User talk:Mpaa/Archives/2012

Adminship
Be that as it may, I would like to nominate you for adminship on Wikisource. I think that your knowledge, methodology, and approach to the work and editors makes you an excellent candidate. Please give it serious consideration.— Ineuw talk 04:53, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I am flattered by your consideration and I am honoured. I am a bit hesitant about it though, as I am not completely aware of what the role implies, esp. regarding time availability needed, as time is something I am a bit reluctant to commit to. --Mpaa (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Please consider it as you are certainly qualify. As for details on the Admin's duties and responsibilities, The other admins would provide you with some info, and sure to find info on the main Wikimedia site. On the lighter side of things, - you will be saddled with all my planned deletions and changes in PSM. This alone will get you voted in, since they must be tired of my bugging people. :-) — Ineuw talk 21:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Your lack of reply makes me suspect that you're hesitating about being nominated for adminship. I have a feeling that the other admins would welcome you among their ranks, (As arcane as this may sound.) :-) Give it a chance and accept being nominated. I'll be happy to do so. — Ineuw talk 03:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right about your suspicion but I value your judgement. So you managed in convincing me. So go ahead, and let's see the community opinion :-) --Mpaa (talk) 10:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no additional time commitment, do what you can, when you have the time same as now, you just get extra tools to do the work with. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

PSM categorization and other pending tasks
Hi. I spent last night weighing all the corrections, and improvements I/we are considering, or in the middle of doing, and listed them in our TO DO LIST, just to get an overall picture and have a written record which also includes this post as well.

The PSM page To do list is by no means complete. It's only part of the effort to standardize and stay consistent throughout the PSM project, and plan on achieving this prior to proofreading from volume 51 and on.

As part of the record; I still have images to upload, pages with tables to proofread, pages with music notes, checking for missing running headers, adding nop where needed, and anchoring titles to indexes.

This brought me to the conclusion that we really have a lot on our plate, and it's best to add SUBPAGENAME as the sort key reference, in spite of its limitations. My first and main concern is to diffuse the concentration of the titles under the letter "P" and no matter what we come up with, many sort keys will have to be re-defined manually to be sensible. I hope this meets with your understanding and approval. — Ineuw talk 22:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I also thought about Categorisation. My main concern is that whatever we use as sort-key, it will not be visible by readers of the Category page and then, by not being obvious, it might lose its value (e.g.: if an article about energy stays under letter "C", why is it so? Only carefully looking at the article the reader will notice that it is about Coal ...). So in short, I share your view. Let me know when you want me to run the script.


 * Talking about categorisation, you might have noticed my post at Scriptorium. I was going to mention this on the PSM talk page. I would like to follow B. suggestion and:
 * 1. place anchors in obituary articles (the anchor below is placed)
 * 2. create redirects (e.g. with syntax: #REDIRECTPopular Science Monthly/Volume 42/December 1892/Notes & Obituary Notes -> Popular Science Monthly/Volume 42/December 1892/Obituary: Ernest Renan)
 * 3. Categorise such pages with Category:PSM Obituaries and Category:Obituaries+defaulsort on names.
 * Driver for this is the historical perspective that you get+all links that this might generate, also from wikipedia pages.
 * What do you think? --Mpaa (talk) 22:25, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry, for some reason, I am AGAIN not getting email notices of your post even though you are on my watchlist. This has happened before on numerous occasions. I complained but then, so what?
 * Is this something that depends on me in particular? Let me know if I should do something. --Mpaa (talk) 20:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thus, I missed this earlier when we discussed the issues on #wikisource. For the bot, you better check with the Admins, again. Perhaps on #wikisource, on their notice board. As far as I am concerned, just go ahead, but I can't give you permission.


 * I created THIS LIST for the files to be renamed on the commons. Please look at it if it's correct and then I will deal with them. Some admins there know of my work on the PSM and have received script help previously when a mass change was required.— Ineuw talk 08:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The list looks OK to me. Did not check one by one but made an intense sampling. --Mpaa (talk) 16:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking at it. The process I used in the past is to place it in the TALK PAGE of the Volume and then post a request. — Ineuw talk 20:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Suspend the bot and move to the approval stage
As you are really getting into the botting, and it is starting to have an effect on the Recent Changes log, can I ask that you temporarily suspend the bot work, and set through the next stage of Bots to get this approved by the community. Giving the bot a bot bit allows it different access, and different logging on Recent Changes. Thanks. — billinghurst  sDrewth  23:54, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Indents in PSM lists
Before discovering that a table can be universally defined with an indent, I added indents to individual rows, and that's what caused the double indent. It was defined as || and I think I got them all removed, but if you still find an odd one, just remove it. Now, they are only used in the "Publications received:" section of the Indexes.— Ineuw talk 21:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Built a filter
I am hoping that you can see [//en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&wpSearchFilter=18 PSM watch] filter. At the moment it is set to record edits where "Popular Science Monthly" appears in a title (all namespace) where it is not Ineuw, you or your bot. We can add people to that filter easily so that they are ignored too. I don't have it tagging edits (tags appear in Recent Changes) so you will need to peruse it on occasions. Get back to me with feedback; I was able to do some limited testing to prove the concept, just not sure enough of its reality test. — billinghurst  sDrewth  09:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Multiple part articles list
Hi. In the emailed list, there are a couple of exceptions. In at least two cases, consecutive articles in the series do not have the same titles, and in one case Part 1 and 2 are in a single article as I & II. Let me know if you want me to find them - tomorrow.

Also want to thank you for the requested list because without it, I would have missed numerous spelling errors. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 06:33, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks. Would be nice to have though, if possible, also the last article in a series, as we need to fill the notes also in that article. I will use you "rh approach" for notes. Let me know, in case, if the is not OK. --Mpaa (talk) 14:18, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. You're right. From my list, it's impossible to tell which is the last article. I will email you another list.— Ineuw talk 19:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

An idea for a bot explored.
Hi. I overdone the bio article title changes and decided to return and strictly conform with the WS rules. It was an attempt to satisfy my desire for full names and eliminate the periods like, '''Prof. John A. Smith, LL. D., Ph. D., M. D.''' etc., make future searchers' lives easier, and follow the naming norms of Wikipedia.

Was wondering if a script can be written to operate on a single article title, to be activated from my custom toolbar. This would read the input from the discussion page of the currently viewed page, and changes the title and all related links. There are 312 biographical articles up to volume 50, and I want to clean up my own mess. Reasons for one at a time are:


 * 1) Not take up much time and resources of WS at once.
 * 2) The possibility of no deletion requests, just changes.
 * 3) Must read the original titles since I've already changed my data.
 * 4) Allows me to do it whenever I have the time.
 * 5) Redo it if I made a mistake.

