Wikisource:Scriptorium
The start a new one; please see Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help.
The Administrators' noticeboard can be used where appropriate. Some announcements and newsletters are subscribed to Announcements.
Project members can often be found in the #wikisource IRC channel multilingual Wikisource. There are currently 445 active users here.
 |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days and sections whose oldest comment is older than 30 days. |
Announcements
[edit]Proposals
[edit]Request that English Wikisource be added to Commons deletion notification bot
[edit]Per an earlier discussion, it sounds like it would be useful for Wikisource to be notified when files in use here are nominated for deletion on Commons. The 02:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
02:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
- provisional support—provided that the notifications are restricted to files that are relevant to enWS and that the notifications are prior to deletion rather than post-deletion. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
06:29, 10 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
05:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
18:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
16:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
22:44, 27 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
00:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
23:04, 3 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
I have posted the Phabricator request here: 15:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @Nosferattus: Another discussion here: Is the Index talk page the best place for this notification? Talk pages often go totally unnoticed on smaller wikis like this one, or the editors involved with those indexes may have left 10 years ago. Should the bot give the Scriptorium, Copyright discussions or some other main discussion space, a notice instead, so the entire community can become immediately aware? SnowyCinema (talk) 15:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- That is a great question. Feel free to open a new discussion about that so that we can collect more input. Nosferattus (talk) 15:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @Nosferattus: I agree that Scriptorium would be a much better place for such notifications. Besides, I understand that the above discussion was about files generally, not only about .pdf and .djvu files. Some index pages are backed by .jpg or other kinds of files too. Besides, we may need to upload locally some images used as illustrations of our works too. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 14:11, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Bot approval requests
[edit]- See Wikisource:Bots for information about applying for a bot status
- See Wikisource:Bot requests if you require an existing bot to undertake a task
Repairs (and moves)
[edit]Designated for requests related to the repair of works (and scans of works) presented on Wikisource
See also Wikisource:Scan lab
Repeat of request to move pages in Index:Mathematical collections and translations, in two tomes - Salusbury (1661).djvu
[edit]As per previous request of September 2024, could you please undertake the following moves:—
- Index page name = Index:Mathematical collections and translations, in two tomes - Salusbury (1661).djvu
- Page offset = 1 (i.e. text on /115 moves to /116)
- Pages to move = "115-274"
- Reason = "realigned pages"
- Page offset = -1 (i.e. text on /409 moves to /408)
- Pages to move = "409-454"
- Reason = "realigned pages"
- Delete = /705 & /706
Thanks Chrisguise (talk) 23:45, 8 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I don't have (yet) the tools to deal with that sort of request, so can't help you here. @Xover: perhaps you could do this? — Alien 3
3 3 17:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)Reply - I've started it, assuming that you meant for the first move 275 and not 274, as the empty page that should have been crushed as it was not in source anymore was at /276, and at /275 was the {{missing image}} that ought to have been in /276. — Alien 3
3 3 19:39, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply 20:18, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks for doing this; everything seems to be in order. It's so long since I looked at this that I don't know whether 274 was a mistake, or whether I had something else in mind. Chrisguise (talk) 12:05, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Renascence and other poems
[edit]This should be moved to Renascence and Other Poems. In addition, the poems themselves need to be moved to title-case. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
22:34, 16 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Not voting here; regardless of policy, I have seen mass moves towards this title-case style and adjusted my own title cases here and at wikidata. I appreciate the uniformity and the fact that it is how I was taught to title things; two moot reasons for sure but honest. Perhaps that policy should be changed and voting can happen there. Typically this is not an area that gets votes.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The problem with title case is that there are 00:27, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Index:The Poetical Works of Thomas Tickell (1781).djvu
[edit]Following deletion of two duplicate pages, could you please undertake the following moves:—
- Index page name = Index:The Poetical Works of Thomas Tickell (1781).djvu
- Page offset = -2 (i.e. text on /104 moves to /102)
- Pages to move = "104-175"
- Reason = "realigned pages"
- Delete pages /182 & /183 Chrisguise (talk) 16:24, 17 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- When you say "Following deletion of two duplicate pages..." do you mean that two pages will need to be deleted as the first step, before completing the items on the list? or do you mean that two pages have already been deleted, and the items on the list can now be completed? --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Apologies, I thought I'd replied to your question. The items on the list can be carried out now because the two pages have already been removed from the djvu. Chrisguise (talk) 06:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Your comment of 17 February has somehow got separated and is below the next section. -- Beardo (talk) 14:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- OK, thanks. Chrisguise (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Your comment of 17 February has somehow got separated and is below the next section. -- Beardo (talk) 14:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Apologies, I thought I'd replied to your question. The items on the list can be carried out now because the two pages have already been removed from the djvu. Chrisguise (talk) 06:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The two pages have already been deleted. Chrisguise (talk) 16:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
20:44, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks, everything is now in order. Chrisguise (talk) 00:15, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Index:Mythology among the Hebrews and its historical development.djvu
[edit]Merge Index:Mythology among the Hebrews and its historical development.djvu (file 1) into the existing index file Index:Mythology Among the Hebrews.djvu (file 2) as I accidentally created a duplication. For content pages, use pages from file 1 as they contain links. And for other pages, use those from file 2 as they are proofread. --1F616EMO (talk) 15:18, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- As the files are quite different (not same number of pages), could you please say precisely which pages, should be moved to the other index, and with which offset? Thanks — Alien 3
3 3 12:13, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
A few figs from thistles; poems and sonnets
[edit]This should be moved to A Few Figs from Thistles (Harper & Brothers, 1922), to distinguish it from A Few Figs from Thistles (Frank Shay, 1922). The current title (which is doubly bad, as it is incorrectly capitalized and includes a subtitle) is independently bad as that title and subtitle are shared between the two 1922 editions. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 06:04, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
07:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
A Wonderful Bird is the Pelican
[edit]Please move this page to A wondrous bird is the pelican, as the current page title does not match the text. Or to A Wondrous Bird is the Pelican, if that capitalisation is preferred: I'm confused, as the style guide seems to call for minimal capitals but using title capitalisation seems to be widespread. Either way, the page title should align with the text. Mooncow (talk) 22:50, 5 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- You should be able to do this yourself -at the top right, there should be a heading "Page" (second from right next to "Tools") - Move is one of the items in that menu.
- The style guide prefers sentance case but allows other. -- Beardo (talk) 00:39, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- ‘Move’ is not in that menu for me. I’ve made updates on other wikis, and have moved plenty of pages, but I’ve not made many updates yet on wiki source, so my guess would be the ‘move’ action is only available to logged-in autoconfirmed users who have made a certain number of updates. Hence my request here.
- Thank you for the case clarification. If you or someone else therefore has the ‘move’ action available, could you please move this page to A wondrous bird is the pelican. Thanks! Mooncow (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes, autoconfirmed is needed for page moves. The move is
20:17, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Much obliged Mooncow (talk) 03:55, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes, autoconfirmed is needed for page moves. The move is
Poems of Anne Countess of Winchilsea 1903
[edit]This should be moved to The Poems of Anne Countess of Winchilsea. “The” should be added; “1903” should not be placed at the end, and in any case, no disambiguation is needed. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:01, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
11:10, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @TE(æ)A,ea.@Alien333 I had to do some cleaning up after this move, since a lot of linked items were not followed up (e.g. the table of contents, external links to the then POTM 'A Room of One's Own') Chrisguise (talk) 00:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah, sorry, that's my fault. Sometimes I forget to check after moves. — Alien 3
3 3 06:58, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah, sorry, that's my fault. Sometimes I forget to check after moves. — Alien 3
Preparation for death
[edit]The sub-pages need to be moved under the current title, Preparation for Death; in addition, they need to be changed to Consolation # from their current titles. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:41, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- You mean Consideration not Consolation - no ? -- Beardo (talk) 04:59, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @TE(æ)A,ea.: could you answer that question? I'm waiting for that to do the move. Thanks. — Alien 3
3 3 08:07, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- Alien: I was working on cleaning up Consolation at the time, so I wrote down the wrong name. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
16:27, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @TE(æ)A,ea.: could you answer that question? I'm waiting for that to do the move. Thanks. — Alien 3
Five excellent songs (1)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Five Excellent Songs ("The Constant Shepherd") (see Five Excellent Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 13:54, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
08:06, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Five favourite songs (11)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Five Favourite Songs ("The Golden Glove") (see Five Favourite Songs) for disambiguation purposes. In addition, the pages should be moved from Index:Five favourite songs (11).pdf to Index:Five favourite songs (10).pdf, as the latter is a much superior scan of the same edition. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
08:09, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Other than that, the mainspace move is
08:10, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Alien: (10) is better than (11) because p. 4 is cut off in (11) (requiring reconstruct templates), while no text is cut off in (10). I would prefer that one of the indexes be deleted; we certainly don’t need both. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah, indeed, makes sense. Blurring is negligible compared to cuts.
14:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah, indeed, makes sense. Blurring is negligible compared to cuts.
