User talk:Theornamentalist/Archive 2011

Heads up

Hi,

Wikisource:Proposed deletions#Porky's Preview

Hesperian 04:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Swiss Family Robinson, In Words of One Syllable

I wanted to talk to you before I deleted the subpages of the work because I wanted to understand your reasoning for putting the work onto one whole page, which in my opinion, makes the work more difficult to work with and for readers makes navigating a little tougher. I also wanted to ask you why you are using break instead of the the usual blank space. It makes the paragraphs sort of run together which makes the reading of the work more difficult. Thank you for your input.--Xxagile (talk) 20:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Swiss Family Robinson

Hi, I note you've disambiguated SFR. How do you know that the Kingston translation is 1812? If this is correct than the Kingston that's linked is the wrong one as he was born in 1814. When you've decided how to resolve this let me know so that we can fix Author:Johann David Wyss' page as well. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:41, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Why Category: Film by year ... ?

Wondering why the extra and parallel "by year" "by genre" etc. One would think that they are all still as Category:Works by year or Category:Works by genre and not a separate parallel generation. We have used works quite well to cover all aspects of the original production, and to bind the topic matter rather than by parallel creation. I believe that the community has also worked well in discussing such additional matters prior to creation. To me the extra derivation is unnecessary, and there are tools around if one wants to do separation of subcategories, then parallel hierarchies. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I am thinking that someone wishes to simply look up films by year, as opposed to all works in a year, this can prove useful. Adding something like cat:Works by year to the cat:Film by year would allow for them to fall underneath, but also remain separated. I'm open to any suggestions, just getting starting to get the gears going on this stuff.. - Theornamentalist (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't you think that it is worthy of community discussion prior to implementation? One that is a means of derivation, where else are we going? Publications? Poetry? ... What makes film special enough that it is the deviation? Why not look to use something like Magnus's intersection tool, then build a tool that filters by subsidiary category rather then whole hierarchy. A proper tool could then be expanded for whatever is the topic matter, genre, that is relevant, and not parallel hierarchies. Propagating bad and arbitrary schemas shouldn't be where we are, especially as recategorising works for misnamed categories is such a masssive PITA. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I apologize for the excessive amount of typos and, well, poor English in last nights response. Regarding why I thought film was special enough: I saw only a few mediums at our disposal, text, sound, and video. I thought that videos were important enough, in the same way that I would like to have the capability to view music by year in category pages. It is definitely worthy of community discussion though, I suppose I got carried away in getting started yesterday. As far as Magnus' tool, I had read about category flattening and intersection, but I had never seen either used to propagate category pages. Show me how to use these tools. - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Noooooo. Please don't create all those portals either. One portal for cinema or movies, is probably appropriate, I doubt that film is appropriate, and not all of them. It was not my intention to give that impression if that is what you took from it. We try to think through all these portals, align them and have them manageable and workable, I don't see that what you are implementing is going to be either of those. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Update on film cat

Hey Billinghurst,

After further consideration, I see what you mean, and will successively move cats into their standardized form. This is being done with the hope that one day cat intersection can build cat pages for, say, "1912 works" and "Film" in order to produce something like films released in 1912. Also, I've added an idea for text size toggle at the scriptorium; you were the only one to comment, and I think this could prove useful for the variety of readers WS may encounter. Looking forward to your feedback - Theornamentalist (talk) 06:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Will comment when I am back home tomorrow and have some time to think about it. I think that we could be working on a standardised template that can be added for plug and play filtering based on a parent category AdamBMorgan (talk • contribs) is excellent with that stuff and we might be able to borrow some of his thinking especially with some of the fantastic work that he has been doing with Portal: namespace. We could also look to how some of those filters may also work well to then cross-categorise with Commons if there is a match to the filter. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:54, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not thinking of the portals as really something complex. Almost like a selection reduction after successive refinement; although separate portal pages, I am trying to make it appear as though one stays on the same page by use of the same header template. What do you think of the text size toggle update? I might try reposting it to get more attention. - Theornamentalist (talk) 18:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

It all adds complexity and maintenance requirements, and becomes all features and no benefits. We have been trying to simplify unless there are benefits for expansion, as it all seems to be used and abused when overly complex, and someone moves on. It becomes yet another page that someone is required to add a piece of work through the site which just confuses newbies. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:54, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Currently, maintaining portals are a problem; I see that now at any of the Library of Congress Classification system portals. Many—many remain un-updated and can of course become a poor reflection of what Wikisource has to offer, or of course one users' idea of what is important enough to belong there. However, portals are a highly functional and amazing navigational tool at Wikipedia; the only difference is that there are limited resources here to work on them. I know it creates complexity on some level, but I don't think that that or limited resources should inhibit the creation of it. I plan on writing some portal etiquette or something. I believe one day as Wikisource grows and attracts more users, these things will not seem so arduous.

