User talk:Akme

Welcome
Welcome

Hello, Akme, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * Help pages
 * Style guide
 * Inclusion policy
 * For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in Add the code active projects, PotM or CotW to your page for current wikisource projects.
 * Proofread of the Month
 * Community collaboration
 * Requested texts

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click  [ edit] ) and place  before your question.

Again, welcome! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:11, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Subpage naming convention
Hi, I've just noticed that you've been using naming convention for subpages that's different from our norm. Our strong preference is to use "Chapter 1", "Chapter 2", etc. rather than a bare number. The reason for this is that having a standardised way of naming means that wikilinking is made easier. I've just looked at the Style Manual and realised that we haven't been explicit about this. That's because the Style Manual is not meant to be a strait-jacket. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I’m sorry. I’ll use that method for future works. I saw this method in a few works and thought it was ideal (for me only, unfortunately.) —Akme (talk) 12:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

After creation can be added to WD
Hi. After you have created the author page here, you should be able to add it at Wikidata in the Wikisource section. The linking from that end creates the relationship and then the linking from this side. — billinghurst  sDrewth  10:31, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. If you're referring to the details of Jonathan Sturgis Sturges, I've just finished doing the necessary. I hope :) —Akme 11:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, and when we add them to Wikidata, then we can rely on Wikidata to provide the authority control data. If WD provides that data, we just need to have the template without any parameters here at WS, and the magic will automatically happen. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:43, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, got it. Thank you again. —Akme 07:09, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Chapter nn, rather than roman numerals
Hi. The community long ago moved to having chapters utilise numbers rather than roman numerals, so I am wondering whether you transcluding of Nisbet's work was purposeful or just incidental? — billinghurst  sDrewth  08:25, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't know that: I thought both were equally valid (and I find this way more convenient in the 'Next' and Previous' fields). I'll change over from the next work. Or would you like me to do it with the remaining chapters (and rename those already done? —Akme 08:37, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Preference would be for them to be renamed. The reason for the policy was that we future proofed inbound links by using an agreed nomenclture for internal links to works. Re linking, I have a script that does -1/+1 for prev/next which works well for numeric chapters which you can steal if you are using the TemplateScript gadget. — billinghurst  sDrewth  15:07, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you, I will. (Even if I do wish you'd said so earlier--I've almost reached the end of this.) I'll use 'Move'--somewhere on the Menu at the top of the page iirc--scripts and such creatures are beyond my limited intelligence :) —Akme 15:25, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Not as messy as I thought it might be. At my end at least :) —Akme 03:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The difficulties of people being on different time zones. :-/ Thanks, and did I accidentally make a bit of a mess earlier, easy to tidy up, however, a mess all the same. — billinghurst  sDrewth  06:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Template:Century Magazine link
Hi. I recently created this template to make linking of these works easier. and it replicates Template:Littell's link in that manner. — billinghurst  sDrewth  23:08, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Very nice, thanks. Any chance of getting one for The Strand Magazine? —Akme 04:11, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Template:Strand Magazine link noting that no examples until you have pages in place.  Feel free to create shortcut redirects as you feel appropriate. Also to note that I have not done shortlink " lkpl " templates to this point as was no clear need, though can do some once there are real examples. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:34, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Wow, thank you! —Akme 05:48, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

fl and fi ligatures in Tom Swift
Hi, I see you're validating Tom Swift in the Caves of Ice. I was reminded that I had forgotten to trigger a bot task to fix the fi and fl ligatures that had slipped through. I had to use the OCR button for many of the pages and for some reason it put in the ligatures as single characters, which makes searches fail. I've just made the bot request, so it will make the validating easier. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:58, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That should make it a lot easier. I have the same problem with these ligatures (and with curly quotes) every time I use the OCR. It's even worse when the spellcheck fails to mark every odd one. I'm quite sure that I must have missed more than a few. —Akme 09:46, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have the 'fi' replacement available as part of my cleanup script, if that is of interest. Feel from to poke user:billinghurst/common.js if you need it or others. — billinghurst  sDrewth  22:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Page:Dorothy Canfield--Hillsboro People.djvu/134
There is a poem on this page. You had a bit of a problem when trying to align table cells. I had something similar at another site. If you are still interested in the solution, take a look. Humbug26 (talk) 16:50, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Wow, thanks! I've bookmarked it to study when I'm a bit more free (and less tired). Thanks again. —Akme 17:01, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

