Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/November 2003 to January 2004

Translations

What does that name mean? Appel du 18 juin in English? If Appel du 18 juin is the original name, I would prefer to translate that name into English and create a page accordingly rather than use "in English". And I totally agree with Angela, we have to categorize our texts from the very beginning. --Samuel 17:56, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I don't know about translating the title. Some things like "Mein Kamf" would be unrecogizable by English speakers at a translated title ("My Struggle"). --Maveric149 01:38, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

So we should "consider the general convention." - If the Apology will be included in here, and that text is an English translation, then I assume the title would not have to be in ancient Greek.

We would need, then, a way to disambiguate Mein Kampf_(English) from Mein Kampf_(Original). Tomos 21:58, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The original language (or one of them) should take precedence, and appear without such a disambiguator. For the example either "My Struggle" or "Mein Kampf (English)" should be acceptable, perhaps with one redirecting to the other. Eclecticology 00:16, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Looks good. Tomos 08:18, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

（日本語、かなり意訳）
翻訳されたソースも受け付けるべきか。その場合にはページ名をどうするか？
Mavさん:Mein Kamf（我が闘争）を英語に訳して"My Struggle"としてしまうと英語圏の人はわからない。
Tomos:でも「ソクラテスの弁明」の英語版のページに古代ギリシャ語の名前をつけておく必要はなくて、英語でいいはず。その言語圏での慣用を考慮する、衝突がある場合には曖昧さ回避を行う、などという対処がよいのでは？

---

Acquisition policy

Items to be discussed:

• Avoid sources that are alredy available elsewhere on the Net in an accessible way. Just link to those sources.
  • Copy everything from all possible sources and archives.

It depends on the format. If the document is available elsewhere with an easily accessible format (text, html), then link, otherwise, copy. Yann 09:26, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

• Avoid sources that are not published through mass media, public institutions, nor academic media.
  • Anything public domain or GFDL are welcome here, except for those that are more appropriate for other Wikimedia projects.

Anything possible according to me. Yann 09:26, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

• Avoid sourecs of obsolete versions, when there are multiple versions. Keep the latest.
  • Acquire multiple versions and keep them on separate pages.

Latest version, barring an older version has some particular interest. Yann 09:26, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

• Avoid "Data"-like sources such as a list of participants in a major international conference, or a table of basic health statistics by countries.
  • Acquire "Data"-like sources

Again, it depends of the data and the availibility elsewhere. Yann 09:26, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

日本語

ソースの収集方針について、議論すべき事柄

• オンラインで既に容易に入手可能な状態にあるソースはウィキソースに加える必要はない
  • 様々なアーカイブからのあらゆるソースのコピーを受け付けるべき

• マスメディアや公的機関や学術媒体などで出版されていないソースは避けるべき
  • パブリックドメインやGFDLのものであれば何であれ歓迎。例外はウィキペディアなどウィキメディア財団の他のプロジェクトの方に持ち込むべきソースのみ

• 複数のバージョンがある場合には古いものは避けるべき。最新版のみを持ち込むべき
  • 複数のバージョンがあれば、それらを別々のページに保管しておくべき

• データ系のソース、例えばあるメジャーな国際学会の出席者一覧とか、主要な保健衛生系国際統計表などの持ち込みは避けるべき
  • データ系のソースも持ち込むべき

---

From Wikisource, a repository for free source texts

Now the new Mediawiki namespace is in operation, the things listed at Template:All messages can be changed. So far, all that has been changed is the "Project Sourceberg, the free encyclopedia" to say "From Wikisource, a repository for free source texts". Changes could be suggested at Wikisource talk:All messages. There's still the issue that they can only be in one language though. Angela 03:06, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

Domains in other languages

See Talk:Main Page#Language domains

---

Pages?

Are pages here called articles? I'm not sure that makes sense in this context in the same way that it does on Wikipedia. Should they just be called pages or something else? Angela 03:58, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The "articles" should probably be called something else; I'm sure that an appropriate name will arise in due time. "Pages" or perhaps "chapters" should probably refer to the various segments of an "article". The length of some of the things we already have must be putting a strain on some browsers. Eclecticology 08:49, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Wikibooks uses 'modules' and Meta uses the generic 'content page'. Either would work here, IMO. --Maveric149 12:06, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)~

---

Texts layout

Is there a standard layout set for Wikisources? I submitted 2 texts yesterday and used a gray background on the main text because I know it makes the eyes become tired when you read long texts in bright backgrounds, like white. I also changed the font to one that is very similar to the one used by many imprints (Georgia, Bookman Old Style, etc). --Maio 05:02, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I changed the dark background because the lack of contrast makes the text difficult to read. I'm indifferent about the font, but what is seen by the user will default to something that is available on the user's browser. Eclecticology 10:06, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I have no problems with your change, that's why I'm asking, to avoid those type of edits in the future. :) --Maio 15:11, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)