Please let me know your thoughts on this idea. — Ineuw talk 00:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. The general purpose is clear, a bit less what you would like to do.
 * Can you post a link of a page where you would like to run this?
 * when you say changes the title and all related links: which title, the title page? related link, you mean links included in 'what links here'?

As a first feedback, if you want a script that you can run, it should be written in JS, I guess, and I am not that expert there. But let's try to clarify this a bit further and we might ask for help to the right people. --Mpaa (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * This would be a perfect example: I must re-edit the title of Sketch of William Edmond Logan on page Popular Science Monthly/Volume 23/September 1883/Sketch of William Edmond Logan and change it to Sketch of Sir William E. Logan, LL.D., F.G.S. as in Popular Science Monthly/Volume 23/September 1883/Sketch of Sir William E. Logan, LL.D., F.G.S.. I would like to do it while on the page where I would place the Change to title somewhere like the discussion page or whatever good idea someone comes up with. Again, all the related links must also be changed. — Ineuw talk 19:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry again. Probably I am too slow tonight ... (or slower than usual :-) ). So you basically want to rename the page on the fly instead of moving it? If so, I wonder if that is possible. Or I am completely out of track? Even if possible, it is out of my current knowledge to do it in JS. In python, except the rename part, which could be a move, fixing pages that 'links here' should be possible, but you still need to move back again the redirect and delete the current one.


 * You're not slow. I was hoping that as a .js/python bot creator, you would have the permission to alter records without deletion. Being familiar with SQL, I am not sure if admins have to go through these steps, or rather that their deletions are not visible to the rest of the community. But then, what do I know?


 * I am motivated only by a single concern: robbing admins of time, having to deal with deletions generated by my changes. When I joined WS, some two years ago, I had a quasi-idea/proposal to allow trusted editors to delete their own creations, provided that they were the only editors. On the other hand, if a deletion request must be made, I am OK with that and release requests in small batches. Each previous article title change I did, generated two page deletions. I am hoping that the same will be for the future changes.— Ineuw talk 00:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I think it is better to ask to someone more familiar with this process. So far I have always done read/write of the same page title.
 * However, as I understood it, we need:
 * 1 - move back the page -> this is something we can do, problem is that it will generate a redirect to be later on deleted by someone
 * 2 - change pages in 'what links here to insert the updated reference
 * 3 - ask for deletion of the current redirect, which is named after the new title.


 * Except the deletion of redirect, which should be no be big deal, the rest should be feasible (judgement late at night …)
 * Need to check if as bot owner I can already delete also pages now.


 * However, my best suggestion is to ask someone like Inductiveload about this. --Mpaa (talk) 00:37, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Spoke with Inductiveload. He explained to me how to handle redirects, etc. Pages can be tagged with "Dated soft redirect" and a bot automatically will delete them after 2-4 months. That could be one way to solve the mass deletion of redirects. A second issue is how to handle the current redirects. It could be the same approach if we do not care in having them around for long. If you want I can try to apply myself and make a script to handle the list. In case I need a file with 'old name' 'new name' on which I need to work. Let me know. I cannot promise something quick as I want to be cautions with all these backlinks to take care. Really time to sleep now. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 02:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. I will prepare a short list of some 4-5 records for you to build on.

Otherwise, this is not a "burning" issue. — Ineuw talk 18:48, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Admin nomination successful
Congratulations, you are now an administrator. Hesperian 13:40, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * And congrats indeed. Please do add your languages known to the administrators page. — billinghurst  sDrewth  15:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, to you and all the others as well, who supported me either explicitly or through their guidance. --Mpaa (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Congrats. As it was recorded in history, "I came, I programmed, I administered". :-)

Sort of a status report
Hi. Just to keep in touch, I haven't forgotten about preparing the biographical article titles list and should sort them out this week. Also, I will slowly deal with the pages marked PSMTable as now I am just pushing to complete all title pages until the end of Volume 50.— Ineuw talk 21:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. I started to prepare some basic functions that will be needed. As soon as I have the data I will start. There for sure will be cases that I have not been able to foresee so far. So I will be very careful. As soon as I will start to achieve something I will let you know, so you can keep an eye on it :-) --Mpaa (talk) 21:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. I completed the list of biographical titles and placed them here: User:Ineuw/Sandbox3. I appreciate your help.— Ineuw talk 20:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. I tried the enginee of the bots on these 2. Can you tell me if it is OK? Pls note that old pages are tagged as soft redirects and then are still there, to be deleted by a bot in 2 months time:


 * Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1/June 1872/Sketch of Charles Lyell
 * Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1/June 1872/Sir Charles Lyell
 * Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1/July 1872/Sketch of James Dwight Dana
 * Popular Science Monthly/Volume 1/July 1872/Prof. James D. Dana


 * If this is OK, I will take care of making the scripts looks nicer … . Bye --Mpaa (talk) 00:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * They look great. Many thanks.— Ineuw talk 17:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Please keep an eye on this work. I do not feel yet 100% confident with the script. An additional couple of eyes will definitely help :-) --Mpaa (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Bot is progressing. I am doing a lot of sampling to check and looks OK. One note: due to complexity in handling double-redirects that we use for disambiguation, for now I left the old ones in place. Once the bot will delete them in a couple of months, I will regenerate the new ones. Bye --Mpaa (talk) 01:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It's almost complete and I find it perfect. Also, I have a way to check the links later. By later I mean in a couple of days after I make the same changes in my offline database. Once I've done this, I can check for discrepancies. Although, I don't expect any.— Ineuw talk 03:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC)




 * Thanks for everything.— Ineuw talk 04:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Capitalization after the colon
Hi. You are absolutely correct in the application of lowercase following the colon, as in this title, Popular Science Monthly/Volume 45/September 1894/Barberries: A Study of Uses and Origins I, this being the European rule. Uppercase is the modern American English convention as stated in the English Wikipedia article Colon (punctuation). The caveat is, if it's a proper sentence, but in this case being a title, it's debatable. I don't claim to have known this beforehand, but there are dozens of PSM titles that are already capitalized and I would like to follow this convention if it's OK with you. — Ineuw talk 19:03, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No issue at all with me. To be honest I do not follow you, as you created the page :-) I just added the 'Next in series' note. Anyhow, do you need me to do something to help? --Mpaa (talk) 19:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Not at all. I seemed to remember that you noted to leave the letter "a" following the colon in lowercase. I must have dreamt it. I better pinch myself. :-D — Ineuw talk 03:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Another result of the PSm work
Hi. I've been experimenting, in parallel with the PSM proofreading work, of merging the indexes of all volumes and the split them by alphabetical pages for a comprehensive all encompassing index of all volumes. The work is done, except that I wanted to properly complete the first fifty volumes before posting the results. I will keep you posted and ask for your input about how it's best to split the work.— Ineuw talk 23:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Good. I think it is good to have many different ways of accessing such an amount of info. I am curious to see your results. BTW, Pls. see note above on bot. --Mpaa (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Here is the first result of the index extract. User:Ineuw/Sandbox8. It needs a lot of work still. :-)— Ineuw talk 04:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * That's nice! Is it based on the Index content? If I understood correctly, an article will be listed twice, once sorted by its title and once by its author, or? The part I found a bit obscure (but I guess you are on it) is when you see a lot of author names repeated, such as 'Allen' for example. Anyhow, overall I think it is great. As I said above, the overall mass of info needs more access points that the pure TOCs. And the Index pages usually go a bit undetected. --Mpaa (talk) 09:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * These are the Indexes of Volumes 1-50, merged and alphabetically sorted. There are 15,575 article and paragraph entries, EXCLUDING publications which consist of an additional 5,877 entries. These will be displayed separately.


