Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2019-10

Is Wikisource no longer getting indexed by Google and other search engines?
Several recently-created pages seem to be completely absent from Google. If I search for the complete title, and even add "site:wikisource.org", Google comes up with nothing. I see the same with Bing.

For example, I tried searching for "Ritual of the Order of the Eastern Star", which is currently at the top of the "New Texts" section of the front page, and again nothing (the index file comes up, but not the actual Wikisource text).

Has Wikisource done something to deter indexing, such as the use of a robots.txt file? If so, why? It makes Wikisource content harder to find, which is surely inimical to the success of the project. Grover cleveland (talk) 09:48, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've done some more digging, using the Works/2019 page. Notes on the Ornithology of Oxfordshire, Aplin 1899-1900 (added August 1st, so more than two months old) appears to be absent from Google.  Other (older) pages that link to it are hit, though.  It appears that Google isn't indexing newly-created pages, but is continuing to update its indices of older pages. Grover cleveland (talk) 10:12, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Copyright and deletion discussions needing community input in October 2019
The following copyright discussions and proposed deletions discussions have been open for more than 14 days, and with more than 14 days since the last comments, without a clear consensus having emerged. This is typically (but not always) because the issue is not clear cut or revolves around either interpretation of policy, personal preference within the scope afforded by policy, or other judgement calls (possibly in the face of imperfect information). In order to resolve these discussions it would be valuable with wider input from the community.

Copyright discussions require some understanding of copyright and our copyright policy, but often the sticking points are not intricate questions of law so one need not be an intellectual property lawyer to provide valuable input (most actual copyright questions are clear cut, so it's usually not these that linger). For other discussions it is simply the low number of participants that makes determining a consensus challenging, and so any further input on the matter would be helpful. In some cases, even "I have no opinion on this matter" would be helpful in that it tells us that this is a question the community is comfortable letting the generally low number of participants in such discussions decide.


 * Copyright discussions
 * Philosophical Writings: Translators modern unpublished translation, or possible gifted translation
 * Apostille Convention
 * File:Flag of ASEAN.svg
 * Index:Civil Rights Movement EL Text.pdf
 * Act of State Independence of the Republic of Abkhazia
 * Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing


 * Proposed deletions
 * Offences Against The Person Act, 1861 (repealed)
 * Historic American Engineering Record - Boston Elevated Railway Company photographs and information
 * Template:Chart
 * Epic of Gilgamesh
 * Huon of Burdeux
 * Airasia flight QZ 8501 passenger manifest
 * Old transcription efforts...
 * Template:Ledger
 * Template:Cl-act-p
 * Template:Hymn/header
 * AWK Language Programming

Note that while these are discussions that have lingered the longest without resolution, all discussions on these pages would benefit from wider input. Even if you just agree with everyone else on an obvious case, noting your agreement documents and makes obvious that fact in a way the absence of comments does not. The same reasoning applies for noting your dissent even if everyone else has voted otherwise: it is good to document that a decision was not unanimous.

In short, I encourage everyone to participate in these two venues! --Xover (talk) 09:21, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Copyright and deletion discussions needing community input in November 2019
The following copyright discussions and proposed deletions discussions have been open for more than 14 days, and with more than 14 days since the last comments, without a clear consensus having emerged. This is typically (but not always) because the issue is not clear cut or revolves around either interpretation of policy, personal preference within the scope afforded by policy, or other judgement calls (possibly in the face of imperfect information). In order to resolve these discussions it would be valuable with wider input from the community.

Copyright discussions require some understanding of copyright and our copyright policy, but often the sticking points are not intricate questions of law so one need not be an intellectual property lawyer to provide valuable input (most actual copyright questions are clear cut, so it's usually not these that linger). For other discussions it is simply the low number of participants that makes determining a consensus challenging, and so any further input on the matter would be helpful. In some cases, even "I have no opinion on this matter" would be helpful in that it tells us that this is a question the community is comfortable letting the generally low number of participants in such discussions decide.


 * Copyright discussions
 * Philosophical Writings: Translators modern unpublished translation, or possible gifted translation
 * File:Flag of ASEAN.svg
 * Index:Civil Rights Movement EL Text.pdf
 * Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing


 * Proposed deletions
 * Offences Against The Person Act, 1861 (repealed)
 * Template:Modern
 * Template:Chart
 * Huon of Burdeux
 * Airasia flight QZ 8501 passenger manifest
 * Template:Ledger
 * Template:Cl-act-p
 * Template:numbered div family
 * AWK Language Programming

Note that while these are discussions that have lingered the longest without resolution, all discussions on these pages would benefit from wider input. Even if you just agree with everyone else on an obvious case, noting your agreement documents and makes obvious that fact in a way the absence of comments does not. The same reasoning applies for noting your dissent even if everyone else has voted otherwise: it is good to document that a decision was not unanimous.

In short, I encourage everyone to participate in these two venues! --Xover (talk) 09:21, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-41
 Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes
 * Octicons-tools.svg The abuse filter function now has a faster parser. This is to shorten the waiting time when you save an edit.