The Oregon Trail
Hi Akme, do you remember working on The Oregon Trail a couple years ago? I just uploaded the file listed as the source, and have been doing a match & split. I'm about halfway through that, but just started to notice that the files do not match entirely. Note the last few words in the last two paragraphs on this page, for instance. Is it possible you were actually working from a different edition than the one you linked? -Pete (talk) 23:52, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I certainly do not remember working on this, though I've always meant to ;) It's quite likely it was copied from the gutenberg file, and only casually matched to the Internet Archive version. My apologies. I'll be happy to help in proofreading and ridding this file of the mismatch. —Akme 04:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think that's a good guess -- I looked for some of the mismatched text on the Gutenberg page, and it matches. The Gutenberg transcription does not seem to mention the edition, or included a title copyright page from the original, or link to a source...so it stands to reason that the editions might have gotten crossed up when linking to an online version at the Internet Archive.
 * It would be enjoyable to work on it together, if you're game. I propose we simply match it to the one it's now linked to, from the Internet Archive. Do you happen to know of a template that we could put at the top in the meantime, to indicate "edition confusion"? -Pete (talk) 17:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you: it should be enjoyable working on this, since I always meant to. But I may have to limit my work to light proofreading: removing mismatch, adding RH's and chapter titles. Will that be alright?
 * Frankly, I feel that indicating the "edition confusion" is unnecessary. The changes seem minor--a word here or there, or--at most--a sentence removed. This edition (per title and copyright page) is "author's copyright edition, 1901). Just my 2c. —Akme 17:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Based on a recent conversation with a librarian, I feel that it's important to note these inconsistencies (and is one of the main things that will help librarians take Wikisource seriously). But that doesn't mean I think it's a big deal...just that it should be possible for a reader who cares about such things to find the info. How about this -- I moved the comment (and expanded it a little) to the talk page -- there's already a link on the main page, pointing to the talk page, called "information about this edition" -- so that seems to meet my goal, without intruding unnecessarily into the page of the main work. Better
 * And, as for your efforts on this work...I'll enjoy working with you to whatever extent you're able. No pressure! Thanks for your quick and thoughtful replies, already. -Pete (talk) 19:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That seems right, I guess. And the more librarians actively interested, the better for the quality of work at Wikisource. Thanks —Akme 03:30, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Spicier with spaces?
Another question regarding Wiggin--Ladies-in-waiting and PHILIPPA'S NERVOUS PROSTRATION in particular.

There are instances of formations like "does n't". I figure it is a stylistic variation of the time in which it was written/published, just like "to-day", "to-night", and "to-morrow" can be seen written in that era.

See page 292 for an example.

My bias is to preserve the "signs of the times" (such as "to-day"), much like preserving the particulars of original Shakespeare or Chaucer. I wonder how you feel about "does n't"? Elsewhere in this same text I've seen this expunged, in favor of the modern flavorless "doesn't". What is your desire? Shenme (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)


