Wikisource - User contributions [en]

User:BirgitteSB

2012-07-14T20:44:53Z

BirgitteSB: Fix again

I am more active at [[:en:User:BirgitteSB|English]].

[[en:User:BirgitteSB]]

User:BirgitteSB

2012-07-14T20:44:13Z

BirgitteSB: Fix

I am more active at [[:en:User:BirgitteSB|English]].

[[en.BirgitteSB]]

User:BirgitteSB

2012-07-14T20:42:54Z

BirgitteSB: Fix

I am more active at [[en:User:BirgitteSB|English]].

User:BirgitteSB

2012-07-14T20:42:06Z

BirgitteSB: auto summary: HI ADMINS, I REPLACED THIS PAGE with 'I am more active at en:User:BirgitteSB.'

I am more active at [[en:User:BirgitteSB]].

User talk:Tpt

2012-07-14T20:40:24Z

BirgitteSB: /* Default header */ new section

{{Welcome|[[User:Zyephyrus|Zyephyrus]] 23:12, 23 March 2011 (UTC)}}
Agréable surprise de te voir arriver ici :)

== Admin ==

[[File:Mop.svg|100px|mop]] : here is the mop.

[[File:Bathsheba, Barbados 01.jpg|100px|seau]] : trouvé ceci en cherchant « seau » sur Commons...

...may be this one is more adequate: [[File:Seau à puits.jpg|100px|seau]]

Congrats :) --[[User:Zyephyrus|Zyephyrus]] ([[User talk:Zyephyrus|talk]]) 20:12, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
:Thanks ! [[User:Tpt|Tpt]] ([[User talk:Tpt|talk]]) 10:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

== Default header ==

Can you put the links on my talk page to the protected page where portal needs to be added?[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] ([[User talk:BirgitteSB|talk]]) 20:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Header

2009-03-05T20:38:26Z

BirgitteSB: Category:Exclude in print

<includeonly>{{#switch:undef!
|{{{title|undef!}}}
|{{{author|undef!}}}
|{{{section|undef!}}}
|{{{previous|undef!}}}
|{{{next|undef!}}}
|{{{notes|undef!}}} = <div style="text-align:center; border:1px solid #CCC; font-size:0.9em;">'''template error: please do not remove empty parameters (see the [[WS:STYLE#Templates|style guide]] and [[Template:Header#documentation|template documentation]]).'''</div> [[Category:Headers missing parameters]]}}</includeonly>
{| class="headertemplate" id="headertemplate"
|-
|class="header_backlink" | {{#if:{{{previous|}}}|←{{{previous}}}}}
|class="header_title" | '''{{{title|Untitled}}}''' {{#if:{{{override_author|}}}| {{{override_author}}}|{{#if:{{{author}}}|{{#if:{{{section|}}}| | }}by {{#ifeq:{{#expr:{{{author}}}}}|Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "["|{{{author}}}|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{override_author|{{{author|}}}}}}}}|unknown|Unknown|[[Author:{{{author}}}|{{{author}}}]]}}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{translator|}}}|{{#switch:{{lc:{{{translator|}}}}}
| ? = ([[:Category:Deletion requests/Unknown translators|unknown translator]])
| unknown =, ''unknown translator''
| not mentioned =, ''translator not mentioned''
| wikisource =, translated by [[Wikisource:Translations|Wikisource]]{{#ifeq:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}}|[[Category:Wikisource translations]]}}
|, translated by {{#ifeq:{{#expr:{{{translator}}}}}|Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "["|{{{translator}}}|[[Author:{{{translator}}}|{{{translator}}}]]}}
}}}}{{#if:{{{section|}}}| {{{section|}}}}}
|class="header_forelink" | {{#if:{{{next|}}}|{{{next}}}→}}
|}
{| class="header_notes"
|-
| {{{notes}}}
|}<includeonly>{{#switch:{{{translator}}}
|?
|unknown = {{No translator info}}
}}{{#ifeq:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}}||{{#switch:1
|{{#ifexist:{{#rel2abs:../}}|1}}
|{{#ifexist:{{#rel2abs:../../}}|1}}
|{{#ifexist:{{#rel2abs:../../../}}|1}} = [[Category:{{#if:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{NAMESPACE}} subpages|Subpages}}]]
}}}}{{#if:{{{override_author|}}}|[[Category:Pages with override author]]}}{{#switch:Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "["
|{{#expr:{{{author}}}}}
|{{#expr:{{{translator}}}}} = [[Category:pages using the author field hack]]
}}{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{override_author|{{{author|}}}}}}}}|unknown|[[Category:Anonymous texts]]}}</includeonly><noinclude>
[[Category:Exclude in print]]
{{documentation|Template:Header/doc}}
</noinclude>

