User talk:Mårtensås

Welcome to Wikisource

Hello, Mårtensås, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for joining the project. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Help pages, especially for proofreading
• Help:Beginner's guide to Wikisource
• Style guide
• Inclusion policy
• Wikisource:For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in

• Proofread of the Month
• Monthly Challenge
• Requested texts

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{Collaboration/MC}} to your page for current Wikisource projects.

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

Have questions? Then please ask them at either

• Wikisource:Scriptorium; or
• Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username if you're logged in (or IP address if you are not) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.

Again, welcome! — billinghurst sDrewth 13:19, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Page:Rudiments of Grammar for the English-Saxon Tongue (Elstob 1715).djvu/13

Thanks.. And thus in Modern english hearth? (One for Wiktionary I think.) :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, it's the same word. Mårtensås (talk) 22:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Into the Darkness

Wikisource no longer accepts secondhand copies from Project Gutenberg. However, this work is still under copyright in the US because of renewal R414351. It cannot be legally hosted here until 2036. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:37, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

ppoem

This is a processing-heavy template, which means that it fails to function if used on lengthy poetry. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I understand. Should I split the page into several parts? Or use several instances of ppoem (or will this still break)? Mårtensås (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

There are no clear places to break this into shorter sections. Any such breaks would be arbitrary and artificial. Since this isn't backed by a scan, such divisions would also create problems for future editors. The ppoem template has limitations, and cannot be used on lengthier works. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Germanic poetry

This concept does not fit into any of our established categorization structures. It is not a language, or a nationality, or a subject. It is rather a loose assemble based on an abstraction of their linguistic history, something for which we have never had a category structure. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Old Germanic poetry has several things in common, like:

• meter, specifically alliterative verse with each line having four stresses,
• poetic formulae
• exclusive poetic words and expressions

It is a well accepted category, not a loose assemble (see Wikipedia: Alliterative verse#Common Germanic origins), but "Germanic" is fairly broad, and modern poetry in Germanic languages like German, Scandinavian, English &c. generally takes much more from classical sources of inspiration than native Germanic. So maybe we could have a category like "alliterative poetry" or "Old Germanic poetry" instead? Mårtensås (talk) 15:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

This would be better expressed using some kind of Portal, I think, rather than a category. The fact that certain features were common across multiple languages is not independent of their common linguistic origins. We have a Portal:Germanic literature. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:04, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

The Germanic alliterative poetry was basically a shared poetic movement that died out in all Germanic-speaking areas except for Iceland, and has much more in common than just language. Modern German, Swedish and English are all Germanic languages, and their literatures are "Germanic literatures", but their poetry is not Germanic alliterative poetry. Did you read the Wikipedia article?

If you do not delete it, I will create a portal for "Germanic alliterative poetry". Does the Library of Congress classification system mean that Old English poetry must be sorted under a separate portal? Or are we allowed a bit of freedom with our classifications here on Wikisource? Mårtensås (talk) 19:19, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Alliterative poetry

What determines whether a poem belongs in this category or not? Does it have to alliterate in the original language, or in the translation? How much alliteration? Is The Raven (Poe) an alliterative poem? --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

In alliterative poetry the alliteration is the key part of the metre, not just a decorative flourish. The metre of the Raven is built on end-rhyme, not alliteration, whereas a poem like Beowulf absolutely requires alliteration in every line; without it the meter is defunct. But yes, it is perhaps not always clear. Mårtensås (talk) 19:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I can't find that definition of "alliterative poetry" anywhere. Nor does it seem to be a phrase found in the literature. Where did you find this label, and how will readers of WS know what it means? --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Even in the Wikipedia article’s lede, one reads: ”In prosody, alliterative verse is a form of verse that uses alliteration as the principal device to indicate the underlying metrical structure, as opposed to other devices such as rhyme.” Mårtensås (talk) 20:48, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

There, it is called "alliterative verse", and that is the label I have found in the literature. It is not a widespread term, but I do find it. However, I do not find "alliterative poetry" used in the same sense. Changing one part of an academic term to a synonym creates a new phrase that won't be recognized. I'm am coming to the opinion that this would be better handled using a Portal than a category, so that a full explanation and links to relevant WP content can be provided for context. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Northern Antiquities

Please use Roman numerals in the page titles for chapter numbers, even if the chapters have Roman numerals in the original. You can display Roman numerals, but the page names themselves should use Roman numerals for chapter numbers. EncycloPetey (talk) 22:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

How will readers get to the Dedication? There are no links anywhere that point to it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:39, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I guess that it should, along with the Account of the Author, be added to the Table of Contents, maybe using "includeonly" tags, since it is not present in the original. It is also linked to, namely with a "previous" from the Translator's Preface (or is that the Account of the Author? I am presently on my phone and cannot check; but both are linked in that way). Mårtensås (talk) 07:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC) Mårtensås (talk) 07:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Removing redirects

In these edits it looks as though you're sorting the listings by page numbers in the publication. On an Author page, we sort by date whenever practical, and when it isn't, we sort alphabetically. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

These poems are surely in a specific order for a reason, and many have an internal coherence. For instance in Tiresias, and Other Poems where "The Charge of the Heavy Brigade at Balaclava" is preceded by "Prologue" and followed by "Epilogue". Mårtensås (talk) 21:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

And they will be listed in their published sequence in the book's table of contents. But if someone is looking on the Author page for a listing, alphabetical sequence is preferred. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Index pages

Please do not use "Move" to "move" an Index page. Doing so does not work, and leaves behind a huge mess. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:29, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay but now it's impossible to edit Index:The Hymns of the Rigveda Vol 2 (better).djvu. What should be done is that Index:The Hymns of the Rigveda Vol 2.djvu is deleted or otherwise marked as obsolete, since numerous pages are missing at it (which is why I moved it in the first place). Mårtensås (talk) 19:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Switching from one Index to another is a complex process. Until you understand the process, I recommend asking for help if an Index needs to be switched. I have just gone through and cleaned up all the pages that were at the old Index by deleting them; have created the new Index again; and have adjusted all the links. The pages attached to the original ndex do not disappear when an Index is moved, nor do they move with the Index. And they often do not align to the same page locations in the new scan.

An Index is named based on a specific file on Commons, and all of the linked pages shown in the Index are tied to that same file name. If oyu need to switch to using a new file, create a new Index instead of trying to "move" the old one. Or ask for help with a bot to move all the individual pages, because as I say, it is a complex process that can create a big mess if not done precisely correct. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)