 * (added) See page 295 for an instance of "could n't" and one changed to "couldn't"! Shenme (talk) 04:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Please ask this question at the scriptorium: I do my best, but I'm certainly no expert. As far as "Philippa's" is concerned, I personally would prefer "could n't" to "couldn't." But you are welcome to change it as long as changes are consistent, at least for the story. OTOH, if it's my carelessness, I apologize. [I think this question was raised at the Scriptorium; I forget, or missed out the answer. —Akme 08:05, 16 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Or see this discussion on the topic which we recently had. What you're seeing is a half-space in the contraction, and there are several ways people handle them. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I had just found that discussion by narrowing down searches for " n't" :) I'm going to peek at those other discussions . . . Notes accumulated at User:Shenme/notes.
 * I'm thinking the determination is two-dimensional. If the insertion of spaces was entirely an artifact of printer pecularities, then modernizing to micro-sized contractions is reasonable. But if the insertion of spaces was an artifact of "the times", then alteration/deletion approaches translation of "to-day" to "today" and "Thou" to "You". You begin to lose reference to the era and the author's natural language.
 * Would it be reasonable to re-open the discussion at Scriptorium along this two-dimensional line, or just leave sleeping spaces lie? (Though see my notes at how often the subject resurfaces)
 * (Thank you for your forbearance, Akme - I wanted to avoid using a bullhorn at Scriptorium) Shenme (talk) 01:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


 * You could always broad a discussion if you feel there is something to be gained or resolved. In this instance, there is more than one interpretation, and I don't think we'll find a one-size-fits-all solution. I tend to preserve the space only if it appears in dialogue where the pronunciation is clearly dialectic, or in some poetry where collapsing the space would alter the rhythm. In most cases, I consider it to be a printing artefact akin to the half-space that used to be placed around an em-dash, or before an exclamation point, and collapse the half-space therefore. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Title pages for Chickens
I uploaded a blank title page. File:Mother Careys Chickens-0011-alt.jpg. I recently saw an example of how to use these Page:Glen Aldyn Plays.djvu/1. So, it is there if you want it.

More about title pages. I was going to upload a librivox recording of the book and make a different version for them. That will be two "versions" and one "written work" at wikidata. I try to use the title page when there is a scan involved. So, if I put the cover at wikidata for your version, I apologize for the next apology which is: I am going to change the cover which is in the Infobox to the title page and I am sorry if you changed that.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 21:34, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Category for short stories in periodicals
Hello. I do not know if you are already aware of this, but Category:Short stories in periodicals now exists. Best regards. James500 (talk) 07:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I certainly did not. Thank you. —Akme 08:06, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

A problem with EPUB version of Middlemarch
Hello. I am very sorry to bother you, but EPUB version of this great novel does not contain text, only a table of contents Is it possible to put chapters from Book 1, Book 2 etc. together on the novel's main page? --Ratte (talk) 18:25, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

When you remove all the links from a work's main page, it breaks the downloads. Please see The Age of Innocence for one way to avoid breaking the EPUB downloads. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:48, 12 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Uh, sorry. I became aware of this problem quite some months ago, but somehow I haven't been able to get around to it. (One reason possibly being that I can't remember which files have been messed up.) I'll clean this file (and others which I can remember), as soon as possible. Thanks for reminding me of it. Also, thanks, Encylopey, for the solution. —Akme (talk) 12:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, it's done. Please check if it's acceptable now. Thanks. —Akme (talk) 19:38, 13 March 2020

Broken links
Hi. Talk:Golden Silence has a broken source link, it is the second I have seen of your works today. Please would you be able to double check the links when adding, thanks. — billinghurst  sDrewth  03:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, sorry. Thanks for informing me. —Akme (talk) 17:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Uh, and thank you for correcting it. —Akme (talk) 17:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

author and override_author parameters
Hi. I am fixing up some old works where you had but things like

If you are using in the header, then please just leave the  empty, eg. Otherwise we are getting the pages thinking that they are linking to   and all the componentry that goes with it. If you had already stopped doing that, great. I am running my bot through now, so there is nothing for you to do with previous edits. — billinghurst  sDrewth  15:15, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you. I'm pretty sure I copied the code from some other place, though. But I probably messed up something, as usual. Is there any other way of inputting multiple authors? —Akme (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The "Override_author" permits doing all kinds of arbitrary stuff. So, for instance:


 * -Pete (talk) 19:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you —Akme (talk) 20:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Please never do an external http: link in an author field, nor an enWP link in an override, they are all meant to be local links. Peteforsyth that is a horrid example.  — billinghurst  sDrewth  01:52, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hahaha...OK, I suggest (first) a nap, and then a little reflection on the difference between an example that demonstrates what is technically possible, and a recommendation to do a certain thing. :) -Pete (talk) 01:56, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Except I have seen people link like that to enWP, and other sisters, including Wikidata. So fantasy links are not great examples. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:48, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * O, the horror! Didn't realize how awful the situation was. Akme, my apologies for going off on this tangent on your talk page. -Pete (talk) 18:27, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Apologies if I was vague. The request is when using {{parameter|override_author} field that you don't also populate the underlying. Your use use of was all good. The -like fields are just display changes so we need their corresponding fields left empty. — billinghurst  sDrewth  01:49, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Pulp magazines
I'd like to get a solid collection of pulp magazines on Wikisource full scan-backed, so in the future, if you come across something like Professor Jonkin's Cannibal Plant, can you just tell me the issue and I'll try and get a scan and index page available on Wikisource promptly? Even if you just want the one story, it's a start to a complete (or more complete) collection. Thanks.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:29, 22 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Can you give me a list of the magazines you consider pulp magazines? I'm confused myself. One problem here is that I have an awfully long list of magazine works I intend to work on, and the story I work on generally depends on my whim of the moment:) But perhaps we could make a start if you can upload all the Smart Set magazines on IA (specially those named "sim_smart-set-xyz." Or, since these are created by separating the 4-monthly volumes, the scans from which they were created. Also the Adventure and Popular Magazine: I'm almost certain to works on stories from these in the near future.
 * And—pardon me for mentioning it—I'm not too terribly gung ho about scan backed works. I've seen quite a few "scan-backed" works of shoddy quality—some of them "validated." Some are just copy-paste jobs from a different edition in Gutenberg, lazily validated. In fact, if it weren't for encyclopetey I'd probably be guilty of validating one of these.  (Also, just for the record, almost all my work is scan-backed; only the scans may be in IA of Hathitrust. The sources are mentioned on the Talk page).
 * Then, again (paraphrasing encyclopetey) I'm appalled at the number of works (and authors) not represented here on WS, many classics included. I'd like to see as many of them as possible before I leave; and the scan-backed route takes 3-5 times the time! And Itruly don't mind people converting my works into scan-backed works and deleting them—even if they are masochistic enough to redo the proofreading and formatting.
 * I'm sorry for being so very long-winded. —Akme (talk) 14:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Forgive my intrusion here. I am a huge fan of Akme's work choices for proofing (I have called it "liter" but that was because of wikidata and the shorthand for "literary work" being "literary w" and too much typing of that).  User:Prosfilaes, once Smart Set is here, Scribner's Magazine has been well-populated by Akme's works.  Volumes 12, 13, 16, 28, 32 (also has the first Little White Bird, 33, 34 & 35 (have stories that were in a book Akme proofed, the mags having better and more images), 43, 44, 47, 57, 58, 59, and 67.  I would like Volume 39 and 40 42, for some illustrations.
 * Akme, I have been wanting to visit here, to get recommendations for reading. Your work is a good break from the stuff crap I am usually working on.  Do you have a list of everything you have proofed and put here?  The Princess and the Microbe from Princess Pourquoi still sends me into gales of laughter....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 15:51, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words, but I think what you mean is that you're a great fan of the works I work on (which probably means that you're quite whimsical, too) I'm sorry but I don't have a list of my projects; once I've finished a work, I forget it till I have one of my cleaning-up itches, or remember that I haven't added the images yet. And thank you for reminding me of Margaret Sherwood: it's probably time to revisit her page :) —Akme (talk) 17:52, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "" Thank you for the kind words ;) But, even here you may be mistaken: I'm very likely to go from a classic like, say, Charles Dickens, to pulp, or even utter trash.
 * The Scribner's Magazine page has already been set up. Scans and even ToC's are missing for most volumes, though. Here's one which has both.
 * I believe that the Adventure and Popular Magazine are on Commons in PDF format, which may not be good enough. I can certainly get the Smart Set works up here, though the original scans weren't of the greatest copies or the greatest scans. I won't have time for the next week, but I'll do it after that.
 * My concern about scan backed works is partially the ease of checking errors, but it's also getting the illustrations correct and the ease it makes to bring an era forward, instead of just a story. I tend to be unmoved by Lovecraft, but Weird Tales/Volume 1/Issue 1/The House of Death is one of my favorite stories of all time, and without work on the volume as a whole, it would lie dead in the past. Likewise, the snippets around the works matter to me, the non-fiction bits and editorial material that always gets removed for anthologies.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Did you set up (formatting for) the Weird Magazine pages? The formatting there  has made me feel hugely inspired, and burn with  envy:)—Akme (talk) 15:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, no. User:AdamBMorgan did, and then in 2016 he just made a few off-handed comments about real-life and planning to come back, and hasn't edited since. We should probably give better credit to The Science Fiction, Fantasy, & Weird Fiction Magazine Index, which, as you can see, was copied from quite liberally, but Adam is the one who put it into Wikisource form. Quite enviable, yes, indeed.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:37, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Irregular Brethren
Hello,