 * Cleanup and merge is a very lengthy process currently. There are numerous issues need to be to resolved and the process of reprogramming requires a major rethink and commitment which would sidetrack me from proofreading.


 * The multiple appearance of entries indicate their existence in the various volumes, and often multiple times in the same volume.


 * The "" duplicate indicator cannot be used unless a separate sort key is built.


 * The volume number and month has to be added to the year as well.


 * Some entries appear three different ways, while some articles are missing altogether. There is nothing I could do about this, as I am only using existing data.


 * I will keep on refining the idea off and on, but cannot give it priority.


 * Currently, the list indicates the differences between my offline data which is missing the final refinements made to the links. That's what the red is all about.— Ineuw talk 14:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Bacon's Prayers
Thank you, sir, for offering me help in proof reading. I would be delighted if you could me assist in it. Being a "newcomer", I don't know very well how these engines work, but I am determined to keep on working!

A new day, a new PSM question
Hi. How are you? A new PSM issue has cropped up and wanted to discuss with you. Is it possible to know which author/contributor published a PSM article, and is missing the PSM link to the main namespace? I am referring to authored articles in volumes 1 to 50 and 68. This is what I am focusing on. Is it possible to create a script that checks for missing PSM links occasionally as we advance, just as you have done with the redirects? — Ineuw talk 12:35, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. Fine thanks. For sure I can try, if it is possible (for me) only time will tell :-) When you say: Is it possible to know which author/contributor published a PSM article, I guess you already have the authors and you want to check for PSM link in their page, or …? If you send me the list of Authors you are interested in (or put it in a Sandbox), I can try to set-up a script that reads each Author:page and search for PSM link. Just missing/present is enough or are you interested also in how many/which PSM links there are in a page, etc. etc.? --Mpaa (talk) 12:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Like minds . . . I generated a list of all authors and their contribution counts as they should be, and placed the list HERE. I already know that there are some discrepancies and would like to generate the missing links. This is not urgent, it's just part of the updating and cleanup process before continuing past volume 50. Many thanks.— Ineuw talk 19:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Links to existing texts
In Author:Sabine Baring Gould - Short Stories, three titles: A Christmas Tree, A Pair of Silk Stockings, The Fly are blue but need to be red as they are unrelated to texts by other authors. Also is there any way to amend Odd People I have Met—Auntie so that the single text has two titles, i.e. Auntie is a story title but Odd People I have Met is the series title of which it forms a part. Would appreciate your help. Another question: Why can I only access this Author page via Wikipedia;  a search for the page within wikisource says it does not exist. Johndoeqwe (talk) 13:11, 13 February 2012 (UTC) Johndoeqwe (talk) 19:12, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. There is no space between help and me. If you see something turns red, it is not a good sign.
 * I disambiguated the pages by adding "(Baring-Gould)" in the name of the pages to be created. E.g. The Fly . It does not appear in read mode due to the "|" . See also the disambiguation page for The Fly now. If you edit Author:Sabine Baring-Gould, you can check the other changes. I have not created disambiguation pages for the other works (The Fly was already there and I added a line). It can be done once the works will be created.
 * I am not sure I understood you correctly regarding Auntie. I have only modified the title in the Author page. I have not touched the page with the work. Let me know if that was you meant.
 * You can find it in the search. It is the first link when you search for "Sabine Baring-Gould". The page is called Author:…. It says that the page is not existing because the engine is looking for "Sabine Baring-Gould" in the Main namespace and not in the Author namespace. If you type "Author:Sabine Baring-Gould" it will go directly to the page. --Mpaa (talk) 19:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Excuse my jumping in here. I have moved the other two identified works to being author specific, and created disambiguation pages at the generic titles.  With regard to the works and subworks.  Our process has now changed with ready access to scanned copies of works, in that we will now put the compilation at the top level, and any works contained will be subpages to the work. A number of reasons to this, and for that specific example, we can look to move the works to being subpages of the overarching title, though it would also be useful to get a djvu scan, and migrate the works to that formation. With regard to your search, in your preferences, do you have AUTHOR: namespace included there, see Special:Preferences. — billinghurst  sDrewth  02:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I really appreciate the help from both of you.  There is just one thing still not quite the way I wanted it,  although user: billingshurst you have understood what I am trying to achieve.   I cannot see how you have managed to do what you have done, so cannot try it myself.   Here's what I would like to see.   1. compilation title:  Odd People I have Met   2. story title:  Auntie   3. note below author:  Odd People I Have Met—Auntie.   I want Auntie as the story title because this story also needs to be blue under In a Quiet Village, 1900.   If the latter does not also happen, I propose to alter the story title of the text to Auntie and list its full publication history underneath. Johndoeqwe (talk) 12:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. To see how it was done the best way is to look at the history of the pages you are interested in and compare revisions. So you see the delta. Regarding Auntie in particular, I do not have the full picture on that specific work to formulate an answer now. I hope sDrewthhas more insight here. --Mpaa (talk) 18:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * My preference would be to see if there was a scanned version available, either at http://archive.org or http://books.google.com and then look to lift the work to the modern standard and to work from an evidence base. That not being available full indication of how the work was produced so that we can look to replicate the work as possible. — billinghurst  sDrewth  06:20, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion
Hi. To speed up the proofreading process, and because I've done over one hundred tables with more than that to come, I switched to using images of some tables. Do you think that they are acceptable? — Ineuw talk 07:41, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * As a back-up solution yes. But how to find them if later on one wants to remove the image? Shall we leave the Table tag? Another thing that I noticed it that the structure of the table is quite standard. Wouldn't be an option to invest some time exploring a possible way to generate tables quickly (e.g. insert data in Excel and run a macro?) and tweak the output as needed? --Mpaa (talk) 14:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You have a valid point. I will put the template back in the header. this should be sufficient for proofreaders of the page namespace, and readers in the main namespace. If this makes sense, please let me know.— Ineuw talk 22:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I will re-tag the table images created previously. This is easy for me because I am very familiar with the PSM image galleries and my work. There aren't that many, (they're just very long tables).— Ineuw talk 06:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Some comments on our discussions about tables:
 * I used Excel in the beginning but stopped as soon as I became familiarized with wiki tables. The problem is the cell/row/column format coding because I find the process to be extremely time consuming and I wish to get back to proofreading.
 * I know of the existence of numerous tables in volumes 50-92, because of the image files downloaded and this means MORE time.
 * Being an old VBA programmer, I was toying with the idea of writing an Excel procedure where a table is translated to include Inductiveload's format codes. My reluctance is: its usefulness, since the format codes are only used in Wikisource, and the time sacrificed to programming instead of proofreading. In my opinion, HTML, CSS and javascript are the present and the future, while VB & VBA are the past.
 * Your comments are appreciated.— Ineuw talk 03:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If you think that the time you have to invest in a "tool" will be paid back by faster proof-reading (your knowledge increase to be included in the business case …), then go for it, otherwise drop it. I personally use excel to compose the table in the proper order (OCR sometimes misalign entries and re-phase everything in a text editor is tough). Once cells are in place I move the to a text editor (sometimes with the help of where with regex I insert all the necessary formatting code. I agree it is not the ideal process and it is time-consuming. :-( --Mpaa (talk) 10:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Heads-up re: Proposed deletions
Hi Mpaa,

