking @ IA imho (has a fair number of other editions avail. too)
After reading most of the author's comments/front matter, the differences between the 1895 thru 1910 editions are fairly minor in scope (though the swing in the number of total pages makes wonder about that claim). The revised editions also are also pretty much the same - only the Introduction section at the start goes from 30 something pages in the "old" to ~110 pages in the Rrevised. Of course the copies with faux, faded-backgrounds per page degrade not only the text but the images as well. -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:41, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
I've taken a look at the linked 1912 revised version. The formatting is far more complicated than the original version, and would be much too challenging to make a good PotM collaboration. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:59, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Then I'll shut-up now because I can't seem to wrap my head around how adding to what amounts to about the 14th or 15th online available copy between GooBoo & IA alone is of any benefit to anyone let alone en.WS (admittedly I've kept away from these selection processes for some time now). I guess busy work for sake of busy work is still better than the lack of group cohesion from month to month. Prost. -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:41, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I got pre-occupied by music and didn't get back to this and we're at the end of the month again. Because I'm used to the formatting of the 1912 version from floras I didn't see it has being difficult, but on reflection it probably is too complex for a PotM. I suggest as an alternative book on birds this book, which is a companion volume to the one we did on Mollusca in February 2012. (In the same series are volumes on mammalia, reptiles and fishes.) An initial random sampling of pages suggests that it is complete. Thoughts? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:12, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
We need to discuss and settle on a biography for June. I have to say I'm not enthralled by Hübmaier, so offer a few of alternatives. That said, if people want Hübmaier, I won't object further. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Autobiography of Charles V [44] (Emperor at the time of Henry VIII)
Autobiography of Henry Williams Blodgett [45] (US Federal judge)
Autobiography of Giuseppe Garibaldi [46] - this is vol 1 of 3.
I wasn't too keen on Tolstoy myself, only that it was the only biography I could find on the transcription project. So how about Paul Kelver? A (semi)autobiographical novel by Jerome K. Jerome, 433 pages approx. But I don't know whether autobiographical novels are included in Biographies…? Sincerely —Clockery Fairfield(talk·contribs)10:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree with your point on Burma, painted and described (1905)and the two Japanese books but what is the end goal in all of this? Should we focus upon nations a bit closer to us and learn about the Americas and our allies or are we choosing books because they seem like romantic far away places for amusing and casual reading? What is the criteria? In reference to India, it has hundreds of religions which I feel sure you are aware of. —Maury (talk) 05:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
We had been trying to do geography, not culture, not folklore for this topic matter, and for that we have previously looked for something with good images, as it populates Commons, adds an extra element of interest (see previous years examples). Re areas closer to home. Whose home? Most of us don't live in the US, and we usually have enough American focused works so this is the point of the geography topic in an area where we don't have works, or not likely to get works. Allies? What? Whose? When? This is about books that are available and suggested. Anyone is able to make suggestions, and we choose something. The whole purpose of POTM is to engender interest of the casual proofreader, popping past and enough to get them to poke their head in, and hopefully stay. — billinghurstsDrewth09:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Billinghurst, in reference to illustrations I have been preaching and trying to promote them for a long while now. In reference to Allies I refer to the Americas including Canada, and nations of middle and south America. Those are close to the USA and the USA has a huge immigration of peoples from all over Latin America. Thus the book Mexico as it is and was completed by several of us and illustrated which became a Featured Text. I also refer to Great Britain and all of her former colonies such as Australia, New Zealand, and perhaps even India. I would also include France. These are all far away from my home in the USA. I also mentioned the two very nice books on Japan. As for geography and culture they are not exactly the same thing as culture is often determined by geography. MarkLSteadman cites two "geographical" works below which include culture and they both are illustrated. EncycloPetey I think that "You" refers to me, so in reply I state that pure geography has nothing to do with people whether they are living or dead or never existed. It includes the study of volcanoes, undersea earthquakes, tectonic plate movements and likewise topics. Culture has it's own area of science which is why we have and use the word "culture". I am not trying to debate you fellows. I asked my question to see what others thought because I didn't know and would not assume to know what others think. Kind regards to some of the best people I have ever met on Internet and all of us with a common interest in learning and books. —Maury (talk) 18:30, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I meant billinghurst, but what you describe as geography is actually geology. Geography does include the subfield of physical geography (erosion, rivers, topography, orogeny, etc.) but it also includes much, much more, such as population science, culture, urban planning, geomatics, and a host of other topics. You might want to read the Wikipedia article which, although a bit sparse, does a fair job of presenting the many aspects of geography. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:53, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
You make a distinction between geography and culture that I have not previously seen. As quoted on Wikipedia, geography is "the science that studies the lands, the features, the inhabitants, and the phenomena of the Earth". [emphasis added] And, Maury, yes I am aware that India has many religions, of which we cover virtually zero. --EncycloPetey (talk) 10:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
The works that we've chosen in the past to fill in gaps in our Geography coverage have been broadly focused on an area of the world. The works cover physical geography along with the inhabitants and their cultures. It is these broader works that each year generate the most interest and we have completed the first work in less than a week in both of the last two years. A more narrowly focused work like the one on the Khonds (which overlaps with anthropology for me) doesn't seem to generate the same level of interest. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:23, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that reply. I've some idea at this point what makes a "good" or "bad" choice, but I don't have the experience that some others do. What do you think about a longer volume, such as the one Mark has suggested below on India and Indo-China? It's volume VIII of a larger work, so I wonder about the suitability a work that is both lengthy and at the same time part of a much larger work, even though I do like the topic. For the record, both of his suggestions do appeal to me. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:27, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
One advantage of the regional break-up of the Reclus is that I would suspect that each volume would still be quite suitable on its own, although at the same time benefiting from the other volumes if they are ever completed (since they have a common author/approach). MarkLSteadman (talk) 22:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Two other, longer possiblities are:
A volume from Elisee Reclus's Universal Geography (e.g. India[48]) (1876-1894) 700p
Attempt to distill above discussion into a few options
We have several years' worth of suggestions here and need to narrow down for this year. I've listed here those that have interest by more than one editor. Please indicate your preferences below. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:49, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
"Maury's New Elements of Geography for Primary and Intermediate Classes" and "Burma, painted and described" selected. Let's start with Maury's one, which has already been uploaded.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 13:11, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
August 2013
Earlier in another forum there was a request for more works by women. I have found Author:Rosa Campbell Praed an early Australian colonial writer Her large bibliography covered multiple genres, and books for children as well as adults. She has been described as the first Australian novelist to achieve a significant international reputation (wikipedia). archive.org author search with a variety of works and sizes. Would be worth considering. — billinghurstsDrewth
Marriage as a trade (1909 American edition) by Cicely Hamilton cited as "trade aspect of marriage; i.e., wifehood and motherhood considered as a means of livelihood for women the business of getting or gaining a partner, and the business of marriage partnership, without reference to the paramount claims of love, or without considering love at all." 280pp, wouldn't take the whole month as it is a smaller in size. — billinghurstsDrewth07:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I'd love to see us do The Adventures of David Simple (1744) by Sarah Fielding, particularly since we don't have any of her works, but I can't find a clean copy. n.b.: It was published in more than one volume. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:40, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
But that's a 1904 edition, and the work was published in the 1700s. Reprinted works from around that time tend to be heavily edited and altered from the original, so I wouldn't consider a 1904 edition to be useful. And although it is indeed a scan of the work, it is not a clean copy. It appears to be a mish-mash cobbled together from at least two different scans (which is why the page scans are different sizes and colors), and whoever assembled the comleted file got left- and right-hand pages mixed up sometimes. That's why I said I couldn't find a clean copy. Bad copies yes, but a good clean one, no. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:50, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
The Private Correspondence of Jane, Lady Cornwallis 1613–1644 [50] looks to be an interesting work.
Diaries of court ladies of old Japan [51]. Includes 2 diaries from the late 10th/early 11th centuries, with some nice woodcuts (two in colour). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
We're scheduled to do a Requested Text this month, so I'm going to start a list of things that look interesting in some way. Feel free to add to the list. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Where did you get "Handbook of" in the title? Both the cover of the volume and the title page call it "Precious Stones", without the "Handbook" part. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:31, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Oh. Umm. Ah. That was the title of the first edition (1882). I must have read the preface (djvu /11) immediately before importing to Commons. We'll change it before we put it back into circulation in the templates. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
UGH! "Precious Stones" indeed. The book is ugly with all text, a few tables, and a few diagrams showing the geometric patterns of "precious stones". A book about precious stones should have some color images showing why such stones are considered by people to be so "precious". Black and white diagrams do not cover the beauty of precious stones. I love the idea and once collected a fair number of precious stones over the dollar bill. I am not entirely new to the beauty of precious stones and how they are set into an ornate ring, necklace, &c. I suppose it is better than nothing but hopefully we may someday find a book worthy of such a title. —Maury (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
So not only are 2 pages missing (now patched with place-holders to enable what I thought was the start of the Monthly project according to our "news" page) but the File: & Index: titles are wrong to boot? Isn't this why we go 15 rounds with folks about the bang telling us to look on the Index: talk page for just such information? <sigh>
Anyway, I'll properly swap the correct pages in sometime soon (this week) but fwiw, Proofing can start; all the rest of the pages seem to be there too. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm not particularly worried by the slightly incorrect title of the file/index. By "change it" I mean that the title field on the Index page will be changed so that the transclusions are to the right title. We often have Index pages with different titles to the transcluded work. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
The point was I could have changed it to better reflect the "specifics" (1893, 1st ed. 111 pp. / 1905, 2nd ed. 135 pp / 1913 - reprint 2nd edition / 1924, 3rd ed. and so on) given the opportunity if I was going to replace the original anyway, but if we don't care about stuff like that then I sure won't speak up about when I see this happen again. Sorry for the interuption folks. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Wel, some people might not care, but I do. I care and also appreciate the work you do to "get it right" at the start, so that issues don't have to be redone later. I wish more people took the care to select suitable file names, so that we wouldn't continue to have some of the problems I find in names of older files. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:56, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
October 2013
I think October begins the fiscal year in the US. Why not something on economics. I have just uploaded and added images to Stabilizing the Dollar (1920). It reads well. There are about 12 tables, 9 TOC pages, 9 index pages... but mostly text, and not very many footnotes. Not too daunting; something for everyone (except poetry). Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Topic matter itself doesn't stimulate. To encourage me, I would want the work to be a seminal work, or by a prominent author, or produce something that highlights something. Part of a PotM is about enticing people into the system. — billinghurstsDrewth03:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
I think that economics would be an interesting topic, I'm just not sure what type of book would be good. J.S. Mill's Principles of Political Economy and Alfred Marshall's Principles of Economics would be the standard, influential textbooks of economics. There are also the works of Ricardo, which with Smith, form the basis of Anglo-American classical economics, and the French writers Say and Bastiat. There were also many economists who wrote about economic history in the historical schools: Arnold Toynbee, William Ashley, Friedrich List. MarkLSteadman (talk) 04:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
I think economics/fiscal policy would be good choice for that same October-ish period for no other reason other than it will be mainstream-media-topical in one form or another here in the U.S. The possibilities of drawing in new users by highlighting historical works contrasting the current fiscal policies (such as the one Londonjackbooks first mentions) could be optimal given the timing of the start of the new fiscal year here. I'm sure there are many other works in this area that would be considered far superior to the one first presented by LJB but I don't see how something like that would translate both into new interest and new contributors at the same time. -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I've unilaterally chosen the first suggestion because (1) there was no consensus on any particular work, (2) it is already here and ready to go, and (3) it seemed topical given today's shutdown and consequent problems with the dollar. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Support. That's interesting, as I had already downloaded the DjVu for that book some time ago... intending to work on it at some time. Sounds like a good choice, though it might not last the whole month. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
I can't get to that one either. Association Football is complete but there is nothing to easily replace it. Most of the chess books I can find include a lot of diagrams (which, personally, I don't have time to extract at the moment). Does anyone have an idea for a replacement? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I can perhaps "get to" a book others may not be able to get. But does the book have to be about games? Aren't there enough games throughout the year, especially e-games, and more e-Games around Christmas? I once loved Chess but I don't want to read more about it unless it is Through the Looking-Glass and what Alice found there. Why not a book that is about the origins of CHRISTmas? There is at least one that I am somewhat familiar with and it's about learning and not more playing more day-by-day & year-by-year games. (Song: "Born in the USA" —Maury (talk) 16:33, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I downloaded the Chess book it it is only about 53 pages in length, lees than that when I edit the Google material out of it. -53 pages wouldn't be too boring although boring it remains. The books starts with an ad on Billiards which I much prefer having grown up near University of Virginia pool hall when the dress code for students was coat and tie. Professionals like Tommy Pappas and Jimmy the Greek would come in before UVA started classes and "shark" the wealthy students. Us locals were taught pool shooting by those pros but we were required to stop and watch as agreed on. I learned pool very well and used it in the U S Navy as the best on our ship opposing the best on any other ship when in port -- Newport Rhode Island. Bets were placed and money exchanged hands for my shipmates. Those were good days. —Maury (talk) 16:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I have edited out the word Google on every page of the Chess Book cited by Beeswaxcandle in the text above. This .PDF can be uploaded to Ia now. I have uploaded there a couple of times in the not so distant past and BEEZ, I got that NZ Flowers book for you from HathiTrust that has beautiful color illustrations. This Chess Book is now 37 pages in length and the last pages are all advertisements for unique items such as:
HENRY A. MURTON,
Manufacturer of India Rubber and Oilskin
Clothing of every description.
Waterproofs
for present season, guaranteed proof.
Tweed Coats, Cloaks, Wraps,
for Tourists, Travellers,
Walking, Riding, &c.
Driving Coats and Capes.
Riding Coats and Leggings.
Storm Coats. Fishing Coats.
Army and Regulation
Cloaks and Coats.
Coachmen's Driving Coats.
The "Poncho"
Bicycle Capes and jackets.
Leggings, Overalls,
Storm Hats and Caps, &c.
87 & 89, Grey Street, 20, 22 & 24, Market Street,
NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE.
Branch Stores, 109, High St., SUNDERLAND.
Another
Murton's New Stores.
BILLIARD TABLES.
Full size, 1 2 feet x 6 feet, Mahogany Billiard Tables,
from £+5·
Murton's Special No. 1 Billiard Table,
solid mahogany, 1 2 feet x 6 feet, 12 cues, thick Bangor
slates, fast cushions, with complete fittings for Billiards,
57 guineas.
Murton's No. 2 and 3 Billiard Tables,
1 2 feet X 6 feet, superior selected mahogany, extra thick
slates, new low cushions and complete fittings for Billiards,
66 and 7 8 guineas.
Murton's No. 4 Club Table,
special value, fine figured wood, thick bolted slate bed,
improved fast low cushions (guaranteed not to get hard),
best West of England cloth and complete fittings for '
Billiards-7 5 guineas.
Testimonials from leading players, Clubs and Institutes
throughout the North of England.
How many pages does that book have Soloman7968 and how many are illustrations? AND we could use both of these books. —Maury (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Rawdon Crawley (pseud. van George Frederick Pardon.)
Longmans, Green, 1866 - Sports & Recreation - 261 pages
THE BILLIARD BOOK.
BY CAPTAIN CRAWLEY
WITH NUMEROU8 ILLUSTRATIVE DIAGRAMS.
L O N D O N:
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
1866.
