Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Sep 2005 - Jan 2006

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search

No dumps for subdomains[edit]

At http://download.wikimedia.org/special/sources/ the dumps get smaller and smaller because of the creation of subdomains, but no dumps for the subdomains are available. Where can they be requested? --Jofi 17:05, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I also noticed this. What we need is for Wikisource to be listed along with the "regular" projects (Wikibooks, Wikiquote, etc.) at http://download.wikimedia.org/ (rather than in "special:).
Brion recently wrote that we should "always file a bug report" whenever anything is needed. So it would make sense to file a request for a Wikimedia feature regarding the for the dumps to be listed.Dovi 17:49, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
Files this at Bug 3541. Please vote for this bug.Dovi 19:49, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Just a note that Brion has taken care of this completely; see here. (It is also a relief to know that all projects in all languages have been backed up.) Thanks for the millionth time, Brion! Dovi 20:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Links to wikisource.org[edit]

In the world of subdomains, the s: link is fantastic. It makes to possible to easily link to any Wikisource language subdomain from any other project. I suspect that most or all of us like this new system very much.

But as some may have noticed, there seems to be no way to make a direct link from a Wikisource subdomain to wikisource.org. (If I am mistaken about this please correct me!) Nor is there a way to link to wikisource.org from the other projects. Please note that s: cannot be used for this purpose because it already links to subdomains from other projects (e.g. from French Wikipedia to French Wikisource).

I would like to make the following radical suggestion. The idea may take some getting used to, so think about it a bit before responding. I know it sounds weird, but here it goes:

Let us use [[:wikisource:]] as a link from the subdomains (and any other project as well) to wikisource.org. Any page at wikisource.org could be linked to from any other project.

That may not sound so strange, so here is the really unusual part (get ready...): The [[wikisource:]] link (without ":" in front) would also function as a language link in the sidebar ("other languages").

For instance, the Main Page of any subdomain besides listing Main Pages in various languages (,, etc.), would also list [[wikisource:]]. How would it appear amongst the list of native languages in native script? I suggest that along with "Francais", "Deutsch", "Espanol", "English", we also have "Wikisource" – plain and simple, to go to wikisource.org.

Thus language links from any Main Page would include links to the other subdomains, but also to the Main Page here at wikisource.org as well!

Likewise, any parallel article at wikisource.org could be linked to from subdomains. For instance, an info page on the Logo at French Wikisource could link to the Wikisource:Logo page right here.

What do people think of this?Dovi 19:34, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi,
You can't use wikisource for linking from a subdomain to Wikisource, because then how would you link to [[Wikisource:Page]] within the subdomain. And I think it will also be problematic from other projects. A possibility would be to use ws which is not used for any language, AFAIK. Also technical issues have to be taken into account before looking into any new idea. Yann 20:16, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
You're right, that was silly of me. Hmmm... maybe "WS" or other ideas?Dovi 20:19, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
another possibility is to use the two-letters code for the pashto language, and to alias it to the main site. the prefix would be 'ps', which can be read as the initials of 'Project Sourceberg'. (ok je sors -------->[]) ThomasV 20:37, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
From other project, [[wikisource:]] works now as interwiki to En Wikisource. It seems there is no interwiki header for this site. I prefer to have "wikisource" interwiki header as one to this site or to the same language version. --Aphaia 19:14, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Further discussion below under #Language code. [[oldwikisource:]] works.--Imz 01:44, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

The future of wikisource.org[edit]

Here are some ideas about the possible future of wikisource.org. I suggest that it will, for the most part, fulfill three functions:

Main Page Portal[edit]

The Main Page here at wikisource.org is a dynamic (not static) multilingual portal. It directs users both to the language subdomains and to the local main pages for languages located here. (There is room for adding a more functional division between these two categories.)

Local languages[edit]

This wiki is a place for local languages without their own wikis. We can afford to be very liberal about this, and let people start a Main Page listing texts in nearly any language. They can do this on their own, wiki style, with hardly any restrictions. Even if a local language project fails, there is no harm done to the project. If one succeeds, and a significant library in that language is created, a wiki can later be requested.

Wikisource coordination[edit]

This can be a place for coordination between Wikisource languages on issues that concern them all. (This function is the one that makes a way to link here from subdomains, even from the sidebar, so important.)

The most obvious real-life example of this is our choice of a new logo. The discussion and eventual vote on the Logo should be held here, and linked to from the subdomains. In fact, we may actually be very fortunate that right away after the advent of language domains, the next big thing we have to do at Wikisource is choose a Logo, because making that fun choice will set precedent and standards for future coordination among all the subdomains.

Besides the Logo, I suggest we create a page here at wikisource.org for occassional updates from all of the language domains. This will be a place where people can summarize what has been going on at their language wiki for the past few months. I suggest that it look something like this: Wikisource 10-05. The descriptions of each subdomain can be translated into any and all languages (see the example).

Right now, people are still busy building the subdomains, and "recovering" from the move. (I know that English still has a lot of recovering to do.) Therefore I suggest that the first "edition" of this update be delayed until 10-05 (see Wikisource 10-05). By the end of October people can leave that one alone for posterity and start adding updates to 12-05, perhaps quarterly (once every three months) from then on.

Please feel free to change/modify/criticize/suggest etc. at the suggested page for Wikisource updates.Dovi 19:43, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree that coordination is needed, and there are debates (such as logo choice or project name) that would better have everyone involved, not just the English-speaking of us. It would be great to make sure that at least one admin per subdomain checks this place from time to time, and takes part to the discussions. ThomasV 19:50, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
As for coordination, there is already meta for this purpose. For instance, Wikinews use it for their coordination (like licensure poll). A benefit to utilise meta for coordination between language proejcts is editors who are rather active on other projects is easily involved. The poll mentioned gets not only Wikinewsies' votes but also from other project participants. And if gathering the more voices is better, met a has a merit at this point. It is nice to use this site for coordination, but meta has its own merit. Just for consideration. --Aphaia 11:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

en.wikisource.org vs wikisource.org[edit]

(This section moved from s:Wikisource_talk:Proposed_deletions#en.wikisource.org_vs_wikisource.org here.)

It seems like I'm not the only one confused about the difference.

I see this when I start a new page:

You are about to create a new page. 
Please note that Wikisource now has language subdomains for the following languages: (a list)
You should not create your page here if it is written on one of those languages. 

There are no subdomains for, e.g. Catalan, so such documents go here, at least for now.

http://wikipedia.org/wiki/whatever is a redirect to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/whatever; should the same be done for http://wikisource.org? I think so. If not, perhaps requiring logins would discourage this sort of accident; documents in a language w/o a subdomain would to, e.g. other.wikisource.org.

Problems with the current setup: http://wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page links to the various languages, so pages created here are essentially hidden. Here's how I got tripped up. I typed wikisource.org into my browser and typed something I knew was in wikisource into the Search form on the left. It wasn't found cuz it's in 'en.', and I got rather confused. -Elvey

what remains to be done[edit]

The robot User:ThomasBot has updated its lists since moved pages have been blanked. Much less pages are listed now. There are still a few pages in those lists, though. Some pages that have been moved have not been blanked by the bot (in some cases because the page was protected and the bot did not have sysop rights (sorry), in some other cases due to server not responding, server error, network overload, or my putah changing its ip). I will try to detect them, and to remove manually the pages that should have been blanked. Some other pages are still here because they have been forgotten when the list was made (sr ru ja zh lists were done manually), because they were not wanted in the subdomain (for copyright reasons, or because the people thought they were useless). Finally, there are some pages that have been added to the site after the move, by users who were not aware of subdomains.

It would be great to help clean this. Especially for the ru zh ja pages (they are now listed in 'unknown'), because I am not in a position to decide whether they have been forgotten or simply unwanted. So here is how you can help: patrol the robots lists, for the languages that have a subdomain, and also the 'unknown' list. if you find a page that the robot should have blanked (a page that was moved), then delete it or blank it (with "Category:moved to xx"). If you find a page that has been forgotten, copy paste-it to your subdomain and delete it or blank it. If you find a page that is unwanted both here and in your subdomain, mark it for deletion.

ThomasV 20:27, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Language code[edit]

Hi! Is there a language code (like en, hu, fr, su, la etc.) for multilingual wikisource projekt? My problem is that I can't make links to here since english wikisource started.

In hungarian wikipedia [[wikisource:Tollas Tibor: Beszélő]] link should show to the page Tollas Tibor: Beszélő, but unfortunately, it always shows to here: [1]. Thx. Gubb 07:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

In czech wiki we use this: [[oldwikisource:Tollas Tibor: Beszélő]] (with additional old) and it works. -jkb- 07:58, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it works. Thx very much. Gubb 13:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
They've set up a link to get to the multilingual Wikisource?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 01:50, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
No idea why and how it works, we had this problem in cs:wiki and then someone discovered this. -jkb- 13:19, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Meta[edit]

Wikisource in Meta: Wikimedia News

Indonesian[edit]

Following the request now archived at Wikisource:Language domain requests/archive2, the Indonesian Wikisource has been created at id.wikisource.org. Angela 05:54, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Hmm...I notice that people are still supporting a logo or opposing one. I know a LONG time ago we tried to get the vote going. Should we retry that effort since people still are showing their interest in it?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 04:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I do not think that the votes on this page can be given any credit. no clear rules were stated. most "voters" seem to have no other contributions to wikisource than their vote; actually they could be sockpuppets. In addition, new logo proposals were added after the first people voted. the only positive point I see is that this page incited people to submit new logo proposals. ThomasV 07:03, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
So, do we start a new vote with better defined rules (something similar to the vote for the new language sub-domains) or just let it die? I believe we got very far in an old vote and Eclecticology asked the designer of the logo if he'd release it to the Wikimedia Foundation, but we never received a reply. It almost seems that doing another vote would just be too much work, especially when very few people visit this site any more (few compared to how many are visiting the language sub-domains, that is).—Zhaladshar (Talk) 21:29, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I did respond (pretty quickly in fact), and I did release all my designs to the foundation. The discussion can be found here and the license granted here.
Given that my first logo suggestion is about to reach its first birthday, it would be nice to get this issue resolved. I am disappointed that there has been very little debate about what the community actually wants. Perhaps this is because most of the more active contributors are interested in content and care little for matters like these (which is reflected in the fact that a lot of the contributors and 'voters' have not made significant contributions to the wiki). For what it's worth, I don't think this is a reason to dismiss them, as I think that these people are probably active contributors to other WikiMedia wkis, and if they're anything like me, they consider the various different wikis to be different branches of the same endeavour, rather than separate projects in their own right. They therefore have a natural interest in the well-being of the wider community, even if it's an area they aren't actively contributing to.
I agree that the vote (such as it is) is entirely meaningless, and have stated this several times before. Most of the logos don't even meet the basic criteria, or are just bad. There are perhaps four ideas that are worth developing, and I think only two that could be considered close to a 'final' version. However, I am very much in favour of getting something to replace the ugly blue square that currently sits in the top left corner. It's been a blight for far too long! Any suggestions about how to proceed would be appreciated. Having submitted three logos plus variants, I would find it hard to take the lead in this matter without being accused of bias, but would very much like to see something get done. --HappyDog 03:18, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
I do not want to be organizing a new vote, because it will be a lot of work, and I do not have enough time. However, if someone else is willing to organize one, here are a few suggestions:
  • do not allow new proposals to be submitted after people started to vote. posting new proposals during a vote is unfair and antidemocratic. IMO, the fact that this elementary rule was not followed in the first vote makes it invalid.
  • have clearly defined and well agreed-on dates.
  • dismiss the votes from people who do not really contribute to the project. editcounting might be a bit biased at the moment, because some pages were copied to subdomains with their whole histories. maybe it is time now to delete the pages that were moved. currently, edits are counted twice (once here and once in the subdomain where the pages have been moved).
  • needless to say, the vote must be advertised in each subdomain.
ThomasV 12:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
When I get time, should I have the inspiration, I might try to organize the new vote. This sort of thing takes a long time and is very hard for one person to do by himself, so I can't start it until around Christmas at the least.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 18:06, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
First ask who want a new logo. I see a lot of users who want it but they have not contributions in the proyect. Second, I am thinking in the links to a new image in all wikimedia proyect.....mmm too much work...... Volunteers? --LadyInGrey 03:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
personally, I do not want a new logo. I suggested that somebody organize a new vote because there seems to be some demand. but we might as well drop the idea if it turns out that these people are not real contributors. ThomasV 07:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

The actual logo is not the best it could be, but I don't find anything better among the new propositions, so better to keep the current one. Yann 21:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

January 2006: As someone trying to contribute and participate, I find the lack of structure counter-productive. I suggest a committee of three to five interested individuals manages the process to produce a definitive conclusion. I volunteer to participate in such a council, if helpful, and would be happy to organise it, although I would need some help first identifying those most appropriate to join. spirit 13.04, 05 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource doesn't need council and power structure. It needs people really participating. If no conclusion was reached upto now, it is because no proposition is really good enough to gather a consensus. As you mention on your page that you are a graphic designer, you could help greatly designing a new logo. The idea of spring suggested on the logo page is interesting, but there is no submission for this idea. Yann 14:19, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Conclusion and agreement will not occur unless people make it happen. It's not power; it's responsibility, and a strong motivator for getting things done. sprit 20.12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Deleting moved pages[edit]

It's been a little over two months since the first sub-domains have been created. People by now are used to the sub-domains and know where to find the articles they desire. We should start thinking about when it would be a good time to remove the documents that were moved over to the first batch of sub-domains. Of course, we don't have to do it immediately, but setting up a general date when we should begin the arduous task might be beneficial.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 18:06, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I was planning to use a bot for that. it is not ready yet, though. ThomasV 19:01, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
ok, the bot is working now. it is currently deleting the pages that have been moved to fr. ThomasV 09:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Delete Bot[edit]

A robot is now deleting the redundant pages that have been moved to subdomains. Please let me know when I can proceed with your subdomain. I will wait until I get confirmation from an admin of each subdomain. Please confirm on this page that I can proceed with your subdomain: Wikisource:Pages_moved_to_subdomains. ThomasV 09:53, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

You can proceed with es, --LadyInGrey 21:55, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Pages in Category:Moved to sv can be deleted. The pages are now at the Swedish domain. /EnDumEn 14:37, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

thanks. I realize it might take too much time to wait for every admin to answer, and I guess it is also useless. I'll just delete these pages now. if one of these pages is needed one day, it will still be available to admins. ThomasV 00:50, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Ah, seems, I am too late. We no longer need the pages here.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 05:06, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
You can go on with da. --Christian S 08:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
done! Wikisource is now much slimmer :-) ThomasV 17:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Wow...1400 articles. That's so small! One minor question: does anyone know how often Google refreshes their databases (that is, will the pages on the subdomains be listed on Google or will those links still point to the multilingual wikisource)?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 03:45, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Google will update their db pretty fast, a few weeks I guess. one thing that might confuse Google is if external website point to the multilingual wikisource: Google gives a higher rank to the pages that are pointed to. Now that these pages are removed, subdomains should show up more easily in google's results. ThomasV 09:05, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

extension for rendering translations[edit]

I just submitted an extension for displaying translations on two columns. you can see it running on my machine: http://thecircle.dyndns.org/wiki you can vote for the bug here: http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4104 ThomasV 11:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

This is a neat little extension! It'd be nice if such a thing were to be implemented.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 03:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
I hope it will be available to us soon. in the meantime, if you have comments about possible improvements (syntax, etc) it's better to post them now than later. ThomasV 09:07, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
That is outstanding! I'll go vote for the bug now. Dovi 18:22, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
the bug has my vote, (7) --LadyInGrey 17:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
the extension is now in cvs. I hope it will soon be enabled on Wikisource... btw, I'll be on vacation for the next 8 days. happy new year to everybody. ThomasV 21:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
It would be nice, if it would also work for users without javascript. --Jofi 00:00, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
it is now enabled (see below). there might be a way to display the arrows with pure css, I haven't tried yet. ThomasV 00:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

How to format verse?[edit]

There already was a discussion, but as far as I know there is no really good solution. When using <pre> tags the text can't be formatted (bold, italic, links), the css property "white-space" doesn't work with many browsers. So what can be done? --Jofi 23:54, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

There is a "verse" class, but as Thomas mentions it, no possibility to have formatting inside. I ask Brion for such a feature, but he turned the request down. However somebody has made such a patch for Mediawiki, see http://crash.vikimedija.org/index.php/Poem . Yann 15:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
"see ."? I think there is something missing. A separate mediawiki tag "verse" could have another advantage: Automatic line numbering could be enabled. The only (automatic) way to do this now would be Javascript. Bad for people without Javascript. --Jofi 00:15, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
OK, Brian turned the request down, but as far as I can remember he thought it could be done easily with CSS, what is true only for some newer browser, others would get rubbish instead of verses. And a feature like automatic line numbering (it should be possible to exclude lines) would make a serarate extension even more useful. So if think, if there are no better ideas for a solution, we could try it again to make such an extension possible. --Jofi 23:01, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Brion suggested using CSS which is what we do, with the problems mentioned above. I think that a proper feature should be proposed again to the Mediawiki developers. But that needs skill and time. Yann 23:32, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Display / hide page numbers, annotations etc.[edit]

At de.wikisource there are script extensions that can be used with templates (e.g. [2]) to display or hide page numbers, annotations an so on. It adds an item to the toolbox on the left where any user with javascript can change the visibility of these elements. Maybe other projects can also use it. Most likely the code could be improved as I'm not a developer. --Jofi 00:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

that's great. I think we will use it on fr.
for the people who do not read German: if you want to see what it does, find a page that links to the above template, and click on "Seitenzahlen ausblenden" ThomasV 10:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Making proof reading easier[edit]