Heads-up re: Proposed deletions. I only just noticed these redirects, and they are contrary to my understanding/intentions for our site, so I've thrown it open for public discussion. Please don't feel slighted - what you've done is prima facie sensible, and of course your intentions were the best - I just think that on deeper consideration it will prove to be not the best way to proceed. For my part I won't feel slighted if you end up deciding to affirm and defend what you've done here.

Cheers, Hesperian 14:01, 19 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. No problems. See my answer there. Bye--Mpaa (talk) 14:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Bucks (Victoria County History)
Much appreciated if you could proof-read this, more than just the sample pages you did :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Magyar Biographical Sketches
I would appreciate if could have a look at it, because I am still staggering with the partial transclusion. Orsb (talk) 21:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Take a look now. Note that I renamed the previous section to align naming with chapters. fromsection refers to the starting page and needs to be placed near from=n. --Mpaa (talk) 21:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, now I understand how it works. Orsb (talk) 21:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

PSM stats
Hi. Just completed Volume 40 images and whenever you have the opportunity, can you please update the Statistics? My guess is that 30% of the volume should be complete. Thanks.— Ineuw talk 05:16, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. I do it weekly, usually on Sundays :-)--Mpaa (talk) 07:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh Good. It's only my curiosity. — Ineuw talk 19:11, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Robert Service
Hello. I noticed you recently added an external link to a work on Robert Service's Author page. I was wondering if you know of/can recommend any comprehensive (collected/selected, etc.) work by the poet that is in the public domain that we can create an Index for here. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:31, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi LJB. I am afraid I am not in a position to make such a recommendation … Honestly, I do not remember exactly what drove me to add that scan. My best guess now would be that I was patrolling someone else's work and in doubt I went on IA to cross check some editing, and having found a scan I just reported the info. Or maybe, I was just busybody, looking at recent changes and I went there. Sorry. Anyhow, I hope that I picked up a good one :-) --Mpaa (talk) 01:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, and no urgency... I wouldn't really be working on it at this point with having other stuff on my plate. Thanks, though! Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Content Tables
Hi. I have a problem. Hope you can give it a look. I tried doing here the same as in the "The Wild Swans at Coole", but for some reason the links only work from here and from here. There has to be some obvious mistake, but I cant see it.

Thanks for validating tWSaC, BTW! --StephenDaedalus (talk) 07:45, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I quickly try a fix here. Quick feedback, might be wrong as I only had a glance. The problem is that TOC link create links to sub-pages. In your case, you have put the chapters on the same level as the main work.--Mpaa (talk) 07:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * TOC link creates different links depending whether you are in Page ns or Main ns. That is why in Page ns it works. In Main ns, hoover the mouse on links for pages in the TOC, you will see what link is created. That should allow you to understand why it is not working. However, best practise its to keep the whole work together. My suggestion is that you move the chapters below the main page of the book. And leave redirects in the current pages if they are searched as individual works. --Mpaa (talk) 12:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * StephenDaedalus, is this still an issue? Do you need help in moving the pages? I can support with a few pages if you need.--Mpaa (talk) 15:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. I've alredy fixed it. It was the page/sub-page think. I think it's way too long to be presented all the poems together. Thanks a lot for the help! --StephenDaedalus (talk) 11:35, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What you did is what I meant, chapters&sub-chapters, not all text in one page. --Mpaa (talk) 15:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And I have been in and edited, and put in direct links to the subpages. — billinghurst  sDrewth  15:34, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Please have a look
Hi Mpaa, You helped me several times with little problems in editing PSM. Thanx, for that. I have a new little problem, and I can't easily find something simular somewhere. Will you have a look at page 839 and 840, PSM vol.30? It is about the list, as you will understand. WeeJeeVee (talk) 09:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. I prefer tables. See pag. 863 and 864. Note the multi-page table for transclusion. If lines height is too small, remove "lh95" from the table heading.--Mpaa (talk) 20:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Think it's fine this way. I'll hope I can reproduce it, somewhere, when necessary. Thanks WeeJeeVee (talk) 08:42, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

New PSM maintenance template and category
Hi. I needed to create a new maintenance PSM Images template and a related PSMImages needing replacement category, but I don't know how to link the two together as you did with Template:PSMTable and Category:PSMTexts needing Maintenance. Could you kindly work your magic and duplicate the link? Thanks in advance.— Ineuw talk 07:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Some spelling+purge. --Mpaa (talk) 13:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

leveral times?
Hi...