It does still say so in the Pagespace of the book itself. Inaccurately, but that is the reason why someone might think so. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
As we've almost done all of the selected ones above, I've uploaded the following so that they can be added in (in any order) as we work through them (struck out when moved into use):
striking those that are validated, though from what I see they are all at least proofread though need to be transcluded to main ns. There are enough there to add in for validation, though at the current rate, you had better be quick. I might see if I can grab something with a little more meat to keep the the fingers busy for longer. — billinghurstsDrewth15:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Question: Why does Google mess up books like the one shown above by EncycloPetey? Page 35 is ruined. The pages are perhaps too large because Google widens and elongates each page. One page is dark and the next page is light. This is often done by Google. Does that useless width which looks like it needs to be cropped make a difference in derivative works from Internet Archives? The book would make a good addition for our library (as will those listed below). —Maury (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Can't help butting in even though I'm a non-participant. If you're looking for important works that we don't have, you can't go past Boswell's Life of Johnson, regarded by many as the finest biography ever written in English. Hesperian09:13, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
I like Embroidery and Fancy Work. The book is late Victorian, so the designs are a bit dated, but it covers a wide range of artistic forms, and there are still many people actively interested in Victoriana. I checked a number of pages, and the text looks clean. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:28, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
At the rate Embroidery &co. is progressing, we may need another selection. While I like the images in Chainese Carvings, it is a gallery catalogue of items for sale and has almost no text. I'm not sure it would make an effective collaborative work (though an individual or two might find the 58-page catalogue a good project). If we need to go to a second work then, I recommend Renaissance Architecture. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:35, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Another suggestion: Handbook of sculpture, ancient and modern. It's an introductory text about sculpture, its history, the different schools, etc. I found it rather easy to read, the text is large, and there's not too many images or complex structures. There are some greek words scattered throughout, since the history of sculpture does go back to ancient Greece, but these are minimal as well. Mukkakukaku (talk) 01:42, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
I have only looked at the second one (by Campbell), and found that it's not much on geography. It's sort of a travelogue of missionary work among the natives with some local natural history and such thrown in from time to time. Not too keen on it at a PotM. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
All three appear to be travelogues, although previous years appear to count travel writing as close enough. I have no strong preference in this selection, although I admit I'm amused by the blatancy of "Cannibal-land" as a title. Something needs to go live tomorrow, however. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:12, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Since we need something of the earth on my wedding anniversary ("mayday-mayday",} why not consider a sub-division of geography? I offer this as a mere suggestion: On enWikisource we already have a book _sitting untouched since about 2009_ that has text in terrible shape (loaded in by a bot with text extracted). This work is also on Google as well as volumes 1 and 2 being on HathiTrust. This is illustrated mostly with b/w images but also some color images. I refer to "Great Neapolitan Earthquake of 1857: The First Principles of Observational Seismology as Developed in the Report to the Royal Society of London of the Expedition Made by Command of the Society Into the Interior of the Kingdom of Naples, to Investigate the Circumstances of the Great Earthquake of December 1857" —Maury (talk) 16:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I think there are but two pages like that in which case I would use an image. We also do have people here who like puzzle pages like that - not me. But we need something and when I saw Adam's statement about needing something by tomorrow (May 1st) I offered what I was already aware of. I looked at the travelogue books but I don't care for the Cannibal book that Adam mentioned. The images are also very difficult. Discard a good book (The "Great Neapolitan Earthquake &c.")for two or three pages of difficulty? At least it isn't a travelogue and it is about the earth and its movements and changes "Mother Nature" brings to many nations as opposed to someone's wanderings. It also is not all about the past because these still happen. But then I recently watched Pompeii and hear of earthquakes on television ref California, Mexico, and many others and I lived through one in the state of Washington that was shown on CNN that scared me since I knew not what to do. There is no where to run. The ground below me was like a liquid and more difficult to stand than being on a ship in a storm in blue water at sea. In Washington I was introduced to the bridge that replaced the swing bridge called "Galloping Gerdie" now called Tacoma Narrows Bridge". I would much rather be safe at sea on my favorite ship where we weathered many fierce storms. We need to learn about these machines of nature and what to do when they hit as with many tornadoes hitting nearby states fiercely this week. Where we live can become dangerous in a split second even if it has "never happened before" so we had best learn what to do ind especially as we move to or through new places to us. I presently live in an area called "Hurricane Alley" and knew little about what to do when I came here. We, and others had best learn or suffer the consequences. I don't know about land movements in Australia or New Zealand but I do know about situations in the USA including being caught in a flash flood somewhere in Nevada as water from nowhere started coming UP through cracks in the land when there was no rain coming down or when I watched as a river worked its way totally underground -- ground with deep cracks with the river, once flowing fast, totally disappeared below the ground. We need to learn about the Earth and how it functions more so that work on travelogues of any sort. I an not arguing I am just suggesting what I think is important to know and what is useful for us today. Has anyone here seen the recent news on mother nature's weather machines? -- Look at WikiPedia's front page and the article, April 27–30, 2014 tornado outbreak Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 03:12, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
It isn't just two pages, there are technical symbols and formulae throughout much of the book. The vocabulary is also highly technical, which means that proofreaders will have a hard time with it. It is a valuable book certainly, just not a good choice for a general community collaboration effort. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I admit to not having looked at the New Hebrides' books in detail and hadn't realised that they weren't really what I hoped. I'm happy with the Lake Ngami book. 07:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
The selected work is progressing quite rapidly. In case we need another this month, I am starting a list of possibilities, focusing on Borneo and Brunei, since that nation is much in the news of late. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:16, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I would go with this if we can swap the May and June selections. I am trained as a botanist, and would gladly help out a lot on this important work, but will not have the time in May. My schedule in June is much, much freer than this month or next. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I agree with EncycloPetey's request/suggestion above. It is always good to have someone we know here who loves the topic and can spare the time and that book is lengthy. So, can we switch months on that book or not and if not then why not? Switch to geography, geology, or gemstones. —Maury (talk) 01:30, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Secrets of Crewe house : the story of a famous campaign (1921) by w:Campbell Stuart Subject: Great Britain. Dept. of Propaganda in Enemy Countries; Propaganda, British; has portrait photos and illustrations (~50), good quality scan, though yellowing; 340pp {Note: Work itself would need to be hosted locally, some illustrations would be eligible for Commons]
selected
The British Black Book (1915) by Rudolf Cronau. German anti-British propaganda aimed at keeping the US out of WWI (or, at least, not on the side of the Allies). Short, about 140pp, with a one illustration and a few typographic ornaments. I placed a portion of the Black Book here on WS but it didn't have that title. It was something like England, a Destroyer of Nations.—Maury (talk) 04:35, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
The tunnellers of Holzminden (1920) by Hugh George Edmund Durnford. The story of the Great Escape of World War I, as told by one of its participants. 192pp (including 4 diagrams), plus 14 plates. Apart from the occasional umlaut, there is no tricky formatting. PD in the US due to age, but I don’t know if it’s PD in the UK, as I have been unable to find a d.o.d (or d.o.b.) for the author. — Iain Bell (talk) 10:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC) (struck out by Iain Bell (talk) 11:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC))
@Iain Bell:I did some searching for this author previously, and died in 1965. Link on the talk page to a family tree. If we were to do this work we would need to host it on enWS, rather than Commons. That said, are we pushing our friendship levels to have people from Britain/Australia/Canada editing a work that is seemingly still under copyright outside of the US. — billinghurstsDrewth14:29, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
You have a point, so I have struck out that suggestion. Mind you, it will be eligible for Wikilivres in a couple of years... — Iain Bell (talk) 11:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Re: the first choice (Elements), I'm not sure how valuable a book published in 1915 would be towards analysis of the War. In any case, it reads rather simplistically. The second (Russia) looks quite labor intensive; a 350 page book about Russia in the War that was published in 1915, and well prior to the October Revolution, seems less likely to be useful. The third choice is the one of these I favor most, although it covers mostly British speeches. --EncycloPetey (talk) 09:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
August 2014
Theme: Female Author
Suggestions:
Louisa May Alcott, A Garland for Girls (1888). -- Easy to read, large text, decent OCR (even if all the quotation marks came out as ").
Out of Due Time (1906) by Josephine Ward (Mrs. Wilfrid Ward). Mrs. Ward "was a member of England's leading Roman Catholic family and wife of the Catholic author, Wilfrid Ward." The novel "reflects the impact of religious and theological controversy [and] the unfolding crisis of Roman Catholic Modernism." (Abstracts: Amer. Acad. of Religion Society of Biblical Literature 1992, p. 113.) Londonjackbooks (talk) 23:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Constance Frederica Gordon CummingA Lady's Cruise in a French Man-of-War (1882) described in her 1924 obit as "...It was in 1877, while in Fiji, that she was offered the opportunity of a voyage in the Pacific in a French man-of-war, visiting Tahiti, Tonga, Samoa, and other groups, finishing up in California. The result was one of her most interesting narratives ..."
We haven't yet chosen a work for August. I haven't been part of this discussion, so I'd rather not choose one, but if someone would like to, we can update the main page.—Zhaladshar(Talk)13:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Selected CF Gordon Cumming's A Lady's Cruise in a French Man-of-War because it sounds the most interesting and therefore might get completed. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Memoirs of Babur, full version translated Leyden & Erskin Vol. 1, Vol. 2 reprint of 1826 edition; abridged version with magnificent illustrations [54] translated F.G. Talbot
Suggestion: Something naval For this month Was wondering about doing with a naval basis, but less people biographical and something on naval subjects or objects, or terms. So here are a few things that I have uncovered
Selected Development of Navies. Would have liked to do the Dictionary, but it's got long-s (s) throughout, which doesn't work well for a PotM. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:13, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Since we're almost done with America's National Game, what about moving on to True Stories of Girl Heroines next? The formatting is straightforward, and the book is written in independent chapters for each "girl", so editors can work on a single chapter without further commitment. The only thing I see that needs to happen is that the Index page's page numbers should be corrected to account for the internal illustrations. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:57, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: Newbie made a suggestion for completing a work, and I replied that maybe we could consider adding it after we completed the current PotM. I said it blind without looking at it, though was so so so so kind to ping BWC. — billinghurstsDrewth02:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Ah, you mean Index:Forth Bridge (1890).djvu. The remaining work to be done for that volume consists of processing a number of missing images, and entering a few hideously complicated tables. I don't think that work is particularly amenable to general community work as a PotM. Rather, it needs an image-savvy person and a table-savvy person.
In the tools section on the left side of the page there is a link "related changes". Click that when you're on the Index and you'll see the last 50 edits. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:41, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The PotM templates assume djvu extensions. As we can always get an OCR'd djvu file by conversion, I think that this is a reasonable requirement. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
The source listed for "The Museum" notes - "Possible copyright status: The publication, and the images and texts within it, may be protected by copyright; use of such materials beyond fair use or other exceptions provided under applicable copyright law may violate the copyright laws of the United States and/or the laws of other countries. Permission from the appropriate copyright holder is required to publish or reproduce." Although I'm not sure why.. Best to consider an alternative until the status question is resolved by IA. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
This is standard text for the digitising source library and puts the onus on the downloader to ensure legality before use. However, it was published in 1917 in New York, so meets the pre-1923 requirement for PD-old. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Further possibilities, to follow after the current options:
Angelo's Bayonet Exercise (1853). This is a military training manual in use of the bayonet, as is still referenced by modern weapon enthusiasts. It is short (97 pp.), which makes it very doable.
Child-life & The Museum are now already proofread, so will put them aside in the meantime. I've a couple of other works in the pipeline, that I'll post as they're needed. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:16, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Other works if experiences contributors are interested (call it PoTM (Advanced level)
These are already proofread and just need validation. Usually we're looking for a work to take from un-proofread through to completed. However, let's see what others think. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
In that case, let me propose Srikanta (Part 1); it does not have any complicated formatting, is easy to work with, and is also an interesting read. Alternative: Kapalkundala. If you require a work in a still earlier stage, i.e., not yet added here, then proposed: The King of the Dark Chamber(1, 2, 3) by Tagore, which has a Gutenberg version, so, easy to proofread. Hrishikes (talk) 09:52, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't really want to do works that have already been proofread. I think those need to wait until next November or be used in a "validation swap" with another user. I think doing plays would be difficult for a PotM because every page would need formatting for the change in character and stage directions (which is a lot to ask for new-coming proofreaders). I would support the idea of Srikanta. Are there other parts of that work that haven't been uploaded, or at least other novels that we could use? We'd go through that work in about 5 days.—Zhaladshar(Talk)14:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Srikanta is a four-part novel; the first part is most famous, PD translations of the other 3 parts I could not find. Non-PD complete translation has been published by Penguin (1, 2, 3), but that's not for here. Secondly, this may not take much time, but this is easy, therefore ideal for PotM. For the time factor, I added an alternative, Kapalkundala. More works can be proposed by others, I think, if there's more time, after finishing these two, if agreed upon. Lastly, about your newbie theory. I am also new here, joined only a few months ago, and my first work here was a play (Nil Durpan). Hrishikes (talk) 14:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
As I've said elsewhere, it's a problem that these files do not include a text layer. We're now experiencing technical problems with the OCR button that's supposed to appear in the edit window. If we can't get that fixed, then without a text layer, these files will not be good choices for PotM. We were lucky that someone created OCR pages for Kopal-Kundala before the OCR went buggy. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:50, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
I've noticed that we have no complete, sourced works by James Joyce. There are two transcription projects underway that could be used for part of this month, though I wouldn't put either at the top of the list for PotM—they're more filler for the end of the month as needed, as both have been started:
The first option has a flawed source file, so it isn't viable at this time. The third option would be too complicated for a PotM. Ideally, we want a selection simple enough that even newcomers could participate Formatting an academic journal volume is not likely to be a good choice. The last time we tried a highly technical volume we didn't come close to finishing it. The second selection is less than ideal in that it contains many transcriptions of Sanskrit words, which require careful attention to (and typing of) diacriticals unfamiliar to most English speakers outside of India. It might still be workable, but it will liekly be frustrating to many editors and will require an additional proofread by someone properly versed in recognizing which dots, dashes, and other little marks are missing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
addendum: The second and third options appear to be missing their text layer, so we wouldn't use them for PotM. All selections should have a text layer that shows up in the edit window. Without this, we would have many additional problems, especially in light of the aforementioned Sanskrit transcriptions. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
We're close to finishing Queen Mab, so will need a second work. Sheaf doesn't have a text layer, so isn't a possibility. As a result we'll go with the Hindustan ballads. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, this can be next, but the first work needs finishing off. I know there's a problem with a couple of the plates, but there's still other pages that can be fixed. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Prefer either the Greenland or Burma works mentioned above, based on the fact that to my eyes they deal with proportionally poorly covered areas in wikipedia, might be most easily used to improve that content, and our being able to show that our work can improve their content might be the best way to get new editors involved here. John Carter (talk) 18:51, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Can we take some text on Nepal? By the way, how do I search for books needing proofreading sorted by Geography? --Siddhant (talk) 04:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
How to Know the Ferns (1899), by Frances Theodora Parsons. A classic book with some nice illustrations, and one of the first popular fern manuals published for North America (if not actually the first). At only 262 pages, this book might not last the whole month. If we choose it, then we should have another ready. It's really a shame we don't yet have any works by this author. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Another proposal: Index:Life Movements in Plants Vol 2.djvu. It is a classic of botany and biophysics, part of a body of works which proved that plants were living creatures because of having movements of life. Vol II has a Gutenberg version mentioned on the author page, which should make it easy to proofread. Hrishikes (talk) 09:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
My proposal: Index:The Gall Wasp Genus Cynips.pdf by Alfred Kinsey, a great and voluminous study of gall wasps. I started it last year and had it done for nearly a half, but it was the easier half, consisting mostly of text. The remaining half contains many tables and images, so there's a lot of hard work to do. Nonexyst (talk) 21:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
OK, but it's really (biological) anthropology rather than natural history. That said, it is a key work and needs to be completed. If we select this for June then we should have a different topic for July. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Um, on second thoughts, there are many good online sources for this text. Do we really want to do this? What do you think? --Siddhant (talk) 00:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
My personal thinking on that issue in general is that we can't count on other online sources to continue to exist, or to continue to be available for free. Just look at Google News; one day it had extensive publicly available archives, the next day they were gone, replaced by pay services. BD2412T02:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, makes sense. But can't we at least use the text someone has already produced? Why proofread all over again? --Siddhant (talk) 03:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks like it's already been digitized electronically, you can grab the epub here. Although i'm very confused on the footnotes, poorly done. --Rochefoucauld (talk) 00:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
July 2015
Not sure whether this fits, but how about: Zhuang Zi, an ancient Chinese text that is one of the two foundational works of Taoism. The Giles translation is our only copy and it has not been proofread. The work consists of short stories, allegories, and anecdotes, so it would be easy for a new editor to edit a whole "chapter" in a short time. There is also not much text per page, and the font is large and friendly. The only wrinkle is the presence of a few breves (e.g., ŭ) and macrons in some of the transliterated names. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, more or less it is. It is broadly "cultural anthropology," because most all of the so-called "social sciences" can be called that. I could certainly go with this, and, maybe, if it finishes early, maybe adding some other texts from volumes 39 and 40 of the Sacred Books of the East, or maybe just those two books themselves, John Carter (talk) 15:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Nothing to say about the category issue, but I'm glad to see this proposed here. I've read A. C. Graham's Chuang Tsu: the Inner Chapters which explains the significance of the book. Though traditionally ascribed to one author, it's actually a mess of different stories and wisdom from different philosophical schools. There's lots of reverence for Confucius and the Chinese Classics, but also irreverence and criticism and as EncycloPetey says it's a foundational book of Taoism along with the Lao Tse/Tao Te Ching. I'll help out with this whether it's PotM or not, but I'd be glad to see this prioritised by the community. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:29, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Out of Due Time (1906) by Josephine Ward (Mrs. Wilfrid Ward). Mrs. Ward "was a member of England's leading Roman Catholic family and wife of the Catholic author, Wilfrid Ward." The novel "reflects the impact of religious and theological controversy [and] the unfolding crisis of Roman Catholic Modernism." (Abstracts: Amer. Acad. of Religion Society of Biblical Literature 1992, p. 113.) Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:06, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Since it wasn't selected earlier this year, I'll put this forward again, possibly as a second choice for the month: How to Know the Ferns (1899), by Frances Theodora Parsons. A classic book with some nice illustrations, and one of the first popular fern manuals published for North America (if not actually the first). At only 262 pages, this book might not last the whole month. It's really a shame we don't yet have any works by this author. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:15, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Looks like a decent selection (though I haven't checked the file). The only note I'll make is that there isn't much text on each page, so this might go quickly. It would be good to have a second selection on hand in case we need it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:00, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
We need to see whether it is the same edition or not. Primarily, and whether we (are going to|can) go to a straight migration, or we need to do some back end gruntwork. If it is that far advanced, it may be better to just continue with the work, and look to input the missing page(s) separately. Depending where the missing page is, and the alignment of the work, we may just be able to import over the top, and update the file details with the new details. — billinghurstsDrewth23:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
It is a different edition. Current is printed 1905, this one is at least 1908. At least a couple of photos are different. So we have to come down to how much of purists that we wish to be. If we are only missing the one page, will a text insertion suffice? Does it take it out of the PotM space or not is a different question. It would take it away from Featured Text, but not necessarily PotM — billinghurstsDrewth01:49, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
As far as I can see, this Google version here is the only 1895 copy available on the net for free download, so missing pages cannot be substituted. Apart from the missing page issue (which no one has specified), it is B&W and has a frontsheet, the latter making it liable for deletion at Commons at any time as per previous precedence.
