User talk:RaboKarbakian/Archives/2022

Less-than-pretty pictures (and, separately, magazine articles with Rackham illustrations)

I noticed the growing list of periodical articles at Rackham’s Author: page; I was thinking of transcribing them soon. If you could select some from which to extract images (to be added in the transclusion), I can work on those first. In less-fun-pictures news, would you mind stripping the background color out of a few images (or make them new, as you’re inclined)? Some coins (which would replace the image here, as well); a map (although this one looks nice); and some seals. I was just working on these, and was bothered by the backgrounds. (You can see how interesting the book is, with three images in the first 487 pages.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Yeah, I can do those images, except the one, unless you want them all to be jpg. If the image is good, I leave it alone. A couple of that sourcerer's color plates in the Greenhouse book were as good or better than mine and I left them because replacing a good image with a 'not so good' or 'just as good' image is a dreadful thing. Several of those I replaced were great, but they were png, and the book, so heavy with images and no plan for making downloadable books with lighter weighted images yet.... So, lets leave it (I really don't like to be a bad guy removing others images).

About the Rackham article.... I had to stop myself from doing just that a couple of times, because of being busy and wanting to get what should be a finite list filled. They are all linked to, either in the bibliography or in the magazine section at his author page; at this point, your choice is as good as mine, really. A couple were poems. The Punch stuff is all just images, I made galleries for them at commons, which I'm not sure how to handle that here, and if it even should be handled here. The works of eh, C. V. something are all poems. There is a non-fiction work, by an engineer, about beds, which is not typical. There are sports pieces and sportsman's pieces, and probably a fairy story or two (but I haven't done Little Folks or St. Nicholas yet, so not as many as you'd think).

I got about 250 topsy-turvy scans to make right and a different IA upload experience to experience right after. I think I'll do those images for you first. Sorry to be chatty, it was a long day making pages straight and listening to the scanner whirl (or is it whizz?). Beaver coins sounds about right, heh!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:03, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I changed 90% to 275px, so you might want to change that. The images were huge! Also, I split the coins, and if you want a single image for en.pedia just let me know.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 02:23, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

• Thank you for the images! They look great. (I had always wanted the coins split, too, so thanks for that. I can put them together for the enWP article (although I wouldn’t mind if you put them together). I will go through the articles as I have time; I trust in you to deal with the metadata as necessary. (Unfortunately, my current Little Folks ILL request seems to be gathering dust on the proverbial shelf, just like a dozen other old requests.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Putting the coins together is no problem. Little Folks is very sparse online. So is St. Nicholas, but not as sparse as Little Folks. I wonder if a hundred years from now, people might be trying to find Highlights....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:25, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I've almost caught up to you! Maybe some color next? The public domain day list reminded me of this. One page has a really bad gutter and it is a princess story. But an A. A. Milne princess story! The almost have stonings and drownings and burnings in it; but they opted for brothers.... I need to put the stuff in the book onto the author page. The magazine list is in two places. War Cranks, I am going to redo a couple of those images. I thought that if I treated them like color images, that the real color would come out. After working with a few more scans, I can see, they were supposed to be simple line drawings. Also, the red in the title, I am going to leave it, I thought the tiff was in grayscale and that the centers of the letters were a different color (dark grey not really dark grey), but the tiff is in rgb so I got that wrong also, but nicely wrong, I think. Fun stuff, thanks!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 03:46, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I enjoyed reading “The Green Door.” I have proofread “The Magic Bat,” as well. My ILL requests have finally been renewed, so now I can wait even longer for the Little Folks request to come in. Unless I am impeded by some other work, I should get back to scanning next week. Absent a more interesting finding, Arthur Rackham: His Life and Works will be the first work, although with some censoring necessary for copyrighted images (although the work was not renewed). TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I have fallen way behind you. There is more than just the Magic Bat, they reside in my notices! I am waiting for the Scan Lab to fix one of the Volumes of St. Nicholas or for someone with access to HathiTrust to download a pdf (then upload, of course) of just the missing issue. I have considered that maybe I am on a "doodoo list" (translate to "don't") there. Maybe something else. I had very weird experience with ping there, and other places also and I am glad that you didn't "ping" me today. I have scanned a 1993 printing of Rackham's "The Tempest" which I logged some questions about at Copyright discussions. Once I get back to a different set of bookmarks, I have bookmarked the article by AR about criticism which I should have access to now since the yeardometer has turned. Also, I have been scanning "The Complete Angler" which is maybe PD now and for sure PD in I think '27; either way, to have the scan and the images scanned at 600dpi into jp2 is just great! tif is built on the jpeg library. jp2 is not. Really confusing, but there you have it. It is very nice to hear (read) from you!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I don’t ping, owing to prior, bad experience. Scan Lab requests from, for lack of a better term, repeat offenders (you and L————r) certainly seem to be pushed to the bottom of the list, if not off of it. Owing to the awful weather here, I couldn’t get to scanning much—but there is one thing. Also, would you mind creating these two images? More maps, but hopefully the images from my scan will be more interesting. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Sometime I should dig out the first couple of chats I had with Seeker for you. That gallery book is lovely! The map images are done. Before my computer died, I had an image to djvu script which was broken. I think I was trying to position the paragraphs on the page which was just silly to attempt before having the text match the page simply. Anyway, under different conditions, I would not be asking other people of their time like that. So, whatever the reason, and the ping juggling surrounding Goblin Market (my notification said it was from one of them when I logged into commons, but when I got here, it was suddenly from another of them). Regardless, asking others of their time is problematic to me. So it is how it is. If the St Nicholas is ever to be here, they will need the repairs that I have listed, so I don't consider it to be a waste of my time. Thanks for your patience with the Rackham articles. I have no words of explanation for the delay.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 21:46, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for the map images. I’m going to proofread the gallery book soon, so I would appreciate the images from it (although, of course, don’t push yourself over it). Don’t worry about any delay: I like reading the old stories anyway, or I wouldn’t work on them so much. I’m hoping, next week, to get some more juicy public-domain works: if the weather improves, maybe I can scan them. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
• RaboKarbakian: Could you do this image, please? You can upload the new version over the current name. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:09, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. it's done. The half-tones... It actually looked pretty darn good when I converted it to two colors only, but I handled it like a black and white so that there is some grays in between the whites and blacks. I overheard (and have not yet confirmed) that there is a rare configuration of planets (Uranus and Saturn, iirc and configuration like 2:30 has the same configuration of clock hands as 3:35) right now and even more rare, the last time this configuration was in the signs that it is currently occupying (like 3:35 and then around and around and back to 3:35 again) was when Martin Luther was publishing his bible. I have actually thought about Martin Luther more in the last three weeks than in the total of the rest of my life. Wasn't this a surprise then? It is very nice timing for me. Thanks for the little project.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:05, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks! If you thought the quality of the image was bad, look at it scanned in the PDF—yikes. The original image was just of a low quality, likely because of the cheap printing job. As for your planet alignments, I can only find Martin Luther King mentioned—but close enough, right? This week, I only got to scan a book about the Catholic Index—interesting, but not particularly illustrated. Next week, I will probably try to scan in some more books, unless I am able to get my hands on some Code—I’ve been thinking about Georgia v. PRO recently. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: It requires an ephemeris for the 1500s. That was before Kepler, easier to get now but not in great demand. With the greatest respect to Dr. King, the changes that happened from then really only affected USA, I am not sure how world-wide it was. I like to be corrected about things like this if I am wrong. Publishing a bible so that regular folk can read it (without the education for The church and by The church) was a big deal for the whole world, not just Germany. But it (unfortunately) took some time for the ripples to spread. Checking ephemeris for historical world events is really interesting. Pluto and the world wars is a simple look. I could go on.... It's just that hearing about that particular historical event made me feel so much better about a lot of crap going on right now. Our evolution--it's not exactly linear, and this might be a leap. What is Georgia v. PRO about?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Okay then! I just read about GvP at en.w and it seems so simple to me that it is just nuts that it took the supreme court to deliver a verdict on it. I wonder now if the copyright law assumed govts not to be copyrightable and the lack of writing it out was because, like me, it just seems to be a given.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: The District Court opinion (against PRO), the Circuit Court opinion (for PRO), and the Supreme Court opinion (also for PRO). The “government edicts” doctrine has been in place for some time, but Georgia claimed this as an edge case that went against the traditional formulation (the last relevant decision for which was in 1888). In the U.S., I feel that people overemphasize Dr. King’s influence, especially on the world scale. This is both in ignoring the more influential (like, for example, the real Martin Luther), and in forgetting many of King’s contemporaries who were then-influential but have faded from the general collective consciousness. As for the PRO case, Georgia claimed copyright in the non-binding annotations to its official code, and many states (AR, AL, AK, ID, KS, MS, NE, SC, SD, TN, UT, VT, VA, DC) claimed that if Georgia’s code was rendered uncopyrightable, then their codes would be rendered uncopyrightable. I was thinking of making good on that threat. However, that’s a lot of work, so maybe not. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:37, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. So it is whether the governments "natural language" explanation of the officiously worded law can be behind a pay wall. I keep wondering, while working through this, if it was a gov't paid employee or an electee who took the notes. In astrology, political unrest for an individual country is measured by comparing the country's birth chart with the planets at that time, almost the same as if the country is a person. Assassination is easy for the noise. Noise has such a limited vocabulary. The current situation, which was also in Martin Luthers time is Saturn in the sign of brotherhood, such as is the opposite of the king. I am not sure that monarchy has an opposite, but when talking of Aquarius, it is not anarchy; I think brotherhood. Too much Leo is like too much "I am King and you are not" and too much Aquarius has everyone looking the same and thinking the same and wearing the same clothing, etc. Saturn makes disciplinary adjustments. Uranus is trine to the disciplinarian and is in Taurus, the sign of material wealth. Uranus is about sudden/radical change, awaking, liberation. Martin Luther's publication caused a liberation of the church from its great and extravagant wealth; the church had to go out and convert indigenous people and grab their wealth before they translated the bible. I really hope that this time is good for the planet/environment. But, it is always just guesses until it happens. Like, you can be pretty sure that people will break for lunch at the prescribed time, but you can only guess who sits with who and what they will eat.

I think it is pretty cool that you are actuating the court's ruling.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:43, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I think it depends on when the “natural language” version was written: was it written before the law was promulgated, by the law’s drafters; or after the law was promulgated, by people unconnected with the drafting of the law? This models the difference between pre- and post-law committee reports, which some justices noted in oral argument. The annotations to Georgia’s code were made by a division of Lexis as part of a work-for-hire arrangement with the Code Revision Commission, which the Supreme Courts of Georgia and the U.S. declared to be a branch of the Georgia legislature. This general arrangement is common in state annotated codes, and is (according to the Supreme Court) ineligible for copyright protection. A book on the church and the conversion of the indigenous peoples is a current MC work, which I was reading; more frequently it was the Europeans who needed conversion than the natives. And thank you for your words—they encourage me to scan more. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:01, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: My Little Folks request has finally come in! See Songs of Simple Simon for the two illustrations. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. That's pretty cool! Is there a volume number and/or date on that? Both would be preferred....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:09, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: It is from Little Folks for February 1896; the second item listed here. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. My apologies, while away from the computer, it occurred to me that I could look in the bib myself.... Those volume numbers can be a challenge. Any way: File:Little Folks-1896 Feb-0104.jpg and File:Little Folks-1896 Feb-0105.jpg.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:54, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: The Songs of Simple Simon (that one, at least) is now available! TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:24, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Index:Fables, of Aesop and other eminent mythologists - with morals and reflections (IA fablesofaesopoth00lest).pdf

RaboKarbakian: I saw this, and wanted to make sure you were aware of this other scan of that work. I didn’t want you to start a new work from scratch if you didn’t intend to. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: You mean the one that is missing pages from the index? Index:Fables of Aesop and other eminent mythologists.djvu? From 2009? And that the Scan Lab might fix it if I asked? I could use about 50 of those fables to prevent disambig pages from being redirected, thereby solving another pain in the ass for someone else in the future. Just to sound off alittle: all 700+ fables are permutations of the words Fox, Wolf, Lion, Ass and Horse. "It cannot be!" you might say, "No way are there 700+ permutations of those words!" But sort though them for a couple of months and see if what I say is not true! I see a light at the end of this and I am heading towards it.