Couldn't help but notice - is "leveral times" really the best choice in index naming for "File:Poems of Mr. John Milton, Both English and Latin, Compos'd at leveral times.djvu"? -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:02, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Oops.. Latin parts completely ommitted? Something about being a 1927 edition? Better check with the uploader before promoting this one any further. I'm not so sure this intended to be kept let alone worked. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:20, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. I also noticed it yesterday. And I tried to ask on IRC if it was better to rename or what else to do, but no one answered. Regarding which is the best version (1927 or not) I do not have an opinion. File was there since 2008 so I guessed it was OK. My goal was to highlight to a new comer the index and transcluion process as I noticed that he started to add works. --Mpaa (talk) 09:38, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A worthy goal but incorrect file naming is a pretty obvious thing - one that should always be addressed prior to working a file for a whole host of just as obvious reasons. See if IRC can help you out now I guess. Good luck. -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:35, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * GOIII, what is your suggestion other than contacting the uploader (which I did already)? I think I will move back the original page where it came from, restore the original text as it was (so no one will complain about history :-) ). Then, someone will decide what to do with this. Do you know of any banner that can be put on the Index to prevent further work? My only sin being to have touched this buried file … --Mpaa (talk) 11:22, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Issue IMO is that the mainspace text claims to be based on 1927 edition, whereas the scan seems to be of the 1645 edition or a facimile of it. I'd suggest moving the current scan to its correct title ("several"), and having the mainspace text based on the 1645 edition. Index:Poems of Mr. John Milton, Both English and Latin, Compos'd at leveral times.djvu is a good scan, so I'm not sure why we should stop work on it. --Aplomb (talk) 12:50, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If the date is not an issue, which is OK by me if that is the concensus, then the naming on Commons is still a problem. I agree most every "familar" WS contributor might say who cares if its a letter l instead of a letter s... we fix that on transclusion to the mainspace anyway. Well wiki-life is not that simple. Sooner or later, somebody will question the spelling over on Commons regardless of what we have done here on WS in the interim and move to correct the spelling there (making our transcription problematic thanks to a name/redirect mismatch or mess here). Its best to always verify the host file & its condition before actually working the file - the problem here being every page in the Page namespace will not be renamed automatically when it's index file is renamed - they all have to be moved in addition to correcting the Index file (sometimes this is done by a bulk move script; sometimes manually a page at a time). I'm willing to pitch in to help move everything if Inductiveload is not around to run his script but the first thing that is needed is the correction of the djvu file name over on Commons. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:57, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I will ask for a rename on Commons, which is starting point. Then we will proceed with the other points (date etc.). --Mpaa (talk) 10:00, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Great. I'm willing to help out on anything which doesn't require sysop tools, so give me a shout if I'm needed. --Aplomb (talk) 10:16, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I've first renamed the djvu file on Commons to several.. and then noticed that the source reads feveral.. (that makes more sense to me than leveral or several) and moved it to File:Poems of Mr. John Milton, Both English and Latin, Compos'd at feveral times.djvu. My deepest apologies if this messed things up. Please help fixing things if so (I don't know much about editing wikisource). Materialscientist (talk) 10:47, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. Correct name is "several". The f is actually a long s in old characters. See Long_s. Can you pls rename to several?--Mpaa (talk) 12:00, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Moved back. Materialscientist (talk) 14:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. Moved the Index file as well. Now we need a scripting guru to run his/her bot to either a.) recreate all the new pages as not proofread, move the few proofread pages already edited and then delete all the old pages with the mis-spelled title; or b.) get a hold of Inductivebot's bulk move script and run that to move all the old pages to the newly named pages. -- George Orwell III (talk) 14:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. I moved the pages. Should be OK now. GOIII, can you please make a final cross-check? Thanks. --Mpaa (talk) 18:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello. Just checked & all looks just fine. You wisely did not create any redirects that I can see in the moves so house-keeping should be alright too. (What did we learn, if anything? community first; IRC  last ). -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Recurring titles in the Popular Science Monthly
Hello stranger. I added this new section to cover the monthly recurring article titles. When you have the chance, please look at them, let me know if we can further improve them (Page title content display, additional note info, etc.) Your comments are appreciated. — Ineuw talk 10:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. I think the intent is good. I am convinced that the added value this site can provide compared to pure scans is to make PSM info easy to find and access, etc. and it is right to put some effort into it. My doubt is if these are pages for Main ns or if it would be better to make a portal with this info inside (even though I am not so familiar with portals). I have seen some posts on where it is discussed what should be in Main ns or not or how to access info. See e.g. Proposed deletions and Scriptorium. --Mpaa (talk) 19:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry to have missed your reply. I don't always get a notification. Regarding the final location, I leave that to the community.— Ineuw talk 02:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Cannot find the source of this footnote.
Hi. I was correcting StateOfAvon's work and on this page Popular Science Monthly/Volume 51/August 1897/The Despotism of Democracy there is a footnote segment appears before the first footnote, and I have no clue where it came from. I can't track it down. Could you please look at it at your convenience? Thanks.— Ineuw talk 06:57, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Wrong ref name in Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 51.djvu/518--Mpaa (talk) 07:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks.— Ineuw talk 20:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You're invited to Wikimedia events in June and July: bot users, script writers, template and Gadget makers wanted
I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon, 1-3 June. Registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, then please register by May 1st and mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, teaching, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page at mediawiki.org. Sumanah (talk) 00:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

caching issue
The problem seems to have resolved. No idea why it took so long.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 08:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * thanks--Mpaa (talk) 13:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

TUSC token 7e6cc92019a9ded516c2fb3376989bbe
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Reasons for leaving the fsx template as is:

 * 1) Although there are ~11,000 uses of "fsx", only a lesser percentage requires change because the great majority of captions are single line.
 * 2) The first 10 volumes used the "fs" template.
 * 3) I am planning to check through the volumes to correct minor errors, omissions, and poor quality image replacements, caused by initial ignorance and oversight.

I came to realize that altering the fsx is an unnecessarily extra work when the simplest solution would be is to crate two or two simple templates - 90%, 85% - with line height adjustment, one for each of the sizes/line height in question. These kinds of fixed templates already exist as smaller at 83%, which is the low range of font scaling of 83% to 87%, but without line height adjustment. (90% is the mid range size of scaling between 93% and 88%.)

Comments are most welcome.— Ineuw talk 20:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. I just posted some stats on GOIII page. Stats for PSM only here below. There are a lot of 87% as well, probably can be turned int 85%. Would be nice to stay on 3 values (90%, 85%, 75%) and check the deviations. I could see also many fsx in vol. 1-10. If you are interested in the data, including page titles, I can send you the file.--Mpaa (talk) 20:51, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * addition: PSM accounts for 8320 occurrences of the total 11k. I suggest that if you go for three templates, you keep the consistency across the work, without mixing old/new templates to scale text. Moreover, I can't figure out how to tell single captions from multiple lines in 8000 pages. On top of this, I think there are also other occurrences of smaller or larger to be cleaned up to have a uniform approach. --Mpaa (talk) 21:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Like minds . . . . think alike. :-) I also copied the table offline to examine it closely. I would love to have a list of the Page names and the djvu numbers.
 * Is it OK if I design the two or three of the neded templates, based on percentages only? I will name them accordingly. Also, some sizes are of no concern - the ones over 93%. — Ineuw talk 21:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * in your mailbox. --Mpaa (talk) 21:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the file. - Consistency is my goal. I am not concerned about single or multi-line line descriptions. As for the 87% - I know about them, it was an aborted effort at hoping for improvement.
 * Also modified my Sandbox example for the first two sizes of 90 and 85 HERE. These are controlled by 90% and 85%.
 * The names I chose are fsp90 and fsp85 fs90 and fs85 I also altered the line height to em because the percentages cause a minor visual anomaly in the bottom lines of both sizes.
 * Please let me if the names are acceptable or suggest something that would be more appropriate.— Ineuw talk 21:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Mea culpa
Hi. Inductiveload built the nop gadget and it works very well. So far, I've checked Vol 1 & 4. Also in Vol 1, I found a lot of inconsistencies of my doing - that being my first attempt at proofreading and it was a very confusing effort for not having any previous experience. It's there that I saw the source of the bad habits you copied from me.

