User talk:JamAKiska/Archive 1

Disambiguation
Hang on there, the DNB disambiguation is by dates only. Per WikiProject DNB/Style Manual, section on disambiguation, we use the birth, death or floruit dates to disambiguate. While there may be a few articles that have not been brought into line, that is the guideline. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:26, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reformatting of that page. Will use your edit as the baseline to start connecting the links. Going back to page one edit, John St. John (d. 1596) is buried in Oliver St. John DNB article. Other links should be good. Time permitting ???, I'll research JStJ to piece together an article if desired. JamAKiska (talk) 22:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Stumbled across an example today that had the year of death in February prior to 1750. The other editor converted the date of death to the N.S. or 1619 in this case, which is the date that I used (d.1619) for the link. JamAKiska (talk) 01:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Re the vandal
We have taken stronger defensive measures against the vandal and the source of the vandalism. The information about this vandalism has also been shared wider across WMF for those that need to manage such situations. If they continue to do this type of issue the defensive level will continue to be raised, and we will escalate our response. — billinghurst  sDrewth  03:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Volume 28
Your doing a grand job on this volume. I was thinking it was beyond me but two of us may make a dent in this volume. You are doing very well! I'm trying to assist you. Tell me it you feel stalked. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 16:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Yep its looking like the "end of the beginning". Vol 28 looks good. Not sure I'm intrigued enough by the Hunter Kidney ... bit I did look with a smile and got as fas as this Victuallers (talk) 09:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

indent?
Regarding your style edits, eg., why add an indent to that line? Beside being a smaller block, the text is separated by a blank line. Afaik, this is the style at DNB and it is the widespread convention on other pages. This works for the reader across wikimedia, including, of course, millions of articles at wikipedia. Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Part A of the Style manuel. JamAKiska (talk) 17:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * If you mean 'retaining formatting', the section is quite detailed on what has been retained. "Why not?" ... As I say, the convention has been to not retain the indent at the start of a paragraph - that print style was needed when they were too cheap to put a blankline. Like justification, it is no longer considered a benefit to readers. The best reason is it leaves you free to do your more useful and welcome contribs, as described in the first line of 'Part A'. Regards, Cygnis insignis (talk) 18:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * No doubt that this is in the grey...'preserve the look of the original as much as possible.' Authenticity comes to mind for starters, the sense of the original, which is my impression of what Wikisource is about.  Why use italicized text?  Why did you indent your response to me?  For me, the formatted text appearance, complete with indentations, provides the look of authenticity to the work.  So as I continue to develop my skills at duplicating 'the look,' of which the last paragraph is simply a first step... I wanted to see the effect, and I am quite happy with it (motivation). :-)  While it might be considered 'cruel' to mandate this format, is it not reasonable to retain the option for those that value this form of authenticity? (I completely understand about the two-column thing.)  For me, a slow typist, probably takes 15 seconds to achieve the 'look' for each paragraph within an entire article, compared to the 15-to-20 minutes of otherwise spent time [to me, this ever so small amount of time spent editing is reasonable].  If it is all about efficiency, I would be advising sculptures to stop after the first cut.  Could you imagine David with just one cut?...due to 'the convention.'  Thank-you, belatedly, for your help with that reference back in March. :-} that helped quite a bit for a newbie like me.  Your point is well taken, in a great many cases, efficiency is beneficial.  JamAKiska (talk) 22:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * If we are to indent in a traditional sense, I would rather that we did it with a HTML/CSS compliant scheme rather than adding shreds of template fuzzy template. Such that we use  or a template that does it. Personally, I forego indents in most namespace articles.  With regard to works of art, they were what the artist envisaged, and with our bits that is the works, not the typesetting. MOO. — billinghurst  sDrewth  23:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Deciding what formatting to preserve can be viewed with the following as a guide. Readers want the content, a 'type transcription', so preserve the meaningful formatting. If they want the 'feel' of photo-facsimile they have the scan at the link, attempting to reproduce that on a web-page is redundant. Using an indent instead of, or as well as, a blankline to indicate a paragraph in the main text is needless. When the text is unjustified, with hyphens and columns removed, it is the wrong element to include; this style is widely preferred because it is simple and it works.  Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:37, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * We are in violent agreement on the content aspect of this discussion. The content was identical, only the presentation varied, a matter of style.  As you noticed the indents on a few pages, I noticed the absence of them.  While it may be redundant to the original, most new readers do not understand the access the links provide.  In addition, your argument ignores the human experience, and the power of selection.  I am a big fan of keep it simple so that it works.  That being said, performance should not be ignored, nor should style, within reason, as they may provide the 'spark' for that lone reader (try some poems).  I find it surprising, that a blank line in code, format depending, would take up more space than four or five characters at the beginning of just one line.  If there is a template available that performs this function (to help simplify this formatting issue), would it not be wise to 'test it' and let the readers decide through their selections, (maybe try one volume with this template).  While this decision is not my call, I inadvertently gave you feedback as I explored options along my journey, as that is my nature.  And you noticed (which is good), and that is yours.  JamAKiska (talk) 22:16, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Vol 28
Brilliant ! Victuallers (talk) 21:45, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Hookers
I happen to know this one: Author:William Jackson Hooker is the father of Author:Joseph Dalton Hooker, I think that "William Joseph Hooker" is an error. Cygnis insignis (talk) 22:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...That makes sense and aligns with snippets from Richard and John Hooker articles in volume 27 as well (W. J. Hooker). Am gathering any links like this and storing, currently in previous Blind links discussion, to be moved to a more convenient, and formatted location, at some point in the not too distant future. The current list is up to nine. I am counting on the corporate knowledge to give guidance following their research into the matter. JamAKiska (talk) 22:49, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

