User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )

We don't take excerpts:

Okay, I have had enough of tidying up your edits that do not comply to the Wikisource:Style guide and its associated pages, and your continued approach to blithely continue outside of the guidance for additions. You are blocked and we will continue the conversation on this page until I hear that you understand that this site is about generating a quality product, not some slipshod convenience to you, that it is has guidelines and they will be followed unless there is an exceptional reason to step outside the guidance.

I know that you don't like that I am removing components from your edits, however, this site has a strong culture of patrolling and it is an expectation that we get the style right, and you seem point blank not wishing to apply our standard. Patrolling is part of that and it is about getting pages to our style. You have addressed your questions to the most experienced users at this site and they have all supported the continuance of the guidance.

Detail

• No excerpts. This is clearly stated in WS:WWI. You have been instructed, you have pages moved back to your subpages for completion and our standard will be maintained. If you do not wish to complete the typing on an article, then that is fine, don't add it until is is complete. No more ... in the middle of an article, and such pages will be deleted as they are out of scope.
• No more place name linking. We do not do it by general practice and it would take a strong exception to do it. We do not take our user for fools, and we believe that they can read and comprehend placenames or look them up. A link from an old work to a modern encyclopaedia is generally not pertinent to our works. We don't not interpret works and links that we add have to add value to specifically comprehend the work. If we did what you are doing in these pieces with our biographical works, eg. DNB, EB1911, they would be butt ugly. So we maintain minimal linking. If you had cared to read the previous discussions you would comprehend this, instead you just persist with an argument that the guidance doesn't address removal. Okay, don't add them and they won't need to be removed.
• Style in headers. The notes field is not for the styling of articles that you have added, and you have not paid heed to the repeated edits you would amend your additions. We have developed a style for linking in headers and it has been explained to you.

So where are we going from here? — billinghurst sDrewth 14:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

* Resolution: The excerpts were accepted, since an encyclopedia entry can be read to completion, and a news article can be read to completion. The linking to Wikidata was also accepted for locations. There are a dozen places named Washington and we need to know if the entry is referring to Moscow, Texas or Moscow, Russia. I still have no idea what "styling of articles in headers" meant. --RAN (talk) 06:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Moved out of scope works to user namespace

Hi. I see that we are again going to go around this roundabout again. Personal letters from non-notable people are not within scope with Wikisource, per Wikisource:What Wikisource includes. I have moved the works to your user namespace. I will also point you to Wikisource:Wikilinks and the remind you of the recent discussion that you initiated in WS:AN about descriptions. The only person doing this sort of thing, especially repeatedly, is you.

Again, see above, you are enforcing your personal preferences as if they were !Wikilaw. --RAN (talk) 21:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Are these your ancestors or relatives? — billinghurst sDrewth 20:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

* Resolution: Again enforcing their personal preferences. The letter was accepted and more letters transcribed by other contributors. Wikilinks have also been accepted based on my lobbying effort. --RAN (talk) 06:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Links

Hi RAN,

cf. this edit. When linking to something other than local author pages or another text in mainspace, please use the {{wdl}} template rather than raw interwiki links. The template will automatically start linking to a local author page if one is created later, and by going by way of the template the community can decide over time what are the acceptable linking destinations. The syntax is almost the same as a wikilink: {{wdl|Q128406748|Carl Schneider}} produces Carl Schneider. Xover (talk) 16:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

• Got it, thanks. --RAN (talk) 17:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Surname categories

These categories need re-thinking as they are parented incorrectly. They seem to contain portals only, but they are in a mainspace category, which is for works. While I get your reasoning for creating them, I'm not convinced this is the best solution to the issue. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:16, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

• They seem straight forward to me and they work. --RAN (talk) 06:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

symbols

For whatever reason, I did not like being told to move my personal notes into the main space. The functioning templates, yes; my notes no. And they asked nicely that the functioning templates be moved, so there is that also.

I ignored the rest of that thread because you or anyone is perfectly free to copy and paste my Symbols to (almost) where ever they want it.

It would be nice to have a repository or gallery page filled with that stuff.

Just an example of well, crap isn't the right word but some word that is better, that has happened here through out the years. They found this in a markup clean up and it cracked me up! Maybe you will enjoy it Talk:St. Nicholas/Volume 32/Number 4/Miracle--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• I see we both have conflict with the same person who was using their personal preferences as if it were Wikilaw. My philosophy is that we are still in the experimental stage and the person doing the work should be allowed to experiment. Once every book and news article has been transcribed, then we can worry about the small details. --RAN (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)