I've since removed all the related categories from before, and migrated all Portal spaces to subpages; this way when Magnus' tools can be used to generate intersecting categories, it will work great. So, at minimum, a film I've added falls under cats:

1. PD tag
2. genre
3. year
4. film

If you look through my user subpages (although they're a mess) you'll see that I'm trying to work on a way to verify on screen text and even dialogue using Mdale's recent mwEmbed update for selecting time intervals within a media file. Here's a very bad prototype. - Theornamentalist (talk) 15:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Portal: namespace is where AdamBMorgan is working and we are (well he is) migrating over to that space from an even more chaotic situation at Wikisource: namespace. Hence why I suggested approaching Adam. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi. (I'm afraid that, due to lack of sleep and ongoing computer problems, this message may not be that helpful but I'll try to come back to it later.) Generally, I think it's best to keep everything on just one page until that gets too big, after which sections can be split off as necessary; this allows for more organic growth and limits empty and near-empty portals. Too many subpages could confuse casual readers and can be a problem maintenance-wise (which is why there are some law portals on which I tried to work but finally decided to leave until the end).

Some ideas: You could transclude the subpages into the main page for the time being (see Portal:Medieval texts, which was migrated from two separate indices); this will both keep the subpages and keep everything on one page. Once they get bigger, they can be separated again. It would also help you and other editors if the subpages were categorised in Category:Portal subpages, which is done automatically by {{portal subpage}}. This will at least keep a list of all the subpages on Wikisource. (On that subject, the portal should really use {{portal header}}, be categorised and indexed, so other users can find it easily; it would be in Subclass ZA.) It might even help to keep a list for reference on the portal (or talk page) as well. Anything that would help a random user browse the portal and find whatever they're looking for is good.- AdamBMorgan (talk) 14:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Continuing from my talk page: Yes, all portals should fit somewhere in the LoC system (Dewey Decimal System is under copyright) but it's reasonably flexible. Portal:Film should be in subclass ZA but more specific portals, if and when they exist, could fit elsewhere and you can still link between portals regardless of classification. The reason for the LoC system was organisation and navigation within portal space.

One issue is that portals mainly index a subject area. As a library rather than an encyclopedia, on Wikisource they act like a combination card catalog, special collection, display case and bookshelf (a descriptioon I've stolen from a discussion on Scriptorium). Nevertheless, what they mainly do is index.

At the moment, some of the film subpages have only one item each. That isn't useful as an index (or display etc) and it can present a barrier to users, especially newer users unfamiliar with the site, who may have to go through multiple pages to find something rather than have it all presented to them in one place. Putting it another way, mutiple pages can dilute the content. Eventually the amount of content will grow and multiple portals would make sense at that time. However, portals should represent the content as it is rather than anticipate the future too much. That said, there is no actual minimum for content but I try to aim for a quantity of works at least in the low double figures/high single figues.

Wikisource portals can and should act as a showcase as well as an index. Some, like Portal:American Civil War and Portal:Poetry, use the Wikipedia style and I stole some of your formatting for the showcase on Portal:Science. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Header to files

Would you be so kind to stick a {{header}} onto these pages

+- N    22:53 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/05:55‎‎ (4 changes | hist) . . (+307) . . [Theornamentalist‎ (4×)]
               	22:53 (cur | prev) . . (+11) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (center) [rollback] (no header)
               	20:27 (cur | prev) . . (-17) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (-block center) (no header)
               	20:27 (cur | prev) . . (+17) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (+bc) (no header)
          N    	20:26 (cur | prev) . . (+296) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text=THE ROYAL PROCESSION {{rule|10em}} The Queen invites Alice to join. {{rule|10em}} Alice unintentionally offends the Queen who calls the ...') (no header)
  N    20:21 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/03:54‎ (diff | hist) . . (+155) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text=The Duchess's Cheshire Cat appears to Alice and directs her to the Mad Hatter. {{rule|10em}}The Mad Tea-Party." }}') (no header)
  N    20:09 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/02:30‎ (diff | hist) . . (+193) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text=Alice enters the White Rabbit's tiny House, but, having suddenly resumed her normal size, she is unable to get out until she remembers th...') (no header)
  N    20:07 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/02:21‎ (diff | hist) . . (+157) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text=Alice, now very small, has gained access to the Garden where she meets a Dog and tries to make him play with her. }}') (no header)
+- N    20:04 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/01:27‎‎ (2 changes | hist) . . (+61) . . [Theornamentalist‎ (2×)]
               	20:04 (cur | prev) . . (-2) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (no header)
          N    	20:03 (cur | prev) . . (+63) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text={{center|EAT ME}}}} }}') (no header)
  N    20:02 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/00:09‎ (diff | hist) . . (+91) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text={{center|{{larger|ALICE<br>in<br>WONDERLAND}}}} }}') (no header)
  N    19:55 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/00:04‎ (diff | hist) . . (+154) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text=Alice dreams that she sees the White Rabbit and follows him down the Rabbit-hole, into the Hall of Many Doors. }}') (no header)
  N    19:50 	Alice in Wonderland (1903).ogv/00:02‎ (diff | hist) . . (+91) . . Theornamentalist (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with '{{User:Theornamentalist/Daydreams2 |Text={{center|{{larger|ALICE}}<br>in<br>WONDERLAND}} }}') (no header)