On the other hand, the 1908 version has at least two online copies (IA and DLI), so missing pages from one can possibly be substituted from the other. The IA version is a color-scan (making for better image quality) and has additional components (appreciation by Hobson, intro by the author's widow etc.).
Therefore, the 1895 version should be left as is till repair is possible and the 1908 version should be taken up for POTM. This is an all-time classic of mountaineering by one of the great pioneers, so good for POTM as a quality work. Hrishikes (talk) 04:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
[following I had added to December but we have progressed Sep work well and it is still not half way through the month. Feel up to a harder effort of the RT list?]
(hesitantly) We would not normally do the slightly more complex or older works, but I would like to propose w:The Fable of the Bees: or, Private Vices, Public Benefits (maybe this 1724 3rd ed.). It is slightly political piece, already has an article at enWP and other wikis, but there is not really a browseable version available on the web. We have it referred to in existing works, and it does appear on WS:RT. — billinghurstsDrewth03:31, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
My impression was that due to technical shortcomings with the 1895 version, the POTM for this month was switched over to Index:My Climbs in the Alps and Caucasus (1908).djvu, per User:Hrishikes above, which is almost done. I don't see the benefit to making a project of completing two versions of the same work in the same month (although I'm sure the 1895 version will come along in time). I would rather find an unrelated second work for the second half of the month. BD2412T21:14, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
The Fable of the Bees was requested above, but that was disputed. Even the Mount Everest book is looking a bit long now. Is there something in the range of 100-150 pages? BD2412T14:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Proposed: Index:Panchatantra.djvu. It is w:Panchatantra (certainly the most frequently translated literary product of India, per Wikipedia) of w:Vishnu Sharma (one of the most widely translated non-religious authors in history, per Wikipedia), translated by Arthur William Ryder (whose work as a translator is probably the finest ever accomplished by an American, per Wikipedia). 1925 copyright, not renewed as per Stanford search. Hrishikes (talk) 16:57, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm reluctant to do two works of Indian fiction in translation in the same year. We could look at doing this one next year. Instead I propose Hunger, which is a Norwegian novel by the 1920 Nobel prize winner Knut HamsunBeeswaxcandle (talk) 07:19, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
While I can understand that, I think that there is a bit of a difference between "Indian fiction," which I believe the first work clearly qualified as, and one of the most widely notable works in the history of writing, which, to an extent, the Panchatantra is. I wouldn't call Aesop's Fables an example of "Greek fiction," either. John Carter (talk) 15:23, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks John. There is another point. The language is different. The first one was Bengali, this one is Sanskrit. Wikisources are language-specific domains, so works from different languages should fall in different categories for consideration here, and not clubbed together based on a geographical area. Hrishikes (talk) 02:45, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
I think Hunger would be a fine choice. The fact that it is a bit more obscure might make it less likely to be highlighted otherwise. If recent experience is a guide, we will probably end up needing to work on a second POTM anyway, so let's go with Hunger first, and Moll Flanders as a backup. BD2412T12:14, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Moll Flanders has one point that causes me to favor it: This coming week is Banned Book Week, and Moll Flanders is a previously banned book. We might consider, starting next year, to select a significant work that has been banned for the monthly project. It might even serve to draw in additional editors if we were to advertize that fact. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
That is undeniably a good point. In that case, I will support Moll Flanders for the first POTM, and Hunger for a second, even if we only get started on it. BD2412T02:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I favour Hunger only due it being Norwegian fiction, though would be comfortable with Moll Flanders(noting that fiction is not my favoured type of work), and I think that we can rack and stack, and if we only get half way through the second, that is still advancement. Happy with the suggestion of a banned book month, and it is probably appropriate for us to start the 2016 proposed subject list AND how we can leverage input and discussions from further afield. (We do need to be more on the front foot and more advertorial.) — billinghurstsDrewth02:54, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
A quick point of concern here. The version of Moll Flanders that we are working on is actually two books in one - the first half is Moll Flanders, and the second half is The Life of Roxane (or Roxana: The Fortunate Mistress), a different work by Daniel Defoe.
Agree with EncycloPetey with them about being transcluded as subpages to give honesty to the edition, and just in case there are subsequent versions. The root should reflect the title page. Redirects from the root to respective versions. — billinghurstsDrewth05:35, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
The Moll Flanders portion of the work is done, but we may as well press on and finish validating the Roxana portion before getting to the next POTM. BD2412T15:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Moll Flanders is done, but I'm not sure it makes sense to launch into another substantial work at this point of the month. Perhaps we could either find a small one or start the November validation drive early. Cheers! BD2412T15:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm OK with it as well, as long as there is a mechanism for tracking and granting "credit" to those proofreaders who participate. The user page "awards" may be mere tokens, but they are one of the few incentives or bits of recognition we give out. Some users really do appreciate receiving them. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Proposed: Black's Law Dictionary (Second Edition). This is the last public domain version of this work, which continues to be the most widely used legal dictionary. Once completed, this work will serve as a cross-reference source for Wikipedia articles (demonstrating the historical meanings of the legal principles defined), and for Wikitionary entries. It is lengthy, and probably not doable by an editor working alone. Wiktionarians can be recruited to help. BD2412T18:31, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
While I agree that this is an important work, the great length and the quantity of technical text squeezed onto each page make this a poor choice for monthly collaboration. Especially so in December, which is usually a slower month for member activity in PotM. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Not a good choice for PotM. The style complexities would make it difficult to keep consistent across multiple editors. Also works requiring complex LST don't work well on PotM. This would be better as a WikiProject where consistency of style and transclusion can be ensured. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Proposed: The Royal Institution has a tradition of Christmas lectures [57], and we have a The Chemical History of a Candle (though it is not scan supported yet!), they are not at the most intense level, so I would like to suggest some of these published works, though would feel comfortable with many from the series
Life in motion, or, Muscle and nerve : a course of six lectures delivered before a juvenile auditory at the Royal Institution of Great Britain during the Christmas holidays of 1891-92 Internet Archive identifier: b21929786
"The Chemistry of a Candle" looks interesting. We don't have much chemistry here, so it could make a good choice. I personally like "Life in motion, or, Muscle and nerve" as well, since we have little to nothing on medicine, human anatomy, biomechanics, or kinesiology. I saw only one page requiring advanced formatting, but there are a lot of images. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:43, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Since we are now in December, we really need to lock down our choice. Candles are Christmassy enough, in my opinion. BD2412T04:40, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Because I am silly enough to think that having it as the featured text on Valentine's Day might be amusing, I nominate The Kiss and Its History by Kristoffer Nyrop at archive.org (external scan). The work is one of the few sources cited for the article on kissing in the recent Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, which is evidently reason to think it is one of the better such works out there. John Carter (talk) 18:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Only issue I can foresee—if it becomes nominated for FT—is that you will need to keep a tight rein on the formatting before (explicit formatting instructions on Index Talk page), during (making sure multiple editors are actually following the instructions) and after (perhaps a couple validation run-throughs) proofreading in order for it to be FT-worthy the following month. [Some formatting considerations: Wikilinking (rule of thumb: one internal link—per subject—per chapter—difficult to monitor with multiple editors); poetry (I recommend {{Block center}} with breaks and gaps—also introduce {{fqm}}); references (standard vice symbols)]. Otherwise, I find it a good choice as well at first glance. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
I don't think this would make a good PotM selection. It's a wonderful little piece of research, but it contains a LOT of poetic quotations, and a LOT of foreign language text. I saw Spanish, French, German, Latin, and Greek all in the prefatory material and first chapter alone. This could make a good group collaboration, but I don't think it's suitable for PotM; its format and content are too challenging. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:15, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
I don't see the problem there. The language and formatting issues are not that complex. It's a relatively short work. BD2412T14:28, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Most contributors to previous PotM steer clear of poetic formatting pages, and do not proofread pages with non-English text. So, it is a pretty serious issue for selecting PotM. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:23, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Hunger is coming to an end, so I suggest we pick up the other work proposed in the last time we looked at Fiction, which was Index:Panchatantra.djvu. @Hrishikes: says that, although published in 1925, the copyright wasn't renewed and that this particular translation is an important one to have in our collection. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:38, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Looks like an interesting book. Although I've heard a lot about US First Ladies, I've heard almost nothing about the wives of UK Prime Ministers. Do we know the date of death for the two authors? That could affect whether it's hosted here or on Commons. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:11, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Lee died in 1920, and w:Lucy Masterman is the person listed as a contributor died 1977. One could argue that contributions are not necessarily the authorship (research, opinions, organisational) and the declaration of a specific author is sufficient. Though if you want to play safe, we just have the scan stored here. The work is pre-1923 so able to be hosted here. — billinghurstsDrewth03:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Lives of the Wives of Queen Victoria's Prime Ministers (1917) Elizabeth Lee
For poetry month, I recommend works of poetry by soldiers fallen during WWI. I have generated a list of works for consideration based on my proofreading of For Remembrance & etc.—if this seems like a palatable idea. Sorry for the space this takes up. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:40, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
I like the idea of doing a book of WWI poetry. As this is rather a long list, let's focus on one of the books from 1916 so that we can feature it as a centennial of publication. If we get through the chosen work, we could then move on to Hrishikes' suggestion, which sounds intriguing. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Of the 1916 works (and many others listed), most poems are pre-WWI. I might recommend Leslie Coulson's 1917 From an Outpost (Coulson died in 1916); or Vernède's War poems &c. (1917). We have Mackintosh's works here already, but they are unindexed. Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Plumb forgot about the new PotM. I can set up an index (I am now leaning towards Alan Seeger's Poems (1916)—his war poetry in part the last), or we can go ahead with Hrishikes' recommendation above—just to get a work on the Main page for April at least. If there are no takers, I can try my hand at listing on the Main page—not 100% sure how to do it, but I could give it a shot; just didn't want to step on anyone's toes... Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:31, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Based on Beeswaxcandle's consent to do a 1916 work on war poetry, Alan Seeger's Poems should basically fit the bill. The last portion of the work covers his war poetry, and for those editors who do not necessarily like to work with poetry, there is a somewhat lengthy introduction (with some poetry). I left poetry formatting suggestions at the Talk page of the index, and may add more as I familiarize myself with the work. I will go ahead and make changes to the {{PotM}} and {{Collaboration}} templates to reflect the selection. Feel free to check my changes to make sure I have not made any mistakes. Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
I have selected Hrishikes' suggestion above as second April selection. Seeger's Poems is in still in need of transclusion and standardization, and I will continue that process. Help is still welcomed in these areas. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:30, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Is there time for a third work? I would like to suggest Index:The Bird of Time.djvu, by India's best known female poet. Not a long work, it should be possible to complete within the remaining month. Sorry, didn't realise that placeholders were already in place. Hrishikes (talk) 10:24, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Locations were exotic at time of travel. My recommendation is for the first item of my list, because of the POV of author, and because a travelogue of Europe by a foreigner should be an interesting item. Hrishikes (talk) 02:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I did not know about the full significance of the work, but yes, it is about a little known area, so Support. Hrishikes (talk) 07:31, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
I am actually keen for the first one also. It is interesting to see what perspective would be provided about Europe by some one from India. Since we have generally been getting through two a month, let's line that up to be the second one. BD2412T17:46, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Too many options. Please bring the list down to three of the best-remember that most of us don't have any knowledge of these people or their significance. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't think people here have so little around-the-world knowledge. Anyway, all the subjects have Wikipedia articles, so getting the knowledge is not an issue. The list can be narrowed down to the first three (as good as any), but I would prefer a community feedback. Hrishikes (talk) 08:13, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
I would like to recommend the biography of Isvar Chandra Vidyasagar, a social reformer and educationist from 19th century Bengal, who fought against religious and superstitious rituals and dogma in a rational way. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 07:17, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
The current POTM is proceeding at high speed, so we need to choose a second work. As the first work is a biography, I am proposing an autobiography as the second. We have gone for two India-related works consecutively, so let's go for a British work: let us see, up close, one of the most renowned courtesans in history: Index:The Memoirs of Harriette Wilson Vol 1.djvu. Hrishikes (talk) 14:44, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
[20pp] : USDA (1908) "The White Ant", (Termites); circular No. 50.
