User talk:Goldenshimmer

Welcome

Hello, Goldenshimmer, 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, especially for proofreading
 * Help:Beginner's guide to Wikisource
 * 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.

Have questions? Then please ask them at either
 * Scriptorium; or
 * Scriptorium/Help

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! —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:48, 25 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Newer version of the below message is here :) —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 00:55, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome!
 * It looks like the edit here removed the page header, tabular layout, and footnotes, and changed the text a bit from the printed version (in line 95, from "[𐎠𐏁𐎡𐎹..." to "(𐏁)[𐎡𐎹...", and from "[𐎹𐎠 𐏐]..." to "[𐎹 𐏐]..."; in line 96, from "𐎺𐎡𐎲𐎡[𐏁 𐏐]..." to "𐎺𐎲𐎡[𐏁 𐏐]..."). Are those changes deliberate? Should I put them back?
 * Also, the character I couldn't identify on line 96 immediately following "𐎶𐏓[𐎠]" is encoded in the new version as "𐎤", but the two halves of the letter in the book scan are reversed from the glyph for that character in the typefaces I have installed on my system; is that just an equivalent variant?
 * Thanks! —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 00:06, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * P.S.: Since the change to using " 𐏐 " for the word delimiter instead of "𐏓", should a note be added to the instructions page, since it still states, "In our edition 𐏐 is replaced with 𐏓 (see footnote on page 1) As far as I can tell this is incorrect both as per the meaning of the symbols, and per the actual inscription, but it still must be preserved as published."? Thanks! —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 00:06, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, it looks like I caught you in the middle of working on it. Sorry to bother you! —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 00:26, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Regarding that one character
That particular character on page 161, which looks like 𒁹𒌋, I am pretty sure is a typo. I did a bit of googleing, and as far as I can tell 𒁹𒌋 is not itself an Old Persian character, but rather a combination of 𒁹+𒌋 to form the number 70 (or perhaps 600). However, 𐎤 is apparently a KU sound, and the corresponding transcription is [a]kunau[š]… and of course that other transcription of the inscription uses 𐎤 in this location.

I am inclined to mark this as 𒁹𒌋𐎤 [sic], but I know very little about cuneiform or Old Persian, besides being able to compare pictures, and I'd want to check with someone more familiar with the language. Do you have any insight? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:20, 26 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Also, a Google search for "𐎠𐎤𐎢𐎴𐎢𐏁" brings up several reputable texts referencing this word "akunauš" in this inscription and others, apparently meaning "he did" or something similar. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:29, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I suspect you're right.
 * For this book I assume they must have cut a type for that combined "𒁹𒌋"-like character, though, or else it would have been obvious when setting it that it was two characters getting spaced as one, perhaps? Maybe an error perpetuated from a source transcription-by-hand or something? In any regard, "𒁹𒌋𐎤 [sic]" seems like a sensible solution to me! I guess it will have to remain a mystery.
 * (Sadly, I don't know Old Persian either; I was using the representative glyphs in the Unicode standard to identify the characters.)
 * Oh well, sorry I can't elucidate this beyond speculation... Thanks for the response, and all your work on the book! —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 02:32, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Page:The sculptures and inscription of Darius the Great on the Rock of Behistûn in Persia.djvu/125
I happened to notice you were having some trouble with this page. Finally: I double checked the formatting and structure of page 125, but I did not check the contents of the text itself (except to read your note regarding, which is the correct character). If you are satisfied that the text is correct, please go ahead and mark it Proofread :) —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:24, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I have expanded the style guide on the Index talk page to address some of those issues. In particular I addressed the issues you were having with hi/s and hi/e - let me know if you have more questions.
 * If you have problems while proofreading, you will almost never get assistance if you only voice your problems in the notes of your edits. Feel free to reach out to me on my talk page, or the community at large via the Scriptorium, if you run into trouble. I am also currently keeping an eye on this work's Index talk page, so you can post any discussion related to this particular text there.
 * I'm also looking through your edit history to see if there other tips I can help you with.
 * Page 19:
 * I've never seen condensed text preserved, I'd just use regular text.
 * Horizontal rules are best done using rule rather than by centering a series of dashes.
 * Greek text using polytonic might look like it's in italics, but it isn't.
 * Our manual of style (listed in the work's style guide on the Index talk page) says that all “curly quotes” should be replaced by "straight quotes". It's a weird rule I know, and there is currently a discussion regarding whether to change it, but in the meantime "straight quotes only".
 * Sidenotes (the headers in the margin) are really complicated. I'll start a discussion on the Index talk page so we can figure out the best way to handle them. Let's use the simple version described at Help:Sidenotes for these sidenotes.
 * Page 161:
 * To align text to the right, use right.
 * Those little printer's marks aren't usually included in our edition, because they aren't actually part of the work - they are just artefacts of the printing process.
 * Anyway sorry for the big list, I know Wikisource has a steep learning curve (and the Behistun inscription is an incredibly complex work for someone new to the platform). I appreciate your contributions and I hope these tips make things a bit easier for you moving forward. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Cool, thank you so much for taking the time to write this up, and checking over the pages I worked on! It answers many things I was wondering about :) —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 20:00, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm still seeing an issue with the hanging indents in e.g. page 123 (page 125 is like this too): the line beginning "before (me); I am the ninth" is lined up with the non-first lines of the hanging indent, but it's lined up with the first line in the Web site (e.g. it's lined up with "am I king; Auramazda" in the print copy, rather than "§ V. (Thus) saith Darius" like it is in the Web version). To explain visually, it's the bit highlighted in red in this screenshot that is unexpected: Screenshot_2019.07.29_16.06.27-edit.png Is this supposed to be this way and/or technically the way it has to be? Thanks! —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 20:25, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The hanging indent is handled at the beginning of the paragraph, i.e. on the previous page. When the two parts of the paragraph are joined in Mainspace, the indent will appear correctly. For this reason, it is simplest to ignore the fact that it does not appear correctly in Page space. However, if you feel strongly about it, you can place  at the beginning of the line on the second page (i.e., before "before (me)") in order to force it to display correctly in Page space also. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:51, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah! Cool, thanks! (I don't feel strongly about it, just didn't occur to me that it would stick itself together like that when transcluded, although that makes sense now.) Sorry for the silly question! —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 20:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah! Cool, thanks! (I don't feel strongly about it, just didn't occur to me that it would stick itself together like that when transcluded, although that makes sense now.) Sorry for the silly question! —&#123;&#123;user&#124;Goldenshimmer&#125;&#125; (they/their)｜Talk｜Contributions 20:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)