Problems Changes later this week Meetings
 * There is a problem in the visual editor when you copy or delete text with footnotes. It will be fixed soon.
 * Octicons-sync.svg The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 8 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 9 October. It will be on all wikis from 10 October (calendar).
 * Octicons-sync.svg Octicons-tools.svg You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 9 October at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes
 * The Community Wishlist Survey has a new format. It will focus on wikis that typically get less support. It will probably go back to the normal format next year. It is not decided exactly how it will work this year. You can leave feedback.
 * The URL of the Wikimedia wiki main pages could be changed. This is because the current URLs cause several problems. For example  would be   instead. You can tell the developers if this would cause problems for your wiki.
 * There is a new technical community newsletter. You can read more about the work of Wikimedia's technical community. Subscribe to get the information in the future.
 * Octicons-tools.svg Outreachy is an internship program for groups who are underrepresented in free and open-source software. There are seven Wikimedia projects about coding, documentation and quality assurance in the next round. Persons who fit the criteria can apply. The last day to apply is 5 November.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.  15:34, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment: Are drop by copy and pastes still in scope?
When an IP address decides to copy and paste a text from an unknown source, eg. as was done at Turandot, in this time do we still consider these in scope per What Wikisource includes. To me, I think that we are past the point of just being an ugly text paste factory, and the work that it entails for others to curate and manage texts that are of unknown sources, and unable to be proofread further. If it was a registered editor, then I would normally follow up and see what is possible, though IP addresses are just problematic. — billinghurst  sDrewth  20:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * If we were to consider these out of scope, where would you draw the line between copydump and legitimate text? Would you consider any text added by an IP without a clearly identified source to be out of scope? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:03, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I wonder if it would be possible / beneficial to implement something like Commons' Upload Wizard, to push new users towards adding texts properly (i.e. with scans), while still leaving the regular methods available to those who know where to look, or take the time to find it. It is not foolproof but would possibly cut down on this type of drive by edits. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 21:08, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * here is a scan (does not appear to match) https://archive.org/details/turandotprincess00volluoft -- it’s unclear to me if a wizard will push this editor. don’t know if his periodic dumps rise to the level of nuisance, but yrmv. we could use some FAQ on boarding for new editors, and landing page and a welcome wagon. Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge 02:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I am looking at a reasonable means for an administrator to look at a work and call it irretrievable, ugly high maintenance. I am not necessarily looking to  be hard-arsed belligerent about works that we can suitably manage or retrieve, or where we can have a conversation with the contributor. I am looking at Turandot should give you an indicator of no source, and paste factory. If we can have a fast manage section within {{WS:PD]] rather than an indeterminate, laborious consideration, then I am fine with that.  I just want a way to better cleanse. — billinghurst  sDrewth  10:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I absolutely agree with Billinghurst that our standards should be higher than just accepting any old copydump absent an explicit policy reason that prevents us from hosting it. In fact, I think our standards should be higher in any number of ways, but that's outside the scope of this discussion.{{parabr}}Factors that weigh in favour of keeping something are: scan available, index in place, source clearly provided, plausible license tagging, at least minimal formatting, and posted by a registered user (vs. an IP). Consequently, things that weigh towards not accepting a text are absence of scan and index, no clearly discernible source, no license tagging or incorrect or implausible license tags, and lack of Wiki formatting especially actual incorrect formatting (e.g. the big grey boxes visible in Turandot), and posted by an IP or a user with no or few other contribs.{{parabr}}I think there should be some room to exercise judgement on these, weighing the totality of the above factors, and direct policy grounds for rejecting them (presumably a speedy criteria). Anything that has a reasonable chance of being improved to current standards should heavily favour being accepted; so, e.g., anything with a scan and Index posted by a registered user would be highly unlikely to be rejected on these grounds even if the text has multiple other problems. On the flip side, something with no formatting and lots of problems, with no or unclear source, missing or implausible license, and not posted by a registered user would be very likely to be rejected.{{parabr}}For something like this we should probably have an explicit "challenge + review" type process, where the work in question is automatically restored and moved to full community discussion at WS:PD.{{parabr}}I don't think WS:WWI is a particularly good policy hook to hang this on as a lot of crappy cut&paste jobs would be in scope if cleaned up. Better thus to have a speedy criteria with explicit built-in community review when challenged. If the uploader actually bothers initiating a challenge that fact on its own weighs in the work's favour (demonstrates interest in and willingness to work within the parameters of the project) the same way being a registered user does. --Xover (talk) 11:17, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * yeah. agree with assessment. but unclear about action plan. i would suggest an assessment, triage, put into maintenance category for further work, taskflow. it is unclear to me that WWI with a deletion task is preferable to "included but ignored / not supported / worked on" -- Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge 13:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I think a reasonable standard would be: if no one can figure out the source of a text dump, we delete it. Otherwise, no verification of it will ever be possible. Kaldari (talk) 21:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-42
 Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes
 * You can now use more advanced editing tools on the mobile web. You can turn them on and off in your preferences in the mobile version.

Changes later this week
 * Octicons-sync.svg The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 15 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 16 October. It will be on all wikis from 17 October (calendar).