But, if you think that the scan lab will fix the other if I ask, just let me know.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: If you don’t mind not having the original text layer, I can fix the 2009 DJVU file. Because of the way Commons backend handles text layers, when I repair the file, the text layer from that point onwards will shift. There’s a way to fix it on Commons’ end, but it’s not available to lowly peons like me or you. So, if you don’t mind having to press the “Transcribe text” button a few hundred times, I can fix the file. Also, the TOC pages are the only ones missing, right? [Also, the pages already created after that would have to be moved, but I think a bot-admin could be mugged for that effort once the file is fixed.] TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:26, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea., that would be fine; I was going to have to push that button for the pdf anyways. I was going to upload the individual index pages from the 1669 edition; I will do that if it is helpful to you. JPG, or PNG? Also, I would like to know how you are going to use commons to fix that file....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:32, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Heck, I was considering to just include the missing index pages at the transclusion from the new edition.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Okay on the fixing. I am downloading the current DJVU at the moment. By the “individual index pages,” do you mean the pages of the pseudo-TOC at the beginning that you wanted me to add? If so, don’t worry; everything change-wise is being done on my end. By “fixing the file,” I meant the problem that occasionally pops up when updating PDF and DJVU files with existing text layers, where the text layer for the pages stays with the page order of the old version of the file. There’s some button Commons administrators can press to fix the file; I know Xover has that power, so you can ask him to fix that problem for any other index which is problematic for that reason. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:38, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.!! Let's not screw up the text layer of the old work. Let me just do that transclusion trick, where I proof the missing index pages on the newer work and include them in the main of the original. Then, if there is a problem with this, it can be dealt with by those with the problem....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: The file is now fixed. The pages need to be moved. The text layer simply got deleted, but I don’t think that’s really a problem, as you said. There are, I believe, other (possibly Commons-related) tricks to regenerate text layers. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
• The new TOC pages are heavily compressed, for some reason, despite being very large files. Again, that problem can be avoided by taking the text from the original source. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I pointed Xover to this discussion where it is a choice to intervene or not. The newer version was paginated correctly. To think, this all happened because wikidata was taking up to 32 minutes to update....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I have no special powers on Commons. I'm not sure the exact problem you're referring to here, but what sometimes happens is that one of the early pages of a DjVu file contain an invalid text layer. When that happens the Mediawiki code that extracts the text layer gets confused and starts showing the text layer for the following page instead, and that error persists for subsequent pages (and if there are more DjVu pages with invalid text layers the problem compounds too). My only "magic" fix for that is that I have tools that takes the original scan images (from IA), re-runs OCR on them using Tesseract, and then generates a new DjVu file. In these tools I have implemented sanity-checking that avoids inserting any invalid text layers in the resulting page. I can also do roughly the same using only the existing DjVu (by downloading it, extracting its pages, and then treating them as if they were the original scan images), but that involves lots of manual faffing and tends to produce poorer results (the IA DjVus are usually heavily compressed and reduced resolution, and extracting and reencoding them causes generational loss).

Once a page has been proofread and exists as an actual wikipage here, no change to the file on Commons will affect it. If we insert or remove pages from the DjVu on Commons then we will need to shift any wikipages here accordingly (which is currently somewhat harder and more manual labour than needed, so we try to avoid it when not strictly needed, but entirely doable).

In any case, hope that was of some use. And don't hesitate to ask if you need any such manipulations, either at the Scan Lab or to me directly. I don't have a lot of wikitime right now—so you may need to spoonfeed me the details of what you need, and I can't guarantee any particular response time—but do feel free to ask if you think I can help in any way. Xover (talk) 06:59, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

• Xover: The “magic” you mentioned was the power I was thinking of. However, because the entire text layer for this particular file was lost, it is not needed. The file—Index:Fables of Aesop and other eminent mythologists.djvu—was missing two pages towards the beginning of the scan, so I added those. Because of that, the pages are now incorrect. If you are willing to make that change, please shift all created pages from /20 onwards up two spaces (/20 to /22 &c.). The use of <pages /> in transclusion will also need to be similarly adjusted. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

  @TE(æ)A,ea.: Done Please check and let me know if I messed up anywhere. Xover (talk) 18:37, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Xover: Everything looks good, as in usable -- which it did not look like earlier today! Thank you! TE(æ)A,ea.: Thank you for articulating what needed to be done with that mess.... My mess would not have been as messy, but also could never have been cleaned up and lacks in elegance what your fix has.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:03, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Could you please create the nine figures from this page? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:14, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: commons:Category:A Dissertation on the Construction of Locks (Bramah, 1815)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 03:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks! TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, sir

Thank you for the large work you have been doing on the Aesop's Fables. Really, thank you. —Genesis Bustamante (talk) 02:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I did not know that! I'm glad that my work is helpful. Adding the initials and illustrations was excellent. That is the most tedious work imaginable, so thank you. I'll add them after I transclude to the main-space the remaining pages. Could you help me with adding a fable illustration in page 5? I forgot the wiki-code for that. And... what is buried you will recreate, or relink, I suppose? —Genesis Bustamante (talk) 18:28, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Genoskill: Cygnis puts a "frameless" in the "[[File:" list of things. But, if it is just an image in the center of the page [[File:Caxton Aesop-019.jpg|center|350px]] works just fine.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian: Thank you! What's Cygnis? —Genesis Bustamante (talk) 17:49, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Genoskill: User:Cygnis insignis is (the first that I know of) one of the sourcerer artists.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

St Nicholas...

Okay so you are reverting my attempts to resolve the Lint-error. Thanks :)

Perhaps you have a solution to the DIV-span swap that existed?

It seems that when you set center in image syntax it wraps the image in a DIV container, which can't be placed in a SPAN. That's now resolved, so I went ahead and reinstated your version on the other pages you hadn't reverted to yet.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk)

ShakespeareFan00 Truly! I was unaware of a div-span swap and in these wee-precaffienated hours of my day (in the Moin) I am unable to imagine what this condition might even be! There are no spans in the markup or in the css, for instance. Oh, maybe line-height?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:03, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Images - you had something like <span style="float:foo">[[File:bar.jpg|center]]</span>. This causes a DIV span swap to occur, as the Image syntax creates a DIV wrapper to apply the centering on the image....

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:17, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Recent edit on Charles Kingsley

Hi there, I was wondering what the thinking was behind changing the links associated with 'Hereward the Wake'? You seem to have pointed the title to a Wikipedia page for the work and added links to two index pages that don't exist. In neither case have I seen this done on any other author page I've edited. Regards, Chrisguise (talk) 11:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Chrisguise I used {{wdl}} which links to whatever it finds first of source, en.wiki, commons, or finally resonator. Usually, it links to commons as articles don't exist for the books. When the book is transcribed and put at wikidata, it will point to the link here. I would have used {{WD author}} which only links here if there is a link, but it is too stupid for multiple volumes and too clutzy as it puts anything that follows it onto a new line with a space in front of it. I have no idea how to fix its stupidness that way. {{wdl}} is really made for and is great for linking within works and if that use for the book is too annoying for you, it can be changed back to not use any wikidata templates. Especially since what I did is kind of like stupid on stupid.... I just like to point to where all the work for the volumes has been done; I don't always like how I point.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Page:St. Nicholas - Volume 41, Part 1.djvu/77

Smaller is SPAN based and hence you cant put POEM inside it. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:59, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

ShakespeareFan00 Oops, sorry and thanks. I was going to just redo that page, but later. And by "later" it might mean that I forget to redo it, as my mornings are such.... I always opt for having the appearance of not broken.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:10, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

You might need to use something like {{overfloat image}} , otherwise the verse won't be 'inside' the image. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

ShakespeareFan00 Completely new thing, or old business, from yesterday: https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page:St._Nicholas_(serial)_(IA_stnicholasserial402dodg).pdf/707&diff=prev&oldid=12356168 I have never seen anything like that before and I tried to use it in other places and failed. What is that? --RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:28, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

The {class} syntax is specfic to Ppoem. It's how you class portions..ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Arthur Rackham: A List of Books Illustrated by Him

I have wanted to upload this book, but held off because the frontispiece in the HathiTrust scan was covered by the slip. I obtained a physical copy through ILL and scanned in the frontispiece, as well as the images on pp. 1 and 15. Could you please create the images, please? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I have already spied upon your book and flipped through the pages. I was waiting for your scanned images to appear! They will be done within a few hours, my software is tied up at the moment with an automated task that will take hour(s) not minutes to finish. Sorry for the delay. I could have used the commandline for the task....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:31, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Also, signature! Great find!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Page:St. Nicholas, vol. 40.1 (1912-1913).djvu/20

Your layout did not work. The drop initial fails to display if you apply a vertical shift to the block it's contained in. ShakespeareFan00 (talk)

ShakespeareFan00: First of all, I was wanting to thank you--I have learned a lot. The drop initial, I think, is rendering after and under the image, due to the style being applied after the text moves up. So, I either paste the drop initial style onto the styles.css or I figure out how to import the style to the styles.css (I thought there was some @ thingie) but the web hasn't been good for finding that how.

Do you know how to import a style sheet from a style sheet?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

AhHa! @import "navigation.css"; /* Using a string */ or @import url("navigation.css"); /* Using a url */

I'm gonna need the url import, I think.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC) Unsupported drat.

I don't know how to do an import of a style sheet in-terms of IndexStyles currently... Ask @Inductiveload: perhaps? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Weirdly, I'd sandboxed the page concerned, and without the images , the rest of the layout works just fine, including the drop-initial. Hmm, puzzler isnt it? ShakespeareFan00 (talk)

It is rendering the di under the image. I could make the image transparent, or move the text down instead of up--which doesn't work because the text div pushes the image down with it. So, the question now is gif or png.... My least favorite of questions, and back to the discussion of color space maths with IL....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

So, the real solution (using only css and not transparent images), if it exists, might be in one of those styles I don't understand. Like position -- maybe relative would put it above the image. But there is a transparent png there now, and all is good (in a relativistic sense...).--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Z-index maybe? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

That did it! I clearly still do not understand positioning. I looked it up and was going to start with static. The paste that worked did not use that. Also, it was a great example, I am sorry that mine will go on that list due to its lack of greatness...! Maybe there should be a compilation of great style examples in use like that.... Thanks again and again!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Page:St. Nicholas, vol. 40.1 (1912-1913).djvu/584

This page has mismatched DIV's what were you trying to do? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:37, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

ShakespeareFan00I checked the matched divs before reverting your change. There is one wrapped around the end of the text and after the rule.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:47, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

It was still showing as having mismatched ones after you looked at it, What was the layout you were trying to do? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:48, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

You have 4 closing tags, but only 3 opening tags. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:51, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, you must be right about that. I deleted the extra /div, but the first time I restored it, the last rule was not enclosed in the page div -- making it a lot wider than it should have been. So, a confused thanks! --RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Try using - w:en:User:PerfektesChaos/js/lintHint , It should help finding mismatched items more quickly:), It's also helped me find mismatched italics MANY times. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Another hint : Don't use pixel heights, use em or if browsers support it line-height units? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:57, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Alternatively look into the suitability of a 'polygon' on the image(s) to support the layout better. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

ShakespeareFan00 I have been using pixels when the layout interacts with the image so much. Like when the text block needs to display on the image at a certain place. What I would really really like is to set the image size in ems or even rems. That would change everything, wouldn't it?

Also, I am stunted here and now, on an old browser; that was last year I guess, our discussion of polygons and browser age. There were screenshots of them not rendering here. And I tried to make an old computer with new software and it wasn't booting.... I will look into the javascript!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:31, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Munsell Color Atlas...

Thanks for the table.. What did you use to generate the sRGB(?) values for the chart, and how did you scale the values..

I am asking because I had in mind a somewhat technical query, for Commons image specialists, if we can figure out the difference between what a given shade SHOULD be compared to what the (faded) chart version is. I.E If we know how much typical pigments from that era fade or the paper yellows for example, that could form the basis of how to apply color correction on other color plates from roughly the same era? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:22, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

ShakespeareFan00: I am pretty sure that I color picked it and made plans to do it differently. Colorspace conversions are more complicated than I imagined but not too complicated. They have a Y space and a Y' space that they do things in; elementary linear algebra at its more elementary. It has been about 10-15 years since I worked with the colorspace conversions so, my knowledge is time challenged.

So, my plan hinged on getting my old scripts back, or in refigureing it out again. Ultimately to script the colorspace conversion and the table construction together. I had access to a text book when I did my work with colorspaces. When I got that same book here, from the library, it had been gutted of the maths, "mathless edition" although, they did not have the guts to call it that. The author of that great text book (and the gutted one) w:Andries van Dam.

A difference between the scanned color and the expected color is also so interesting! How colors fade and are affected by a scanner (there is a glow from the glass) is so interesting to me. If a good guess could be made given the time that passed between printing and scanning, maybe that would be useful. And, I just reread your question and this is a restatement of that.... There are other factors, the storage of the printed "original" (I think that more damp is also more yellow) and the acidity of the paper (more acidity is more pink), but the acidity seems to have happened in the '60s or '70s.

I had big plans for that Munsell....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

There is a toolkit for Octave here - https://www.munsellcolourscienceforpainters.com/MunsellAndKubelkaMunkToolbox/MunsellAndKubelkaMunkToolbox.html ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I seem to recall some Python libraries as well...ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

See also https://www.munsellcolourscienceforpainters.com/MunsellResources/MunsellResources.html ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

If it can be done in python ( https://github.com/colour-science/colour), it can probably be done in lua.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:34, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@RaboKarbakian: If you have a specfic edition that had the maths, you might ask someone on the Wikipedia Resource Exchange to help you relocate the math. BTW I would very strongly suggest you publish your source code, and any explanations on Wikiversity. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:52, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens

Maybe the missing plates can be found: 14, 33, 47 and 48. BTW, the index has two page 79s. Sorry I didn't follow your formatting with "div" but feel free to change anything I did. I just went as fast as I could, to get as much done as possible today. Good night! Ufh.. lots of work but aside from maybe having time tomorrow to add a few more missing black and white images, I'm pretty much done with this one. :) Good luck and nice to meet ya. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:10, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

curly quotes or straight quotes

You mentioned straight quotes or curly quotes. Do you want curly quotes on the items you're working on? I always change the curly quotes (smart quotes) to straight quotes because I thought I was supposed to. But I just read on the net that for published works, some prefer the curly (smart) quotes. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The Eloquent Peasant: Heh, smart quotes. I like that. I got into this from images to text, so it is so much about the "visual" for me. Some here might find this to be abhorrent due to the importance being the words. And they are right, if it had not been for computers and my involvement with image software, I would have been one of them. But I got involved all backwards like, and how the page "looks" is so much more important to me than if the words are correct. It is what my eyes see. I have tried to make these eyes see the words. I am "well read" enoughish, etc.

