User talk:Beleg Tâl/Archives/2020

Search

You mentioned better search, I am hoping that you have one of the improved lookahead techniques in place from your preferences. I use "Redirect mode with subphrase matching (advanced)" — billinghurst sDrewth 14:09, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

I do have that, I merely mentioned it because I was replying to a comment that said pages such as Author:Emerson were necessary because search was not sufficient for finding such pages. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 14:12, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

BrokenRedirects after moves of Flint and Feather

Hi. A lot of broken redirects were laft behind from moves of Flint and Feather, see Special:BrokenRedirects. I see two option, delete them or point them to the new location. Any preference? Let me know if you need assistance in fix it. Thanks.Mpaa (talk) 22:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Mpaa: They all need to be pointed to the new location, not deleted. I was planning to do it once I get AWB working on this PC, but if you are in a position to fix it and it's not too much bother, go for it. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:08, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Lab rat?

I made… a thing. It's hacky as no neveryoumind, and probably buggy as crap, and I wouldn't be surprised if it pushed over little old ladies and made babies cry in its spare time. But anyways…

mw.loader.load( '/w/index.php?title=User:Xover/Headertools.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');

It adds a bunch of stuff to the Tools section of the sidebar when in edit mode in the Page: namespace. Primarily a "Reset header and footer" command that will go fetch the stuff set in the header and footer fields in the associated Index:, and insert it into the current page's header and footers, replacing whatever was there before. It (tries to) supports ProofreadPage's {{{pagenum}}}, replacing it with whatever label is set for this page in the Index:. It also supports a custom {{{chapter}}} magic value that will be replaced with the current chapter title if one is set (see below).

It also has a "Set chapter title" command that prompts for a text string to use for replacing {{{chapter}}} when resetting the header and footer.

And finally it has "Auto-reset header and footer" and "Stop auto-resetting header and footer", that enable or disable automatically resetting the header and footer on page load.

The impetus for this dingus is works that have been Match&Split, since phe-bot, despite the docs, does not honour the header and footer fields in the Index:. By setting something suitable in the Index: and turning on auto-reset, updating the "current chapter" as you go, you should be able to essentially forget about the header and footer when proofreading. I haven't tested with regular (non-M&S) proofreading, but the chapter replacement should make that more convenient too.

It uses the Web Storage API's localStorage facility to remember "current chapter" and "auto on/off" per work (it keys off base filename), which means it'll stick across sessions, but will not stick across web browsers or different computers. It also means aggressive anti-virus may conceivably block it, and if you use other web apps that put stuff in localStorage these settings may eventually get evicted (there's a size limit, but no time-based expiration).

In any case, since you're probably the biggest M&S user on the project I figured you might be interested. I'm not sure yet whether this will ever be suitable for general community use, or whether it has sufficient utility to be worth it (it's made for a pretty specialised use case), but if you play around with it I'd appreciate any feedback (and that goes for any talk page stalkers that like to live dangerously too). No guarantees it'll work, and no guarantees I won't suddenly decide to rewrite it, breaking it horribly in the process, but, in any case, there it is. --Xover (talk) 16:32, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Sounds very cool! I'll give it a try soon. -Pete (talk) 22:13, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: sounds amazing, will give it a shot! —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Works great, at least for my straightforward situation. Thanks! I will continue using it where I can, and I'll let you know if I see anything worth noting. Seems like as good a time as any to learn a bit more about the wildcards and magic words that can be used on index pages. -Pete (talk) 17:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

And now it should support non-M&S works too. It used to botch the page number because it was only looking for links on the index that pointed to existing pages. It now falls back to checking for (redlinks) pages that do not yet exist when the first fails. CC Pete. --Xover (talk) 08:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

oddity symbol

Would you like to have a guess at the symbol in the table (column 3) at Page:The Present State and Prospects of the Port Phillip District of New South Wales.djvu/33 — billinghurst sDrewth 14:07, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: it's the 'per' sign ⅌ —Beleg Tâl (talk) 22:43, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Kolbs

Think that is much as I am going to get on vital details. There is some odds and sods data, but variation on the same points. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:30, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Index:The Christian Year.djvu ?