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2008-01-14T19:09:37Z

BirgitteSB: /* Copyright clarifications from Mike Godwin */ new section

{{Scriptorium-side}}


'''[http://sources.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium&action=edit&section=new Edit(+) / Seite bearbeiten(+) / Modifier(+) / Pagina bewerken (+) / Düzenle (+)]'''
See Scriptoria in other language sub-domains: 

[[ca:s:Viquitexts:La taverna|Català:La taverna]] -
[[cs:s:Wikisource:Pod pramenitou lípou|Česky:Pod pramenitou lípou]] -
[[da:s:Wikisource:Skriptoriet|Dansk:Skriptoriet]] -
[[de:s:Wikisource:Skriptorium|Deutsch:Skriptorium]] -
[[en:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|En:Scriptorium]] -
[[es:s:Wikisource:Café|Español:Café]] -
[[fi:s:Wikiaineisto:Kahvihuone|suomeksi:Kahvihuone]] -
[[fr:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|Français:Scriptorium]] -
[[he:s:ויקיטקסט:מזנון|עברית:מזנון]] -
[[it:s:Wikisource:Bar|Italiano:Bar]] -
[[nl:s:Wikisource:De kroeg|Nederlands:De kroeg]] -
[[pl:s:Wikiźródła:Skryptorium|Polski:Skryptorium]] - [[pt:s:Wikisource:Esplanada|Português:Esplanada]] -
[[ru:s:Wikisource:Форум|Русский:Форум]] -
[[tr:s:VikiKaynak:Köy çeşmesi|Türkçe:Köy çeşmesi]]
[[zh:s:Wikisource:写字间|中文:写字间]]

=Notices=
==Wikisource project pages==
*[[Wikisource:What is Wikisource?|What is Wikisource?]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks|Wikisource and Wikibooks]]
*[[Wikisource:Votes|Votes]]
*[[Wikisource:Multilingual statistics|Statistics]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright|Copyright]]
*[[Wikisource:Possible copyright violations|Possible copyright violations]]
*[[Wikisource:Proposed deletions|Proposed deletions]]
*[[Wikisource talk:Index|Cataloging]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Project Gutenberg|Wikisource and Project Gutenberg]]
*Languages - see below

==Separate discussions==
'''Verschobene Diskussionen / Discussions déplacées / verschoven besprekingen / 移动的讨论 / Discussioni spostate'''

===Logo===
*[[Wikisource:Logo]]
*[[Wikisource:New_Wikisource_logo]]

===Languages===
*[[Wikisource:Language policy|Language policy]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests|Language domain requests]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/Rules for voting|Language domain requests/Rules for voting]]
*[[Main Page|List of Wikisource Languages]] (=[[Main Page]])
'''The language domain vote (over now):'''
*[[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)
*[[Wikisource:New discussion on language subdomains|New discussion on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)

===Archives===
'''Archive / 存檔 / Archivi'''
(oldest first)
*[[:m:Wikisource]] (Pre-launch discussions)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/November 2003 to January 2004|November 2003 to January 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2004 - Jun 2004|Feb 2004 - Jun 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jul 2004 - Oct 2004|Jul 2004 - Oct 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Oct 2004 - Feb 2005|Oct 2004 - Feb 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2005 - Apr 2005|Feb 2005 - Apr 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Apr 2005 - Aug 2005|Apr 2005 - Aug 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Aug 2005 - Sep 2005|Aug 2005 - Sep 2005]] (through the move to language subdomains)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Sep 2005 - Jan 2006|Sep 2005 - Jan 2006]] (months following the move language subdomains)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jan 2006 - Dec 2006|Jan 2006 - Dec 2006]]

:''Note: all archives are made by copy&paste, so that the whole history is here.''