If I am involved with a community project, I use the straight quotes, and am glad of it, for the ease and such. But on my own, if the work used curlies then I do too.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

just a thought on deadlines

I was curious as to your message re: timelines/ deadlines / # of days ..

Why do you set deadlines for yourself for finishing books? I personally never do that.

I see this place as a place to relax  :) since I really do have too much work outside of here..

Of course, it's not really my business how other people approach Wikisource.. so you don't have to answer..

Still thinking of how I can help. Please feel free to let me know if I should revert anything I did on Peter Pan... etc. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 10:16, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The Eloquent Peasant: The middles of any of my projects are filled with boredom, loathing and the wondering of the reason I became involved in it to begin with. Here, I make complicated layouts, that can be returned to and remembered, but are easier when fresh in my mind. Real life projects are similar. Complicated, over-blown, some are kind of big. If a person reaches adulthood between the ages of 26 and 28, then I have been this way since adolescence. It actually relaxes me to think that the whole damn thing will be finished in 3 days, or whatever. I love the beginnings and the finished projects, they make the middles bearable. The boredom, loathing and the regret for me are not as bad as these words imply; and seeing each page looking beautiful is very nice.

I know that the universal "relaxing" symbol is something like being on a beach with a cocktail and an umbrella. But 15 or 20 minutes is all that I can take of that kind of relaxation before stressing out with a mind filling with things uninvited, looking for something to do.

This is all outlined perfectly in my natal chart. Intercepted Gemini, too much Virgo and Scorpio and with a mis-guided aggression that expresses itself in mother-like concern and tears. A very very very poorly placed Venus, which I shared with several people I graduated high school with and some who were in the class behind mine. These elements all get along with themselves/each other just fine, but are like a stubbed toe when relaxing on a beach....

Do not let me make you suffer with my foibles! They are mine, like the deadlines, which are also mine. Gladly self-imposed!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Valkyrie

I'm so sorry!!! I read your post on my page. I'm sorry if my changes caused issues.
I reverted one thing.
and I reverted a second thing here.
How does it look? I can imagine that I would also be sad if things were getting damaged. Please know it was not my intention. I hope everything gets better with the books soon... The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The Eloquent Peasant: I did not mean to blame. Only to mention that where you go things break. I have no information with which to assign a blame. Without this information, I would surely have to blame this horrible, retched computer I am on that so elegantly representative of the broken parts of my relationship with my mother (it got hacked when she "downloaded" an image for her desktop which I had already put on her computer -- waiting for her to find some time so I could show her how to use that computer which I built for her.) I had nothing to do with this computer as it stands now. The software, the kernel, etc. Nothing. I have too much self-respect for this.

I suspect that the chain of software that exists and operates between me and the wiki is much more complex that I "know" and that it is what is causing the problems I am having. That your interaction with what I am working on messes this chain up somehow is really, very interesting. Software, typically, is very stupid. Software is installed by people who are usually not stupid, but fall somewhere on a scale between [Stupid -->Misinformed -->Ignorant -->Knowing -->All knowing] Stupid, being the "babies" and Ignorant being the "teenagers". This scale is not of the "goodness" or "badness" of a person, indeed, a "bad person" can be just as misinformed as a "good person". But what makes this problem proceeding you is not so interesting and more like terrible is how it is all that I have access to. And all my years of study and are just sitting here, without root access, watching and trying not to be "the victim" which I hate, loathfully hate, side-step whenever possible out of self respect and respect for those around me.

Unless you "know" it is something you did, it probably isn't. There should not have been any blame. The most I would ask in this situation is that you wait until I am finished before you proof and validate, which, under normal circumstances, I greatly appreciate.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

...Only to mention that where you go things break.... Yes, that's kind of true but I am actually quite careful to not go places. Today, for example. I felt the need to drive, through hell and high water, to reach a store with a discounted item. Along the way, drove by a home and saw an odd thing. A person lying flat on her back, an elderly man talking to her. In this country, offering help to a stranger can actually get one in trouble. If I were to help, physically help him lift up his wife, they could sue me (if she were to get more hurt or something). So I simply offered to call an ambulance and the gentleman told me "no!" and proceeded to explain that "she has no sense of balance..." WOW! If having no sense of balance would cause me to fall flat on my back in the middle of a green lawn, on a sunny day...!!!??? I don't think I'd go out much. But maybe he was telling me that I have no sense of balance, which I don't - because why would I drive through hell and high water, on the first day of school, looking for a discount? I kicked myself for that because that was at the beginning of my trek that I saw the old couple. At the end of the trek, I had not found the item I was looking for (something for my garden). Apparently the store's inventory system doesn't work well - the system says there are 30 in stock, but when you go there, a clerk (and I won't describe him because I don't want to be mean)... told me their store doesn't actually have the stock that the website says... I came home, went online, bought the damn thing and told myself- that I will never drive so far ... unless ...Maybe, I just wanted to get away from my desk- that's probably the main reason I went.. I hope I have a sense of balance. At least I hope I have some sense. g. night. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 03:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

beautiful or correct?

Okay. Okay. So you love when a page is beautiful. Steve Jobs, I think was like that. But things have to be typed correctly. On shopping again, I found "marching tables" and "mating tables" because many people can't bother to check their spelling when they post on Craigslist. I don't want you to think I spend my life shopping. At this point, I only need flowers and more pretty flowers, for my garden. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 10:48, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

The Eloquent Peasant: Three things.

1. An apology. When I read your message from last night, I also reread what I wrote and it certainly did read as if I was accusing you of perhaps "doing" something purposeful that messed things up. There was this thing, this funny "truthful" thing that was the list of steps for problem solving. One item on the list was the "punishment of the innocent". Since reading that sarcastic yet truthful list, I try to avoid some of the worse of those steps. I failed to do that at the onset of this problem and now am apologizing.
2. My spelling has gone downhill since 8th grade, with a steep decline in the college Math classes. I asked my dad once what he didn't like about words and punctuation and spelling -- he is really really good at a lot of other things. He told me this: That the rules don't apply everywhere equally. Like the specification for a #2 pencil or a half inch bolt. After my math and physics classes, I am not fond of words because they are so fuzzy. Forget the people who sound out other words from the ones that are there meaning something entirely different (a form of insanity, I think); but the problem of when I say the word "home" and you say the word "home" and ET said the word "home" -- they all mean something different and provide different mental pictures to the speaker and the hearer. And worse, if that doesn't happen, that if you think "home" is the same exact location that I think is "home". Wars happen from that. Words are problematic. I did concede that the words here are more important than the look of them and the images that go with them. My journey into here was backwards. Bad spelling is only a real problem when those words fail to communicate accurately, which is their job. Bad spelling also give that variety of nit-picker something to do. I speak as a nit-picker (but not so much about spelling, lately).

Madonna sang in Bedtime Story, "They've gone out, lost their meaning" - she was done with words. But words is all we really have. My husband and I have had to invent words to have a common language and understanding because we don't speak the same language.The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

1. I am wondering if you are Facebooking before coming here to proof. And if you are facebooking on a phone and then proofing here on the same phone. I wonder this because after you breeze through the stuff I am working on, the format is more like Facebook style (the paragraph breaks not being very visible) than the wiki style. Like maybe some FB app is seizing everything else. It is probably wrong to diagnose software problems based on style changes, yet, that is the nature of this question. --RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay. No, I don't facebook before proofing or maybe I do. Never actually tracked myself on the net but I did download 9 huge files from Google 'cause apparently they track me and you. Still, this comment you wrote about Facebooking before proofing - sounds more like a conspiracy theory. :P The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

The Eloquent Peasant there were a lot of ifs in my thought, for sure. The question I asked was based on 1) that the "wiki style" gets messed up after you work on it. and 2) that the style it gets is more like the style on FB, where they seem to discourage paragraphs. I asked about a phone also, because what was in my head was an inept FB app that doesn't let go of the keyboard, or similar. And, truly, the author of my hypothetical inept software would probably like everyone to think that s/he wrote it on purpose that way (embracing the conspiracy rather than the ineptness). In truth, I don't have enough information for any good guess. My disappearing previews, when I am offline and while I am looking at the kernel modules and other not very stealthy behavior of my computer is a completely different matter. I consider the unasked for stealing of a persons working on a computer to be malicious, what other reason to not ask first? But you messing up the style of new pages here, I still think "ineptness"; it being FB style is a small small potential.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 02:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Conspiracy theories should be embraced. "They wrote it it on purpose that way..." -One time, when Pee Wee Herman was doing tricks on his bike, he did something amazing or he fell. Bystanders were astonished. With a pretty straight-face Pee Wee explained, "I meant to do that." Thanks, so I've now cued up my Netflix with "Pee Wee's Big Holiday" and I'm hoping it'll make me laugh a little. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 15:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Yup- Very funny. "Pee Wee's Big Holiday" minute second 7:32 - 7:45 is hilarious. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 15:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The Eloquent Peasant: I used to look forward to that show; it was funny and different. If a mistake gets a laugh, a comedian can use it, as laughs are the goal. The writers of software do not have it so easy as this, as something like this is not making me laugh. If I was laughing, it is pretty elaborate and messy, so what amount of laughter is worth it? As I am not laughing, greatly or even a little, what would be the goal, the purpose? Software is a different realm, really. I have made a few mistakes that caused something like a re-purposing. And there is a phrase: "bug or enhancement" but that is for mistakes that do something wonderful and wanted and previously unexpected. (enhancement is not the right word, I am too long out of my favorite element I think). I am a big Pee-Wee fan, so when opportunity comes up, I will surely look for your moment there....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Writing software with quality takes time and effort but no one now seems to want to spend the money for that. They don't trust the programmers and just really, really limit how much is spent on software development. Testing? That's done in the production environment when the thing goes live, by the frustrated users.. The end-user is recorded as they use the software and encounter bugs and yell at the computer. The programmers laugh at our reactions to the bugs, and choose which bugs to fix; maybe they choose which bugs to fix based on how hard we make them laugh with our reactions to the messed up software. That's why it's important to talk to the computer when it's not working correctly and say exactly what's happening and exactly what you wish were happening. That's my conspiracy theory. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 17:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The Eloquent Peasant I think that the very beginning of my personal problems with software and other things right now in my life has to do with saying "C programmers are like a dime a dozen" once too many times.... Other than that, I always found that screenshots were very helpful for communicating problems and successes. Then, I watched screenshots disappear from my mobile device, literally, there and then gone. I considered that a screenshot I took of a movie frame might have been "too big" for the "overlords", but what they are doing with whole movies while preventing me from these screenshots is like the difference from grabbing a lifesaver from your moms purse as compared to holding up and taking over the liquor store. So, I trashed that "cause and effect" idea I had.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:59, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

WD templates

Thank you for working on versions/translations pages, switching to {{WD version}}. I like the idea of having consistent formatting for all dab/author/version pages – I'm surprised that there isn't a standard guideline for this, and these templates definitely seem the way to go. That said, I've come across a few things on the pages that you've edited recently:

1. Using {{WD version}} on translation/versions pages adds the same author to each entry. This information is already in the header: wouldn't it be better to use {{WD author}} to omit the author information, and only use {{WD version}} on dab/portal pages, where the author will vary?
2. The entries sometimes say "translated by unknown value" when the translator is unknown. What would you think about adding an override parameter for entries like this (e.g. |translator=), until it's possible to detect these "unknown value"s via Lua/parser functions/etc.?

--Yodin^T 11:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Yodin It is a very pleasant "end of season" task; last February it was Portal:Aesop's Fables and {{wdl}} became more streamlined and is now able to very easily handle a mere 200 Grimm tales.

In regards to:

1. Of course you are absolutely correct about this. My tendency to default (thoughtlessly) to version when not on an author page is the cause of this. On the other hand, I also noticed when an entry did not have an author. Fixing this (changing version to author) might be a good task for a software edit.
2. "unknown value". Fixing this requires some module editing. Another (implied) suggestion is that when bringing in more than one value, (see translator in example below) an "and" should be put into the right place. Maybe that is not good at the module level or maybe it could be a "grammar" toggle in the module. I thought to leave it so that the repair/fix/upgrade is remembered. There is kind of a mess at WD with "author string" which when the author becomes a Custom entity, the author string does not know this and no such "string" thing for illustrators, editors or translators. Not a big mess, but a little one for sure.

