User talk:EncycloPetey

EncycloPetey

(Archives index, Last archive)

Licenses needed for Midieval Scholars and for current Government Officials?

Does an Author page need a license? I wasn't aware of that. But you've tagged all these with {{no license}}, despite that three of them are midieval scholars, Author:Bahya ibn Paquda, Author:David Kimhi, Author:David ibn Merwan al-Mukkamas Since that is clearly indicated, please go back and remove the tag, and instead tag them with this: {{PD-old}}.

Thanks. I'll address Author:Shlomo Pines, since one work is 1936, and may possibly be PD, and the other probably copyrighted. Two others are current U.S. government official, so please tag them with this: {{PD-USGov}}

William Chomsky is the father of the famous Noam Chomsky, and his page isn't under any threat of deletion like his father's page now is. Perhaps you could do the research.

Author:Nayib Bukele is the president of Portal:El Salvador, and Author:José Raúl Mulino is the president of Portal:Panama, and License tags or laws for those countries aren't listed at Help:Copyright_tags. So please find that info and add it to the help page, or else remove the {{no license}} or at least put it on the bottom of the page. As you can see easily on those pages, the only works added are those that are published by http://state.gov concerning Author:Marco Rubio's recent dialogues with them, and therefore the works are covered by PD-USGov. So you could add that.

The Authors in question are these:

• 14:38, 13 February 2025 diff hist +38 Author:Bahya ibn Paquda + auth. control current thank
• 14:37, 13 February 2025 diff hist −41 Author:William Chomsky + auth. control current thank
• 14:37, 13 February 2025 diff hist +37 Author:David Kimhi + auth. control current thank
• 14:36, 13 February 2025 diff hist +37 Author:Shlomo Pines + auth. control current thank
• 14:36, 13 February 2025 diff hist +37 Author:David ibn Merwan al-Mukkamas + auth. control current thank
• 14:34, 13 February 2025 diff hist −23 Author:José Raúl Mulino No edit summarycurrent thank
• 14:34, 13 February 2025 diff hist +37 Author:Nayib Bukele + auth. control current thank
• 14:34, 13 February 2025 diff hist +38 Author:Mauricio Claver-Carone + auth. control current thank
• 14:33, 13 February 2025 diff hist +37 Author:Charles Ezell

These you evidently visted, after examining the resume on my User page, where they are linked. And did so immediately after proposing [[Wikisource:Proposed_deletions#Imposing_Maximum_Pressure_on_the_Government_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran,_Denying_Iran_All_Paths_to_a_Nuclear_Weapon,_and_Countering_Iran’s_Malign_Influence|one of my recent contributions for deletion, even though its obviously in the public domain, and also highly notable and newsworthy.

One begins to wonder whether there is some partisan bias or other deliberate ignorance at work in your efforts to delete texts that are obviously in the public domain, and also in the argumentive and unconstructive manner in which deleted or reverted my constructive and good-faith contributions on Portals - many of which were dilapidated and practically defunct before I came - and then rebuked me on my talk page and then registered complaints against me at ANI.

Jaredscribe (talk) 00:26, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Author pages should have license templates, yes. No, I did not examine the resume on your User page; I am unaware of what that might be. I made a pass through recently created Author pages and tagged some for cleanup while also adding the authority control template that is standard for Author pages. You are welcome to help clean up those pages by providing the required templates. See Help:Author pages. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:31, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

That's quite unusual, because I created politicians last week, but I created the scholars' pages last november Author:Bahya ibn Paquda, Author:David Kimhi, Author:David ibn Merwan al-Mukkamas, as their histories will show. They don't show up in recent changes, yet edited them all in sequence, as your record of contributions on 13th February will show, immediately after you proposed for deletion Trump's NPSM-2 which I'd added. And they are all listed on User:Jaredscribe, along with the other P:FED subportals over which you've been hounding me.

But nevertheless and regardless of your methods and means, I will appreciate if you please take this opportunity to remove the "no license" tags which you never should have added, and instead add the appropriate "public domain" tags which you should have added in the first place, and would have added if you had been more competent. Thanks, Jaredscribe (talk) 01:01, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

 Comment: I have {{tl}}ed the above license tags, as they should not actually be invoked when mentioned in this section's first comment. — Alien  3
3 3 06:32, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Deleted "beyond scope" please explain

Hi, I recently created Index:Méthode de serpent adoptée (...)Roze Nicolas bpt6k1170148h.djvu in order to translate into English the French-language Méthode de serpent, published c. 1814 by the Paris Conservatoire, which I've just completed transcribing on French Wikisource here, with the assistance of Denis Gagne52. This was the speediest deletion I've ever seen, given I didn't even get as far as the page list, so can you please explain how this is beyond scope? — Jonathanischoice (talk) 23:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Please see Wikisource:Translations. We would not host an original English translation until that scan-backed original exists at fr.WS. I checked, and no such transcription has been started there, so the English translation is premature, and beyond scope. Once a transcription of the scan has been proofread at fr.WS, a translation may be started here. The transcription you pointed to t fr.WS is not using the same scan. You may start a translation using Index:Roze, Nicolas. Méthode de Serpent (1830).djvu, since that is the scan transcribed at fr.WS. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:30, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Al Mawakeb Research Center(AMRC)

Hello, I previously created a page on wikisource that was title "Al Mawakeb Research Center(AMRC)" yet it's been recently deleted and i wanted to reach out to know the reason behind the deletion of the page and if theres anyway i can bring it back on. Rayyanae (talk) 19:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikisource does not host pages that consist of promotional content. Nor do we host self-published works. The page was deleted in accordance with WS:WWI policy. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The Black Camel