;===========================================

=Your Scriptorium=
== Multiple languages side-by-side ==
It sometimes useful to make two or more languages of the same text side by side, especially useful to those language learners. What's current policy? [[User:222.130.198.181|222.130.198.181]] 09:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
:I don't know if there is a common policy. I find bilingual editions the best, with the original version and the translation, one in each column or in separated blocks; useful for very little texts. If the text is large, i find preferable to link to the original version, so contents are not duplicated. [[User:Aleator|Aleator]] 17:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

No policy in this point but a feature, see [[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jan 2006 - Dec 2006#Side-by-side alignment tags for translations?|archive here]] and [[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jan 2006 - Dec 2006#Side by side alignment (continued) : main pages same problem ?|archive here]], [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

== Licence PD manifesto - how to handle it? ==

The licence '''PD-manifesto''', see e.g. the English wikisource [[:s:en:Help:Copyright and Wikisource#Uncopyrightable works]], seems to be OK for the use on the opages of Wikisources. My question is: is it OK, and the second one if yes, how should we handle it if there is no similar licence in other countries. Also, what can be recognized as pd-manifesto. For example, there is a speach of a president of a country to celebrate the new year; it is not possible to use a licence like PD-German-Gov, as the president is not a part of the government; could the licence PD-Manifesto be used here?. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 18:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:Actually, we're having a crisis on en:ws about this very thing. Our policy says that PD-manifesto is valid, but we are seriously discussing whether that's true or not. The way we are leaning, however, is that manifestos are not inherently copyright-free, and so might be incompatible with WS (at least on a policy level, if not even on a legal level). If that's the case, we will have to change that part of our policy, of course.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to the discussion on en:ws? I would like to follow. Especially, on cs:ws there are some documents like the Manifesto of Charter 77 or other manifestos, produced by the oppositional groups or persons under the communist regime, then semi-government speaches etc., where we use this licence, but... [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 08:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

:[[s:en:Template:PD-manifesto]] does not have a discussion page in use. You may want to try the scriptorium there.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 09:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

::I think you refer to http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Public_speeches_in_general. [[User:Aleator|Aleator]] 19:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

== Cascade protecting for main page? ==

I have just deleted the 13th vandalism on [[Talk:Main Page/]]. There is a new feature for protecting pages, the cascade protecting, but I am not sure how it works and if it would help here. Anybody knows? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

:I actually thought I had already done it; it's done on all important main pages. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 11:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

::I had indeed. See protection log. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 11:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes I see there... But I understood this feature in that way, that by blocking of the main page all semi pages are blocked as well - but it is obviously possible to create Main Page/ rurther on. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

:Cascade protection protects pages that are used as templates on a page (in this case the templates on the [[Main Page]]). It does not protect talk pages, subpages, or similarly named pages (unless they are used as templates on the cascade protected page). /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 12:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. So we shall have to delete this several times a week in the future:-)... [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

== 1100 uncategorized pages ==

See please [http://wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Uncategorizedpages this category]. There are 1100 uncategorized pages. Some of them have been moved, some of them can be specified by language. But not all. When I am sure I delete them, but the most ones are pages where I am not sure what language it is. And a language category should be the minimum of categorisation. I ask some users like Smeira to have a look there, but it will not help profoundly. What shall we do with those pages?. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:They are generally not in English. I cannot identify their languages.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 18:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, some 4 weeks later there is a good balance: from 1100 uncategorized pages to some 460 now. I would like to thank here to all those who helped - and still are helping - to in this case. Nice to see that this domain still works somehow. Thanks, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:As of today, all remaining pages in Devanagari are in Sanskrit. These could be categorized with a bot. Any way, I think that there won't be a Sanskrit subdomain any time soon. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 08:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
::Fine. Sure, it should be done by a bot. I think Seira hat something like that, and I could ask him. But, to keep the RC clean it should have the bot flag, which can be granted by a bureaucrat only, I can do nothing (see also [[User talk:ThomasV#Bot]]). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