I see that you started Irregular Brethren but I can't see a note of where the text was sourced from. Do you recall ? -- Beardo (talk) 22:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Condensed Novels: Second Series by Bret Harte
Hello,

In your introduction to Condensed Novels: Second Series by Bret Harte (revision of 17 March 2021) you wrote that The Stolen Cigar Case is considered by Bret Harte as one of the best parodies. Did you mean considered by Ellery Queen, which would be in line with the Bret Harte Wikipedia page. I find references for this statement by Ellery Queen tend to peter out in an offline reference, but I think it may be in a book Queen's Quorum which can be found at the Internet Archive, although that needs an account to check out and read. Philh-591 (talk) 15:00, 18 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Duh. How dumb! I can't imagine how I could've been so careless. Luckily you spotted it. I've changed the description now. I think I meant, Mark Twain; but I can't see anything in the Wikipedia article suggesting such admiration; though he certainly wasn't an admirer of Harte. Thanks —Akme (talk) 19:25, 18 April 2023 (UTC)


 * OK. You may be interested in a section I've added to Harte's Wikipedia page to summarise the parody targets.  After more than a century, some of the previously obvious parody targets have faded into obscurity, so this section tries to maintain the connections.  Philh-591 (talk) 16:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I am —Akme (talk) 18:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Quantity and quality
I want to know your secret. You seem to have been quiet about it for a long time, (and I'm really surprised no one else seems to have asked you this until now), but how on earth have you been able to contribute so many short stories and novels in such a short time? I saw when you were correcting Mistress Madcap Surrenders, your search for typos only spanned about a single minute, throughout hundreds of pages. I know you're not generally using scan-backing, but even without that this contribution speed is off the charts.

I've been seeing your contribs here and there since I started my time here, and I'm sincerely impressed. What is your method? Are there any technologies you're using for this that I'm not aware of? OpenAI released their incredibly accurate "vision" API model only a couple of days ago, but you've been doing this since the mid-2010s so it couldn't be an AI solution...could it? I'd like to know as much about your workflow, methodology, the technologies you're using as you're willing to provide. Maybe there's also a way you've been training your eyes and hands along with the technology you've been using. Go into as much detail as you'd like, because I'd like to learn from you as to how I can speed up my own processes.

If you're a developer as well, I'd be interested in seeing some of the code you've written for this, if you're willing to share that. PseudoSkull (talk) 02:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC)