Help talk:Contents

Introduction

This is going to need some more work, since Wikisource editing techniques are subtlely different from Wikipedia editing. Here this is a need to be more of a proof checker, with the additional need to have skills in the finer points of mark-up codes. Foreign scripts, such as Greek and accented Roman letters, typographical symbols such as the m and n dash, the section sign, the dagger and the pilcrow all can appear. Footnote numbers need to be inserted and hyperlinked. I suggest these skills are going to be more than the everage editor ever uses if writing and editing humanities pages on WP. Therefore we need to build in the tools here Apwoolrich 18:40, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I personally think we just need to blank this page and start from scratch. You're right: editing here is very different from editing anywhere else. We have specific templates to be used in certain situations, and not many people (pretty much only the veteran editors) know what they are. And besides, our documentation is horrible and needs a revamp just for that reason, too.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 18:52, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I suggest we think along the line of putting together a toolbox specifically for WS use. Would it be dangerous to assume we will only ever get skilled editors working here? My worry is that we might get enthusiatic newbies who will need a fair bit of training to get started, or at least not make horrible messes everywhere that are going to need salvaging.

Maybe we might have in the left hand toolbox column links direct to at least Wikimarkup (including Tex for maths, WS templates, Making tables, How to scan and OCR texts, Copyright, How to do footnotes (and anything else which comes to mind. There is an ad on the EB1911 page about to go out inviting people on WP etc to take part in the project, so we may get a sudden influx any day. I have also wondered if we might have on the discussion pages a template which lists the stages of the work, eg upload new scan, add appropriate markup for accents etc, prooofread, and finally freeze, so thay can be ticked off as they are done There is a gizmo on the new main page which does this, but I don't have a clue how it works in practice.

I feel is would be useful to have a section on the mechanics of using Mediawiki on a PC. This gets over the hassle of having to be on line, and gives an exact WYSIWYG result for checking. Long texts can be worked on over several days is necessary. There is something similar which works with some browsers, but it seems to need to be on line to be able to use it. I have not yet done anything about this, only having found out it is possible a few days ago. Then there is the use of the markup extension on Firefox.

As we are producing raw texts which will be frozen, I am not happy at the thought of having links to WP (and elsewhere) marked up in the texts. It is better to have one direct link at the top or bottom to a WP article. If there are in-text links they should be to places in the article, as in a qv link. As you know there is a fair bit of work in progress in the EB1911 project which could be milked for the rest of WS. Apwoolrich 19:31, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Bug?

I apologize if I am posting in the wrong place, but I think this is important, and I can't find a wikisource specific bug threat. For some reason, my account got deleted - while I haven't logged into it for several month, it was gone now. I created an new account with the same username, and contribs have reatached themselves, but my userpage/talkpage/watchlists seem gone. Anyway to restore them? Also it may be wise to see how my account got deleted, since we don't want this happening to other users, right? --Piotrus 01:21, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Updated Translation Appropriate?

I am thinking of editing an obsolete translation of a Tolstoy work that is in public domain. It's in really horrible shape, and the Gutenberg folks are releasing it -- of course, their concern is preserving the past, not so much creating something that is a pleasure for a modern reader to actually read. If this works out, it could be the predecessor for other updates of public domain translations. Is this something that would be appropriate for Wikisource?

Maybe this should be moved to the Scriptorium, since it will deal with some site-wide implications.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 21:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

formatting guide?

Is there a guideline anywhere on how to properly format an article? author backlinks, chapter navigation headers & footers, top-matter style, or other general formatting considerations? I wanted to put a link into the cleanup template, but wasn't sure what should go there. I'm directing to Help for the moment (it used to point to Wikipedia:Style_and_How-to_Directory) Wolf ^man 04:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. There is Guidelines for adding documents, but this does not cover what I think you have in mind. I will draft a suitable Help page about it. Kind regards. Apwoolrich 12:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

There used to be on the old Wikisource. Give me some time to hunt it down.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 00:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Hm, on second thought, it seems that there isn't. Wikisource:Title formats (which needs to be finished) and Help:Author pages are the closest it comes to formatting an article. It seems we will have to write this ourselves.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 00:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

5000 digital texts

Comment moved to the Scriptorium. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 21:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Categories

I would add a link to categories.--Mac 12:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The "Help:Contents" page is to list the contents of the Help, and it mentions "Help:Categorization".