===Hints, remarks etc===
::I checked some pages; I could at 90% be sure of how to categorize them because they were linked somewhere else from some Main Page, or have an article in some Wikipedia I can read, or themselves claim to be in some language. I am also 90% sure of the language for the following pages that either have their own wikisource subdomain or have no language category, yet:
::*[[Dagome Iudex (latina)]] claims to be in Latin (and seems like the claim is true) so it should be moved to la. subdomain
::*[[Forsíða]] is a fossil page for redirecting to is. and fo. subdomains. category old main pages added, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC) 
::*[[Ynglinga saga]], [[Hálfdanar saga svarta]], [[Haraldar saga hárfagra]], [[Hákonar saga Aðalsteinsfóstra]], [[Haralds saga gráfeldar]] are all works by [[Author:Snorri Sturluson]] who is Icelandic (is. subdomain)
::*[[I-Internationale]] is in zulu but there is no category for such language category zulu added, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC) 
::*[[In 't Bronsgroen Eikenhout]] is the anthem of Limburg; the English wikipedia says that it is written in old Dutch (nl. subdomain); the page has also a section with a translation into English (en. subdomain)
::*[[Indonesia Raya]] and [[Internasionale]] are written in Indonesian (id. subdomain)
::*[[Internacionalah]] is in Karjala but there is no category for such language
::*[[International (mi)]] is in Maori but there is no category for such language category maori added [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC) 
::*[[Internationala]] is in Swedish (sv. subdomain)
::--[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 21:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

:::[[Kimi Ga Yo]] is a transliteration of Japanese (ja. subdomain) and a translation into English (en. subdomain)
:::[[Korea's Nation Archery Game Rule]] is bilingual English (en. subdomain) and Korean (ko. subdomain)
:::[[List of Hangeul syllables]] is Korean (ko. subdomain)
:::[[Luettelo Stalinin vainoissa kuolleista Vuolelaisista]] is Finnish and already exists that page on the fi. subdomain
:::[[Lỡ Bước Sang Ngang]] is Vietnamese and already exists that page on the vi. subdomain
:::[[Moscow agreement]] is English (en. subdomain)
::::::notice in en.source made, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:::[[Omelia della Messa di Insediamento di Papa Benedetto XVI]] is Italian (it. subdomain)
:::[[Osa I]] and [[Osa II]] are Finnish (fi. subdomain)
:::--[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 14:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

::::[[List of Hangeul syllables]] should probably be moved to Wikipedia, but I do not know if importing to Wikipedia is possible.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
::::::Transwiki from xx.source to xx.wikipedia is the default preference as far as I know. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::[[Wikisource:รัฐธรรมนูญ]] and [[รัฐธรรมนูญแห่งราชอาณาจักรไทย พุทธศักราช ๒๕๔๐]] are in Thai (th. subdomain).
:::::--[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 16:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

== category multilingual ==

I have just created the [[:Category:Multilingual]] (two examples: see there), as I have seen some more pages here with translations in more languages. But, I do not know if we want to have them in this way. Soon or later everybody will publish here texts of something translated into more languages. What shall we do with this??? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

:We still have some of that left on en.ws when the mass import happened. What we do is make sure that what does not belong on en.ws exists in the proper subdomain or else here and then delete it leaving the english. Perhaps you should do the same. If there are multiple languages that belong here, then create seperate pages in the native title.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 21:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

In fact the [[:category:multilingual]] is a nonsence and I created it as a temporary solution only, as I didn't know what to do with such pages. In some cases they are bilingual only (in language xx and original in latin just to compare it), in some cases they content some 10 languages of one text. Anyway, what ever we decide about it, the category multiligual keeps those pages one one place so that we find them later - to move them, to divide them or to delete them. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

==what happened to my previous user account??==
why was my user account apprarently deleted? I just had to re-register to be sm8900. Appreciate your help with this. --[[User:Sm8900|Sm8900]] 16:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:probably you want something else, see explanation in [[User talk:Sm8900]], [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

== Is a parchment fragment eligible to be a notable source? ==

I put the transcription of a parchment fragment here: [[Indovineło Veronéxe]] ([[Talk:Indovineło Veronéxe|info]]).