Bad file? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:16, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: Wrong edition, and it is easier to delete the one page than to migrate everything and make a versions page —Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:19, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Template:Stagescript/styles.css

Somewhat simplistic, but I'd like a second view on using this on the work you recently scan backed (assuming I find some more details on the translator...) A play script is in essence a "list" of dialogue lines..

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:44, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: It's very clever, and well done. I'm not sure if I agree with the choice to use definition lists for play scripts; I don't object to it, but I would seek broader consensus before making it common usage beyond The Daughter of Heaven. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:09, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Also: I notice that we have a number of script-formatting templates, each of which has a specific style and a very generic name: {{playscript}}, {{dialogue indented}}, and now {{stagescript/s}}. Perhaps an opportunity presents itself to make a broader framework that supports various styles. Do you know whether TemplateStyles supports some method of using a different style sheet per work? Maybe something like {{Stagescript/s|centered-smallcaps}}. Just spitballing. I don't know. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:09, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Well I can add a model-parameter that changes the stylesheet/class name? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:44, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: good thinking. Then we can specify the class name as a parameter, with a list of supported class names in the template documentation. And thus we can use the template in any work that has play scripts, regardless of how it is formatted. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:51, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Note - This template is "Scene" style , some of the other templates you mention are "cue-style" : Both should be possible with one template and a style-sheet if done carefully. See some examples of script formats here https://www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/writers-lab/medium-and-format for the difference ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:00, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: Can you take a look at the stylesheet, and add things, tidy up? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:00, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: I'm not sure I'm the best person to comment on this since I rarely work with stage scripts and hence have a poor grasp of the needs. From a technical perspective I don't like the definition list as the markup (it is semantically iffy, and at the same time constraining), and the use of conditionally loaded TemplateStyles is just asking for trouble (it's not designed to be used like that).

Are we sure this is solving a problem that is commensurate with the complexity of the solution? Do we have a lot of such scripts? Where manual formatting is sufficiently problematic / tedious? That all fall into a number of categories small enough that it is reasonable to have a stylesheet for each? And where each unit of the work is large enough that we hit the transclusion limit?

My only real thought immediately is that it might be better to have multiple "start" templates that each just load a single TemplateStyle. --Xover (talk) 16:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: Well I am minded to scrap the whole thing, because Mediawiki as always decides to "get in the way" (sigh) Page:Daughter of Heaven.djvu/27 with an attempt at a simpler stylesheet using headings, except Mediawikis default styling gets in the way. Why waste my time if Mediawiki is going to fight me all the way? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: Yeah. Fighting MediaWiki is generally a losing proposition. Some things are just not practical without explicit support in the platform. Best just to do the best we can within those limitations, and look for opportunities to push for long term solutions (such as your "list defined references from a separate page" suggestion on Phab). --Xover (talk) 18:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

The stylesheet which Mediawiki decided not to follow (due to other classes) is here - Template:Stagescript/simplistic.css, Applying header levels using wikitext markup causes Mediawikis internal classes to conflict, DESPITE the stylesheet quite definitely defining text alignments it doesn't reliably apply them. I'm reverting my changes and going back to using the previous approach. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:22, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

See also T162402, If there was a specfic tag for writing scripts... like there is for poems, music, math etc.. 20:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikilivres is definitely dead

Wikilivres has been offline since the middle of August 2019. That's six months now. It's obviously not coming back. I think that the page about it and the template that links to it should be deleted and an effort should be made to remove all of the many (now broken) links to it on this site. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 10:23, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

@Simon Peter Hughes: I agree about it being dead. I'd get WS:S or WS:PD on board before starting deletions. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I will now go to the right place and propose that the Help page and the template be deleted. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 13:29, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

template:Font-size-x/s

I am not certain that this is fully going to work as expected, at least not in Page ns:. If this template is used in the header section of Page: then it is going to be <p> formatting inside and not work. I see the template {{fsx}} used in Page:Life and Adventures of William Buckley.djvu/222 and surrounding pages, and that doesn't work on Life and Adventures of William Buckley/Addenda.