- Other than that, the mainspace move is
Five popular songs (1)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Five Popular Songs (Edinburgh) (see Five Popular Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
08:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Five songs (1)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Five Songs ("Robinson Crusoe") (see Five Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
08:15, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Index:Ukpga 18610100 en.pdf
[edit]This needs to be moved to Index:Offences against the Person Act 1861 (UKPGA Vict-24-25-100 qp).pdf due to file move on commons. ToxicPea (talk) 18:11, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
08:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four songs (1)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Four Songs ("Duke of Gordon's three Daughters") (see Four Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:02, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
08:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four Songs (6)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Four Songs ("Roy's wife of Aldivalloch") (see Four Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:02, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
08:22, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four excellent songs (1)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Four Excellent Songs ("Home, sweet Home") (see Four Excellent Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
09:09, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four excellent songs (10)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Four Excellent Songs ("The Laird of Cockpen") (see Four Excellent Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
09:24, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four favourite songs (104185890)
[edit]This should be moved to Four Favourite Songs (Glasgow) for more useful disambiguation. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
09:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four Favourite Songs (2)
[edit]This should be moved to Four Favourite Songs (Newton-Stewart) for more useful disambiguation. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
09:33, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @Alien333: Just reminding that when moving some pages it is also necessary to fix all the broken links and also broken redirects have to be either fixed or deleted. Done now :-) --Jan Kameníček (talk) 10:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes I know, and most of the time moving I have spent updating links. Ah, I see, missed this TOC. — Alien 3
3 3 10:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes I know, and most of the time moving I have spent updating links. Ah, I see, missed this TOC. — Alien 3
- Alien, Jan Kameníček: Thank you for all the moves! I’ve been cleaning up the NLS chapbooks with similar titles, and I run into a lot of these issues. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @TE(æ)A,ea.: No problem. Feel free to request similar moves whenever needed. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:50, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @Alien333: Just reminding that when moving some pages it is also necessary to fix all the broken links and also broken redirects have to be either fixed or deleted. Done now :-) --Jan Kameníček (talk) 10:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four excellent new songs (1)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Four Excellent New Songs (c. 1780, Falkirk) (see Four Excellent New Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:31, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four excellent new songs
[edit]This needs to be moved to Four Excellent New Songs (c. 1805) (see Four Excellent New Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:31, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Four Excellent New Songs (3)
[edit]This needs to be moved to Four Excellent New Songs ("Johnny's Grey-Breeks") (see Four Excellent New Songs) for disambiguation purposes. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:31, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Other discussions
[edit]Transclusion of multiple or all subworks on a single subpage
[edit]As is done e.g. at Poems (Pushkin, Panin, 1888).
Arguments that I know of, feel free to add:
For: can be construed as simpler (less pages, reduced/no need for section tags)
Against: prevents attaching information to one specific subwork ({{similar}}, wikidata items, &c); can result in unwieldy pages; searchability a bit reduced (with the title not being in a pagename)
Where do you all stand on that?
I personally would be rather against. — Alien 3
3 3 20:22, 16 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- As far as attaching information to a specific subwork at wikidata, there is no longer a hindrance, since wikidata can support redirects now. I am not aware of any reduced searchability; searches are already hit-or-miss, even when the title of a subwork is in the pagename. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:43, 16 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Our works are not always so cleanly divided into subworks. We have a lot of gray area with some of our works. Consider Bibliography of the Sanskrit Drama/Names of Authors. Should we treat that as a single section because it is so listed in the ToC, or do we need to split it up by letter of the alphabet because there are clear divisions in the text pages? Should The Poems of Sappho/Chapter 3 be divided into 122 separate pages because fragments of 122 poems are identified? even if some consist of a single line? Is The Waste Land by T. S. Eliot a single work, or a collection of subworks? In The Souls of Black Folk, should the song at the head of each chapter be placed on a separate page because it is a song and not part of the essay that forms the chapter? I do not think a single answer can be applied to all our many works hosted here. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- LJB preferred to do poetry books that way for two reasons: a) to keep the poems that followed a theme together (bibliographic); and b) to not need to use sub-subpages (practical). When I did Whitman's Leaves of Grass (1882) I went the sub-subpages route and ended up having to create intermediate subpages that aren't in the text just to parent the sub-subpages.
In general, I agree with EP that there is a lot of grey. The philosophy should be to ask what is going to be most useful to the reader. How will the work or page be used? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks to to both for the info! — Alien 3
3 3 10:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- @Beeswaxcandle@EncycloPetey Whilst I agree that there are grey areas, in most cases where poems are grouped under a heading, it's still clear—from typography if nothing else—that they're separate poems, not the equivalent of stanzas or cantos of a larger piece. In such circumstances, I think the poems ought to be transcluded separately. Lumping stuff together just looks like a half-hearted job. I've broken up a number of poetry collections that were lumped together, although I don't intend to make a habit of it; it was a tedious process. Chrisguise (talk) 00:08, 9 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks to to both for the info! — Alien 3
- While things are sometimes grey, we shouldn't confuse things, and say well we should just transclude the whole DNB or EB1911 onto one giant page because hey, what are chapters with epithets anyways? We can provide some prescriptive guidelines that things like having a 1000 page transclusion of a book that lists 100 chapters in a TOC is generally bad and should be broken up. magazine should be broken up into issues and articles etc. There may be leeway in interpretation, but it isn't all grey. And then we can provide more suggestive guidance, where I would incline to agree with @Chrisguise that for poems listed in a TOC and titled individually we should favor breaking them up in general over using anchors and deep-linking, especially if we think it is worthwhile to have an independent WD entry. MarkLSteadman (talk) 01:22, 9 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- My work on Punch/Volume 147 may be a good model for the way I like to transclude these mixed works.
- Each issue of Punch is (generally) 16 pages of cartoons, short articles, and miscellaneous jokes. I transclude these as a single page. I feel this best preserves the feel of Punch, rather than it being ghetto-ised into 500 paragraphs each on a separate page. However, for all the material in Volume 147 I then went through and also individually linked every named item (e.g. Punch/Volume 147/Issue 3817/The Watch Dogs). This took an immense amount of work, and I don't think I will be doing this linking for future issues unless there are particularly significant articles or series that I would like to refer to elsewhere (it did make the index amazing, though).
- I'm following the same process for the issues of Notes and Queries/Series 1/Volume 1 that I'm working through. In the 14 years that page images had been available on the site, 1 of the 30 weekly issues had been transcluded. We're now up to 7. If people want to go through, add section markers, and individually split up the major articles, in addition to the whole magazine view, then they are welcome to, but it's not something I'm going to do in the near future. Note that having all of the issue on the same page makes it much easier to hyperlink the inter-issue page references which are a feature of Notes and Queries.
- The Strand Magazine, on the other hand, makes much more sense to be split into individual article pages. Qq1122qq (talk) 09:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @Qq1122qq That Punch volume work is truly amazing. I agree, it seems almost impossible to scale up without automating part of the process. But I think it's totally feasible to add some kind of markers during proofreading and let the robots handle the tedious work of splitting and generating individual articles. I actually wrote a similar script myself last month. Ignacio Rodríguez (talk) 02:36, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- LJB preferred to do poetry books that way for two reasons: a) to keep the poems that followed a theme together (bibliographic); and b) to not need to use sub-subpages (practical). When I did Whitman's Leaves of Grass (1882) I went the sub-subpages route and ended up having to create intermediate subpages that aren't in the text just to parent the sub-subpages.
Dashiell Hammett's works from Black Mask magazine
[edit]Starting in 1927, Hammett published several series of related stories in Black Mask, which he then reworked into novels. The first of these is at The Cleansing of Poisonville, which was taken from a scan of just that story. I have not been able to find scans of the full magazines, and I understand that there are very few copies of the magazines still in existence. Should these works be left as standalone works, or should they be treated as sub-pages of the relevant issues of Black Mask even if we are unlikely to get the rest of the issue ? -- Beardo (talk) 02:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I would group them under the periodical title, and create a page listing contents we have. We do this for newspapers and periodicals, in the eventual hopes of getting a scan, even if we do not currently have such a scan. They may need to simply be under "Black Mask/etc" without volume or issues numbers, unless we have the means to be sure of that information. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I don't have the volume and issue numbers - the nearest that I have are 5 years before and 5 years after, and the issue numbers aren't quite consistent. I have the date and have used that. -- Beardo (talk) 02:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Presidential pardons
[edit]Do we have a standard way that presidential pardons are titled? --RAN (talk) 17:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Do we even have any presidential pardons on here yet? ToxicPea (talk) 15:04, 7 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- If it's just a standard proclamation I'd just call it Proclamation XXXXX ToxicPea (talk) 15:08, 7 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Here is the one I want to bring over: File:Presidential Pardon of Charles Frederick Lindauer by Ulysses S. Grant on 21 March 1873.jpg --RAN (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I suppose you could just call it Pardon of Charles Frederick Lindauer. ToxicPea (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Does @Koavf have any comment on this. ToxicPea (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks for pinging me. I agree that "(Presidential) pardon of [Name]" is probably best. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I also wanted to ask what we should do when there are multiple recipients. File:Full and unconditional pardons=pardon-warrant-7-19-jan-2025 1.pdf for example. ToxicPea (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah, yes, that could probably be something arbitrary like "Presidential pardon of [characteristics of group] by [politician]" or if there is no single defining characteristic of them, "Presidential pardons by [politician] of [date]". —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:52, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- That's not particularly helpful in this case because there isn't really a single defining characteristic for these people and this isn't the only pardon issued on this date. ToxicPea (talk) 02:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Well, it is useful actually because (as I recall), the other pardon that Biden issued that day did have a common characteristic of politicians who may face retributive investigations by the incoming administration. Finding the best way to name that one may be a bit of an open question, but you name that one with the defining characteristic and then you name this one "Presidential pardons by Joe Biden on January 19, 2025" and then link the two together to disambiguate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- They were actually six other pardons and it doesn't seem like it would be that difficult to name them. I am unsure about how to name File:A FULL AND UNCONDITIONAL PARDON-Jan6 Committee, Staff, Police=pardon-warrant-1-19-jan-2025.pdf however. ToxicPea (talk) 03:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- At a bare minimum, we could just have one "work" that is "Presidential pardons by Joe Biden on January 19, 2025" and transclude multiple documents. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:10, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I have Pardon of General Mark A. Milley about a third done if you want to look at it. You can probably figure out how to format this better than I can. ToxicPea (talk) 04:03, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I think that Page:A FULL AND UNCONDITIONAL PARDON-GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY=pardon-warrant-3-19-jan-2025.pdf/1 is pretty close to the best it can be now, but there may well be better ways to float the images and text at the bottom. I certainly think it's usable. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:29, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- They were actually six other pardons and it doesn't seem like it would be that difficult to name them. I am unsure about how to name File:A FULL AND UNCONDITIONAL PARDON-Jan6 Committee, Staff, Police=pardon-warrant-1-19-jan-2025.pdf however. ToxicPea (talk) 03:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Well, it is useful actually because (as I recall), the other pardon that Biden issued that day did have a common characteristic of politicians who may face retributive investigations by the incoming administration. Finding the best way to name that one may be a bit of an open question, but you name that one with the defining characteristic and then you name this one "Presidential pardons by Joe Biden on January 19, 2025" and then link the two together to disambiguate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- That's not particularly helpful in this case because there isn't really a single defining characteristic for these people and this isn't the only pardon issued on this date. ToxicPea (talk) 02:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah, yes, that could probably be something arbitrary like "Presidential pardon of [characteristics of group] by [politician]" or if there is no single defining characteristic of them, "Presidential pardons by [politician] of [date]". —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:52, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I also wanted to ask what we should do when there are multiple recipients. File:Full and unconditional pardons=pardon-warrant-7-19-jan-2025 1.pdf for example. ToxicPea (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks for pinging me. I agree that "(Presidential) pardon of [Name]" is probably best. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Does @Koavf have any comment on this. ToxicPea (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Sorry about waiting so long and hijacking your thread. Did that sufficiently answer your question? ToxicPea (talk) 04:09, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I suppose you could just call it Pardon of Charles Frederick Lindauer. ToxicPea (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Phetools-based Gadgets removed (OCR and Match&Split)
[edit]Since Phetools went down during The Great Toolforge Grid Engine Migration™ last year, the OCR service and Match&Split service that it provided have been non-functional. I have now removed (disabled) the two respective Gadgets (ocr and robot) so that the user interface artefacts of a non-functional service doesn't show up any more.