The notability of this fragment is stated [[:en:w:Veronese Riddle|here]] (there links to Italian, Spanish and Venetian versions of the article).

I think I correctly followed the steps of [[Wikisource:Text quality]], but now I wonder if this can be a "notable source".

--[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 23:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

PS: Is the [[Wikisource:Protection requests]] page still working? The last request dates 9 July 2005 15:45...
:Yes, sure. You can even put the image of the parchment to illustrate the text. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 11:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks! Unfortunately there are lots of copies of that image on the Internet, but none of them is PD or GFDL. More: the image is property of ''Biblioteca Capitolare di Verona''; according to Italian laws, one can ask permission to publish but one is not allowed to republish elsewhere. I already faced that problem on it.wikipedia, and this was the answer of Italian admins: if ''Biblioteca Capitolare di Verona'' gives permission I can upload that image but I have to mark it as "copyrighted".
::--[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 13:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

== Multilingual text templates ==
What do you think of making/converting multilingual templates (for example, [[:Template:Scriptorium-side]]) to similar ones to this one from meta: [[:meta:Template:Uptodate]]? It would avoid pages full of text, BUT it would be a bit confusing for update. [[User:Aleator|Aleator]] 19:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

== Transwiki - Importing data ==

I found some valuable sources in Venetian on it.wikisource. I was suggested to ask for a [[:Special:Import]] for that source into "oldwikisource" in order to put those sources in the correct place.

First question: is this job reasonably feasible?

Second question: what do you exactly need to know? I mean: should I tell you just which is the "cover page" for each book to import or should I tell you the complete report of all the pages that compose each book to import?

Third question: is it possible to automatically add the [[:Category:Vèneto]] categorization while importing the pages, or should the pages be categorized subsequently by handcoding?

Thank you in advance for answering. Regards, --[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 16:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

:OK, so here the answer: we shall need the names of the pages which are to be imported - I assume, that the pages will be imported comletely, i.e. incluseve history and inclusive the talk page. You can make the content here.
:But, first I have to love a problem: every admin can use this so called transwiki, but first I have to apply/request somewhere that we can import from the Italian Wikisource. I ask somewhere where I have to request and then we can make it.
:Answer here, I will follow this page more frequently... :-), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

::Ok, should I wait your "start" anyway?
::If I misunderstood your post, here is my first request for transwiki, just in order to see what happens:
::#an easy import:
::#*[[:it:s:Ritmo bellunese]]
::#a complex import:
::#*[[:it:s:Autore:Carlo Goldoni]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Dedica]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Introduzione]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Personaggi]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena I]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena II]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena III]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena IV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena V]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena VI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena VII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena VIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena IX]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena X]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena XI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena XII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena XIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena XIV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena XV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Primo/Scena XVI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena I]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena II]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena III]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena IV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena V]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena VI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena VII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena VIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena IX]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena X]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XIV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XVI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XVII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XVIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XIX]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XX]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XXI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XXII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XXIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Secondo/Scena XXIV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena I]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena II]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena III]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena IV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena V]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena VI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena VII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena VIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena IX]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena X]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XIV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XV]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XVI]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XVII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XVIII]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XIX]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XX]]
::#*[[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne/Atto Terzo/Scena XXI]]
::This list does not include templates and categories used by these pages. Is it ok this way? Can it be made simpler (i.e.: please import [[:it:s:I pettegolezzi delle donne]] and all subpages)? Should it be made more complex (i.e.: list and/or import templates and categories, too)? I hope that my questions are clearer now, with an example.
::Regards, --[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 12:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