Example:

"How Six Men travelled through the Wide World" by Brothers Grimm, translated by Miss Blackley and May Sellar, edited by Andrew Lang, illustrated by Henry Justice Ford, in The Yellow Fairy Book (1894)

Thank you for your kind words and productive suggestions (and fixing the documentation at the template, for sure good thanks here!)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good! I'll have a go using AWB for the automated edits, and will try to keep an eye for any ways to fix the "unknown value" things in the future. 🙂 --Yodin^T 11:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

In regards to "author name string", the way that is supposed to be used is odd, and it's usually wrong... not well documented, and one of those things about most WD edits being made by people who don't live there. :)

For each author, there should be an "author" statement, with an "object named as" claim that has the name as stated on the title page, and a "series ordinal" putting them in order. It's also nice to have wikidata:User:Tohaomg/rearrange values.js, so you can rearrange the order in which statements appear. "object named as" is the way WD generally denotes that the "stated name" of something is often totally unrelated to the WD label. The same thing applies to editors, translators, publishers, illustrators, and so forth. Even New York City, when it's named as New York on the title page.

Only if the "author" is set to "unknown value" (which means either the author doesn't have a WD entity, or you don't know what it is) should you have an "author name string" statement (with a matching series ordinal). Those statements are actually used by thewikidata:Wikidata:Tools/Author Disambiguator, mainly to connect the authors of scientific journal articles added by the DOI bot (they seem to just love to constantly publish with variant sets of initials, which makes that topic a whole extra layer of hell). Once someone connects the work to it's author, the "author name string" is supposed to go away. Jarnsax (talk) 05:46, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Just so it's not "only my saying this," the documentation for this is on the talk page of "author name string" at wikidata:Property_talk:P2093, and there a bot-generated constrain report for the exact condition (both author and author name string with same serial ordinal) at Wikidata:Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P2093. Jarnsax (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Jarnsax Yes. I explain it from use. When you paste the officious description, it first annoys me but soon I am glad. It's "use" mindset is when the author qid does not exist or whoever is putting the data onto the publication qid doesn't know the real name. I was also considering re-purposing it. I will never suggest it, but I thought when I first saw it that it was for wrapping the used name with the real name link. But the "object named as" used to be "stated as" (d:Property:P1932 is a good qualifier for this same task. I really like to note the name they really used, not the this century/decade name. So, that property as qualifier is useful for more things than the author's pen name. The name used is always going to be useful and nice to link to the "current" name. This is a good check to be added to any module.

You can see when other online researchers left notes at "their" record, and it is simple and very civil. Often it is an obituary and what the publication was. When you see something that is data but that you don't have a place for that yet, that too is when some qualifiers get used. But I am pretty consistent with the "stated as" "named as" property.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The whole point of me explaining this was to point out that you should not rely on the continued existence of an "author name string" field to store persistent data... it is subject to being "randomly" removed from entities by automated tools, and it's value moved into a "object named as" claim on an author statement. You should use an "object named as" claim to store and retrieve the actual full text string stated on the title page.

By "century/decade name", I assume you are referring to the way authors are named in library catalogs (like: Sullivan, James, 1873-1931). The actual term for those is the "authorized heading", and they (or, at least, the LOC version) can be searched at authorities.loc.gov, which is a great resource for disambiguation since the records actually document where the "evidence" for the name was found (that particular James Sullivan is https://lccn.loc.gov/no96026134). The "full text" of the authorized heading, which becomes the "entry point" (the indexed term on a author card) in library catalogs, should be stored in a "subject named as" claim on the WD statement for the authority control number, on the author's WD entity.

Sorry if I am coming off as "officious", I'm actually trying to help you, and I'm deliberately trying to explain stuff in a overly elaborate manner so that we can avoid misunderstanding and arguing like was happening on my WD talk page, or down below about what is technically considered to be an article by the software. Jarnsax (talk) 17:38, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

And again, to note something I should have mentioned, the entries in "object named as" and "subject named as" claims should also be added to the list of aliases in the relevant entity's label. That's how editors/bots are able to find the correct entity later. Think publishers, who tend to have lots or variations in how their name is printed on title pages. Jarnsax (talk) 17:59, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Ideally, we can get you storing data, and retrieving it, in a manner that is compatible with m:WikiCite, so that the work and edition entities you create can be used for citations on other projects, and wikisource transcriptions can appear in those citations. Jarnsax (talk) 18:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Locks images

(I moved here; I hope that it is easier for you to respond here.) The scan with “images” in the title also has the second plate, folded out, from which I derived the number of images, and from which you can derive the actual images. But the images you’ve already derived are good. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hah! Confused and busy! [[1]] is the page!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Arthur Rackham

I looked at your edit history here, and figured out this is "the bibliography" you were probably talking about.... I recognize the name, and think I had removed unsourced claims about him being the illustrator of "Mysteries of Police and Crime" (I think that was the work). I had removed them because they were unsourced, and he wasn't attributed as the illustrator in the book scan I was looking at. Please go back (since I am not sure which work it was) to the edition entity and add the claim that he was the illustrator. The claim should have the reference "stated in" (PP248) "Arthur Rackham, a Bibliography" (Q109252158), and, preferably "page(s)" (P304) claims as well. It should also be set as preferred. If it's what I suspect, that's probably also the source of the claim about the publication date of that edition..if so, the same thing (including setting it preferred) applies. Jarnsax (talk) 00:00, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

list articles

I'm not going to mess with this right now, simply because I now know it would cause breakage of {{wdl}} here, but (I dug through your history to find this example) the interwiki linking of pages like The Story of the Youth Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was is not done correctly... to do it right, {{wdl}} needs to understand "has list" properties.

This is not a single publication. It is a Versions disambiguation. Yet, it is a publication and does have a first publisher. If German wikisource did not have a versions page, their first publication (the 1812 or the 1816, which ever year that was) would go into the wikilinks and the quid for the version isn't linked but is in the list of versions. That is the only way I know to link any language wikipedia to their one same language wikisource version, without losing it as it's own citation, which I really like. It could be written so that the wikipedias sift through the editions and find theirs, but I started having problems at Aesop's Fables because all of the editions were being read at the same time -- it was so "taxing". I suspect sifting editions would breakage at wikipedias.

Which ever German publisher put it through the press first. It has several "firsts". The first time it was illustrated and who did that. The first time Rackham/Crane/Cruikshank/etc. illustrated it (but I think maybe he didn't). The first time that Alice Lucas translated it. The first English translation (which is incomplete.) It was in two separately titled Rackham books, three if you count the third different as the illustrations multiplied and some were now paintings. The first complete English translation.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I just picked it as a semi-random example of the "type of article" I was describing.... in general, a "mainspace page" here that is just a list of "stuff that meets some criteria" is a "Wikimedia list article". Jarnsax (talk) 02:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

A mainspace page like The Story of the Youth Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was is an "instance of" Wikimedia list article (Q13406463), and should have it's own entity on WD, linked to The Story of the Youth Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was (Q694844) with "is a list of" (P360). Since that is an inverse property, you don't have to add anything to Q694844, lists are automagically added as "derived statements".

I'm not going to hunt one down, but there are authors who have both "articles" and "list of works articles" on various wikipedias, and this is how they are linked (it basically lets you link multiple mainspace pages, on the same wiki, to the same WD entity). The various concepts are not the same, and WikiOntology actually needs to care to support interwiki linking in all use cases. (added: I have no doubt that, for some notable books, "list of editions of the work" articles exist in the wild as well).

The same thing does not apply to pages about authors here, or Portals, since they are not technically "articles".... they don't exist in the main namespace. Jarnsax (talk) 00:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Portals and Author pages here are the same as wikipedia articles. See Portal:Wireless telegraphy for example. For Grimm: We've got the Author pages for each of the Brothers and a Portal for both of them. Actual authorship gets worked out on the tale quid. Author and Portals here are at the same "level" as Wikipedia articles. --RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Ha Ha! List of Works. Those categories: I don't mind them on Commons. I do mind when they get removed from the Author's category there. It is that not having links within the nest rule, but it makes really long fragile branches. From the author point of view (in their category), they get left with funny pictures, high schools named after them, statues -- secondary and unimportant in and to the larger world. To take the time to make a Gallery that would fix how many times you will need to click to get to the authors books, magazines and films -- A proper Gallery is the finished books, here. Then, the "books" get moved into "works" and split into journals, books, films and it gets more and more difficult to get from the author to his stuff. I don't mind the Lists of books by Author, but I do mind not having the books with the author. I usually don't remove them, but with that damn nesting rule, anyone can undo that. Fae and Flickr put books by <IA title> (year) (at commons) I try work separate from them because I care about mine. Those uploads by Fae from Flickr are great bookmarks for me and I like them for many reasons. But separate is better, I think.

Portal:Aesop's Fables here, I left the list at the Author page of the same alphabetical and old school, on purpose. It can do what wikidata can't, and that is list all of the fables and their related qid, too many for wikidata, but a list like that should work on any wiki, source or pedia. Just throwing that out there.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. I know they are, on Wikisource, the "local equivalent" of articles. The distinction I am making is simply that because they live in their own namespaces, instead of mainspace, to the wiki software itself (and Wikibase) they are not "articles", and actually work differently in the software itself (and the WD "ontology" realizes that to wikisource they are articles, which is why they don't have something like the category/list thing, they are directly about the same "concept" as a wikipedia article). Jarnsax (talk) 02:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The linking of Portal:Aesop's Fables (though is looks odd at first glance, because of the different name) looks right to me. Portals are supposed to be linked that way, because they are "special" by being across namespaces. Jarnsax (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

To be really really specific, when I talk about "articles" in the context of interwiki linking, I am referring to pages that are examples of MediaWiki main namespace page (Q15633587), that are not redirects, and are handled by the software "as articles". Jarnsax (talk) 02:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Jarnsax: This is the Grimm where the text magically went to hyperlink: The Elves and the Shoemaker The book doesn't link yet, because there is nothing there yet.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:50, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

AFAIK, I haven't messed with anything related to that, and don't see any obvious issues (tho I'm not researching the books). Basically, though, if the relevant wikipedia article (and thus, the WD entity) is itself "about" a list, without being one.... well, that's the case with the Portal, which like I said looks fine to me. Jarnsax (talk) 02:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

To try to elaborate, the "Portal" and "Author" namespaces here are unique, specifically because wikisource uses them as the "local equivalent" of articles.... even though they contain lists, usually, the concept they are actually "about" isn't the list, its the author, or whatever the portal subject is, so it's appropriate to link them directly to the same WD entity that is linked to wikipedia articles about the same concept. The lists that exist in the main namespace here, though, are generally "Wikimedia list articles" and should be linked that way (so fix the template, lol). TBH, though, this point is more nitpicking than anything, it's "dirty" ontologically but, though I'm sure examples exist where it would conflate concepts, I haven't seen it cause linking drama "in the wild". Jarnsax (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

History of New York State, 1523–1927 (1927)

Since you made a comment about how it would be nice if I was finding/uploading stuff that Wikisource can use... volume 1 is at c:History of New York State, 1523–1927, Volume 1 (1927) and should be "camera ready" for over here, including extrtacted plate images. The work was published in 1927, but was not renewed (it was cleared by Hathi, and I cleared it again, as documented on the work item (History of New York State, 1523–1927 (Q114067501)). I'm still working on the other volumes, but should have them done within the next few days. Just as a note, the first six volumes are continuously paginated, and the work is 'logically' divided into sections (I have not tried to document this on Wikidata) that somewhat randomly span the physical volumes. I'm not asking you to transcribe it (it's thousands of pages) but if you could do the index pages and such over here (I find actually editing Wikisource annoying, the templates here are weird), that would be great. If you do, please remember to add P1957 (Wikisource index page URL) to the entities for the volumes.

Stuff like this, BTW, is the intended result of me "working down the list" of WD entities with Hathi identifiers... many need immense amounts of cleanup, including a "real" copyright clearance check. Jarnsax (talk) 23:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Jarnsax: I gave ShakespeareFan00 (who is a really good indexer) first dibs. I showed this to SF because sometimes we edit collide with different pagelist. The same with some TOC. I have not looked at it yet. Either way, I will be curious regardless of the choice of tasks.

And, it will be good to know if the pages are there. I vote to start with Volume 6, I did a magazine which had a series of articles about construction there and then, well, I think, maybe the fifth volume (1900-1912).--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:41, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, for what it is worth, that first "problem" I found at Hathi was not very big of a deal, except I rarely find anything. It was just that 1901 editions and 1904 editions got mixed up, with only one RGB scan of the lot of them, no wonder. I think, also, that the Grayscale they chose (the image mode, choice of indexed, RGB or Greyscale (Grayscale also)) makes images that are larger than RGB. The images saved in Grayscale is nice (depending on how the colors (colours) were reduced). But for type and ocr, it is heavy and soft where indexed are crisp, light weight and easy for human eyes and digital (ocr) eyes. So, they might be able to switch their RGB scans for their Grayscale and gain space at the same time! Hathi is great! They have stuff there.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 23:55, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

One of the things I plan on doing before I finish with a work is submit error reports to Hathi about misplaced scans.

If you look at the file history of, say, History of New York State, 1523-1927 (1927), Volume 2 (miua.1262471.0002.001).pdf, I uploaded it more than one time, as a 'version history'. It started out with Hathi watermarks, I didn't 'remove them' by editing the PDF, I 'deconstructed' it into the embedded images, deleted all the watermarking crap, and generated a new PDF from scratch. Part of the weirdness with some Hathi scans is the page images being embedded in in CCITT format (which is basically a fax image standard), and that's "not workable".... converting the page images to png is why the file size balloons in the middle version (embedded jpegs are even worse), but the "optimization" step shouldn't mess with the image quality. To get the plate images, I'm using a totally different workflow, since I want jpegs not pngs, and I'm deliberately uploading the full page image, to avoid generation loss when some person downloads it and cleans up the crop and rotation... they can overwrite my file if it's the only photo, or overwrite my crap extractions if there is more than one photo. Other than the conversion of image format (which I can't attest to) everything I'm doing should be lossless, so other people have clean stuff (or, as clean as possible) to work from.