If you are going to transclude these pages, then wrapping the header inside <noinclude> is our suggested solution. We have a practice of all main namespace pages utilise the template, it aids the navigation. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:29, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Geography! Supernova (talk) 09:44, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

Hi. I see that you have requested a cloak. However, since you don't have an IRC account on freenode, we cannot proceed with the cloaking process. You first need to register at freenode (type /msg NickServ REGISTER Theornamentalist your@email.address), then send the required memo to wmfgc (type /msg MemoServ SEND wmfgc IRC cloak request) and then we can proceed with the cloaking process. Thanks --Filip (§) 12:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Undo or Rollback

Re: Edit if you use rollback instead of undo, the undone edit gets marked as patrolled. Jeepday (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Admin?

I just realized you probably don't have rollback, then I looked a little more. You have been around a long time and very busy on the project. Would you consider being nominated for admin?

You have been nominated Wikisource:Administrators#Theornamentalist, Thank you for saying yes. JeepdaySock (talk) 10:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Featured texts

Hi, you asked for help on IRC. I have created a modified {{featured}} which can be found on User:Sir48/Sandbox1. It displays the featured text as shown in User:Sir48/Sandbox2. The correction is to insert a {{clear}} in the template. I am not authorized to do that, but if the result is ok, you will surely find someone who can. Regards --Sir48 (talk) 17:30, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

With regard to the icon thing disscussed in WS:S earlier....

The above works, but of course inserts an additional line between the bottom of the firstHeading line and the top of the green navigation header. There is no problem with any of this until you introduce dynamic layouts -- which wraps everything (the text-container?) starting usually with the header in <div id="headertemplate"> but, as we now know, will include any other template before/after the header irregardless as well.

We need to find away to exclude this handful of absolute-top-right templates from being wrapped under this text-container even though they "appear" as a child under that div text-container (don't think that is possible?). I believe a workaround for this is to find a way to get the desired template to mimic the "behaviour" of the proofreading-color-progress-bar (a table) or the back link on proper sub-pages (a span) as these find a way to be wrapped in <div id="contentSub"> which is a parent to the div text-container wrap. — George Orwell III (talk) 23:36, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Top icon

After taking a peak at your stylesheet, I can see why the top icon code didn't work. I wasn't clear with the details; instead of the div, you need to copy the following into your stylesheet at User:Theornamentalist/common.css:

/**
 * Icons on the top right of the article.
 * See also JS
 *
 * @source: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Snippets/Top_icons
 * @rev: 2
 */
/* Hide without javascript */
.Top_icon_raw { 
	display: none;
}
/* With JavaScript */
.Top_icon_dynamic {
	float: right;
	padding-left: 10px;
	font-size: 50%;
	width: auto !important;
}
.Top_icon_raw p, .Top_icon_dynamic p {
	padding: 0; margin: 0;
}

You also need to add the following to your javascript at User:Theornamentalist/common.js:

/**
 * Icons on the top right of the article.
 * See also CSS
 *
 * @source: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Snippets/Top_icons
 * @rev: 2
 */
jQuery( document ).ready( function( $ ) {
	$( '.Top_icon_raw' )
		.removeClass( 'Top_icon_raw' )
		.addClass( 'Top_icon_dynamic' )
		.prependTo( '#firstHeading' );
} );

Then, if you look at the example text in User:AdamBMorgan/Sandbox2, you should see the star in the right place. To enable this on all top icons, they need to be converted to divs with class="Top_icon_raw" (with no other style css, which is apparently handled by the above code). If it goes live, the existing templates will need to be modified; the simplest method may be to copy the Wikipedia symbols and change the class. The full documentation of this code is at mw:Snippets/Top icons but there isn't a lot more than this. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:53, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind the presumption, but I added a line to your javascript. The statement wasn't closed properly; it's an annoyingly common problem with computer programming. At least in this case it is only a small piece of code, looking for a single typo in a whole program gets old quickly. It should work now (maybe, debugging is also an annoying process). I'll start a proposal for adding this to common css/js and see how that goes. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikisource translations

Hello Theornamentalist, I have been travelling for a few days and have probably missed something. What has happened with this translation? Has it been decided that it wouldn't be a Wikisource translation any more, or does this adding of a translator's name have another meaning I haven't understood? We might have both translations, a wikisource one and a translator's one, or is there any inconvenience if we do that?--Zyephyrus (talk) 07:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Your solution seems to me to be very good. The translated text by a known translator will allow to protect the text, and the wikisource translation will remain open to modern and collective translations separately on another page.