:Well, this is pretty OK for the first time. I requested for me the possibility to import from other Wikisources, but in the moment I cannot say how long time it will take. There are some communication problems at present, I guess.
:After that, I will import the listed pages, and I will do it completelly, i.e. including the history and including the talk pages (if any). But, if I should import subpages as well, then indeed, they must be listed. If also categories or templates should be imported, so you should list them as well, but in this case we should be sure that there are no categories or templates like this here in the multilingual wikisource.
:After I have transwikied (=imported) the pages (I hope my request will be fullfilled), you will just have to categorize the pages here (normally, the category tags are imported together with the page, but normally they are different from the categories here).
:So, this for now, I hope it will happen soon. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you mind if I ask why you wish to not work on Venetian texts at it.ws? Since wikisources texts are static it is very useful to keep related languages together. It is not like wikipedia where one person will start an article in Venetian and another will want add more in Italian.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 21:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

:The answer is simple: Venetan is related to Italian exactly as French is related to Italian: they are "brother" languages ("cognate" or whatever). More, Venetan language is not even related to Italy: Venetan speakers span more countries in a similar way as Catalan speakers do.
:Apart from that, Venetan literature is most separate from Italian literature, and according to an admin of it.ws it was a mistake to start Venetan texts there; he is actually encouraging me to go on here.
:--[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 09:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks. I should have done a little research before asking, because after looking I see they are only related as far as "Romance."--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 13:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Ehm! Hello -jkb-, nice to meet you, Birgitte, Ciao Achillu! I'm the admin of it.ws who talked to Achillu! I can assure that it.wikisource hosts texts in [[:fur:|furlan]], [[:sc:|sardu]], [[:nap:|nnapulitano]], [[:eml:|emilian]] and in other dialects (obviously including [[:vec:|veneto]]). I don't consider an error if we host dialectal texts on it.source, but I understand that Veneto (I don't write "Venetian" because we are discussing about texts from [[:w:Veneto|Veneto]], not only [[:w:Venice|Venice]] and I don't know if a correct adjective exists in English) has a vast literature and a good potential to fork a wikisource of its own (I live in [[:w:Verona|Verona]], and I know what I'm saying); on the other hand what lacks until now is a core team of contributors to take care of such small wikisources, so we are using it.ws like a sort of incubator until some shrewd user decides to move and try to rise a new wikisource: that's what's happening with vec.source, and I'm quite happy of it. The process is undergoing the right steps (oldwikisource --> gathering of texts --> advertising on vec.wikipedia and it.wiki* --> request for subdomain), is there anything wrong with that? I don't think anyone is in haste. '''[[:w:it:utente:OrbiliusMagister|εΔ]][[:w:it:Discussioni utente:OrbiliusMagister|ω]]'''

::::No I do not think anything is wrong with that. Honestly I don't think that there is a wrong answer to this kind of thing but a neccessity to balance between the pros and cons. I asked to be certain this had been thought out. The comment about ''put those sources in the correct place'' made me wonder.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::Sorry I don't understand if there is any final decision about importing that data. I've been waiting for either a "no" or an "import" but it seems to me that neither of the two happened.
:::::I suspended any activity on the project because I am still waiting. If I understand well, you should decide if the "correct place" for a "Venetan incubator" is here or on it.ws, right?
:::::--[[User:Achillu|Achillu]] 08:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I have a very great news. I just tested adding myself importing right here through Meta and importing function would be expanded to allow importing from any Wiki site through local disks. We should select a place to allow users, especially admins, to request expanded importing rights here. Then requests approved here will be sent to Meta for activation. Thanks to those who supported [[m:Stewards/elections 2007/statements/Jusjih|my steward election]] with 73-1-4-99%.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 04:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC) (admin here and new Meta steward)

== How much articles would be enough for a separate domen? ==

I see here that test Wikisources with 500 and 700 articles are still not open. Belorussians like to work very much, and if they will understand necessity of Wikisource, they will put thousands of articles here. But we must have some goal - so, how much articles would be suposingly enough for opening of separate domen - 1000, 1500, maybe 3000? Are there some precedents? --[[User:Yaroslav Zolotaryov|Yaroslav Zolotaryov]] 16:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

:Normally, we prefer quality to quantity. If you upload here 1000 pages in one week and then do nothing, so it is bad. If three users upload here 10 pages a week but they do this every week, so they could have a better chance. But in the moment, as you probably can see, there is a discussion on meta on how to create new subdomains. So any answer on your question could be wrong. Be a bit patient please. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

