User talk:Hesperian/Archive 13

The following text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.

Wikisource User Group

Wikisource, the free digital library is moving towards better implementation of book management, proofreading and uploading. All language communities are very important in Wikisource. We would like to propose a Wikisource User Group, which would be a loose, volunteer organization to facilitate outreach and foster technical development, join if you feel like helping out. This would also give a better way to share and improve the tools used in the local Wikisources. You are invited to join the mailing list 'wikisource-l' (English), the IRC channel #wikisource, the facebook page or the Wikisource twitter. As a part of the Google Summer of Code 2013, there are four projects related to Wikisource. To get the best results out of these projects, we would like your comments about them. The projects are listed at Wikisource across projects. You can find the midpoint report for developmental work done during the IEG on Wikisource here.

Global message delivery, 23:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Old version of WS:AN?

Hi, looks like you've somehow edited an old version of WS:AN as the edits since the rename request have disappeared. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, sorry about that. Fixed. Hesperian 02:36, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

No worries

No worries about the mixup at Wikisource:Administrators' noticeboard. Looks like you cleaned it up alright afterwards so everything's good. Have a great day! :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Scripts

I am definitely interested in scripts, thanks! Susan Susanarb (talk) 16:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

rule

Hesperian, I added rule|4em (don't kill me!) then validated. See watchlist. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 01:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou. Isn't it funny how one can overlook such obvious things sometimes?. Hesperian 01:28, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

You're most welcome. I was reading slow. You were probably typing fast.—Maury (talk) 01:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Quick 'n' easy validations

Hi everyone,

Hi Hesperian! I have the same problem with nobody validating the Southern Historical Society Papers. The short cut to them is SHSP. Pretty please feel free (anyone) to validate some of those volumes. They have been there for a long time and I have proofread many pages. Meanwhile, I will try to help you all on your needed validations -- a working together "swap" for everyone and anyone interested in en.Wikisource. My respects, —Maury (talk) 14:45, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

There were only 2 that I changed to get them closer to the center or at least away from the margin because the books don't have them close to the margin. See watchlist. I marked the 2 as "m" + "Validated". I validated all in your list here. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Tonight I have been plucking some 'low-hanging fruit' by working through a list of very short pages that are proofread and awaiting validation. I am now left with a list of 56 such pages that I cannot validate because I am the proofreader. In case any of you would like to join in and grab some 'low-hanging fruit', those remaining pages are listed below.

<snip>

Cheers,

Hesperian 14:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Maury. Hesperian 00:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

---

---

re: "What the heck?" Hesperian, I saw your message moments ago. On recall, the reason I removed that raw image was because I was about to insert the cleaned image but I got some emails and was sidetracked and accordingly I forgot about inserting the finished image -- many of which are completed and on my hard drive. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 13:50, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

---

---

Roger that, thanks for the explanation. Hesperian 13:51, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Images Not Loading

I'm spending a lot of time reloading pages because the page image doesn't always load the first (or second or third) time. Sometimes, the space for the page image is black with a red X in the top left corner. Sometimes, there is not even the frame for the page image, but instead the editing space extends to the right border of the window. Refreshing the image usually brings in the image, but sometimes I need to return to the index page to try opening it from there. I'm guessing that this is a problem with my set up, not with Wikisource, but I don't know how to fix it. Have you heard of this, and do you know what I can do to make the images load the first time I go to the page? Thank you for your help! Susan Susanarb (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I had already imported Susan's common.js to my own. (It really is a great time-saver. :D) However, nothing much out of the common (no pun intended) has happened to me. Sometimes, none of the images on the site loaded, but that was probably my computer's/browser's problem, because the same happened on all the sites I visited. Maybe the same here? —Clockery Fairfeld (talk) 16:58, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Mine works fine but I understand the nature of the problem on my system when it doesn't work as well as on Susan's pages. I will go to the word IMAGE at the top of my browser and load in the stubborn image and then go back to edit and the stubborn image shows up. I think sometimes the problem exists during the day when there are a lot of people on the system. But her pages are fast on my system now. I use Firefox 22. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you! I have tried Firefox, and had the problem once in 10 pages, which is much better than I had with Internet Explorer. I'm more comfortable with IE, so I'll keep looking for a solution, but this might be the day when I learn to love Firefox! Susan Susanarb (talk) 18:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

But maybe not. While the images load more often in Firefox, I've now had 5 times when they didn't. It's still a puzzle. Susan Susanarb (talk) 19:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Susan, I have been having the same trouble these last few days. I don't attribute it to anything we can fix — over the years Wikimedia's performance has gone up and down from time to time, and we regularly have little periods where page image loading is flaky. And sometimes longer periods. It is frustrating.