And welcome among admins  :) --Zyephyrus (talk) 10:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Line-height

[Somewhat copied/pasted from my Talk page] Out of your experimentation with "Burden", it seems you have inadvertently taught me how to set line height... Something I've been trying to figure out how to do, since I am html-challenged!

<span style="line-height: 3em">

I have applied the above line-height notation here, and was wondering what you thought... It seems to solve text-wrapping issues associated with drop-initials... But now the height of stanza breaks seem a bit too large... Any thoughts or recommendations? Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:26, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

You now have administrator rights

Congratulations!--BirgitteSB 00:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit

http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource%3AAdministrators&action=historysubmit&diff=2793510&oldid=2787925 ??? JeepdaySock (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I did that, thought I was logged in. - Theornamentalist (talk) 16:33, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I would be the cause of that as I gave you the https: url. You may wish to go and block out the contributor component. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Spanish constitution (irc comments concatenated)

[space goo applied and teflon handholds activated]. IMNSHO this becomes two different versions and we should disambiguate at the existing root page of the work. Move the existing work to xxxx (1978) as the original version, and work out its copyright status as a separate process. The new work is a version of the year of its last amendment, so becomes xxxx (YYYY). There are plenty of examples of such. Obviously it would get respective listings at Portal:Spain and Portal:Constitutional documents though at the later, I sometimes wonder whether listing just the latest version is relevant and point to a place that disambiguates the parts. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:24, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

A Forest Hymn

How beautiful is that!?
A lovely Easter read this morning, Thanks!
Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC):

Thank you :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Catullus 93

Just a heads up that the page you deleted is a complete poem recognized as part of the Catullan corpus. I know it doesn't look like much. :) Prosody (talk) 03:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

SpanishConst

... question.

I wanted to correct Section 67, item 3. but I'm not exactly understanding the naming convention you applied to the opening & closing section tags throughout. Give a mamaluke a clue maybe? :-) — George Orwell III (talk) 04:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey George,

are you referring to the inordinate use of ##chapter1## and ##chapter2##? If so, I know, probably better ways. The first book I saw its use in used these two for every section split (here). I completed the book, and began practicing that to split sections. Later, I did realize that you could call it other things, but found it an unexceptionally marginal bit easier when transcluding since it was always one or the other. - Theornamentalist (talk) 12:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Mornin',

Did you every stop to look at the resulting transclusions from such an application??? In The Swiss Family Robinson, In Words of One Syllable/Chapter 2, note the end of page 11 to the begining of page 12; a line break is introduced creating a 'split' or sentence fragment. Same thing from the end of page 10 to the start of page 11. — George Orwell III (talk) 12:13, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I've seen that, but only figured that was a good as it got. That break is remedied by using different section tag names? - Theornamentalist (talk) 12:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Not entirely. It was just throwing me off (open chap 1 close chap 2 ????) from a real fix for the Span Const. when using wikicode ( : ) for indentation across page breaks. I don't what the entire story is with the Swiss family either.

The overall point is to use unique tag names in case somebody wants to create a book or excerpts, etc. one day. Re-using the same tag names throughout a single work nearly always introduces conflicts when some other application of the work you never thought of is dreamed up by somebody in the future.

The problem I saw had more to do with the wikicode indentation than the tags. (Part III is fixed already). — George Orwell III (talk) 12:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Removal of cover image from Index/Main pages of Poems of the Great War

I was wondering if the mere fact that an Index of scans is without a text cover image means that it is "doomed" to be so as well in the Mainspace for the text...? While I understand your reasoning (image "does not appear in scan") behind your removal of the "orphaned" cover image from the Index:Page (while not wholeheartedly agreeing with the removal), I do not see why the image must be removed from the Mainspace page as well (and for the same reason). The image originated from a Gutenberg source (same edition), and although it is not a superb image (since some of the image is unfortunately cut off), it (in my opinion) is better than no image at all. And I also believe (but have not confirmed) that the illustrator of the cover (William Nicholson?) is the same illustrator of The Velveteen Rabbit... Speaking of which, it is my understanding that in order to obtain better rendering of some images from The Velveteen Rabbit (pre-featured status), it was necessary for WS editors to "borrow" from other image sources (I could be wrong on that specific point, but it would not be inconceivable that such measures would necessarily be taken in similar cases where better images would need to be found)...? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I saw that you wikilinked William Nicholson in the note of the text... Is it then the same William Nicholson (who illustrated The Velveteen Rabbit), as I had suspected? I couldn't find proof of it online to be certain... Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:57, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey LJB,

I don't feel too strongly either way, as it I suppose an essentially harmless addition. But my reasoning which led to the removal is as follows:

1. Not in scan: highest importance. I feel we need to maintain the intergrity of what we have as scans, else people could potentially add what they feel is related or belongs; a case I recall is someone having added images by Gustave Dore to a Little Red Riding Hood story. Anyway, in principle, we have no way to check such a case, which forces us to count on the online editors of other sites being accountable. This image is not so severe as that sounds, I mean, it looks certainly like his illustration and all, but it's just principle.