Meetings
 * Octicons-sync.svg Octicons-tools.svg You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 16 October at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes
 * Internet Explorer 6 and 7 are no longer supported. This means the browsers might start looking a bit weird. They will not get security support. You can't read Wikimedia wikis in Internet Explorer on Windows XP or Windows versions that are older than Windows XP. This is because almost no one uses the browsers anymore. Supporting them made the wikis less secure for everyone else.
 * In the future section headings might have a share link. This is to make it easier to link to the section. You can read more and discuss.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.  23:32, 14 October 2019 (UTC)


 * By the way, and unrelated to this particular "Tech News" issue, but still possibly relevant to be aware of is T234576. The WMF have recently removed  from , and the replacement is  . This affects all Gadgets and user scripts that still use the former, and will show up as either an error message (in scripts with well-written error handling) or a silent failure when a script attempts to change a wiki page. In almost all cases the fix should be simply replacing the former token with the latter. --Xover (talk) 06:18, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Feedback wanted on Desktop Improvements project
. The Readers Web team at the WMF will work on some improvements to the desktop interface over the next couple of years. The goal is to increase usability without removing any functionality. We have been inspired by changes made by volunteers, but that currently only exist as local gadgets and user scripts, prototypes, and volunteer-led skins. We would like to begin the process of bringing some of these changes into the default experience on all Wikimedia projects.

We are currently in the research stage of this project and are looking for ideas for improvements, as well as feedback on our current ideas and mockups. So far, we have performed interviews with community members at Wikimania. We have gathered lists of previous volunteer and WMF work in this area. We are examining possible technical approaches for such changes.

We would like individual feedback on the following:


 * Identifying focus areas for the project we have not yet discovered
 * Expanding the list of existing gadgets and user scripts that are related to providing a better desktop experience. If you can think of some of these from your wiki, please let us know
 * Feedback on the ideas and mockups we have collected so far

We would also like to gather a list of wikis that would be interested in being test wikis for this project - these wikis would be the first to receive the updates once we’re ready to start building.

When giving feedback, please consider the following goals of the project:


 * Make it easier for readers to focus on the content
 * Provide easier access to everyday actions (e.g. search, language switching, editing)
 * Put things in logical and useful places
 * Increase consistency in the interface with other platforms - mobile web and the apps
 * Eliminate clutter
 * Plan for future growth

As well as the following constraints:


 * Not touching the content - no work will be done in terms of styling templates or to the structure of page contents themselves
 * Not removing any functionality - things might move around, but all navigational items and other functionality currently available by default will remain
 * No drastic changes to the layout - we're taking an evolutionary approach to the changes and want the site to continue feeling familiar to readers and editors

Please give all feedback (in any language) at mw:Talk:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements

After this round of feedback, we plan on building a prototype of suggested changes based on the feedback we receive. You’ll hear from us again asking for feedback on this prototype.

Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 07:15, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Proposed update to template:header
There has been a discussion about adding some parameters to the header to capture contributors to sections/subpages of works, and to create synonyms to have more generic parameters available. The proposed changes are at template talk:header. Flagging this prior to implementation in case anyone sees problems or has major issues that should stop moving forward. — billinghurst  sDrewth  21:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * --Xover (talk) 08:52, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , I do miss the section translator in the template. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 17:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Fully validated indexes that aren't transcluded
Here are the 36 fully validated indexes that are not properly transcluded into main space (based on bot data): Some of these have no transcluded content at all, some of them are partially transcluded, and some of them have more fundamental problems like incomplete indexes. If anyone wants to work on them, go for it! Kaldari (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Index:"The Mummy" Volume 1.djvu
 * Index:06-24-1920 -The Story of the Jones County Calf Case.pdf
 * Index:1909 sep 18 gk chesterton002.jpg
 * Index:1930 QLD Royal Commission into Racing Report.djvu
 * Index:2018-09-24 Kavanaugh to Grassley - Kavanaugh Nomination.pdf
 * Index:Adelaide Contents.pdf
 * Index:Aircraft Accident Investigation - Varney Air Transport - 1 May 1935.pdf
 * Index:Aviation Accident Report - Mercury Chic crash on 22 June 1935.pdf
 * Index:Baron Trump's marvellous underground journey.pdf
 * Index:CC BY 2.0 deed.pdf
 * Index:Certification of the electors of the state of Delaware, 03-06-1789 - NARA - 306213.jpg
 * Index:Cordell Hull to Joseph Kennedy - NARA - 194940
 * Index:Cordell Hull to Winston Churchill - NARA - 194930
 * Index:Erotica.djvu
 * Index:Felicia Hemans in The Christmas Box, 1829.pdf
 * Index:Felicia Hemans in The New Monthly Magazine Volume 34 1832.pdf
 * Index:Ford, Kissinger, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin - September 13, 1974(Gerald Ford Library)(1552787).pdf
 * Index:Goddard papers - goddarddec151916.djvu
 * Index:Grouville mines 1940.djvu
 * Index:Letter to the Sub Inspector of Police Roma Street.pdf
 * Index:News, West Coast Times, Tuesday January 8, 1889.gif
 * Index:OTTO WEININGER (THEODOR LESSING) english translation.pdf
 * Index:SASC Iraq OIF Decker April 2004.pdf
 * Index:Scientific American - Series 1 - Volume 001 - Issue 01.pdf
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 04.djvu
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 05.pdf
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 06.djvu
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 07.djvu
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 08.djvu
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 35.djvu
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 36.djvu
 * Index:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 37.djvu
 * Index:Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc.pdf
 * Index:Three hundred Aesop's fables (Townshend).djvu
 * Index:Treatise on Soap Making.djvu
 * Index:United Nations Resolution No. 69-131 (International Day of Yoga).djvu
 * Here's a PetScan link for future reference: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=12253885 (also dibs on Townshend) —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:43, 16 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Which is why I generated the petscan queries ages ago, see User:Billinghurst (note that some need to be retweeked, as Magnus's petscan v.2 made his fields case sensitive for initial character (-> category and templates), and I had hoped that he would fix that issue) and why I generally get around to transcluding these at the end of each months, though Southern Historical Society Papers is a massive job, and it is taking me forever to work through Index:Dictionary of Indian Biography.djvu. — billinghurst  sDrewth  21:53, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Index:Dictionary of Indian Biography.djvu can be mostly automated, if you are interested, feel free to ping me.Mpaa (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Esme Shepherd can be pinged on her non-transcluded works as she is currently active. — billinghurst  sDrewth  21:53, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you both for your efforts in making this info more accessible. Much appreciated. -Pete (talk) 21:57, 16 October 2019 (UTC)