Last time it was really bad, I wrote a little script called "halve", which is still in my common.js but I didn't bother to offer it to you the other day. When I click on the "halve" link, it reloads the page image at half the current resolution. Thus (a) it allows to try to reload the page image without having to reload the entire page; (b) it avoids any issues with stale cached thumbs by requesting an image of a different size; and (c) it hopefully overcomes any size/resource limit issues by asking for an image that is only a quarter the size. If the image still doesn't load, you can click it again and it halves again.

It isn't much of a solution but it might be worth a try as a stopgap.

Hesperian 00:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Let me think about that -- I have enough trouble seeing the print as it is, so smaller would be more difficult. I may just treat this as yet another life lesson in patience. :-) Susan Susanarb (talk) 02:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't make them smaller, just lower resolution; i.e. same size but potentially blurrier. Depending on the original resolution, they may not become noticeably blurrier on the first click, but certainly after the second or third. As you say, it's a tradeoff. Hesperian 03:20, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I see -- then I would like to try it, thank you. Also, I can see the first four scripts that you loaded for me, but I can't get it to refresh so I can see any of the others that you gave me. How do I refresh the scripts list? (Also, I love the Cleanup script -- very cool!) Susan Susanarb (talk) 03:59, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I've tweaked it to drop the resolution only 10% instead of by half, and posted it into your common.js. I'm not sure why you're only seeing four scripts. When I copy-paste your entire common.js, unchanged, into my own, I see all 17. I suggest you go to User:Susanarb/common.js and follow the instructions at the top about bypassing your browser's cache. Then go to a page you want to create/edit, go into edit mode, and if you still don't see all 17 scripts then do the same thing (i.e. bypass your browser's cache) on that page too. If you STILL don't see all 17 scripts, then I am bamboozled. Hesperian 04:40, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, your problem is that

1. My script is stealing access-keys. Mediawiki uses Alt-T to takes you to a page's corresponding talk page, but I never ever use that functionality, so I feel justified in stealing Alt-T and using it as a hot-key for marking text up as a title e.g. "THE MAN FROM SNOWY RIVER" -> "[[The Man from Snowy River|THE MAN FROM SNOWY RIVER]]"
2. In order to do that I have to deregister the old access-keys, and in order to do that I am using XPath
3. Microsoft has completely abandoned support for XPath in their latest versions of Internet Explorer (IE9 and IE10). Personally I loathe Internet Explorer, and never use it, so I never bothered to check if my scripts work on it... which they don't, because of the absence of XPath support.

I have commented out the offending line for now, so you should now be able to see and click all the scripts, but the ALT key shortcuts will only work for those keys that were not already assigned. e.g. ALT-T won't work.

And I will have a think about how I might go about deregistering an access-key without using XPath.

Hesperian 05:17, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I must confess that my computer skills are not as advanced as yours, and much of what you wrote (access keys and XPath particularly) here makes no sense to me. However, as you said, I do now see all the scripts that you've loaded for me -- thank you! I had to edit several pages before an image failed to load (it's like seeing a police car only when you don't need one), and I used your Reload script. It worked quickly and well, so thank you for that too! It's now my bedtime, so that's all for me today! Thank you! Susan Susanarb (talk) 05:45, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Meh, somewhat fixed, but still the accesskey only gives focus, rather than activating. Hmmm. Goodnight (or rather, good morning). Hesperian 05:53, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, this has been quite an adventure. All scripts are visible now, and all accesskeys are working. But the scripts that need to detect what text is highlighted are still broken — they work if you manually click, but using the access-key makes the browser "forget" what was highlighted. Hesperian 07:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Good to know -- I don't mind using the links instead of the access keys (I now see what you mean about the access keys). SusanSusanarb (talk) 15:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I still intend to fix this, but I won't have access to IE10 again until Monday. Hesperian 00:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Another alternative

Hello. Pretty much by chance some time just before all your trials and tribulations above commenced (but probably about the start thereof, because I spotted and some of your later changes and incorporated them), I stole a copy of your reload_page_image() script and reworked it as a stand-alone bookmarklet. In case the result is of the slightest use here it is:

javascript:var%20thumbElement=document.getElementById("ProofReadImage");if%20(thumbElement!=null)%20{var%20match=thumbElement.src.match(/-([0-9]+)px/);if%20(match!=null)%20{%20thumbElement.src=thumbElement.src.replace(match[0],"-"+(parseInt(match[1])*11/10).toString()+"px");};};%20void%200

I have no illusions about my changes being particularly clever or efficient coding; but it does work (at least for me), and I am grateful for you coming up with the basic concept for getting round that annoying failure-to-load quirk. MODCHK (talk) 07:26, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

name

Hesperian,

When a person does a name change do they lose all of their edit counts and awards? If not then I would like to change to Maury vs my long-winded name, William Maury Morris II —Maury (talk) 17:59, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Maury,

