User talk:Ezhiki
Thanks for the question about the postal codes. Many of these were put here in the earliest days of Wikisource by people who did not like lists in Wikipedia. Ultimately, after applying Wikipedia's "Votes for Deletion process" they were first removed and then restored when it was realized that a vote that was interpreted as for deletion should have been read as for keeping. Since then there have been additions to both projects, but not necessarily postal codes for the same places.
To me Wikipedia is the place for such lists. These are really as much lists of cities as they are lists of codes. Since articles about cities are a part of Wikipedia links from these lists to the cities themselves are more easily created on Wikipedia. Some arguments have been made that these lists can be considered as source material, and I suppose that in a way they are. It all depends how you define "source". Lists on either project should reflect the kinds of things that are normally in that project. Eclecticology 05:34, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- In response to your suggestion I have copied the above exchange to Wikisource:Scriptorium to give others a chance to comment. I'll refrain from further work on the matter until I see the replies.
Thanks for the answer. While I could argue that postal codes better belong here, in sources, than in wikipedia, I do also understand why they are in wikipedia now. To me (personally), it would seem to work the best in wikipedia pointed to wikisource whenever lists are involved.
My reasoning is as follows: imagine a regular (book) encyclopedia. It would contain articles on a variety of topics, however, when it comes to lists (or original texts for that matter), they would either not be in the book, or would be placed in appendices. So it seems logical to put appendix-worth material in wikisource, and leave wikipedia to the articles.
It's just a suggestion, of course. I am pretty new to wiki*, maybe your practices are different, and I do understand that wikisource is a quite recent endeavor. If you could put this polemic out for discussion, I would certainly appreciate that. --Ezhiki 14:40, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I do have an unrelated request arising from this. When replying on a talk page could you please do so below the other person's comments, and at a different iindent level. This helps to make the discussion easier to follow, and the different indent levels help the reader to distinguish the writings of one person from another.
Similarly, if you start a new topic please do so at the bottom of a page. Eclecticology 19:05, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Sure thing. Like I said, I am still pretty new to this. My attention probably did not grasp a lot of other minor details as well :)
- As long as you don't mind when I make criticisms. :) If I go too far I'm sure you will let me know.
- No problem. Criticism is the foundation of any creative work. :) --Ezhiki 14:42, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- As long as you don't mind when I make criticisms. :) If I go too far I'm sure you will let me know.
Thanks for the Russian anthem and constitution. It is quite acceptable, and even desirable if the article titles for these appear in the original language. The title "Constitution of [the] Russian Federation" would then be available for an English language translation. In the various indexes and tables of contents, I have been trying to establish the standard that a bulleted single indent is for the original version in whatever language it may be, and that bulleted double indents are for translations of that text into any other language. Putting words like "Russian original" in italics in a single indent would simply indicate that we don't have the original text yet. I hope this is not too confusing. Eclecticology 21:01, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Well, as a matter of fact, it is confusing, but I sure hope that one day (hopefully in not-too-distant future :) wikisource is going to be formatted like wikipedia. Original texts will then go to the corresponding languages' sections, and English translations will stay in the English section. Anyway, since this has not happened yet, I will follow the guidelines you outlined should I have more original texts available. In any case, please feel free to correct me if anything looks wrong formatting-wise. Thanks for the support! --Ezhiki 14:42, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I can understand your concern. Wikisource, unlike Wikipedia, is a multilanguage single project, where anyone can contribute in any language. This creates a number of very interesting challenges. One that I'm hoping to implement is a master table of contents that allows the user to know all the versions that are available. Thus far that index has been English based, but nothing prevents additional full or partial indexes from being created. I look forward to your continued support, and your addition of further texts. Eclecticology 17:27, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Ramir, в ответ на:
- А не мог бы многоуважаемый Ramir поставить-таки ссылки на размещённые ранее документы с главной русской страницы Wikisource?
Какие документы? Когда размещённые? Скажите хоть адрес. Ссылки помещаются с помощью системы Wiki. В исходном коде Заглавной страницы просто не трогайте то, что в тегах(< английских непонятных словах, заключённых в скобки-уголки >).