 * As I have noted on my talk page, 'Index:Adelaide Contents.pdf' was transcluded 17.5.2017. 'Index:Felicia Hemans in The Christmas Box, 1829.pdf' and 'Index:Felicia Hemans in The New Monthly Magazine Volume 34 1832.pdf' have been done today. Esme Shepherd (talk) 20:35, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Translations and source tabs
Why do translations not have a "Source" tab? For example: Translation:Sleeping Beauty, which is transcluded from Index:La bella durmiente del bosque.djvu. Kaldari (talk) 17:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Good question. Perhaps knows? --Xover (talk) 17:43, 15 October 2019 (UTC)


 * It's a known issue that has been outstanding since 2013 (i.e. when the Translation namespace was created), see T53980 —Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:46, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * because Translate: ns. was our add-on, and it probably never got coded in. Presumably there needs to be some connection the &lt;page> building to know that it adds the /proofreadpage_source\ tab to the Translation: ns. when it transcludes pages.
 * plugins/gitiles/mediawiki/extensions/ProofreadPage/+/master/ProofreadPage.body.php
 * plugins/gitiles/mediawiki/extensions/ProofreadPage/+/master/modules/article/ext.proofreadpage.article.js
 * I am not a coder so don't expect me to make it. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:40, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Duplicated proofreading status with Visual Editor
Hi! When creating a page, without any other change (just saving the content as is), if using the Visual Editor then the proofreading status is created twice (e.g. this page). Any idea? Is it a known bug, perhaps? It happens in other Wikisources as well. Thanks! -Aleator (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Found: T202200 —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:10, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Not being solved for 1 year and 2 months… How typical. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:40, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * yes, it is apparently having a status for header and status for body; status not easy to update in VE. could add to wishlist. Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge 00:21, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It would seem that it is still physically adding text  to the header, whereas the text is no longer actually added any more as it was melded into the page content model.  I would have thought that it could have been a fairly easy fix. I would suggest that you bang on about the problem on the phabricator ticket, and ping some of the VE developers.. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Somewhere in /plugins/gitiles/mediawiki/extensions/ProofreadPage/+/master/modules/ve/pageTarget/ve.init.mw.ProofreadPagePageTarget.js and looking for "quality" to see where it adds the tag to the header, and presumably we want to see where it also sits in the new content model. The version presumably in the header needs to go, and ensure that VE changes the content in the other when it edits. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:46, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-43
 Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes
 * Octicons-tools.svg' prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.]] The API sandbox and help pages now show more clearly when API modules are marked as . API modules marked as internal were probably internal before. It was easier to miss. You should look for non-internal alternatives.

Problems
 * There is a translation tool we use on wikis with more than one language. For a few days it did not create pages for new languages when someone translated a page. The languages did not show in the language bar. This has been fixed.
 * The history and diffs can show wrong content. This is because of a cache problem. It will soon be fixed.

Changes later this week
 * Octicons-sync.svg The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 22 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 23 October. It will be on all wikis from 24 October (calendar).
 * Reference Previews will be a beta feature on all Wikipedias and some Wikivoyages. It shows you a preview of the footnote when you hover over or click on the number. It has been a beta feature on German and Arabic Wikipedia since April.

Meetings
 * Octicons-sync.svg Octicons-tools.svg You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 23 October. See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.  14:18, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Projects from Community Wishlist — skates time
I am reliably informed that it would be beneficial for English Wikisource to think about and plan for projects from the community wishlist, either tidying them up, or extrapolating on them, and to maybe start thinking and planning very soon, or maybe right now. Picking the best and generating a case why they are good projects with excellent outcomes.

Previous years suggestions that have been classified as Wikisource-focused can be seen at and of course some of the more general improvements can work for us as well.
 * Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Wikisource
 * Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Wikisource
 * Community Wishlist Survey 2015/Wikisource

What is it that we truly want that will make our editing lives better? What is it that will make our sites truly better? What is special about our sites that could and should be better to make us better? more integrated? better findable? Let us think how we can generate benefits, and what are the benefits, rather than just think features.

