User talk:Skiasaurus
Add topicWelcome
[edit]Welcome
Hello, Skiasaurus, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for joining the project. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
You may be interested in participating in
Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{CotW}} to your page for current wikisource projects.
You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.
I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.
Again, welcome! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Sectioning is necessary
[edit]Hello. Sectioning of poems on this page and other select poems within this text (identified as Thoreau's) is necessary, because the poem is currently separately transcluded here. Also, we seek to eliminate line breaks when proofreading. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not certain what you mean by "sectioning," but feel free to make whatever change is necessary.
- As for removing line breaks (from which I assume you mean the OCR program's automatically generated plaintext), may I respectfully inquire as to why this is done? It has no effect on the wikified output, and it makes doing a side-by-side comparison with the original more difficult. Skiasaurus (skē’ ə sôr’ əs) 22:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
- When you initially proofread the page, you inadvertently deleted some formatting above and below the poem that was used to "section out" a portion of the text for transclusion into the Mainspace (I wish I was better at explaining things technically). I can replace it. As far as removing line breaks, I usually refer to this help page section. Another help page adds: "Line breaks can cause problems (especially with templates, links and tables, and italics/bold which are closed by the line ending)," but leaves the decision whether to retain line breaks (which don't cause problems) up to the proofreader. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:48, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
- As far as side-by-side comparison, I recommend proofreading by moving your cursor along word by word, line by line, and eliminating line breaks as you go. You won't lose your place that way. Otherwise, some recommend saving the removing of line breaks for last, but whatever way is most accurate for the proofreader. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:55, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
- <section begin="label1" /><section end="label1" />Sections are officially part of Wikisource:Labeled section transclusion and, in essence, it is a special markup that allows us to transclude/extract a portion of a page or portions of multiple pages, and join them together. [Analogous to <ref> markup which sections references differently] We use this a lot with poetry and biographical works where we wish for an altered presentation. Due to the different type of editing done here, it is not unusual to not know about them. In short if you see them, please don't remove them. If you wish to see them in action follow the "What links here" and usually you will see something. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:14, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Londonjackbooks: The page to which you linked doesn’t really give a satisfactory explanation as to why it’s good practice, IMHO—it just says that it is. The second page (the you quoted but didn’t link to) seems more reasonable to me. That said, I propose a compromise: have the first proofreader leave in any non-problematic line breaks so as to make the second’s job easier, and the latter eliminate them.
- Call me stubborn, but unless I have committed to a certain project, I usually shy away from validating proofread pages where line breaks have been retained... To me, it is not yet proofread; and "having" to remove line breaks at that stage takes away from concentrating on finding typos and the like. "Proofread" should aspire to be "perfect"—still allowing that we ourselves are imperfect ;) I agree that the two help page references are not in harmony, but should be. Probably due to the lack of strict policy on the issue. Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:37, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Londonjackbooks: The page to which you linked doesn’t really give a satisfactory explanation as to why it’s good practice, IMHO—it just says that it is. The second page (the you quoted but didn’t link to) seems more reasonable to me. That said, I propose a compromise: have the first proofreader leave in any non-problematic line breaks so as to make the second’s job easier, and the latter eliminate them.
- Thanks to both of you for re-explaining sectioning to me. I used to know more about it, but it’s been a long time since I contributed here. Skiasaurus (skē’ ə sôr’ əs) 00:47, 29 March 2017 (UTC)