User talk:AdamBMorgan/Archive 10

← Archive 9

AdamBMorgan — Talk Archive 10

Archive 11 →

All talk threads for the first quarter of 2013

Weird tales, Amazing stories etc.

Hi Adam, there have been a few stories added in the last few hours, but the names don't seem to be right. I'm not sure where to move them to before I add the missing headers. Could you please have a look at Special:Contributions/85.238.110.36, Special:Contributions/130.0.50.226 & Special:Contributions/130.0.41.29? (I've assumed for the time being that there are no copyright issues for these particular stories.) Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Most of the material I've seen is mostly OK so far. It might take a little longer than normal for me to check everything (my latest problem is with my ISP; so I'm only able to log on from work, at lunch etc) but I'll get through everything soon. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Further contributions from Special:Contributions/79.140.1.108, Special:Contributions/130.0.48.32, Special:Contributions/130.0.53.149, Special:Contributions/130.0.53.35, & Special:Contributions/85.238.126.227. I copied your message over from the previous 85.238 to this one as most likely the same person. I'll find some time to add headers and if I pick up any copyvio I'll tag them. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:40, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Header template and years

I just noticed that we didn't get to having the year = &c. variations documented at {{header}}. Would you be able to do it? Thx. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Done I vaguely recall some discussion about whether it should be documented or not but I can't find anything about that now. I might be confusing it with something else. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. It was pumpkin hour and I was growling as I couldn't remember how, pulling open other templates … so it needs to be documented. We may wish to deemphasise it, so we could put it inside a collapsed box OR we could look to getting some basic instructions, and some hifalutin instructions. I made some comment within the week in the Help:Style guide about the author page style in conjunction with the template, and maybe we should be looking to do the same for main ns. Sort of "plain vanilla" vs. "choc chip, dutch, sprinkles, in a waffle cone". — billinghurst sDrewth 05:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean within the template documentation or on a separate page (such as a help page or a process page in the Wikisource namespace)? The laziest quickest way to deemphasise them would be the separate the parameters into "Basic parameters" and then "Advanced parameters". The basic parameters could be limited to just those that appear in the pre-loaded vesion of the header. If you think a separate page would be best, a help or process page covering the use of either headers or dates (in both the main and author spaces with the latter) might work. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

RE: February news

Good to me. I made some little changes, but the overall story is more than OK. I'm also going to write about another new site, the Assamese (ISO code: as) Wikisource.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 22:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Use of "width" parameter in {{overfloat image}}

Hello.

I have been collaborating with Londonjackbooks on a use of the above template (discussion―long!―User_talk:MODCHK#Overfloat_image_help_request if you want the gory details), and have come to the conclusion her case may justify adding a few more optional control parameters for the item_x blocks in such fashion as not to impact current usage. This part at least I am pretty confident I have already worked out; however in looking closely at the existing template I noticed this construct which has remained pretty much unchanged since you created the original template, apart from being (essentially) duplicated a few more times than then:

{{#if:{{{vpos|}}}
 |{{#switch:{{lc:{{{vpos|}}}}}
   |t
   |top
   |#default=top
   |b
   |bottom=bottom
  }}
 |{{#switch:{{lc:{{{vpos1|}}}}}
   |t
   |top
   |#default=top
   |b
   |bottom=bottom
  }}
}}:{{{y1|{{{width|{{{y|0}}}}}}}}}px;

Please pardon my adding line-breaks for (I hope) clarity of the logic. My concern is the use of "width" on that final line. I simply cannot see the logic of "width" ever substituting a default value if "y1" is omitted; and worse, if "width" were indeed specified, it would hide "y" at least for item1. The semantics don't even work as why should a horizontal concept like "width" ever be controlling a vertical "y" offset?

In short can you see any real harm if I remove this reference to parameter "width" for each of the five "item" blocks, and simply leave it controlling only the <div style="position:relative;> directive wrapping the entire template code?

I hope I have expressed this sufficiently clearly.

Regards, MODCHK (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I honestly can't remember why I did that and it looks like I did not document the template with comments at the time. I should note that I copied the code from something User:T. Mazzei did while proofreading Amazing Stories/Volume 01/Number 01/The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar and tried to adapt it to a template so I could reuse it. I may have made some mistakes while attempting that adaptation. Now that I look again, I can't see why I did that.

Feel free to remove the width parameter from the item blocks and see what happens. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I had already check the proto-code in Page:Amazing Stories Volume 01 Number 01.djvu/94, and so far as I can see there was no precedent set there (i.e. no code which could be considered an origin for this.) Thus my query to you, as I assumed the logic may have been drawn in for other considerations.