For the PDFs I upload from this, the color/rbg should be the same as however Hathi had it... I'm not editing the page images other than the ccitt -> png conversion. For the plate images, I am not "converting" the images to greyscale like you would with a color photo, but I am specifically changing the image mode to greyscale (as well as a lossless 90-degree rotation if needed)... changing the mode directly just throws away the 'non color' parts of the image, which avoids as much as possible getting the "tint" from scanning yellowed paper (they were printed b/w, any color picked up by the scanner is "noise" not "signal") without going into anal-retentive (and not lossless) image filtering that usually looks worse anyhow. Jarnsax (talk) 02:07, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

BTW, please look at the edit history of File:History of New York State, 1523-1927 (1927), Volume 2 (miua.1262471.0002.001).pdf. The last three edits (that show 'created claim' on Commons, and are stored in their instance of Wikibase) are done through the "Structured Data" interface on the file page, and are how you link a scan to the source edition or exemplar entity on WikiData. You can also make statements like I was making on WD as qualifiers to the "full work available at" here, such as "digitized by". This is what you should be doing, instead of creating entities about scans, or instances of "digital representation" directly on WikiData. Doing it this way, the "Artwork" (and "Book" which depends on it) templates will automatically add uploads of multiple scans of the same edition/volume to the file pages of other scans as "other versions". Jarnsax (talk) 20:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

the structured data for djvu, pdf, etc (documents)

The commons bot looks for "depicts", "main subject", P6243, "copyright status", and "meta". The wikidata qid that has the scan will fill "depicts", "main subject" and P6243 and keeps the bot happy. If I have a different "main subject" than just the scan, then I put that there. "fly fishing" for a book about "fly fishing", for instance. I like to put the "Main category" as the "depicts", also. Which the bot doesn't mind, but the book template then puts that scan file into some categories that say things like "Artwork with depicts different from SDC". To me it says: "Something that is not an artwork is using the Art Module!!", and indeed, that much is true, as the book template uses the art module, so it is good information at the right place.

Copyright status is easy "PD". I leave "meta" to the bot; it is about configuring http correctly and which file type icon should be assigned to it, etc. The bot will "spell it correctly".

I use the publication date of the scan on it as the date. If it was first published earlier and the scan is just a later but same re-publishing, then the original (first) date (if known) goes into "Inception".

It is easy to use the manual entry at commons, everyone should try a few manually. Preferences might need to be configured so that you can edit it. It shows up in tabs right under the image. To find the property, type a few letters of the word and see when the right thing shows up. It will find the property number if you have it. I use the property number for the one because I remember it.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:39, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

There is not a bot on Commons that handles categorization based on SDC data; its in the Artwork template, and its underlying Lua module.

The template indeed looks for "depicts", "main subject", and "digital representation of". If you set them correctly (all pointing at the QID for the edition) then for book scans the Artwork module only throws the "Artworks digital representation of unknown type of work" error.

That error can be disregarded, because it's not an issue with the data. As you can verify at c:Data:Artwork_types.tab, the issue is that the Artwork module on Commons does not yet handle "digital representations of" entities that are "instances of" "version, edition, or translation" on WD. IOW, that error is just a bug on Commons.

I haven't been bothering to set the copyright stuff in the Commons SDC, since it can both be automatically determined from the file page, and it should also be "heritable" from the entity on Commons. Technically (though people rarely bother to make the distinction for books) a book or page scan doesn't actually have the same "copyright status" as the underlying object.... they are derivative works, and c:Template:PD-scan applies: they are PD as "faithful reproductions of a 2D work that is in the public domain".

In a country like the United Kingdom, that has "typographic copyright", this actually matters, as the publication of a "new edition" (even just as a scan) attracts a new 50-year copyright term, per the "sweat of the brow" doctrine that the US doesn't follow. Fortunately, Hathi, Google, and the Internet Archive fall under US law.

If you are actually bothering to describe the scan itself, instead of just noting the source object, then it's "publication date" is going to be sometime in the last couple of decades (which you seem to realize), and you should use PD-scan on the Commons file page, with the copyright template for the underlying work passed as a parameter.

Just in case I haven't gotten the point across, "digital representation of" is only supposed to be used in the Commons SDC... if you look at the constraints, in particular the "allowed-entity-types constraint" it's made pretty clear the property is only intended for use in MediaInfo. Jarnsax (talk) 21:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Inherit is right. It "can" do that. In theory. It will happen more quickly for images you care about, as I care about my book images, if you see to putting the structured data on it.

That bot crawls my images all of the time; far more reliable for the "file type" data than me. Having the Structured Data with the image makes it so it can be easily used, like it is its own wikidata item -- only housed at commons, to make MARC tags (MARC tags for scans would be great), for instance, XMP data for images, eh, I am sure there is more. Images with "main subject" can be tagged like at flickr.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Like I said, it isn't a bot, the categorization comes from the Artwork Lua module, that's why it appears right away.

I'm not saying putting more detail in the Commons SDC is wrong (it's not) just that there is a level of detail beyond which I cease to worry about it. Since an "automated user" that is pulling Commons SDC data probably understands "digital representation of", it can determine the copyright status from that entity and that the "digital object" is a scan. Jarnsax (talk) 02:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh, you were talking about 'that' bot, lol. Misunderstood, not the category thing. As far as "main subject", "depicts", and such, they should be linked to the entity for the edition, as well as whatever the subject of the actual image (some building or person or whatever) is, since it's an image of that photo as it appeared in that book... if someone obtains a better copy of the original image (GLAM scanned it) they would be wrong to upload it on top. I will go back and add the copyright info to the SDC, tho, it's something I hadn't specifically worried about but it's a good idea. Jarnsax (talk) 04:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Just to write it down somewhere, I did go back and add the basic structured data to ~175 or so plates from "New York". FYI, you much be very very careful when trying to pick plate (Q108607888) out of the UI, it has a few homonyms, lol. Jarnsax (talk) 16:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

WikiData QIDs, and "Wikimedia category" entities

I yelled at you over there, for 'reusing' a QID. Please make sure you have the "Merge" gadget turned on, on Wikidata (it is the very first one). If an entity needs to "go away" (for instance, a "Wikimedia category" entity that is breaking the template here, or the "instance of digital representation" entities for scans that are not notable where the data belongs in the Commons SDC) this is how you do it. Merging is the WD equivalent of a redirect, for QIDs. Since QIDs are intended to be globally usable persistent identifiers that other databases can link to, this is the only way to not undetectably break things like VIAF that are using our data. I'm, again, not going to intentionally break your stuff, but merging also creates a edit log for fixing WD after you fix your template. Seriously, if they are an issue, merge them.

The template/module still needs to be fixed, however. It is my explicit intention, particularly for things like "New York" with hundreds of plates, to create Gallery pages on Commons, with them in order. This is going to create the exact problem that the existence of "Wikimedia category" entities prevents, because a Commons mainspace page (the gallery) will be linked directly to the WD entity for the volume. Jarnsax (talk) 21:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

If you got a good gallery, bump it out of the interwiki links. The gallery has to be better than the category. But really, reproducing the gallery page at commons when it is already here in its setting is. On the other hand, if you find a really good plate and the source might never be available proofed here--that's a great gallery, just waiting for someone to do that volume of (for example) Punch, all 1000+ pages. That is when the gallery is great. It can be there when the stuff goes up. I found some svg which had been broken in 2006, the wiki didn't display svg very well so it is hard to say what was broken. But every thing got fixed in the meanwhile and they went into place and worked. Gallery there for plates like that.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 22:12, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

For "New York", it's not my intention to "duplicate what wikisource does" in the gallery.... galleries that show pages of scanned text are rather pointless, since you can just 'read the book' a lot easier. I intend to create galleries for the huge numbers of plates that are in each volume, in order, with the captions, so that people can just browse the images without having to load each file to read the caption. Commons categories don't work well for that, when it's something like a book where the "image names" it makes sense to use don't actually reflect what the photo is of. In a gallery, you can caption the images on a page, as a set. When galleries on Commons are "bad" (unmaintainable) is when the set of images that would go on it is "unfixed and indeterminate"....things like the Eiffel Tower, where people are uploading new images every day.

The plate images end up "on" wikisource, but not in that same format.... they are interspersed throughout the transcribed book, as opposed to being collected in one location. I only care in the case of something like "New York" because the huge number of plates, across multiple volumes, makes it a pain in the ass. Jarnsax (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

For me, if the Plate is a something, there will be a good Gallery for it to go into already. Like if it is a bird or a plant. The Plants people at the commons made really good galleries, where "Illustrations" can link to the book that is here. But if the plate is not a "thing" that could have and should have a "main subject" Gallery to go to, why bother? A chapter about Dandelions here, with a picture, can link that chapter via the picture to the Gallery for Dandelions there. Galleries would be good for fables and fairy tales, in the same way.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Gallery pages that collect the photos from books, specifically ones that have lots of plates, don't matter to wikisource, but they increase the "discoverability" of the images for other potential end users. Jarnsax (talk) 21:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

"bump it out of the interwiki links"... not sure what you mean by this, but the way pages should be linked cross-wiki should depend on the concept that the page is about, not based on giving it some kind of "status". The whole mechanism of category/list "Wikimedia page" entities, as well as properties like "Wikisource index page", exists for the purpose of being able to link different "kinds" of pages about the same concept, while indicating "how" they are related to that concept by the specific method that is used. Jarnsax (talk) 22:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I consider each wiki by what they have the most of and the most accurate. Here, Portals, Authors and Versions are a very reliable way to find things and stuff be there where they point. I am usually looking around the help cats at wikipedia. There, I see articles. I never go to a portal. Maybe I should, and maybe I am different and the portals are frequent destinations at wikipedia. But Portals here are where articles, books and films get listed by topic. It is all that there is to say about wikisource on the subject.

<this is a rant, sorry> At commons, I was appalled when I had to enable "cats on top" because the only way to get around there is via category. Then, to find that I had to go to AR -->Works by AR -->Magazines or Books or Journals by AR, to find a bunch of 543px x 343px gutenberg bot harvest images..... A good detour, actually, because links to gutenberg work from wikipedia and are present on the page. en.gutenpedia.org also, as I think those users don't get hassled like the ones at home do.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, 'locally' it doesn't actually matter what namespace you keep your "articles" in, but it matters for interwiki linking, because the different namespaces are actually handled completely differently in MediaWiki. For a very long time, WD actually wouldn't let you create cross-namespace interwiki links, you could only link a category to a "wikimedia category" entity. Making it work "the other way" as well basically exists because it's a useful shortcut and easier than educating the Commons userbase, especially when they love to fight about categorization (and the actual argument was "categories are our articles"). The real "answer" is to not rely on the Commons categorization tree, instead use the templates (commons:Template:Wikidata Infobox and commons:Template:Book) on the work/edition/volume categories (at whatever level of detail Commons has), link them to the right WD entities, link the WD entities to each other correctly, and the templates will show and maintain the correct category links no matter how Commons futzes with them.

FYI, this is not my original username, I "retired" and started over a few years later. I was a Commons admin for years (as well as an OTRS dweeb), and had something over a quarter of a million edits there.... and I always thought the category wars were a really stupid waste of time. The "general quality" of Commons file pages is also abysmally bad, and TBH the 'level of scrutiny' the community there gives to copyright claims is far less than what I hope most people here do, there are a LOT (many thousands) of URAA-affected book scans on Commons that are almost certainly copyright violations in the US. A good number of them uploaded by Fae, since he just ingests data without any curation (he's not actually looking at that stuff). It's a symptom of the same kind of garbage in-garbage out problem that made Worldcat and OCLC almost unusable for so long, and still shows up in Worldcat as stuff like duplicates cataloged in different languages. Avoiding that is why I'm actually working on cataloging books into Wikidata from looking at the scans, instead of just copying a library catalog.

For the kind of works that end up here, the information you find in the online Library of Congress catalog (and copies elsewhere) that comes from the 'old catalog' is crap, anyhow.... when they digitized it, they didn't copy the complete bibliographic description from the printed cards, since it was intended to (over decades) re-catalog everything according to the "new" cataloging rules. You need to look them up in the wikipedia:National Union Catalog (https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000140237) to see the whole entry, and many records in Hathi and Worldcat are just direct copies of the 'not complete' version the Library of Congress transcribed with the 'from old catalog' note. Jarnsax (talk) 02:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Just since I mentioned the URAA in the context of Commons, and that (and the Commons drama that went on for years and years until the people who cared gave up, the whole idea of PD review never took off) is pretty obscure at this point... see commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/All files copyrighted in the US under the URAA#Legal team's statement from way back in 2012. The world exploded every time someone sent a URAA-affected file to DR, no matter how obvious it was. Jarnsax (talk) 04:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

SF and others made a copyright review of a good portion of Faebots ia/pdf upload. I don't know much drama at commons. Some "make good gallery" drama there, which I enjoyed. Also, the French laws regarding new photographs of old sculptures drama, always good! My drama was "Wikipedia is not a plant book!" and I was banned for using quotations from similarly named celebrities, more than a decade ago, and I still get a chuckle from that. A greatly enjoyed drama (that I only heard of was) the "Wikipedia is not a field guide!" drama.

