Wikisource talk:Periodical guidelines

Recurring or serial work

• A special case to consider is where the periodical contains an entire work split up over multiple editions of the periodical. These should be linked and I'm working on a special header for such cases.
• A concern I have about the Periodical/edition/article structure is that some things in the periodical like poems will have no logical place and wherever they are put will not be the place they were in the original work.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 15:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• I've been thinking about that. I was going to use {{versions}} for this (it isn't perfect but it will get the job done) and a note in the notes section of the header. I've started this at Hector Servadac for the first part of Amazing Stories/Volume 01/Number 01/Off on a Comet—or Hector Servadac, although the second part has not been proofread yet. My other plan was to synthesise the whole work in the mainspace from scans of different issues; which would solve one problem but create too many others. A special header could help.
• I'm not sure why poems would be a problem. For examples, see The American Review: A Whig Journal of Politics, Literature, Art, and Science/Volume 02/July 1845/Eulalie, The American Review: A Whig Journal of Politics, Literature, Art, and Science/Volume 02/December 1845/The Flight of Helle or Weird Tales/Volume 36/Issue 1/Reincarnation. All the contents of an issue go in that issue, regardless of type; all issues go into either a volume or directly into the periodical; all volumes are part of the periodical.
• Another possible objection is the long, complicated and possibly frightening page name (depending on the user). However, a tree of subpages is how a computer understands the relationships; it makes organisation and navigation simpler from that point of view (eg. moving/renaming a parent page moves the children, templates can be made to automatically handle the periodical etc) as well as making the origin clear. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 16:38, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• Re the serial work, I'm not sure {{versions}} is right in this case. Two options are a different header style for such works that links to the next work - which is the track I was taking - or multiple templates on the same work as some articles on fr.ws use. Consider fr:Les_Mois and fr:Les_Mois/Texte_entier. I don't particularly like this latter method but it's worth looking at a while. I'm not too worried about the page name, I don't expect most casual readers are using the address bar as their primary means of navigation.
• Re the poems, well, I suppose, but does a limerick, or even a one-liner, get it's own page?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 17:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, it isn't quite right. The French page is a little similar to my (abandoned) synthesis plan. I'll wait and see how your header turns out.
• Personally, yes, I would put limericks etc on their own pages but I can see others disagreeing. To me, however, it's a variation on Wikipedia's "Not Paper" argument: we are not wasting resources either way. The other extreme would be to have the whole issue on one page, which is likely to be worse. That said, with Weird Tales/Volume 36/Issue 1 and Amazing Stories/Volume 01/Number 01, I've left "other" stuff in the parent and just put the stories and poetry into subpages. In these cases, "other" mostly means adverts, as well as the covers and contents pages. I'm not sure what other people think about that approach. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Copyright references

A source for a later additon: Some relevant copyright case law appears to come from Goodis v. United Artists Television, Inc. (openjurist.org). RE: renewals, there is point 8: "We unanimously conclude that where a magazine has purchased the right of first publication under circumstances which show that the author has no intention to donate his work to the public, copyright notice in the magazine's name is sufficient to obtain a valid copyright on behalf of the beneficial owner, the author or proprietor." I don't have time to add this right now but plan to get back to it at a later date. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:02, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Public Domain

This guideline should be updated to show the new Public Domain year in the US, instead of 1923. —unsigned comment by Reboot01 (talk) 18:21, 15 May 2020‎ (UTC).

Structure

I am not sure about the wording This structure will depend on the publication of the original periodical and need not be so complicated. Does it mean that the contributors can decide to make the structure less complicated, e. g. by skipping the issue level from the structure when each issue contains only a handful of subpages (as it is currently practiced e. g. in Once a Week or in The Czechoslovak Review? If so, I have no objections, only it should be worded more clearly. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:18, 17 April 2021 (UTC)