User talk:Ken g6

— billinghurst  sDrewth  00:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

DNBer ?
I have seen your work through the DNB and EB1911, and wanted to point you to the projects, especially the magnificently stupendous WikiProject DNB. We have done a lot of work through there, and hopefully explain some of the quirks and shortcuts. Again welcome. — billinghurst  sDrewth  02:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, we hope that you will not wriggle too much as we steal you from WP, and staple gun you to WS. We do allow short trips to WP as the chain is long enough to reach. — billinghurst  sDrewth  02:45, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for the...um, tight...embrace. The thing I like about Wikisource is that there's less need for consensus-building (I hope), so I can just work on something without debating it.  I haven't yet decided which project(s) I want to settle in.


 * One thing so far confuses me. I see pages and I see articles.  The Popular Science Monthly Project (which I discovered from the Template:Active projects you linked to, thank you!) seems to do pages first and not articles.  EB1911 on the other hand seems to do articles, but hardly any pages.  DNB seems mixed.  I also kind of expected wikilinks to be something done after pages were moved to articles, until I saw everything you did on that DNB page.  So I'm confused.  Is there a proper order to these things?


 * Thanks again! -- Ken g6 (talk) 05:40, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah! You are looking at our developing history in action. These days pages are actually transcluded directly from the Page: namespace into the main namespace, and the bulk of DNB is done that way, though we are still tidying out earlier artefacts.  Probably easiest to show a recent before and after shot, eg. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikisource/en/w/index.php?title=Brooks,_Charles_William_Shirley_%28DNB00%29&diff=prev&oldid=2268799 We are using our extension (explained at Wikisource:ProofreadPage) and in local detail at Help:Proofread.  EB1911 has more recently had scans available though some of their editors prefer to work with straight text, and while we collectively have a preference for working from scans, what we want is validated text, and the path that it takes to get there is different. We do have a consensus approach, though generally less argumentatively, and we do allow for difference, and a smaller community working together does build more tolerance. As a note, the smaller community also means that Scriptorium is a useful place to find a quick answer, or finding someone in the IRC channel. — billinghurst  sDrewth  06:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)