The fsx template says "{{Font-size-x/s}} for paragraphs spanning pages. Terminate with {{Font-size-x/e}}". We need div templates to properly span. Anyway, I will look at again when my head is not swimming with sleep hormones. I need to park it somewhere. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:35, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Why not use {{Fsx-block/s}}, {{Fsx-block/e}} ? which already exist. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:52, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I didn't make the choice, I am reflecting on what was used, and what the template says to use. I am also reflecting that span templates don't work in headers of templates when displaying the Page:, though do work when transcluded. We will need to have a look at the usage and work out the better way to resolve. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:29, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: if it works in mainspace, does it matter if it doesn't quite work in Page space? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 00:28, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

<shrug> If people expect it to work in Page: ns and they faff around because it isn't??? It may be a documentation solution and some 'see also, and then telling people that if they have a block of text that they should use the other template set, not currently noted. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:08, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I think I made this long ago, before I realized that span formatting doesn't need to cross page breaks (just end it and then start it again at the top of next page). I'm completely fine with removing extant usage and deleting the templates if that's what is desired. I think I only used it in the BCP. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Greek poetry validation

Do you feel comfortable enough with Greek to validate Chapter 3 (pp 58–126) of The Poems of Sappho (1924)? I expect to finish chapter 3 today, and it is the core of the volume, containing the original Greek of Sappho's poems as well as translations and notes.

The Greek font used in this volume can be a little tricky if you're not used to it. It isn't the usual 19th-century Greek font, but a medieval-derived version that more resembles small-caps, and which uses the lunate sigma instead of the usual sigma. I say more about that and why I've chosen to transcribe the text using modern conventions in my explanation here. There isn't any reason I can see to attempt to preserve the archaic script form, and if someone really desires, they can pull up the original text in the Page namespace.

Also, the DjVu text layer was generated with smart quotes, and I chose to retain them for this work.

It would be much appreciated if you can help to validate this work. It's a 1924 publication, a milestone in Sappho scholarship, and it isn't available on either Internet Archive or Project Gutenberg. It would be well worth Featuring too. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:27, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: how much of the text is the Greek content that you want my assistance with? I can definitely do it, but validating takes me such a long time (ask ShakespeareFan about my efforts on Revelations of Divine Love) that if there's more than a few pages of it I don't think I can commit to any reasonable time frame for completing a validation. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

There are 122 Greek quotations, most of which are single lines or couplets with five to eight words on a line. Most of the chapter is the English translation and notes. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:14, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

The Canadian Soldiers' Song Book

Did we identify the last surviving author for this? Was looking to see if we could apply a date for expiry in do not move to Commons. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:30, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: we did not, but it does contain stuff by Irving Berlin (d. 1989) as well as a number of authors with dates of death unknown. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 01:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Discounting authors with unknown dates, the last surviving author whose work is copyrighted in its source country (and thus prohibited on Commons) is English lyricist Percy Greenbank (1878–1968), with two songs from the 1917 musical The Boy. There are several authors who died later than Greenbank, but their contributions to this collection were first published before 1923 in the USA and therefore are permitted on Commons. The last surviving of these authors is Jack Selig Yellen (1892–1991). —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

The protocols…

I have to say I think this close was inappropriate. There were several people voting in the discussion, and, even worse, a significant proportion of them were (so far) for the opposite conclusion. By closing it after just two days (well short of the 7 day minimum) you unilaterally overrode the community's ability to decide. And for a project that lets discussions linger for months and years, there was definitely no urgent need to close this one speedily.

In addition, your assertion that the texts are identical is insufficiently well founded: you've scan-backed it but not proofread it, so all we actually know is that it has roughly the same pagination. Being probably our biggest user of M&S I assume I do not have to belabour the differences that can remain in a text after M&S to you.