I think you are suggesting that users will click on "Help" when looking for advice on how to find a work, and this page doesnt do a good job of nudging them towards "Help:Reading". John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Where are instructions on how to link to PDFs uploaded here

I've looked all over and can't figure out how to format a link to a PDF I've uploaded to wikipedia. There are a couple pages I've left messages that the page should explain how to do it (like "adding new texts"). If there is a page explaining how to do it it needs to be more explicitly linked. Thanks. Carolmooredc (talk) 15:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

In the interim I finally discovered that at the upload page there is a link to the document so I'm just linking to that from the Document links page. If that's all it is, it may seem intuitive to geeks, but it takes quasi-geeks much longer to figure it out so it needs to be explained and I'll do it if necessary - if that's they way it's done.... 15:21, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Someone just explained else where that PDFs should be turned into DjVu files (which I'd never heard of before) and put on wikipedia commons. It sure would be nice if this help page said so. I'll put in something to that effect and someone else can feel free to tweak it. Carolmooredc (talk) 01:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Does this process only make sense for PDFs containing images? What about those containing only text, including mostly tables? I'm looking to upload http://www.fairtrade.net/fileadmin/user_upload/content/290310_EN_Price_and_Premium_table.pdf and don't see a way to do it. It would be nice to convert successive versions to wiki text and track changes that way. Oh, wait. The TransFair USA organization (which has the UNregistered trademark "Fair Trade Certified") is committed to being a transparent organization, but the prices it sets are 'All rights reserved.' Still, wonder what the answer is to my general question. --Elvey (talk) 18:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

added value in the footnotes

I contribute to the persian wikisource. Until now I have translated lots of English wikilisource's policies and help documents into Persian. So we have accepted these policies. I have a question about inclusion of the novels in the wikisource: Is it possible to add extra information to the text of a novel or any other piece of literature which was not mentioned in the main source? For example is it possible to explain the meanings of some words in the footnote? Could we consider these information as the added value? --80.71.123.75 07:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

This is possible. You might want to consider how you can use hypertext instead of relying on footnotes which are a bit of a holdover from non-digital works. It really is more of a matter of what your community wants. I can't say the boundaries have been set absolutely over how far to go with added value here. But even if they had been; you need not copy us so exactly.--BirgitteSB 20:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion for new "How to get started - proofreading" page

I'd like to suggest a new help page dedicated solely to starting out proofreading. I'm looking for what other people think should be in the table of contents (with not-so-good section titles in ""s: please improve them).

So far, I have:

• It should contain NOTHING about putting new documents up: that only convinces newbie proofreader-wannabes they've found the wrong help page.
• It should be linked directly from proofread of the month
• It should describe that proofreaders should be comfortable editting wiki pages, before they start proofreading.
• "Looking at documents": It should describe the difference between Page Namespace, and main namespace, in particular the differences between the view portion of Page namespace & main.
• "Mechanics": It should indicate that you want to do your proofreading starting out in edit mode right away.
• That the new-lines in edit mode, should match the newlines in the image, for ease of proofreading.
• "How to find pages that need work": It should explain what indexes are, where to find them, & what all the colours mean.
• "Proofreading vs Proofreading(sic)": It should explain that some pages have only been OCR'd, and will need a lot of copy-editing to become useable documents. That this task is also called proofreading in wikisource-land, as opposed to more traditional proofreading which is focussed only on identifying defects.
• That significant edits and markups to get the view page to approximate the image, should still leave the page red, so that two independant eyes can be looking just for mistakes, as opposed to major data-entry/fixup/markup. (Important with automated entries.)
• The set of most useful templates should be linked, eg.
  • sc
  • hw
  • What else belongs here?
• It should explain the various statuses (in a wikisource specific way), & that they're changed by selecting the radio button in the edit session. (No review board, just the individual editor's fingers, so be careful that what you're doing is right.)
• If they run into a problem with a page, they should:

1. check to see if it's a common problem in that project, by checking the discussion page for the index
2. make a note of the problem in the discussion section of that page (pointing to the index page, if they need to)
3. mark the page as problematic (purple)

Or if it's a problem that they don't know something, where to start looking for help (and that they should upgrade the help pages, to what they would have wanted to see when they started :) ) And what discussion boards to visit to post questions/ask for help etc.