The situation is a little complex in your case

1. Your edit history, edit counts, etc go with you to the new name.
2. Your user pages will be moved.
3. No text is changed, so wherever you have signed your name that will stay the same, linking to your current user name (which presumably will redirect to your new user name)
4. The name change will only apply here. Your edits on Commons and the English Wikipedia will remain under the old username unless you request a rename there too
5. It will not be possible for you to rename yourself to Maury on the English Wikipedia because there is already a Maury account there with 19 edits
6. There is also a Maury account on Commons but it has zero edits so you may be able to usurp the name.
7. Since there is already a Maury account on the English Wikipedia, normally I would recommend not proceeding with the rename. However, the Wikimedia Foundation have announced their intention of changing the way things work so that all accounts will be the same across every project. I don't know when this will be implemented — it should have happened already but their schedule must have slipped — perhaps Billinghurst has some idea. When the change does comes in, they will have to resolve conflicts by forcing some users to change names. If you change your name to Maury here, then when the change comes in there will be a conflict between the two Maury accounts, and since the other one has few edits, you will have positioned yourself potentially to claim the name Maury across all sites.

How would you like to proceed?

Hesperian 00:30, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Update: this month; see meta:Single User Login finalisation announcement. Hesperian 00:34, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I think the Maury account on English Wikipedia is my old account. I used MAURY there with a lot of edits -- more than 19 but I forgot my password and could not get back in so I used Maury and didn't make a lot of edits. I started on wikis on WikiPedia using MAURY and that can be seen under Matthew Fontaine Maury under the earliest edits and continued with kinsmen like John Mercer Brooke, and others. I came to WikiPedia from a genealogy background and perspective and wrote about what I knew for positive. It connects to many other articles both new and already started. I was a beginner. I realized I shouldn't have used all caps. I abandoned wikipedia and came to en.wikisource. At first I wasn't aware of the complexities of using a different name and I believe it was later when a name went "global". So, due to the complexities let's leave things as they are. Here I was being called WMM, WMM2 &c. but I figured out how to at least leave my real name as just "Maury" even though the full name shows in the watch area. It is no big deal leaving it as it is on en.WikiSource now. Since all is going Global perhaps I may make a short name change after I think on this within a few hours today. Perhaps my grandfather's name which is very short. If I do not want the change to something like Sam then I will not post here on this issue within those hours mentioned. There are places elsewhere that I may not want my full name as shown. In the past I was not used to systems where one could not make a name change several times. I encountered the difference on WP and here on WS. For example, I still have my alternate account where I worked on the books on the Exploration of the Amazon Valley here on WikiSource. I used both accounts here but not in the format we use today. I wasn't even familiar with what we do here today. Billinghurst watched over and helped me on some things in that area where no book pages were involved -- just text and no god-forsaken transclusions &c. and the rest of whatever codes are here. It was more like Project Gutenberg and a real pleasure to work with. I also didn't have to worry about having my work validated (I recently did that for you so you do understand the need for validating which I get very little of and feel helpless about -- an uncomfortable and very depressing feeling) by strangers &c. I love the books and I admire the people here and while I once didn't care about POTM awards I now want all I can earn. I believe new people that come here run into too many complexities, may perhaps try a few edits and leave for other areas due to the complexities here with so many codes. If I had just arrived here as a beginner I would look at the books and probably end up at Project Gutenberg for more than one reason. It may be due to the complexities for beginners here that Project Gutenberg has as many workers as it does. Many works there are plain vanilla ascii aka text and others have colors under hypertext markup language and people get at least get credit for the work that they do. But I do understand the value of working here as well as the trials and some of the code complexities which are a challenge. Thank you very much. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 07:26, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

decided

Hesperian, I have looked at my older accounts and works and in conclusion. No name change due to complexities of all kinds, I prefer not to change anything with the full name I use now, William Maury Morris II —Maury (talk) 08:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Roger that. Hesperian 13:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Validating

I've found the Proofread of the Month page, and have added a couple of volumes. Then I thought I should return the favor, and validate some pages. I've validated all of the Library of Congress Classification Outline, number 7 on the Queued list, except for one page. I saw that two of the columns were wrong, and didn't know how to fix them. I later figured out the columns, so went back to fix them. Unfortuantely, I could only change the status back to Proofread, not Validated. So it's all done but for that one page. If it were done, I'm not sure I understand what to do next. Move it to the Running list? Or the Finished list? Susan Susanarb (talk) 20:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Susan,

I don't participate in PofM so I don't know about queued lists, running lists, etc. But I've validated that last page for you....

Hesperian 00:45, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks -- I'll ask someone else. Susan Susanarb (talk) 01:58, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Villette source file

fixed. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:12, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Common.js

Hello! I'm hoping you can help me again. Because of your encouragement, I've tried to modify my Common.js file to move scripts around and to create a few more that would be handy. But I've failed at both. Could you please take a look? The list of scripts is basically in the right order, but the last that appears when I'm editting text is the circumflex shortcut -- none of the others appear. I've tried changing the codes a bit, but nothing I've done makes them appear.