So there is a list at commons that was generated due to discussions there and the category just sits there and fills up? "The Talk About It, Talk About It, Talk About It" people can clean up their categories!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Actually, looking at commons:Category:URAA, and the size of commons:Category:URAA-related deletion requests/deleted, it looks like as least some degree of a better job is being done. In my day, those discussions tended to get swarmed by canvassed cross-wiki editors. I've also noticed some of the copyright templates now ask to be given the source country, so they can generate a "possibly URAA" warning in the copyright template.... this is a very good thing, as the 'take home lesson' from everything WikiLegal told us at the time was that if a work was "potentially restored" it was almost impossible that the information to figure out if it actually was would be available to us (meaning the default should have been to go away). I still suspect that a lot of supposedly 'checked' files were looked at by people from that source country who don't give a shit about US law and restored copyrights if it's now "PD at home". What really upset me about it at the time was Commons was basically lying to re-users about the copyright status of the things. Jarnsax (talk) 15:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

FYI, the best source for stupid drama and nonsense, ever, at Commons is the guys who create and maintain the walled garden of massively over-detailed intersection categories for porn. I would not be surprised to find "Short-haired blonde women wearing one red shoe while masturbating with their left hand", sigh. Jarnsax (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Page:Memoir and poems of Phillis Wheatley, a native African and a slave.djvu/6

The image on this page seems to be taken from the DJVU page, as there is artefacting. You may want to use the higher-quality image available here.

Thanks for that. I did not even think about getting that and I really should have. I was sitting at the scanner, thinking about the need for a cover.

Arthur Rackham: His Life and Work and a work

I finally made good on this promise, and have scanned the work. Unfortunately, half of the scan got deleted, so I’ll have to go back again. The various images from the book, numbering in the dozens, I have scanned separately. There are some new images, and much of his life, in this work, so I am looking forward to proofreading it. Would you mind creating the images, and if so, how would you like them? Also, I am almost finished proofreading Out-Door Games: Cricket and Golf, which has some Rackham illustrations as well, if you would like to work on those. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea., all good news, except for the loss of the scans.

I prefer jp2! The name causes confusion, as jp2 has nothing to do with libjpeg. tiff is built with and requires libjpeg, hence the artifact menace. I suspect that this is also the reason that tiff displays in browsers but jp2 doesn't.

Another warning, for space saving (and perhaps you should confirm my findings here) there are three modes: RGB, grayscale and indexed. Indexed is the smallest but is terrible for image work. RGB has the colors and also produces smaller images than grayscale, noticably smaller images. So, for space saving, indexed should be best for text and rgb for image pages. But as I suggested, check the grayscale vs rgb for file size, just to be sure.

tiff vs jp2, everything I wrote is a fact, but I can provide pages showing the various software dependencies if you wish (will a jpeg by any other name still produce artifacts?).

I will start work on the Cricket and Golf images this evening!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:31, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I don’t have JP2 as an option, so I use TIFF. For “how would you like them,” I meant delivery: there are nearly 6 GB of files to send. I scanned the PDF as a “whole” in grayscale, and the images in colour. I will upload the partial PDF locally, and send it to Commons when I fix it. When I go back to rescan the PDF, I can rescan some of the images, if the artefacting is especially atrocious for some images (which I suspect it may be for a few them). I think the options for scanning are TIFF, PNG, JPEG, PDF, PDF, DOC(X), and PDF, if I remember correctly. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. PNG! I never suggest it because it is so-o-o slo-o-o-w! So, I apologize in advance for the extra time for that.

Earlier I was going to write that I thought that the grayscale palette was to blame for the size difference, but that did not make sense (the RGB palette is +2 million and no way is the grayscale palette that big). Until I thought about it. The rgb palette has fewer choices between black and white that are gray so the image palette (which is only the colors that were used and not all 2+ million of them) is less for rgb (due to less to choose from).

In truth. Even without politics, there is something wrong with every image format. (Please don't hate me for the time sink involved with png scanning.)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: That’s good to know: in the future, I will scan with PNG (unless I have misremembered, and I can’t scan in PNG). Scanning in TIFF is already super slow—it took me almost four hours to scan in the PDF and the images—so I don’t think that PNG will change my life much. The scan is here. I will try to upload the images to an off-WMF site as a ZIP file, and will use several if I have to. I will send you another message when I have all of the files uploaded. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
• RaboKarbakian: The files are available here. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for your work on Out-door Games! The index is fully proofread and transcluded, adding another Rackham work to enWS’s collection. On that note, I have proofread (−images) and transcluded another magazine story, “In the Days of Top Hats,” if you would like to create those images. In other news, I have put through a number of Little Folks requests: hopefully they will come in soon. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:57, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I should be (and am) thanking you. I learned a lot about pdf from that medium-small image task.

Mostly I am poking you about the zip file. I am apparently not working on the computer that it claims to be as there is a size limit. Again. I don't know what it looks like on the other end, but on this end, it looks like hack crap and I want to be very clear that I would have never been on the other end, either in its creation or further use. Also, maybe, my ziplibs are too old (2007). I have one other option to try to get them. My sorrow about this situation starts a very long while before this zipfile problem. I will let you know if my other option fails.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:45, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I might be able to get to the rest of the book tomorrow, but no promises. Did you manage to download the ZIP file? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: I downloaded something, but was unable to unzip it. I was going to try downloading it at the library, but there is a 1 hr limit for using the computers there and probably the 6G would not download in time. Maybe what I downloaded was not a zip file?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:07, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

• I have also started proofreading The Zankiwank and the Bletherwitch, if you would like to create the illustrations from that work and are unable to unzip, for the time being, the illustrations from Hudson’s biograph. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: Is it okay for me to make a styles.css for this book? --RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Yes, go right ahead; and reformat any of the images as you would like. I will leave you fully in charge on that front. Same for the title page: which I have not bothered to proofread accurately. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:08, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I’m glad you’ve found the Rackham book scans I added to his Author: page: I’ve added Index:MU KPB 050 Alice's adventures in Wonderland - by Lewis Carroll.pdf, if you would like to add those images (and transclude the book). Could you also add the images to this work, please? Also, also, I’ve noticed your work on adding Rackham’s St. Nicholas illustrations, and they look very nice, both the illustrations and the transclusions: could you add those works and his other magazine/periodical illustrations to the list at the bottom of his page? Also, also, also, I’m requesting a number of his Little Folks works now: once the person in charge of ILL services at Northern Illinois University gets back from vacation (apparently), those should come in. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:31, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: On it all!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:49, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: Almost, but not all of the illustrations for St. Nicholas were the first publication of what was later to become the book Mother Goose. I was kind of waiting for the djvu to be fixed (and also refixed) before putting them around; but I will sort through those soon. I think he had stuff in Vol. 39 also, which I have not done much on. More importantly (to my crank mood right now), I have copyright questions:

The Edgar Allen Poe illustrations were published in 1935 in Poland. I am uncertain about the Polish license, but the images are allowed at commons due to it. So, are they allowed here as well?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I might be able to do some work on the DJVU; which file is it? As for the images, to be allowed on Wikimedia Commons they must be in the public domain in the country of origin and in the United States; at the English Wikisource, only the latter is required; thus, anything available on Wikimedia Commons is allowed on English Wikisource. Thank you for completing Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, in addition to the other Maastricht University Library scans; they really round out Rackham’s well-known collection. I made a comparison of PG’s Rackham holdings and ours, but I’ve lost that file since; that would be a good point for more Rackham works. I have made a request for The Springtide of Life to be repaired, from a Google Books scan that contains those pages. Is there any other work which you would like me to help you with? I feel like I’ve been pushing a lot of image-creation work on you recently. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:10, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. No complaints from me! I was searching and searching for some of those books! See: commons:Category:Arthur Rackham - Poe's Tales of Mystery and Imagination!! In truth, I was going to get the index for Springtide going here, in hopes that you would start proofing it, and get to work on Sleeping Beauty and/or Cinderella images. I was having some problem when I worked on them previously -- the two colors, the "other color" was not a single color. A couple of the other works there can't be here (with images) until next year. But that Poe book is particularly beautiful. I'm going to start that index now....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:20, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Darn, neither of those Poes are the Rackham illustrations. Poop.--14:27, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: That’s good to hear! How would you like the Springtide of Life poems formatted? I can just proofread without formatting, and leave them in “poem” tags, if you want to work on the formatting later. As for scans, I was actually thinking of adding links to all the scans I could find of Rackham works at some point. The addition of the “MU KPB” scans was the start of that: I was surprised that there were so many rather high-quality scans simply unused. Right now, I’m going through all of the “MU KPB” to find English-language Rackham-illustrated works; then I’ll look for already-uploaded “IA scans” on Wikimedia Commons; and finally a search of Internet Archive, Google Books, and HathiTrust to try to find other works. Separately, I got a copy of Riall and scanned in the plates and sketches in high quality, along with the bibliography of periodicals (for personal reference only, due to copyright). The Poe sounded to good to be true: I was pretty sure that those illustrations were some of the last ones in copyright. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:32, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
• Well, there is Poe—but it may be copyrighted, so be careful. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:42, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. When I first looked at those Poe images, they were being used at polish wikisource, (and, maybe there isn't even one of those) and now they are not. About poetry. I am really pleased with {{ppoem}} the warnings have been removed. It comes with its own block center. It handles the ":" indents just fine. To center a line, all you need to do is type "<>". To send a line to the right it needs only ">>". To span pages, {ppoem|end=follow}} and {ppoem|start=follow}} for continuation. For when you use </poem>{{block center/e}}{{nop}}{{block center/s}}<poem> ppoem is {ppoem|end=stanza}} {ppoem|start=stanza}} If you are unlikely to use ppoem, I was able to switch your <poem> to it fairly easily (the nop cued me that stanza was needed and all of the internal formatting translated perfectly or converted quickly!) and a script could be written that would do it, actually. So, any way you want to proof is fine by me. /Uploading... --RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:47, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I’ll try using “ppoem,” but I may leave some old formatting for you to deal with. As for Poe, I did some research. Riall describes a contemporary American edition of Lippincott’s, which would have required U.S. notice and renewal. Having search renewal records for the relevant period, there was one for “Poe” (a different Poe) and one for “Rackham”—Spanish Raggle-Taggle. Thus, I can say with confidence that Rackham’s illustrated volume of Poe’s Tales is in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Okay then, YAY!! I'm going to start on the index, the file at commons is mismarked, like something I might do, actually, if I wasn't sure and wanted time before attention was called to it. It has a {PD-old-70) on it. I am wondering if there is a license that will ward off all nay-sayers....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:35, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Umm, I think Raggle-Taggle is a thing on its own.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:49, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: The Spanish Raggle-Taggle comment was just to illustrate that there was no renewal for Poe’s Tales. For the license, you can fill “PD-old-70” with “PD-US-not renewed”, as that is known, though “PD-US-no notice” is likely. Can you add the cover to Index:MU KPB 016 Arthur Rackham's Book of Pictures.pdf? I am validating the pages now. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:15, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. in case you did not see: Index:Princess Mary's Gift Book.djvu.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:24, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I saw; thanks for your work. Have you transferred all of the pages? Also, I picked up a copy of Willy Pogány Rediscovered, and found his images really beautiful! If you are interested (probably after some more of the good Rackham work), I can try to get some more scans (beyond the Parsifal and Rubáiyát). Also, also, while reading over this discussion thread I was reminded of Hudson’s Arthur Rackham; the file’s still broken, so I can’t do much more work on it at the moment: but have you had any luck with the ZIP of images? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:05, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.: Mpaa did the move. Admins can move pages and they have a delete link. Non-admin have to click through a warning (so two clicks per move instead of one) and need to apply the template. Also, I did not transfer the header and footer instructions from the pdf to the djvu. Sorry.

If it is the same zip file, I have the same computer so I would have the same problems extracting the images. If you would like for me to try again, I will, but something needs to change for it to be successful.

