User talk:Čočkin

 }}

If you can't think of any particular corners to improve on Wikisource, how about taking a look at Portal:Religious texts, Portal:Wars or Portal:Texts by Country for some ideas? Don't forget to list your contributions on those pages as well so others will find and read them in the future!

Yann (talk) 12:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk:The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
hi. I am not sure it is a good idea to break up this page into 500 pagelets. it will make it more difficult to read and to maintain. btw, we do not need to inflate the stats of en.ws ThomasV (talk) 05:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

1 into 500
Hi, and welcome to Wikisource. I hope you find many interesting works to work on here, and find your editing rewarding.

I have some reservations about your "1 into 500" edits, however. Breaking up a large page into such tiny pagelets will make it harder to read the work as a whole, and will also makes it needlessly much harder to maintain the work in future. Have you considered using something like a header (==Level 1 header text==, ===Level 2===, etc)? That would allow a reader to see the work on a single page. You can also use templates like verse to provide links directly to verses within a page, without having to split them up.

If you have questions don not hesitate to ask, either by replaying here, leaving a note on my talk page or coming into our friendly IRC channel. Inductiveload— talk/contribs  05:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Does it solve the problem of iw? I think, that no. (I would like to make iw between cs and en translations of Chajjám but 500 poems in English aren´t tottaly the same with 770 translations in Czech. There are different poems but some are the same. Without breaking I can´t do iw here: The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (tr. Whinfield)/1. It is only luck that 1st translation by Whinfield is 1st by Štýbr.) On czech wikisource we solved pagelets by transclusion. One "virtual" page Malajská pantoum consist from 5 "real" pages. :

I.
is Malajská pantoum/I

II.
is Malajská pantoum/II

III.
is Malajská pantoum/III

IV.
is Malajská pantoum/IV

V.
is Malajská pantoum/V (Click to edit this page to see it). Each user can choose which reading is for him/her better. 1 poem per page or all poems on 1 page? I´m not for only pagelets. I´m for pagelets and large page made from pagelets by transclusion. So I´m for both. Reader is ruler. Reader should have possibility to choose what is for him/her better. Making of transclusion is only technical problem. A bot can do it.


 * Hi! If you look at The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (tr. Whinfield) (the new location of that page), you will see a trial I have made using the verse template. You can link to individual verses like this: The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (tr. Whinfield), because the verse template automatically creates an anchor. This way, you can link to individual verses easily, without creating hundreds of tiny pages. You can also use these anchors for interwiki links: look at http://cs.wikisource.org/wiki/Čtyřverší_Omara_Chajjáma/1., which I have edited just now. Thus you may not need to make separate pages. I am also not sure that you need to link ever single verse together, as anyone who can read both languages will be able to link the two quite easily. I am not saying that your approach is wrong, I am just asking that you consider other methods before you create 500 pages when 1 might be sufficient!
 * I am going away for now, but you can talk to User:Billinghurst who has been working on organising the many different versions of this work. It is good to see someone doing interwiki linking - this is a frequently overlooked part of the wiki world! Have a good day! &minus; Inductiveload— talk/contribs  08:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice. En iws on cs.wikisource will be work well. But cs iw on en.wikisource not because when I find 100 the same czech and english translations on this page will be 100 iws on 100 different poems. (IMHO) And I doesn´t think that it is good idea. You solved the problem of en iw on cs.wikisource but I think that problem cs iw on en.wikisource is still here. --Čočkin (talk) 08:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There is proposal of compromise solution. --Čočkin (talk) 17:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * AD this: "I am also not sure that you need to link ever single verse together, as anyone who can read both languages will be able to link the two quite easily." It isn´t so easy because for example en 37. is linked with cs 99.; en 36. with cs 197.; en 34. with cs 124.; en 39. with cs 225. and so on. Do you really think that is so easy find two the same quatrains? It takes sometimes over 10 minutes to bind two poems. And sometimes I can´t bind them at all. Binding poetic translations isn´t so easy as binding prosa translations. These two languages are very different too. PS:It isn´t verse. It is quatrain. Each quatrain can exist without context with other quatrains. Quatrain isn´t a stanza... --Čočkin (talk) 11:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi again! I moved my suggestion to the talk page of the Rubaiyat, seems Cygnis also has an interest. Inductiveload— talk/contribs  19:51, 2 May 2010 (UTC)