From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Proofread is now enabled[edit]

Have fun! Aviator 15:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've created Template:Page so that pages can be transcluded the same way here as at English Wikisource. —Angr 12:40, 26 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great! One question. When editing appears the message "Please add to every new page a language category.". Do we have to categorize every page, or the message does not apply to page namespace? -Aleator (talk) 15:35, 2 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I created the red notice as we have still a lot of pages not categorized by any category and any language. To categorize or not - see the discussions here. Regards -jkb- 16:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From those discussions it seems that every page, incluing redirects, whether in main space or in the newly created Page: and Index: namespaces, needs to be categorized by language so that importing the pages will be easy if and when the language gets its own Wikisource. But what about subcats of language categories? For example, Category:Séadna is a subcat of Category:Gaeilge. If ga-ws were ever created, wouldn't it be straightforward to import all pages in Category:Gaeilge and its subcats? Also, does anyone run bots here? All the Page: space pages linked from Index:Seadna.djvu and Index:Mo sgeal fein.djvu need to be categorized (either into Category:Séadna and Category:Mo Sgéal Féin if subcats are acceptable, or into Category:Gaeilge if they're not), but that's hundreds of pages and I don't much feel like doing it by hand. —Angr 10:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Sanskrit is the biggest collection we have according to WS:LANG. There are not a lot of new texts being written in Sanskrit, however there are native speakers according to w:Sanskrit, a Sanskrit Wikipedia and there are an enormous number of potential texts.

sa.wp admins Eukesh (talkcontribs), kn:User:HPNadig, and Yann (talkcontribs) could be admins. They all have experience with Wikisource.

Have we discussed a Sanskrit Wikisource project previously? meta:Requests for new languages/Wikisource Sanskrit does not exist. John Vandenberg 04:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No. I see no earlier Sanskrit request at Wikisource:Former_language_domain_requests, nor do I see any similar request at m:Category:Requests for new languages. If enough users want Sanskrit texts to break away, just request at Meta.--Jusjih 05:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am only on a little netbook and moving large files around is problematic. I would very much appreciate if someone could populate our Wikisource Purana page with the Puranas found HERE. There are many other important files as well but it would be appreciated if the Puranas could be focused upon sooner rather than later.
B9 hummingbird hovering 11:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Meta-text environments and audience customizability[edit]

I have been contemplating the audience of Source and customizability of our meta-viewing environment. Let's say we have a text. The text is extant in three versions in one script and there is a salient variation in each version. There are also extant versions in two other diverse scripts, translations done at different timeperiods. Then there is to be a transliteration or possibly transliterations, lets say a romanization for example and IPA. Then there is an English translation and a French translation done by gifted translators/linguists. There is also a verse by verse purport and commentary in both English and French done by different respected scholars. All of these options are in the public domain and are uploaded in Source. Each person who engages the text may wish to foreground different possibilities in juxtaposition. A person may wish to view a verse of the oldest extant text in indigenous script in juxtaposition with the English translation. But another person would like to look at the IPA in juxtaposition with the purport/commentary for example. Another person may want to juxtapose two of the extant sources with annotations of salient differences and the historical dimensions of the text. Another person may wish to juxtapose the French and the English purports. Do we have such functionality? I would appreciate some direction. I appreciate we will soon have powerful translation tools embedded within Source, but this is something different. This is enabling the audience to engage a rich textual tradition in a way appropriate to their needs at a given time. One bit of code that would be of benefit is a box or field that has a button to click and cycle through a paragraph in different scripts to maximize space.
B9 hummingbird hovering 12:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Footnotes as tooltip[edit]

Hi! On I've found an interesting little script that show the footnotes as a tooltip when you move the mouse over the number, without the need of clicking it. (If you don't understand what I mean, just go to and see for yourself ;-) It will be very helpful here, since some texts have a lot of footnotes! This is the script, we only need to put it into Mediawiki:Common.js. The original script can be found here: Thanks, Candalua 22:57, 21 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

addOnloadHook ( function ()
 sups = document.getElementsByTagName("sup");
 for (i=0; i<sups.length; i++)
   note_id = sups[i].childNodes[0].href;
   if (note_id && (note_id.indexOf("#") != -1))
     note_id = document.getElementById(note_id.substr(note_id.indexOf("#")+1));
     if (note_id)
       if (document.all) 
           sups[i].title = note_id.innerText; 
           sups[i].childNodes[0].title = note_id.innerText; 
           sups[i].title = note_id.textContent; 

Well as there were no objections I think I will put it into the commons.js tomorrow. Regards, -jkb- 13:41, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh gosh, it was out of mind, but now I pasted it into Mediawiki:Common.js. -jkb- 14:17, 10 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


moved from Talk:Main Page, -jkb- 09:24, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On devrait créer une wikisource en napolitain: la littérature en napolitain est très importante. --Demart81 08:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sans doute, mais le lieu correcte pour prier un nouveau projet est m:Requests for new languages. —Angr 10:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Je démanderais à s:it:Wikisource:Bar si textes napolitains sont acceptés à la wikisource italienne. Si non, tu les peux ajouter ici. Tu dois aussi créer la catégorie Category:Napulitano et y ajouter toutes pages napolitaines. —Angr 10:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oui, ils sont acceptés. Il y a dejà quelque texte (pour example Candalua 11:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Multilingual books[edit]

Hello. Should we identify (categorize) pages of multilingual books that have to be transcribed here at oldsource? I mean, e.g. Page:Las espigos de la lengo moundino (1860).djvu/5 is from an Occitan poetry book, but that page is in French (it will be transcluded at fr.source if wanted, or not) but should we create Category:Français here, for identifying them easily? A template? How? None? -Aleator (talk) 23:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do I understand it right: the mentioned page is in French but the source is a book in Occitan (or the most poems there are in Occitan)? In this case I would personally prefer not to disjunct the work i.e. to leave the French page here. The page could be categorized in both languages (probably, I think), and on the page Category:Français there could be a notice about the circumstances. Well, it is a special case... Might be somebody else will have an opinion on this as well. Regards, -jkb- 13:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with you. This sort of thing is at the heart of why I argued against separate language domains. Eclecticology 18:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aleator: you may follow the example provided at en:Index:Zwei-Plus-Vier-Vertrag.djvu. it uses one of the Shared Scripts ThomasV 18:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do agree with all three :) I knew about that book, Thomas, but didn't look inside, or better said, I did, but magical templates and misterious scripting stuff has been developed while I was not looking! Improvements are going very fast, and I am slow in realizing them... Good job! -Aleator (talk) 00:45, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ahahaaa!! Could it be added MediaWiki:InterWikiTransclusion.js on the whole wiki monobook mediawiki? That's the way Page:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/5 will work for everybody. Thank you. -Aleator (talk) 00:27, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. If MediaWiki:InterWikiTransclusion.js is imported from Mediawiki:Common.js and adapted as stated at MediaWiki talk:InterWikiTransclusion.js, I think Page:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/198 will catch text from es.source, and es:Página:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/198 will catch text from oldwikisource. Yet es.source is importing InterWikiTransclusion.js. Thanks. -Aleator (talk) 21:28, 14 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't have much time to look at it. can you provide a functional patch ? ThomasV 11:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about User:Aleator/monobook.js? I've used on both oldsource and es.source. It bifurcates in, or (just when "lang"="old"). Works ok at oldsource, say it full page (as Page:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/5) or LST page (as Page:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/198), and ok at es.source, say it full page (as es:Página:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/199), or say it LST page (as es:Página:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/198. -Aleator (talk) 23:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great! All transclusions at es.source work fine. Now it's missing a line at MediaWiki:Common.js like this (or any other better way/place of doing it) for allowing external transclusions at oldwikisource:


Thanks! -Aleator (talk) 23:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello there are a number of primary sources of the Puranas available for harvest[edit]

I am only on a little netbook and moving large files around is problematic. I would very much appreciate if someone could populate our Wikisource Purana page with the Puranas found HERE. There are many other important files as well but it would be appreciated if the Puranas could be focused upon sooner rather than later.
B9 hummingbird hovering 11:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New: Footnotes as tooltip[edit]

On Candaluas request I added to MediaWiki:Common.js a small script from The footnotes can be seen as tooltips now. Example see Trattato di pace con Mohammed II. -jkb- 22:54, 11 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have a question: why here in old wikisourse don't work interwikis in a way they work on others national wikisources? I mean e.g.:



a link -> pl:User:Electron but not interwiki link? And strange that it is a link to pl-wiki but not to pl-wikisource.

I suppose that there might be a problem to make proper interwiki links in other direction (from the national wikisources to the old wikisource) but from here to others wikisource I see any problem to change the way they work now. I suppose it will be only a technical change...

I try to put interwikis from some Belarusion pages to other national wikisources and it is very inconvinient, now. Electron <Talk?> 12:25, 16 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not possible. See e.g. Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jan 2008 - Dec 2008#Interwiki or other ones here, -jkb- 15:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not possible or nobody tried to fix it? Electron <Talk?> 10:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, not possible because nobody tried to fix it up to now :-))), -jkb- 10:02, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. I hope somebody will fix it in the future. A hero with a technical knoledge is needed :) ... Electron <Talk?> 10:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This problem has been frustrating for long time. For example, Template:L'Internationale has many internal and outbound interlanguage links, but linking from subdomain to this domain is much more inconvenient while not standardized. We really need very knowledgeable person to improve linking to and from this domain.--Jusjih 03:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If exists a redirect from a standardized url, e.g.,, the interwikis in the other wikisources appointing to here will work. We are doing this with Esperanto, which is still in the oldsource domain. We asked in bugzilla for a redirect from and now a link in eo.wikipedia to [[s:title]] becomes But I can't imagine a solution to the other way linking (oldwikisource -> wikisource or other projects), exactly because of the non-standardized url, as Jusjih said. CasteloBrancomsg 15:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


We on hr.wikisource have few texts on w:Montenegrin, but we dont know where to place it. Theres a problem because Montenegrin has no appropriate ISO code, so we cant make a new wikisource. We would like to make a difference between Croatian and especially Serbian, because Montenegrin is now a separated language. Could we place that texts on this wikisource and make a main page for montenegrin maybe? --StjepanG 11:06, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That would be OK, but please be sure all texts are in public domain, all text are tagged by a language category (i.e. Montenegrin)? you can also add the source of the text (on the talk pages). If questions please ask here again. Regards, -jkb- 12:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, I hope there wouldnt be many problems, we have some experience;) --StjepanG 15:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If any works were published in 1922 or before and are so in the public domain in the USA, but still copyright-restricted in Montenegro copyrighting for life + 70 years, please consider translating Template:PD-US-1923-abroad into Montenegrin language.--Jusjih 23:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Montenegrin is usually considered a dialect of Serbian, as with its ISO code, and other Wikimedia projects. Innotata 17:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. Sure, usually. But let us see what the discussions about the request m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Montenegrin 3 and about the ISO situation will bring. -jkb- 17:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikimania 2010[edit]

Wikimania 2010, this year's global event devoted to Wikimedia projects around the globe, is accepting submissions for presentations, workshops, panels, and tutorials related to the Wikimedia projects or free content topics in general. The conference will be held from July 9-11, 2010 in Gdansk, Poland. For more information, check the official Call for Participation. Cbrown1023 talk 22:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can this bot please get a temporary bot and sysop flag so I can delete exported tests? Please also read this. was created two years ago.. --Ooswesthoesbes 11:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I support this request, see my talk page. The flags can be granted as temporary ones, either by our bureaucrats or at meta. Regards -jkb- 17:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New main page in Esperanto[edit]

I made a proposal for a new main page in esperanto version. If you have suggestions on it, please tell me on Talk:Ĉefpaĝo:Esperanto#Nova Ĉefpaĝo. You can do that in your language, and even if you are not an esperanto-speaker or editor. I'm asking for comments on the colors, the images, the sections, the layout, etc. This one is the main page, and this one is the proposal. Thanks. CasteloBrancomsg 16:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Global Sysops[edit]

I propose we opt-in to the global sysop wiki set. Having a few extra hands to help with vandalism wouldn't hurt. For those unfamiliar with global sysops, see the page on meta. Maximillion Pegasus 20:06, 18 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good idea. Jafeluv 11:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why? -jkb- 14:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why indeed? There doesn't appear to be a whole lot of vandalism happening here. Eclecticology 17:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I know there may not be a whole lot, but this project isn't very active anymore, and there can be times when no local sysop is available. Maximillion Pegasus 19:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maximillion Pegasus. It might be that you are not that active any more (if you were before). But though there are some vandals from time to time we never had and do not have now problems with it. There are a lot of very active users and there are enough admins that are stil present. Also users from other projects visit us from time to time. And, last but not least, global sysops has been made for other purposes as for stil active Oldwikisource (AFAIK I votedfor it as well). Regards. -jkb- 20:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oldwikisource have 13 sysops, three of which have made fewer than 5 edits this year. While vandalism may not be a huge problem here, I think it's always good to have more hands on the job. As for GS being made for other purposes, I don't think it would be inappropriate considering that larger projects like en.wikibooks have already opted in. Is there a downside I'm not seeing? Jafeluv 09:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Jafeluv, I am afraid we have here the same problem like with a user concerning his bot some two years ago. Try to understand what this (Old)Wikisource is. This is not a normal project like Wikipedia etc. The most admins here do not work here like users or editors as their languages have own subdomains. So please do not judge their edits here with the normal measure. And the second point is: did you find dangerous vandalisms that have not been reverted here? (When somebodfy writes somewhere "Hi, this is a nice day" and it is reverted 5 days later - well, I can show you similar cases in en.wp). Regards -jkb- 10:06, 20 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to sound like I doubted the capability of oldwikisource admins to do their job... I was just wondering whether there was a downside to the whole opting-in thing, since in my view it would certainly more good than harm assuming that the editors given the flag can be trusted not to break anything with the tools. Jafeluv 13:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. So let's start again from another point. I think the question is not to trust somebody from Meta and it is not to doubt the capability of the admins here. The point is if there is a need for it. If yes so I will vote with support. But the idea above came with no such argument and it is why I was wondering, To say "this project isn't very active anymore" is simly not quite right (there is no change in last time), and you are right that more admins can do more the a few. But do we have here that sort of vandalism where we need admin actions? A great part of it has been simply reverted by users themselves. And, obviously we had no discussion on this because there was even no need to discuss it. But, see the notice on the top of my talk page, soon I have to make my luggage for this weeken :-)... Regards, -jkb- 13:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand. You guys probably know better than I do whether there's an actual need for more sysops on the project. I hope you have a nice trip. Jafeluv 16:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have no problem opting in to allow global sysops to step in here. Before language subdomains broke away from here, administrators here would oversee all languages like myself. Then once many languages have broken away to subdomains, each domain has its own administrators and potential to self-govern, provided the community is sizable. While stewards like myself may review deleted edits, allowing global sysops, who are also administrators of any Wikisource domain, to step in here enables them to review what was here and then deleted. For example, when considering Template:PD-US-1923-abroad that is rejected at some domains, including my favorite Chinese Wikisource, global sysops can review what was deleted here while moved to subdomains, then deleted at subdomain while locally unacceptable.--Jusjih 03:52, 23 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brazilian copyright issue[edit]

Over at enWS we have a copyright discussion about a note written by a deceased president of Brazil Carta Testamento. Normally the note would not be able to be hosted due to copyright, however, there may be a part of Brazilian law that puts the work into the public domain, so if there is an expert on Brazil copyright/public records, we would appreciate your input at enWS. Thanks. billinghurst sDrewth 01:54, 23 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Someone recently changed the Template:TopTenCircle, ordering it by number of "articles". I thought that the communauty decided to order it by the Page views (wich, by the way, are very strange since last month). Can anyone revert the last edit and update the Circle : .ru is now in thord place, behind .en and .fr. Thank you, 16:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

done ThomasV 17:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another script for Common.js[edit]

I have adapted this function from en. It makes a duplicate of the links to the "previous" and "next" chapters, and places it at the bottom of the page, for convenience. Very useful for long pages! It works only for Venetian pages, on other pages it simply does nothing. But we can easily adapt it for other languages, if needed. Candalua 21:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

function chapter() {
	var df = {
	if (df.scat && df.sora) {
		footer = document.createElement('div');
		footer.setAttribute('style', 'width: 50em; text-align:justify; margin:0px auto; margin-top:20px; align:center');
		soto = df.sora.cloneNode(true);
		soto.setAttribute('id', 'capitolo_soto');
		df.scat.parentNode.insertBefore(footer, df.scat.nextSibling);

in the meantime done, -jkb- 14:58, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vector skin and interwikis[edit]

The new Vector skin is to become the default. see s:en:Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2010-05#Vector_is_coming

However, the Vector skin does not display interwikis by default. Many people from other projects are concerned about this change, with numerous discussions on mail:foundation-l, and bugzilla:23497 was opened to have the interwikis displayed by default.

I think Wikisource should delay adoption of the Vector skin until interwikis can be displayed by default on Wikisource, as they are a critical part of the Wikisource interface. John Vandenberg 02:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought interwiki links didn't even work here? Jafeluv 05:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Interwikis don't work on, however they work on <lang> --John Vandenberg 06:27, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, you meant for all Wikisources. Never mind :) Jafeluv 07:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this is something than can be configured. we should open a bug to request it. ThomasV 08:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure. But the same bug for MonoBook et al has been opened some more years ago - nothing happened... Might be we should ask for configuration for both skins as I seem to use MonoBook as default just like many other ones, I guess. -jkb- 09:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can it be configured for all Wikisource projects centrally, or will we need the skin to be configured on every Wikisource project? John Vandenberg 10:43, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We could also write a little scriptlet which uncollapses it on page load. —Pathoschild 12:41:33, 04 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good. But the question still remains: why is it collapsed? Interwiki is interesting not for editors only but for visitors and readers as well. -jkb- 14:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent deletions[edit]

I really do not understand the actions since yesterday. There are a lot of hundreds of pages to be deleted. There was an offer to do it by a bot, the request is here. Now everything seems to be deleted by hand. Why? Recent chabges are not to use now. Wouldn't it be better to grant the user the bot and admin flag for one or two days? Sorry. -jkb- 21:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whether something is deleted by hand or by bot should amount to the same thing. Eclecticology 07:46, 5 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, but like jkb says, bot deletion does not flood the recent changes page... Candalua 15:29, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Multilingual works[edit]

Greetings. I have a question about multilingual works that have chapters in different languages. If the language has its own subdomain, should the chapter be on that language's subdomain, even if it's different from the overall language of the work? I'm working on a book in Esperanto which has the grammar described in five languages, all of which have their own subdomain. Should I move the sections to the corresponding subdomains? This would enable more readers to find the work (someone who only knows Polish is unlikely to look for the work here, but they might find it on pl.wikisource), and also proofreaders in those languages would be more available on their own subdomains. On the other hand, it may be confusing to a reader that they keep jumping between different domains when reading a single work. Any thoughts? Jafeluv 10:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Jafeluv. Some hints at #Multilingual_books. The basic idea can be: X-language "texts" (not "works") go to X-language Wikisource. The work en:Index:Zwei-Plus-Vier-Vertrag.djvu is in 4 languages,and every Wikisource has profreaded just the pages of its own language, the other pages beeing transcluded from the outer Wikisource with a template. I do similar things when the language-ratio of pages are proportionate (e.g. a work 50 pages in English and 50 in Catalan; then 1 Index at en.source and 1 Index at ca.source; the transclusions of the full text, as you feel, mixed [for not confusing readers] or separated). In other cases, when the "foreign languages"-pages are just one or a few, then the transclusion can be done without the need of creating the whole Index (for example, this Occitan poem is being transcluded here ["oldwikisource"] from a ca.source "page"/work). -Aleator (talk) 21:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, that's really helpful. I'll try to use the Zwei-Plus-Vier Vertrag page as an example. Jafeluv 21:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there a way to link to oldwikisource with the {{iwpage}} syntax? Jafeluv 22:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, tha "language" code is "old". E.g. es:Página:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/199 at es.source is taking the page in Aragonese language Page:Boletín RAE VI (1919).djvu/199. But the target Wikisource has to import MediaWiki:InterWikiTransclusion.js. -Aleator (talk) 22:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


What is the process to create a new language main page ? Did I just create Main page:Brezhoneg or should I need an agreement ?

I want to create it when I saw the precedent section. I'm doing Barzaz Breiz on but there is currently no place to put the brezhoneg text... Cdlt, VIGNERON 10:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See the Category:Main Pages for some examples and go agead. Pls add a language category (see Category:Brezhoneg on every page you create in this language. Regards, -jkb- 10:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm a bit tired: there is soon Degemer:Brezhoneg and Raktres pajenn degemer (should it be renamed and/or merged?).
I will look at the exemples (for the main page and for the barzaz).
Cdlt, VIGNERON 11:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh... In fact there are no recommendations how to name a main page in a language. So I would say when Degemer:Brezhoneg is categorized in Category:Main Pages than it is OK. -jkb- 12:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

btw, when both Degemer:Brezhoneg and Raktres pajenn degemer are main pages so it would be better to merge them (and leave a redirect, it is better). -jkb- 12:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge done, name kept. Raktres pajenn degemer was just a copy from the french speaking wikisource (and most of the texte was still in french!).
When I look at Degemer:Brezhoneg, I see some text not in the public domain (sadly Bro gozh ma zadoù for example), is it normal?
Now I could begin with the barzaz \o/
Cdlt, VIGNERON 12:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Difficult for me to judge if it is PD os not - I understand there the years 1898 and 1903 only :-) (and google translator doesn't translate Brezhoneg)... But texts that are still copyrighted cannot stay here. Why is Bro gozh ma zadoù not PD? -jkb- 13:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jaffrennou (the author) died in 1956 (more information in english on w:Bro Gozh ma Zadoù). Logically it will be in PD in 2027 (it was maybe release in the DP by the author but it's unsure). This week-end, I will check all the text and let you know.
Right now, I start Index:Barzaz Breiz, huitième édition.djvu; am I doing all right? Cdlt, VIGNERON 13:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ad Jafrennou: see Template:PD-US-1923-abroad (and the talk) if it suits. Ad Index: I never worked with it, might be you ask users like Candalua who have more experience. -jkb- 13:12, 16 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As for Bro gozh ma zadoù, it is in a weird situation since it is the national anthem of Brittany. National anthems are normally not protected by copyright laws (should be considered as public domain), but Brittany is not recognised as a country (in the UN sense) by any other country, so it is unclear whether it can "legally" have a national anthem.
For anyone who needs a basic understanding of a document in Breton, you can try this automatic translator. Provided you understand French, of course, because a second automatic translation from French to English would likely destroy any remaining meaning. Or you can leave me a message. Kouign-amann 12:00, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no universal rule that national anthems are in the public domain. Please check who the authors of the lyrics and the composers are if the national laws do not release anthems into the public domain automatically. Then check when they died.--Jusjih 02:21, 18 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Again (see above) : the author of the lyrics is Author:Frañsez Jaffrennou, died in 1956, so problem. The music is traditionnal, rewriten by James James (died 1902), so no problem, but we don’t care here. You can find all this informations in w:Bro Gozh ma Zadoù.
I dont know anything in the french law (no french texts of law contain the words "gozh" or "zadou" since 1990) or said by Jaffrennou that allow to publish this lyrics but IANAL. Cdlt, VIGNERON 07:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Once more my question from above: when it was published? In w:Bro Gozh ma Zadoù I can read something about "...adopted 1903 ...". And once more the hint: see Template:PD-US-1923-abroad, it could be what you look for. -jkb- 10:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Everything is already written in w:Bro Gozh ma Zadoù : « published in 1898 » (in La Résistance de Morlaix according to w:fr:Bro Gozh ma Zadoù). 1923 is tricky and IANAL so it dont know if we can apply it or not. Cdlt, VIGNERON 12:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If published 1898 outside USA: According to the US copyright law about pre 1923 works and according to the discussion here on the Exemption Doctrine Policy of the WMF (here) it can be posted here. -jkb- 13:13, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Based on the supplied information, I just added an internal link at Wikisource:National anthems. This multilingual portal does accept pre-1923 texts even if they are still copyright-restricted in their source countries. If someday a Brezhoneg subdomain is to be opened but French copyright law has to be respected, only those freely usable in France should be transferred, while those still copyright-restricted in France should stay here. A translation of Template:PD-US-1923-abroad should also be considered.--Jusjih 21:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I absolutely don't understand your rationale : Here you apply the US legislation because the project is hosted in US by a US organization.
Language does not matter, and even English is not the official language for US. If you were basing your rationale based on language's original country, then all English sites and multilingual sites would have to follow the UK legislation.
For the msame reason, I absolutely don't know why you think that the French legislation must take priority for sites, pages or pages in French. Note that French is also spoken in US, and there are French authors there that absolutely don't mind about legislation in France.
French is also spoken in lots of other countries and, for example, I absolutely don't understand why a Canadian or Camooonese author would be bound to the law of France, or when the US government itself creates documents in French !
The onlyjthing that matters is copyright law, the way it is protected by WIPO treaties. Yes there's the exception case of public domain, but then the public domain must be appreciated based on the original copyright : a public domain of a country can only be extended to other countries if there's such a provision in WIPO treaties. As France is a member party of WIPO, its public domain is also protected the same way as its copyright, and all WIPO members recognize the French rules. So if a French author is died more than 70 years ago, plus years of war (not just WW1 and WW2, but also other conflicts, as stated by the French National Assemblee), plus years for service to the nation, this applies internationally as well, including in US that recognizes WIPO treaties and also protects the French copyright.
In other words, if US does not grants additional years of exclusive copyright to authors with US nationality because of wars, it does not mean that US will not repect the French copyright. US can regulate only on the public domain for its OWN copyright.
In all cases, it does not matter at all on which subdomain the article will be, the texts will be on an US website, and must follow the US law, and must protect the copyright of all other WIPO countries where they apply to specific authors.
There most not be any difference between this multilingual wiki here, and a candidate French or Breton subdomain. The copyright restrictions (and its withdraws into the public domain by the original country were the copyright originated) must be applied identically.
This also means that the PD-US-1923 licence proposed here is completely wrong, in any Wikimedia sites hosted and run by (independantly of the language subdomain), because the work above has never been copyrighted in US. As the author is French, the French copyright applies in US too, and US cannot grant the "public domain" itself on a copyright that was not originated from there.
Final note: some countries are granting the public domain for their copyrighted works on unequal conditions between residents and abroad (this is the case of Russia). A national public domain does not mean that the covered product is necessarily free : public domain works are still copyrighted works, until all exclusive rights are levied by the national law from which it originated.
Here we must just check if this applies to US (and only US). For example, if a work in Russian, copyrighted in Russia, goes to the Russian public domain but not internationally, it is not free for use here (in a US-based host run by a US organization). We can only apply the laws that Russia has presented as instruments of ratification of its WIPO membership, and US will have to honor these rules according to the same WIPO treaties, and thus will have to respect them.
In our case, the applicable French law is the CPI (Code de la propriété intellectuelle) plus a few articles voted by National Assemblee after period of wars, they are applicable internationally because the CPI is the main instrument of ratification of France's WIPO membership and treaties. The WIPO is notified regularly when any changes occurs in the CPI, and unless a member country rejects the amendments (this has never occured) through a formal procedure, these instruments will apply everywhere. Note that even today, soldiers serving abroad for France and that die in Afghanistan or elsewhere, benefit of a similar protection of their own creations (so they are also granted additional years of exclusive copyright, for their heirs). That's why we must identify exactly who are the authors (physical persons, or moral persons like organizations), their nationality, where and when they lived and died, and the place and date of publication of specific editions of books we want to reproduce (if we can't find an appropriate edition, we must just assume the last date and place of death of all authors, unless we receive an explicit licence from their heirs). Verdy p 23:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remaining mass deletions[edit]

There are stil some more hundreds of pages to be deleted, particular the whole Limburgish section and the Georgian pages moved to Wikilivres (see Wikisource:Proposed deletions#Mass deletions needed). In April the User:Ooswesthoesbes offered the deletions and requested several times a temporary flags (User talk:-jkb-#Category:Limburgish, Wikisource:Scriptorium#User:OwtbBot, User talk:ThomasV#OwtbBot, see also my note User talk:Eclecticology#Proposed deletions), later the User:Maximillion Pegasus did the same (Wikisource:Proposed deletions#Category:Kannada, User talk:Eclecticology#Proposed deletions). Both wanted to delete the pages by a bot not to flood the recent changes. Apart the fact that Eclecticology deleted manually the Category:Kannada (see Wikisource:Scriptorium#Recent deletions) the pages are still there and wait to be deleted. I don't think that after so long time as nothing happenned we can expect that the named users are still willing to help, and this would be a pitty. So the question is how to clear this matter. -jkb- 08:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Georgian pages need a bit of clean up on Wikilivres. No author, date of publication, etc. is mentioned. I think this should be done before the pages to be deleted, in case some information can be retrieved from here. Yann 13:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Georgian pages: yes, there is a lot to do, but all informations etc. are stored on Wikilivres so that the texts here can be deleted. (btw, on wikilivres I will need a bot as well ...) -jkb- 16:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm still here :) --Ooswesthoesbes 09:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, nice, thanks. In this case I support this sollution once more. The possibilities how to do it has been discussed time ago. -jkb- 14:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I must say that the coordination of this site is pretty bad ;) --Ooswesthoesbes 19:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Starting up Sinhalese pages[edit]

Hi, I have noticed that we don't have our own Wikisource( project. I had a discussion with several wiki guys & they have guided me, to make a request here to get assistance in starting up Sinhalese pages at multilingual WS. Could anyone please help me how to proceed? --බිඟුවා 07:16, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I Start Main_Page:සිංහල sub domain page? -- බිඟුවා talk 14:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK. Create the main page as first and add there the new language Category. When creating other pages so use this category as well. The only one point when creating other own Singhalese categories is this one: this is a multilanguage domain - thus you should avoid a overlapping of the category names. That's all. Go on and good luck, ask again when you need help, regards -jkb- 15:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! I'll do that. -- බිඟුවා talk 16:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For information, there is 7 sinhalese books here on Internet Archive. Cdlt, VIGNERON 12:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please remove the redirect Wikisource:Community portal and add Wikisource:News, which is almost orphan. --Nemo bis 08:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And add Wikisource:ProofreadPage_Statistics to MediaWiki:Statistics-footer. --Nemo 08:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
both done -jkb- 22:10, 19 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikisource, reCAPTCHA, PGDP workflow[edit]

A well hidden thread in foundation-l. --Nemo 20:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi everybody, can I ask for adminiship ?

I need for rename/delete pages (we begin a wrong version of the book Gwerziou Breiz-Izel, there a lot missing pages in Index:Luzel - Gwerziou Breiz-Izel.djvu).

I wondering : can I just ask for temporary adminiship here or should/could I do a proper request for permanent adminship on Wikisource:Administrators and then a removal request ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON 16:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I several times suggested to give Ooswesthoesbes temporary rights + bot flag to make some deletions, see here above #Remaining mass deletions, see also his request Wikisource:Administrators#User:Ooswesthoesbes. Might be this could be done by the same bot/person. I personally do not know any problems with temporary flags, it is a common practise on meta etc. -jkb- 17:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I really don't understand, what's wrong with the bureaucrats here? They seem not to care a bit about oldwiki... maybe we should just elect a new bureaucrat and ask directly on meta:Steward requests/Permissions to give him access, and then we can give admin rights to whoever needs them. Candalua 17:57, 28 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, to me the old wikisource looks a bit rusty compared to the incubator and such. I see some people which are really actively editing this wiki and coordinating it, especially -jkb-, but they are the minority of the admins here :( If we had an active bureaucrat, we could indeed do something like test-sysop which is used at the incubator, though there are some negative aspects to test-sysop aswell. --Ooswesthoesbes 21:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As far as I know, there is nothing wrong with the crats. But most of my participation go to the breton section of oldws (but I'm interrrested for doing more). Moreover, I dont know incubator...

I leave a message to Eclecticology yesterday, so wait and see.

The only thing I really need right know is to delete Index:Luzel - Gwerziou Breiz-Izel.djvu and all his pages (unuseful and bad duplicate). But if there’s a need, I could become sysop (or maybe crat) permanently here to help you. Cdlt, VIGNERON 14:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, there's nothing wrong with the bureaucrats themselves, but at the moment they are a bit silent :)
We await his reply :) You are free to sign up at Wikisource:Administrators. --Ooswesthoesbes 06:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is not only the system of admins that could be improved here. Might be the question should be asked what shall we do with this domain. As far as I can remember there has been some thoughts in the past that the incubator would be better for "incubating wikisources" than this damain (I oppose this view). If we keep it so there should be probably made some basic guidelines for the languages (how to categorize for instance - now sometimes I really don't know to what language a page belongs, as the categories are made with non-UTC-characters and I see ????? only). And then it can be decided if we need something like test admins or not (in fact I do not think so as we have enough users here that are working continuously and could get the normal flag). The question with bots etc. is quite easy to be solved. -jkb- 08:13, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I think the categories should be improved. If all pages of a language are in one category it is much easier to export them to their new domains and less pages will be forgotten. --Ooswesthoesbes 11:11, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@vigneron : I can give you sysop rights. the standard procedure is to ask here : Wikisource:Administrators
@candalua : there is nothing wrong with a 1 week delay between a request and the decision to grant rights. And if there is not enough support for a request, there is nothing wrong with bureaucrats not granting rights.
ThomasV 10:29, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thomas, these few days of delay are not a problem at all; but Ooswesthoesbes has asked for admin rights months ago, and the matter has been discussed several times with no action from the bureaucrats. Candalua 15:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is mistaken; the request is dated July 26.
In a broader matter the software does not permit the grant of temporary sysop rights. It would be a useful feature, especially in this project where a user may want to delete material that has been moved to another language project, but would have little need to come back here after the job is done. Eclecticology 09:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think it is not the question of software. As I suggested time ago, it can be 1. by a request on Meta ([1], [2]) or 2. by an agreement (with a trustfull user, of course) here (we fix here this agreement like "after deletion of ... the user requests the removal ...). -jkb- 09:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, new deletions manually... By the way, I am sorry for this edit, but see above #Recent deletions. For next days it will not be possible to have look at vndalisms etc., as the recent changes will be flooded extensively. I do not understand it. I take a short holiday here. Cheers. -jkb- 09:56, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This should not have a significant effect on recent changes. Just change your preferences at the recent changes tab to show "enhanced recent changes". By setting that option the deletions by one person in one day will be grouped and just show the total number of deletions made by that person. You will then have the option of expanding that line. Manual deletions are so much easiewr than trying to figure out the operations of a bot. Eclecticology 11:01, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I ask for adminship on the standard page : Wikisource:Administrators#Requests for adminship. Cdlt, VIGNERON 18:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I’m now admin, thanks everybody. Don’t hesitate to contact me. Cdlt, VIGNERON 09:12, 13 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Two templates for numbering verses?[edit]

Hi all,

These two templates Template:NumVerseRight or Template:NVR (same template), and Template:R, serve the same purpose, don't they? I hadn't noticed R was already here when I created NVR. Do we keep them both? --Zyephyrus 14:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This two template have the same purpose and nearly the same code. I think we should merge it. Cdlt, VIGNERON 07:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, we'd better redirect template:R to template:NumVerseRight (better documentation). --Ooswesthoesbes 07:43, 25 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Merged. --Zyephyrus 14:03, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Using LanguageConverter syntax at Wikisources[edit]


After some contributions at pt.wikisource, I was looking at some old talks from the archives from English Wikisource Scriptorium (like these: 1, 2, 3 and so on...) and thinking about the following question:

Is it useful to have a text both in the original spelling/grammar and in an updated version, without having to duplicate the whole text in two places?

If so (and I think it is), maybe it could be an interesting possibility to use the syntax and features of the LanguageConverter (used at projects in Chinese and other languages) so that besides the original and intact version the reader would have a link to access an updated version of the text generated "on the fly" by the converter. This is the same feature that Tim suggested could be used for treating the differences between American & British English, so besides the updating in the spelling and grammar, the resulting text could be shown using terms of the specific variant chosen by the reader (American/British). Similar proposals are also being made at Strategic Planning wiki, at strategy:Proposal:More multi dialect wikis (talk), and the same idea was suggested by a user from French Wikisource.

As I proofread the text at portuguese Wikisource, I'm keeping track of what "conversion rules" could possibly be used by the system in order to convert from old to modern forms of Portuguese. The current table is at

What do you think? Would this kind of thing be a new kind of added value to our Wikisource texts? Helder 03:53, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, if it's only old spelling -> new spelling I don't think it is really useful, unless there have been so many spelling changes that the original spelling no longer is readable. --Ooswesthoesbes 08:18, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We have a problem of old spelling in French (fro, frm, ... fr-1718, fr-1740, ... fr-1835, fr-1878, ... fr-1990). fro is clearly not readable for modern french people, frm is difficult, fr-1718 is strange but begin to be readable, after the difference are more and more rare ('boîte' before 1900 instead of 'boite' after 1990). The problem is that the automatisation is not esay but if you have a tool, that a good news ! Cdlt, VIGNERON 13:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A good start would be to make a draft of how the French conversion table(s) would be like. This can be done while you are proofreading some old text at Wikisource. I've corrected the link above (which was pointing to Wikipedia instead of Wikisource) to the table I started based on pt:Elementos de Arithmetica. The syntax (explained at MetaWiki) is very simple: essentially a list of pairs from => to; surrounded by -{ and }-. The longest match takes precedence. The system also makes it possible to indicate in each page what should be converted, so that changes which are not doable globally for the whole project (using the conversion tables) can be made using the appropriated syntax in the wikicode of the specific pages.
In Portuguese Wikisource we have some texts whose spelling is somewhat hard to read. For example, "cõtynuadamte" is currently written as "continuadamente" (or even "continuamente") and there is a lot of words with suffered changes like this in the book Bem cavalgar (from 1843). Helder 18:36, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
I am strongly in favor of this idea, and I would like as much of you as possible to support it. I believe Helder is in the right path to make the content of many Wikimedia projects, like Wikisource, available to a wider audience, and help overcome the natural difficulties caused by a text written in an unfamiliar way. This is an idea that will only succeed if it is implemented collaboratively, in the spirit of Wikimedia. Please lend your support, lend a hand, an arm, or a leg :-), lend some of your valuable time to something that a few can do for so many. Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado. Vapmachado 22:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There soon a draft on fr.WS : fr:Wikisource:Dictionnaire (used by a script activate by the link Texte modernisé on the left). The problem is that fro is a different langages and nearly all the words are differents so it's a big table (I work with the wiktionnaries too). Cdlt, VIGNERON 08:26, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cool! That is amazing! :-) I'll take a look there too. The table certainly would be usable by the conversion system of MediaWiki (just a matter of changing the syntax, and eventually doing some minor adjustments...). Besides this, using the table in the internal converter should be faster then using JavaScript. Helder 22:08, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
This sounds like an excellent idea. On :no: we have attempted to use the same script as is used by :fr:. Initially, there was a lot of enthusiasm for the project, and a dictionary was made, but it hasn't worked as well as we hoped for, which has resulted in the project falling dormant. (I recently tested it, and although most words in the dictionary were converted, some were not, even a simple couplet such as "grøn -> grønn".) Another issue is words which in previous orthography were written the same, but now are written different. As an example, "at tænke at" (to think that) is in modern orthography: "å tenke at", so a mechanism would be needed to separate the first at (changed to å) from the second (to remain the same). If conversion was more reliable and such word couples which today are different but previously were not, could be dealt with, this would be a massive improvement, and would give WS a massive boost. V85 15:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Using LanguageConverter, the conversion rules are executed from the longest to the shortest, so it would be possible to define in the customizable conversion tables the rule
  • at => å
and also the rule (of greater precedence)
  • at tænke at => å tenke at
(this is just an example. I don't really know if "at" is usually converted to "å" and only in some cases to "at")
This makes it possible to use a single rule
  1. forlægger => forlegger
instead of each of these:
  1. forlægger => forlegger
  2. forlæggeren => forleggeren
  3. forlæggerens => forleggerens
In portuguese this is useful when specifying the rules for conjugations of verbs, and for plurals, when the conversion happens in the part which is common to all forms of the word.
The rules which can be used in large scale conversion would be stored in pages like "MediaWiki:Conversiontable/<lang>-<variant>" and the eventual exceptions could be corrected manually in the wikitext, using the markup -{no: original/old text; no-nb: modern bokmål text; no-nn: modern nynorsk text}-. The markup has options (described at Meta-Wiki) to indicate the conversion of the title of pages, or to define a conversion rule that should be applied to an whole page (instead of specifying the same rule in various places in the same page), and also to disable the conversion in pages where it shouldn't happen.
I've made an adaptation of the javascript used at and, and converted the previous table to two dictionaries. It seems to work. Helder 00:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
See also my note about the current version of the script, on fr:Wikisource:Scriptorium/Janvier 2011#New version of script for modernization. Helder 12:50, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