Feel and be free to drop whatever image work here!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:15, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: On some image work: these two pages for an article on Japanese literature, and some images from the Nihongi, some missing and others of low quality, from this high-quality scan. Here and here, at least. The Scan Lab is finally working again, so I’ll be able to proofread the rest of Rackham’s Springtide of Life. Also, Hudson’s Arthur Rackham is fixed. I’m still not sure how I would be able to send a better ZIP to you, but that can be a problem for later. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea., I will have those Japanese images by tonight and look to see if more are wanting -- if you find some more: share the link! *Sigh* I saw that Springtide had been fixed. It will probably be good to mix up Wagner opera with bunches of babies.... I am reconstructing Index:The fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm (IA fairytalesofbrot00grim).pdf, well, cleaning up Grimm here and then reconstructing the text. Snowdrop and Hansel & Gretel are just that 1909 whole, split into 2 ("boys" and "girls" versions, I suspect) but Little Brother and Sister tales are not in that first issue of Grimm. So, those two are next up after the Ring opera, and Springtide. Poe is almost done. So, Japanese images, then babies/opera images, and throughout all, fairy tale reconstruction. (was going to script some "caption" pages manufacture which are all missing.)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 19:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

• A lot of the images aren’t bad, but are very small. ii, iii, 10, 11, 15, 38, 46, 78, 87, 95, 116, 133, 135, 136, 182, 189, 327, 357. These are all of the pages with images, although a number of these images are of fairly decent quality. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. These are done, but I might work a little more on that map. And, you were right, for the most part, my uploads are just "bigger" and in a couple of cases, the lower quality scan produced better images (fewer holes). It was a great help that you dug the images out of those texts....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thank you! They look very good. Also, I have finished up Index:MU KPB 009 The Springtide of Life Poems of Childhood by Algernon Charles Swinburne.pdf, for your future image-creating pleasure. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for your work on Hudson! It’s almost completely finished now, thanks to your hard image and formatting work. I’m currently scanning in Nostradamus’s Prophecies to stave off a deletion request, but soon I’ll be able to get proofreading some more Rackham. On the topic of images, would you mind getting the four images from The Probable Error of a Mean? (It’s an important statistical work, being the origin of Student’s t-test, if you know of it.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Heh, don't thank me 'til it's done! I can (and will) get the pictures done, but editing in the Page: namespace here -- I lose the basic wiki style and get something else. I have only theories of what is happening, but I am unable to finish anything in the Page namespace due to this problem. I was so close to being finished with many of the things it happened at. I also wanted to redo some of the Lock images, as I have learned how to fake anti-aliasing lately. Gosh, was I terrible in statistics!! iirc, I did not want to study this thing I considered to be a bad philosophy (being as taken with "=" as I was). Just the images for that one article?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:36, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Yeah, just for that article. Could you upload a screenshot? You might also want to make a S/H post. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Smells like FB style
• 
  Lost "previews" in GIMP on same day
• 
  Others were not screenshotted

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for the statistics images. If you can edit other Page:s, that seems like a strange problem with Hudson formatting and local settings(?). I can edit those pages: have you tried a different browser? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:24, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

No different browser. Well, I had one but that "miraculously" stopped working the second time I used it. My other option is to edit at the library. 1 hour a day. This happened to all of them, sequentially, starting with Peter Pan. Tales of Mystery. The Rhinegold. Hudson. I make a stylesheet, I get close to finishing it, the style gets screwed up this way. With Hudson, my style was not crossing the {{dhr}} line, which would happen if the closing </div> were not making it to the page. And then the Hudson paragraphs started to act like Facebook paragraphs; I thought Hudson would be okay because we have edited together on so many things before this. Maybe it did not happen with the Rhinegold, though. I lost my graphics software for a time. Happy is not the first word that comes to mind as I have had to just get used to intrusive software being used on this old crap box. Now the intrusive is also messing things up, taking not just my thumbnails, but then the previews! and I am that much farther away from happy. Okay, so history bundled with some rant. Sorry. And thanks for the opportunity.

Also, secure connection problems persist. Maybe it is that "subscribe" option.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 22:46, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Can this problem be attributed to one specific feature added to the stylesheets? I can comment out the CSS work for a little bit if you want to work on image stuff on your browser. (Is your browser taking the width parameter and applying it to everything, deleting the rest of the stuff?) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:43, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. So, I just commented out the stylesheet. It did not fix what was broken. I waited a good long time, so that anything that had parked itself between my browser and the wiki style sheet might move along and away. Those automatic hyphenation in words, while they might be nice to have; I would need to understand how they got there (the software and the people who use it) and now, the reason that I had this functionality intermittently. Maybe it is something interesting like the wikimedia library card, which I do not know how to work, the hyphenization, not the broken between the stylesheet here and the wiki stylesheet.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

The last edit to Index:MU KPB 015 Poe's Tales of Mystery and Imagination.pdf/styles.css was 25 July, Page:MU KPB 015 Poe's Tales of Mystery and Imagination.pdf/307 broke on 10 August. Poe's Tales of Mystery and Imagination/Ligeia was proofed on the 26th and installed on the 27th. About half of the proofed pages were created after the last edit to the style sheet. The fancy css is in the toc and loi. The text is paragraphs, plates, captions and often a blockquote in the beginning of a chapter. Pretty standard stuff, really. There was never any reason I could see for the problem to happen. No line-height, I don't know the class that would affect the space between paragraphs of the whole wiki.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I would check your editing preferences: not that you’ve changed them to cause this problem, but that changing them may help you avoid the problem. I was thinking that switching between the Visual Editor may help, but I’m not sure about your problem (I don’t use Mozilla). I see that you can edit some pages from Latimore–Haskell—if that’s because of that work’s lack of CSS, you may still want to comment out the CSS file for the time being, and see if that allows you to edit. This problem is very strange, however, and if you report it generally you may get a MediaWiki ticket for your troubles. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Would you mind creating these two images, please? I saw your edits to the Hudson; I hope these will allow you to edit those pages again, as it would be nice to get these works finished up. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Nice engravings! Thanks for the image work! I am nervous to trigger some chat bot, so I haven't made the category: commons:Category:Muscles and Regions of the Neck (Simon, 1843). Truthfully, I started the items on the bibliography because I am trying to clean this hd I am using. All this crap is preventing me from cleaning off my hard drive, which needs it.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for the images! There have been other problems with ProofreadPage and Page: recently, but unfortunately, they don’t seem to match your problem. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Could you make the images from Index:Female Husband.pdf, please? The text is more interesting than the images, I’m afraid. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I just used the commons croptool; I hope you don't mind. There is a little I could have done with the images, but overall, not that much. Henry Fielding, eh? That era of Brit Lit seems very sarcastic, at least as far as Fielding and Swift go....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:12, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for the images. I don’t know much about Fielding, but this short work may have been satirical. (I proofread it off of an RT request.) Looking back to Scan Lab for a different request, I found Arthur Rackham: His Life and Work: is it still not working for you? It just seemed unfortunate to leave it, when it was almost completed. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:36, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Hmm, satirical, had I not had the trouble "finding" that word, I would have had trouble spelling it. Thanks for that! For sure, I can finish that book, thanks (also) for the reminder! I was going to start (to finish) the Ring, but this can come first. In the next couple of days, I suspect. After the Ring: Pan and I have the "gallery" for that also (my copy is *huge*, it was one of the (many) reasons I was cleaning off this harddrive). Then, maybe onto the Vicar? Unless there is something else I abandoned in my snit....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:48, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I was holding off on the Ring cycle, because I’m watching the operas performed by at an opera house professionally, and I didn’t want to read ahead and spoil the story. But now that I’ve seen Das Rheingold and Die Walküre, I can look over the first volume. For Rackham, that looks to be a good progression. When I borrowed Riall, I wrote down the publication information for the various post-1926 volumes, to check for copyright status; I can go over those in the near future to look for more recent public domain Rackham works. The next two books I’m personally scanning in are of literature only, but after that I hope to scan in two books (one of which hasn’t come in yet, but soon, hopefully), which are both Japanese art books. From next year, I’ll also have more opportunity to scan books, so hopefully more Rackhams will appear at that point. (Maybe also some nice Poganys?) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:06, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Would you mind making these images (blank category)? I see your work on the first Ring volume; it looks very nice. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. the finished images should go to commons?--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:22, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I answered my own question... commons:Category:Anthology of Japanese Literature (Keene, 1955). Was kind of blind about the covers. If you think/wish for tweeking, be sure to ask.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: The “Modern” images are from Modern Japanese Literature (Keene, 1956). TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:27, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. commons:Category:Modern Japanese Literature: An Anthology (Keene, 1956) --RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:32, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you. Your images are nice, as usual. I have another book, more filled with images, but it way be a while until that one gets scanned. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:19, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I found a reference to this in an advertisement, 132 pages. Pretty cool, if you saw the movie and even a little so if you didn't. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015071565991 Interested in proofing this? (It has nothing to do with Rackham.)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:44, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Stuff that's broke and how to fix them

I'm trying to figure out what exactly got broke and what we can do to fix it. And looking over the various discussion threads I find, I am utterly failing to understand the problem. So… Could you explain, so simply that a poor techie can understand it, what it was that broke when changes were made at Wikidata?

I think, maybe, it's something to do with interwiki links to categories on Commons. But I'm not even sure about that, and that's the extent of what I think I understand. And to have any hope of tweaking things I am going to need spoonfeeding which page something is broken on; what it used to be (or is desired to be) and what it actually is; and any other such first-principles stuff.

Getting a link to a Commons category to display here, no matter the setup on the Wikidata side, using {{wdl}}, I am fairly confident I can figure out (with some handholding on the Wikidata stuff). Whether we can also figure out some way to stay within the limits of MediaWiki that lets that work on pages like your Æsop's lists is a different matter, but let's do this a step at a time and see where that takes us. Xover (talk) 13:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Xover The broken was Page:Arthur Rackham, a bibliography.pdf/33 and it has apparently been fixed. Truly, I am sorry it is fixed as I would like to discourage that "wikimedia" directory "main category" bypass for entities which will never have a shared directory on another wiki.

There is this (I think it came from en.wikipedia) thing (line of thought) where all Portals should only link to wikipedia Portals and all Categories should link to wikipedia categories. But categories at commons are like Portals here and are best linked to articles at the wikipedias. So, {{wdl}} has just been fixed to "work with" this en.wikipedia scheme and the en.wikipedians remain stupid about how and what other wiki do. So, thanks for fixing that.--14:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC) (ikes, fixing my signature) --RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:05, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

{{wdl}} has not been changed, so whatever changed was changed elsewhere. But I would like to change {{wdl}} such that using it will produce the desired result for the right way to hook things up over at Wikidata. So…

Page:Arthur Rackham, a bibliography.pdf/33. It has several links that appear to have been made using {{wdl}}. At least one of these links did not go where you wanted it to for a while. Which of the links on that page was that? And where did it go that was, in your opinion, incorrect? Xover (talk) 14:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Xover Ha! It is not fixed!! I take back my snarky thanks! And I was clearly wrong there. The link on Wild life in Hampshire Highlands is going to reasonator, d:Q114035089 it should be going to commons:Category:Wild Life in Hampshire Highlands (Dewar, 1899).

A "wikimedia category" entity was made for WLNH at d:Q114144281. I asked that the maker of that "wikimedia category" entity find another wiki with the same purpose category (aka, another category to put there) to justify its existence before asking anyone to fix the wdl module to work with that type of "category reach around". The module, as it stands, looks for something at home (in this case en.wikisource), not finding that, it looks for an article at wikipedia, not finding that looks for a category at commons, not finding that it goes to reasonator. And that is what it should do.

My claim (I am unable to prove it yet) is that if it fails to find a wikipedia article, it will also fail to find a wikipedia category and that the module is doing the right thing already. Having another wikimedia category at d:Q114144281 (Category:Wild Life in Hampshire Highlands (Dewar, 1899)) would be the proof that my mindset is wrong. Someones mindset needs to be changed before the module is changed.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:45, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

So far as I understand it, that indirection is how Wikidata as a project has chosen to organise their content, similarly to how we have made various choices on English Wikisource (like keeping author pages in the Author: namespace, for example). We can either work with their content the way they have chosen to organise it, or we can try to persuade them as a project to change their mind. I suspect the latter is an extremely uphill battle, so I recommend the former approach. And in that light I am working on updating {{wdl}} so it will give you a link to a Commons category even if it is provided in a separate topic's main category (P910) linked item. Xover (talk) 16:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Xover Well, okay. I lose (for now) and without proof. This "episode" started when that user was "spooked" by the titles I was installing at wikidata, btw. I guess I jumped from "Shooting" to "Private Paget" but I was just filling in that bibliography, and not writing a fiction or a non-fiction. I am sorry that the words on my list, (combined with what we had done and what we still need to get) triggered such a response. I remember working with that editor previously with no problems what so ever.

My vote, if there ever is one, about that wikidata policy, and after the experience with Portal:Aesop's Fables is that less reaching is better, especially if the reach is unnecessary. Also, that I have made some wikimedia categories, to settle what looked like shinanigans at commons. Usually it was characters who appeared in published tales and separating character content from publication content. It is a very nice tool for settling things like that. I actually would have no problem with the wikipedias providing the list of "mediawiki categories", in fact, it would be the easiest way to find the necessary ones.

I was just heading over to Talk:Scan Lab to discuss the possibly having a property for "wikimedia scan" as some of ours are not to be equaled online any where else.... Thank you for your time with this, and for giving me my "day in court".--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Just as a note, the "thing about Portals and Author pages and such", that you are referring to, and something behind a lot of the Commons drama about Category pages, way back, is that for years, while the actual "wikibase" software, itself, was still being written, it was technically impossible to create interwiki links, across namespaces, on Wikidata. It was, as far as I know, never the intent to not be able to link wikipedia articles, that live in the main namespace, with Portals, Author pages, Creator pages, or any other type of "content" pages that live outside of the main namespace on any wiki. It just took a long time to make it work, apparently because of how MediaWiki itself handles namespaces. As I recall, you didn't even get what I was referring to in regards to "namespaces".

It was never intended that Category interwikis could live on anything other than Wikimedia category entities, because it is incredibly common, across the projects, that it would cause linking issues. This would happen in the myriad cases, when you look across the set of all wikis, that there are both an article and a category, on the same wiki, with the same pagetitle. Some people at Commons complained, and it was very very long time until they finally implemented it, only for Commons, because they had to extra effort to make sure it was just for Commons, and didn't break everyone elses links, and because it actually served exactly zero purpose other than to make Commons interwiki links to show up on other wikis in a different place than they otherwise did. It made Commons appear to be a wiki in a different language.