I also wanted to create scripts for three more shortcuts: SIC, center, and right. None of the other shortcuts seemed to be close enough in function for me to just copy the language and replace with the SIC, center, and right. Would scripts for these three be possible? I think (without knowing what I'm talking about, of course) that these three are basically the same things -- well, SIC is quite different, now that I think of it. But could you please create these for me? And fix what I've messed up?

Many, many, many thanks. Susan Susanarb (talk) 22:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I have fixed a couple of unmatched braces. I can only test it by copying it over the top of my own js file, so I think I'll be lazy and simply ask you, is it fixed now? If not then let me know and I will copy it into my js file and debug. Hesperian 01:37, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

As for the other three, some time in the next week or so I will find time to get highlighting working for you on IE10. Once that is working I will whip up SIC, center and right for you. Hesperian 01:43, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and lastly, continue to be bold in trying things out in your js file. It's how we all learn. You can always go into your history and revert to a good version, and I'm always happy to help you debug. By the way, are you aware that you can hit F12 in IE to pull up a bunch of developer tools? It's very powerful — you needn't understand everything it can do all at once — but as a starter, you can go to the "Script" tab, display the console, reload a page and watch for any error messages. Hesperian 02:28, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I can see all of the shortcuts now. But I think you've unleashed a dangerous wildcat by telling me how to do this . . .  :-) Susan Susanarb (talk) 02:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

All your scripts should be working with accesskeys now, and I have added center, right and SIC for you. Let me know if any problems.

1. center wraps the highlighted text in {{center|}}. I gave it accesskey "m" for 'middle'. By default, "m" is the accesskey for moving a page, so you've lost that.
2. right wraps the highlighted text in {{right|}}. Accesskey "r" is the default key on Firefox for reloading the current page, which I didn't want to mask, so I gave it accesskey ".", which has the right arrow ">" on it too. By default, "." is the accesskey that takes you to your homepage, but I'm guessing you didn't know that and don't use it... seeing as you don't even have a homepage yet. Meanwhile, if you are definitely going to stick with Internet Explorer to the indefinite future, then it should be safe for you to claim accesskey "r".
3. Applying SIC when the highlighted text is "asthetic" will replace it with {{SIC|asthetic|[asthetic]}} The first argument is the text as it actually appears. The second is supposed to be the presumed correct text. I included the highlighted word again on the assumption that the presumed text will be nearly the same, but I wrapped it in braces as a reminder that it needs fixing.

As we claim more and more accesskeys, things get messier and messier. I encourage you to set your own preferences for accesskeys. For example, you might like to use "c" for center instead of small-caps. To change an accesskey for small-caps from "c" to "k", find the line that says

regexToolWithShortcut('small-caps [c]','smallcaps()', 'c');

and change it to

regexToolWithShortcut('small-caps [k]','smallcaps()', 'k');

To remove the accesskey altogether (so that small-caps can only be triggered with a mouse click, change it to

regexToolWithShortcut('small-caps','smallcaps()', null);

Also, if I'm not mistaken, IE lets you have different access keys for lower and upper case, so, for example, you could set "c" for small-caps, and "C" for center.

Over to you!

Cheers, Hesperian 04:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Many Thanks! I'm going to use these a lot, and explore the possibilities of it all. Susan Susanarb (talk) 17:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Delete

The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (1920 John Murray edition) because _______ ?

George Orwell III (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

It was kept [1], and the delete tag not removed. Hesperian 02:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Even better (one less proposal to work). Thanks. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Commons usurped?

Sorry to be a pain, but can you look into the deletion proposal on Commons for File:Ian Charlton.ogg against our local upload of File:Ian Charlton .ogg (note the space before dot oh-gee-gee)? [same file size for both]

At face value this looks like an attempt to include the File here on WS because it failed to meet some MP3 limitation over on Commons - as well as having improper/invalid licensing to begin with - but I can't be sure since I'm Commons-Clueless for the most part (plus clueless about .ogg/.mp3 guidelines overall). Can you help? -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

File is indeed encoded as an MP3. The MP3 format is patent-encumbered, so not a "free" format. I think the rule against MP3 encodings is more than just a Commons policy — it is a Wikimedia Foundation policy, and the servers don't even support it, hence it is showing as "Invalid OGG file". It's a pretty simple matter to re-encode in Vorbis instead of MP3. I am doing so now. Assuming it works okay, I'll upload over the top. No interest in sorting out the licensing issue though. I suggest speedy deleting the Wikisource file as both invalid and redundant to the Commons file. Hesperian 04:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Commons file is now a valid OGG Vorbis file. Licensing issues are unresolved. Hesperian 04:54, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again. -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:22, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

/* Notes */

Hesperian,

Would you please be so kind as to show us the brief and correct method to sign this? [[2]] It only appears to look proper under "proofread" but when formatted it doesn't. Neither Beeswaxcandle nor I do it properly. A formatted page shows that. It will all run together in a formatted page. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 20:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Well it's impossible to know how the author/typesetter would have intended for the sign-off to appear on a computer screen, but in these situations I tend to treat it as right-aligned with an offset. i.e.

