User talk:Mahagaja

Wikification

Could you check out my user page and let me know what you think about that sort of setup compared to "Fuzzy-Wuzzy". I feel this set-up would answer objections, but do you feel it is an appropriate way display poetry? Will it become to cumbersome with longer works? It is not a great deal more efffort and by using templates there is an extra line of security for the proofread and formatted text.--BirgitteSB 16:25, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

A Dialect of Donegal

Have you seen the new Proofread page extension and how it works?

• Help:Side by side image view for proofreading
• An example (in progress) Index:How and Why Library

You may find it is a better way to proofread. Plus it allows you upload a single pdf or djvu file to Commons instead of doing every image separately.--BirgitteSB 18:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

You're right (unless you have some software I don't), you would still have to upload individually.--BirgitteSB 19:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The Lord's Prayer

I was doing a bit of patrolling when I noticed that you had changed someone else's changes back to a more traditional reading. I really don't know whether the previous version was valid, but it did seem plausible and modern. Can someone enlighten an atheist like me about the status of the situation? Eclecticology 10:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, the biggest problem was that he changed the version labeled "From the Book of Common Prayer" to a version that isn't from the Book of Common Prayer. Also, while some of his changes reflect genuine variants ("forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us" and "lead us not into the time of trial" are actually used in some churches), others were just nonsense ("give us to thee our daily bread", "as we forgive each other who sins against us"). And then he added a poem at the end ("Let all the people sing Amen") which may or may not be genuine (I've never heard it, but then I've never heard lots of things), but certainly isn't the Lord's Prayer. At any rate, the edits may have been in good faith (which is why I reverted with "rv" and not "rvv"), but were definitely not an improvement. Angr/_Talk 07:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration project

fyi, We are collaborating on Author:George W. Bush this week. It would be great if you can help, even if it is only proofreading a small document like Page:Bush 1974 Tender of Resignation.png, or noting an important work that we should obtain and transcribe. Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Author:Civilla D. Martin

The change of the initial is a part of logically dividing the Category:Authors-M so that it will have a more manageable size (less than 200). I realize that this changes the Author-indexes, but these suffer so much from a lack of maintenance that they should probably all be deleted anyway. I changed the pages for all the "Ma" pages and about 30 weren't on the author indexes at all. Eclecticology (talk) 22:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Angr 23:22, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!

You now are a sysop. Let me know if you have any questions. Good luck--BirgitteSB 03:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank-you spam

Thank you for supporting me for adminship. :) I'll try to make you glad you did it. So here's a belated Nadezhda "Harry S. Truman" Durova campaign song. All the best, Durova (talk) 05:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

• 

text width

On Wikisource:Scriptorium#Hard-coded font faces I mention how to hard-code the text width as being a certain percentage of the available space. Hope that helps. --DavidCary (talk) 12:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for showing me how! I tried making the margins wider so the text is easier to read (it's difficult to follow text when the lines are too long). Angr 18:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

It's looking fine, and within what I would consider acceptable parameters. While I might feel differently about exactly how much of the screen's width should be text and how much should be margins, this is mostly an editorial decision best left to the discretion of the person doing the hard work. Eclecticology - the offended (talk) 18:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Index:Two Magics.djvu

I have purged the file at Commons, and the text layer is now available. Will make any further work on the text, a lot easier. billinghurst sDrewth 14:47, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Angr 16:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

French?

I belieive this comment is in french Talk:Lady Chatterley's Lover/Chapter 1 and can you check if it is appropriate for the talk page or if a {{sdelete}} is indicated? JeepdaySock (talk) 11:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

It was a question about something that happened in the movie. Not appropriate for a talk page here, so I deleted it. Thanks! Angr 13:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you :) JeepdaySock (talk) 16:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Little request

Notice modeled after [1]

As Template:New texts is monitored in IRC, and many users have it in their Watchlists, I was wondering whether you would consider adding the name of the text being added to the edit summary, rather than solely +1,-1. Even if it is just have +Name of work, -1 that would be most helpful. Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 04:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Continuation of Scottish Gaelic Dialects

A heads up if you're interested, I found out a few days ago that Scottish Gaelic Dialects continues in The Celtic Review volumes 4 and 5. I mean to work on it as time permits. Prosody (talk) 23:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Abide with Me

To clarify - the source I give on the talk page has an exact reproduction of the text from Hymns Ancient and Modern, 1861. On the issue of using small capitals for Lord and similar words, this was standard practice in Victorian times, as shown by that hymnal. Apologies if I reverted anything else while correcting that.--Longfellow (talk) 08:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Move Audrey Hepburn to French Wikipedia

Could you please move the above article in French to the French Wikipedia. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 12:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Miss Mapp

No worries. I like to keep a work needing validation on my regular "doing" list. Gives me a chance to read stuff that I don't think of putting on WS. I have to say, though, that doing Mapp & Lucia books is pure indulgence. I tend to re-read my copies every year or so. Shame that four of them are after 1923. If I had to pick only one of the six it would probably be Lucia in London. I'll get to Queen Lucia later in the year. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:39, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Latin

Good job on Page talk:Latin for beginners (1911).djvu/407, looks moderately painful to create. There are several of them in the book, I think I am going to stick to {{missing image}} for now. If I give you a list of all the tables after the first pass through would you be interested in doing the tables for all of them? JeepdaySock (talk) 16:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, make a list and put it at Talk:Latin for beginners (1911) so that other people can have a try too. I don't want to feel like I am solely responsible for making tables. Angr 11:40, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