(Blind Links)
 * Andrew Broughton, regicide.

'':Rev. John Cotton (d. 1652). in 1901 Vol. II''(f)
 * John de Critz, a painter.
 * Herbert, John Alexander Cameron, war correspondent.
 * John Hoffner, fellow painter.
 * William Joseph Hooker. The [q.v.] links to vol 27 article on his son, William Jackson Hooker, currently unwritten.
 * Edward Howard, 9th Duke of Norfolk
 * Gustavus Hume (Irish surgeon) wiki link to Hume street, Dublin.
 * John Lawson (16th c. educator).
 * John Lucas, Lord, older surviving (?) brother.
 * Howel ab Morgan. Should be a peer of Gruffydd ap Rhydderch.
 * Thomas Neeve, nephew of Richard Bentley (scholar).
 * Sir Edward Ponynges
 * John Roper, AG to Henry VIII.
 * Francis Sandys (Georgian architect)
 * Dr. (Alexander) Torriano
 * Vanbleek or Van Bluck.
 * Robert Walker (1709-1802) but does not match the description found in this version of Walker, Robert (DNB00) article.
 * William Weston (author) who published book in 1747

Leitch, William Leighton (DNB00)
Can't get the second page of the text to show up on this DNB entry. I have double-checked work using another users entry as an example but I can't work out what has gone wrong.

Briggs, Henry Perronet (DNB00)
Another problem on this entry. It shows "no such index". Also the page "Briggs, Henry Peronet (DNB00)" needs deleting as it has the wrong spelling.


 * That's a small issue: the volume is always two digits, so here needs to be 06. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

patrolling
Do you realise you marked a large page blanking as patrolled? Cygnis insignis (talk) 14:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, the alternative did not seem like the correct course of action at that time. Was there something else that should have been accomplished? JamAKiska (talk) 15:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * What was the alternative? Cygnis insignis (talk) 16:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ignore the situation and continue with the work at hand. It seemed to me that you would be able to restore the page yourself, and at least the person performing this action would be aware that someone noticed their unusual activity very shortly after the act. JamAKiska (talk) 17:03, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Then you need to find out about patrolling, it means "I checked this, it was fine, no further action needed". The same page was blanked yesterday, I thought nothing of it appearing on my watchlist at first glance. An archive does not trigger a new message banner. The alternative here would be more useful for a couple of reasons, another would have been to undo the edit. Cygnis insignis (talk) 17:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, which was my first thought; however, that option was not available on the page I was viewing, only "mark as patrolled". JamAKiska (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll put up a proposal for a link "ignore this page". Cygnis insignis (talk) 18:25, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

links
You are aware there is no consensus for non-local links in the DNB, and that annotations require a clean text to be made available? Cygnis insignis (talk) 20:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks much JamAKiska for the Rose fix but most of all for fixing the link to it on my page. Thanks again. Daytrivia (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2010 (UTC)