IMPORTANT: javascript problem[edit]

Please, could some admin add the following: importScriptURI(""); at the top of MediaWiki:Common.js? This is needed in order to make the other importScriptURI work. Thanks. Candalua 15:19, 30 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(And since this is not my first "please, admins" request, this time I'm also running for adminship! :-) Candalua 15:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

done ThomasV 04:40, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

JS error[edit]

I'm getting this javascript error when working on Page namespace:

Errore: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80004005 
(NS_ERROR_FAILURE [nsIDOMNSHTMLTextAreaElement.selectionStart]"  nsresult: "0x80004005 (NS_ERROR_FAILURE)"  
location: "JS frame :: :: mwSetupToolbar :: line 65"  data: no]

line 65 on that script is:

&& textboxes[0].selectionStart === null ) {

so the problem is clear, someone put 3 equal signs instead of 2. The problem is: how to fix it? Do we need to report it somewhere, and where? Candalua 20:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

bugzilla ThomasV 09:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem is different, and not related to the number of equal signs (both will perform the same when comparing to null). It comes from the attempt to read property 'selectionStart' from the null object 'textboxes[0]'.
The 'null' object normally has no properties, except: its type, being convertible to the "null" string, being convertible to a false boolean, being identity-comparable to itself (true), equality-comparable to itself or to an number (true if zero) or to a boolean (true if false), and having its prototype as itself but not being instanciable with operator new.
So it should be :
&& (textboxes[0] == null || textboxes[0].selectionStart == null) ) {
Apparently, this means that the textbox element was not found in the document by this script (most probably an incorrect selector to find it, or incorrect assumption about the DOM structure of the page content, possibly because of a bug in another script that altered the page, or caused by the script itself that already deleted the element). Verdy p 00:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The other possible cause of failure is that 'textboxes[0].selectionStart' is not 'null' but is 'undefined'. The 'undefined' object is even more restricted then 'null', and is not even identity-comparable with any other object (including 'null') except itself. But the 'undefined' object is still equality-comparable with the 'null' object (in this case the equality test, with 2 equal signs, will return true).
In that case there's no 'selectionStart' property in the existing textbox, even though it has a 'selection' property : to get the equivalent of the 'selectionStart', you have to look in the properties of the 'selection' property value itself, because the stript only tests for the existence of the 'selection' property but not 'selectionStart' (which is incorrectly assumed, and probably specific to a few javascript engines/browsers). Verdy p 00:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bot wanted[edit]

I want to use a bot, to make a split operation (duplicate of the same operation on french WS). Anybody who knows the name of a non restricted bot can help. ThomasBot was used on french WS, but here it is restricted to sysops. --Wuyouyuan 08:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

no, you completely misunderstood, the bot has never been restricted to sysops. The bot is a sysop, therefore it is dangerous to let anybody use it, this is why I disabled its free use. I re-enabled it for your purpose. ThomasV 09:18, 15 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
it is almost done, all OK. Thanks to ThomasV. --Wuyouyuan 16:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much ThomasV.--Gwendal 16:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Import of a French template[edit]

Hi all,

I have imported this template from it creates thumbnails of pages from a djvu file. There were pages included in the French example, I have deleted the ones that obviously didn't belong here. I wonder if some of the remaining templates can be useful here or if it is better that I delete them all. Your opinions? --Zyephyrus 12:51, 17 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

bot flag request for User:MerlLinkBot[edit]

Hi, i havn't found any page on this wiki containing the local bot policy and where to request for bot flag. Wikisource:Robots is only an overview of policies on the subdomain wikisources. So i try it here:

  • Function summary: changes external links which are outdated and can be successfully replaced by a new one.
  • Already has a bot flag on: 60+ wikipedias and other wikimedia projects, (see all flags)
  • Function Details:
    The bot replaces urls that have to be changed. This can be only a domain change or a more complex page structure change on a website. Links are dectected with the help of the api (and not with regex) and are only replaced if the webserver of the new url returns a 200-status-response for that new resource. “Link text” is not changed. (own framework written in java - used by all of my bots)

Merlissimo 14:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If there is no objection i'll start running this bot at a slow rate in a few days. There are about 100 edits in queue for this wiki at the moment. Merlissimo 15:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! For the flag, you should ask directly to one of the bureaucrats: User:ThomasV or User:Eclecticology. They usually don't read this page very often. Candalua 17:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think they do: they must know wikisourcians' opinions before deciding or doing anything, don't they? Botflag being a decision not easy to take because wikisource requirements are so different from other projects requirements, I think it is normal that getting an answer takes time; I think that running first the bot at a slow rate is right. --Zyephyrus 19:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The bot never started editing? I guess the flag is not desired. Oppose until such time as the bot demonstrates it has a need to edit here at all, let alone flagged.--Doug 14:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am an admin on Polish Wikisource. The text Księga Welesa was transferd from Old Wikisource by bot in 2005 to Polish Wikisource, see here -> pl:Księga Welesa. The bot did not transfer the list of users who made edits into this text. This is a translation and we have problem to know who was the author of translation. Could anybody admin see into the delated file and say me the name of the user or the list of users who made edits in this text? Thanks in advance. Electron  <Talk?> 22:10, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Three edits:

  • (show/hide) (diff) 00:13, 1 August 2005 . . Niki K (Talk | contribs | block) (Deseczka 2а (II 2а))
  • (show/hide) (diff) 00:11, 1 August 2005 . . Niki K (Talk | contribs | block) (Deseczka 2а (II 2а))
  • (show/hide) (diff) 23:06, 17 June 2005 . . Niki K (Talk | contribs | block)

Regards -jkb- 22:32, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks a lot. Electron  <Talk?> 23:35, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
After temporary undeletion here, complete edit history has been sent to Polish Wikisource.--Jusjih 02:43, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. Thanks. Electron  <Talk?> 00:46, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Is it possible to add br.wp on the list of site on Special:Import ? (I need it to import some breton template like w:br:Patrom:Disheñvelout). Cdlt, VIGNERON 12:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do not know how to add add br.wp on the list, but I can import for you if you specify which pages.--Jusjih 02:54, 17 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If I understand correctly, adding a site to the dropdown list can only be done by the developers. This can be requested in Bugzilla (example). Jafeluv 12:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jafeluv : that’s right, I've forgotten that.
@Jusjih : how could you do the import ? (by xml ?) I you can, please do it thanx.
Cdlt, VIGNERON 08:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chuvash page titles[edit]