It looks at though the US Dept. of Agriculture, Entomology Division, has put out a whole series of short publications on pest insects. We might consider working on this range throughout the month. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:30, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
There are a number of works we have in the series of Portal:Hibbert Lectures that cover this genre. They are usually substantial in size 300+ pp for a series of lectures. So looking at w:Hibbert Lectures maybe we could consider one of
Upton's Lectures on the bases of religious belief(external scan)
Sayce's The religions of ancient Egypt and Babylonia(external scan)
For Kuenen, this scan: (external scan) looks to be the best. The length is fine, the subject is broad, and the many footnotes are mostly short and easy to handle. The only possible complaint I can see is that the author's view towards the origin and practice of Islam is likely to offend most Muslims. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:14, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
If we include material offensive to a group, it is because part of our function is to document the social mores, for good or ill, of the past. BD2412T02:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
The inclusion of such material is not at issue. What is at issue is the selection of a suitable work for community collaboration, which necessarily requires a different set of criteria. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but what criteria? We had The Descent of Man as a collaboration, despite its controversial (and, arguably, offensive) nature to creationists; The Aborigines of Victoria and Riverina, which paints an unflattering picture of that group; and The Varieties of Religious Experience, which dismisses the doctrinal truth of religions altogether in favor of a more psychological cause, and primarily cites Christianity for its examples. It doesn't seem that offending a group, or offensive characterizations of a group, have been a consideration in the past. BD2412T17:17, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
So... you are arguing that we should offend as many people as possible, then? Or that: because a thing has not been done in the past, we shouldn't start now? Or, what exactly? Your opinion in the matter is not clear. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:25, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I am arguing that it hasn't been done in the past, and adopting such a position now creates the appearance that there is one specific group for which we would dismiss the historical value of a work to avoid giving offense. BD2412T14:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
My opinion is that for POTM we should focus on the historical and literary importance of works, having a diverse breadth of coverage, and suitability in terms of size and formatting issues. I don't think that we should be particularly concerned with whether an otherwise qualifying work happens to reflect the prejudices and societal misconceptions of the day. BD2412T15:25, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
An alternate view of anthropology, there is an important primary work still quoted in current day media ... Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowdswork already available at Gutenberg. The links are to scans from 1841, and the condition is reasonable, though not brilliant for the images (external scans (multiple parts): 1, 2, 3). — billinghurstsDrewth02:21, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
As mythology is also allowed:
The Mythology of All Races (1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)
If we choose to do one of these volumes, I favor Mythology vol. 3 (Celtic & Slavic), as it covers an area where we currently have little information. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:18, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, good enough, I think. If vol 3 gets completed before the month is over, then we can take up another volume; mythological stories are likely to sustain contributors' interest, these are also easy for POTM. I would prefer vol 12 as the second item, if it comes to that; its area is also little covered. Hrishikes (talk) 16:31, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm. I've been seeing lots of references, and thus red links, to Cox's Mythology of the Aryan Nations, so I'm now leaning that way. It too would make a valuable addition, even though I'm uncertain how much of the scholarship has held up after all this time. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
I am retracting that one. So many images make it unsuitable. As a second choice, I am leaning towards Kuenen's work, if objection does not come from a Muslim editor willing to participate in POTM, then it should be OK. The madness work should also be OK, I am trying to see if images can be obtained from some alternate source. Hrishikes (talk) 12:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Anthropology from another direction might be a work like, there are lots of images in the work as may be expected.
The Bengali part of the book will not be a problem, because proofreading of those pages will be done in Bengali Wikisource and I guarantee to complete it there. I have already added {{iwpage|bn}} template in relevant pages which will directly render them from BN WS. Please check this page for example. It would be a good collaboration between the two language projects. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 09:07, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
What is the point of presenting only the English translations of dialogues intended to help the traveler acquire Bengali? This really belongs at multilingual Wikisource. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: Can you please explain how this work belongs at multilingual? As I understand, languages are not mixed at mul, they are kept separate, each with its own Mainpage (when created), waiting for its own subdomain in future. It is just a waiting hall for future wikisources. As both Bengali and English have moved out of mul, so how is a book using these two languages suitable for mul? This work is a Bengali primer in English, intended for English-speaking people, so the right place for it is here at the English Wikisource, I think. However, its suitability for POTM is another issue. Hrishikes (talk) 02:04, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Your understanding of mul is incorrect. Yes, the work is a Bengali primer for English speakers, but here we would host only the English, which would make the work pointless, as there would be simple everyday conversations in only English. The Bengali wikisource would host only the Bengali, which would consist of simple phrases in Bengali. The whole point of the book is that it sets the Bengali and the English side-by-side for the reader to learn the one from the other. The mul Wikisource exists to host books in more than one language, not just to host languages that do not yet have their own projects. This is one reason I have never worked on a book that sets the Greek and English of ancient dramas side by side. We don't host those here. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:25, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Mul wikisource is defined at mul:Wikisource:Oldwikisource: The multilanguage project Oldwikisource is portal between the existing Wikisource domains in different languages and it also serves as the incubator for Wikisources, hosting languages that don't have their own domains yet. No mention of hosting bilingual/multilingual texts. Moreover, if anyone tries to create a new page in page namespace, a warning appears, listing the existing language subdomains and with this advice: You should not create your page here if it is written on one of those languages. Exceptions may apply for pre-1923 work still copyrighted in its home country and forbidden in the specific language subdomain. I am not getting validation of your understanding that mul Wikisource exists to host books in more than one language; so can you please point me to any such policy, or to examples where bilingual texts are hosted in toto in mul when both languages have own wikisource subdomains? Hrishikes (talk) 02:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
The discussion to permit them never got anywhere, and there was strong opposition to including parallel texts. The page Wikisource:Multilingual texts was started to try to collect discussion on the issue, but (as you can see) we never got as far as any coherent text on the issue. The strong opposition is why I abandoned hope of having such texts here. If you feel such texts belong here, please point out a policy that permits them here. I have seen none. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:52, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
You would be more knowledgeable about policy, but I have seen practical examples. Index:Swahili tales.djvu is a bilingual work, the Swahili portion being hosted in mul and the English portion here. In a work having Bengali and English, I had kept a fully Bengali chapter in Bengali Wikisource, keeping the link here. By this edit, the status was changed by another admin and the chapter was brought to English WS, although it is wholly in Bengali. This suggests that old perspectives have changed and new ones are gradually emerging. Carey's book is meant for English speakers and as you said, it requires both Bengali and English together. So it can help conceptualize future policy on this matter. When a specific work requires a specific approach, we should have the capability to be flexible and open-minded enough to accommodate experimentation, instead of nipping new ideas in the bud. As Bodhi pointed out below, this can be handled in various ways. If it is handled through POTM, new ways will emerge through the application of many minds; and who knows, this may be ultimately beneficial for this site. So I urge you to be more tolerant of new ways; policy either for or against can always be formulated later, after seeing how it goes. Hrishikes (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you please cite a policy where it was decided not to host this kind of book in En WS? En WS do have some multilingual books, which have been proofread simultaneously with other language Wikisource projects. This was one of the purpose of creating the InterWikiTranclusion.js. If transclusion of side by side pages seems to be a problem, we need to find a way to link them, thats all, may be it can be solved by Wikidata integration or by providing links of each other in both language transcluded pages or in some other way. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 03:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you please provide examples of these "multilingual books"? We eliminated all the ones I knew about a few years ago. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:52, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
In the case of Swahili Tales, the original book was indeed parallel, but the work as presented here is not. Only the English portion is present here, it is not side-by-side, and the English portion is both indepedent and complete in and of itself. It does not require parallel structure for presentation. The work being discussed here requires side-by-side text to be in any way meaningful. Please provide an example of this kind of text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Like the English portion of Swahili Tales, the English portion of Carey's book is complete and independent. The Bengali portion is the translated version of the corresponding English pages, just like the Swahili Tales and also complete and independent itself. I can assure you as Bengali is my mother tongue. Carey's book doesnot require side by side text to become meaningful. Just like Swahili Tales, you just have to provide link of corresponding transcluded pages. That's all. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 01:58, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
The Swahili Tales work is not presented side by side. I do not understand why you think that it is. One can see wither the English text of a chapter, or the Swahili, but not both.
With respect, the English portion of Carey's book is not complete in and of itself. The work is not a narrative, a piece of fiction, a speech, etc. It is a work instructing bilingual language acquisition. By its very nature, then, it cannot be complete with only one language present. I'm sorry you cannot see that. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey:, I think enough time and effort have been spent on the nomination debate. I am really sorry that I could not satisfy you with my points, hence I withdraw the POTM nomination. But I still believe that the book should be kept in EnWS along with BnWS and find no reason to delete them -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 06:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
The length, extensive footnotes, and numerous unusual characters (such as "h with a dot below") would make this a poor choice for a general community selection. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
The text here seems to be consistent with the version at [62], so this is rather a case of match and split, instead of POTM. Moreover, this work was not banned on a national or even state level. Teachers were restricted to teach it by Bay District School Board in 1986. I don't think this is sufficient to categorize the work under Banned books. For POTM of this month, a work should be picked from some better list, e.g., w:List of books banned by governments. Hrishikes (talk) 03:34, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
How about Upton Sinclair's The Jungle? The version in mainspace appears to be a project gutenburg, but there's an index here waiting to be transcribed. While not universally banned, it did get banned in East Germany for being "incompatible with Communism." Which isn't entirely relevant, but it's an important part of American history. (Or, at least, it was required reading in my US History classes in high school.) Mukkakukaku (talk) 19:59, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
I want to suggest we take a look at Albert Bigelow Paine, who was a close friend/contemporary of Mark Twain and wrote a few books about Twain. I know the 4 volume biography would not be a good candidate, but perhaps the Boy's Life of Mark Twain might be of an interest for us to have here. Here is the IA link for the book: https://archive.org/details/boyslifeofmarktw00painiala - Tannertsf (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
(e/c) This is certainly an interesting book, but I think the subject matter is a bit heavy for December when we usually look for lighter material. I propose that we keep this work for our Anthropology month in 2017. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
I am an long time editor on wikipedia and wikisource. With that stated, I finally would like to suggest the rest of a 9 volume set of Cassell’s Illustrated History Of England. The 4th volume is underway now with Tannertsf and myself and almost all images have been placed in that 4th volume. We need more text done. Therefore, we could start with volumes 5-9 and once done we have a serious history of the homeland many of us have ancestry or where we came from or live in now. I grow weary of so many poems, and tattered pages for tots, as well as foreign lands. Look at these last November POTM texts we worked on and how much was accomplished -- unappreciated boredom boys and girls, or none of those chosen would be left over. Merry Christmas y’all, --Maury (talk) 21:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
I think another work would be better for December. Due to personal considerations, I do not want this as our next POTM. Not trying to be aggressive, but I want to be able to finish this project without tons of people working on it. - Tannertsf (talk) 23:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Since Paine's Boys Life of Mark Twain is getting done pretty fast, I wanted to give up two titles I think would be good: First is The Chemical Foundation (1919), which is an 80 page report to congress by A. Mitchell Palmer, an author who we only have one speech by. Its link is https://archive.org/details/cu31924013797844. Second is The Man with the Iron Hand (1913) , a book by John Carl Parish about the coming of the French explorers and their interactions with the Native Americans in the early times of America - its link is https://archive.org/details/manwithironhand00pari. - Tannertsf (talk) 12:43, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Given the success of Boys' Life of Mark Twain (thanks Tannertsf for the popular suggestion), I've put a similar book about Booker T. Washington for the next work. I tried to find a book that began with "Girls' Life of ..." but was unsuccessful. I propose that if we need a third book for December that we go with Index:True stories of girl heroines.djvu. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:32, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
A Treatise on Soap-making (1807) [63] 160 pp selected and now complete
The Mutiny of the Bengal Army (1857) [64] 62 pp already here and proofread
Church Seats and Kneeling Boards (1876) [65] 26 pp selected and now complete
The Post Office of fifty years ago (1887) (contains a reprint of Rowland Hill's proposal for Penny Post and a facsimile of the original sketch for the stamp) [66] 182 pp selected and completed
Instruments of the Modern Symphony Orchestra (1917) [68] 74 pp too many images and has score snippets on every second page of the body of the work—best if I do it myself
Paper and Its Uses: A Treatise for Printers, Stationers and Others (1914) [69] 250pp selected
Support. We'll need to set up a style guide early on in order to alert participants to some of the dialectical spellings, places where {{' '}} is needed, and decide how to format the few letters (correspondence) which appear in the text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
While this would be a great book, the translator died in 1949 so it is not PD in life+70 jurisdictions. While that doesn't mean it can't be on Wikisource it would mean that editors from Britain and Ireland couldn't legally join in. BethNaught (talk) 10:18, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
I would like to propose two stories by Mary Wright Plummer (there is still no her author's page here): Roy and Ray in Mexico (on the IA: edition of 1907 — two scans — first and second; edition of 1912 — one scan), and Roy and Ray in Canada (on the IA: edition of 1908 — also two scans — first and second; edition of 1912 — also one scan). She was a prominent librarian, so she has some relation to wikisourceans (since wikisourceans are also librarians, at some bit). And, in addition, these stories likely would be interesting for inhabitants of US (for which Mexico and Canada are neighbors) and Canada (one of the described countries), of which there are many of readers and editors of the en-WS. P. S. Since these books could be easily considered as "lighter works", I don't anyhow oppose if it happens that they are to be moved for December. --Nigmont (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
It seems that current selection for the March — Women Wanted — will be done soon... In addition to my proposal(s) above: I have created the authors page for Mary Wright Plummer, and uploaded to the Commons scans of both of those works (now they could be found in the commons:Category:Mary Wright Plummer texts (English)). If current absence of the pageindexes is the major problem of my proposals then I could easily fix that problem and create those indexes, if it would help to the nomination. And thanks to EncycloPetey for the comment below. --Nigmont (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Most of these suggestions are fiction, which is outside the remit of the topic of Women's History, (or there are problems with the Index: that need to be fixed before making a PotM). I propose that one of the following be chosen: Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:30, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Comment The "Women's History" is a Wikipedia effort. In the past, we have gone with any book authored by a woman, and have not limited our selection beyond that. That is: a popular or significant book authored by a woman is part of "Women's History", and our selection does not have to be a book about women in history. --EncycloPetey (talk)
I would support Women Wanted (being the 100th anniv. of American involvement in the War). The particular version linked to above, however, has missing text issues. I would choose another IA version of the same work. There are several, and one version I came across contains illustrations [72]. I checked the text for errors, and all seems in order. Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:24, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't sure that this proposal would be generally accepted because of large size of the book, and that many people may be required to complete proofreading it (600 pages in a month is about 20 pages to be proofread daily — that is at least 2-4 people working on proofread at daily basis); but as of me personally — if this work would be selected than I try to participate on it (provided that I would not be busy IRL or elsewhere in that time), I think that a book of national songs tends to be interesting at the most instances. --Nigmont (talk) 18:18, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Waiting this long was not possible for me. I have sought out and begun transcribing some better editions of Pindar. --EncycloPetey (talk)
Both The Book of Scottish Song and Sisyphys have layout issues that make them problematic for PotM. Can I suggest we have a go at Women's Voices? It's an anthology of 85 poets and about 200 poems, published in 1887. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Could you give a more specific criticism than "layout issues"? I know of nothing in Sisyphus that would be more of a layout problem than what I see in your suggestion. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:10, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
It's more about the problems of ensuring consistency of approach throughout. Sisyphus has three different speech layouts (on page 8 all of them) that will need careful consideration on how best to approach them and still make the transclusion look OK. For Scottish Song the double-columns, page borders (in multiple colours), headings in blackletter, and prefatory remarks at the head of most poems on top of the dialect makes this one challenging to get consistency across multiple editors who aren't invested in the work. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:47, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
I see only 2 speech layouts done according to a single rule: If the first line of the speech begins as a new line of text, it begins on the line below the name of the speaker, but if the first line of the speech continues a previous line, then it is indented to follow from the previous line and the speaker's name appears on the same line. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:52, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment I challenge that 600pp is too long, we finished 400+pp by day 11. I don't see the length as an issue compared with the formatting, so I say go for a large work! Find an epic work, make it a magnificent challenge, even if we have to slip through a couple of volumes. —unsigned comment byBillinghurst (talk) 04:20, 30 March 2017 (UTC).