This does not affect any alternate or replacement service; only the ones that used the Phetools service on Toolforge. Xover (talk) 07:38, 11 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks for the update. Pete (talk) 20:10, 5 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Embedding dust jackets in the header template
[edit]We have several options on how to handle dust jackets of books, such as: not worrying about them at all, transcribing them with the book, or transcribing them under a different title. I propose another one, which is to just include a picture of the dust jacket in the "notes" section of the header template, like what is done here. I want to do this, but I am afraid of getting reverted. prospectprospekt (talk) 20:41, 14 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I think this is a bad idea for three main reasons (1) it pushes content of the book further down the page in favor of the header; (2) it places content that is not part of the scan into the work; (3) it puts potential content into a place that would not be available in the Download. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:48, 14 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- 1 and 2 are also arguments against transcribing the dust jacket in the main (un-subpaged) part of the book, and I can make it collapsible by default if that is necessary. Also, it would not make sense to attach the scan of a dust jacket to the scan of a book because a book and its dust jacket are separate things. prospectprospekt (talk) 22:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC) edited 22:40, 14 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- On 2, that isn't true if it was included as part of the scan of the book. If the dust jacket is part of the scan, and I believe it should be, then it should be transcribed along with the internal portions. However, a large number of our scans come from libraries where the dust jacket was not bound with the rest of the book, and so is not present in the scan. And for1, that's only true if the dust jacket is placed at the very top of the first Mainspace page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:58, 14 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- 1 and 2 are also arguments against transcribing the dust jacket in the main (un-subpaged) part of the book, and I can make it collapsible by default if that is necessary. Also, it would not make sense to attach the scan of a dust jacket to the scan of a book because a book and its dust jacket are separate things. prospectprospekt (talk) 22:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC) edited 22:40, 14 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I think including the dust jacket (or cover images, for books without dust jackets) in the Index page would be best. It's part of the work, and should be transcribed along with it. I also think it or any nice illustrative image of the work should be allowed to be included optionally in the mainspace page. Perhaps not in the header notes field, as that results in a fair bit of empty space, but floated to the right as we do for author images. It's good to give readers a visual clue as to what the original worked looked like physically. Sam Wilson 05:04, 15 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- To clarify, you do not mean
any nice illustrative image
as in "any decorative image which seems to fit the theme of the book", but as in "an image of the physical object that was scanned", right? - Besides whether it is desirable, we would have the issue that often the closest we have to that is a scan of the cover, with borders cropped, which, well, doesn't bring anything in msot cases. — Alien 3
3 3 07:37, 15 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- Yes, absolutely! I didn't mean any random apposite image, but specifically a cover or first page (or whatever is most appropriate) of the work. I think especially for manuscripts it could be very useful to give a feel for the work. Sam Wilson 01:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- But that's not what the
|notes=field in the {{header}} template is for, and adding it outside the header would be an annotation. If the dust jacket is included in the scan it can be treated like any other part of the book (title page, frontispiece, etc.), and if it is not then our readers will have to do without it as with any other lacking element of a scan. And even when the scan includes the dust jacket we should probably generally avoid it as it has limited value in the majority of works, and at the same time takes up space and gets in the way of the content in our texts (unlike in a physical book). General media related to the work can be found on Commons, as linked in the sisterlinks in the header template provided the connection is set up on Wikidata.Also keep in mind that the actual author in most cases had no or minimal input on the dust jacket. Like other artefacts of the publishing or printing process we very explicitly make the distinction: it is the author's work we try to reproduce as faithfully as possible, and everything else is either of secondary importance or explicitly excluded (library cards, ex libris, letters, clippings, etc.). Xover (talk) 07:40, 15 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- In my opinion, a dust jacket is "information that adds value to the reader" so it fits in the
|notes=parameter (edit: and AFAIK we don't have strict guidelines on how that parameter should be used. Some people use it to quote book reviews, which are not part of the book either). I don't see any problem with adding it as an annotation in the body either; then, it could be moved to the very bottom of the page instead of taking up space at the top. Perhaps the best solution is to transcribe it in a subpage, so both its connection to book and the fact that it is a different object is made clear. prospectprospekt (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2025 (UTC) edited 16:18, 15 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- We have a policy when it comes to Wikisource:Annotations. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- In my opinion, a dust jacket is "information that adds value to the reader" so it fits in the
- To clarify, you do not mean
- Seeing that there is no consensus against it, I will begin doing this (1) only for books I proofread and (2) with some modifications: I will float the image to the left, put the caption inside the image and decrease the width to 250px (though I am willing to decrease it further). prospectprospekt (talk) 17:32, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- To review: only three people have commented. I was explicitly against. No one was in favor. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Sam Wilson is kind of in favor, with his concern being that the dust jacket would take up too much space. That, however, can be mitigated with not centering it and making it smaller.
- From what I've observed, we generally give users wide deference over their stylistic choices and what they can include in the notes parameter. How to include dust jackets is something we don't have a clear guideline on (and I oppose including them in the scan), so I think that any method a user may choose to use should be respected. prospectprospekt (talk) 19:04, 23 February 2025 (UTC) edited 19:11, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I have created {{dust jacket}} with some changes from the specifications I previously laid out. I am putting the image(s) in the center because I found a way to do so and decreasing the width to 200px. prospectprospekt (talk) 05:36, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- To review: only three people have commented. I was explicitly against. No one was in favor. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Cursive font support
[edit]Hi all, dredging up a Méthode de Serpent. I'm thinking that adding this font (as a single static WOFF2 file) to the Wikisource extension will mean it gets deployed along with the JS, CSS, images, etc. into the production static delivery, neatly sidesteps all the cited issues around Google, privacy, performance, admin burden, and "polluting" the Universal Language Selector and/or other sister projects with unnecessary extra fonts. Thoughts, @Beleg Tâl, @Beeswaxcandle, @Billinghurst, @Koavf? Have I missed something? Cheers — Jonathanischoice (talk) 00:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes, there is still an appetite for Petit Formal Script. Please. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes, you're missing the fact that the WMF has not a single developer assigned to Wikisource, nor a single team whose responsibilities include the software stack that Wikisource relies on. This problem isn't technically all that hard to resolve, but it's effectively impossible when nobody owns the issue. I think our best bet is still waiting for T166138 and its anciliary tasks. It might be possible for volunteers to get Petit Formal Script into the Wikisource extension, but once there it needs to be maintained; and once it's there all the other language Wikisourcen will want additional specialised fonts for their needs that it will be very hard for an ad hoc contributor to be responsible for. We either need the Language Team to take responsibility for web font support (as the team was originally intended to before the WMF rescoped them to i18n) or we need a Google Fonts proxy in production so we can use anything available there without having to involve the WMF. Xover (talk) 08:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Black Panther (newspaper)
[edit]A cursory check in the U. S. copyright office revealed that issues of the newspaper was never registered, meaning that they could be in the public domain. Are there any other factors I need to take into account? Norbillian (talk) 00:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- {{PD-US-no-notice}} only is for works published between 1933 and 1977. — Alien 3
3 3 07:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply - You want {{PD-US-1978-89}}, there was no registration with the USCO. --RAN (talk) 02:53, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Note that some of the issues have copyright notices on them. (The June 30, 1972 issue has one, for instance; the date is, oddly enough, 1971, though that might just shorten the term rather than invalidate the notice.). I don't recall off the top of my head exactly what formalities requirements were in force in the 1970s, but I would not assume that any issues with notices on them are public domain. JohnMarkOckerbloom (talk) 22:32, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I believe a notice alone would be sufficient. They had to be registered before renewal, but that requirement ended with required renewal. There's a case where a major studio lost copyright to a movie because they wrote MDCXXX as the copyright year instead of MDCXXXX, but that only happened when they failed to renew it 28 years after the copyright notice because they thought they had ten more years. So 1971 should be fine.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:25, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Redlinks caused by page moves
[edit]I noticed a number of redlinks in the list of works completed at Wikisource:WikiProject NLS. On investigation, all but one were caused by the works having being moved without redirects. I amended the links on that page, and also a couple of the index pages which linked the now non-existent page. I also noted that there were several now-redlinks from User or User talk pages. Should anything be done about those ? (The user that I saw is no longer active). -- Beardo (talk) 02:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Redlinks to moved works mostly ought to be corrected, but in user (talk) namespace, I'd argue just leave them (As the content of these pages is either the user's or that of the users who commented.) Maybe leave a comment at talk (for user pages) or a reply (for user talk pages) to notify that the work has changed title. — Alien 3
3 3 18:09, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- Thanks. That makes sense. -- Beardo (talk) 22:38, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
publication date of federal register vol 90 issue 31
[edit]Is the publication date for this the eighteenth or the fifteenth? The document says it was published on the eighteenth but was actually made available on the fifteenth. ToxicPea (talk) 17:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The listed publication date is correct. It is the same issue for Executive Orders; the text is announced in advance, although the formal printing happens later. It is the Executive Order No. __ of January 20, 2025, even if it published on January 28. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:50, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- But the formal printing for this issue happened on Feb. 15 even though it was supposed to happen on Feb. 18. You can see that File:Executive Order 14211.pdf was uploaded to commons on Feb. 15 even though the order wasn't supposed to be published until Feb. 18. You can also see 03:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- My question is essentially, do we use the intended date of publication or the actual date of publication? ToxicPea (talk) 03:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- ToxicPea: The issues are drawn up and released in advance of their formal date of publication. Technically, you’re just looking at a draft, but the text of the presidential materials generally remains unchanged. The formal date is when the physical issue is published, which is in any case the date we use. To go back to my example, we use the listed date of publication for Executive Orders as the date, despite the descriptive text which gives the date of signature. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- My question is essentially, do we use the intended date of publication or the actual date of publication? ToxicPea (talk) 03:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- But the formal printing for this issue happened on Feb. 15 even though it was supposed to happen on Feb. 18. You can see that File:Executive Order 14211.pdf was uploaded to commons on Feb. 15 even though the order wasn't supposed to be published until Feb. 18. You can also see 03:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Spaced out OCR
[edit]The automatically generated OCR on this volume has a space between each character:
Page:The Public General Acts of the United Kingdom 1973 Vol 1.pdf/116
I'm not seeing this on all volumes when creating a page, e.g.:
Page:Ruffhead - The Statutes at Large - vol 12.djvu/107
Is it something to do with the particular volume, or a bug with the software? Technolalia (talk) 13:09, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Technolalia: I don't think that there is "automatic OCR" here, unless you pushed that [OCR] button in the tool bar. The PDF brought its own OCR with it. If you do not like the OCR that your PDF came with, feel free to push the [OCR] button and receive "semi-automatic" OCR from some cloud associated with wikimedia. This button can only be seen if you have set your preferences to display the toolbar which contains a lot of other tools that I have never found to be useful in the slightest here.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- As they said, it's an issue with this particular volume. I uploaded it, so I'll see if I can do something to fix the OCR text layer and then reupload the file. If not, I might just have to run through the whole file and use the OCR button on each page to redo it. I'll try and check on this with future uploads, but just mention it on the talk page if you see any other files of mine like this. Penguin1737 (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Successfully able to redo the OCR layer on that file, currently doing it for 1973/2 and 1973/3. Will check for this issue on other volumes in this series. The OCR certainly isn't perfect with the sidenotes, but it's at least a workable base now. Penguin1737 (talk) 03:06, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Please delete my redundant Black Camel index.