Just making sure, as many of the Coates collections I have added to WS are built from IA scans, etc., but their corresponding Mainspace pages contain images from my own collection, since I was able to scan sharper images. So as long as the edition/credibility/worthiness of the image can be established and documented, I assume the inclusion on the Mainspace page is ok then?... As for the Poems of the Great War cover image, I am not quite so concerned—since you have linked to the image in the note, and the image is somewhat "off"... Thanks! Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

1. Image was cropped very poorly, did not add that much to work. (Personally, I found the cropping to render the image rather ugly, but that's off the books.)
2. Personal desire to move away from PG text if possible.

   In order to compensate for the loss, I added a link in the note to the image. Despite all of this, if you feel strongly to re-add, I would not object.

   Regarding TVR, I feel that is not so much related, as the same images were being supplemented for larger resolution scans. In fact, the "new" ones more closely resemble the scan the the previous ones, which had different coloration altogether and came from some unmatched e-text like PG if I remember correctly.

   Gladd to see Stops at Various Quills garnering support for FT :) Although, I want to mention that I noticed you had removed the page scan link column in order to allow for rendering of the text as PDF; I can't find where its required where we have them, but I can't think of any other transcluded text which does not have the page links! We can make a book and save it as PDF, and allow for download if you like, and then revert back to {{Page:}} format or something. - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Well—I've been waiting for a solution here at WS where transclusion formatting can at the same time render page scan numbers (links) as well as be PDF-renderable (is "renderable" a word?) to regular WS viewers... If we are now excluding that option via a generally-accepted preference for the page scan column, then why even include the PDF download option here at all? I hope someone can figure out a formatting solution that includes both, for documents print out nicely in PDF format... It can be done! (I hope) :)

P.S. Re: Stops project: It was fun to do, and thanks for your help/support! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 15:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

New Category: 1001 Children's books ...

Thanks for stepping into this. It suddenly started appearing as I was heading to bed my time and my head wasn't clear enough to know what to do with it. A category like this would have met a swift demise over at enWP, probably as a speedy. I have concerns over the copyright issue, if what we do is based solely upon the published book - after all it is just one person's ideal list of books. But let's see how it shapes up. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:25, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem :) I think we may be okay; with the list being available at other sites (which we can refer to) and as long as we don't include the commentary than we are just making a list. Hmm, but maybe we should bring this to scriptorium? I'll be out for the night. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge Portal:Children's general fiction <-> Portal:Children's literature ?

Having Portal:Children's general fiction and Portal:Children's literature seems like an exercise in duplication and possibly a confusion where it makes it hard to differntiate which works belong where. Would you consider merging to Children's literature? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

That makes sense, I admit when I first started working on those I did not have any knowledge of our LOC-style system, and thought of "Children's literature" as a hub for various sub genres. I think the entire concept I employed there needs to be re-examined :/ - Theornamentalist (talk) 11:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hi, would you mind taking a look at this discussion, and this page's edit history and talk page. I know this user does good work, but his ownership of Wikisource seems clear. I don't know how to resolve it, talk page and waiting for things to cool down don't work. Green Cardamom (talk) 16:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea with The Pheonix. Working on that now. May have some questions, will get back. Green Cardamom (talk) 19:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Theornamentalist. That's a markup learning curve, but looks good, almost like TeX. I'd be interested in learning more about where Wikisource is headed with this approach, if you want, point me to the right place for background. Also, how does the poem incorporate with the dab page for The Dead Man's Chest, if at all, or how to link to it from Wikipedia? Green Cardamom (talk) 21:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your help. You put a lot of work into it. While at the beach :) Final thought: would you mind if I posted on the Scriptorium page, to see if anyone had an idea how to link to a poem that's in a book, but not clearly delineated from another poem on the same page? Green Cardamom (talk) 21:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Point of procedure

FYI - Vote on point of procedure. Green Cardamom (talk) 14:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikisource:Annotations/types