Don't get me wrong, I think the most likely outcome is that it will be kept so in that sense it's "no harm, no foul", but in either outcome it was the community's decision to make. Even for a fait accompli it is desirable in itself to let people have their say. --Xover (talk) 07:00, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: I think that it is more than just a fait accompli—my having added a scan nullified the entire premise of the deletion proposal and completely addressed the concerns of those who voted to delete. If the work had been copyvio, we would have speedy deleted it and closed the discussion even if other users had voted to keep, because there is no point wasting time on further discussion. Just so, now that the work is correctly sourced and there is no foundation for deletion, I have speedy kept it. If you look through the archives of WS:PD, you will see that this is not the first time that we have ended such discussions in this manner.

As to your second point, I have not proofread it thoroughly enough to change the page status, but I have checked it closely enough to be convinced that there are no differences in the text beyond the occasional typo correction (and italicization, which was incorrectly omitted from the intermediate source that we were using previously). I have used scans that are far less identical in scan-backing before (for example, in Shakespeare's Sonnets (1883) all the semicolons are replaced with colons, and there were a number of commas that were placed in the wrong spots), but this particular scan was delightfully satisfactory in its correspondence with our text. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

The community can decide whatever it wants (keep, delete, transwiki, etc.) in a deletion discussion. The difference with a copyvio is that the Terms of Service does not permit us to host such completely irrespective of local community consensus (and the WMF will enforce that through Office actions if needed). By speedily closing the discussion (which is against local policy) you have taken away the community's opportunity to make that determination for itself, including the determination of whether your other actions have sufficiently addressed the concerns of those who voted to delete. I don't think such unilateral action was appropriate in this case, and I think it is harmful to the community (and thus the project) in the long run. --Xover (talk) 15:25, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: Ok, I have reopened it. I do not think I was wrong to close the discussion (despite the official discussion time frames outlined in WS:D, which we have never really stuck to), but I'm not going to be a stickler about it. If anyone wants to discuss it further they can. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:13, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, and I have in the past done so myself, and probably will do so again in the future (although I do try to be punctilious about only doing so in the most obviously cut&dried cases). It was in this particular instance I felt it was not warranted.

In any case, thank you for reopening the discussion. Very much appreciated! --Xover (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Runesy

If you have a moment to spare at a time, would you mind casting your eye over the runic-like stuff on Page:Studies in Irish History, 1649-1775 (1903).djvu/242. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:16, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Done: it's {{insular}} script, and says "ball dearg". —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for helping and being team-focused. When one does so many different things, simply cannot remember the very very occasional things; sure you know that feeling similarly. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Broken page

You've broken Covid-19: Lightening the load and preparing for the future, which is currently displaying raw "====" markup, for reasons I cannot determine, . Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Done fixed - need to use {{nop}} before a wikimarkup header at the beginning of a Page. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

The Book of Martyrs

Hi. I would like to ask whether the 1926 edition of the Book of Martyrs, which was imported to Wikilivres, was hosted (and deleted) here previously too. I am just asking to know whether there is a chance of its undeletion after the copyright expires. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jan.Kamenicek: yes it was hosted here and could be undeleted when the copyright expires. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

wikidata item on redirect

HI. When working from Apostles' Creed (TEC BCP I) you left the WD link on the redirect. Can I please leave it with you to resolve. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:53, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

WD supports linking to redirects, I see no problem with this —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Militia Act

The link for the 1795 act is incorrect. It looks like a copy-paste error since it duplicates the first one. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: it looks fine to me, it's just relinked because no one's added it yet. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 02:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

There's a scan of it here if you're interested. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 02:16, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

It's redlinked because I removed the (incorrect) link. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:17, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Transliteration enquiry...

What's the non comma in the word after banāyan in Page:A Grammar of the Urdū Or Hindūstānī Language in Its Romanized Character.djvu/41 and how should it be transcribed? ThanksShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:02, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: the footnote on page 7 describes it as a "diacritical tick". I personally might use U+02CF ˏ Modifier Letter Low Acute Accent. --BT 198.91.139.39 21:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Man or the State?

