Wikisource:Comparisons

Comparative pages
The main namespace can be used to show different versions of the same work on the same page for comparison. However, each version should be clearly labelled and no attempt should be made to misguide the reader.

General notes
If necessary, information for the reader can be given in the header template's  field, or through footnotes or similar system. The comparative texts do not need to be annotated, however; they can be presented to the reader without comment, leaving conclusions to be drawn independently.

Serial comparison
The easiest method of comparison is to put each version in series, under different headings. The headings can be used to indicate the version of the text being used for comparison. This is more appropriate for shorter works and for comparing more than two versions.

For example:

1850 British version
Foo Bar Baz

1901 American version
Foo Bar Baz

1920 Australian version
Foo Bar Baz

Parallel comparison
A slightly more complicated method of comparison is to show two (or possible more) works in parallel, alongside each other. This allows individual lines to be easily compared with each other in addition to the comparison between the works as whole.

This can be done in two ways. First, tables can be used to hold the two works in the correct layout. Second, if you a re familiar with HTML, .. tags can be used to create the same effect.

This is more appropriate for slightly longer works. It may not work well if more than two works are being compared, however.

For example:

Examples

 * The Book of Obadiah, Chapter 1: Verse 3, a serial comparison of Obadiah 1:3.
 * Elegy II Comparative text, a parallel comparison of a 1633 and a 1896 version of John Donne's poem "Elegy II".


 * Another use of comparisons to evaluate OCR qualities: [//en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zyephyrus/Two_versions_of_Poetics&oldid=4298592 see here].