Building relationships within the broader Wikimedia can be advantageous, especially if we listen. — billinghurst  sDrewth  09:43, 15 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Community Wishlist Survey 2020/Wikisource is officially open. Submit, discuss and revise proposals: October 21 to November 11, 2019

Comments

 * Sidenotes and Layouts. We have had discussion here and never had solutions to building sidenotes from works, especially in the migration from a portrait page, to a landscape and wide computer monitor, and also onto a small mobile device.  Aligned with that is the toggled layouts that were designed in prehistoric web time, and never fully functioned with sidenotes. So I would love to see if we can have some global work done on our CSS, as it is a true weakness for us.  It also flows through to how we present in mobiles, and don't have good use of scripting means to present works in a known universal means, nor easy ability to check. So I would like for one consideration for a project is to look at the output of ProofreadPage to various devices and the compatibility of our CSS to do that well. Whether this then flows to other outputs as EPUB, and other portable document formats would be interesting. — billinghurst  sDrewth  10:04, 15 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Visual Editor, user experience design as mentioned at Wikimania,News/2019-09/Wikisource_at_Wikimania visual editor came to wikisource, but is not used because the menus are based on wikipedia. a UX refresh based on some user feedback would improve functionality. Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge 13:59, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you wanting additional menus, or the ability to swap out menus? (as a non-user of VE, I am not much use here). — billinghurst  sDrewth  22:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * i am less interested in customizing, since i use wikitext, and it would be too many choices. i tried testing it out, but it rarely helped me do what i wanted to do. it does some things well, like "find and replace", and showing line breaks. but we need a standard menu layout, based on frequent workflows and tasks. i am suggesting that until a menu redesign is done, based on newbie workflow, there will be little take-up. a regrettable lost opportunity. Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge 19:12, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

--Jan Kameníček (talk) 09:22, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * OCR tool. As it has been discussed in many places, Phe's OCR tool has been out of service for many months and there is no hope it will be repaired in some reasonable time. The other available OCR tools do not work satisfactorily: either the quality is bad or they are slow. The new tool that we need should (please add more points):
 * be open for repairs and maintenance, so that the whole community did not have to rely on availability of a single volunteer
 * provide good quality OCR text, comparable with the Phe's tool or better
 * be quick
 * be able to recognize text in columns (e. g. in magazines or newspapers)
 * be able to recognize foreign characters and diacritics
 * Most OCR tools recognize and mark bold and italicized text. If one is being created specially for WS, have it transform that into proper quote-markup. Right now, that information is lost entirely in the output. --Levana Taylor (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not completely thrilled about marking bold; especially in much of the text we work on, bold is more often just an OCR error or something that should be marked up in a different way than something that should actually be marked bold.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:45, 22 October 2019 (UTC)


 * OCR extraction from PDFs. Existing OCR text layer is very poorly extracted from PDF files here, although other applications like Acrobat extract it much better. Interestingly, the OCR extraction improves when the file format is changed into .djvu. We need to be able to extract OCR layer in the original quality directly from PDFs. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 09:30, 22 October 2019 (UTC)


 * PDF/A support, as described at Phabricator. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 09:31, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * yes, please put OCR on wishlist. the backlog of "Text Layer Requested" requiring use of OCR button is long. <font face="Vijaya">Slowking4 ⚔ <span lang="de-Latf" style="font-family:UnifrakturMaguntia, UnifrakturCook, Unifraktur, serif">Rama's revenge 19:18, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Curly quote templates
I’m pleased to read that typographic quotes are now allowed.

One approach for editors who don't have them on their keyboards would be to create specific templates. E.g. sq could have variants like sqs (single quotes, straight) and sqc (sq, curly).

Alternately, would there be some way to have the quotes in special subpages so that something like "Name of file.djvu/dq/begin" contains the single character  and have a template that transcludes that? You could then switch the quote style for an entire work with just 4 edits.

Opinions?