Length is not my consideration here. We did indeed knock off a long work quite quickly in March. However, that was prose and we're looking a poetry this month, which is harder to work quickly on by dint of the indents. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:47, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Billinghurst that 600 pages is not a problem. If there is a consistent poetic style to be applied (or a small number to be applied consistently), I think was can still do that. BD2412T22:17, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
We should add formatting guidance to the Talk page, if it is not already being done. Someone with knowledge of the nature of the book (with reference to poetry formatting, sectioning, etc.). I have not yet looked it over very thoroughly myself, but will... Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:23, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Smuggling from St. Pierre-Miquelon available at archive.org here. They don't get much more "little known" than w:Saint Pierre and Miquelon. Maybe with one of a few other works on the same area available at archive.org, of which The tourist's Maritime Provinces : with chapters on the Gaspé shore, Newfoundland and Labrador and the Miquelon Islands here seems most substantial. Maybe alternatively adding something like Basil Thompson's Savage Island about Niue and Tonga, available here, because Niue might be one of the few places less known than Saint Pierre and Miquelon. John Carter (talk) 17:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Alternately, Author:Robert Henry Codrington's The Melanesians: Studies in their Anthropology and Folk-Lore, which has a scan available at archive.org, is still counted among the leading anthropological works, specifically in the anthropology of religion subfield, out there. John Carter (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- The "Smuggling" text in archive.org looks rather bad, as far as the ocr-text is concerned. - "Tourist's Maritime Provinces" (516 pages) and "Savage Island" (290 pages) look much better. - The Melanesians is also good quality, has 450 pages. --Dick Bos (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Support for all suggestions above, if the scans are up to par, with preference to Smuggling and Tourist's Maritime Provinces due to a slight personal bias towards Canadian geography :) —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:09, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
The Tourist's Maritime Provinces is selected as the first work, with Savage Island as the second. Let's keep Smuggling for January when we're doing shorter works (there's only about 10 pages of text). Also, I'll put The Melanesians into August as the second work of anthropology. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Whizzed through the two works fairly quickly, so I've thrown in a more complex book in for the rest of the month, that looks at the Russian Empire in the late 19th Century from a American tourist perspective. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:06, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
An Index page is not required for a nomination, but it does help if the Index page is created before the new PotM becomes active. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:29, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
You might post a request for repair in the Scriptorium. There's a special section for that. We usually want to start proofreading with a complete scan, in order to avoid complications. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:52, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The image in question exists in the previously uploaded scan, though without a caption (this replacement scan has captions). The individual text-pages appear to be identical though, perhaps it would be wisest to take page 167 from this replacement scan and insert it into the other scan? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:47, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
(sorry for prolonged answer from me): really, I don't understand what did ShakespeareFan00 mean. Now I've downloaded new version of the file (that one to which Beeswaxcandle replaced the previous one, where 167 is missed), and I don't see any problems with page 193 (number is regarding the numbering in the original book, not as in the file) and pages around it. The image, which goes near 193, follows the page 194, and it exists in both versions of the file (and it has number 221 in both files, if according to numbering of the file). P. S. But I support the idea of Beleg Tâl: to insert missing page 167 from the second scan into the proper place of the first scan (produced from original 1902 year's edition), and replace the file to it. I tried to do it myself--with djvm.exe from DjVuLibre, but I failed (got error "[1-15108] Corrupted IFF file (illegal chunk id)."). --Nigmont (talk) 18:12, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Now I've tried to fix the pages' list in the index, and now it seems to me to be good, I don't see any missing pages in this version of file. Could anyone check this too? --Nigmont (talk) 18:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think ShakespeareFan00 looked far enough to see that the page was after 194 instead of before page 193. I didn't look far enough either. So the newer scan is okay for proofreading. I can't help you with fixing the other DJVU file though. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that the current scan, since seemingly there are not missing pages in it, is sufficient to go ahead with proofreading. Probably it would be better if someone could fix the scan of the original book (in order to use it instead of reprint publication); but since we seemingly could not do this right now (none of us has sufficient skills for this)—so we may stay on using the scan of the reprint edition, I think there's no any harm of this. --Nigmont (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I inserted page 167 and lcallly uploaded here File:Thoreau - His Home, Friends and Books (1902) fix.djvu. Note that the image at page D055 and D056 is splitted in two (in a way I cannot fix), so you cannot use this file right away but you would to shift pages. I leave the way-forward to you. If you do not need the local file, feel free to delete it.— Mpaa (talk) 09:45, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
If we need another work, perhaps The Earliest Lives of Dante, translated from the Italian of Giovanni Boccaccio and Lionardo Bruni Aretino, by James Robinson Smith, 120pp. (1901). I recently discovered we have almost nothing at all on Dante (only a few encyclopedia articles, and Tennyson's translation of the Divine Comedy). The work I'm nominating contains translations of the earliest two biographies of Dante, one of them by the writer Boccaccio. The work is mostly straightforward prose, without notes. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:17, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
SupportThe Earliest Lives of Dante (it seems to me a good continuation); also The Prince and Princess of Wales is not opposed by me, though I am not sure that I myself will join to it. --Nigmont (talk) 21:49, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Another possibility: Index:Life and Times of Frederick Douglass (1892).djvu which would add a significant autobiography that we do not currently have, and which could be selected as Featured Text for February, since that month will mark the 200th birthday of Author:Frederick Douglass. We have quite a few of Douglass' works, but nothing currently backed by a scan, and this volume (his final edition of his third autobiography) is not yet available at Wikisource, in any form or edition. I am currently setting up the Contents and Images. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:31, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Scratch that option for now; the source file has a couple of serious issues, and there are no other copies at Google, IA, or Hathi from which to effect a repair. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:59, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
I've gone with the Browning biography for number 3, mainly because I'm not keen to have the PotM and the Community Collaboration on the same topic. Best to give people a choice of what to work on. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 23:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Fifth option (since we're moving so quickly) Peter Cunningham's The Story of Nell Gwyn, one of England's first actresses (highly regarded), later mistress to Charles II, and who since "has come to be considered a folk heroine, with a story echoing the rags-to-royalty tale of Cinderella". --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think it makes much sense to move to a sixth with two days left in the month. Better to use that time to revisit unfinished works from previous months. BD2412T20:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
I'd support these both in future proposals. Can we put Woman of the Century on the top of our November list? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:13, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers has been fully proofread, and needs only validation. We could now safely pass on using that for PotM, and validate in November (if it's not already validated by then). --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
This is certainly an interesting book, but I think the subject matter is a bit heavy for December when we usually look for lighter material. I propose that we keep this work for our Anthropology month in 2017. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
[Copied from May 2017 proposals]
Author:Robert Henry Codrington's The Melanesians: Studies in their Anthropology and Folk-Lore, which has a scan available at archive.org, is still counted among the leading anthropological works, specifically in the anthropology of religion subfield, out there. John Carter (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Beeswaxcandle and I would like to use September's PotM to add sources to one or more key works by Author:Frederick Douglass, so that they will be ready to feature for his 200th birthday this February. Currently, not one of his works is backed by a source, and ideally we would locate copies of the original publications. Do people like this idea? --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:56, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
The first one looks like a great source, but the second includes "extracts" from speeches, rather than complete speeches, and so would work only as a secondary source about Douglass and his public speaking. It still is a work we do not have, though. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:22, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
If we're ready for another text, we have either of these ready:
Although we have a scan of the revised edition of his third biography, the scan has missing pages, duplicate pages, and a missing frontispiece. I could find no other scans of that edition from which to repair it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:07, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
If we can get the original source scans, sure, but that doesn't seem to be happening. Most of the scans I've found for them have excerpts rather than whole original texts. We do have a number of his important speeches already, just unsourced. His biographies, however, we don't have at all. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
That's a 1979 publication, and it's quite likely we can't host it. Each speech has an introduction that will need to be removed from the scan. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The point of transcribing Douglass' works this month is to provide featurable content. This won't be the case for using a partial copy of a 1979 edited reissue collection from which much of the content has had to be removed. It might still be valuable in that it will serve as some sort of scan backing of some texts, but it will hardly be featurable quality to extract from such a scan. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
OK, the 1892 revised edition of the third autobiography now in the templates. I can only find later transcriptions of the LoC collection of handwritten texts—which are definitely not appropriate for PotM. If an wikisourceror wants to upload the scanned longhand texts and then put them through the proofread/validation process that's fine, but it needs to be separate project. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:57, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
If needed, I can hunt down specific recommendations, but thought I'd leave that choice to other people first who might know more than I do. I'm familiar with his work only in the most general way. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Since we'll likely finish A Bid for Fortune in plenty of time, perhaps we should next consider the horror short stories by Georgia Wood Pangborn. We currently have only one of her stories, but they are all short, and each could be done quickly.
Since A Bid for Fortune was validated a few days ago, and no other works seem to have been chosen, I've set the template to overflow. Hope I haven't put my foot into anything, please do change if another work's been selected. —C.F.19:12, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Another fun possibility: The Man Who Knew Too Much, by G. K. Chesterton, whose UK works entered PD this year. This book is a collection of short stories, mostly featuring the same detective team. It is unrelated to the Hitchcock film, but because of the similarity in the title, it may draw in new editors. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Currently, we have neither Dolliver, which was unfinished at the time of Hawthorne's death, nor Septimus, which was discovered and published posthumously. Our copy of Fanshawe is not backed by a scan, though we do have it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:09, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Selected Cyclopedia of Painting as the first work. If got through relatively quickly, then we could make a start on Moslem Architecture (which looks quite interesting). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:05, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Umm... That series is already the Community Collaboration. The books don't need to be handled in two separate front-page collaborative projects at the same time, surely? --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:13, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
there is 20 books to pick from. those that i don’t do before then can fill the time. —unsigned comment bySlowking4 (talk) .
Being selfish, I would just like to note that I am not merely proofreading Pennell's contribution, but am also reading it as I go along. Anyone is free to help, of course, but as there are many others to be worked on, I would like to all but claim this one. Trying to do a chapter a day. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
I have just set up the one for Emily Brontë. But again, these will likely all be proofread long before March, and are already part of a different collaboration project. We should pick something for MArch PotM that isn't already being done. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:21, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
At 92 pages, this won't last a full month, but these sonnets were politically influential in English foreign policy at the time. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps Vols. I & II of George Kennan's Siberia and the Exile System (1891) V1V2 In 1884, the editor of The Century Magazine suggested Kennan go to Siberia and give the results of his work to the magazine. The 2-vol. set is a compilation of the fruit of Kennan's observations. Numerous pictures, maps, etc. History, geography, etc. of a then-"terra incognita". Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Oppose I'm afraid if we can finish these 2 huge volumes within one month or not because they have so many pictures and maps within each volume (in the text or at individual pages). Albert Micah Hang (talk) 21:47, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
This is a series of short biographies of all of Britain's poets-laureate from Ben Jonnson to William Wordsworth. It includes biographies of outstanding poets for whom we have little or no information, such as Laurence Eusden (whose author page I just created). --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
P.S. I should say why: On of Canada’s most famous early authors, and known for his humour. It seems like that might help make this more fun to do, then a dry source text? On the other hand, no images. —Canageek (talk) 22:16, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Option B
Either of these early novels by Edith Wharton would be nice. She was a Pulitzer prize winner (the 100th anniversary of which is coming up), but we are missing lots of her works, and I can't find many of them in on-line catalogs either: VIAF, BnF, GND, and LoC are sadly short of her works, so having them here would contribute to the diversity of the entire web and not just Wikisource. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:37, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Support I think The Marne is the best option for July because it is short enough for us to finish in one month and it corresponds to the topic of "Early 20th century novel". But I'm a little bit afraid that The Fruit of the Tree is so long for us to finish. Albert Micah Hang (talk) 17:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Note first that although there are many pages over two volumes, there is very little text per page and little formatting to be done, and second that this edition was published by T. C. Newby, who is renowned for poorly supervising the printing and correction of the novels that he published. This edition is no exception; it contains many errors. So we will need to make liberal use of {{SIC}}. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Support to add the scan. Less timely than Bronte (Option C), since Frankenstein was published in January, but still a great option. I'd do this as second work after Bronte. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 14:50, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
My coin says option C. I've updated accordingly. Apologies to anyone who considers me to be stepping on their toes - or if I've missed a step. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 00:49, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
I fear that doing two such works at the same time would divide the number of interested editors, and thus slow the progress of both. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Polynesian mythology & ancient traditional history of the New Zealanders, as furnished by their priests and chiefs, by George Grey (1906) [1922 reprint] (external scan)
Being unable to find a suitable PotM work on WS:RT, I have moved the Natural History month forwards and chosen a work in a series we have already done several across other years. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:44, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Nothing else has been proposed for this month at present. I will be away from a computer at the time of changing over, so someone else will need to update the templates. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
The Fish volume isn't yet complete. Most of the images have been done yet. So we could either wait a while longer, or switch if there is an Index for something else ready to go. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Unfortunately, my time will be very tight until about mid-month, but I would really like to see the above proposed theme stick. BD2412T02:01, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
The first edition has already been fully proofread, though only the first volume validated. The 1831 edition technically has yet to be proofread against the scan, but is presumably from Gutenberg and has therefore been through a proofreading of some sort. If we're to pursue this we need to know which direction to proceed. We don't usually select works for PotM that are mostly or completely done. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:11, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Then we will finish it very quickly, and can then cross the bridge of selecting a second work. We already have Dracula. What else is good (and missing) in the eerie fiction genre? BD2412T03:57, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Typically, we retain the current work until it is validated for PotM. If you are proposing a procedural change to PotM, this section is not the correct place to do so. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:55, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
As I said, I can inform WS:WPV of the work, and they should be able to complete it by month’s end. As you said, I am not proposing a policy change, and, as can be seen by a number of recent previous works, the completion of works is not necessary. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:02, 11 October 2018 (UTC).
If we decide not to do a Great War item, this could be a good choice. John Woolman was a Quaker whose journal and essays had a huge impact in both the US and UK. We currently have none of his writings. The 1871 edition of his Journal seems to be the definitive edition. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:29, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Comment We have plenty of Novembers at our disposal before the 200th anniversary of the end of WW1. More than enough time for fresh new themes between now and then. The war ended 11 November 1918. I say it is significant enough to rate a PotM for this year. But if we do continue with a Great War theme, I propose we come up with a work that is not so narrow in scope as the above proposed (in option A). One that addresses the War itself, preferably one that is both objective and reflective, which may be difficult to find in public domain material published so close to the end of the War. I don't currently have a work in mind, but can look for options. I promise not to propose any works of poetry ;) Londonjackbooks (talk) 04:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
The intent of this subject is, as LJB says, to cover the centenary of the end of WWI, otherwise known as the Great War. The loss of ca. 16 million lives in that series of conflicts is something that should be acknowledged. We do this not to glorify war, but to remember those whose lives were sacrificed in the belief that the world would be a better place. There are several multi-volume works, which will be too big, so I've gone through looking for more concise works. I offer some further options (I will be, once again, away from a computer on 1 November, so someone else will need to update the templates):
It’s rather late in the month, but I think validating volume 3 truly and beginning to validate volume 1 wouldn’t be too difficult. Volume 3 only needs to have some images validated, while volume 1 is the most complete of the remainder. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2018 (UTC).