I know namespaces. I might not use them correctly, but I know them. Scripts and templates application. I don't know them at wikidata.

You read "Stop breaking my stuff", which was my message, as being "angry". Perhaps you would be angry if it were all reversed. I don't like breaking things and I think that you don't either and your response had some guilt in it. You started messing with my stuff because some titles disturbed you? What reason are you even looking at it? Do you know of the Spanish Inquisition? What made you so concerned about the titles in my contribution list? You responded badly to "titles" without looking at what the titles were connected to. "title" is also a namespace.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:26, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Still this shit.

You showed up on my WD talk page accusing me of stalking you, which is an outright accusation of acting in bad faith, you continued accusing me of acting in bad faith over there until I threatened to take it up with the admins, and now you are doing the same shit here just to bitch.

Baseless accusations that a person is acting in bad faith, attacks against their motivations as a person, are personal attacks, are abusive, and doing it repeatedly is harassment. Harassing or abusing other editors is a violation of Part 4 of the Terms of Use, and can get you globally banned.

The whole rant I'm replying to is just egregious personal attacks, and some of it doesn't even make sense, like claiming I cared about "titles in your contribution list", which.... what? I'm surprised calling me a Nazi didn't make the list, given the Spanish Inquisition did.

You also apparently don't have the slightest clue what "pagetitle" means, still. You can't put interwikis to w:Earth and w:Category:Earth on the same entity, they have the same pagetitle and subject, and are in different namespaces on the same wiki. You have to use a Wikimedia category entity. That's why the damn things exist.

I've told you that the way I created a list of stuff to work on over on WikiData was pulling a list of entities with Hathi IDs, and that I had no idea who you were when you suddenly showed up screaming nonsensically and calling me a stalker.

• @Xover You've been a witness to this, you've already apologized to me once for his behavior, and you are an admin here. Please do whatever the hell you have to so I don't have to kick this upstairs to get him to stop. The snide 'that person' shit just makes it worse, and I really don't need this.

It was obviously a bad idea to even try to help you figure out this issue, or to respond when you originally pinged me over here. You have been screaming at, and blaming me personally for, things that were decided on WikiData or about Wikibase, done, and documented, something on the order of half a damn decade before I was even an editor there, and are not even possibly remotely "my fault" even if they were somehow wrong.

It it also not even remotely my fault that you apparently didn't read or understand the WikiProject Books pages, or the other documentation about biblio stuff, to figure out what the hell you were doing and how to "play well with others" before you decided to start doing it at some kind of scale. I have not looked at your edit history over there, but from what you have said, and what I have seen you've created some kind of walled garden of complex constraint violations that you think you own, completely separate from anything related to the template here and "Wikimedia category" entities.

"complex constraint violations" are also known, on WikiData, as "members of bot-generated lists of broken shit to fix." I've told you this, and that "breaking WikiData" by evading deletion discussions, and "reusing" Qids that are supposed to be persistent identifiers, is completely unacceptable, and from the way you acted when I warned you about it, immediately scampering over here to ping me, I suspect that you've done those things a lot.

I'm probably not the first person you've edit-warred with, or treated abusively, to defend what you mistakenly imagine is "your shit" on a collaborative project.

I'm going to go back to fixing book entities over there at my convenience, which I actually stopped doing for a while out of courtesy, to instead help you figure out your problem here first, and I'm not going to pay the slightest attention to if it's linked to by "your shit" over here out of a deliberate attempt to avoid engaging with you.

If you pull the same bullshit over there again, or I see you edit warring, or screaming abuse at other people, I'm going to do my best to have you blocked over there, which probably won't be hard. You've acted in an antisocial and disruptive manner and have failed to demonstrate competence.

You've given me every legitimate reason to actually sit down and scrub your edit history there, just to fix damn constraint violations and see if you have abused other editors as well, and not give the slightest fuck about your dependence on, here, or sense of ownership over, a walled garden of shit that is so broken bots ask us to fix it. Jarnsax (talk) 00:45, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Sigh. Well, since I've been invoked as an admin, I guess I'm going to have to put my admin hat on…

In which case I am going to ask you—both of you—to drop the stick.

@Jarnsax: You're over-reacting. RaboKarbakian is just over-invested in all the wonderful possibilities of linking different kinds of knowledge between the projects, but without a particular technical understanding of why Mediawiki behaves the way it does, nor particularly why it's data model is the way it is or the consequences of diverging from it. They are reacting defensively and feeling under attack, and not handling it particularly well; but the "personal attacks" on display are pretty weak sauce. You, on the other hand, seem to be annoyed out of all proportion with the actual provocation, and are responding with an increasingly confrontational stance emphasised with liberal curse words as intensifiers. If you don't have the patience for dealing with the technical and ontological language barrier here then step away instead of escalating. I feel quite confident you can forgo having the last word and letting a few low-key rhetorical barbs slide in the interest of letting some water pass under this bridge.

@RaboKarbakian: You definitely need to drop the "who did what to whom" and "who's more at fault" stuff. Whatever you feel about the way they went about it, or about the way Wikidata as a project requires things to be set up, Jarnsax was trying to help and acting with the very best of intentions. And you've had ample opportunity by now to realise that the way you are handling it is annoying them. It behooves you to either amend your approach so you can work with them constructively, or to simply stay away from them. I get it that it feels pretty horrible when someone comes wading in out of the blue and starts messing with something you've carefully built up, but if you manage to keep the resultant frustration in check you'll find that nine times out of ten the other person is just pursuing a similar worthy goal and is willing to discuss how both can be achieved.

And I would really appreciate it if I didn't have to put this admin hat on again any time soon. It's stinky and fits bad, and it gets in my eyes in a really annoying way. Xover (talk) 06:31, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

@Xover At this point, stay away from me is the only acceptable option. I agree, it's not like he was shouting "you are a dick", but I have zero obligation to explain or justify how or why it bothers me so much, especially to a total stranger on the internet. It does not matter. Personal attacks are abusive, and against the Terms of Use, which do not make any attempt to say "this level of abuse" is not ok, but "weak" abuse for a couple of weeks is.

It is abusive, and is harassment. He just needs to shut the hell up about me, as a person, whether he continues to edit or is made not to. Period. Full stop. Jarnsax (talk) 08:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

@Jarnsax: That it bothers you, and that you perceive it as harassment, has been duly noted. With my admin hat on I have asked the both of you to drop the stick (that is, to stop prosecuting this disagreement), and I will follow up on that. The part of that that applies to you is that you now need to stay away from RaboKarbakian's user talk page. And in the like vein to how you have asked that they not refer to you, you need to refrain from referring to them in discussions elsewhere. In my endless optimism I am going to assume that I do not need to spell out that this applies both ways, entirely irrespective of who is more or less guilty of whatever sins. There, now you can both be more pissed at me than at each other. Xover (talk) 09:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Since then, the skin has changed to make them show up in a different place anyhow, regardless of where the link lives.

At least, that is how I recall the history, years down the line.

The issue with just saying "screw it" and ignoring the issue, for "your stuff", is it's not "your stuff" when you store information on WikiData. It's WikiData's stuff, and you have absolutely no guarantee that the commons category links will stay on the "main" entities, for the simple fact that it works either way. Any random editor, even from some other random wiki, could change it, and break your shit, and never know until you went and yelled at them. It's not a good idea to rely on it simply because it's not normal or reliable, not because "I said so", especially when using it for something it wasn't intended for, and that nobody will have the slightest indication you are doing.

Do you really intend to make a career of going around and yelling at people, on random wikis, just because they touched one of "your" entities on Wikidata, making what is a completely valid edit on Wikidata? You'll probably end up blocked from editing.

Are you willing to risk that a year from now you get hit by a bus, and stop watching your shit, and some person with a bot decides to "clean up" over on Wikidata, and breaks every single one of the places you have used this in the course of an hour?

The reason we had "drama" over on Wikidata is you showed up and started yelling at me, then accusing me of being a stalker, while refusing repeatedly to actually explain what the damn problem was. I had to throw you off my talk page, and threaten to report you to the admins for what was essentially edit warring and vandalism before you pinged me, from over here, and finally told me what template to look at.

It's obvious that I'm over here now, and have been watching your talk page, for conversations about this exact topic, because you invited me here. I'll unwatch it now, and go away, but I really don't appreciate the passive-aggressive "that editor" shit. It's childish. If you're going to talk about me, when you know I'm listening, at least have the intestinal fortitude to use my damn name.

Bye. Jarnsax (talk) 08:28, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Book of designs

I came across this book, and was wondering if you would be interested in creating the images. (No pressure if you’re not, of course; I haven’t made a Scan Lab request to import the pages yet.) In return, is there any work you might want some proofreading done on? I have seen some of your recent St. Nicholas work, but I don’t want to mess up your pretty formatting and WD work with some off-hand proofreading. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. we can do that! With or without Wellville, even. Me and Queen Zixi only need half of the month (especially when the ads get repeated and reduced after the Dec. number....)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:54, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Heh, those silly typical Germans are very thorough with their download options!!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:59, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: It’s funny how you commented just a moment before I sent my comment—and both about proofreading a book! Yes, Wellville seems nice, and I can proofread that for you, if you don’t mind getting the index (and possible formatting) set up. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:08, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. Wellville has real tables! And I would like some of those to work on (I just tried some in an ad that were impossible to do right). Yes, it was weird! I thought you were maybe suggesting not Wellville. So good to have something other than kid-stuff (which I mostly enjoy)! About the Japanese Ornaments, if you would like, I can either: upload the pdf from the web site or separate and recombine for a DJVU recombination (like Grimm was done.)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I hadn’t seen your Wellville comment when I had made my comment. As for the Grammar (which is a very silly name for this book), I will leave that choice to you: I have no great preference. As you can get the images from the original German source, there’s no need for concern about DJVU compression. As for more non-kid-stuff, I recently ordered another book—Dickins on Hokusai’s prints. (The text is available on-line, but not the images, so I’ve been trying to track them down.) It just came in yesterday, but the one that came in was unfortunately also only text, so I will suffer on yet. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:30, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. If I can interrupt the suffering. The Japanese grammar pdf was downloaded and then uploaded and it is broken for presentation here. commons:Category:A Grammar of Japanese Ornament and Design (Cutler, 1880) I took half a step towards the Scan Lab and asked for a djvu construction of it as the Germans were so nice to make the very nice tiff available. Also, in that half step Wellville.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Also: Author:Thomas W. Cutler--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for the author, Commons, WD, and personal scan requests! When they are processed, I’ll start proofreading Wellville. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea.:Index:A Grammar of Japanese Ornament and Design (1880).djvu I put the index together to check the pages. Feel free to change whatever page labels you might have a better name for.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thanks for that: I’ll be proofreading this one right away. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:11, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I will start on the 56 Japanese Grammar plates tomorrow. The other illustrations are there. Also, (and with no watermarks): Index:The Road to Wellville (1926).djvu the "numerically missing" page was blank. Style later. --RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:11, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: Thank you! I’ve just finished up the text from the Grammar, so I look forward to the plates (and other images). I’ll get to work on Wellville (in spirit) shortly. There was a problem with one of the Grammar plates, which I marked, and that might take until next year to be completed sorted out; but that shouldn’t prevent the completion of the rest of the work. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:18, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. I took a little audio hiatus, which was refreshing!! Some of my "super-powers" (softwares) have returned to me. Glad to have the completed book to stress my intentions some.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:00, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

• RaboKarbakian: I’ve seen your work on the Grammar—the plates are turning out nicely! Would you mind creating the seal from this page, please? TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. So interesting! We were just talking about Mr. George C. Wallace earlier this month, and his impact upon our federal elections. Apparently, it is due to his run for the presidency that we are all now required to declare a party before we can vote in the primaries. 3 weeks later, and here this is! (I kept forgetting to grab that fancy rule for the Japanese book....)--RaboKarbakian (talk) 02:36, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

• Also, File:GrammarPlate35replacement.pdf is available for the broken plate 35 in the Grammar. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

TE(æ)A,ea. So, I have been a little schizto concerning when I leave the color and when I change it to black. Some were almost black when I manipulated them mathematically, then later, I did an old "removing the scan haze" trick and made what might be a truer color (or not, depending on reality, etc.) Well, it is getting within a couple of days of completion and:

1. Another opinion on whether to use the color or not and which ones to restore and which not to restore.
2. Do you want the text to have the same(ish) color as the single color prints? As it was in the book.
3. Any "redo"'s you might like.
4. Also (an after thought): What about a gallery? With all of the images smaller and then link to the larger version on a single page? The thought of them all on one page was too much....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:48, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

There is the option also, of replacing the blacks with a single shade of the color that was used. It would have been what the lithographer was trying to do, but it will also look somewhat different. Solid, like bluish-orange and not shades of bluish-orange. My eyes tend to not mind so much when the blacks become uniform but weirdly, with a different color, I hesitate.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 18:47, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paragraph indenting is not done here

I see that you are forcing paragraph first line indenting by using divs. We have a stated policy to not indent paragraphs. See subsection 5 of the formatting section of the Manual of Style. Please cease from this practice and revert those that you have done. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:05, 7 December 2022 (UTC)