I created the two templates fs85 and fs90, and will begin to correct volume 1. There is a lot. Thanks for all your help. — Ineuw talk 14:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Are you going to do it by hand and replace all fsx templates or only part of them?--Mpaa (talk) 14:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I can only replace the 83%-93% and 83%-93% templates. Sizes larger than 93% are not important and I didn't make templates. Any size between 83% to 87% equals to fs85, and 88% to 93% equals to fs90. Do you think I can ask for a bot to do this??? — Ineuw talk 19:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. Yes, I think I can do it in a way or another, both for fsx and fs (BTW, I sent a mail with data for fs).
 * There is one thing that puzzles me about about this approach. Why have you decided to hard code line-height? As we are going to do many edits (8k?), I'd better ask now ... --Mpaa (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the file. I hard coded the parameter because there was a problem with a series of if/then statements and didn't want to add a third parameter. This is simpler and the line height is still adjustable if necessary. . . . and yes, I hope that all occurrences in the PSM project are replaced. — Ineuw talk 22:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

How is your headache?
Since I've given you numerous headaches today, I hope you're resting. It occurred to me, that the best approach would be to limit the implementation of the font/line height changes to Volumes 1 to 4. My rationale being is that these four volumes are proofread, and don't expect additional font related changes. It would also set volumes 3-4 as the reference for other editors, and would help me see the original publisher's finalization of the formats for the following 40 volumes. Have a good rest. . . . and if we communicate tomorrow, please prepare a bottle of aspirin by the computer. :-) — Ineuw talk 01:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Missing running headers in PSM
Hi. In the process of cleaning up, I came to realize that it would be best if I add all the missing headers to all proofread pages. Whenever you feel like it, could you please generate and paste a raw list HERE? I will remove the duplicates. Thanks in advance. — Ineuw talk 20:57, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. I think you will have a hard time. 5500 entries … --Mpaa (talk) 10:16, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, it may be so, but it must be done and I am used to it by now. :-) — Ineuw talk 16:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Obituaries in Popular Science Monthly
I have closed the discussion on the deletion of Category:Obituaries in Popular Science Monthly as Keep, no consensus for delete. You may want to work with User:Hesperian towards a proposal to post on Scriptorium‎ that will gather wider community involvement towards a solution. Jeepday (talk) 10:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

An additional comment on the hanging indents
An addendum to my email; you'll find some paragraphs with the hanging indent of and that's wrong. I used it because of poor poor optical perception of the scan. They should all be the default. Thanks. — Ineuw talk 03:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Darwinism
Mpaa, I've now I think found out how to mark a book for proofing. Darwinism (Wallace) has now got about 10 chapters ready. If the cue you're looking before starting for isn't there, can you let me know what it is, as this is first longer work I've uploaded. Thanks Chris55 (talk) 11:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. I think you did and are doing it right. Actually, it was not my intention to proofread this text. I was patrolling recent changes and I saw you work on-going and, you know, I am curious … . As the quality looked OK (formatting, etc.), I thought to tell you to mark them as proofread, assuming also text was checked, as usually formatting is the last thing I do :-). Then, I saw your reply to mine and other posts and looks like other checks on text are anyhow needed before Proofread can be set, but that's according to the flow. Bye--Mpaa (talk) 15:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The time has come
Hi. Con il cappello in mano. I've come to ask if you would be kind enough to run the bot and replace any font definitions for volumes 1 to 6. These six volumes were checked page by page, but I may have missed some. I am referring to any font value of less than 100% and in the articles only. Advertisements are not relevant.

Also, please accept my outrage at the Spanish win. — Ineuw talk 05:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Ineuw. I acknowledge the request but I am not sure I can do it shortly.--Mpaa (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem. 140 years and ± a few more won't make a difference. :-) — Ineuw talk 18:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Need your help
Hi, hope this finds you & your's well...

First, thanks for the bulk moves in Index:Romance of History, Mexico.djvu and the mainspace adjustmments.

Second, I've located an online version of the work and have imported the missing page of text already but the remaining missing image is beyond my skill set.

It is in .gif format while the others are .jpgs reused from the original source on IA. Is there anyway you can convert it to more match the others and upload it with the rest? -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. I have uploaded the picture. As on the online version on IA the 2 missing pages were visible, I cropped them from there and inserted them instead of the placeholders in the djvu. Also the picture is taken from there. Hope you agree. Pls give a second look, I made some spotchecks and I had to purge here and there. BTW, I missed you on IRC for a few secs. It would have been convenient to have a chat :-) --Mpaa (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Back-up a second... the 2 pages were present in the DjVu file existing on IA or they were just present in the JP2 zip file?
 * Not in djvu, I did not check jp2, I just took it from the 'stream' visualization, cropping the screen. A bit of dirty hack, I thought later that I could have looked directly into the jp2, probably was too late at night.--Mpaa (talk) 05:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * If the latter, then there is something odd about the way IA operates because omitted scans like this instance seem to be more common than one would think. Anyway, thanks for the best fix one could hope for.


 * On another note - please take a look a Hesperian's talk page and let me know if you think generating such a list of flawed Indexes is possible per my last addition there.


 * Finally as a sidenote - the entire Wikifoundation went down for about 5 minutes and I thought IRC might be appropriate. Otherwise I avoid it like the plague - there is nothing that cannot be addressed or discussed in the normal wiki framework of sites & pages. Experience has also taught me no good ever comes from parallel discussions taking place out of sight of the normal community at large. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess it is a matter of taste. Some practicalities or support issues can be sorted out very quickly there, without writing or waiting too much.--Mpaa (talk) 05:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back
The title says it all.— Ineuw talk 00:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Mpaa, thank you for those validations. Respectfully, Maury (William Maury Morris II (talk) 20:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)


 * You’re welcome :-)--Mpaa (talk) 20:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks 2
Hi. Thanks for validation of a Set of Six. :-) --Mpaa (talk) 00:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * You're welcome and I will state that I am impressed by your excellent editing. I also strongly dislike a new and finished work not to be completely Validated.  Maury ( William Maury Morris II (talk) 06:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Mpaa, please take the time and validate these few pages of mine?

