Wikisource talk:Maintenance of the Month/Creating a YouTube video about Wikisource

Script
In looking over the material I noticed something not addressed. That is, WHY bother with anything about Wikisource? WHY bother editing books that can be obtained in .PDF format and with the always Free Acrobat Reader, from Internet archives? Or WHY not just download, or read online the books. WHY should a person care about Wikisource and that is if they have even heard of Wikisource? As for free books many people after decades have heard of Gutenberg and have been told of other free books in other areas on Internet. WHAT is the attractive interest of Wikisource? This is not a question just for Erasmo, this is a question for everyone who works on Wikisource but it is my strong guess that others here, except for two, will not address these ideas and questions. In fact, I would bet that few would even participate in the overall idea and post their thoughts and opinions here. In short, it is a thankless task to even try to get other editors involved right here on WS and after years of them working as editors here. Getting several people/editors/ and/or administrators here to participate in this idea of WS on YouTube is a true "Lost Cause" and partly because we never have and never do "work together" —Maury (talk) 14:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Why Wikisource? Two words that pop out: Aesthetics (something Gutenberg lacks, in my opinion) and accuracy.  Collaboration is not always direct; we each do what we love, or we wouldn't/shouldn't be here (for if our heart isn't in it, accuracy will take a back seat as it will defer to mere obligation). Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Came across this You tube video a couple/few months ago: Hit [show more] to link to 48:10 (where User:Dominic presents "Wikisource and the US National Archives: a case study"). Some ideas for the script could be garnered from this as well. Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:30, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I started such section ("Why should I bother with Wikisource?"). There is room for improvement, so please edit it freely.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 17:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Will try to do, Erasmo Barresi. I do want to thank Londonjackbooks for her statements. The video was good except for the many no-no pauses of ah..ah, uh... in public speaking but regardless the messages came through. Too, the several other videos in that area on "wikis" can be gleaned through to learn from. Kind regards to the both of you, —Maury (talk) 19:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Blast! public speaking 'rules'... In a volunteer forum, all that's necessary is heart. Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:44, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with your statement but I just noticed the situation from my being in Public Speaking classes _with the rules_ so long ago just as we here cannot "Blast the Rules" in editing and will spot them and correct them. Professionals do it too. In fact the professionals overuse the word "pretty" pretty often even with "pretty" bad. But this matter is of no special interest to me aside of noticing it. I am far more interested in the projects, presentations, the people I saw, and that had a strong impact on me. BTW, regarding your statement of Blast the rules on public speaking, you see no volunteers for announcing do you? Out of all of us, including you, there are none. Can you guess why not? I would say that some are concerned about their ability, or lack thereof, of public speaking. So perhaps we cannot simply blast the rules as easily as we would want. Perhaps some people just shy away "like a fly on the wall" I do not know their reasons but each volunteer here knows their own limitations or shyness, or whatever holds them back. I am not shy and never have been but I personally don't think I have a good-speaking voice. How about yourself? I do not think, from what I know of you, that you would volunteer to "announce" materials. So, "blast" the public speaking "rules"? I'm not so sure about that thought. —Maury (talk) 22:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * When someone comes along with a desire and 'ability' to lend their voice to the project—whether it be in a month, a year, etc.—then the timing will be right. All things in good order.  I actually hired someone to read (create a sound file for) a poem I wrote for one of my children due to not liking my speaking voice... but she read it perfectly (the first take!)!  Right place, right time, right person.  Hoping that will be the case here.  Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That is very noble of you to write a poem and then have someone create a sound file for your child. You are younger than I. I have never heard of this before now. When people get together and chat and others read and hopefully join in then a lot of good ideas can come up. But I believe in doing what and when I can instead of hoping for things to happen. People can make things happen as you well know from your own poetry you have applied to WikiSource and thereby making WikiSource _far better_. I just finished making a video that is short but I believe effective for my 1st test on YouTube. It has no sound in it but it does advertise Wikisource and it does have the url at the end. It is very short because it is my 1st experiment. I am thinking of adding some soft music in the background. I can add voice and there are many other options that I will perhaps build on with other and different files for www.youtube.com I have never placed anything on youtube. Still I am not going to sit and hope someone else does for en.ws You know from your own work on Coates that _you made that happen_ or it would not exist on ws. It is an excellent and artistic project. You could also have a lady friend read for that work as Ms Coates. People need to not only learn that wikisource exists and what it is and also they should be able to use their other senses of sight and sound and not just reading black text on a white background. Too much reading on a white background hurts my eyes and yours too. So color is also an important factor. Keep the faith! —Maury (talk) 00:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * More on off-topic: It was after hearing the woman recite a Coates poem (spot on, in my view—even though I have never heard Mrs. Coates speak) that I thought of asking her to lend voice to my poem.  Good luck with the video project. Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Although we are not on-topic of a written script we are eliciting ideas about what kind of script should be written. Personally, I would like to see the entire script placed here and work on it piece-by-piece so others can see and interject their ideas. I have stated nothing on the script on Erasmo's sandbox but here I would try to work on it. I have seen wording I would change. My ideas are different from that script Erasmo wrote, or altered from another. I have partly completed one of my experimental ideas tonight. There is no end in sight with expanding it but the 1st will be the shortest. Therefore, we have two different formats and with AdamBMorgan's file that is yet another format. I tend to seek ways others don't use but yet are effective. Whatever happens—happens. Not to try is my only real loss. —Maury (talk) 02:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Comments
Something hihly unusual happened to me when listening to the video Londonjacks posted. I have been on WikiPedia and WikiSource since around 2006 on Wikipedia and around Wikisource since round 2009. I also have been on Internet before browsers and websites working for the University Technology Committee before WP and WS existed. In the video, "Wikisource and the US National Archives: a case study"), I saw people I have communicated with! It was very strange to me but also enlightening. I was very impressed. I had the feeling of something far more grand than just text and images I have seen for several decades. I felt something stronger and bigger than just text posted as I am doing now. I felt that "real people" situation behind decades of text and book or other images. It was a feeling I had never had in all of these decades of Internet. It was a far bigger and more important emphasis on our works and on a grander scale than I had ever felt in decades. The sum of our and other's works work was huge -- far larger than it's parts. It was a strange feeling that we work together for something greater than all of us combined and something that would last for many generations after we are bones and dust. I actually FELT that greater work than what we work on as individuals. That was IMPACT! From it I keep feeling we need to show the real people -- the workers building these great wiki achievement projects. I am reminded of skyscrapers in New York where one sees an old film of men building those skyscrapers to unimaginable heights. They sometimes fell to their death but in time the skyscrapers were completed and the builders died over time. Yet those skyscrapers still remain and are still functional. Wiki areas are like that -- built for the greater good of all mankind. —Maury (talk) 20:20, 31 January 2013 (UTC)