I have already removed the logic from a copy of the template, and both of "samples" contained within the documentation appear to work identically. MODCHK (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. Just letting you know I pushed out some changes to {{overfloat image}} a few hours ago that I have had simmering for some time, including removing the "width" default discussed above. I also took the opportunity to more closely match the documentation to how the template behaves now, as opposed to several changes ago. Please improve if you think appropriate (I fear I have perhaps gone into too much detail?) Cheers, MODCHK (talk) 21:40, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Thailand

Hi, this is a mainspace article masquerading as a dab category. My initial instincts are to push the contents across into Portal:Thailand, but is that the best thing to do? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 19:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the portals are meant to provide collect works by subject area, not re-purposed disambiguation pages. I've added everything from the linked categories to Portal:Thailand and soft-redirected the former disambiguation page. I've also done the same to Brunei, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Periodic regular maintenance

In the MotM, do we have a space that talks about categories that could do with regular browsing maintenance?

My thinking is that there are certain categories that we wish to have done regularly, that are not particularly difficult, just need to be perused and done (here I am not thinking requiring admin assistance). The sorts of things are

• Category:Articles with missing files
• Category:Pages with missing files

(build a list) We can probably even group these categories (as we find them) into their own supergroup so people can readily access them. We can add particular information to each category to assist those who peruse to ensure that there is not a complete hash made of it. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I've been thinking about a complimetary page (perhaps just Wikisource:Maintenance) to list regular maintenance, which might cover part of this. I might also move the To Do list subpages across so all of the "stuff that needs doing" is in one place, leaving MotM as "stuff that we are concentrating on at the moment" (with prominent links between the two). I just need to think about how best to implement this idea. At the moment, I'm considering splitting it into sections based on either difficulty, time and/or type; filling each with links to each category, a description or instructions and perhaps a dynamic page list to link to a few of the pages in each category. Adding guidance to category pages sounds like a good idea too. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

We have some of the special pages that fit into that category. To me some of the regular tasks are basic wiki, eg. double redirects, those above, that need periodic attention, and possibly we can identify by count of numbers to whether people pop in. There are also those that need some more local knowledge of process. So, yes I can see that working on such a page. You may want to build a skeleton somewhere else, at which we can poke at it. To me the most important for such a page is simplicity to identify a task, or to undertake the task easily with instruction. Something to complement MotM seems worthwhile, it sets the standard and the tasks, but is probably light on discussion. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

To note that for the sake of shoving it somewhere, I did Wikisource:Maintenance of the Month/Regular tasks though it may belong somewhere else for maintenance tasks. To the link on that page, I have added specific instruction to the Category about how to fix, and a link to where to ask questions. It probably could be refined, but I can see value in such an approach for all our maintenance tasks, and probably templated to make it easy to add. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Weird tales

Re: Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Weird_Tales_stories is closed, option to move is provided. Jeepday (talk) 11:33, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Portal classification

Adam, couldn't Portal:New Orleans be classified at Class E: States of the United States with Portal:Louisiana as its parent portal? Please also have a look to this proposal I had prepared for the Scriptorium.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 10:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Class I: Texts by Country has got six subclasses, but the only widely used one is Subclass IN: Nations and Portal:Nations is a redirect to Portal:Texts by Country. This is a proposal to remove subclasses from class I. The classification of a national portal would be simply:

 | class     = I

while Portal:Cornwall (and similar ones) would be classified:

 | class     = I
 | parent    = England

If the proposal is accepted, I will:

• reclassify the portals, using the {{national}} template,
• update Portal:Index and the {{Library of Congress Classification}} template,

but I will need an administrator to delete Portal:Counties, Portal:States, Portal:Towns and Cities and the {{LCC Class I}} template.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 10:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I can't remember, at the moment, why I created those subclasses. It might have been because of the USA/Rest of World split between classes. I will look into it and get back to you. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I didn't take any notes at the time. All I wrote was "to add flexibility to the classification". I think it will be useful in the long run to have nations, cities etc in separate classes, but I'm not set on the idea and child portals of the nations could work too. Class I is one of the few not set by the LCCS itself, so we have some flexibility. You can try it on Scriptorium. If that is successful, I can delete the redundant portals. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Comparisons

Hello AdamBMorgan, please feel free to remove the example I have added on the Comparisons page if you think it is inappropriate to mix OCR quality and texts qualities  :) It may be seen as a different topic. --Zyephyrus (talk) 20:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

It's fine with me for now. It might come down to what the community decides along with annotations and translations. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much for all your hard work!

Thanks so much for all your hard work on Wikisource:WikiProject Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library! I really appreciate it! Michael Barera (talk) 20:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Year logic templated and ...