Mediawiki doesn't support proof reading. A first step to make it easier would be to preserve the line breaks. For that a soft hyphen is neccessary for line breaks within words. I think, the only way is to change Mediawiki and add a symbol that, used at the end of a line, isn't displayed and puts the word before and after the line together without an empty space. This could be "&shy ;" or a "-" (if the text should have one, it has to be uses twice "--") or something else. Or is there an other solution? --Jofi 00:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I reported it as Bug 4473. --Jofi 00:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Obviously nobody is interested in that. Why not? --Jofi 00:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't exactly understand the problem or what's being asked. To me everything seems to work just fine.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 00:42, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I try to explain it. If you have an original text like this:

Dies ist ein Beispieltext, der nur Test-
zwecken dient.

it is displayed in Wikisource like this:

Dies ist ein Beispieltext, der nur Test- zwecken dient.

Correct would be:

Dies ist ein Beispieltext, der nur Testzwecken dient. (without "-" and empty space)

So you have to change the text to have it correctly displayed. But then you don't have the original line breaks. If now somebody wants to proofread the text, it is much more difficult for him to find the correct line. This could be easily solved if:

Dies ist ein Beispieltext, der nur Test&shy;     (or anything else instead of "shy")
zwecken dient.

would be possible and would result in:

Dies ist ein Beispieltext, der nur Test­zwecken dient.

You would have nice text in the article view and original line breaks in the edit view. --Jofi 21:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, got it. Thanks for clarifying.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 22:07, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

partial protection of pages[edit]

The current page protection scheme is not satisfactory. One problem is that there is a good reason for never protecting pages, even if when they are complete and error-free : pages will always need to be updated, because we will keep inventing new formatting tricks, and we will keep adding interlanguage links.

I posted another bug, in order to have partial protections of pages: http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4375

ThomasV 00:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

en.wikipedia already has something like that (w:en:Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy). I think this could also fit the wikisource needs. People who are active for a longer period of time mostly know what they are doing, but newbies often only "correct" the old typography to a newer one. --Jofi 01:45, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

This is a very good idea. It's much better than what we had been planning on doing, since this way allows anyone to edit formatting. The English WS had been talking about using templates and protecting those (which contain the text) so as to allow any user to edit the formatting. This way (if it becomes implemented) will be much better.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 16:43, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I do not have much time to implement it now, this is why I posted this bug. however I guess it would not be too complicated to write, as long as no modification of the interface is made. If someone feels like doing it, please go for it. ThomasV 21:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

well, implemented. please vote for the bug. ThomasV 18:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
it was added to cvs yesterday. I do not know how long it will take until it is enabled here. ThomasV 07:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I requested this extension to be enabled on wikisource. however, I was told that it is appropriate to organize a vote in order to show that there is consensus about it. the point is that it would modify protection policy; nobody seems to be willing to take responsibility for that. Vote page will be here: Wikisource:Vote on enabling the ProtectSection extension ThomasV 14:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

copyright templates[edit]

I hate them. All of them. In general, people who visit this site are looking for texts, and I am sure that in most case, they do not give a *** on the copyright status of these texts. The are looking for some information, or they want to enjoy some nice reading. They better not be disturbed by large templates that look like advertisement banners.

I once recommended that those templates be placed in the talk pages. Apparently my proposal did not convince many. Now, there would be another way to keep this information non-invasive: it is possible to modify the skin, so that a new tab for the copyright status is displayed if a copyright template is present in the page (and the template is not displayed). Users who click on this tab will be redirected to the template.

Check here for an example. This page uses a template (Copyright-ONU), and this results in a "license" tab (license is French for licence). How it works: I moved the existing template to the Wikisource: namespace. I then replaced the redirect page with an empty div that carries an id recognized by Monobook.js.

ThomasV 20:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm glad to see someone else hates the copyright templates as much as I do. I really hate the PD templates the most. I'm going to bring this up on the English WS to see how many people would rather have a tab than have to place a template (which are the ugliest things) on each work.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 22:27, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

great. let hate unite us :-) ThomasV 22:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm in for a seperate copyright/license tab. That makes much much more sense to me. Incidentally, "license" is english for "license". "Licence" is American English for "License". :) Cheers -- ChristianEdwardGruber 21:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I support a seperate copyright/license tab as well. It is now used at French Wikisource.--Jusjih 01:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

bilingual extension[edit]

the DoubleWiki extension was just enabled by Brion! you can see it in action in the French wikisource.

In order to use it on all wikis, sysops need to adapt their Monobook.js file. many thanks to all those who helped me getting this through.

ThomasV 20:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

here is a short description of how to use it. ThomasV 20:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)