Your doing bangup good work in creating that list. Any chance persuade to make the list at Wikisource:Annotations/types? The list will be key for long term in structuring a vote and deriving a policy. We're still at discovery and discussion of how to define annotation, and that will need some time. Then voting, people need to be notified and given fair chance to weigh in on voting procedure before it actually begins. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem; I have a tendency to move quickly which almost always results in most dismissing my attempts. Gotta learn to slow down sometimes :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 04:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Rihani text proofreading

One Ameen Rihani text that I would be very interested to enter into the proofreading system is The Path of Vision, which is also on archive.org. How difficult would that be to do? [1] Tfine80 (talk) 13:07, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll upload this one, then you can refer to it for the one we talked about on your talk page. - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Here's the upload and info at commons commons:File:Path of Vision; pocket essays of East and West.djvu, and here's the index file Index:Path of Vision; pocket essays of East and West.djvu. - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Fantastic. Thank you. I will start digging into this. Tfine80 (talk) 13:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I have a question. I notice that the OCR produces spaces at the end of lines. Does it matter if these spaces are kept or removed? Tfine80 (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes and no. It reads each line break as a space, so it does not necessarily make a difference in the output. However, some of the wiki markup, like italics, end at each line break. It is neater to condense the text, and most people here adjust the OCR. - Theornamentalist (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

That TOC markup looks fantastic by the way. Cheers. Tfine80 (talk) 03:08, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

stuck on stupid

Hi, seeking further advice & input from you on signature issue.

Well, after cycling through various historic and/or government docs from the recognized eras and reviewing how they appear across the sets and standards of subsequent publications for more than 2 hours stright, I have come to a singular conclusion....

Using a template to try and facilitate a duality of displays per namespace being viewed might not be be the best approach to this after all.

It might be worth doing for certain collections that are fairly unchanged in their presentations from one century to the next such, as my Executive Orders and similar agency-head communiques, but for the majority of the most-likely-to-be-added-to-WS type of works (such as the recent NARA-ish stuff), there is rarely an instance where lines, leads, closings, titles, trailers, abbreviations and so on are repetative enough to identify or quantify for standardization via application of a template.

Long story short, lets scrap my whole over-blown attempt to do seals, right-side and left-side signatures all in a single template and focus on your initial idea instead. The basic or default settings should mirror the following guidelines (GPO MoS, 2008) as they seem to be common more often than not ....

16.17. Signatures, preceded by an em dash, are sometimes run in with
        last line of text.

16.18. Signatures are set at the right side of the page. They are
        indented 1 em for a single line; 3 ems and 1 em, successively,
        for two lines; and 5 ems, 3 ems, and 1 em, successively, for
        three lines. In measures 30 picas or wider, these indentions
        are increased by 1 em.

Mark J. Pitalippo, Chairman.□

Mrs. Joanne Wilder□□□
(In absentia.)□

John Q. Smith,□□□□□
Lieutenant Governor□□□
(For the Governor of Maine).□

16.19. The name or names are set in caps and small caps; Mr., Mrs.,
        and all other titles preceding a name, and Esq., Jr., Sr., and
        2d following a name, are set in roman caps and lowercase; the
        title following name is set in italic. Signatures as they
        appear in copy must be followed in regard to abbreviations.

16.20. If name and title make more than half a line, they are set as
        two lines.

Joanne Wilder, Board Member and Secretary.□

□ = 1 blank em of spacing

Any help would be greatly appreciated -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:54, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

We have three separate ways of achieving this from the work you did earlier I see on the Page. My sandbox, {{Sandbox}}, and a direct, on Page ifeq; which do I think is most desirable? Ha I look at yours, and it is beyond what I can easily comprehend. Functionally, yours looks like it works good. Capturing the variety of lines, placement and such leaves it with many parameters, while I find it may be simpler to just allow the editor to make it work in the Page space itself. Yours on a bit of a diet gets my vote; an example of what I find excessive would be the use of "suftxt1" for "Presid." I would find it easier simply to insert it myself outside of the template. Keep in mind, I am saying this without being able to perceive it's full capacity, so there is likely ignorance in my opinion. It seems as though something so complex might work against the editor when trying to cover such a variety of works. If you continued with this template you've built, I opt to be a subject and give feedback, but as for the technical aspect, no comment.

As far as my opinion on the whole matter, and not just the template, I like the preservation of the signature in the mainspace, but this stems from my view that it can be a unique part of the document and the fingerprint of the person. I err on the side of keeping all signatures present on the document in the mainspace, only because I don't want to decide who or when to exclude. The seal I am less opinionated on; this is a perfect case where we've used the grandchild. How important is this seal as an artifact? But in the least, I like the final product here. For signatures, we have alt text, hover text, author link if possible, and the plain text in the page space; a reader hopefully can find out who it is. So, with the plain text in the Page space and the approximate artifacts (or if need the be, the actual images from the particular document) in the mainspace, I feel en.ws is giving the best representation of the document. - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

The whole convulted reason behind the creation of a prefix and a suffix parameter was only because it insured adherence to the one "rule" no matter which guideline or manual of style I looked to -- they all say the signing person's name should be in small-caps. If I go back to the originals as first published and without the benefits of later editions, re-releases or consolidation - the rule goes to using a small(er) font but all capitals (which really translates to all uppercase for us no matter how we get there).