What else should be covered?

User_talk:Ineuw#Checklist_for_proofreading - another list -- SoftlySaid (talk) 15:00, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Good point people for Wikisource to help new editors from Wikipedia?

Hi everyone. I'm looking to gather 1-3 contacts for Wikisource who would be interested in serving as point people for new editors from Wikipedia. I don't expect that it'll be too time consuming, but, just in case we have a new editor stop by the Teahouse who expresses interest in participating in media contributions and you can be friendly and welcome them and perhaps direct them to an area that might interest them. You're welcome to respond here, or even better, on my talk page if you're interested in being added to this list. Thanks :D SarahStierch (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Help for consumers?

Where are the help pages for people who want to use the product of wikisource?

It's not at all obvious how to use the "Create book" option. If a million people want to download the same book, do they all have to go through the same process? And I see on the discussion pages that EPUB output is supposed to be enabled, but I can't see any reference to it.

Does anyone expect anyone to actually read any of these books? Chris55 (talk) 21:03, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I recognise the lack of exportable options at Wikisource, and I am not the only one. There is active development of the ePub export tool (called WS-export), but it will be a while (a few weeks) before there is a solid offering that can be used to compile and generate custom books (the PediaPress PDF book creator is buggy and frequently fails to work at Wikisource). In the meantime, you can generate ePub's of most works by checking the "Add a print/export link to download pages as EPUB files using the WSexport tool." gadget in your preferences, and then looking for the "Download as ePub" in the sidebar. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 22:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that tip. I set the option and downloaded a couple of books to my Kindle (via Calibre). I'm impressed at the result: much better than Gutenberg or archive.org, both in accuracy and organisation. Some problems too, but this isn't the place for those.

But why did I have to ask here? That was only an example. I could have asked why, if I type in "Charles Darwin" to the search box, I don't get a list of his works. (In this case there is a See also to the right page but it's not obvious.) More importantly even the Help:Reading seems to be geared towards contributors as it has a lot of pointers to the source, which is hardly the best way of reading and doesn't even mention downloading a book. And that has to be the future. IPads, Kindles etc. are the way to read books, not standard computers.

Ok, I know I can improve that page, but I'm suggesting something a bit more basic. In Wikipedia the top level help distinguishes "Browsing" and "Editing" as 2 fundamental activities (out of several) and treats them differently. Should Wikisource do similarly? I just want to ask before barging ahead. Chris55 (talk) 08:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

As I said, this is an area under active development. The help pages always need work to improve them, and we certainly need focus on browsing as a separate activity. WS is a small community of editor who generally work single-mindedly toward completing their works. However, this tends to lead to WS being difficult for readers or newcomers.

There is a new gadget (as of yesterday) that helps you to create books (bottom of the gadget list). It is alpha-grade, and may not work as expected. The books are in a new style using the {{saved book 2}} template, and this may still change. The tool may also be buggy or unpolished, and if you have any issues, I'd appreciate you leaving a message at my talk page about it (I am the maintainer of the tool).

There is ongoing discussion of the the search issue at the scriptorium. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 15:50, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

My reply has been deleted and I am cast aside. I honestly tried to help. What a waste of time and effort that was trying to help others. Live and learn... —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 16:55, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, assuming good faith, I would say it was probably removed by accident as Chris55 tried to fix the TOC on this page. I have restored it below. In any case, there was no need or benefit in removing my reply to him. The most harmonious way to respond would probably have been to restore your edit with a summary like "Restoring accidentally removed text". If it was removed again, you could then ask why. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 20:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

---

Inductiveload, I don't know if I am understanding your comment but I did not "remove [your] reply to him". I didn't remove any statement. (See your statement immediately above). Respectively, —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 23:26, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