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:Darien_Exploring_Expedition.pdf

Kind regards, Maury ( William Maury Morris II (talk) 03:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Your thoughts on my word list on Wiktionary?
Hi. Placed on my Wiktionary user page the collection of 19th century words extracted from PSM (As of July 6, 2012). Would it be possible to create a script which would delete the existing and leave me with words I need to identify? This is a long term plan and thought of exploring it, being aware that it's not Wikisource and will need to approach the admins on Wiktionary for its implementation. — Ineuw talk 18:53, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Let me see if I got your point. You would like a script that goes through your Wiktionary pages and generate as output only those words that do not have an entry in Wiktionary. Is that right?--Mpaa (talk) 19:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Here is a query you can run: http://en.wiktionary.org/w/api.php?action=query&generator=links&titles=User:Ineuw/Words_to_be_added_8&gpllimit=500&prop=rv
 * You are interested in the "missing="" pages, am I right?--Mpaa (talk) 19:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. :-) Many thanks.— Ineuw talk 22:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry to bother you, but how do I continue running the query past the 1st 500 query limit? The list of missing words exceed that on the pages. — Ineuw talk 23:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You have to replace "&gplimit=500" with the "gplcontinue="3619974|0|vespertilionidæ"" parameter. You have to copy the string that appears on top of the query result in  (see also some help on APIs here):
 * 
 * 
 * 


 * In my scheme of things, this only works without double quotes:
 * 
 * Does this mean that quotes are needed when the string contains spaces? — Ineuw talk 23:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure. I guess the best is trial-and-error and look into the API docs for more info :-(--Mpaa (talk) 12:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Takeover?
Hey again.

In spite of your IRC addictions :) you seem like the logical choice to pick up the slack on some long overdue script-based maintenance. Would you be willing to at least catch us up on the dated-redirect task previously handled by Tal-Bot? -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi GOIII. I can try to back-up Talbot but at least for now I do not feel to take a long term commitment. I started to look into it. My first guess is that I am lacking something or I have not fully grasped all bits of it, as I cannot understand how certain pages in User:TalBot/soft redirect maintenance are generated otherwise. I guess he has some other script to automatically generate those pages and the content. Anyhow, I will give it a try and I will document my output in User:Talbot/soft redirect maintenance directory, following what has been done by him.--Mpaa (talk) 17:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A temporary catch-up would be just fine. Right now, without it, the Special:Orphaned_pages list is becoming overloaded with these lingering tasks (& it keeps growing every month). As far as the generation of those pages go, do your best; but I don't see why documenting them forever was useful in the first place. If there is anything manual that needs doing - just call upon me. Thanks again. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Well I'm down to being handicapped by these soft-redirects again. If you can just whack July 2012 that would cut the orphaned pages list by more than half for me. Any chance you can handle this one more time it being near the end of the month anyway? -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:39, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Mpaa (talk) 22:13, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You da' man. Thanks! -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

A Contribution to the [Tt]heory of Science
Can I trouble you to resolve this duplication please? Hesperian 00:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Popular Science Monthly/Volume 68/March 1906/A Contribution to the theory of Science
 * Popular Science Monthly/Volume 68/March 1906/A Contribution to the Theory of Science
 * ✅ - I kept Popular Science Monthly/Volume 68/March 1906/A Contribution to the Theory of Science, which was the linked one to the Index and TOC of Vol. 68, and them made more sense to me.--Mpaa (talk) 08:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Use of the specially designed font templates for PSM
Hi. I realized that we can't (and shouldn't) change inline font templates because the essential difference of fs75, fs85 and fs90, templates are the line height and the pre and post paragraph spacing.

After doing the first 9 volumes, I came to learn that:


 * fs90 is used for author line as the article subtitle, paragraphs, and poems.
 * fs85 is used stand alone image descriptions, and on a very rare occasion when articles contain 4 or more subtitles and some contrast is wanted.
 * fs75 is used as the article third subtitle.
 * Images inserted in tables have their own 85% font size and 95% line height provided by the ts template parameters.

As always - there are some very exceptions necessitated by the original. — Ineuw talk 01:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Shall I go ahead with the changes? It is not possible for me to discriminate in which situation a template is used (i. e. if it is in the middle of text, which would them be a problem, or not).--Mpaa (talk) 06:25, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply, just connected to WS. There is no problem. Just remove "smaller" and "x-smaller" from the bot change list? You already gave me the list of these font templates in use, and it's no problem for me to check and adjust them manually if needed. Just do whatever is convenient, problem free, and automatic.

PSM fonts
Hi. With the completion of Vol 9, I am focusing on the special fonts like smaller etc. Extracted the list of "smaller" from the .xls file and corrected them to fs75 which was changed from to. They are either encased in the center which is a , or preceded and followed by an empty line, which has the same effect.

Will check fs85 and fs90 tomorrow, as well x-smaller.

Just checked you IA upload. It's not done yet, but it's possible to see that it's being prepared when selecting edit on the left, then selecting the "change information" box and scrolling all the way to the bottom of the page. Take care. — Ineuw talk 09:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Presidential addresses
Hi again,

I think I see you've started to tackle this area and thought I better chime in before you get too far along. The outstanding issue I have with these works has to do with the title naming themselves and, because of that, the subsequent categorization.

President's have been giving weekly addresses for some time now. First by print, then radio, sometimes thru TV and now regularly by podcast. Because of this, the vehicle (print, TV, radio or web) to deliver these should be dropped from the title and probably from the resulting categorization as well.

In order to make these a more uniform & ongoing series (as they are currently compiled for publication by the National Archives and Records Administration in various serial sets) here on en.WS, we probably should be looking towards a more general title scheme - one where the vehicle the address was made in is dropped.