Hello. There are some pages in Category:Чăваш that have a language prefix in their name and should be moved to plain titles without the prefix. I'd do this myself but it's probably better if someone with a better understanding of Chuvash and/or our naming conventions does it to avoid duplication of effort. For example, Cv/Иванов, Константин Васильевич is an author page, Cv/Викивулавăш:Хайлавсем seems like a projectspace page judging by the prefix, and I'm not sure what the prefix Кăтартмăш: means. Also some of the titles with the author's name in parentheses probably don't need disambiguation (eg. Cv/Ватă вăрман шухăшĕ (Константин Иванов)). Anyone want to try to sort this out? Jafeluv 22:39, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to deal with multilingual books ?[edit]

I’d like to do these Middle-Breton hours. But the text is in three languages (english, middle breton, and latin) all mixed together (you can found the three on the same page).

The 'usual' method (splitting on en, old, and la wikisources and using template:iwpage) dont seems a good idea here. Has anybody an other idea ? Cdlt, VIGNERON 14:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I quickly scanned its content. I found this
  • This book is not out of place in en.source: it's thought for an Englsh speaking reader, some pages in the introduction and some explanatory sections are completely in English language: they are to be transcluded and proofread from en.source.
  • Latin is ininfluent: there isn't a real complete text to extract, on the other hand there are a lot of single words or sentences that any proofreader (let him be English, French or Breton speaking) with some knowledge of Latin language can decipher.
  • Most pages are divided in two areas, an upper one with Breton/Latin text and a lower one with english translation. It's quite fit for interwiki transclusion: two distinct texts can be created out of these areas, both useful in their proper project.
  • The last section of the book is a glossarial index Breton-English: there's no way to divide Breton from English. I would assign it to the project with most readers (namely en.source) and would address readers from fr. and oldwikisource to proofread Breton text in that place. When that section is proofread it can be imported in the Breton project (i.e. here or in a future subdomain). A duplicate, I know, but this way we can be sure that both Breton and English are thoroughly proofread, and will be avalaible to both Breton and English users.
No easy solution is possible, only a compromise. - εΔω 16:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
That was my vision too. I think I will keep this text for later. Cdlt, VIGNERON 20:17, 27 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This is a general problem with all multilingual texts endemic to our Balkanized system and deserves further discussion on a way forward.--Doug 14:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vec and br[edit]

The venetian (vec) and breton (br) wikisources just open. There is still lots of work to achieve the migration, every help is welcome.

Cdlt, VIGNERON 19:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Small correction: vec and br ;) Jafeluv 20:12, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just a moment: many authors in it.wikisouce have interlinks pointing here: please wait for some days before deleting them. - εΔω 08:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Dont worry, importation doesn't delete the page here. There a lot of link from fr.WS to oldWS too. Cdlt, VIGNERON 14:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
can they be deleted now ? I do not want to add the new domains to the statistics while the moved pages exist at two sites simultaneously. ThomasV 11:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Vec seems pretty good (ask Canduala for confirmation) but there still some problems on br (no pages).
Moreover, elections are still in progress : vec:Wikisource:Ciacole & br:Wikimammenn:An davarn/Miz Du 2010 (end the 2nd December). Cdlt, VIGNERON 14:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for adminship and bot for eo.wikisource[edit]

The eo.wikisource was approved and soon it will be created. I'm the proposal of this project and sysop on eo.wikipedia, eo.wikinews and pt.wikipedia. I'm requesting for adminship of this new project (eo.wikisource, not olwikisource) here, in the Esperanto village pump. As a steward said here, the community could vote here, before the project is launched, in order to not have to make a request and then wait one week to begin to edit MediaWiki messages, delete pages, etc. I'm also requesting the use of my bot, CasteloBot, to make regex replacements, like Category->Kategorio, File->Dosiero, add/change categories and templates, by using AWB. CasteloBot has flag for this kind of use in eo.wikipedia, eo.wikinews and pt.wikipedia. Feel free to point your questions or let a comment here. Thanks. CasteloBrancomsg 22:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Bureaucrats on this project do not have the authority to grant rights in eo.wikisource or any other project. Your request should be made on Meta. 10:14, 30 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, the nomination still needs to be made locally. The request on Meta comes only after there's evidence of community consensus for the adminship. Jafeluv 11:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The linked comment was not from a steward but from me, who was critisizing the current practice. I think there should be a sort of voting here before the project will be created. Elsewhere it will be created without the rights of admins will be granted, and the project will be paralyzed for some days or weeks. We should vote here to shorten this procedure. -jkb- 00:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My mistake! I assume -jkb- was a steward. That's ok, I'll wait after the import, then. Thanks, anyway. CasteloBrancomsg 05:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, if you give me your vote, I can surely request for the stewardship :-) ... -jkb- 16:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Congratulation to the new subdomain to be opened soon. Seeing the vote for any new administrator there, any steward can grant a flag after getting consensus. Perhaps any new administrator there can import Esperanto pages? IF not, please tell.--Jusjih 19:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, Jusjih. I think there is no problem in waiting a little for the sysop flag and then I can import the pages in Esperanto Wikisource. And -jkb-, you have my support! CasteloBrancomsg 03:45, 13 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No need to do it yourself, when eo.source will open they will also import the pages (keep an eye on them, on vec they had forgotten a lot of pages ;-). When you are sysop, you'll just have to create the css and js you need and some Mediawiki pages, then when everything is fine you can ask ThomasV to delete the old pages here. If you need some help, I've spent the last month doing this same kind of things, so feel free to ask! ;-) Candalua 19:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also spent the last month doing this with Esperanto Wikinews. But this is not so automatic. There are some good guys in Meta that offer their help in import the pages, that's why you didn't need to do this on vec.wikisource (but SPQRobin did). Everybody can export the pages in a category, by using Special:Export, but only importers or sysops can import the .xml files in a project, by using Special:Import. If some pages were not imported, so they weren't in the correct category (maybe the .djvu files?). So, with the flag I can do both things (sysop things, like create css, js, MediaWiki messages/sidebar, protect pages/templates; and importer things, like look for pages in or outside the Category:Esperanto and import them directly, without needing to wait for the valuable help from the importers. And yes, we'll need the help from ThomasV or other sysop here for deleting the pages, after import them. Thanks! CasteloBrancomsg 21:11, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

#wikisource webclient[edit]

Thought that it may be useful for admins to add a link to the IRC webclient hosted by freenode that lets people connect to the #Wikisource channel. billinghurst sDrewth 05:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ok, thx, -jkb- 07:32, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]