User talk:Genoskill

Welcome
--EncycloPetey (talk) 16:24, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Chase translation
Thanks for spotting problems with the current "Chase" translation. This is one of the oldest works added here, and was added through copy-paste, and done badly it seems.

The ideal solution in situations like these is to complete proofreading of a scanned copy, such as Index:The ethics of Aristotle.djvu, and then transclude the proofread content from the scan. Doing that, it will no longer be doubtful whether the content came from this translation or that translator. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:30, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. We need more people working in Greek and Latin texts. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:49, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

The transcription you are working on should first replace the content at Nicomachean Ethics (Chase). The "annotated" version should then be a later copy with Wikisource annotation added. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:01, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Greek text should be rendered in Greek, not transliterated. If you need help with Greek, you can tag it with Greek missing and someone will help. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:18, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Indeed. The "annotated" in the page title means that it takes the initial text and alters it with annotations. We need to have the original text in the Page: namespace and at the Nicomachean Ethics (Chase) location. But once that copy is in place, it's possible to refashion it in a version identified as an Annotated edition of that work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:39, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

The Oldest English Epic
There is already a listing at the top of The Oldest English Epic/Chapter 1.

Generally speaking, when we create our own Table of Contents, that differs from the published one, we use Auxiliary Table of Contents, and we try not to replace the original ToC if we can help it, though we might supplement it.

That is, you could list an Aux ToC after the book's ToC, using the template to identify it as a Wikisource-created one. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:22, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Alternatively, you could create a separate "Contents" page, using the Aux ToC template. See Jane Eyre (1st edition) for an example where an Aux ToC was needed (in this case because no contents were listed in the original publication. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:23, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Template:TOCstyle
I trust your interest means I can finally hand this monster over to a maintainer who is not (yet) totally alienated by the community (Please do not ask!)? Since writing (in collusion with another party who has also long since escaped) this thing, wikimedia has moved on, with the result other solutions have opened up since&mdash;especially &lt;TemplateStyles&gt; which may simplify a lot of unnecessary complexity. Please ask if you need any assistance and I will help if available and capable of doing so. I do not however pretend to have all the answers! 114.73.168.91
 * Not to worry. I saw your edit and jumped to the wrong conclusion. I also saw your reply and realised you were not the appropriate person for this task. Please accept my apologies for bothering you. 114.73.168.91 10:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Greek text
I noticed your contributions to Index:The ethics of Aristotle.djvu through the addition of Greek text; would you be willing to look over some Greek text in works that I have proofread? The original text (on this page) is rather difficult to read, and the scan quality for this work rendered the text very difficult to read, as well. Any help would be appreciated. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:53, 2 May 2019 (UTC).
 * I will help, sir. Are there any other pages? -- Genesis Bustamante  (talk) 05:33, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Small scan link
The template small scan link is always a temporary link, and is only used when a work is incomplete, and still being transcribed. Once the work is fully proofread, we remove the small scan link template because it has served its purpose. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:27, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I screwed up again, my apologies. --  Genesis Bustamante  (talk) 00:37, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey

Hi ,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. [mailto:surveys@wikimedia.org Email us] if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely, RMaung (WMF) 14:32, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Fables
Thank you for your work on the Fables. They have long been poorly maintained here. One thing to note: the drop-initials you are adding to this edition do not match the drop-initials in the actual work. You can either mark the page as problematic, add the correct drop-initials, or ignore them (and use no image). Thanks! TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * For the new glossary, there are two parts. First, proofread the glossary as you would a normal part of a work, without any additions. Then, add an annotated sub-page (using Annotation header) with the new content with the old content, organized as you see fit. For the in-text annotations, there are a few approaches. First, don’t use tooltip. While this looks nice on desktop, it doesn’t work on mobile, and doesn’t export. Also, it conflates with the templates used for marking errata and corrigenda. You can either add Wiki-links in the text which link to the glossary (or the specific entry in the glossary), or add annotations in the text as references (which would be in the format, likely with some standardized form such as Glossary: new word , although that part’s left to your discretion). (Another option is to create annotated versions of each fable with the modern spellings, foregoing a glossary entirely.) If you need some help with a more detailed description or examples showing how it works technically, you can ask me. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 03:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Responses:
 * Yes; the ideal approach (in my eyes) would be to create a standard message and system to link to the entry within the annotated (versus original) glossary, and to cloak that in.
 * Yes; if you do this, you should also use a similar system to reference the original glossary (although the text referencing the two glossaries should be differentiable).
 * If there is an errata page in the original, links can be added (and errata marked generally) with errata.
 * You’re welcome! TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:05, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * An approach would be to have only the glossary annotated (i.e., by adding more notes to the new glossary). However, this glossary wouldn’t export from The fables of Aesop by William Caxton (Jacobs)/Vol. II, but from The fables of Aesop by William Caxton (Jacobs)/Annotated/Vol. II (the annotated version); and it would only export from the latter location if that location existed. This leads in to my answers to your new questions.
 * This is a big no. The key problem is that by making a new glossary in the location of the old glossary (in the annotated version), you have effectively deleted the content of the old glossary. In making annotations, it is not allowable to remove content: content may be changed, to be made more readable; content may be supplemented; but existing content may not be removed.
 * This is probably a good idea, especially if you want good top-down export functionality for all annotated pages. (The somewhat clunky design of the annotation system is owing to its old age and ill use by most active users.)
 * This could work, but I see objection could be raised if these were added to the “original” (not annotated) version. In such a situation, references marked with ua would be preferable. In the annotated version, that concern would not be necessary. However, I’m not sure if such a system would work with export. That’s not to say it wouldn’t, just that I’m not sure if it would.
 * Don’t worry about the questions! I like helping others out, and the Fables certainly weren’t being worked on by anyone else. Another option for annotations would be to change all of the old words to the new words (listed in the glossary); but that may not be advisable, especially if the original is what you’re interested in. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:30, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The extended glossary is a better idea than a separate page, even if it was at a different title, because, at the end of the day, the terms in the original glossary are still nice to have (in addition to the terms in the annotated glossary). I would hold out on creating all of the annotated pages until you’ve proofread and transcluded all of the original pages; for batch creation, I would ask Inductiveload. The full-on all-annotated-pages idea is probably the best, especially export-wise, although it will take longer (with all the annotation templates you’ll be adding). The policy on annotations is available here. It is, like most policies here, ignored by most people; the practice here is mostly unwritten, and the rules are rarely referenced. There are no comments in that policy regarding a preference for reference-style annotations over Wiki-linking, so I would say to choose whichever you prefer. (For the annotated pages, Wiki-links might be better; but I haven’t really tried that.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:30, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I think the phrase “modernized spelling” is used in that context; the focus is not the lack of a glossary, but rather the incorporation of terms formerly in the glossary into the text. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:51, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You may modernize as you see fit. For some texts, it would not be strictly necessary to modernize every word; but it seems to me that this text would need to have a large number of words modernized to approach modernity, so to speak. As this is your project, you may invest such time and mental resources into annotating words as you see fit; but do please maintain consistency—do not have one section annotated more than another, in terms of what words are annotated. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:25, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

block centering
We usually do not apply formatting that was not present in the original. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:22, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Heracleidae
The Madness of Heracles is a different play from Heracleidae (The Children of Heracles). --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the proofreading you've been doing to the Swanwick translations. I've also spotted a couple of times that you've wikilinked in the text however, and that shouldn't be done. Feel free to wikilink terms in the footnotes or endnotes, but not in the text itself. For that, we'd want a separate copy identified as "Annotated." Transcribed texts should be clean and free of wikilinks, as a general rule. For one thing, mobile readers using touch screens have trouble scrolling through texts if touching the screen might instead navigate to a different page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Caxton
appreciated your kindness about the work on Caxton, and I tried to send it back via mutual appreciation thoughts because I was so busy. Truly, last month, I buried a lot of someones hard work, replacing unsourced fables with links to sources. So, my work on the Caxton (and LEstrange) is to make up for that. Your work on Caxton has made my work so much easier! (See this for an example of how I buried things!  Terrible!)

Just today, I have uploaded the images for this, including the first letters commons:Category:The fables of Aesop, as first printed by William Caxton (Jacobs)/Volume 2. I don't know if you want to use the initials or not, but if so they are there. If you would like me to help with the initials, I will. If you would like to put the images on, the decision is yours, I can do that also. There is a caveat with the images. They came from a different scan than the one that is being transcribed (because I don't like to start with jpegs) so the page numbers don't match the image numbers.

Also, the initials were the same (meaning A = A all though the text so I only did one of each and named them nicely for quicker person pasting or perhaps even a software edit. So that should make using them somewhat easier.

Anything you would like for me to do, let me know. I really am glad you got this up and around, especially after my burying so much....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:44, 1 April 2022 (UTC)