Pelagic (talk) 12:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Would having a selection of them in the editing toolbar be sufficient? Templates for basic characters are fiddly and tend to look pretty cluttered in the code. --Xover (talk) 13:40, 15 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Could be a user option to move them out of the "Symbols" section of Special Characters to a more prominent location. Anyone up for writing an option to allow someone to place a customized set of special characters in the main editing toolbar? On second thought, there is already a gadget for keyboard shortcuts for accented characters. Easy to add quotes to that. Levana Taylor (talk) 15:30, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm, the gadget sounds good, so I have added it in my preferences now, but I cannot find anywhere whether there are any default shortcuts for some characters or how to add new shortcuts… Is there any documentation or help page about it? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 16:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * We can also resurrect dq and similar templates. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Adding templates sounds as though we are encouraging their use. I wasn't aware that this was the plan of the community with the change. — billinghurst  sDrewth  03:29, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the ship has sailed … the idea of allowing curly quotes was greeted with enthusiasm by about 8 out of 10 commenters, so those same people will be busy converting texts, and it’s all to the good to facilitate doing so neatly and completely. Levana Taylor (talk) 04:17, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, the issue here was perhaps more in regards using templates, specifically, for the quote marks. I don't think that's something we should encourage in the general case (with exceptions for special cases, including those where templates are the only reasonably efficient way for a given contributor to use curly quotes). All templates clutter the text in edit mode to some degree, and here we have a multiple-character expansion (6:1) that will occur tens of times on each page. It may even be enough to be a bona fide technical problem in a long quote-heavy work when you transclude a few hundred such pages into mainspace (cf. the issues with dotted toc lines).For preference we should look to other methods to allow contributors to enter these characters, such as toolbar buttons (but at least one contributor does not use the 2010 wikitext editor or the 2017 wikitext editor), or OS/browser/keyboard-native input methods (but some OS and keyboards make that unreasonably hard). So we may need such templates for those outlier cases, but in that case we should label them accordingly as a stop-gap measure and possibly also run a continuous bot task to substitute them for the actual characters (on enwp they run a bot that automatically substs all instances of templates where the template is tagged as "must be subst:ed" that we could probably coopt for this purpose if needed). --Xover (talk) 04:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I say no to templates. If people wish to do this less preferred means, then they can learn how to use all the means to add non-keyboard characters, or to use their User: drop down on their edittools set up. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:21, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I also say no to templates. We have worked on removing the need for character templates (such as ae), so adding them for the various quote marks would be counter to our intentions. In terms of me being the main contributor who does not use either of the wikitext editors, don't initiate something specifically for me. I recognise that I am unusual in this regard. Currently things are working for me just fine without them. If I choose to work on a book in which curly quotes have been decided on, then I will add the characters to my User set in CharInsert and enter them that way. [Of course, works that I bring in and start working on will use straight quotes only.] Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:05, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, if you don't use them then it is likely that there may be more who choose not use them. I'm not saying this should be a dealbreaker for any solution we contemplate—like very old web browsers, at a certain point you just can't keep supporting them—but it would behoove us to keep the issue in mind and cater for it when reasonably possible. We want to increase the pool of contributors and make the bar to entry lower, `cause we sure ain't spoilt for folks willing to do the work! :) --Xover (talk) 06:20, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Huh??? To whom are you directing this remark? The whole purpose of simple quotation marks is exactly for this purpose of simple editing, and why we have the style guide set as it is. The whole damn thing has been set for simplicity. In the past few years, it is the newer users who have been hyping things up trying to have exact replicas of works. The dinosaurs have long argued "KISS" and aligned with the simpler styles. — billinghurst  sDrewth  11:31, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I was responding to Beeswaxcandle's "Don't worry about me, I'll make do" by saying he's probably not the only one with that particular setup and if we can cater to it without excessive cost then we should cater to it. Recruiting new contributors is one thing, but it's equally important not to lose existing contributors (by making it harder or more frustrating for them to contribute). And in saying that I am merely stating general principles, not advocating any particular solution. But as an example (and only an example), by having a bot that automatically subst:s quote mark templates we could have our cake and eat it too: anybody that prefers it or needs it can enter them using templates, but the bot will replace them with the actual characters within minutes so that the presence of such templates in the work is only temporary. But, again, not a proposed thing we should actually do; just an example to illustrate the sort of thing that we might want to consider when the situation warrants. --Xover (talk) 14:00, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, if a template shall be allowed, it should be clear that can be replaced any time by a bot.Mpaa (talk) 22:02, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It's all very good to say no to templates, but quote templates such as dq and " ' have been around for years and are in common use throughout the site. It is not a question of encouraging their use, but rather of tolerating their continued use. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Updated Module:WikidataIB
Hi to all. I have imported the newest version of this module that enables complex connections to WD and predominantly supplies data for our infobox equivalents (headers/footers) from WD items. Since we imported the script a year ago it has almost doubled in size, which would indicate increased potential for pulling data. I also imported the documentation page, so we should hopefully be able to see what functionality differences are listed in the help page (hoping!). If someone sees something of a useful nature that allows us to do more from the documentation, then please do speak up. I have protected the page as we should be inhaling the standard, stable version from Commons/enWP rather than fiddling with it locally. — billinghurst  sDrewth  03:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-44
<section begin="technews-2019-W44"/> Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes
 * You can post proposals for the Community Wishlist Survey. The survey decides what the Community Tech team will work on. You can post proposals until 11 November. You can vote on proposals from 20 November to 2 December. This year the wishlist will focus on Wikibooks, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikisource, Wikiversity, Wikispecies, Wikivoyage and Wikinews. You can read more about the format for this year.
 * Mobile users now have a specific design for their Watchlist.
 * You can share feedback and ideas on the Desktop Improvements project. The goal is to make the interface easier to use for readers and editors without removing any functionality. The Foundation's Readers Web team will work on this over the next two years.
 * Octicons-tools.svg OOUI now allows using  (pixels) instead of   (em) for some specific cases.

Changes later this week
 * Octicons-sync.svg The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from . It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from . It will be on all wikis from (calendar).