---

---

To answer the question about anyone reading the books here, everyone who transcribes a book reads the book s/he is transcribing. So, yes, I have read a lot of good books here and out of curiosity I roam about reading what others have produced as well as how they use code. But the books here are not just for us here and now as they will go far into the future. How many generations that entails nobody knows but many old books are saved here on Wikisource -- they are gathered here, archived here and remain here. The faint words of some old books and typos by the typesetter can be corrected by the human eye. Some old books not placed here, never cared about and not OCR'd may be lost to people of the future. This area is like a library of some of the finest works. The question as to whether or not anyone would actually read books in a library like this, probably to be bettered constantly with technology advancement, is up to each individual now, and in the future after we are but dust. There are programs that are good screen readers that read aloud for the blind. There are programs, such as Dragon Systems that type in what is read aloud. All of these elements exist now but as technology advances I myself certainly expect areas like WikiSource to advance further than what we few are building for others here. I myself do not care for the Create a Book option. I found it by exploring and dislike it. But nothing stops me from collecting text and printing a book in, say, Word format or altering some things in that, as well as adding illustrations to that work. Now, regarding help for consumers -- this place is a treasure of wonderful books and all kinds of books. If you look at eBooks for sale or look at some of the books on Amazon you, as a consumer who is aware, will notice that books in those areas for sale are also here for Free. They are here for free because we care and have a love for books. I have seen one book I placed here that sold on eBay for $45 and it was already here for Free. I have also seen others in a likewise situation. That situation is absurd! CONSUMER AWARENESS is the real issue. Many consumers do not know about Wikipedia and certainly not about Wikisource. I know because I am forever asking out of my own curiosity. I have often regretted that so many people I talk to have never heard of Wikisource although many have heard of Wikipedia but do not trust it as being accurate. They must not read enough or perhaps they go by hearsay. Perhaps some are not orientated towards modern technology so simply buying a book from Amazon is easier for them but a generation of people like that is dying out and technology continues to advance. My granddaughter at age 8 now, is fully aware of many technology advances and makes videos, owns iPad2, and cannot imagine there was never an Internet. As generations pass away and technology advances the people will advance with that technology and archives like WikiSource may well (well, it already is!) a grand archive of free learning on thousands of subjects -- whatever consumers may wish to study and in time as they are grown into adulthood areas like this will have been and will continue to be a resource for education that can get them jobs just as civilization advances into creating new jobs. It presently is a matter of Consumer Awareness for older generations but the younger generations are already advanced in knowledge because of areas like this which will always be here in one form or another. I consider what we have here now as only a beginning just as I recall when Internet started and webpages were created only by hand. We all are in an information generation but on different levels and learning curves. The word, "consumer", to me sounds like a purchase although I am aware of other meanings but here knowledge is shared and for the "consumer", one "consumes" Knowledge for Free through the work of others. —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 01:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Inductiveload for restoring this. You're right - looking back on my changes I DID delete it - but totally inadvertently, I didn't even see it. Sorry William.

And thanks for all your work in creating texts. There's a lot there, but it's well hidden. If I do a Google search for a book, I get Gutenberg and archive.org (as well as Amazon of course) but not Wikisource. I suspect that for some reason Google doesn't realise it contains these texts - I'm not sure why. One reason may be that very few of the Wikipedia entries for the texts contain links to Wikisource (and where they do it's a vague badly conceived box that Google may well miss). The front page of Wikisource doesn't blow its own trumpet or make it easy to find texts.

So I am starting to think how the help section at least can be improved - this is the 3rd time I've approached Wikisource; the first two times I was put off. I too, for instance, believed that I had to use "Create a book" to get any complete text out whereas I now believe it's really, for instance, for making your own collection of poems. I haven't yet afforded an IPad but I swear by my Kindle!

