Wikisource talk:WikiProject Biographical dictionaries

More potential works for inclusion

I'm not sure how many are already covered, but I have rather a large number of roughly biographical works over at User:John Carter which might be worth discussing here. Also, over at wikipedia:Bibliography of encyclopedias, and related pages, there might be a few others. So far as I remember, all those which I added from the older 1986 Sheehy Guide to Reference would qualify as being in the public domain today, although, admittedly, I'm not sure how many are and are not here yet. John Carter (talk) 21:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@John Carter: <tl;dr> If we don't have it, add it or request it.
That you say you are unsure whether we have a work, or not, is a good indicator that the project has a need.

I am not looking to limit this project in any regard. I am looking to set up a framework that allows the works to be transcribed, and to allow a common formatting and transclusion process, and try to make it easy/easier, so it is not a barrier to contribution. For this project to work best if someone can say "you need this work ..." and the old hands can get the ground work done to get the framework set to make a work available for transcription, and in that regard it differs from transcribing a "standard" work where the concentrated effort is to get a work completed for when it reaches its value. With biographical dictionaries, each article is its own entity, and brings its own value, and generally getting individual pages transcribed brings value. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree with the goals you expressed above. I have added a few works I have found which are at least substantially biographical. Not all, apparently, are purely biographical dictionaries, however, as some seem to indicate that they are "historical and biographical" or similar.

Also, FWIW, if it would be workable here to establish a broader project for encyclopedias and dictionaries in general, maybe specifically concentrating on those which are specifically included in the bibliographies of articles in more current encyclopedias, like those listed in the pages of wikipedia:Category:WikiProject libraries, I would love to see it. I would think those specific older reference work articles might be among the most useful for wikipedia, and, possibly, having people working here to make them more easily available might encourage more wikipedia editors to come here, and, maybe, stay for other works, like, for instance, some of the other longer works in some of those bibliographies. John Carter (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

The list

I've just learned about this WikiProject page. Nice to have a central place for strategizing around thins kind of work.

I wonder -- is the list on the main page really necessary? It seems like a great deal of work to maintain, and it will always be horribly incomplete. We already try to accomplish more or less the same thing through the category system. Wouldn't it be better to put the work applied here into the category system (which benefits readers as well as editors), and simply link to the category here, instead of pursuing the same work in two separate places? -Pete (talk) 20:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)