@TE(æ)A,ea.: Never too late. But Punch has yet to be completely transcluded into the Main. Once that has been done, I say go for it, unless others disagree for any reason. I would set things up, but will be busy. Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:35, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Wow! I was hoping for a decision (or vote) at this late date, but we got more options! Mpaa set up the work in option C (The War and the Future), so I can set things up with that. It shouldn't take long to proofread. Can we get some feedback (decision rather than more options) on a follow-up work if the Masefield work is done early? Since BWC is not available to update the templates, I'll volunteer. Just please be patient as I muddle through. I've only done it once before. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:26, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
December 2018
Option A
Tales of To-day and Other Days, translated from the French (1891) (external scan)
I’d prefer this to the latter (In bad company and other stories), as the latter has already been completed in large part. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC).
As Option A has been completed, and this option (Option C) is far shorter than the other option (Option B), I shall upload this file, if there is no objection. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:03, 14 December 2018 (UTC).
Calendar 2019
Latest comment: 4 years ago97 comments13 people in discussion
It has been created here; an additional page was added at the end of the index, which I will remove in a short time. In all other matters, the index is normal. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:08, 24 January 2019 (UTC).
Whilst the text has been fully proofread and transcluded, although not yet validated, the transclusion is likely not the best. I ask anyone here if they would be able to provide a better alternative to the current system. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:19, 26 January 2019 (UTC).
I prefer the latter work, as its shorter and has fewer diagrams. They’re both rather short, however, and could be easily completed within a month. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:54, 11 October 2018 (UTC).
Painting Illustrated in Three Diallogues(external scan). While there are a large number of pages (~350), their isn’t much text per page. The book is a great example of painting, and provides a great deal of information upon the subject.
This one isn't appropriate because of the long-s. Odd characters don't make for successful PotM works because we lose the drive-by editors and as a result lose the chance for people to potentially stay around. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:51, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Whatever the decision, I’d like the work to be chosen and uploaded before the month begins, so that we may avoid the problem of last November. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:08, 30 January 2019 (UTC).
In the past when I've made a decision on the consensus early and uploaded the file quite a chunk has been done before it gets put into the templates. This is part of why I stopped doing the monthly awards for PotM. It was getting really messy to work out which contributions were entitled to an award and which weren't. The main disadvantage to the current system of uploading shortly before putting into the templates is managing damaged files. I assume that when people nominate a work that they have checked that the file they link has been checked for completeness. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:48, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
We could, but again, it would be outside the scope stated for this month. The performing arts are separate from the fine arts. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Even if this is PD in the US (and I do not know whether it is), it will remain under copyright in the UK until 2036. Our UK proofreaders typically do not participate with items still under UK copyright, and we prefer to avoid selecting works for PotM that would disenfranchise participants. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:49, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Poems by “Cushag” (1907), a wonderful, relatively short (~70 pp.) collection of Manx poems (in English). By “Cushag”; (external scan). We have so little in the way of scan-supported Manx literature on Wikisource, and this being one of Cushag’s longer works, it would be a nice addition. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2018 (UTC). Done --kathleen wright5 (talk) 06:41, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Not quite the only one, since we don't have Dream of the Red Chamber either, and Khalil Ghibran's The Prophet is at Bibliowiki until 2019 because of US copyright. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Part of the problem is that no complete English translation was published until about 40 years ago. The longest English translation in PD translates only the the first 58 of the 120 chapters. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:20, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Comment: Do we have an alternative? It looks like Ben-Hur might be completed before June. I suppose that we will still have Felix Holt left over from March as a possibility. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Have a look for a Walter Scott novel. I know you've been wanting us to do one for a while and this would be a good opportunity. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:40, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
selected I've selected Guy Mannering as the earliest red-link on Scott's page with an edition that matches for date and country of publication. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Not worthwhile to do Dream of the Red Chamber, I think. The longest English translation in PD translates only the the first 58 of the 120 chapters. We'd end up with a permanently incomplete copy. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Scans of the 1794 edition of The Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets are now online (Vols. 1, 2, 3, 4). All include fairly high quality embedded text from the original HathiTrust scans, although the use of the long-S form (ſ) periodically yields some inaccurate results, which will require careful human proofreading. Tarmstro9918:18, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Comment The formatting on this one is odd: quoted text indented with slight redcution in size and quotation marks at the beginning of each line, as just one example. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:58, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
Biographia Hibernica: A Biographical Dictionary of the Worthies of Ireland (1821) is now online here, based upon newer HathiTrust scans that greatly improve upon the earlier versions and include high-quality embedded OCR (Vol. 1, Vol. 2). A few early entries from Vol. 1 may be ready for match-and-split. Tarmstro9916:22, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
selected this because good OCR and no long-s characters, which never go well in PotM. Also Lives of Poets has a lot of already proofread pages. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
Now that Floating City is finished, could someone start on the next work? I would prefer the Cyrano de Bergerac, as the Lewis Carroll is too long. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC).
Neither of the linked scans of Voyage to the Moon are suitable, so I've selected a second Jules Verne work that already has scans uploaded here. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:13, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
a) pages are offset so that obverse and reverse are the wrong way round throughout; b) a Google scan, so automatically poor quality scans and OCR. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:46, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
This scan appears to have no serious issues with its OCR. In addition, I see no problem with the offsetting of the pages, as, when proofreading or validating the pages, you would only see one at a time. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2019 (UTC).
Offset pages is a problem when using clean-up scripts that depend on obverse pages being on the right and reverse pages on the left. There can also be problems with page-level metadata and transclusions. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:49, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Neither of these has a DjVu file on IA and the last time I used the IA-Upload tool to convert to DjVu it made such a mess that the file was not suitable for PotM. If either of these are wanted, then can someone please do a useful conversion of the jp2 file. Otherwise, please suggest other options. [I'm too jet-lagged right now to think straight enough.] Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
@Beeswaxcandle: Is there any reason why it has to be a DjVu and can't be a PDF? In any case, the previous POTM isn't done yet, so there isn't really much need to rush finding a new one. DraconicDark (talk) 19:50, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
The templates are set up for DjVu only and PotM should demonstrate best practice. The previous PotM was completed mid-September. The work currently in the templates is a supplementary one. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Since this month’s work is, for the text, proofread, should the November work be started? Should the images be uploaded first? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 12:24, 13 November 2019 (UTC).
@TE(æ)A,ea.: Theoretically, November's Proofread of the Month should be started, and should have been started even though October's wasn't done. However, for some reason, it hasn't been selected, with no reason why not. I messaged Beeswaxcandle, who selected the past few Proofreads of the Month, about it on his talk page, but haven't gotten a response yet. I'm not sure who else could select the Proofread of the Month. DraconicDark (talk) 16:13, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
November 2019
Hausa Proverbs, by G. Merrick (132 pp.) (external scan)
@Kathleen.wright5: Yes, we are aware, but the issue is that no one seems to be able or willing to officially select the next PoTM. I'm not sure who other than Beeswaxcandle can select it, but I haven't heard from them. In any case, I will upload the DjVU of Hausa Proverbs, and invite anyone who is willing and able to select it to do so. In the meantime, there is also this work if you want to proofread something related to this month's theme while you wait. DraconicDark (talk) 23:03, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
I propose that all, or at the least, a large number of the works that are completed for PotM are works with scans not uploaded as part of PotM. The scan (Index:) system was created with the intent to reduce the number of abandoned works, works either unfinished or poorly done, in the main-space. However, this has created a new problem: a large number of abandoned indexes, with little to no work completed, remain forgotten in the Index namespace. There are already a large number of indexes listed on this page, and from links from this page, that would amicably fit with the requirements for PotM, and I suggest that we use some of the lists on this page to select works for proofreading.
Support doing both suggested relatively short works, in the order stated (Lemur, then Cheese making). I only regret that we can not combine them into a single work titled Hand-book on the Placenta of a cheese making Lemur. BD2412T05:40, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
As I believe that there should be many works completed in January, I have made the following list of some potential works. Do not worry about the existence of a .djvu scan, as I can create one myself, and upload it to Commons.
“A Few Plain Observations upon the Ends and Means, &c.” 48 pp. (transcription project)
“The Real Cause of the High Price of Gold Bullion.” (Edward Cooke) 55 pp. (transcription project)
“A Contribution to the Pathology of Phlegmasia dolens,” by Robert Lee. 24 pp. (transcription project)
“A Short Account of the Botany of Poole,” by Thomas Bell Salter. 27 pp. (transcription project)
“Description of the Abattoirs of Paris,” by Richard Boxall Grantham. 18 pp. (transcription project)
“On the Application of Sewage in Agriculture,” by E. Haughton. 6 pp. (transcription project)
“The Art of Modeling Flowers in Wax,” by George Worgan. 39 pp. (transcription project)
“A Treatise on Medical Astrology,” by F. R. White et al. 70 pp. (transcription project)
The indexes for the above works have been created (the first one should be completed soon); proofreading can begin at any time. As the current work is already proofread, any of these works may be viewed as a part of the project; the templates will be updated once each work has completed validation. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2020 (UTC).
The proofreading finished, and the validation stalled, for the initial work, the ten works here listed shall be selected, in order. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC).
While “The Placenta of the Lemur” does seem interesting, I am worried about the large number of figures; past experience has shown reluctance to complete works that contain a large number of images. If User:Lemuritus can supply these images, or has them already produced, the work would be more acceptable. In addition, the plates mentioned at the end of the scan given would have to be sourced from a scan of the complete work, following which the plates must be attached to the existing scan. I would attempt to do this, if User:Lemuritus can display the images already mentioned. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2019 (UTC).
As there have been no objections raised to any of my suggested works, I will now convert them into .djvu files. If User:Lemuritus can positively respond before the month’s end, I will attempt to create “The Placenta of the Lemur” as a combined .djvu file. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:50, 30 December 2019 (UTC).
To be honest, I didn't even really look into the work, and my 256mb RAM severely crimps my ability to do much - even proofreading pages is quite intensive for my computer - so we can skip that one. Uploading is beyond my capabilities. On the other hand, is only two pages, two pages and four pages :) Lemuritus (talk) 02:32, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
As we are nearing completion of the list of suggested works, and there is still time left in January, let me suggest another work; looking through the Index-Not Proofread category, I found Unlawful Marriage(transcription project) by J.J. Janeway, which seems to fit this month's category. DraconicDark (talk) 23:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
I also found Wound infections and some new methods for the study of the various factors which come into consideration in their treatment(transcription project) as another suggestion. If these two suggestions aren't done this year, we could maybe consider them for next year. DraconicDark (talk) 00:04, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Looking back, I didn't put the Prussian Army suggestion in because it has multiple tables and side-notes. So, I would recommend caution with respect to selecting it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Note: the DjVu exists, but there does not seem to be a text layer. If someone can run a bot to create OCR starter pages, then this could be a good choice. But without a text layer, we will have difficulty getting the work started. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:18, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
The .pdf scan hosted on the Internet Archive Web-site has a high-quality text layer extant; it could manually transferred to the corrupted .djvu file we have. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC).
Of the suggestions from last February which were actionable but upon which no action was taken, I prefer A History of Japanese Colour-Prints(external scan). The issue regarding the scan file can be readily resolved. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC).
I would support starting with Chicago Poems, then going to Armenian Legends and Poems, then the rest in order if time allows. BD2412T02:22, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Another thought: since the ban on Wikipedia in Turkey has now been lifted, perhaps we could find a cultural or archaeological work based on that region? Portal:Turkey has very little content. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:43, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
If that's our justification, why not something about the Republic of Turkey, instead of the archaeological period?
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001861422 has Turkey, by Arnold J. Toynbee and Kenneth P. Kirkwood; Toynbee is apparently on the outs of academic historians, but is still a big name. It has the 1924 Constitution in the appendix. The problem is, I doubt HathiTrust's copyright clearing on this; between Toynbee being British, and the number of attributions for reuse that need their own rechecking, I'd be hard for me to be really comfortable that it's PD. The English translation of the 1924 Turkish Constitution is from Political Science Quarterly, which apparently didn't renew, so that's probably clear.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.82592 is the Rebirth of History, by Clair Prince. It's 1923, so clearly PD, it has a decent scan on Archive.org (don't be confused by there being two, they seem to be the same) and a lousy Google scan on HathiTrust, and it's got a lot of detail about Mustafa Kemal Pasha, the father of the Turkish Republic.
Hathitrust has a couple books from the 1940s, but if we're dotting our i's (a bad phrase in the realm of Turkish) and crossing our t's on copyright, I'd wonder about non-renewal/URAA issues on maps and photographs, especially as one of those books thanks the Turkish Embassy for those.--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Toynbee’s work on Turkey is in the public domain for U. S. publication and subsequent non-renewal. I don’t know which 1940s works you reference, but HathiTrust is generally very reliable as regards copyright of works. However, most works that are chosen are in the public domain by age rather than by U. S. non-renewal. Whilst I support Strabo’s work generally, I believe it may be too long due to the apathy of the project. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:53, 3 February 2020 (UTC).
@EncycloPetey:@TE(æ)A,ea.:@Prosfilaes: If we want to proofread something related to Turkey, I have a few suggestions (note that these are more historical than geographical, but that shouldn't be a problem):
If we don't do The Hittites in May, we could try in July. It's looking as though we might not be able to get a scan of Huizinga's book. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:46, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
I cannot believe you have 400,000 works here and not this...it would definitely help the project and I would definitely help proofread. Lemuritus (talk) 18:52, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
It looks as though it might be, on a quick look. However, it would require someone to convert it to a DjVu file. The PotM templates are all keyed to work with the DjVu format. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:49, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
If I may suggest something which could be useful both here and on WP, it would be The English Hymnal (1906). The lyrics only version would be relevant to articles about hymns over on WP; and this would prove doubly useful in that when someone decides to make the version with the music, a good portion of the work will already be done. RandomCanadian (talk) 02:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
This looks like a challenging work. We do tackle some of these in PotM from time to time, but we'd likely need a clear style guide established ahead of time to make this one work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Last year we got about 20 pages proofread in a similar work for the whole month. It's usually better to go for one or two books that focus on a single individuals. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
As it is now August, and last month’s work has been completed, a new work should be selected. I support the Biographical Dictionary listed above, but I would like other input; DraconicDark, EncycloPetey, and Beeswaxcandle, what are your opinions on what work or works should be proofread? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC).
@TE(æ)A,ea.: I was the one who originally suggested the Biographical Dictionary listed above, so in principle, I support it. My second choice, should we not select it, would be either Margaret Fuller or Saint Theresa of Avila listed above. DraconicDark (talk) 16:16, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Although I would certainly prefer some greater input from other proofreaders before I select the work, it is more important to start the work; if there are any objections, please quickly change the templates to a more preferable alternative. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:45, 2 August 2020 (UTC).
September 2020
The following discussion, originally placed under “October,” has been moved to “September,” as the themes for those months have switched.
I have selected The Aquarium, as the other work does not have a .djvu file readily available. However, a .pdf of the same has been uploaded here. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC).
I have previously proposed that we switch some of the themes around, and would propose here that switching September and October themes, and having this as an October theme, would be an ideal outcome. BD2412T02:23, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
I see no problems with this proposal, so have swapped the topics over. As someone who happily ignores hallowe'en (having a very steep drive deters the neighbourhood kids from coming to us), I never think of such things for myself. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:58, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
I support the selection of an issue of Weird Tales, although I have no specific preference as to which of the aforementioned issues should be chosen. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC).