I’ve finished proofreading this but am not up to transcluding. If you would like to carry on, please? Cheers, Zoeannl (talk) 04:33, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Guerilla Open Access Manifesto

Please undelete, it's PD: https://archive.org/details/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

@Koavf: IA is frequently known to incorrectly display a PD mark on copyrighted material. The only licensing for this work indicated by Schwartz or his heirs is the text (cc) share and enjoy on Schwartz's personal website, which is not sufficient under the Wikisource copyright policy. And lest you think that the reference to (cc) should make it allowable: Schwartz's CC license of choice (and the license that most of his other work is properly licensed under) is CC-BY-NC-SA which is explicitly incompatible with Wikisource. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 03:23, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah but did you read the document? It's obviously intended to be reproduced. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:25, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Koavf: See WS:CV#Guerilla Open Access Manifesto. I fought tooth and nail for keeping this, and even I ultimately had to admit we don't have the grounds for keeping it. Quite apart from the (in themselves persuasive) arguments Beleg Tâl and Prosfilaes make in the WS:CV discussion, I talked to Aaron's estate about it and it is clear that CC BY-NC is at least as likely an interpretation of his intent as BY-SA. --Xover (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Wow. Thanks, Xover. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Good to see you active again; I was starting to get a little worried. :) --Xover (talk) 05:49, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: haha, thanks. I realized I had a problem when I saw that I had learned more in the last year about obscure wikisyntax and Lua and Lilypond and SPARQL than about the stuff I'm actually paid to know about. So now I'm only checking in once in a while to make sure everything's ok. -BT 172.97.146.200 19:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

You mean you don't get paid for this wiki stuff? :)

Yeah, taking a break now and again is good for one's sanity; preferably before burning out and never returning. Enjoy (I sincerely hope!) IRL, and stop by to say hi when the fancy takes you. You'll be missed, of course, but I'll try to restrain myself from filling up your notifications with stuff that might rope you in until you're ready to dive back in. Try, mind you, but no promises! :-) --Xover (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

An inquiry

I understand that on 18 January 2018 you deleted from Wikisource an 1873 published lecture by Bolesław Prus, "On Discoveries and Inventions".

I know too little about the intricacies of Wikisource licensing to understand what might have been done in order to keep Prus' lecture on Wikisource.

I feel sure that this item is of value to scholarship and that no actual impediment exists to its being reinstated, if proper Wikisource licensing can be provided.

I would appreciate any advice you could give me on how this could be accomplished.

I work mostly on the English-language Wikipedia.

Thank you.

Nihil novi (talk) 05:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nihil novi: The issue is that, while the Polish original is in the public domain due to copyright expiration, the translation was licensed only under the GFDL, which is not permitted. In order for us to host such a translation it has to be compatibly licensed, typically through either a public domain dedication like {{CC0}} or through the appropriate Creative Commons license, {{CC-BY-SA-4.0}}. Technically all user contributions to Wikimedia projects (with a few exceptions that are not relevant here) are automatically dual-licensed under {{CC-BY-SA-3.0}} and {{GFDL}}, but you had explicitly tagged your translation with only GFDL, which is what created the problem.

Looking at the revision history of the deleted text, it looks like you were the one to translate all of it, and that it was an original translation (you didn't copy the text from anywhere)? If that is the case, it will be sufficient if you reply here stating clearly which license you intend to apply to your translation.

There are also a couple of technicalities we need to fix: since it is an original translation by a Wikisource contributor (vs. a previously published translation) it needs to live in the "Translation:" namespace (i.e. we need to move the page to the correct place); and the translated text should be backed by a scan and proofread in the Page: namespace as well as having the Polish original proofread in the Polish Wikisource.

Beleg Tâl is busy IRL right now, but if you need assistance with these things just let me know and I'll follow up on your talk page. --Xover (talk) 09:26, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Xover (talk), thank you for your kind reply.

I am indeed the translator of Bolesław Prus' published lecture, "On Discoveries and Inventions", from the original Polish into English.

I found the original Polish text on Project Gutenberg: O odkryciach i wynalazkach: A Public Lecture Delivered on 23 March 1873 by Aleksander Głowacki [Bolesław Prus], Passed by the [Russian] Censor (Warsaw, 21 April 1873), Warsaw, Printed by F. Krokoszyńska, 1873. [1]

The Project Gutenberg text can serve for verification of my translation.