[edit]I inadvertently created a redundant index for The Black Camel (1929) by Earl der Biggers that is inferior to and uses the same source as an older one. Could someone please delete it? It can be found here: Index:The Black Camel (1929).djvu
SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 16:22, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- SurprisedMewtwoFace: I added {{sdelete}}, which populates a category which administrators regularly review. In the future, you can either add that template or post a request at Wikisource:Proposed deletions. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- To add, I am informed "If an Index page has other pages attached to it, then either those pages need to be tagged "speedy" as well, or the whole set should be listed at Wikisource:Proposed deletions, so that [administrators] know there are multiple pages involved, not all of which are tagged." -- Beardo (talk) 20:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I was recently informed that the administrators have a tool which will find all of the subpages. I wonder which information is correct?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:25, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The issue is not finding the subpages. The issue is knowing that those pages are being requested for deletion too. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- So, can we mention "and all subpages" in sdelete's 1=comment?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:51, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Either all the requisite pages should be tagged, or a deletion nomination should be posted at Wikisource:Proposed deletions with full information. A speedy deletion is a marker used to indicate an uncomplicated deletion, not requiring additional action. It is for only a single page. The 1=comment is for stating the reason the page qualifies for speedy deletion, so that it does not need to go through the full official process at Wikisource:Proposed deletions. If you have to put something alse in that comment, that is an indication that it does not qualify for a speedy deletion. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:36, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- EncycloPetey: Is there a situation where the Index: is deleted but it's Page:(s) are not?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes. There are instances where the transcribed pages are tranferred to a new Index. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- So, there you go. I was told not to bother with tagging all of the redirects after I moved the pages. I've had a few months of very good and not too "talk about it talk about it talk about it" administration. So, my final question is this: If I mention that all sub-pages are redirects (which would be the case if I hadn't requested help with the moving of the pages); does the administrator doing this mass-deletion have a problem finding the sub-pages? And is it so terribly wrong to mention that in the template?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:36, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- "Mass deletion" is something entirely different; and no one but you seems to think there is a problem with finding the pages. I've already explained earlier in this conversation that finding pages is not the issue. At this point it looks like you're repeating the same questions, and turning cartwheels to avoid using the procedures we have in place. Why are you so averse to using the procedures we have? --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- So, there you go. I was told not to bother with tagging all of the redirects after I moved the pages. I've had a few months of very good and not too "talk about it talk about it talk about it" administration. So, my final question is this: If I mention that all sub-pages are redirects (which would be the case if I hadn't requested help with the moving of the pages); does the administrator doing this mass-deletion have a problem finding the sub-pages? And is it so terribly wrong to mention that in the template?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:36, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes. There are instances where the transcribed pages are tranferred to a new Index. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- EncycloPetey: Is there a situation where the Index: is deleted but it's Page:(s) are not?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I'd say it's not in all cases that {{sdelete}} containing something else than a reason means a page should not be speedied. For example, for indexes getting G4'd as duplicate scans of same physical books, deleting the sub-Page:s makes sense, and could be done without a PD. — Alien 3
3 3 17:22, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- We have Wikisource:Proposed deletions for multiple reasons: To ensure that a page is properly deleted; to allow for discussion because sometimes the Index and pages should not be deleted. The purpose in listing an Index with pages is to be sure that all the pages are also removed, in the event that the Index page is deleted. So that no stray pages have to be hunted down afterwards. In an Index is indeed a duplicate (and not every duplicate has turned out to actually be a duplicate), and if there are multiple pages to be deleted, then either the full set should have every page tagged, or a request should be opened at WS:Proposed deletions. If the Index is a duplicate, an admin may then choose to proceed with the deletion and close it as "speedied", but adding a {{speedy}} tag should not involve a reading exercise with information about other pages to be deleted placed into a comment inside the template. Note also, that requests for deletions should not be made in the Scriptorium. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Either all the requisite pages should be tagged, or a deletion nomination should be posted at Wikisource:Proposed deletions with full information. A speedy deletion is a marker used to indicate an uncomplicated deletion, not requiring additional action. It is for only a single page. The 1=comment is for stating the reason the page qualifies for speedy deletion, so that it does not need to go through the full official process at Wikisource:Proposed deletions. If you have to put something alse in that comment, that is an indication that it does not qualify for a speedy deletion. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:36, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- So, can we mention "and all subpages" in sdelete's 1=comment?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:51, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The issue is not finding the subpages. The issue is knowing that those pages are being requested for deletion too. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I was recently informed that the administrators have a tool which will find all of the subpages. I wonder which information is correct?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:25, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Upcoming Language Community Meeting (Feb 28th, 14:00 UTC) and Newsletter
[edit]Hello everyone!
We’re excited to announce that the next Language Community Meeting is happening soon, February 28th at 14:00 UTC! If you’d like to join, simply sign up on the wiki page.
This is a participant-driven meeting where we share updates on language-related projects, discuss technical challenges in language wikis, and collaborate on solutions. In our last meeting, we covered topics like developing language keyboards, creating the Moore Wikipedia, and updates from the language support track at Wiki Indaba.
Got a topic to share? Whether it’s a technical update from your project, a challenge you need help with, or a request for interpretation support, we’d love to hear from you! Feel free to reply to this message or add agenda items to the document here.
Also, we wanted to highlight that the sixth edition of the Language & Internationalization newsletter (January 2025) is available here: Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter.
We look forward to your ideas and participation at the language community meeting, see you there!
MediaWiki message delivery 08:29, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Transcluding Tarzan and the Lost Empire
[edit]On the Index page for Tarzan and the Lost Empire, we have a minor controversy. It appears some people don't realize that the Ace edition of the book (1962) was published without a copyright notice. On the Index page there's at least one user that seems confused and thinks there might be a seperate copyright for this edition. This is one of the 13:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Okay, I cleared up the copyright description on the Wikimedia Commons file a bit more here. This should eliminate any remaining confusion. Thanks for bringing this to my attention!
- 15:23, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Potus-eo on dark mode
[edit]The text on the bottom bar of the Potus-eo header is extremely difficult to read on dark mode. It appears to be peach on white, though I can't really tell. ToxicPea (talk) 02:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- If dark mode is causing problems (again, of course), it should just be disabled. It is not a priority here, in any case. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
12:36, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Tech News: 2025-09
[edit]Latest Translations are available.
Updates for editors
- Administrators can now customize how the [1]
- The wikimedia.org portal has been updated – and is receiving some ongoing improvements – to modernize and improve the accessibility of our portal pages. It now has better support for mobile layouts, updated wording and links, and better language support. Additionally, all of the Wikimedia project portals, such as [4]
- One new wiki has been created: a Wiktionary in [5]
[6]
Meetings and events
- The next Language Community Meeting is happening soon, February 28th at sign up on the wiki page.
MediaWiki message delivery 00:41, 25 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Contemporary oral histories
[edit]I'd like to ask about criteria for inclusion of contemporary oral history. I am in touch with some academics who have compiled professional oral histories about the impact of covid on local communities in New York City, as well as other topics. They would I think be willing to free-license the texts. The names of the interviewees may in some cases have to be stripped for privacy reasons. Perhaps we could share such oral histories at Portal:Coronavirus disease 2019? Pharos (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- My main concern with this would be around what the participants had agreed to. If they agreed that the (deidentified) conversation could be used beyond the study, then you have a stronger argument. Modern voice recordings are copyright unless there is an explicit release. If the text of the recordings is able to be released, then they belong in Index: space and Mainspace. Portals are for curating content rather than holding content. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 18:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I thought that one of the key things with Wikisource is that the works should have been published in some form. Will these oral histories have been published anywhere ? Perhaps Commons would be more suitable ? -- Beardo (talk) 02:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I was assuming a suitable academic source when I responded. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @Pharos - are these oral histories already published somewhere ? -- Beardo (talk) 23:20, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I was assuming a suitable academic source when I responded. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I thought that one of the key things with Wikisource is that the works should have been published in some form. Will these oral histories have been published anywhere ? Perhaps Commons would be more suitable ? -- Beardo (talk) 02:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Style Question on DJVU: List Chapter-Starts?