November 2020
Can I propose that November, "Language", be specifically a English-language work on a currently-endangered language, or one of the languages that boast(?) the smallest Wikipedia/Wikisource in their language? Might as well kill multiple birds. (Lemurs eat tamarinds, now you know!) Lemuritus (purr or yap) 01:39, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
You can always propose a specific work for the year that meets inclusion guidelines. The best options include a link to a scan somewhere that we can upload, and which has been checked carefully in advance for problems. But we like to keep the most generalized topics for the monthly listings such as "Biography" or "Science". --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:09, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
In a rudimentary walk through the To Be Proofread works for books about less-commonly-taught languages, I've found a couple (along with current speakership from Wikipedia):
A Grammar and Vocabulary of the Language of New Zealand (I assume Māori?, "149,000 self-report some knowledge of the language") (transcription project)
Latvian self-taught for English speaking people (1.75 million speakers) (transcription project)
A Grammar of the Mahratta Language (83 million native speakers, 12 million L2) (transcription project)
A grammar of the Teloogoo language (82 million native, 11 million L2) (transcription project)
The number of native speakers is not, by any means, “sizeable;” it is merely .002 of the population, disregarding the (lest prevalent) diaspora. The revival referred to a rising popularity in the learning of the language, as it is not fluently spoken by many of the tribe. See also the Wikipedia article, Māori language revival. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC).
I support all of these works, as they have been already uploaded; however, I oppose the last two, due to the presence of non-Latin scripts used for writings the named languages. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2019 (UTC).
I also support the first two options proposed by Crocojim18, preferring the Language of New Zealand, as less work over all has been done on it. (not sure if one has been chosen yet) Blue-ray656 (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Please don't use the Language of New Zealand book for PotM. The scan is faulty and the alternative on IA is worse. If you want to do a Māori language book, then the third edition [84] of Maunsell's Grammar of the New Zealand Language is good. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
I haven’t noticed the faulty pages you references; but would this scan be an effectual alternative? If this work is unable, I would prefer the Latvian work first, as it is shorter, followed by the Cornish work. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:45, 31 October 2020 (UTC).
Interesting that it's the same print copy, but a far superior scan. Compare the obverse pages from print page 157 onwards. In our IA downloaded version, characters are swallowed into the binding, while in the Hathi version they're all clear of the margin. If you're able to get a djvu file out of the Hathi and load it over the top of the current version in Commons, then it's good to go. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:07, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Seeing as how the October work is mostly finished, I think the November work should be quickly chosen; however, I will leave the choice to another Wikisourceror, as I have already given my opinion on the above choices. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:40, 3 November 2020 (UTC).
Comment none of these works are truly what we would aim to be proofread of the month material. They have complex formatting which leads to scaring off newbies and variable formatting that usually needs extensive re-formatting, and scaring off newbies. — billinghurstsDrewth12:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
For December, perhaps A Sportsman's Sketches ((external scans (multiple parts): 1, 2); alternatively here and here) by Ivan Turgenev would be good; it wasn't featured for December 2019's Proofread, and this book is especially important for our collection of Russian literature because it was Turgenev's first major work. Orlando the Cat (talk) 05:14, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
The proofreading is now entirely finished, and I have updated the templates accordingly. One question: Should the works be listed as “chapters” (or similar, as appropriate) or by their names? I have done the former as a start, but the latter might be preferable here. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:07, 5 December 2020 (UTC).
Books parked for consideration
Latest comment: 6 years ago11 comments7 people in discussion
I would be happy with this being in the rotation. It's medium length, but the typography is easy, so it should be doable to get it validated in a month.—Zhaladshar(Talk)20:44, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Amusements in Mathematics by Henry Ernest Dudeny. In an effort to find some popular public domain publications for inclusion here at WS, I found that the HTML version of this book is the most-downloaded text at the Internet Archive. Plus, someone has already gone to the trouble of extracting and cleaning the images [85]. There is a tiny amount of text cut off on pages 63-64, but the missing letters can be determined from context and from the Archive.org HTML version --EliyakT·C22:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
EncycloPetey, et al, we could take one or more per month not as PoM but as something yet to be finished every month starting with the easiest and shortest texts that are not complicated to work on. For that we should have a different kind of an award, perhaps the only the image of "The Thinker" to be used. I like collecting the awards, it shows achievements as well as the dates show the years we are here working and the icon shows our work - again using only something like "The Thinker. It separates everything from PoM. It is an obvious aside from PoM. Poms are often slow anyhow so that gives us time and the PoM’s often also, well…..I dislike this word but to convey the idea, often SUCK and are boring chosen by a few, so I typically, these days, only do one or a few pages in them. I am working on 9 thick and illustrated volumes of Cassell’s Illustrated London but I would step aside and do pages on "The Thinker" (or any other icon but the same icon to stand out, each time so as not to get it mixed up with PoM. and I would expect an award for working on those extra "abandoned books" books. Something along these lines of thought. Feel free to modify. —Maury (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
EncycloPetey, I think the idea of finishing "abandoned books" is a very good idea. I am working on two of them now. If we all did this together we could finish them up quick and add them to our library here. THESE should be "Proofreads of the Month" instead of finding more before we have finished these sitting here.. —Maury (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Maybe creating some sort of WikiProject regarding these abandoned or unfinished texts might be a way to get more attention to them? That project could then be listed as the existing community collaboration. Having said that, I think it might be a good idea. John Carter (talk) 16:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
John Carter (have you met any Terminators yet?) I figure the "abandoned books" have to have an attraction and many people like earning awards - especially "Special Awards", ["build it and they will come";] use that and they will come. —Maury (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
I think you meant John Connor there. :) Having said that, is there any sort of page indicating the "progress bar" or similar out on the various indexes which have been started to date? Also, maybe, having something on the community portal listing the number of completed indexes might help too. And, of course, like you said, some sort of "award" or w: Wikipedia:Barnstar available for such might be useful. Do we have any such yet here? John Carter (talk) 18:15, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
@John Carter:(gone to Mars yet?) I think this is a great idea. I'd participate even without a reward. Is it started yet(speaking of John Carter, are the books on him on wikisource)? JustinCB (talk) 00:20, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
I think those in the public domain are but not all are PD yet. So far as I know though the bot generating progress bars doesn't exist yet. I hope those were the answers you sought.John Carter (talk) 00:25, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Author:John Lloyd Stephens (listed on en WS)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Author:John Lloyd Stephens wrote several grand books and they are illustrated. Let us choose something a bit more exciting lest we have an *another* unfinished work. —Maury (talk) 18:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
The Tale of Old Mortality
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
We don't have Walter Scott's The Tale of Old Mortality, which shocked me. Actually, we have very few works by him at all, despite his stature as an English writer, but The Tale of Old Mortality (or simply Old Mortality) is considered one of his best novels, and is a pretty high-profile English novel for us to be missing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Well, to clarify first off (if you didn't know), Old Mortality is one in a series of loosely associated novels collected under the title Tales of My Landlord, though each is an independent story and novel. Of the first four volumes that make up "series 1", volumes 2 through 4 are Old Mortality (volume 1 is a separate story entitled The Black Dwarf). So, here then are the first edition (1816) volumes: Vol. II, Vol. III, Vol. IV. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Proposal of Proofreading Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Series in 2019
Latest comment: 6 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
Even single volumes have complicated tables and lots of diacriticals. Works such as those usually do not attract as much participation, and remain incomplete at the end of the month. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:49, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Proposal to revise monthly categories for October and November
Latest comment: 5 years ago19 comments5 people in discussion
I propose that beginning next year (2019), we revise the monthly categories by eliminating "The end of the Great War" (which was topical when we were approaching the 100th anniversary of WWI, but will no longer be topical in 2019), and replace it by moving "Natural History" from October to November, and making October another fiction category, but with a focus on the fantastic (fantasy, horror, science fiction, and the supernatural). My initial thinking was to make October something more of a Halloween theme, but I realize that Halloween is not universally observed, nor is it observed the same way everywhere. Nevertheless, these themes are broadly associated with October, and I think this would be a good new tradition. I would propose starting with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, as proposed for a different month above. BD2412T14:37, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Up until this year November has been designated as Validation Month—a month in which to catch up on validating several works. However, last year we completed no works, so as a one-off I went for the Great War. I've been trying to keep a broad range of domains covered in PotM and have hence kept fiction to only a couple of months each year. However, if people feel that we can sustain a third one and not have other domains lose out, then by all means we can put the fantastic into October in addition to the other two. We also need to decide if we want to restore Validation Month in 2019. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:31, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
I wasn't aware that the change was that recent. I would think that December would be a better validation month, since it is the end of the year, and seems like a time for cleaning up after ourselves. BD2412T01:36, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
We might consider separating the Validation Drive from the PotM, and having its section on the Main Page year-round. Pick and list three works separately from the PotM (maybe listed below), and rotating a new work in once one is finished. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
I prefer the idea of having three current titles to a single one set to rotate on a monthly basis. That way it's less formal and people have options to select from. Validation can happen at any pace, but stating that one work is "for the month" restricts what we validate. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:09, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
That is reasonable. A "validation month" is always less fun than starting a new work from the ground up. BD2412T03:25, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
We used to do that every November, but declining participation led us to switch to a topic for November instead of validation. See the previous discussion on this issue below, wherein we concluded that Validation is no longer popular for PotM, since the last time we did it we validated no works that month. I have therefore changed it back on the basis of the prior community discussion. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:54, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
I changed the topic for precisely that reason: the previous disinterest, or whatsoever caused the numerous works above to not become validated, would be greatly aided by a dedicated effort to cause those indexes to be so validated. This would forgo the need to create another index for proofreading and validation, as is the usual. The discussion has not been concluded, and your personal opinion on the matter should not influence the community’s decision; as the sole contributor to that discussion that was in favour of the alteration was you. The results of previous validation months are irrelevant, as this one is specifically dedicated to finishing works already selected for WS:PotM. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC).
You misunderstand. The community discussed this issue and came to a consensus. Please do not unilaterally seek to override community consensus, but seek to change the community's opinion first. You have misinterpreted the discussion if you came away thinking that I was the sole contributor in favour of the alteration, or indeed that I was even in favour of the change. I neither proposed nor supported the change; in fact I made some suggestions concerning possible retention of the Validation month. Please re-read the discussion and re-open if you like, but changing the calendar against consensus is inappropriate.
The current 2019 Calendar was proposed by Beeswaxcandle, and BD2412 proposed changes for 2019 back in 2018. BD2412 and I agreed with Beeswaxcandle that the prior Validation month pattern was not successful and discussed the possibility of a separate Validation of the Month. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
I have yet to note where the community has so come to this consensus of which you speak. The discussion has not been closed; therefore, no consensus can be derived from the discussion that it contains. I have started a discussion here as an effort to inform the community of this problem and to propose the use of a previously-implemented activity as a solution to that problem. I would also like for you to not revert my comments on this discussion, so as the community may be so informed of my proposal. If you wish to create a larger discussion on the matter, you may do so wherever you believe that such a discussion would be appropriate. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:47, 13 October 2018 (UTC).
Wikisource does not formally close discussions in most of its pages; Featured texts, Deletions & Copyright issues are the only three fora where discussions are formally closed. Discussions that have sat idle for more than a year without comment and in which all participants were agreed are assumed to be resolved. If you would like to enact a change different from what Beeswaxcandle has proposed (and which I agree with), then you should wait for further responses before enacting changes. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:54, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
The discussion hasn’t had a comment in approximately three months, and not all of the participants came to an agreement. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:58, 13 October 2018 (UTC).
Three months, yes, sorry. But the question raised was "Do we want to restore Validation month?" and no one spoke in favor of doing so. The discussion instead turned to have a separate Validation project distinct from PotM. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
One month of inactivity is sufficient. SpBot archives discussions that have been inactive for one month on the forums where it is active. In the discussion below, there was no disagreement to retire validation month, and no disagreement to implement a monthly validation, over the period of a month, so we can consider consensus to have been established. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:42, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Latest comment: 5 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion
Per the discussions above, there is consensus to have a Validation of the Month instead of using November's PotM for validation. I've accordingly started Wikisource:Validation of the Month and I encourage the community's input regarding the logistics of the change. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:40, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
My only concern: Of course, every stage of the proofreading process should be performed with care, and not casually. But particularly so during the validation stage. It should not be treated, imo, merely as a second proofread, but with a meticulous eye focused on the minute details as well as on the work as a whole—particularly when it comes to formatting consistency throughout an entire text. This is more difficult to achieve with "drive-by" validation (which a VotM, or even validation month can unwittingly encourage). Not sure how this can be addressed necessarily. Just thinking out loud. Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
P.S. It concerns me as well when I see almost-immediate validation of pages during the course of a PotM, knowing that having multiple contributors will likely lead to multiple formatting practices (even if/when guidelines are listed on an Index:Talk page). One sees green, and one assumes done... but perhaps not done with a high (consistent/holistic) standard. Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:26, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
This can be one reason to establish a separate Validation group, who can support each other and train newer arrivals in Validation practices. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:15, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
We also need to be sure that works proposed for validation are ready for validation. Not every work that goes through POTM has had every page created, even. BD2412T04:09, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Just picking up on the thought in the previous section on putting up a few works that require validation and rotating those as required. This would be my preference rather than putting up a single work. For the mainpage, we would need to maintain a template within the VotM space and then transclude it. Some possible wording as a starter: "These texts need another pair of eyes to check they have been proofread correctly. See How to Validate."
We have an ever-growing list of works that people believe are ready for Validation at Wikisource:Proofread of the Month/validation works#Queued to be validated. When updating the list of four works that are on WS:PotM I've been selecting from this list and trying to cover a range of domains at the same time so that validators might have something of interest to them. The other source of works ready for Validation is Category:Index Proofread. The caution with both of these sources is that they haven't been checked that they really are ready for Validation. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
What would possess them to draw across the fold like that? Didn't they know someday someone would need to scan this on a futuristic piece of machinery? BD2412T22:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
With a million or so IA PDFs now at Commons, might be worth fixing the template instead? DJVU is great and all, but sometimes it's just a hurdle when the PDF exists at Commons and is readable and has OCR? That said, we might get paragraph breaks in the DJVU OCR soon, and AFAIK, PDF doesn't do that).Inductiveload—talk/contribs16:06, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I have checked all of the works I listed (excepting the “Remarks,” as it was already created); they are intact, although the Google information page will need to be stripped from A Prospect. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC).
Work should start on these works as soon as possible; they should thus be added to the appropriate templates as soon as possible. Inductiveload, can you upload a DJVU of this file? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC).
I supportColour-Prints, if the images may be reliably obtained. I oppose all works below as impermissible, with the exception of Bryan's, which I object to on account of its length. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC).
Gentlemen Prefer Blondes is fully proofread, and largely validated, with the exception of images. Once that is finished, I would recommend Women of the West as the next work. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC).
Maybe, finishing The part taken by women in American history.djvu and then something non-USA focused? I like the approach of using this series to complete and validate texts rather than starting from scratch which can be harder for inexperienced volunteers. Languageseeker (talk) 20:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
That work is mostly proofread anyway, but the index is not proofread; that will take some time to complete. I think choosing another work, perhaps a work of a famous woman author, would be better. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:03, 8 March 2021 (UTC).
I picked that one precisely because it’s so close to being done. It’s a huge work and finishing it during this month would be a great way to celebrate women in herstory. Languageseeker (talk) 18:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
The proofread/validation for Gentlemen Prefer Blondes is done, and since we still have 2/3 of the month left, I SupportWomen of the West, second choice The part taken by women in American history. 3rd choice something not on this list (those History of Women Suffrage volumes seem too unwieldy for a mid-month replacement). Clay (talk) 15:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
One of the 3 major works from the Harlem Renaissance. It's a great way to honor the contribution that African-Americans have made to English literature.
I have moved this discussion to June, as that month features novels; I certainly think that this work should be proofread. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC).