Meetings
 * Octicons-sync.svg Octicons-tools.svg You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes
 * There will be no software changes from 19 December to 2 January. The first MediaWiki version next year will come the week of 6 January.
 * Octicons-tools.svg Gadgets and user scripts can access variables about the current page in JavaScript. In 2015, this information was moved from global variables named  to  . The old global variables will be removed later this year. You can know more about it and tell the developers if you want to try this out on your wiki first.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe. <section end="technews-2019-W44"/> 16:09, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

PDF to wikitext import
For PDFs with embedded text (i.e. not requiring OCR) what's the simplest way getting the text of a PDF in commons converted to wikimarkup? Apologies if I'm missing an obvious help page, but I've not been able to find it. Evolution and evolvability (talk) 05:08, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * See Help:Adding texts. You create an index for the work, then proofread (transcribe and format) each page, which is eventually transcluded together into a reader-visible page in mainspace. Don't hesitate to ask if you need assistance. --Xover (talk) 06:15, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think the bit I am confused by is "The text field may be blank or it might have been automatically filled with the text of that page". If uploading a PDF equivalent to e.g. this, how much of the formatting would be automatically extracted into wikitext? Evolution and evolvability (talk) 10:34, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not entirely sure that document is in scope for Wikisource (we primarily host previous published works). But in any case, what you get out depends on what you put into the PDF file's text layer. You will not normally get any formatting at all, just plain text output. The process we call "Proofreading" involves not just correcting typos (scannos) and such, but also adding wiki formatting (wikifying). For example, page 2 of your example PDF contains this text layer (line-breaks and all):

Wikimedia Journals APPLICATION TO FOUND A NEW SISTER PROJECT

Background Public trust in Wikipedia is high, yet it has long struggled to gain reputation and engage academic/expert communities. Similarly, the quality of much of its content is superior to other encyclopedias, yet highly variable from page to page. As well as the first stop for information, what if Wikimedia could also be the last stop in some cases with content considered sufficiently trustworthy to be citable? The process of independent peer review by external experts is a foundation of robust quality-control for information. This is what we have started to achieve with the WikiJournal project. After hundreds of years, academic publishing is finally undergoing a rapid transformation. The Open Access (OA) movement is revolutionising reader access to peer-reviewed research, but the publishing cost is still out of reach for billions of people who cannot afford ‘article processing fees’, which can be thousands of dollars for one paper. A Wikimedia journal platform would not charge for any stage of publication, relying on volunteers and donations to run the entire project. We have shown how the WikiJournals can draw expertise from academic and professional communities who otherwise rarely contribute to the Wikimedia movement.

What has been done so far? Combining academic publishing and Wikipedia has been done in several formats over the last decade. ●

●

● ●

Dual publishing​: In 2008 ​RNA Biology ​began requiring authors to also write a short Wikipedia page to accompany any article on a new RNA gene family. In 2016, ​Gene s​ tarted a similar format. Journal first publishing​: In 2012, ​PLOS Computational Biology created a format where authors write an article that is published in the journal and then copied directly to Wikipedia. They were joined by ​PLOS Genetics​ in 2016, and ​PLOS ONE ​in 2019. Wikipedia first publishing​: In 2014, ​Open Medicine ​put the first Wikipedia article through academic peer review and publication, requiring an article processing fee. All of the above​: Since 2014, the WikiJournal User Group has run a set of journals that specialise in these formats, hosted within Wikiversity (more in the Proof of Principle section below).


 * In any case, in addition to the PDF on Commons, is not meta the most appropriate place for such a proposal in wikipage format? --Xover (talk) 11:07, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * if the document is a modern document and published electronically, so not requiring proofreading, then we have always taken those documents electronically, without a scan. We just need to ensure that we have the source documentation is captured, and we confirm the licence as provided. — billinghurst  sDrewth  11:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Search and replace button
In one of the proposals of the current Wishlist Survey in Meta (UI improvements on Wikisource) there is a mention of some "search and replace button" among the "Advanced" functions of the Wikitext editor. However, I failed to find it. Is it available in English Wikisource too, or do I have to switch it on somewhere, or am I just blind and cannot see it? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 12:07, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hm, I have just found it, but it works strange: it replaces different chunks of text than I ask for!!! --Jan Kameníček (talk) 12:13, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * the find and replace on visual editor works better. (down the page options menu next to the magic pencil) you should test it out. yrmv. <font face="Vijaya">Slowking4 ⚔ <span lang="de-Latf" style="font-family:UnifrakturMaguntia, UnifrakturCook, Unifraktur, serif">Rama's revenge 20:49, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Generally, my experience with VE is very bad (it always looked like the biggest bug in MediaWiki to me :-) ), but I am inclined to give it one more chance :-) However, if the button is displayed outside VE (although the programmers did their best to make it almost invisible), it should work outside VE too… --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:50, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * i agree about VE, and it is hidden down that menu, but it works well for me. might be worth toggling to VE just to find replace. <font face="Vijaya">Slowking4 ⚔ <span lang="de-Latf" style="font-family:UnifrakturMaguntia, UnifrakturCook, Unifraktur, serif">Rama's revenge 22:24, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Index:Eight Harvard Poets.djvu

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:04, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Index:Dreams and Dust, by Don Marquis.djvu

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:05, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

help please

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:06, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Broken links to scans from Index pages

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:13, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Ongoing discussion about DjVu files at Wikimedia Commons

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

MediaWiki:InterWikiTransclusion.js

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:17, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

"Studies in Irish history, 1649-1775" available in scanned form?
Is anyone able to see a downloadable, OCR'd copy of the work "Studies in Irish history, 1649-1775" by Murray, Alice Effie b. 1877., Gwynn, Stephen Lucius 1864-1950., Mangan, H., Wilson, Philip. , Butler, William Francis Sir 1838-1910. et al.