[edit]Just a style question, no shade on the tcr guy disagreeing with me (he's been super-helpful with my uploads!); but 02:17, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- We prefer to display page numbers, rather than to describe pages, when that is possible. Sometimes there are pages that do not fit into the numbering sequence, and then there are options. But when pages fall into the numbering sequence, the numbers should be used. The numbers get displayed in the margins of the work when the pages are transcluded. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:25, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah,the numbers displayed as pagelist are used in the rh/lh/rvh templates so using words would mess that up? Is there a way to modify the pagelist system to accept a 31=5="Chapter II"parameter to hold the pagenumber invisibly to give the margin templates but still display the useful text on the DJVU page? Fundy Isles Historian - J (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- That seems to me an unnecessary complication. You have the chapter headings and page numbers in the table of contents. Why do you want the chapter titles in the pagelist as well ? -- Beardo (talk) 14:38, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Fundy Isles Historian - J: I added {{spl}} to the index so that within the Index: namespace, the link goes to the Page:, when transcluded (displayed in the Main namespace) those numbers (in previous years) would link to whatever the last parameter tells it to.
- That seems to me an unnecessary complication. You have the chapter headings and page numbers in the table of contents. Why do you want the chapter titles in the pagelist as well ? -- Beardo (talk) 14:38, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ah,the numbers displayed as pagelist are used in the rh/lh/rvh templates so using words would mess that up? Is there a way to modify the pagelist system to accept a 31=5="Chapter II"parameter to hold the pagenumber invisibly to give the margin templates but still display the useful text on the DJVU page? Fundy Isles Historian - J (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- What you wanted to do would make the mainspace links be "Chapter 1#Chapter 1" and it would display "[Chapter 1]" where "[5]" is actually more interesting and informative. I think putting {{spl}} into your very nicely done table of contents solves what you were trying to do.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Minutes of the Kawthoolei Bloc Political Meeting hold at SHO on 02-04-1956
[edit]This document is linked to an index which is not on English wikisource, but the general wikisource. Is it acceptable doing it like that ? -- Beardo (talk) 03:56, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Heh, I might be wrong here; but that is completely wrong!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I'd say that pages relying on multilingual texts hosted at mulws should also go to mulws, and/or be deleted here as out of scope. — Alien 3
3 3 16:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- It looks like it's all in English, just the scan/index were posted (accidentally?) to mulws instead of enws. Is it possible to move the index from mulws to enws? —Tcr25 (talk) 17:15, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Think so. — Alien 3
3 3 17:24, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- Oh {{iwpage}}!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Though - another issue - I am not sure if the document is actually in public domain. The original uploader marked it with a creative commons licence - which probably referred to the scanning. But was the underlying document PD. It seems that in Myanmar, copyright is authors' life plus 50 years. But I don't know if anyone knows anything about the authors. -- Beardo (talk) 19:17, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Oh {{iwpage}}!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Think so. — Alien 3
- It looks like it's all in English, just the scan/index were posted (accidentally?) to mulws instead of enws. Is it possible to move the index from mulws to enws? —Tcr25 (talk) 17:15, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Index:Deccan Nursery Tales.djvu
[edit]This index is showing Error:Invalid Interval and the transcluded work now shows Error:no such page. I tried purging here and in Commons but that didn't seem to help. -- Beardo (talk) 20:40, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The history is confused, but it looks as though the files was in danger of deletion on Commons, so we had a local copy of the DjVu that was proofread. When the file was "restored" on Commons, our copy was deleted, but the Commons copy does not connect properly to our transcription. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:24, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I have restored our copy for now. someone will need to upload our copy over the Commons copy (because it is damaged). OR we need to get the Commons copy moved without leaving a redirect, then upload our copy to the vacatted name, or some such. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I have tried uploading over the Commons copy with our copy, but Commons identifies it as an exact copy. So there is some technical issue happening with the Commons file preventing it from displaying. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thank you. -- Beardo (talk) 23:33, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @EncycloPetey, @Beardo: if I got it correctly, the file we have here was FileImporter'd to commons over the file they had there, today, after your last messages. Am I right in assuming the local copy can now be deleted as {{now commons}}? Thanks. — Alien 3
3 3 20:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply- There is no history on Commons indicating a new upload. There are only edits to the file description. We won't know if the file works until we delete again. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I've deleted the file again, and all seems fine now. If the problem resurfaces, we can try something else. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:50, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ok, thanks! — Alien 3
3 3 20:55, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ok, thanks! — Alien 3
- @EncycloPetey, @Beardo: if I got it correctly, the file we have here was FileImporter'd to commons over the file they had there, today, after your last messages. Am I right in assuming the local copy can now be deleted as {{now commons}}? Thanks. — Alien 3
- Thank you. -- Beardo (talk) 23:33, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
New Portal for the Russia-Ukraine war
[edit]Portal:Russia-Ukraine war was published last night, along with many official public domain texts from the U.S. and U.N.
- It needs at least some texts from Russian government. Please research and add any official translations of Russian proclamations, executive orders, parliamentary resolutions etc.
- Some Chinese, Iranian, and NATO propaganda on this topic would also be valuable to historians and researchers and enable a more full analysis of the topic. Also someone could blueify this: Ukraine Defense Contact Group with the help of primary source texts cited on our sister projects' w:Ukraine Defense Contact Group.
After U.S. and Russian diplomats met in Riyadh earlier this week, a U.N Security Council resolution has just passed, and the Heads of State of both U.K. and France have visited the White House and given joint press conferences with POTUS.
Ukrainian PM Volodymyr Zelenskyy is meeting with POTUS Trump as I write this, and they may or may not make a joint statement or give a press conference. Alot will happen in the next few weeks, so please do the research and contribute to recording this significant episode in World History. We can aspire to become a hub and resource for historians active on the Ukrainian, Russian and other wikisource projects.
Collegial regards, Jaredscribe (talk) 18:21, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Here are some texts to start researching and redlinks to blueify:
- Letter dated 28 February 2014 from the Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council S/2014/136
- Minsk protocol 2014 September cease-fire agreement. w:Minsk agreements#Minsk Protocol
- Memorandum on fulfilment of the provisions of the Protocol on the results of consultations of the Trilateral Contact Group 2014 September 19
- Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreement (Minsk 2) 2025 February 12
- United Nations Security Council Resolution 2202 2015 February 17th, called on all parties to fully implement the Minsk agreements
- diplomatic correspondence, annexes, addendums and appendices. Portal:Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine, w:Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Steinmeier formula of interpreting the Minsk agreements by German President Author:Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
- Jaredscribe (talk) 22:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
- A significant issue when President Trump Meets with Ukrainian President Zelensky in the Oval Office February 28, 2025 at the whitehouse, was the history and future of Foreign Assistance to Ukraine.
- EU Assistance to Ukraine [7] as of 2025 February 25, according to the Delegation of the European Union to the U.S.
- U.S. Security Cooperation with Ukraine as of 2025 January 20, fact sheet from the U.S. Department of State [8]
- These are my todo lists for next week, but you can beat me to it by blueifing these and doing other research to add public domain texts to our free LIBRARY. Have a good weekend.
- Jaredscribe (talk) 22:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC) IReply
Burmese Textiles
[edit]The source files have been deleted at Commons as not PD (in UK, I assume). It seems that the source was as separtae images in a category. Can anything be done ? -- Beardo (talk) 05:28, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- File:Bankfield Museum Notes, 2nd series, no. 7, Burmese textiles from the Shan and Kachin districts.pdf uploaded locally and the index page created. I have also made a request at Wikisource:Bot requests#Burmese Textiles to move the pages under the new index. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 13:56, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Dark mode interaction with US Stat Sidenotes
[edit]Dark mode causing problems again. The US Stat sidenotes on dark mode are white text on a white box. ToxicPea (talk) 02:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Assuming you mean {{USStatSidenote}}, I don't see anything. eg if you go to Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 1.djvu/468 and turn on dark mode it's white on black. Could you point to where you're seeing problems? thanks. — Alien 3
3 3 14:59, 2 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- The problem is in the mainspace pages such as United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/3rd Congress/1st Session/Chapter 10. My guess is that the issue exists in {{USStatCols}}. ToxicPea (talk) 15:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
EOsubsection
[edit]Could someone please make an {{EOsubsection/s}} and a {{EOsubsection/e}} so I can use it across pages. See Executive Order 14144 for an example of my problem. ToxicPea (talk) 01:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- On that note, could someone with a better understanding of these templates than me please write documentation for this. ToxicPea (talk) 02:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- So it seems like the problem is seen across Page:Executive Order 14144.pdf/2 and Page:Executive Order 14144.pdf/3. I am good-not-great at templates and I have fiddled around with ones that wrap across pages before, but for the life of me, I can't remember any of them at the moment. Can you recall similar /s and /e-style templates that I can reverse engineer? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:15, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The first one that comes to mind for is {{numbered div/s}} and {{numbered div/e}} ToxicPea (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I created the /s and /e. Can you take a look at the relevant pages and confirm output is what you wanted? — Alien 3
3 3 18:17, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- (Note: fixed /e behaviour at 18:19 UTC) — Alien 3
3 3 18:19, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- Yes this is what I wanted. ToxicPea (talk) 18:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- (Note: fixed /e behaviour at 18:19 UTC) — Alien 3
- I created the /s and /e. Can you take a look at the relevant pages and confirm output is what you wanted? — Alien 3
- The first one that comes to mind for is {{numbered div/s}} and {{numbered div/e}} ToxicPea (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- So it seems like the problem is seen across Page:Executive Order 14144.pdf/2 and Page:Executive Order 14144.pdf/3. I am good-not-great at templates and I have fiddled around with ones that wrap across pages before, but for the life of me, I can't remember any of them at the moment. Can you recall similar /s and /e-style templates that I can reverse engineer? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:15, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
March Proofread of the Month
[edit]As a Wikisource project for Women's History month, I've added Virginia Woolf's A Room of One's Own (transcription project), which recently entered the public domain, to Wikisource and to the {{PotM}} template following discussion on the WikiProject page. It's a couple days late, but we have more than four weeks to catch up! -Pete (talk) 04:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I looked hi and lo to find a copy to upload for Public Domain Day, but failed. I'm glad you're more resourceful than me. Thanks for the upload and for encouraging us to collaborate on it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:16, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Glad that worked out! I can't take credit for finding the scan(s), I think EncycloPetey, MarkLSteadman and Alien333 did most of the legwork.
