User talk:ShakespeareFan00/Archive1

Page Quality issues
See Also:/Sfan00_IMG

Hello, ShakespeareFan00, welcome to Wikisource! Thanks for your interest in the project; we hope you'll enjoy the community and your work here. If you need help, see our help pages (especially Adding texts and Wikisource's style guide). You can discuss or ask questions from the community in general at the Scriptorium. The Community Portal lists tasks you can help with if you wish. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Sherurcij (talk) (λεμα σαβαχθανει) 14:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Google Books / Print - Public Domain books...
I just realized I had never responded to your note on my talk page. I agree with what Jude said at the Scriptorium. The underlying text is public domain. Although I would not upload a full pdf from them onto Commons, I see no problem trancribing the PD text to wikisource (mechanically or otherwise). Nor do I see a problem copying a original illustration from the scan to a new PD file. Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. is decisive on that issue.--Birgitte SB  19:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Radio
I have added some candidates for featured texts on WS:FTC, and the collaboration projects for the next few weeks have been scheduled at WT:CotW. I suggest putting those two pages on your watchlist, and enabling email notifications in your prefs. The next collab project should provide some very interesting content for a program. -- John Vandenberg (chat) 22:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The Cutters Practical Guide
ShakespeareFan00, I e-mailed the sites owner of where you found The Cutters Practical Guide. I asked her if she had the complete collection. I am hoping to hear back soon. Please leave a message on my talk page if you want to get a hold of me about anything. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 12:58, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hansard
I answered your question at Scriptorium: "I think some of my friends are already working on digitizing and making publicly-available all of the Hansard. See http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/ – Kaihsu (talk) 13:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)" Cheers. – Kaihsu (talk) 13:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Authors

 * (Move log); 21:29 . . ShakespeareFan00 (Talk | contribs | block) Author:John B. Dykes moved to Author:John Bacchus Dykes (Expand inital)
 * I was actually talking on IRC yesterday (were you there?) about our need to do this more often, per library standards, and to reduce errors where we have a redlink to "John F Kennedy" or something. I was thinking of creating a Category:Authors with unidentified initials to put these authorpages into, and then we could collaborate as a group to fix them all up. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Nikola Tesla‎. 21:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Bradshaw


Hey SF, I managed to get that copy of Bradshaw I have scanned in. It's issue XVI from 1843. See File:Bradshaw's_Monthly_(XVI).djvu. Enjoy. :-) Dominic (talk) 14:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The Elements of Euclid
I suggest merging all the information on User:ShakespeareFan00/Elements into The Elements of Euclid. --DavidCary (talk) 12:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I've gone ahead and merged them. ✅.


 * We do have sdelete for use as required. -- billinghurst (talk) 23:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Works belong in main namespace
With Portal:English_Statutes/Titles_%28Ruffhead%29_Hen3._to_Hen6. you have transcribed a work to the portal namespace, and this is not correct. All works should be transcribed to the main namespace as that is where published works live. Portal is a compilation space, see Help:Namespaces. — billinghurst  sDrewth  02:39, 1 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Feel free to move it to an appropriate place :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Collapsing tables
Hi, the tables we have been talking about could look like shown below (start of article). A couple of problems remain: 1. text is bold and centered in columns and 2. references must belong to each collapzible table. The problems probably have to do with CSS, but I thing it could be solved by doing some styling. Regards, --Sir48 (talk) 21:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, this revision of the sandbox is very close to the ideal styling. The problem that remains is borders. Borders are set in each cell and in the table body. Apparently they can't be set with rows/cols. Fixing the borders for headers is comparitively easy since they're few and we'll probably template-ize the code for them anyway. The problem lies with the individual cells. Setting the border for each cell isn't practically feasible. Either we need a workaround that I haven't found yet, or we need to make ourselves content with extra borders for the bodies (not the headings) of the nested tables.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 00:51, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, User:ShakespeareFan00/collapsing tables has been templatified with Template:Table start. Creating good-looking nested tables should be easy with this template. Regards--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 03:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

1380

 * }

 with  ''' and then previewing the work with the change in place. Saving the page with the change in place should not be needed but if you opt to save the page instead of just previewing it, please remember to revert the change soon after your done inspecting the results.

Your questions or comments are welcomed. At the same time I personally urge participants to support this proposed change. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:04, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Sidenotes redux.
I don't know why you can't seem understand that sidenotes cannot be properly implemented until fix-ups occur in both the ProofreadPage extension and the current Dynamic Layout scheme. Oh Sure. You can make it look like the printed page using another bazillion single-work templates, but everything you do now will all have to be undone when those fixes are finally realized. You are actually making more work in the long run.

Please -- for the love of God - find something sidenote free to work on (or just proofread the main body of text, leaving the sidenotes for another day). -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Finally I get the explanation I was needing, that something is actually broken, and its seemingly not worth tying to find an acceptable workaround.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:36, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately that is the sad reality (and I have volumes and volumes of government serials that have sidenotes just collecting dust too; I've been pizzed off about that for years now). btw The above section points to the first step of many to follow to try and get to the root of the problem(s). -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Linked the comments here to the phabricator thread, can remove if needed. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:43, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


 * "Nested divs..." and "sidenotes based on nested divs..." are not exactly the same thing. Please don't confuse the issue anymore than it already it - rem the link to this discussion. Plus the folks at Phabricator aren't going to be able to anything for us until we at least get our house in some sort of "acceptable order" first. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I've reverted the experimental templates in the work they were used in... Do you want me to start rveerting uses of sn-parargaph on a similar basis, albiet that one is documented and notes it cannot be used for multi-paragraphs yet?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:46, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know how far & deep that template'ss usage has been to date. I leave it up to your judgment. -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 3 works. :)
 * Page:1930_QLD_Royal_Commission_into_Racing_Report.djvu/51 I've reverted some, but will go back and put in what are in effect sidetitles as the font style shown in that example. Saves having to re proof the page. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 02:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Calcutta, Past and Present.djvu
Page:Calcutta, Past and Present.djvu/283, which on the Index is 206. The transcription is not the same text as the scan. So far, this is the only one I've found like that. Maile66 (talk) 15:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Which scan are you using, purge first? I've rechecked and there is no issue..16:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Well, it looks perfect now. Strange. Maile66 (talk) 17:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Comment on Vril
You posted on my user page about the work Vril: The Power of the Coming Race; The New Utopia, could you please clarify what this means? :

"Somewhere buried in the Index: namespace was a version of this supported by scans. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)"

--Riadse96 (talk) 19:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Task 86984
The merits aside, where is the local proposal and community consensus agreeing to this -- not only on en.wikisource -- but every sister project possibly effected?

Forgive me if this comes off other than intended but you are way out of line by bringing this to Phabricator without even local notification never mind a formal proposal, etc. taking place here first. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:11, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * This was a completely independent effort made in what was intended to be good faith, based on the fact that the template was found to be incredibly useful.


 * However you make a convincing argument, that this SHOULD have been subject to a local consultation first.


 * On that basis, is there a way to withdraw the task on the basis it's technically out of process? (Even if I withdraw it myself?) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 02:16, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I completely understand and have been chastised more than once for doing exactly the same thing under exactly the assumption of best-interest/good-faith; please - no worries; no need to read into this any further than that. As long as the nuance of thinking before opening a ticket and how it relates locally (or not) sticks with you for the future, then my work is done here. YOU should first the task for yourself, change the priority to normal (or lower) and make sure the security level is set to none before you close the task as invalid. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I've withdrawn them as Declined (for now), as opposed to Invalid... I of course have no objection to them being re-opened if there is further discussion, or interest. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 03:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Right now on what basis do we start the relevant local discussion? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 03:08, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * That is an entirely different matter in my opinion. I, for one, am not in favor of expanding the inline Ts styling scheme without addressing what Tech13 correctly suggested back under the Task after you closed it -- come up with and agree upon the addition of [more] basic HTML table-related class definitions to be applied as a core foundation before altering individual elements with further styling customizations. The ones we have defined now  (MediaWiki:Common.css/Tweaks.css) hardly ever get used as it is so this is a lot more than proposing a conversion of the existing scheme but  prior to a possible "expansion upon" or "conversion of" what is already in place via formal proposal & community consensus. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:30, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Do you have objections to me quoting that on the Scriptorium? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:53, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Overall & in general -- none at all. At this particular moment in time -- I'd rather not crack open that can of worms just yet. HTML Tables, in general, are about to be, if not already, "superseded" by the latest CSS3 specifications so any focus in, on or around anything-HTML table related is putting the cart before the horse. The long standing issue with tables is that they were never meant be used for formatting anything -- even its own contents. Tables were simply meant to organize comma-separated bits of info (think Microsoft Excel here) in a simple, rationale fashion and display them accordingly. But because of previously existing limitations of the Div[ision] element world-wide in addition to the "loss" of flexibility & applicability of sectional heading (H1 thru H5) here specifically in the wiki-world, the Html table has become a "be-all, fix-all" for many situations (that goes 2x for us on WS).  That primary, non-Wiki specific DIV issue has been pretty much been resolved (the caveat being that "old" browsers will never recognize CSS3). Please carefully look over the following - specifically the display:  attribute's value(s) in the inline styling -- for starters:


 * Just copy and paste the above to your favorite sandbox, save and you should see an of a 2 row, 5 column TABLE -- without all that HTML TABLE non-flexibility baggage. And THAT is one of the biggest problems facing Wiki-whatever at this point in time; the over-use/abuse of the HTML TABLE spec for purposes other than intended. Fortunately modern browsers and OS'es recognize CSS3 and the above implementation -- and good reason for us to address issues that will hinder this transition -- both in policy and practice -- before anything else that, in the end, adds to the existing Jenga pile of blocks concerning tables (all of the above is just my-humble-opinion of course - you are free to do whatever however you like). -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * When is the CSS3 standard likely to adopted? because the above seems to be a lot more sensible for some applications, also surely some of this could be wrapped in classes, like Technical13 was suggesting on the closed task?.
 * If it works on the latest versions of Internet Explorer (yes), FireFox (yes), Google Chrome (yes), Safari (yes) -- then consider it adopted. The real-world problem is with folks still using older versions of those browsers in too-high of a percentage wiki-wide. The additional reason we can't do something along those lines (yet) is because Mobile Mode doesn't recognize almost any of the current local & server-fed the desktop-mode CSS definitions as it is (in short: too much, too fast & too soon). -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:59, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

This might and I say might also suggest one solution to the sidenotes issue, at least in terms of 'paragraph' centric sidenotes, it wouldn't be any use for sidenotes that occur mid-paragraph (as I've encountered in the Ruffhead Statutes for example.), However you've previously stated that full sidenotes support is currently blocked by other issues, and I suspect likely to remain so.

Would it at some future date (after consultation) be worth suggesting that the above CSS3 based approach becomes the accepted rendering for tables on Mediawiki, the former HTML methods being deprecated to legacy browser support?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You're killing me here - I explained all this already. Dynamic Layouts, embedded pagenum link-backs, hover highlighting and several other tangent pieces to them all must "die" first (i.e. be totally redesigned) before any of this-thing or that-thing can truly happen. I only managed to get the idea of switching to an all Div-based 'exact replica of the long-time, table-based header template familiar to most regulars just this month. Do you understand how more seemingly inconsequential and/or idiotic refinements still need to be vetted, proposed and implemented to that all-DIV-based header before we can address the next problem in a chain of problems - the auto-footer created that's based on the header template's info? Don't get me started. -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:59, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Leave my work alone
I am aware that this contradicts the spirit and the law of Wikisource, but your 'modus operandi' of butting in, interfering with projects without any in depth assessment, starting and not completing, assigning tasks to people rather than doing them yourself, and then using feeble excuses as to why not, are actions that leave a lot of shit in their wake and irritate me and others to no end. The posts on your talk page on Wikipedia confirm this.