I do not know the differences between licenses {{CC-BY-SA-4.0}} and {{CC-BY-SA-3.0}} but will happily take your advice to add the latter.

If there is anything further I need do in this matter, or if I need to urgently return to this page (as I do not visit Wikisource daily), could I be notified at my Wikipedia talk page?

Please forgive my ignorance: what is "IRL"?

Thank you again for your help!

Nihil novi (talk) 03:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I've just found the definition of IRL ("in real life").

Nihil novi (talk) 03:14, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

he.wikisource "In other languages" broken link

Hi, the page

https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%97%D7%9F_%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%9A_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94_%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%94

has "In other languages" in the bar on the right, pointing to

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Shulchan_Aruch/Yoreh_Deah

which is the old deleted location, but when clicking "Edit," the Wikidata entry is correct, en: Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Yoreh Deah So why is this error? Nissimnanach (talk) 12:47, 1 July 2020 (UTC)Nissimnanach

@Nissimnanach: It is set manually. Manual links override the Wikidata entries. I fixed it. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 00:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

occupational categories rejig

I have set up proof of concept conversions for some of the occupation categories

• category:Physiologists

and the requisite Template:Category disambiguation and configured HotCat to not allow the category's addition, and instead to show the sub-cats. Hoping that you are a HotCat user and willing to test and confirm that this will work. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Though maybe the template should be renamed to align with c:Template:MetaCat — billinghurst sDrewth 05:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I can confirm that I could not add this page to category:Physiologists using HotCat. I like this idea, good initiative on your part. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 01:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Annotated editions

Unless something has changed, annotated editions should have (Annotated) appended to their name rather than being subpages of the unannotated version. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: WS:ANN says "The format is not fixed but could work like version disambiguation (eg. "Foo (annotated)", where Foo is the name of the original work), with a clear description as the title (eg. "The Annotated Foo"), or as the subpage name (eg. "Foo/Annotated", where Foo is both the original work and the basepage)." As it happens {{Annotation header}} assumes the subpage format as the default. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:30, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

That is a draft proposal, not a guideline. It also does not explain why you moved an existing page with a naming format in that list to a different naming format on the same list. The header template you mention does permit the use of independent pagenames through the inclusion of a parameter; it does not mandate a subpage. The template also predates the draft proposal by two years, and has never been heavily used or publicized. It is quite possible that its function does not align with the proposal. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Jack Okham & Tom Splicewell

Regarding this. These are part of the NLS transcription project, and in addition to not wanting to summarily delete something they expended resources on for reasons of keeping the relationship sweet, it is possible they had specific reason for transcribing multiple copies of the work. Could I ask you to withdraw the speedy, and if you still think it should go then do it through WS:PD? They're really not very well embedded in wiki culture so I try to treat them with kid gloves as much as possible so we don't scare them off. --Xover (talk) 13:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

The edits to the Lacnunga items are not great

The text that has been uploaded to https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Leechdoms,_Wortcunning,_and_Starcraft_of_Early_England/Volume_3/Lacnunga while interesting due to being a truer reproduction of the writing style -- is much harder to parse and not nearly as convenient or useful as to what preceded it.

This format was much better: https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Leechdoms%2C_Wortcunning%2C_and_Starcraft_of_Early_England%2FVolume_3%2FLacnunga&type=revision&diff=9996288&oldid=6662777

Could we somehow get those back?

Brimlar (talk) 23:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@Brimlar: Wikisource-hosted texts are reproductions of existing publications. The previous version of this text did not accurately reproduce the publication it was copied from, and this has been fixed. If you can find a scan of a public-domain publication of this text that uses Latin script instead of Insular script, we can add this publication to our collection as well. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:26, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Help is needed for Index:A Collection of Esoteric Writings.djvu

Hello, Beleg Tâl!