- As Alien333 pointed out, we're already almost done with this work. There are a few suggestions for followup PotM once finished, we could use another voice or two in making a choice: Wikisource_talk:Proofread_of_the_Month#March_2025:_Woman_author (toward the bottom of this very long thread) -Pete (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Tech News: 2025-10
[edit]Latest Translations are available.
Updates for editors
- All logged-in editors using the mobile view can now edit a full page. The "Edit full page" link is accessible from the "More" menu in the toolbar. This was previously only available to editors using the [9]
- Interface administrators can now help to remove the deprecated Cite CSS code matching "
mw-ref" from their local MediaWiki:Common.css. The list of wikis in need of cleanup, and the code to remove, Parsoid, and the deprecated CSS is no longer needed. The CSS for backlinks ("mw:referencedBy") should remain in place for now. This cleanup is expected to cause no visible changes for readers. Please help to remove this code before March 20, after which the development team will do it for you. - When editors embed a file (e.g.
[[File:MediaWiki.png]]) on a page that is protected with cascading protection, the software will no longer restrict edits to the file description page, only to new file uploads.[11] - When editors revert a file to an earlier version it will now require the same permissions as ordinarily uploading a new version of the file. The software now checks for 'reupload' or 'reupload-own' rights,[13]
- When administrators are listing pages for deletion with the Nuke tool, they can now also list associated talk pages and redirects for deletion, alongside pages created by the target, rather than needing to manually delete these pages afterwards. [14]
- The the SUL3 project page for more details and an updated timeline.
- Since last week there has been a bug that shows some interface icons as black squares until the page has fully loaded. It will be fixed this week. [15]
- One new wiki has been created: a Wikipedia in [16]
[17]
Updates for technical contributors
MediaWiki
MediaWiki message delivery 02:30, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Work in Gaelic
[edit]What should be done with a work in Gaelic - Index:Gille dubh ciar-dhubh.pdf -- Beardo (talk) 04:34, 5 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Gaelic is IIRC not in our scope, and there is no gaelic WS (source: Special:SiteMatrix), so it should probably go to mulws. — Alien 3
3 3 07:57, 5 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- Thanks. That is what I suspected. How should that be done ? (There may be other of the Scottish chapbooks like this as well.) Beardo (talk) 15:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Another - Index:Ioram na truaighe, le Issachari M'Aula do Thighearna Assinn.pdf -- Beardo (talk) 16:43, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I believe Alien means multi-language wikisource ( wikisource.org ) - Pete (talk) 16:54, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yes - but how does one move pages between different wikisources ?
- This is where Scottish Gaelic is listed on the main wikisource - 17:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I see. Pasting my answer from PD, which I think applies equally well to both of these works, and regardless of whether it goes to multi-language or Galic wikisource?
- I don't know an automated way to do it, but since it consists of just six pages, it seems like a simple copy-paste job would be pretty quick. I don't think preserving the version history is important, because I don't believe editors own any copyright over efforts to faithfully transcribe something (there is no creative/derivative component of the work). But even if I'm wrong, surely we could just get explicit agreement from the three editors who seem to have worked on it? - Pete (talk) 19:29, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I am sure that there is no need to ask individual editors - and suspect that some were part of the NLS project and no longer active - but the wikis generally like to maintain edit histories. -- Beardo (talk) 00:35, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- When they moved the images from the pedias to the commons, they also maintained the upload history. It should be a matter, for things like this, of adding it to the versioning software directly. There are things that can be done with versioning that we (simple autoconfirmed users and probably even the regular admin) do not have an interface for. I have actually seen some "cherry picking" going on here and at commons previously, via different histories. The people who did that could probably do this legitimate and open versioning thing very easily.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:08, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Assent from the editors is not needed, but we do try to preserve edit history whenever possible. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I am sure that there is no need to ask individual editors - and suspect that some were part of the NLS project and no longer active - but the wikis generally like to maintain edit histories. -- Beardo (talk) 00:35, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I believe Alien means multi-language wikisource ( wikisource.org ) - Pete (talk) 16:54, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Another - Index:Ioram na truaighe, le Issachari M'Aula do Thighearna Assinn.pdf -- Beardo (talk) 16:43, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks. That is what I suspected. How should that be done ? (There may be other of the Scottish chapbooks like this as well.) Beardo (talk) 15:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Universal Code of Conduct annual review: proposed changes are available for comment
[edit]Please help translate to your language.
I am writing to you to let you know that You can provide feedback on suggested changes through the end of day on Tuesday, 18 March 2025. This is the second step in the annual review process, the final step will be community voting on the proposed changes. Read more information and find relevant links about the process on the UCoC annual review page on Meta.
The you may review the U4C Charter.
Please share this information with other members in your community wherever else might be appropriate.
-- In cooperation with the U4C, 18:51, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
License for Elysee.fr and visit of President Macron to the White House
[edit]Visit to Washington February 24 2025 by President of the Republic of France, Emmanuel Macron. This raises three questions, which are likely to re-occur, concerning 1. License options, 2. External Links, and 3. Transcript.
- License options: Stated at The present license is conceived to be compatible with any free license which requires attribution, and in particular with the prior version of this license as well as with the "Open Government License" (OGL) of the United Kingdom, "Creative Commons Attribution" (CC-BY) of Creative Commons and "Open Data Commons Attribution" (ODC-BY) of the Open Knowledge Foundation. On the text in question, therefore, I applied a {{CC-BY}}. Is that adequate, or should we create a new template {{Open Elysee License}} or something like that?
- External Links. The wikisource text I've added reproduces links in the source text, which transcludes from YT and X.com, as you can see here: https://www.elysee.fr/en/legal. Therefore I've just left external links to the Audiovisual content. The text of the Xpost/Tweets that are transcluded on elysee.fr, are considered under the license terms of elysee.fr, so I have copied that text, as it is under a free license.
- Transcript. Neither whitehouse.gov nor elysee.fr released a transcript of the press conference, but instead linked to the video. A transcript is available at C-SPAN.org, and I have not (yet) included it in the wikisource text. Do we have a guideline or best practice on C-SPAN transcripts of U.S. government proceedings?
I'm taking the weekend off. If anyone wishes to continue this work, please do.
This week I've added many other texts related to the Portal:Russia-Ukraine war, and have reorganized and expanded these: Portal:USSR, Portal:NATO, Portal:European Union, as well as Portal:France. Work to be done includes uploading the pdfs that are available on the official websites, and blueifying redlinks found on the portals by adding more texts. Please contribute. Jaredscribe (talk) 23:24, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Dark mode interaction with tables.
[edit]Tables of the variety class="_ba2021_sched2" and possibly others always have dark lines. This somewhat an issue on dark mode in which the lines are barely visible. ToxicPea (talk) 05:05, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I think I figured out the problem. The css styles page for the act's index is something like
- ._ba2021_sched2 {
- margin: auto;
- border-collapse: collapse;
- border-bottom: 1px solid black;
- }
- ._ba2021_sched2 th:nth-child(n+2),
- ._ba2021_sched2 td:nth-child(n+2) {
- border-left: 1px solid black;
- }
- ._ba2021_sched2 th {
- border-top: 1px solid black;
- font-weight: normal;
- text-align: center;
- border-bottom: 1px solid black;
- }
- ._ba2021_sched2 td {
- text-indent: -1.5em;
- padding-left: 2.5em;
- padding-right: 0.5em;
- vertical-align: top;
- }
- "1px solid black" should just be "1 px solid". Could someone have a bot go through each Act of Parliament of the UK and delete the word "black" from any css styles page ToxicPea (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Oh. That's ... one of the reasons we usually use templatestyles.
- How many are there, exactly?
- And also, why didn't people make a template for this?
- The removing is going to be non-trivial, I think, because there might be in all these index css's legitimate uses of it. Even
/border(\-(top|left|bottom|right))?\s*:\s*1px solid black\s*;/sis likely to have false positives. — Alien 3
3 3 17:33, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- I'd assume that nearly every piece of UK legislation with a schedule table would have this problem and possibly non-UK legislation as well. I wouldn't expect to find this on non legislation pages but I can't be sure. ToxicPea (talk) 02:40, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Can we write this up somewhere, a list of styles not to use or that cause problems with dark mode. I, for one, have been using
1px solid blackin the TemplateStyles for several books... Arcorann (talk) 09:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- <rant>This is all, as always, WMF's darn fault. People had made a (relatively) simple invert-style dark mode, which worked in nearly all cases, and caused a few errors for stuff which shouldn't be inverted, for which there was a quick and universal fix: .mw-no-invert. And, then, of course, they felt the need to add this huge mess of a "feature-style dark mode", which essentially the marketing way of saying "you had some exceptions; now you have more exceptions, everywhere, yay!" And, of course, the fixes aren't always simple: if you're lucky, you "only" have to spend fifteen minutes searching through codex's bad color documentation to figure out the right approximation variable; but then, if there isn't a good approximation (because of course codex doesn't just represent the whole palette), then either you know CSS thoroughly and you have to take out the big guns with @media screen, in the end only to redo manually what the invert dark mode did automatically, or you can just tell yourself to go to hell. And of course they throw on the wikis the responsibility of fixing their mess. And to top it all, I haven't yet seen one ducking valable excuse for using this instead of inverting.</rant>
- What causes issues, it's very simple: about every single use of colors. Precise doc is at 10:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- About 5300 uses - unsigned comment by ShakespeareFan00 (talk) .
- That's only the border uses; there are also all the background ones (or have you fixed them all already?). Also, note that the regex times out, which means in the end any number greater than 5300. And also, this is only for black borders; all borders that used fixed colors are problematic in dark mode. — Alien 3
3 3 18:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- That's only the border uses; there are also all the background ones (or have you fixed them all already?). Also, note that the regex times out, which means in the end any number greater than 5300. And also, this is only for black borders; all borders that used fixed colors are problematic in dark mode. — Alien 3
- About 5300 uses - unsigned comment by ShakespeareFan00 (talk) .