{{right|Yours sincerely,|6em}}
{{right|{{sc|Howard R. Garis.}}|1em}}



{{nop}}

I'm not at all sure that I've understood your question. I hope that helps. Hesperian 00:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

This is really a "cleanup" question, as when those lines were formatted the way I did them, invoking the cleanup script collapses the lines back into one. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah, as to that, here is the fix: [3]. Hesperian 03:14, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

May as well catch the other cases while we're at it: [4]. Hesperian 03:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

advice

Hesperian, I would like to have some advice if you don't mind. Question:- regarding Southern Historical Society Papers (volumes); a very good editor has started using "blockquotes" on a volume. He states it openly on the watchlist. However, the original volumes do not have the text shown in a blockquote pattern. My understanding is that we all are to duplicate works as exact as possible. So, is the use of blockquote allowed? I don't think so but I want to make sure before he goes too far in the use of blockquote which is a form of indentation of many lines. I myself would like to illustrate the volumes but I know that would not be accurate when compared to the original volumes. Very Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Maury. It's not for me to say what is "allowed"; I can only give you my opinion. My opinion is that Page:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 02.djvu/23 (for example) is not faithfully transcribed, due to the introduction of indentation not present in the original. If it were not already validated, I would decline to validate it. Hesperian 00:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, sir. I fully agree. —Maury (talk) 00:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Takeover of my hard-worked project after the hardest of the work completed ?

[[5]]

I think an argumentative problem starting to brew amongst a user/s taking over the easy image work after I have completed the hard editing (text with lots of ships in italics) work.—Maury (talk) 03:37, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Can you please change my username from "Guycn1" to "Guycn1 (unused)"? Guycn1 (talk) 19:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello! I could do, but why? Hesperian 02:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Because I want to create a new global account called "Guycn1." --Guycn1 (talk) 17:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand. The Guycn1 account is already attached to a global Guycn1 account. If I rename it locally, it will be detached, leaving you free to create a new Guycn1 account, indistinguishable from the one that you asked me to move. So why move it? Hesperian 00:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

raw

Hesperian, can raw images be in the finished mainspace as used in the manner they are presented in this book? They aren't cleaned and I have never seen images used this way. They always go to Commons and are placed in a category but not these. Index:Panama-past-present-Bishop.djvu It's a very curious situation. —Maury (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm feeling pretty positive about it myself. This was the whole point of creating the raw template; if an image is good enough to display as-is, then we do so. Only if it isn't good enough to display as-is, do we display a big ugly error box. Hesperian 06:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then images are a lot easier. All of us who have been downloading images and cleaning them up until now didn't have to do that cleaning, &c. Images can be as discolored as in the old books as opposed to looking like the book when the book was new. Best to let Ineuw know this because he is making the Popular Science images perfectly clean when they can remain dirty as the books. But he is a hard-working perfectionist. —Maury (talk) 11:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Isn't there a problem when a person/people come to en.ws and decide they want that book with the discolored images but know that when it is printed out it will not only be a messed up book but also the discoloration around every image also uses a lot more ink? Yes. Now imagine many books or all books done in that manner. The raw image is great for a place marker but not as the final images in an un-completed book. I know that I can change them but my project already has 200 images and I have another project waiting. The problem I see is setting a bad precedent for upcoming books. Kind regards, —Maury (talk) 12:55, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

We still want to replace the raw images with cleaned-up images. The purpose of the raw images is give readers something rather than just a box that says "There should be an image here." Also, the raw images are here on enWS, while the final images need to be on Commons. It's also a way of providing a high-quality image for cleaning so that we don't have to go back to IA and find them for them for ourselves. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:52, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Beeswaxcandle, you are saying what I have been trying to get across. The editor used raw images as a finished product unless someone comes along and cleans them all. Usually we see cleaned images placed in the Index page which get transcluded but not in this situation which is what caught my eye. You know I am particular about good images in our books. I view Hesperian's work only as a marker to be replaced by cleaned images. Okay, let us wait to see what that editor does with those images in the mainspace. —Maury (talk) 23:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Maury, I misunderstood the issue you are raising. This use of these images outside the {{raw image}} / {{missing image}} templates is not what they were intended for, and I am opposed to it. I will reflect on what actions need to be taken e.g. educate the user, update the documentation, revert the pages to problematic, etc.