Why is there no consumer awareness? It's partly because Wikisource isn't selling itself very well yet. Chris55 (talk) 21:17, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

My previous statements were too danged long anyhow but somewhere in all of that I figured there must be something of value. But, No problem, I bounce back. I totally agree that Wikisource does not get enough attention (does not get promoted to the people) and that has been a peeve of mine for a few years now because I love books. I was saving old books to text (from U.Va. rare books) before Wikpedia started and I still have 1 full book on Internet fore 19 years now. Google would not want to point to free books on Wikisource. Google provides free .PDF &c. files but it also takes those and prints them and places a nice, pretty cover on them and sells them through Amazon.com as well as through its own eBooks and they are sold on eBay. Google creates its own links, per se, that always comes back to Google making money off books scanned at universities. Never would Google want to point to the same book on Wikisource for Free. On the contrary -- wikipedia has links that point to Google's books, and I would suppose that Wikisource does also. By using Google's files we retain the initial greetings to earthlings as well as have "Digitized by Google" at the bottom of every image page. (ugh!)(Reminds me of reverse engineering) As for Ipad2 with gorilla glass and the new Kindle-"Fire" is it? I don't have a need nor desire for them and I can afford them. I would rather save old books to wikisource and read them as I go. For traveling I would use a good 35mm DSLR camera with a telephoto lens and tape recorder; but at home -- wikisource is "home" on Internet for me with a few other areas about speech technology. There is no end to the books here. I also have grown to like wikisoure better than watching re-runs on Television inc. cable channels,imagine that! Your questions are excellent. I have never said anything about the same before now. I just keep transcribing more books on subjects I love to learn about no matter what anyone else prefers to do. The administrators here are grand too. You must have gotten "put off" by someone on Wikipedia. I plan to work on Commodore David Porter's Journal next. Kindest regards, —William Maury Morris II ^Talk 23:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Get an ebook reader, William. The ones with the e-ink screens. They are the true successors of books. Kindle, Nook, Sony, whatever. I can't sit down and read a book on a computer screen for more than about 10 minutes at a time, but with Kindle I can read for hours!

There's a huge difference between Wikisource and Google - and that is the texts are being proof-read and organised properly. The big advantage of the EPUB format which is now in beta is that you can download a whole book in one go. The PDF version only gets a single chapter. Now archive.org will often provide it in PDF, Kindle, Daisy, flipbook, DjVU as well. And I don't see why Wikisource shouldn't do many of those too. But the contents on archive.org are often second rate. Chris55 (talk) 23:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Here is a difference between us and that is I love saving old books for future generations and I read as I transcribe. I have been this way all of my life minus the days before I could read. I have aways wanted access to all of the universities in the world and I have always wanted to save the rare books and afterwards the old but not rare books. For me it is like saving a life and I have saved a few lives so I know this comparison. Regarding the e-ink screens, at one point not long ago here on wikisource I started harming my eyes. They actually started hurting and burning and I once rubbed one eye too hard and had to see a doctor. I had scratched my eye and my eyes had become dry. This is because I was putting in many hours, day and night, on transcribing wikisource books. I asked for help but really didn't expect anything that could help here. Inductiveload, they fellow above that you have been conversing with, created an anti-eye-strain javascript where you can color the background any color you want and thus I was able to continue as once before with no eye strain. Otherwise I also would not be able to sit and read a snow-blindness white computer screen here or anywhere else and at that point I would have to get and ebook reader -- or just listen to books as they are read to me by a professional screen reader than my blind wife uses. As it is, at age 65 now, I even don't need eyeglasses yet. My computer serves as my ebook reader here on wikisource. It is imperative to realize the desire to "save books". I don't just want to read them. I have purchased several great hardcopies from Amazon.com and yet I have not read them. They are at the most 3 years old now. My desire is to save books for future generations and I do not know what I care about that. I just do as God makes us all different. I am aware of the devices and programs you use because my own son, Chris, created an Internet ISP, Cornerstone Networks, long ago and sold it after his partners out-voted him. He them paid cash for his house and stepped right back into technology working with animation and 3-D as well as music and other projects tat are complex. He teaches his 8 year daughter technology every day since she was of age to learn and he also keeps his father (me) informed on his projects which I would not begin to be able to create. So, the technology is all around me and has been since Internet and webpages were created -- actually before webpages could be created and the population did not know the word "Internet". I also taught and worked on a Unix system using Archie, elm, trn and a multitude of others. I have grown up with technology but still my preference is still saving old books. I tend to prefer the 1800s and also nautical adventures and nautical science. I am very happy with this. I have no reason to buy anything else to do what ? -- walk around and read -- go to the beach and read -- not me, if I am at the beach I am still going swimming and observe the pretty women -- no books for me. Traveling to different nations is creating a book. Document what amazes and come home and write a book, which I have done. The observatory in England and also in Australia both have my book there and I get a reall "rush" off these things. I have sold a lot of books as well as 52 volumes of the Southern Historical Society Papers on searchable CD. I like to do things not just read what others have done but as I transcribe I am doing both. My Respects to you, Chris, and especially if you have read all that I have written. 00:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Have done. Chris55 (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Two editing sections