- The nigh mode aware background lint error was worked on, I hit the limit of not having admin powers. Not sure about other uses. So treat 5300 ish border uses as a low-end estimate it was only about 500 for Index/Template namespaces, and I tried to carefully migrate some other namespace border uses already. And Yes I note I am also a proflic usesr of 1px solid black directly.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Access to Ancestry resource
[edit]Can someone with access to ancestry.got get me the death date of Alice McClure Griffin, given 09:25, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- 18 Apr 1918, in Gallatin, Kentucky, United States. It is availble via the wikipedia library. Morris80315436 (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks! and thanks also for reminding me of TWL, I keep forgetting it exists. — Alien 3
3 3 11:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks! and thanks also for reminding me of TWL, I keep forgetting it exists. — Alien 3
Request Frog: the Horse.... index be renamed
[edit]The index is currently named Index:Froghorsethatkne00meek.pdf. I had the file on Wikimedia Commons renamed to 21:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Deletion Request: Frog-The Horse....Index
[edit]Could someone please nominated Index:Frog-The Horse That Knew No Master(Froghorsethatkne00meek).pdf for speedy deletion? Based on the information that was posted on its Wikimedia Commons page by ShakespeareFan, I think I got it wrong and was renewed, just in 1960 instead of 1961. Very sorry to have caused anyone trouble with this. None of the pages were ever finished so nothing should cause any problems there. Again, sorry if this caused any trouble. SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Can't you do that ? One of the reasons is creator request. -- Beardo (talk) 03:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I'm sorry, but I don't know how to delete index pages on my own. It says to add the sdelete template at the top of the page but editing indexes is a bunch of fields rather than a regular Wikisource page. I don't know how to delete the index on my own. SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 04:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Actually, I finally figured out how to put the sdelete tag on Indexes. Was not terribly user friendly but doable. SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 04:19, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I normally put the sdelete tag in the table of contents block - that seems to work. With indexes, it is not obvious, true. You can't delete things - only administrators can do that. -- Beardo (talk) 19:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I did indeed get it to finally work by putting sdelete on table of contents. All resolved now. SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 19:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I normally put the sdelete tag in the table of contents block - that seems to work. With indexes, it is not obvious, true. You can't delete things - only administrators can do that. -- Beardo (talk) 19:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Actually, I finally figured out how to put the sdelete tag on Indexes. Was not terribly user friendly but doable. SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 04:19, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I'm sorry, but I don't know how to delete index pages on my own. It says to add the sdelete template at the top of the page but editing indexes is a bunch of fields rather than a regular Wikisource page. I don't know how to delete the index on my own. SurprisedMewtwoFace (talk) 04:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
04:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Dark Hester quotes style
[edit]See Index talk:Dark Hester.djvu - there seems to be a conflict about the quote style. -- Beardo (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- And if we decide to go with curly quotes, is there an easy way to change straight to curly ? -- Beardo (talk) 20:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Changing typographic/curly quotation marks to straight ones is much easier than vice versa. A good semi-automated proxy that I've used is changing
"to“and"to”. I have a user script that puts a find and replace box on every page that I open, so you could copy that if it helps. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Changing typographic/curly quotation marks to straight ones is much easier than vice versa. A good semi-automated proxy that I've used is changing
Tech News: 2025-11
[edit]Latest Translations are available.
Updates for editors
- Editors who use password managers at multiple wikis may notice changes in the future. The way that our wikis provide information to password managers about reusing passwords across domains has recently been updated, so some password managers might now offer you login credentials that you saved for a different Wikimedia site. Some password managers already did this, and are now doing it for more Wikimedia domains. This is part of the [19]
- The Wikipedia Apps Team is inviting interested users to help improve Wikipedia’s offline and limited internet use. After discussions in Join the discussion or email [email protected]!
- All wikis will be read-only for a few minutes on March 19. This is planned at 14:00 UTC. More information will be published in Tech News and will also be posted on individual wikis in the coming weeks.
resolved last week.
Updates for technical contributors
MediaWiki
In depth
- The latest quarterly Growth newsletter is available. It includes: the launch of the Community Updates module, the most recent changes in Community Configuration, and the upcoming test of in-article suggestions for first-time editors.
- An old API that was previously used in the Android Wikipedia app is being removed at the end of March. There are no current software uses, but users of the app with a version that is older than 6 months by the time of removal (2025-03-31), will no longer have access to the Suggested Edits feature, until they update their app. You can read more details about this change.
MediaWiki message delivery 23:09, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Index lua issue
[edit]@CalendulaAsteraceae: All indexes I can find have "Lua error in Module:Proofreadpage_index_template at line 516: data for mw.loadData contains unsupported data type 'function'." now. I suggest we maybe revert at Module:Proofreadpage index template/config until we can sort it out. — Alien 3
3 3 19:07, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- (Note: it has been reverted and issue is now fixed.) — Alien 3
3 3 19:44, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- Thanks. People may still encounter the issue for a while until everything is updated. It's showing up on multiple pages for me, but I find that I can clear the problem with a null edit. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:58, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- How long? I'm still getting it. IdiotSavant (talk) 02:24, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Try 02:29, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Is there going to be a way to clear the problem automatically ? Or will each index need to be done manually ? -- Beardo (talk) 13:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- If we want, we could null-edit all indexes with a bot, but before undertaking mass site-wide actions I'd prefer waiting a week (so until the 18th) to see if it doesn't fix itself. — Alien 3
3 3 17:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- OK. Could a bot do a purge on all indexes ? -- Beardo (talk) 17:59, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- A null-edit is I think about equivalent (for our purposes) to a hard purge. What I mean is that doing a null edit also have the effect of a purge. We could also just purge, if we want to. — Alien 3
3 3 18:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- A null-edit is I think about equivalent (for our purposes) to a hard purge. What I mean is that doing a null edit also have the effect of a purge. We could also just purge, if we want to. — Alien 3
- OK. Could a bot do a purge on all indexes ? -- Beardo (talk) 17:59, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- If we want, we could null-edit all indexes with a bot, but before undertaking mass site-wide actions I'd prefer waiting a week (so until the 18th) to see if it doesn't fix itself. — Alien 3
- Is there going to be a way to clear the problem automatically ? Or will each index need to be done manually ? -- Beardo (talk) 13:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Try 02:29, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- How long? I'm still getting it. IdiotSavant (talk) 02:24, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks. People may still encounter the issue for a while until everything is updated. It's showing up on multiple pages for me, but I find that I can clear the problem with a null edit. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:58, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
FYI: Wikisource and Wikidata together: lessons from the Wikisource Conference
[edit]07:49, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Add text to Proposed deletions directing users to the Multilingual Wikisource
[edit]I imported some content from here to mul.ws today because the work was in Irish. This happens every now and then, so maybe some kind of text directing users here that they can request importing for non-English texts to 17:46, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- This gives some brief who/what/why info: Help:Multilingual Wikisource. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:30, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Adding a note about importing to mul seems a good idea to me. To WS:PD, yes, but I don't think we should add it to {{delete}}, as it doesn't contain that type of information (it's not much more than a link to the PD discussion).
- I've moved this section to the bottom of the page, as it does not appear to me to be a proposal. Feel free to move back if I am mistaken. — Alien 3
3 3 18:41, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply- I thought of it as a proposal, but I'm indifferent to where it's hosted. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:49, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Anchor links
[edit]I'm trying to add anchor links throughout this book, but they're not working the way I had envisioned. When you click the anchor link on an individual page it works just fine, but they don't work properly on the transclusion. I can see what's going on but I'm not sure if there's really anything that can be done about it. Is there another way to do this that I'm missing, or is it a limitation of the module? MediaKyle (talk) 11:13, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- @MediaKyle: If the target is on a different transcluded page, the "subpage" parameter is required. Wee "Wolfville" in djvu page 9. • M-le-mot-dit (talk) 11:23, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Gotcha, I see that now. Thanks a lot. MediaKyle (talk) 11:35, 13 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
'color:black' and related.
[edit]Enough. Various contributors have done various (background-color:black) migrations, across various namespaces.
Which of the approaches is the CONSISTENT and STABLE fix, otherwise the attempted fixes are a waste of time? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:32, 14 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- For the record: as far as I know, there isn't only one solution. Replacing the black by currentcolor, removing it, and replacing it with a codex variable all three work in most cases. — Alien 3
3 3 17:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
<rant>It would be nice as with other issues to have ONE, CONSISTENT and STABLE repair to apply, which can be fixed using AWB in a short period, rather than a hap-hazzard, what 'seems' to work approach, by random contributors. </rant>
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:35, 14 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Okay ,I found the Codex.. And have some idea of which incantations to chant to tame the CSS.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I HAVE HAD IT. Some update I made a while ago doesn't work here and so was reverted. Perhaps someone else can make 'night-mode' behave in a sane way? Until then I'm sorely tempted to just disable the template that's causing the conflict. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Can someone else also please look over Template:TOC templates/styles.css and find the working version, and editprotect it, so I';m not thrashing around trying to NOT solve the problem please? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:54, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Yet another example of dots overlapping. : Index:Mazeppa (1819).djvu , I'm sorely tempted to just start disabling broken templates, until they get repaired. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:28, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Definitely not. The templates seemed working fine until this night mode play started. So, it seems to me that first everything should be made compatible with the night mode without disabling anything, and only after all this will be done the night mode should be deployed. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Perhaps you can figure out why in the instance listed the two templates don't work together? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Definitely not. The templates seemed working fine until this night mode play started. So, it seems to me that first everything should be made compatible with the night mode without disabling anything, and only after all this will be done the night mode should be deployed. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- which.. is ... what .. I ... have ... been ... attempting to do. But some templates DO.. NOT.. WANT.. to work nicely together. Currently {{Dotted TOC page listing}} and {{AuxToc}} - Is there some aspect of overlapping CSS styles that I am missing entirely? With these two templates, I've tried various minor changes to try and get a stable template in BOTH light and dark modes and cannot seemingly pull it together. Can someone else please find the last STABLE versions of all the tempalates I've made attempts to repair, and actually implement something STABLE please? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Stop bothering with {{Dotted TOC page listing}}. It has long been an example of how not to do a template and playing with it further always makes it worse. It needs to die, but is too widely used at present. Also, DTPL and AuxTOC were never intended to work together, so trying to make them play nicely is not worth the candle. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- As stated above , I'm sorely tempted to just disable the template and break stuff in one massive outage, it.. should .. not ... need ... something that drastic to get things fixed.. I've tried various approaches to get working.. NONE worked. In Dark mode trying to set backgroundtext doesn't even actually seem to work properly anyway. FIX the template or it should be disabled immediately, I am FED UP running around in circles trying to improve things, only be told I shouldn't have bothered.. Drain of effort, seriously :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:39, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Stop bothering with {{Dotted TOC page listing}}. It has long been an example of how not to do a template and playing with it further always makes it worse. It needs to die, but is too widely used at present. Also, DTPL and AuxTOC were never intended to work together, so trying to make them play nicely is not worth the candle. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 17:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
I did a quick test with {{Dotted TOC line}} which didn't work either, showing almost exactly the same problem. There should be ONE template that ACTUALLY works, instead of contributors playing hunt the glitch? As I said above, FIX or the templates should start to be disabled. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:50, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I've essentially had enough of playing find the quirk, especially when I can't actually find what went wrong in the first place, and it's not as if 'night mode' is actually something Wikisource asked for.. <rant> ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Of course if CSS had support for actual dot leaders... <rant>.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:07, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
ShakespeareFan00: Here is Inductiveload's toc to toc conversion script. It smartly replaces dtpl with the other one. If you want to massively relieve source from this template, this is how to do it. I make no promises about it fixing the AuxTOC problems, but this script could be run once every 3 months or so and repeatedly fix a lot of problems while allowing the very simplified use of the offending template.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:00, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Your wiki will be in read-only soon
[edit]Please help translate to your language
The Wikimedia Foundation will switch the traffic between its data centers. This will make sure that Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis can stay online even after a disaster.