I have no objection to these images being uploaded to commons as-is:— in taking on this raw image project it was never my intent to set myself up as arbiter of image quality. But the direct use of the raw Wikisource images will disrupt my process, so this will need to be addressed.

Hesperian 02:23, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you and that's okay about misunderstanding since every person does it in life. I was really getting confused that you would want a book finished with uncleaned images. I was more concerned that others would start doing the same thing. I thought that perhaps that editor was not finished but he went to two other books to work on. Before he did those images I thought perhaps I might do them and I therefore asked him in the open what was he going to do about the images -- thinking I might do them if he had not planned on doing them. I received no reply so I thought, "to heck with them". Still, it bothered me that they could remain on en.wikisource like that. Through the years I have gotten more and more and very protective of en.wikisource. Wikisource is a friend just as the people here are considered to be friends by me. Most people here are incredibly nice (like you and others) and have been that way ever since I met you. I like that kind of life. It makes a wonderful world. It's sad the real world isn't more like wikisource! It may sound silly but I am serious.

I suggest do not bother that specific editor because he does excellent work editing text but educate the masses via documentation. That will keep the peace and keep the editor. Then I still may clean those images. Besides, Panama has a special place in my mind via the Darien Exploring Expedition (1854) when Americans (USN) 1st found the way from the Atlantic through the Isthmus (jungle) to the Pacific although many died. Lieutenant John Minor Maury, nephew of Commander Matthew Fontaine Maury was on that expedition and played a very important part. Matthew sent kinfolk to the dangest places! He sent William Lewis Herndon to Explore the Amazon Valley and all kin possible he had live and work at the National Observatory (later Naval Observatory) Soon, I will try to get an excellent and heavily illustrated book here on The History of Panama with superb illustrations and color maps even though it supposedly is for Young People but gee, I am only 66 so that's young enough. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 09:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Question about how best to deal with an anonymous letter in the middle of a collection

Hi, Susan's got a situation that I'm not sure how best to handle. Can I invite you to User talk:Beeswaxcandle#Anonymous Author to share your thoughts? I'm asking ResidentScholar as well as he may well have thought through this kind of thing before. Many thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Page:Secret history of the French court under Richelieu and Mazarin/Chapter I/Page 1 ...

You had a hack at this at one point ages ago. Seems to be an archaic attempt at something, that has long been abandoned. I was thinking that I would just substitute the transclusion it to the main ns, so it sits at the main ns just like any other work not supported by scans. Thoughts? Disagreements? — billinghurst sDrewth 09:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Same old Commons timeout

I patched File:Proceedings_of_the_Linnean_Society_of_New_South_Wales,_Volume_44.djvu with the place-holders you marked it with but of course I can't upload it to Commons.

Its uploaded locally as File:Linn.djvu - I trust you can move it, adjeust the pagelist and all the rest? -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thankyou! Hesperian 08:53, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up my mess with Atharva-Veda Samhita. Prosody (talk) 11:18, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy to! Hesperian 06:38, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Hesperian, (1st.) I like the HesperianBot. (2nd) If you encounter works that need images worked on about Mexico, Mesoamerica, or South America, please give me a heads up. I enjoy such projects. (3rd) Not long ago, and I think I posted here but presently I cannot see above as I type this, a fellow used HesperianBot images to complete a book. I intended to replace those so I would like to know where that book is and it's title. If I had thought of this #3 ahead of time I would have looked back through my posts here (Shrug...) but I'll look after I send this. Have a great day! Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 09:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Maury, (1) Thank you for the support :-); (2) Wilco; (3) I assume it was Index:Panama-past-present-Bishop.djvu. You also have a great day! Hesperian 10:41, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The "support" is just a matter of making sense. I am glad we have it. The HesperianBot filled blank pages. Tell Yahn, or however he spells it, to take a "GASP!" at Index:Panama-past-present-Bishop.djvu to see how that looks when using raw images. If nothing else there is discoloration. Besides, down and uploading images are both a part of "volunteering" and following established rules/guidelines on en.ws I am uploading images now and placing them after I leave here. Often images have problems (crack on torn image &c.) and those need to be worked out along with the images being cleaned. Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 10:57, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Macmillan logos

Just wondering why Macmillan logos in some texts were replaced by another when the originals were adapted from their specific text?

Original edits:

• Machiavelli
• The Recluse

Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Howdy! I figured that it doesn't make sense for us to have twenty, thirty, forty, even a hundred images of the same logo; and I figured people would rather not have to go to the trouble of cleaning up the same logo image over and over again, so I created {{Macmillan logo}}. I used File:Macmillan header ornament.png because it has a generic filename and a transparent background. That image isn't ideal because it is low contrast, but it was the best I could find at the time. The template can be changed at any time to use another image, and ultimately I'd like to see it point at a high quality SVG version of the logo.