Now, please repair the mess you made HERE, and in the future, regardless of your "acting in good faith", please stay away from me and my work. — Ineuw talk 16:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I can't actually repair or complete that at present as I explained to G03, because MediaWiki wont't let me move a page over the Redirects, which is why I asked for assistance when I did. I flagged the redirects for speedy deletion, which would enable a script to move the remainder of the affected block without hassle.

Next time, I will just simply consider not contributing at all, because according to you I seem to lack the competence to do so effectively. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Re: Next time consult &c.
Obviously you know who I am; as do I when you are (conveniently) not logged-in. Don't lecture me when (with a tiny amount more effort) you could have made your work impeccable should you have taken the minimal effort to document your changes and/or have checked your edits before committing them to "Save."

Pot, kettle: both equally black.

Hypocrite.

I need say no more. The above was unsigned
 * Well I consider the above to be a little unreasonable, we all sometimes forget to log in. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:19, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I've had enough


If I am going to get hassle for reverting what looked like an odd choice, leaving a comment to consult (based on what others have said) then perhaps it's time I stop contributing altogether, once certain projects I'm working on are complete. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * In addition the IP claims I knew which user they are, I didn't and there's no easy to determine it. Fed up ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:24, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Look - I don't know what to tell you here other than it was certainly not me. Again, I was only trying make point so that you would not repeat the mistake in the future. Unfortunately, your mishaps seem to have (directly or indirectly) "opened-up" some long standing frayed nerves at the same. Why don't you take a complete break from WS for a day or two and see if you (and everybody/anybody else) "feel" about "things" then. -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:52, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I feel the same way as GO3. Don't pack up your bags and leave. Take a break and asses the issues brought up. You have access to your history of activities and reflect on it. I did it and it helped. I also have no clue who left you that IP signed message. Just ignore it. — Ineuw talk 15:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * In respect of the Lillypond issue, see the discussion on the Scriptorium... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * The 'Lillypond issue' and all your past questions of similar nature are good examples of your lack of faith in your own work. Has anyone complained? Has anyone told you to do otherwise, because it's wrong? Personally, I think it's a great job to have both because they are distinctly different. Trust me that if it was wrong, you would be told sooner or later with an explanation! My strong feeling is that aside from the issue of lack of faith, you have a need and desire for feedback and contact. Well, you are in the wrong place for that. By the very nature and definition of this place and our work negate that. Facebook etc. would probably be a better place for that.— Ineuw talk 15:44, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * The discussion on the Scriptorium on the Lillypond issue, was because I DID trust my own working, but wanted a second opinion more generally, as other works of a similar nature may be affected. (I also refer the Honourable Contributor to some comments made a few posts up.)ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Pursuit of this subject is just another fine example of your indulging in what I outlined above. Don't fish for second opinions and pats in the back. You won't get it. They are time consuming and meaningless, just like the continuation of this post.— Ineuw talk 16:54, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Well you've made your point. Discussion terminated.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Index:Physical Geography of the Sea and its Meteorology.djvu - ShakespeareFan00, Thank you !
ShakespeareFan00, I am very glad that you took your time and have helped me with proofreading pages on this project as you have with other projects. Seriously, don't let any online bullying get to you. You do good work. I know from watching over a few of years as well as assisting you on some of your works. You are valuable in helping others who don't know every thing that needs to be known. None of us knows that much and none of us is better than the next person. We all just know some different things. WS and WP isn't all that constitutes real life -- far from it -- it is more of a place for loners who want something to cling to and yet something worthy to do. —Maury (talk) 21:50, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * And I've found some coding errors I made 2-5 years ago which no-one including me noticed :(

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * My thanks also for the effort you have made in page-checking of the works added by me. You are possibly the only worker in that department, and this kind of work also has great value. I have corrected the faults you have pointed out in those works and your efforts are welcome in my projects. Hrishikes (talk) 01:50, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