Gday. Was thinking about the year display and categorisation logic. As the display logic is now quite significant within {{header}}, I am wondering whether it is time to pull it into its own (sub-)template; probably the logic alone, and not the placement. What prompted my thoughts is that I think that the UN General Assembly Resolutions portal subpages could do with the year parameter, so it was either just categorise and add the note somewhere or apply the code we utilise in header. etc. etc. ad I ended up here with my thought bubble. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

This might be a job for Lua (when I get time to figure out how it works). Both {{header}} and {{author}} now have similar, but not quite the same, versions of the sub-template. Using one template for both, and any other pages like the UN portal subpages, would be nice but I think it might need more flexible code to work properly. I recall that making the template also used some rather inelegant brute-force techniques to capture as many permutations as possible. Lua might help clean that up a bit. Maybe. I need to test it. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:58, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Edith J. R. Isaacs

Thank you for filling out my stub on Edith Isaacs. My latest puzzle is Helen Ingersoll who did some of the botanical articles for The Encyclopedia Americana (1920). I think her middle initial may be M. and that she was a librarian for the Torrey Botanical Club and perhaps is the daughter of naturalist Ernest Ingersoll who had a daughter named Helen. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I haven't found that much, I'm afraid. There are two VIAF records for "Ingersoll, Helen" (26985507 and 18986369) but neither appears to be a good match.

If Helen M. Ingersoll is the same person who corresponded with Elizabeth Britton, also of the Torrey Botanical Club, then the M. stands for Marcy.[1] That didn't lead me very far, however.

Working on the Ernest/Helen link: The 1896 Naturalists' Universal Directory lists a Helen Ingersoll living at 788 Broadway, New York. Further googling shows an Ernest at the same address, such the members list of this 1902 Manual of the Author's Club (his own entry in Americana says he was the secretary of this club). The 1905 Naturalists' Directory lists both an Ernest and a Helen Ingersoll living at 50 Morningside Ave., New York. Slightly more interesingly, the 1902 Botaniker-Addressbuch (PDF, Austrian) lists "Ingersoll, Helen M." at the Broadway address and the 1909 edition lists the same at the Morningside address.

It's a little weak but I think links Ernest, Helen M. and the Torrey Botanical Club. It doesn't prove that she wrote for Americana, however. Sorry I haven't found anything definite. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. This puts me further ahead. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 13:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Please move the new community portal

Adam, could you please

• edit Ws:Community portal into a temporary redirect to Ws:Maintenance of the Month/Community portal and
• move Ws:Maintenance of the Month/Community portal (along with its subpages) to Ws:Community portal?

Some edits will be needed after the moving in order for content to display correctly. Many thanks.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 21:37, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Done - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

IEG

Hi Adam! I just discovered your blog and I was surprised of not seeing any mention to this Grant Proposal. I hope you didn't miss the site notification with all the noise!--Micru (talk) 03:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I've only recently really started to get going with blogging. I actually have a long list of barely-formed ideas but still have problems. I have read the IEG and thought about writing something but I have little to add (I've also considered something about the roadmap with the same result so far). In the mean time, I have already written a paragraph and a bit on Wikisource:News/2013-03#Strategic vision grant request, which will go live tomorrow. I think this highlights my "little to add" problem. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:24, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the post! Initially we had a more ambitious plan (involve the WMF), but since their focus is narrowed and they don't want any external interference, we'll have to manage the best we can with current resources (at international level, trying to leverage different participation programs), and plan ahead for when Wikisource can be on the main development agenda again.--Micru (talk) 22:22, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I hope I got it right. Looking at the discussion page, I think different people interpreted the proposal in different ways. I have now written a blog post too (also covering the other Wikisource proposal—which I did almost miss because it wasn't advertised here and I don't often browse meta). Hopefully I got that right as well. I'm still not sure that I really added anything but blogs don't have to be meaningful. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:26, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

West Virginia Constitution

Hello- I have the most recent copy of the West Virginia Constitution as provided by the WV Legislature via PDF from their web site. I notdd that what we have here is incomplete and does not have the preamble. How may I start adding this?? ThanksCoal town guy (talk) 00:25, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikisource. It looks like you are doing fine on your own. Good luck with your work. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 14:10, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Weird tales

Did you get a chance to finish moving these? Jeepday (talk) 00:17, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You might want to stop at this one also. Jeepday (talk) 00:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The first set: yes, I have moved and/or deleted everything. The second set: I have not done anything yet, I was waiting to see if any other opinions were raised, but I can move them later today. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, all done :) JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:44, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

US Legislative Data Workshop

hi, i noticed your work at Portal:Acts of the United States Congresses. would you be interested in teaming with the Cato institute started at w:Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Legislative Data Workshop and their open government xml data going forward? Slowking4 (talk) 17:54, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Artistic / illustrative

Adam, I have known you to be, or have been, interested in artistic (illustrated) pages that often get marked as Advertisements. Please see if you would like to do these two

• [2]
• [3]

pages so that they will not simply be marked away as useless. As always, kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 08:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)