I can get the right-side to "work" but only when I make the image portion an input rather a set of built in parameters....

Theodore Roosevelt

I'd like to get the sig image to behave as a set of parameters but the variations on a theme seem to varied to accomplish this unless I make the whole bit an input. This where the most refinement is needed because I just can't seem to wrap my head around making more than one signature display well at a time without always re-tweaking the defaults.

To your point about signatures in the mainspace -- I'm a little tired of playing this game to be frank about it. I have no problem recycling the same signature over and over again because I've heard of autopen and similar rubber stamp methods used throughout U.S. history. I strive to include the signature image in the mainspace whenever I can, even though the corresponding scan in Page: show no such "lineart". Its silly; I know the document was signed at some-point and in some fashion -- that much is a fact in spite of the absence of edvidence-in-hand to show those who may question the practice. -- 15:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Well let me know if you move it into Template, I've been doing some NARA stuff and would like to use it. As far as the sigs, I meant to use the image from the doc if one did not exist in a clean form (like .svg) at commons. I feel the same way, I guess this coincides with my preference for using a clean seal too. If someone wants to see the exact document, they would not be looking at our digitized copies. With the signature size, I don't think there is anyway to standardize; only thing I can think of is if images could be defined by mdashes, where the digitized word could approximate how long the name is in em's and then make the signature image size that too. Unfortunately, I believe we cannot do this. Related, I wish we could make all our images (especially illustrations, which some prefer small have a great variety on size depending who edits) based off of emdash width or something. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I guess that one is ok to move to a real template name - any thoughts on what to name it and/or the shortcuts to it? Keep in mind - this is only for right hand side signatures. Ones appearing on the left (and with seals in play?) will need the opposite formula to the right's 5-3-1 em margin spacing. I figure best not to try another layer of coding to accomplish this namespace specific stuff on top of a left or right display.

I guess I'll leave the image thing as an input rather than a built in parameter as well? -- George Orwell III (talk) 19:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

┌───────────────────┘
Well, as you know, I went ahead and created the basic SigR and SigL templates without any feedback. Apply them as you come across the need to but let me know if there are new issues that come to light as a result.

Next problem - that dang seal. Again, I would like to at least give the reader a line-art rendering of these stamps but again it should be limited to the mainspace only. The issue at hand then revolves around actual placement vs. intended placement.

If we looked at an example of an actual seal as affixed to a hand-written original work against the subsequent collection in which that original was recorded and transcribed into for posterity and legal notice, we can see the seal is meant "go with" the closing declaration - typically declaring witness along with place, time, date, etc. - rather than mirror wherever it winds up being physically placed in the original. So in the Alexander Hamilton commission's case, the seal physically appears down and just above Benjamin Lincoln's signature while it probably should be higher up and a part of the same paragraph as the line "Given under my hand at ...." is found when being depicted (at the least in) Page: namespace for plain-text transcription proofreading.

Does that make sense or I am I over-looking/thinking here? -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

First, I'd like to apologize for not being more active recently. Afraid the next couple days won't be much better. I am very happy with the templates you made for signatures; I will be using them from now on. Regarding the seal, I personally wouldn't fight with placement. I mean, I wouldn't change it if you placed it a little higher on the page, next to the final sentence, but I probably wouldn't place it there if initially editing it either. With the way our works spread horizontally, it never really looks like the original. I think you may be overthinking a bit. Are you asking this because you would have the template float up on Pages in general? Or is this specific case? - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

urgent request

as a steward, I need an admin ASAP. please contact me privately. Matanya (talk) 15:35, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Please document what happened here. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 15:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure; I did not do this initially for potential privacy concerns, but it was in regard to a someone using sock puppets and vandalizing. Powerloan (talk • contribs) was one of them. Others were listed, but the accounts do not exist here, so I've only blocked that one. The others, Breakearth, Dramamost, Rocksaid, Daysdays, Wheelwatch and Kittiesonfire, I will log into the Admin board soon - Theornamentalist (talk) 15:49, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

When do you intend to do that? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 23:11, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Done; I have been busy this week Cygnis. - Theornamentalist (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Descent of Bolchevism

I saw that you began work on this! I will try to assist! Best, Tfine80 (talk) 03:40, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The Art of Nijinsky

Thank you for doing all that you are for this text. I deeply appreciate it. What you are doing is way beyond my capabilities. Respectfully, Mattisse (talk) 21:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