I see that Phe-bot is creating the pages, but there are many, many errors in punctuation, and even in the text included on the page. Especially words at the start or end of a page are incorrect, or missing, or are from a neighboring page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
That's common for match and split (it can get confused by hyphenations and sometimes loses track slightly), it's why the pages are created "red" rather than "yellow". Inductiveload—talk/contribs17:09, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
But that only happens when the text is being imported from a separate source instead of using the text layer in the source file. That's why match-and-split is done from a proofread copy, not for a newly added work. For a newly added work, the text layer of the file should be used, becuase editors of different editions make different editorial changes. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
It's coming from the PG copy, which is almost right except for some very minor differences. It's definitely closer to what's on the page than the raw OCR. It needs checking in any case. Inductiveload—talk/contribs17:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
But those are the sort of differences that WS proofreaders don't expect. For example, you've proofread page 11, but there is still some punctuation missing that is present in the scan. OCR text generally isn't missing punctuation, so we're not in the habit of carefully checking it. Since the text comes from an external source and has gone through PG editorializing, we need to pay careful attention to the punctuation beyond what we normally do. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:48, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
gutenberg copy editing is different, (checking punctuation, small caps, italics, dashes, and page breaks) and we should be welcoming to the newbies (or forgetful outsiders) who are attracted to the "in the news" works. Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge13:44, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Phe-bot is not run by newbies. The issue isn't about welcoming newbies, it's about setting them up for failure with a flawed text from the get-go. If we want to have a Gutenberg edition, then it should be added as a Gutenberg edition, not entered under the misleading guise of the text from a scan. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Since there are so many great novels from 1925, I was thinking about making June a month to celebrate the major novels that entered the PD in 1925. I've created several list here and I'm working at creating Indexes for all of them. It'll be a great way to prepare for some summer beach reading. Languageseeker (talk) 02:07, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
In absence of a “natural sciences” category, and with some opposition to the above work (on account of its length), I nominate The Conchologist's First Book(external scan), a major work in the development of conchology as a popular discipline, especially in the U.S. (where it was first published). The scan above given is the first edition. This work is by far the author’s best-selling work, and contains many images besides, which make the work more appealing. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:15, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm inclined towards the conchology book as subject matter, but have no insight into the relative technical difficulty of editing either (in terms of tables, diagrams, or illustrations). BD2412T16:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The conchology book has many images, but less formatting. The ILT book is much longer, and has a number of diagrams and tables interspersed throughout. I believe the images in CFB are confined to the set of plates at the beginning of the book. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
October (Fiction: SF/Fantastical)
I nominate [106]Hoffman's Strange Stories, a collection of English translations of the popular stories by E. T. A. Hoffmann, who is best remembered for The Nutcracker and the Mouse King, which was adapted into the well-known ballet. Several of his other stories have inspired well-known composers to write music and operas, but thus far The Nutcracker... is the only one of his stories for which we have a complete text. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Something is very wrong with the spacing of this scan. The text is treated as if it is in columns, when it isn't. BD2412T19:42, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
@BD2412: Switch it out, PDFs are trash IMO as something just goes wrong when the text layer appears. If we are going with this work then please download and use the DJVU. — billinghurstsDrewth04:39, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
We seem to have no works about the French language. Does someone have a recommendation? Perhaps a seminal work on the subject? --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
I also think the dictionary is not an ideal choice for the PotM. With a good text layer import (the OCR is...not great due to the language and printing) it might be OK in the MC, but even then I'd be surprised if it got traction. Inductiveload—talk/contribs09:26, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
I gather that this is not happening this month. If not, perhaps we can get through some proofread works needing validation. BD2412T05:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Calendar 2022
Latest comment: 1 year ago17 comments6 people in discussion
2022 List
Month
Work
Category
Status
January
Quirky
February
Fine arts
March
Wikipedia:WikiWomen's History Month / Woman author
Since it is February already, I selected A History of Japanese Colour-Prints since the index for that one already existed and there were no objections. DraconicDark (talk) 20:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
I don't think that the Current Collaborations section on the front page is serving us to well. Instead, I propose that we have a running list that automatically progresses to the next work once the current one is done. Furthermore, I propose that we divide the texts into four categories and display all four at once to allow users more choice and cater to more skill levels.
Easy - These texts will be proofread texts that need validation. They will serve to introduce users to wikicode through an immersive environement and provide a low barrier to entry.
Medium - These texts will require proofreading, but have fairly decent OCR. They can be novel or books imported from PGDP.
Hard - These books have more complex layouts and may have more garbeled OCR, but they should not present too great of a challenge. Perhaps a book with lots of images or a few tables or a pre-19th century works with long s and ligatures.
Challenge - These are probably mainly reference books or manuscripts. Lots of complex formating required.
I do agree that we need some method of automatically queueing up the next POTM when the current one is finished. BD2412T06:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
PotMs can now be queued up in Module:PotM/data and will auto-advance at the end of the month, updating both {{PotM}} and {{Collaboration/POTM}} automatically. Currently, April is set to be Index:The torrent and The night before.djvu, but that was a random choice from the proposals since there has been no other discussion there. You can also pre-queue further works in a month, but if prior works aren't done, you need to set current, otherwise it'll point to the last work in that month's list by default. Inductiveload—talk/contribs07:33, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: Thank you for this. This looks awesome. Do you think it would be possible to add navigation arrows so that users can choose to look at the other works and potentially work on them? Also, would it be possible to add a description section so that we could add one or two sentences about the book? Languageseeker (talk) 01:39, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Re the arrows, that would be kind of awkward in the Wikitext paradigm without some kind of JS to dynamically load them in. Which would need to be globally loaded (and maintained into perpetuity), so it's a bit impractical for a single-purpose thing. If you wanted something more fancy and web-2.0'y, you should probably consider writing a Toolforge tool that serves a web app of some sort.
@Inductiveload: The arrow thing sounds like way more work than it's worth. What a simple textual Previous Next? Is that as much work? If it is, then it's also not worth it.
@Languageseeker: Previous/next would require a page to use as a target. If the text doesn't exist as Wikisource page you can reach with a [[Link]], you'd need a script to do it. {{New texts}} has archives, but PotM's method has been to just add works to the gallery at Wikisource:Proofread_of_the_Month. In theory, if the PotM data was backfilled, that gallery can be auto-generated.
To add a description to {{PotM/base}} is a matter of editing the template and figuring out a nice place to put it, if the parameter is given (I guess just before {{#switch:{{{option}}}...). Since this is core template, that's actually a protected template, so you'll have to do it in {{PotM/base/sandbox}}. Then you need to get Module:PotM to pass descriptions to the template (near line 117) if present in the data item. Inductiveload—talk/contribs19:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Core texts
Latest comment: 3 years ago13 comments5 people in discussion
I think the entire idea of a work a month does not work. Not everyone wants to proofread the same text at once. I think that we should have a list of several works every month including half finished text such as the one you mentioned. Progress would be measured by the number of pages proofread. Then, we could build a core set of key texts and clear the backlog. However, if we maintain our present system than this work would be out of scope for this month. Languageseeker (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
There is no requirement to work on the PotM, and there are hundreds and hundreds of texts with Index pages awaiting proofreading. Editors are free to work on what they wish from that very large selection. Various editors here have compiled personal lists of what they think ought to be worked on, and everyone's list is different. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:50, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: I agree that everyone has a different lists, both there are some works that commonly make it to top lists and that should have scan backed editions. These are the texts that will attract users. Right now, we don’t have scan backed copies of Hamlet, Portrait of Dorian Gray, or Clarissa, to name a few. Could text such as these not be considered core texts? Languageseeker (talk) 17:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes and no. Fiction is just one area that Wikisource covers; there is also non-fiction to be considered. Further, Hamlet is a play (a long one), and when we have previously tried community proofreading of a play it did not go well. Dramatic works require an advanced knowledge of formatting that is not conducive to community efforts. Wikisource also does works that have been translated into English. We to not have a copy of The Mahabharat nor do we have scan-backed copies of Rumi's Masnavi I Ma'navi or Ovid's Ars Amatoria. We have almost no translations of major works in French, Spanish, and Italian. There is so much missing, that it would be an enormous list were we to compile it. It might be worth assembling such a list, but selecting good scans for these works would require care, dedication, and expert knowledge or research in some cases. And many of these works are beyond the scope of a single month's transcription. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I think a WikiProject Core Texts would be a really very good idea, but it needs a lot of curation and meta-editing to get it usable. Dumping a list of Wikipedia's 100 greatest books and letting it rot won't achieve anything. For example, Wikisource:Requested texts is pretty moribund, because it's way way easier to drive by and say "Oi, we should have X, Y and Z, hop to it" than arrange decent scans and actually do it. Even when scans are (eventually) sourced, requesting users very rarely actually do it. Furthermore, I speculate that one reason we have such poor "core" coverage is because most "core" texts are already trivially available online and people would rather do something new than painstakingly patch (or re-patch) a PG text into a scan-backed format.
A hypothetical WP:CT would presumably take on some of the responsibility of finding, processing, uploading and generally organising the "core texts" to facilitate proofreading by others, especially (but not limited to) newcomers.
In my internal fan-fiction of how that might go, it would be partnered with an analogue to the frWS "Mission 7500" (formerly Défi 5000), where we have some kind of automated back-end that allows use to track progress, which (at least at frWS) appears to be good rallying point for many people. Again, this is something that takes real effort to organise and maintain, it doesn't just happen. I'm unconvinced that the frWS bot-edited page method is the most efficient way (I'd think some kind of web-app on the Toolforge combined with some kind of on-wiki list/JSON/categorisation would be more snazzy, responsive and need less maintenance), but it certainly seems to work well for them.
I have deliberately glossed over the issue of determining what is and isn't "core".
Re: most "core" texts are already trivially available online and people would rather do something new: In some cases, it's possible to do both. For example, when transcribing the dramatic works of Aeschylus and Sophocles, I deliberately went for editions by other translators. That is, nearly every on-line copy of Sophocles' plays in English comes from the translations by Storr that were published in the Loeb Classics, which went up on one site and then got copied over and over to other sites. And nearly every library copy in the US is Campbell's translation. So I opted to transcribe the editions of Jebb and Plumptre, which were not the same copies everyone else offered. Wikisource now has the plays of Sophocles, but not the same copies every other site has. Doing this won't always be possible in every case, but it is something to consider. Similarly, most translations of Russian novels online are the translations by Constance Garnett, which are generally held to be mediocre, so Wikisource could strive to find public domain copies by other translators. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey, @Inductiveload: I definitely don’t want to create a dumping ground for important texts that nobody works on. I also hear that what is important varies and many of these texts can be found available online. However, the goal is to attract users to Wikisource. Even if a text is available online, it still makes sense to create a scan backed copy here. These are the texts that will bring users. Also, many of these texts are of dubious quality so having a better quality copy makes sense. Lastly, by creating a high-quality etext, this site can help to make these texts to a broader community and end systemic inequality.
The selection of the texts will still have a communal nature, but will now explicitly aim to build up the core collection. We can do multiple translations or editions as long as they make sense.
I’m also not proposing to turn this into a series of dead, white men who wrote fiction. Instead, I think it makes sense to split the works into categories: LGBTQ+, Black Authors, Classical Text, Translations, Women Writers, Scientific Texts, etc.
I think that we should at least try the French model. I’m happy to do the translations and create the templates, if an administrator is willing to import the bot. For May, we can select 15 texts. 8 to proofread and 7 to validate. It could be a good test to see how this community reacts. Languageseeker (talk) 18:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
not supported From my several years' experience of being the primary co-ordinator of PotM, large projects do not work. There needs to be one work at a time on the Mainpage. The broad domains of knowledge that are in the annual calendar were set up to ensure that there is a good range of works worked on to appeal to various interests. Over the years we've interpreted those domains with some latitude. Also, I find the concept of "core texts" to be paternalistic at best and dictatorial at worst.
"Oh, you haven't read XXX? Well, that's absolutely dreadful. Of course, it's so much better in the original language, but you must still read it before you can consider yourself to be a well-rounded member of society."
Yes, we want to make available the works that are widely considered to be the best ever written, but we must also make the also-rans available. If we don't, then we are not following our neutrality stance. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
@Languageseeker: I think the most useful thing you could do up-front while we ask for the bot to be approved and set up for us, is to detail exactly how Mission 7500 works at frWS and construct a draft page for enWS. Importantly, a list of monthly task that are needed to keep the wheels turning, as that is probably where it's all seize up à la PotM, so we need a figure out a way to minimise that list. Likely we'd also evolve some different "rules of engagement". And it needs a name: Mission 7500 is unlikely to work since I doubt we can do 7500 page right off the bat! Inductiveload—talk/contribs19:16, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: I created an English translation at User:Languageseeker/POTM and imported all the relevant templates. Most of the heavy work appears to be done by the bot that generates the statistics. The two main tasks that will require human intervention is 1) Selection of Texts 2) Cutting and pasting the individual texts as they get worked on. Languageseeker (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
@Languageseeker: to be clear, I don't think we should really be aiming to replace PotM with this. To me (and I know there are many interpretations) PotM is more a way to get an "interesting" and accessible work, rather than an "important" one, out for collaboration.
This seems more like an parallel thing. Perhaps after some time it'll become a primary driver of progress, or perhaps it will fizzle out, but I think either way we should let it be its own thing than an attempt to replace the existing collaborations. Inductiveload—talk/contribs22:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
@Inductiveload: I think it’s important to feature it on the front page even if we don’t call it PoTM. Maybe, for now, we can replace the Current Collaboration with this? Or, do you have a different term in mind? Above all, I want to give it a fair shot to see if it will work. Languageseeker (talk) 23:23, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Change May to Harlem Renaissance
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I think that it would great if Wikisource expanded its collection of writing by persons of color. For next month, there are no good suggestions. Instead, I propose to change next month to The Harlem Renaissance so that Wikisource will include this major literary movement and achievement of Africain Americans. For the first text, I propose The New Negro. Languageseeker (talk) 13:30, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
This feels like a much bigger project than would last a month. If a collection of works with scans and OCR layers can be accumulated, it might make a good Community Collaboration in a few months' time. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
A Community Collaboration would be the best approach to this idea. The current Collaboration is stale and was only put back in to the templates to tide us over until a new Collaboration could be decided upon. PotM needs to be a smaller project. In the past when we've tried a larger project we've had very little traction. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Propose work by Chesterton
Latest comment: 2 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
@Vis M: there are over a million 'not proofread' pages, usually a user opening and saving pages for something to do, few people seem inclined to proofread those (I'm not one of them). However, your idea for linking the category instead of a random 'proofread' page is worth considering, but the current practice is to nominate and add a proofread work to that subpage. Hope I'm being clear, and that validated is understood to mean proofread twice. CYGNIS INSIGNIS15:49, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Done
Done
Does anyone have a suggestion for the remainder of the month. If I hear nothing over the next couple of days, I will do a lucky dip on something that it semi-advanced. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
— billinghurst sDrewth 09:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
. Moondyne (talk) 06:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Support. Hrishikes (talk) 07:31, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Comment The "Women's History" is a Wikipedia effort. In the past, we have gone with any book authored by a woman, and have not limited our selection beyond that. That is: a popular or significant book authored by a woman is part of "Women's History", and our selection does not have to be a book about women in history. --EncycloPetey (talk)
Neutral This book have a lot of text, but there are still some decoration pictures in the text that should be handled if selected. Albert Micah Hang (talk) 18:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Oppose This book have a lot of tables to deal with. Albert Micah Hang (talk) 18:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
One of Ours by Willa Cather. A Pulitzer Prize winner that we do not have. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:25, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Comment none of these works are truly what we would aim to be proofread of the month material. They have complex formatting which leads to scaring off newbies and variable formatting that usually needs extensive re-formatting, and scaring off newbies. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