All traffic will switch on 19 March. The switch will start at 14:00 UTC.
Unfortunately, because of some limitations in MediaWiki, all editing must stop while the switch is made. We apologize for this disruption, and we are working to minimize it in the future.
A banner will be displayed on all wikis 30 minutes before this operation happens. This banner will remain visible until the end of the operation.
You will be able to read, but not edit, all wikis for a short period of time.
- You will not be able to edit for up to an hour on Wednesday 19 March 2025.
- If you try to edit or save during these times, you will see an error message. We hope that no edits will be lost during these minutes, but we can't guarantee it. If you see the error message, then please wait until everything is back to normal. Then you should be able to save your edit. But, we recommend that you make a copy of your changes first, just in case.
Other effects:
- Background jobs will be slower and some may be dropped. Red links might not be updated as quickly as normal. If you create an article that is already linked somewhere else, the link will stay red longer than usual. Some long-running scripts will have to be stopped.
- We expect the code deployments to happen as any other week. However, some case-by-case code freezes could punctually happen if the operation require them afterwards.
- GitLab will be unavailable for about 90 minutes.
This project may be postponed if necessary. You can read the schedule at wikitech.wikimedia.org. Any changes will be announced in the schedule.
Please share this information with your community.MediaWiki message delivery 23:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Template:Dotted TOC page listing
[edit]Okay I was trying to get this working, and it now broken beyond being repaired apparently. I don't know what revert or change made it stop working anymore. Can somone else PLEASE find a STABLE version and lock it, so I'm not going round in circles trying to make this unstable clunker actually BEHAVE! ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
You've made me reconsider if it's actually worth the time to actually care, if technical problems like this are not going to be solveable on a realistic timescale.. Do not make me waste effort on this again! ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Ive now gone all the way back to the last version by a different contributor. And this page is now not rendering properly..
Page:The_Zoologist,_4th_series,_vol_1_(1897).djvu/522. At some point today it WAS working. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:10, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Names of UK Government Statutory Instruments
[edit]I queried that The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 was moved and retitled to Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, when the SI clearly has the former title and was told that most of the other pages in Category:Statutory Instruments of the United Kingdom remove the leading "The". Why is this done? I think it should not be. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:34, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I venture that users have attempted to align with Wikipedia's convention of dropping articles whenever possible (their style guide states that leading articles should be dropped unless they are "inseparable" to the name, and Wikipedia editors appear to have decided that the "the" is not needed for UK legislation). However, Legislation.gov.uk, Wikidata, and Commons files all include "the" for SIs. I'm not sure what Wikisource's style guide is for this, but I would assume we would want to maintain names as they appear in source texts, rather than changing them to align with Wikipedia article conventions. We don't have too many SIs in mainspace yet, so if anyone else has comments, it would probably be best to standardize them now. Currently some have "the" and some do not. Penguin1737 (talk) 17:59, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- What does the semi official SI guidance (seem to recall there is a guide linked on legislation.gov) say on titles? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- The wikipedia style guide says "Do not place definite or indefinite articles at the beginning of titles unless they are part of a proper name ..." - surely they are part of the proper name here ? -- Beardo (talk) 19:05, 16 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Legislation.gov's guidance for ministers and staff writing them states: "The title should begin with ‘The…’ and end with the year in which it is made. The only exception to using ‘The’ in SI titles is when they start with ‘[His] Majesty’s…’". On legislation.gov, "the" is only omitted in a few cases where it appears in the original text, so few that it is likely data entry errors. There are historical SIs without "the" in the title, but they are mainly Acts of Sederunt and Adjornal by Scottish courts.
- I also agree that "the" is part of the proper name of the act, and thus should be included in the mainspace name. Penguin1737 (talk) 00:35, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- General comment There is no problem here at enWS with the definite article being used at the beginning of a title. A defaultsort with the "The" moved to the end of the title should be used, which disposes of the need for redirects. We are not enWP and do not follow their titling rules, as we are reproducing published works rather than writing new articles. If the title, as published, begins with "The …", then there is no question that we should follow suit in our titling. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:08, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Comment I too adopt the practice of dropping the "The" for statutory instruments (as well as other legislation), as it would create a bunch of texts categorized under "T" in relevant categories. The only case that I can think of is in case the "The" forms the name of some organization (as an example, The Legislative Council Commission Ordinance instead of Legislative Council Commission Ordinance). Again, this represents my style — some might well prefer naming texts like Statutory Instruments/1964/1973! My opinion is that (a) if "The" is included, make sure the categorization is based on the second word in the title, and (b) do provide suitable redirects for others.廣九直通車 (talk) 09:39, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- If you want to change how things are indexed in categories, use
DEFAULTSORT:, don't misname them. And use standardised, not personal, styles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply - For information: on the technical side: {{header}} defaultsorts automatically now. e.g. The Lady of the Lake 11:27, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- If you want to change how things are indexed in categories, use
- Comment I too adopt the practice of dropping the "The" for statutory instruments (as well as other legislation), as it would create a bunch of texts categorized under "T" in relevant categories. The only case that I can think of is in case the "The" forms the name of some organization (as an example, The Legislative Council Commission Ordinance instead of Legislative Council Commission Ordinance). Again, this represents my style — some might well prefer naming texts like Statutory Instruments/1964/1973! My opinion is that (a) if "The" is included, make sure the categorization is based on the second word in the title, and (b) do provide suitable redirects for others.廣九直通車 (talk) 09:39, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
FYI, I've now raised the same issue on en.Wikipedia: 11:35, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Tech News: 2025-12
[edit]Latest Translations are available.
Weekly highlight
- Twice a year, around the equinoxes, the Wikimedia Foundation's Site Reliability Engineering (SRE) team performs March 19 at 14:00 UTC.
Updates for editors
- The the unified dashboard, desktop users can now: Translate new sections of an article; Discover and access topic-based Community-defined lists filter, also known as "Collections", from wiki-projects and campaigns.
- On Wikimedia Commons, a new system to select the appropriate file categories has been introduced: if a category has one or more subcategories, users will be able to click on an arrow that will open the subcategories directly within the form, and choose the correct one. The parent category name will always be shown on top, and it will always be possible to come back to it. This should decrease the amount of work for volunteers in fixing/creating new categories. The change is also available on mobile. These changes are part of planned improvements to the UploadWizard.
- The Community Tech team is seeking wikis to join a pilot for the project talk page.
- Starting March 25, the Editing team will test a new feature for Edit Check at on Phabricator. [20]
- The listing of existing translations and documentation to check if their language needs updating or creation.
- The GlobalPreferences gender setting, which is used for how the software should refer to you in interface messages, now works as expected by overriding the local defaults. [21]
[22]
Updates for technical contributors
- Later this week, the way that Codex styles are loaded will be changing. There is a small risk that this may result in unstyled interface message boxes on certain pages. User generated content (e.g. templates) is not impacted. Gadgets may be impacted. If you see any issues please report them. See the linked task for details, screenshots, and documentation on how to fix any affected gadgets.
MediaWiki
MediaWiki message delivery 23:48, 17 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Template:Rbstagedir
[edit]A couple of points about this template.
First, in some works with rhs italic stage directions, if a character name appears in the direction then it is in normal text, not italic. Surrounding the relevant word with '' works fine except if it is the first word, when the template produces the wrong result. This error can be avoided by using the {{normal}} template (see following example).
[My name is Fred.
['Fred is my name.
[Fred is my name.
Second, the template assumes that a square bracket is required, which is not the case with a lot of works. It would be helpful if the template had the option to either include or not include the square bracket.
Regards, Chrisguise (talk) 06:12, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- I'd suggest using classes for the brackets: with something like .wst-rbstagedir-bracket, which could be display:none'd through index CSS. — Alien 3
3 3 06:23, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
The New International Encyclopædia transcription uses fake sources
[edit]The New International Encyclopædia is a transcription of the 1905 version of The New International Encyclopædia. Only problem is, Volume 8 of the 1905 version does not exist on the internet. In a misguided attempt to work around this problem, User:Bob Burkhardt (aka User:Library Guy) created fake source pages for the 1905 volume 8 that he assembled from bits and pieces of volumes 7 and 8 from the 1903 edition, which is substantially different. See Index:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 08. If you zoom in on the actual images used for these pages, you will see that they have been modified in an image editing program, complete with fake page numbers and even a fake volume number. This defeats the entire purpose of having scanned-backed sources, which is to make the text verifiable. For now, I've removed the mapping to the page images on Commons and removed the fake cover image. I've also nominated two of the images for deletion: 18:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Hathi has 18:44, 21 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Nice detective work, Pete! Nosferattus (talk) 18:51, 21 March 2025 (UTC)Reply