If you object, feel free to revert. I assumed this would be approved by the community: perhaps I misjudged.

Hesperian 00:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with using a generic template (I just liked "mine" better ). I'll keep my eyes open for one with better contrast. Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I just upped the contrast myself. Hesperian 01:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Please excuse my putting my own 2¢ in as well.

As another "recipient" of the template I think the idea is basically sound. I admit to not being the most competent image manipulator around (Huh! who am I kidding?) so am happy to take advantage of the best image around.

Now doesn't this beg the issue that nobody has (yet) created a Portal: for Macmillan Publishers (which would be the logical place to look for these sorts of "common" items)?

I never know quite how to kick these things off myself, but if nothing happens after a week or so I might give it a shot.

Regards, Viewer2 (talk) 08:54, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

It turns out Macmillan have deployed three different logos over the years. It's not yet clear to me what years etc they apply to, but the template will need a name change, there will need to be others, and we will definitely need a 'logical place to look for these'. Hesperian 09:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the "logo evolution" before, so if it helps this & this in combination proves the current template is valid for 1893. Viewer2 (talk) 09:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• 
  1
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4

1. is templated; 2. needs to be; 3. may be a one-off, or at any rate is very rare; I suspect 4. is used for an academic line of books rather than being date-constrained. Hesperian 10:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Also note the ampersand in 1. but not 2. I suspect this maps onto a name change from/to "The Macmillan Company" to/from "Macmillan and Company". Hesperian 10:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

On further investigation: originally named "Macmillan & Co.". It opened an American branch, then in 1896 sold it off, the American sell-off thenceforth trading as "The Macmillan Company". Hesperian 10:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I have tentatively created Portal:Macmillan and Company as promised earlier (which even—and probably controversially—contains a link right back here. I am nearly certain that of itself breaks a namespace-crossing-link tapu/tabu/taboo.) I am sure I have made many mistakes in style and both ex- and in- tent and look forward to learning more from people's corrections (huge hint!) I based the list, as you can probably tell, upon works which already link to "your" {{Macmillan logo}} logo template. Obviously this technique will miss works, but at least gives what I feel might be a reasonable starting point. Thoughts? Viewer2 (talk) 03:40, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Very nice, thank you very much. Also thank you for 'crediting' me but I think Wikisource would be improved by removing that. I will bump the creating-new-templates task up my task list. Hesperian 04:03, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I feel like I may have awoken the Western Leviathan. So much activity! I hope you do not mind, but I linked a couple of the templates back to the new portal in preference to them initiating a popup (might be a gadget specific to my preferences?) implying another publication than the one using the template. Also, noticed in passing that somehow you had renamed/moved {{Macmillan logo}} to {{Macmillan and Company logo}}, but the corresponding {{Macmillan logo/doc}} entry was left behind. I tried moving this to {{Macmillan and Company logo/doc}} which to my mild surprise seems to have worked. Please double-check me! (I don't want people to erroneously think that I might know what I'm doing.) Viewer2 (talk) 07:45, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

(Stories Revived) Three Volumes

(Imported from George Orwell III's talk page —Maury (talk) 00:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC))

72 Stories Revived

Hiya,

I assume you have seen or will soon see Index:Stories Revived (3 volumes, London, Macmillan, 1885), Volume 3.djvu. On further reflection I have become very keen to simply overwrite the entire three volumes with the Hathi Trust 'University of Michigan' scans, should they prove to be better than the rather awful Google scans I have uploaded. What is the process for this? Is it 'all part of the service' for George Orwell III? Or are there people around who have expressed a willingness (and ability) to provide Hathi Trust volumes to those of us who cannot get access? Having obtained the volumes, I guess the next step is to contribute them to the Internet Archive and then wait patiently for IA to roll us a djvu?

Hesperian 04:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

---

Hesperian,

I do not have full access to HathiTrust (try this anyhow=> http://www.hathitrust.org/home

When I get books from there I download one .PDF page at a time. That isn't too difficult when someone is used to it. But then all downloaded .pdfs need to be placed into one pdf and then all of the ads need to be removed.

The books there have stamped on every page ads about Google and a University such as U.California but typically U.Michigan and the quality with Google is the same - usually poor.

However someone with a complete download of a .PDF file may get a better .PDF File - I don't know and the question should be posted elsewhere in the open to find out if someone has that full access.

With 3 volumes it becomes one heck of a 'task just to prepare editing out ads for google and whatever university. Volume 1 that you listed last page is not legible. I just looked moments ago. This was with one look as there are probably other copies from elsewhere on HathiTrust.