I see that it is at HathiTrust though no indication of whether scanned.

If it is, it would be great if someone can get it into archive.org so we can take it to Commons. Thanks. — billinghurst  sDrewth  03:18, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * It says full view at the bottom, and the first scan (unusually for HathiTrust) even lets you download the PDF directly. I've got a copy of the PDF, though at over 100 MB, I've got to upload it to IA and then sideload it to Commons.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:33, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I can't upload it to Commons, since one of the authors died 1950, and there's three others with no death date at hand. It's too big for me to upload it to Wikisource. It's at https://archive.org/details/studiesinirishhistory16491775, if anyone knows how to get it here.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks, the download links must be country specific, and as I am not operating from a VPN, it knows that I am not US-based.. I will pull it onto Wikisource once it has derived a new form. If it is still over 100MB, then we can get someone to upload it on the backend. — billinghurst  sDrewth  03:47, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Looking around more, this is the same scan as https://archive.org/details/studiesinirishhi02obri . The HathiTrust version has an update date of 2012, so there may be a rescan or two, but it ultimately came from the same source.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:25, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * What?!? I don't even see it in a search result. Sheesh, sorry to put you to the effort. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:40, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ad not US-based: Try Hathi Download Helper, but the downloading times are long. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 19:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

I didn't quite follow the above, but took a guess and on the chance it'd be useful I grabbed, regenerated a new DjVu from it, and uploaded here as File:Studies in Irish History, 1649-1775 (1903).djvu with an index at Index:Studies in Irish History, 1649-1775 (1903).djvu. If it's not needed or or borked in some way then feel free to delete. --Xover (talk) 11:29, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

IA-Upload tool is down

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:23, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

The source of local time digital clock display

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:23, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Index:Carroll - Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.djvu

 * This section was archived on a request by: Kaldari (talk) 18:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Index:Carroll - Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.djvu

 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 13:56, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

KaldariBot

 * Bot name:
 * Bot operator: (home wiki: en.WP)
 * Automatic or manually assisted: automatic
 * Purpose of the bot: Add validated template to validated works so that they are properly categorized and can be searched separately.
 * Edit period(s): Continuous for 1 day, 1-6 edits/minute
 * Programming language(s) (and API) used: PHP (mediawiki-api-base, botclasses)
 * Affected pages: The 3086 pages listed at https://github.com/kaldari/validationbot/blob/master/public_html/alphalist.php
 * Additional information: This bot request is per the proposal and discussion at Scriptorium/Archives/2019-08.


 * if we are going to do this, what is the possibility to put the "validated" flag on the wikidata item interwiki for the respective works?  To note that I am gathering that this is for situations where the Index: page has been marked as validated and there is a one-to-one relationship with a main namespace page.  To note that this list does include subpages of works where the works have been uploaded as parts, some would warrant listing indepedently as validated, others, not so. [A find of

It also fixes the bug that prevented the site-wide gadget from actually showing the outline based highlight it was supposed to. And for good measure I added support for a notificationStyle using mediawiki's bubble notifications (set  to try it out). The weird double-negative construction of "dontConfirmNopAddition" is just because I've preserved the default behaviour of the site-wide gadget. If you remove everything except the mw.loader.load line (no setting of options) you will get the old default behaviour with just the bugfix.

The changes can be seen in this diff.

The changed version has had some limited testing and seems ready for wider testing. I therefore propose that we update MediaWiki:Gadget-NopInserter.js with this version. Note that since we do not have interface administrators locally, I will have to request this edit from the Stewards at meta, and they will require a community discussion to verify that this is indeed a change in line with community consensus. It would therefore be very helpful if as many as possible indicated whether or not you support this proposal. --Xover (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I think local bureaucrats can set the "Interface administrators" bit.Mpaa (talk) 14:18, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Bureaucrats have the technical ability to flip that bit, yes. But by WMF Legal-imposed policy it requires 2FA, and so can't just be assigned ad hoc like other local permissions. And since we have no permanent interface admins, nor any "list of people willing and able to make interface admin-edits", we don't actually have any functioning local way to request such changes; unless you yourself happen to have 2FA enabled for other reasons. Thus, asking the Stewards at Meta is actually the easiest option for getting such changes made currently. --Xover (talk) 05:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, just a bit weird that it is 'technically' possible but not 'legally' possible without 2FA. If they want to be on the safe side, they should not allow without 2FA. Anyhow, I am fine with the proposal.Mpaa (talk) 19:37, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the 2FA requirement is kinda dumb to begin with (not that it helps that we don't have a functioning local Interface Admin policy). In any case, this thread, so far, does not demonstrate community support for the proposed change (absence of objections is not the same as support), so it appears this change will not be implemented. Note that if the community's reticence should happen to be about the other changes, I can redo this patch to only fix the (7 years old) bug. In the mean time, anyone that wishes may of course use the copy in my userspace using the syntax described above, but absent any indications of interest I probably will not be actively maintaining that copy. --Xover (talk) 13:39, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

}}
 * This section was archived on a request by: Xover (talk) 08:18, 14 December 2019 (UTC)