No problem; Hope it reaches featured status :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Front matter

Just wondering whether you had considered the second and third pages of Path of Vision; pocket essays of East and West to be called Front matter and transcluded at Path of Vision; pocket essays of East and West/Front matter — billinghurst sDrewth 05:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't mind. I've seen this before, and I was wondering where you typically cut it off as front matter; the title page? I think then it is just removal of redundant titles or ads. Personally, I like including the actual cover in the main page if it is artistic or stylistic, especially if there is an a drawing or photo or something. - Theornamentalist (talk) 10:22, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you about the presentation of the title pages where they add value to the work. Similarly, I like to have the lead pages (front matter) available to, especially where it is other works, as that helps to build their list of works, just not where it can detract from the quality of the rest of the presentation. There is no right or wrong, just opinion, and with the current presentation, I think that it detracts from the quality of the existing work in that the artistic and introductory components are not really displayed until you page down. Your work, your choice; I just thought that it was worth making the comment. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I can do it later today, but if you'd like, feel free to isolate the front matter. - Theornamentalist (talk) 11:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

deletion of template:Iwtrans

Hi, I see you've deleted Template:Iwtrans... maybe there's a misunderstanding, only Template:Iwtrans/doc was to be deleted (its content was to moved to Template:Iwpage/doc that serves as documentation for all 4 transclusion templates). Template:Iwtrans is not currently used but can be very useful, for example for bilingual editions. I'm using it in my user pages, so that the content stays in one place and is replicated "on the fly" on all subdomains, and all pages are always up to date. But the possibilities are immense, in the future we could even trasclude pages from Wikipedia or other projects. Spread the word! :-) Candalua (talk) 15:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

partitioning a book

From my talk page:

"Hey William,

"I'm looking over the index and I'm wondering, do you have a way you prefer to partition the book? - Theornamentalist (talk) 20:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't know which book you refer to because I tend to work on about 3 or 4 books, switching from one to another as I get weary of the the same topic when editing. But, no, I have no preference. I didn't know there are options for choosing a preference in partitioning a book. In any case, I am not through editing any books. Thank you for asking though. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 00:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Theornamentalist, I've seen what you refer to and I certainly do not mind how you work on the Mexico book's Index. I sure cannot do what you have done and neither can our amigo. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 01:43, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

---

---

Glad to help, and the more time you spend working on tables, I assure you, you will be capable of doing it too :) If you have any questions on what or how, please feel free to ask.

I made the front matter transclusion, and the rest can pretty much be set up from there by selecting on the links. I can also set up the illustration index to link to the images when they are transcluded if you like. - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad you can help too. <smile> I know that I can learn about making tables but I find them boring and I came to wikisource to work on transcribing books—not to learn about making tables. I find javascripts and cascading style sheets more interesting than making tables. But wikisource has a place for everyone to contribute. The book on Old Mexico isn't a book that I requested. It was just sitting there and I like the history of that area. Close to that area I placed detailed 2 volumes on wikisource with lots of accent marks within the text; "Exploration of the Valley of the Amazon" volumes 1 and 2. They were very fascinating for me but work nonetheless. Why place books on wikisource and have nobody to edit the text? Somebody needs to it if wikisource is to collect texts. This book on Old Mexico has a lot of images. Each image has to work properly. The cleaning and so forth is fast for me. The uploading and entering the correct data is slower. Then adding them into the pages properly takes still longer. It is a slow process but being a lover of photography I like to work on images too. So, working on lots of text in every small [box] (page) of a book and the images are very time consuming. When would I take time out to learn about tables in all of what I am now doing? I haven't finished the text and images yet. It's slow going. It is a matter of how much each of us wants to spend our time and I am there working every day and into the nights. Even with this I am still learning proper coding within the text—wiki code vs hyper–text markup language. Whatever you can do and are willing to do please do. I thank you for your help and time in all this. People in the future will also benefit from everyone's area of work on wikisource. I almost live on wikisource at this computer. I know I have a lot to learn and as soon as I learn it there will be developed different ways to do the work. I learned HTML by hand when it first came out. I have been on internet for many years now and have seen the changes that programs can do for websites whereas we had to them all by hand and that is outdated for the most part. The process is what changes but I work mostly with the text and images and unlike much of the processes they will not change aside from placing them into another language.—William Maury Morris II ^Talk 03:49, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Porky's Preview

Hi, I see that you deleted the Index file for "Porky's Preview" back in May. Unfortunately the software doesn't delete associated pages and so 21 pages in the Page namespace didn't get deleted along with it and they are sitting in the orphaned pages list (e.g. Page:Porky's Preview.djvu/1). Do we need to keep them? Cheers, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 00:30, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Oops, good catch. I will delete them. - Theornamentalist (talk) 02:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)