I have noticed that you previously did some correcting edits on pages of Index:A Collection of Esoteric Writings.djvu related to Indic scripts, for example this, so may be you give advices for that work — how to deal with Indic (Devanagari) sentences. I don't know Devanagari (as well as all other Indic scripts, I know at good extent only Cyrillic and Latin scripts), so I avoid to do proofreading those inscriptions myself (I'm afraid I might do mistakes in them). So I have such questions — may be you can help and answer them:

1) If I proofread all the pages but leave problematic pages without processing Devanagari — could I put the final work to Template:New texts in order to put the work on the frontpage of the Wikisource? Or should I try to get assistance from other users first to proofread those pages, and only after that put the book onto the frontpage? What the rules/policies say about that? (perhaps you as an admin should know that well?)

2) If I want to get help from others — where I could go for that — is it OK to open a topic on Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help? Or may be other pages are designated for such purposes as proofreading problematic foreign scripts? --Nigmont (talk) 19:53, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nigmont: Tagging the text with {{indic missing}} will add the page to Category:Pages with missing Indic characters where it can be handled by an editor who is familiar with these characters. Unfortunately there are not many such editors, so it can be a long time before someone deals with it that way. In the meantime you can definitely post on Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help to see if anyone is able to assist sooner. The work should not be added to Template:New texts until all text, including the Indic text, has been proofread. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Alright, so I think I will create a topic on Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help to invite users who can be of help. Thanks for information! --Nigmont (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

We sent you an e-mail

Hello Beleg Tâl/Archives/2020,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Methodist Hymnal

Thank you for setting up the other index, as well as this page. If you don’t mind, I can add some to the versions columns. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:23, 3 October 2020 (UTC).

@TE(æ)A,ea.: go for it! —Beleg Tâl (talk) 22:40, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Should Hymnary.org be used? I noticed when I was looking for more information about some of the obscure hymns in the Collection, but it doesn't give a specific source. For “Thus saith the Lord of Earth and Heaven,” they claim Charles Wesley as the author, but the only attribution (from scans) on the page is from the 1830 Collection, which does not specify the authors of individual poems. I generally have looked for references to older published books (hence the Dictionary of Hymnology), but if you think the Web-site credible, I can import the names it provides for the hymns listed. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC).

@TE(æ)A,ea.: I've usually found it credible enough. Sometimes it makes mistakes. It's better than any of the other public databases I've found. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

@TE(æ)A,ea.: PS you don't need to cite sources for authorship if you don't want to (or if it is much trouble) - I personally only put authorship footnotes in my sandbox hymnal indices if the authorship needs further explanation, for example if the authorship is disputed or popularly misattributed (or misattributed in this specific edition). See my footnotes regarding Rous and Byrom for examples of what I mean. — on the other hand don't let me dissuade you from linking to the relevant parts of the Dictionary of Hymnology if you think that is worth including. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:02, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

POTUS Tweet Archive Discussion

You identified some concerns about my idea for archiving POTUS tweets back on 10/12. I appreciate your doing this. I was slow to respond - for which I apologize - but I did post a reply on 10/24 which may have escaped your notice. Any further feedback on the proposed project would be greatly appreciated, thanks. Dennis the Peasant (talk) 03:30, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

dog and cat pack at commons

In case you are interested commons:User talk:Fæ#Why_having_both_formats_is_a_a_good_idea.... I was surprised to find the pdf that had been uploaded by Fæ.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian: I am not sure what you are referring to. What PDF did Fae upload? Why are you bringing it to my attention? What does this have to do with dogs and cats? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@Beleg Tâl: More like PDFs. Fae said 800,000. Search an author or better, some prolific publisher with an unusual name. Possibly (probably) Fae's uploads.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

You are a cat, as you are reliable and competent at Wikidata.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Redirect

Please restore The Condor/2 (2)/Prominent Californian Ornithologists. III. A. M. Shields, which you recently deleted, despite the fact that is in use. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: I'd be happy to help, but from what I can see the page is not actually in use and has been flagged for auto-deletion for nearly six months. Why does it need to be undeleted? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:59, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Because it is, as I said, in use. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:07, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

... @Pigsonthewing: do you see something I don't? the only links to it are on user talk pages, and you can fix the link on your own user page, so what actual use are you referring to? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 23:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming it is used. Please now restore it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: As you can see there are no pages that currently link to the redirect, so there is no need for the redirect to be reinstated. Have a great day. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 14:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)