I downloaded an Illustrated (in color) book for Beeswaxcandle one page at a time and did what needed to be done. I emailed the images for Ineuw to clean and set up to be inserted into the text areas being transcribed. Neither Ineuw nor Beeswaxcandle had access to any part of HathiTrust but I could and still can seen whatever is there and download pages one at a time and then process them. (See on en.ws Flowers of New Zealand for results of our teamwork)

Once a volume, or a book, is downloaded and ads removed it needs to be placed on IA to be transformed into several formats including .djvu files for text but which is bad for images.

Therefore the images are obtained once again and cleaned and uploaded to wiki-commons and then into the desired en.ws pages.

In short, all of this is long process with some works being easier than others.

Take a look at Flowers of New Zealand to see what can be done with teamwork.

Respectfully, —Maury (talk) 00:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Galaxy added to list

... hope you don't need it soon.

Real reason I'm posting is 'cause I saw your 'double ampersand encoding' edits to PageNumber.js and was wonder what that was all about.

You should also be made aware, if not already - took an axe to parts of Commons.js recently (hope that had nothing to do with whatever you were just dealing with <gulp>). -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

No, no rush. If I really wanted it done and really needed your help, I would come begging. At the end of the day, I am capable of doing these things myself. I'm a bit clumsy, and the outcome isn't always optimal, but I muddle through. But thanks.

For explanation of ampersand stuff, see my Scriptorium post which I ended up deleting after I fixed the problem myself: [6].

In case we don't interact again over the next couple of days, have yourself a great Christmas!

Hesperian 03:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Ah... understand completely now. fwiw... I believe image titles having some sort of punctuation in them was a bugzilla not too long ago as well.

Thank you and Happy Holidays to you & your's -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:21, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Hume

Hi Hesperian, I just noticed you made an edit to part of Hume's Treatise of Human Nature. I think I might have uploaded a redundant file. Can you take a look here? Page:Treatise of Human Nature (1888).djvu/2 I don't know what the best path forward is -- if I uploaded something unnecessarily, probably best to delete my upload. But, I don't know which has the higher scan resolution, the better text layer, etc. Thoughts? -Pete (talk) 04:14, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

RedLink bugzilla

Hi,

Tracked in PhabricatorTask T61097

I came across your bugzilla on the lack of redlink=1 by happenstance while trying to solve something else, but I wanted you to know I was able to duplicate it even under the upcoming wmf8 upgrade's (see here) testbed. The fact .png image files were substituted for the text on those vector tabs is irrelevant - even the text-based vector tab linkage is in "blue" rather than "red".

I would add (if I could ever recover my account there) that the "blue" next, prev and up graphical arrow-heads are just as misleading to the newcomer for similar reasons. If the "next page" hasn't been created yet, the next-tab text or the next-tab arrow-head both should be showing "red", if you follow. -- George Orwell III (talk) 12:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

That was a quick discovery; I only posted it a few hours ago! I agree re the need for "blue" presentation. If it can't be dynamically red or blue according to the existence of the target, then it should be a neutral black.

Also related: a four-year-old enhancement request that was disregarded: [7]. Hesperian 13:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Well when you have no toolbar more often than not, its hard not to go nuts looking for workarounds. And I can see how that denied enhancement would be a problem for some folks too. Locking in the same number of tabs and just having the color indicators change seems the best route to take - less resizing, collapsing etc. Oh well - its not like he is around anyway.

Back to the redlink thing - for some reason the class="new" attribute is no longer being added to relevant <A href=... ></A> tags (or similar tag dealing with navigation). I just can't tell if the lack of that class & value is causing &redlink=1 not to be generated at the end of the url string or vise versa. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Fwiw... this seems to be fixed in wmf9 (go here and then back a page or two). Its a stupid long title to begin with but if you look closer - its there. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Admin confirmations

Hi, Hesperian, a very Happy New Year to you.

I’ve put up this month’s admin confirmations, could you please go over it to see I haven't broken anything or done anything wrong? Oh, and just a thought -- I've also updated the timeline, but I’m not sure that what I’ve done is what is usually done… could you look over it?

Thanks again. Regards,—Clockery Fairfeld (talk) 11:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Seems to be all correct; well done. Hesperian 11:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. :) —Clockery Fairfeld (talk) 11:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you also for keeping me on my toes. I think this may be the first time I haven't remembered the admin confirmation closures on the first of the month. Heaven knows how long it would have taken me if you hadn't stepped in. Hesperian 11:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Just a lucky catch on my part. And anyway, if I hadn't done it, no doubt someone else would have. :) Thank you! —Clockery Fairfeld (talk) 12:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

On a completely unrelated issue, could you please update the FTC archives as well? They are already archived, but they need to be shown on the main archive page as well. Thanks,—Clockery Fairfeld (talk) 13:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking, but my response will be that I'm not very active in that corner of the community, and would prefer to leave those who are active there to manage their archiving. Hesperian 13:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay then. Thanks anyway. —Clockery Fairfeld (talk) 14:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The above text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.