After deleting the index, that has left several stray pages which I assume should also be deleted: Page:The Black Camel (1929).djvu/14, Page:The Black Camel (1929).djvu/2, Page:The Black Camel (1929).djvu/3, Page:The Black Camel (1929).djvu/4, Page:The Black Camel (1929).djvu/5, Page:The Black Camel (1929).djvu/6 and Page:The Black Camel (1929).djvu/7. -- Beardo (talk) 19:51, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

When tagging items for speedy deletion, please be sure to tag all items. If an Index page has other pages attached to it, then either those pages need to be tagged "speedy" as well, or the whole set should be listed at Wikisource:Proposed deletions, so that we know there are multiple pages involved, not all of which are tagged. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting. I didn't tag the index. -- Beardo (talk) 20:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Tragedies of Euripides (Way)

Hello. Shouldn't the sub-pages show Euripides as author as well as Way as translator ? Or am I missing something ? -- Beardo (talk) 14:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

The title is "The Tragedies of Euripides". I think at the time I started this, the reasoning was that saying "The Tragedies of Euripides, by Euripides" was redundant in the header. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

I wonder if it might be useful to have links to the author page - either in the header blocks or in the notes. -- Beardo (talk) 01:36, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Teeftallow and Rope

I think that Rope (US 1929) is based on Index:Teeftallow-1926.djvu. It was mentioned in a search result, and I haven't read much of either. I put it at wikidata like this but it really needs to be reviewed/verified. Thank you.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:21, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Highly unlikely. Teeftallow is about a lynching in Tennessee. Rope is a UK play about a plotted murder followed by gloating, and is set in one scene in a single room. Aside from a death, there is no resemblance between the two. I think the AI that suggested the connection made only a random connection between these two. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:09, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian, @EncycloPetey - I hope you don't mind me butting in here. According to http://findingaids.uflib.ufl.edu/repositories/2/archival_objects/290650 the novel was adapted into a different play called Rope in 1928 - "Rope (By D. Wallace) : "A Drama" by David Wallace and T.S. Stribling (Based upon Mr. Stribling's novel, "Teeftallow")" -- Beardo (talk) 15:33, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Beardo: Thanks for the research! I have removed all the bad data.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:25, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Raph Williams65

I'm probably missing something, but, out of curiosity, why did you Nuke him? Only copied over a template from WP, and it doesn't look like vandalism. From looking around, didn't look like it was discussed anywhere, and I'm not seeing in which CSD this falls. (And Nuke, as it doesn't provide a reason, can look intimidating to new users.) Thanks. — Alien  3
3 3 18:44, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

New users should not be blindly copying in templates from other projects as their first (and only) edits here. We have enough cruft. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:06, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Creating Tables

Hi, I need help creating table, as I'm struggling to match the design.

• Page:Phrenotypics; or, The Science of Memory Simplified and Made Easy (Woollacott).djvu/17]]
• Page:The science of memory fully expounded. For the use of students, ministers, public speakers, etc. (IA scienceofmemoryf00will).pdf/104
• Page:The science of memory fully expounded. For the use of students, ministers, public speakers, etc. (IA scienceofmemoryf00will).pdf/105
• Page:The practical memory system (IA practicalmemorys00lest).pdf/46

82.167.168.197 00:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

The first and final ones on that list, I'm not sure how to achieve. I think I've fixed the third one, which may be enough for you to see how to fix the second one. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:39, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Could you use w:en:Template:Diagonal split header for the second and third ones? For the last one, it looks like uploading an image is the best solution. 82.167.168.197 04:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

As I say: I do not know. That's something I've never seen before. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:01, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Is Sex Necessary?

Thank you for working on this fun book! But I do not understand why you reverted the edit that marked page 10 as a blank page in the Index with a dash? I believe that that is the way to do it. It did not mess up the pagination of any of the succeeding pages; page 11 still comes out as page 11. Did you not notice that? See the documentation here: Help:Page_numbers#Un-numbered_pages -- Gnuish (talk) 04:18, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

No, a dash is not used for every blank page. We mark a blank page by setting the Proofread option to "Without Text". A dash is for a page that is both blank and not part of the numbering sequence. The page you marked is clearly page 10, because the page before it is page 9, and the page after it is page 11, so it is part of the numbering sequence. That is explained at the location you linked. You did not read the qualification at the start of the section. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

I did read the qualification at the start of the section. And it says that the numbering continues under the dash, as indeed it does. Try looking at the version that you reverted, using this link, and you'll note that the page number after the dash in the list of pages is 11, not 10. And when you click on page 11, it takes you to a page that has [11] printed at the bottom. It worked.

Pages i, ii, iii, and iv are also fully blank and should probably be dashes in the page list. One can set pages to "-" without disturbing the roman numeral numbering as well. The fact that those pages were blank was an artifact of the printing technology of the time, not actually part of what the author intended to convey. (As is the blank page behind the illustration on page 9, or the blank pages that in some books align chapter starts on a right-hand page.)

I appreciate that there may be multiple ways to do things such as denote a fully blank page. What I didn't appreciate is when you reverted a way to do things that worked fine and caused no problems. Reverting other editors' changes should be reserved for when they have made a mistake, or vandalism, not merely for when you might have chosen to do it a different way. Reverting is not a kind gesture, it's more of a slap in the face. I humbly ask that you seek to be kind to other editors. -- Gnuish (talk) 05:20, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I do not think that the irony in the end of the previous contribution was necessary or helpful in any way. Having said that, I would just like to note that I also often mark blank pages with a dash. As it is not a really important issue, I suggest letting the contributors to the work to settle it. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 10:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)