Not sure why we have two similarly named sections "Editing". Either could we merge or otherwise differentiate. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Banning non-registered users to edit

I am from Persian Wikisourse. We are getting nothing except vandalism from non-registered users. Is there any way to ban them from editing any text until they register and become civil?! Please show me the setting that we should modify. --Yoosef Pooranvary (talk) 08:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Preventing all edits from non-registered users will probably require a request on Bugzilla. If the vandals are all from the same IP range, an admin could make an IP range block. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Add Downloading Section

We see sections on Reading, Editing, etc. but no Downloading. Say we want to download just the text of Sonnet 18 (Shakespeare). Mention if

curl https://en.wikisource.org/...?action=raw > myfile.txt

is the best we can do, to get just the words of the poem. Jidanni (talk) 23:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Interwiki link Esperanto version

I have added the old style interwiki link to Esperanto version of the Help. I have not seen any other interwiki link - I do not know how these links are now inserted; I wanted to copy them and paste into the Esperanto version (the way I did it some years ago in Wikipedia) thus creating all the interconnections, so I couldn't do it now. Maybe someone could fix it. Thanx. NoychoH (talk) 13:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@NoychoH: They are added at Wikidata, so either find the corresponding page at Wikidata, though it is easier to use the "edit links" in the interwiki in the left sidebar. Use the code "eo" and then add your corresponding page data. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:12, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Validating red links?

Please see Page:A Treatise on Painting.djvu/361 From this page forward, there are a number of red llnk chapters on the page. Do I validate anyway? Please advise. Maile66 (talk) 03:12, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Maile66: Red links are not generally a problem. "Validated" status means that the text has been verified to be correct by two people, and that the formatting is roughly compliant with our style guide and reasonably approximates the original. In this case the links are red because later parts of the book have not been completed yet; which means they will turn blue automatically once those parts are completed. This is entirely normal and as expected.

PS. It's usually best to ask questions etc. on a centralized forum like Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help or Wikisource:Scriptorium. Very few people watchlist individual talk pages like this so the odds of anyone noticing and responding is pretty poor. Xover (talk) 10:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Formatting discrepancy - Uncle Tom's cabin

I've started to notice a discrepancy in the page header underline on Index:Uncle Tom's cabin, or, Life among the lowly (1852 Volume 1 Original).djvu. Some have it as a single line, and some a double line. Don't know if it's my browser view, or formatting issue. Examples:

• a single line for Page:Uncle Tom's cabin, or, Life among the lowly (1852 Volume 1 Original).djvu/304
• a double line for Page:Uncle Tom's cabin, or, Life among the lowly (1852 Volume 1 Original).djvu/197

I think I validated it both styles before I noticed this. I'm willing to go back one-by-one to get consistency, if there is an issue on this. Please advise. Maile66 (talk) 15:06, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

@Maile66: Headers and footers are only displayed in the Page: namespace, and as such they don't even strictly need to be filled out at all; much less bulk-corrected due to a cosmetic issue. Most people prefer to fill these out, but it's not required.

Also, one of those underlines you see does not actually exist: it is added in the per-work stylesheet at Index:Uncle Tom's cabin … .djvu/styles.css. The pages on which you see two horizontal rules are simply the ones that have a {{rule}} in the header. Xover (talk) 15:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. That being the case, I will continue with the validation and not worry about the lines Maile66 (talk) 15:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Index:Agatha Christie-The Murder on the Links.djvu

Small issue. When I get finished validating the individual pages, four ADV at the bottom need dealing with. No hurry, as I'm just doing a little bit at a time. Thanks in advance. Maile66 (talk) 20:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)