:) Will do JeepdaySock (talk) 15:51, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The Dream of the Rood

Hi Angr...I'm not very familiar with WikiSource, but the text of this differs from the manuscript form in two important ways: it uses Ws instead of Ƿs, and it includes macrons over long vowels. Personally I'd like to add wynns back in and preferably remove the length markers too, which are often conjectural anyway. Is there a policy on this? Widsith (talk) 13:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

I doubt there's a policy about it. I don't mind if the macrons are removed (but check the MS because acute accents/apices are sometimes used as length marks in MSS), but using w instead of wynn is a very good idea. Basically all modern editions of Old English texts silently replace wynn with w, it's what readers will be expecting, and w has much wider font support. Angr 21:59, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the formatting tips

My thanks to you for your formatting of O crewell causere of vndeseruyd chaunce. I am new to Wikisource, and the demonstration has already proved helpful! - Cultures4 (talk) 22:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :)

Really appriciate these two edtis. Jeepday (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Welsh newspapers

Presuming that you have, but in case you haven't seen the article ... http://www.llgc.org.uk/index.php?id=4723 — billinghurst sDrewth 11:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

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, 23:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Page:St. Oswald and the Church of Worcester.djvu/47 unknown diacritic

This page has 'illegible text' because of an unknown diacritic that I can't find in the usual places and if there other diacritics needed please insert them. Then the index can be validated. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 12:23, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

@Kathleen.wright5: The symbol you didn't recognize is the Tironian et (U+204A; ⁊). I also replaced your capital thorn (Þ) with the thorn with stroke (U+A765; ꝥ) as it is not the same letter. Angr 13:33, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

New Proposal Notification - Replacement of common main-space header template

Announcing the listing of a new formal proposal recently added to the Scriptorium community-discussion page, Proposals section, titled:

• Switch header template foundation from table-based to division-based

The proposal entails the replacement of the current Header template familiar to most with a structurally redesigned new Header template. Replacement is a needed first step in series of steps needed to properly address the long time deficiencies behind several issues as well as enhance our mobile device presence.

There should be no significant operational or visual differences between the existing and proposed Header templates under normal usage (i.e. Desktop view). The change is entirely structural -- moving away from the existing HTML all Table make-up to an all Div[ision] based one.

Please examine the testcases where the current template is compared to the proposed replacement. Don't forget to also check Mobile Mode from the testcases page -- which is where the differences between current header template & proposed header template will be hard to miss.

For those who are concerned over the possible impact replacement might have on specific works, you can test the replacement on your own by entering edit mode, substituting the header tag {{header with {{header/sandbox and then previewing the work with the change in place. Saving the page with the change in place should not be needed but if you opt to save the page instead of just previewing it, please remember to revert the change soon after your done inspecting the results.

Your questions or comments are welcomed. At the same time I personally urge participants to support this proposed change. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:04, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

{{math}} in charinsert?

Hello. Your recent edits of MediaWiki:Gadget-charinsert-core.js happened to draw my attention to the apparent anomaly that the "Math & logic" section contains a prototypic reference to {{math}}. As this template does not exist local to enWS (but is present at e.g. enWP) should either:

• charinsert be further updated to remove the unused template, or
• {{w:math}} be copied here?

Regards, AuFCL (talk) 10:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't ever work on math topics here, so I don't feel like this should be my decision. I'd ask at the Scriptorium. Angr 19:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

That is fair enough. As a devotee of direct use of <math> I personally would not be voting to retain the prototype for {{math}} but expect most people feel otherwise.

Just noticed (late) you wrote "I'd" (implying I should ask) not as I had read "I'll" (implying you will post the Scriptorium entry.) I have run out of time for now but will do so shortly, maybe later today. Better yet, I shall put it on the Administrators' noticeboard. With my reputation there that should /ensure/ nothing gets done. AuFCL (talk) 21:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

no notice

If you're going to make this change then we'll need to retroactively change the templates each year on works published before the earliest year in the rolling date. That is, you're moving the goalposts on works that have this template already, by chaning the statement about when they were published.

The only way to effect the change you're suggesting is if a list of works is maintained listing works displaying the template, but whose date of publication fall prior to the "new" date generated each year. Such a list will need to be both created and maintained, as well as monitored. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I was just thinking that because {{PD-1923}} has already been edited to say "published before January 1, 1924", works published with no notice during 1923 are now covered by both {{PD-1923}} and {{PD-US-no-notice}}, which seems redundant. —Mahāgaja · talk 10:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with redundancy. The problem with implementing a dynamic date on the no-notice template is that (over time) we will accumulate works tagged with a template that gives misinformation about their publication dates. Do you understand the problem I'm describing? --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:22, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I guess. Since you reverted my edit anyway, it isn't really a big deal to me. —Mahāgaja · talk 17:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

The Letters Of Queen Victoria

Hello Mahagaja! I really appreciate the edits you made to Vol 2 of QV of 1907 edition.

I am afraid I owe you an apology for not placing appropriate tags (how do they cancel a project here? I do not think I know that)

This particular project was abandoned because of some missing pages in the scan, and we moved to another edition, of 1908.

If you could help with the French that would have been marvellous. The letters from the French and Russian leaders are given there in French, and I am still confused about proper approach to them. --Tar-ba-gan (talk) 20:34, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tar-ba-gan: If you want to delete the project, you can list it at Wikisource:Proposed deletions. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

Btw the letter of Nicholas I in the 1908 edition is here

BR, --Tar-ba-gan (talk) 22:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)