For example, would it be possible to port these from Presidential radio address - July 4, 1999 to something along the lines of President's weekly address of July 4, 1999? -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I am mainly focusing on the Date aspect. I have made sub-categorization by year following your suggestion not to clutter YYYY works, within the present framework. I have no opinion about naming. I guess you are referring to both Page Name and Title.
 * The schema, for what I have seen so far, follows:
 * Presidential Radio Address - 14 September 1996 for the Page and Presidential Radio Address for title, except Obama, who follows:
 * Barack Obama Weekly Address - 15 November 2008 for the Page and a different title for each address (e.g. Rise to the Moment)
 * I agree that it would be better to address everything at the same time. But then I need to have the structure specified by someone as I am not in a position to define one myself, not being familiar on naming convention for US political subjects. Should I put this on-hold until this is sorted out?--Mpaa (talk) 09:11, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I can only wish to change the naming convention. You, on the other hand, are capable of at least fixing the categorization issue by organizing them not to clutter up the year in question overall. I cannot propose then secure the naming change to the community in a timely manner never mind executing it in a bot-like fashion so I say finish what you've started and hopefully we'll come back to this later. One of the frustrating parts of WIkisource'in is that no matter how much I believe to know that I'm "right" on something like this, its unfair and bad precedent to ram through something like this without establishing some sort of concensus first. And following that through to the end would just throw your train of thought off since its something that can't be accomplished in just a day. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:49, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: A Tramp Abroad
Hi. Thanks for your validation of A Tramp Abroad. One thing: replicating exactly the position of the images, even if it looks OK in the Page namespace, does not display the page in a readable way in main namespace. So a small deviation from the original format in spite of a better readability, which is IMHO the ultimate goal, is acceptable. I am going to modify it back. Bye--
 * 1) Oh. Apologies for that. I won't shift any more (Good intentions: See Road, Hell, to)!
 * 2) For future reference, what is the general recommended strategy for floating images? Insert just prior to affected paragraph? last sentence? Or is this one of the "too hard to quantify" cases?
 * 3) I am particularly interested in the best way to handle text flow around "undercut" images, such as appear here, here or here.
 * Regards, MODCHK (talk) 22:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Apologize for the intrusion in this post but felt that I may contribute since there are numerous undercut images in PSM. Normally, they are treated as a regular square image, floating right or left as in the original, where the "under", or "over" cut is ignored. The only way I know how, is to segment an image. There is a single instance of a three segment image which someone assembled in PSM HERE and is a good example on how to go about it. From what I remember, the difficulty was in slicing the image precisely from multiple copies, and then aligning the segments to look as one. — Ineuw talk 01:04, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

More Questions
Hi Mpaa.
 * I hope this doesn't over-stretch your memory: in Page:1880. A Tramp Abroad.djvu/19 the construct occurs repeatedly to no effect I can understand (always appears in front of a right-aligned field, so «I think» is invisible?)
 * I have modified it to to provide a sort-of poor man's dot-leader (probably literal ····· would have been smarter!), but if this runs counter to some effect you were achieving I am happy to revert it.
 * If so, please let me know. MODCHK (talk) 08:34, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. I think I added that to obtain a padding effect, which I was not able obtain in the proper way at that time. As far as the dots are concerned, in that kind of tables, as it is difficult to obtain exactly according to the original, I either avoid them or I try to see if Dotted TOC page listing is applicable.--Mpaa (talk) 08:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that; I had a look at using dotted TOC page listing but found it unsuitable... as best I can figure out the template, the so-called entry-text is hardcoded in the table to be max-width:80% and that just is not wide enough in this case. It actually leaves too much space for the dot-leader and once more the result is not very similar to the printed page. Pity really. MODCHK (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Additional: In case I was too cryptic above, please have a look at Page:1880._A_Tramp_Abroad.djvu/19 for a demonstration (please undo revision if it offends!), as it demonstrates the problem: the Chapter II entry is normal Dotted TOC page listing, and Chapter I is my mutilated version of the template with two new parameters to control relative entry width and alignment (entry-width and entry-align) Regards, MODCHK (talk) 00:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me.--Mpaa (talk) 07:23, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * One more consideration. Do not leave your personal version of the template in the work. If you feel that the template can be improved, post the proposed changes to the template Talk page and leave a post on Scriptorium to make everyone aware of what is happening.--Mpaa (talk) 12:03, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops. I made the change (including backing out the "personal version") yesterday. However I omitted the rather important step you mentioned of making a relevant submission to Scriptorium… I'd better put some thought into a confession! MODCHK (talk) 22:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Default sort
Hi. I can't edit Volume 1 and I don't know how I made this mistake: sort keys doubled. Can you please correct this? Thanks. — Ineuw talk 20:27, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. It was done by me. It was duplicated in the file you sent and I did not realized it. Might then be more errors of this kind as I did not check each and every change. That is one one the reason why I sent you the file :-) --Mpaa (talk) 20:43, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi again. Could you kindly email me a new list, which includes Volume 54, of PSM main namespace articles titles, with categories and their default sort? I messed up a little with both of the above and lost my way since the older list is only to Vol. 53. Many thanks in advance. — Ineuw talk 04:11, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

FYI: new font fs70 for reducing fraction size for over or frac templates

 * I believe that you also used the to reduce fraction size, however this meant that  was defined as an inline template and this caused display problems with the subtitles etc., where I need a paragraph   definition for the template.
 * So, earlier this evening I created a new reduced font & height template for inline use font-size70% aka fs70 and corrected all the over template calls to this inline font size, and I reset the to    . — Ineuw talk 00:40, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Apology
Mpaa, This book is about a favorite subject of mine. I want to complete it alone and read it as I go. Please do not work on my project - my requested book - until I have done all I can including going over it all later and then mark it as "Done". Thank you for this consideration, &mdash; William Maury Morris II  Talk 16:40, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I just touched a couple of Proofread pages. If you think they are not ready, just do not mark as Proofread then. Go ahead with your project, don’t worry, I will not bother you again.--Mpaa (talk) 18:46, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Mpaa, please accept my apology for one of the dumbest things I have ever written. You only did what I often do and have done with your works. I had pushed myself far too long without sleep. That isn't an excuse, it is a fact. I have been sleeping ever since. You didn't do anything wrong but I certainly did. I don't know what I was thinking if I was thinking at all. I recall it felt like I owned a new book (hardback in the real world) and that someone took a pen and marked on pages with ink. In reality you were helping me. I know this now that I have had sleep and I don't refer to average sleep as I cannot sleep at nights and I push through the day as long as possible. I do this because of PTSD and nightmares. I avoid sleep as long as possible and in that I made this very stupid mistake when you were only helping. You will never know how much I regret this mistake but at least now you do have my apology and explanation for offending you in your good work. Too, "Done" is a marking after Validation of all pages! I was too "out of it" to even realize even that at the time. Nobody owns any book on Wikisource. Anyone can edit another book. We both know that. I deeply regret my stupid reaction. Again, I apologize. You are an excellent worker who encountered me as a fool. Kindest regards, &mdash; William Maury Morris II  Talk 00:35, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It’s OK, no problem.--Mpaa (talk) 07:35, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Redirects
Generally it is good practice to leave redirects in place for works that have been in place for an extended period of time, the reasoning is that we need to consider external linking to our works. Redirects are not a draw on the mediawiki system as they are basically links in a special table that quickly flicks the user on to the alternate name. And "oh my giddy aunt" the page Redirects is so old.— billinghurst  sDrewth  23:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not leave redirects as I was fixing Orphans, so I assumed nothing was pointing there. Any way to check external linking?--Mpaa (talk) 10:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Volume information for EB1911
As I am not sure, I copied your question on my talk page to a more central one: Wikisource talk:WikiProject 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica so that others can put in their tuppence worth. -- PBS (talk) 13:27, 24 December 2012 (UTC)