Page talk:The lady or the tiger and other stories, Stockton (Scribner's 1897 ed).djvu/19

I compared the extant text with this one, its replacement. There were only a few minor differences, mostly use of punctuation and spelling (this text is better, imo), but the inclusion of the double line break made doing this version worthwhile. I never knew what to do with unsourced or prescanned material from trusted users; it seems a shame to bin something that has been around for ten years, yet rearranging them is probably more trouble than it's worth. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 08:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I have asked on more than one occasion whether I should create a versions page to include unsourced versions, but it is always suggested that I replace the unsourced version with the indexed one. I have made exceptions. Londonjackbooks (talk) 09:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Spooky, did you know that I once made a snide reference to that 'unindexed' page. Could be coincidence, the page is … er … hard to forget, and I see your fine contributions everywhere. Anyway, most of the unsourced stuff is PG or typed in manually, worthy efforts that have unfixable errors. CYGNIS INSIGNIS 13:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Wasn't aware of your reference. I was confronted about my replacing some of Kipling's (annotated) works with clean indexed versions, but I think a happy medium was reached. Annotation can still be a sensitive subject, as consensus leading to policy has not yet been reached (I don't believe)... even though an effort was made a couple years back. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you think it was a Lady-tiger? CYGNIS INSIGNIS 16:36, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you mean. I ventured a guess, but I could be wrong... Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:24, 6 October 2015 (UTC)