::Quality is more important than quantity. If sufficient users want a subdomain, it can start with less than 100 articles, but prolonged inactivity may trigger site closing proposal. After Old English Wikisource opened, it is not so active, so [[m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Old English Wikisource|Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Old English Wikisource]] is going on to get the contents to regular English Wikisource.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 16:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

== [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] versus [[:m:Meta:Language proposal policy]] ==

Hi, after a discussion on foundation-l, I received the answer that the current requests made on the [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] aren't 100% ok to the [[:m:Meta:Language proposal policy|current policy to create new wikis]]. See above:
<div style="overflow: auto; padding: 3px; background: #F0F0F0; margin-bottom: 8px; border: 1px solid #CCCCCC; padding: 1em; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom:0em;" class="plainlinks">
* [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-April/028750.html <nowiki>[Foundation-l] A successful request not yet fulfilled (was Language Prevention Committee created)</nowiki>]
** [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-April/028752.html Reply from GeradM] ([[:m:User:GerardM]])
*** [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-April/028753.html a reply not directly related to this issue]
*** [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-April/028754.html another reply not directly related to this issue]
** [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-April/028757.html Reply from Pathoschild] ([[:m:User:Pathoschild]])
*** [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-April/028765.html I again]
**** [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-April/028766.html Reply from Pathoschild; ''read at least this message if you don't have so much free time to this issue'']</div>

Because it, I think that te best to do is:

# Archive all current requests on [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] as unsuccessful and re-open these requests at [[:m:Requests for new languages]] using a very basic structure (a simply stub request form to make the life more easy for these users and a central place to all type of language requests).
# Send a invite to the Wikipedians of affected languages to expand these requests, to arguing instead of voting etc.
# Replace the current text on [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] to a general warning of maintaning the source-texts here ''versus'' requesting a new wiki and pointing to make new requests on Meta-Wiki in a way 100% ok to the [[:m:Meta:Language proposal policy]] and 100% ok to the current policies "texts on this wiki ''versus'' a specific wiki for one language" (I don't have intention to do this step due to my poor English).

In other words: this wiki continues accepting new texts for languages that don't have yet a wiki and continues serving as a coordination wiki, but new requests may need to be placed at the Meta-Wiki and fully following the [[:m:Meta:Language proposal policy]].

Someone agree/disagree? [[User:555|555]] 23:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

-----

I have just sent a short comment to the m-list. I think it should be discussed here, but anyway, I would like to guarantee that new subdomains will work - not like some of the new ones created last summer without any reason. The experience with the languages - do they work or do they not work - can be made here only. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 08:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

:I also replied on the m-list. I am very hesistant to support 555's proposal at this time. I would first like to see them work out the kinks in their process and also see how they will treat a new wikisource request differently from any other new wiki requests. So we don't end up with more like ang.ws, which was created without the support of experienced editors here. If you all think tamil is ready for a subdomain, I suggest several of you leave a comment at the [http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6982 bug] request pointing out you are a admin here and the request is supported. I imagine the developers are hesitant to judge a request approved on their own after the ang.ws incident. I will say that I really do not participate here and if you all would rather hand off the process because you do not want to maintain it; I will support you. But if your think is that handing off the process will give better results regarding things like ang.ws, I must disagree.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 21:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

It is not only to avoid something like ang.ws, but many more unhappy creations. We discussed it [[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jan 2006 - Dec 2006#To subdomain or not to subdomain :-)|here]] last summer after 19 subdomains have been created without a klnowledge of the admins here. See the table and see the statistics from today - in some cases there is no difference. Therefore, I think, this multilingual Wikisource is the best place to let new languages work and to see if they are capable to have their own subdomain. We can - or we should - discus the rules for it, see e.g. [[Wikisource:Language domain requests/New rules proposal]]. I am sure, that Wikisource is not Wikipedia - I am working here since August 2004, and I am sure, that if you move the wikisource languages from here to a general incubator, you will have sooner or later '''10 or 20 different wikisources''', not different by language, but '''different by rules, self-evidence, copy-violations''' etc. Then it is fully different to work in a wikipedia and a wikisource - and it is necessary to learn the rules and goals etc. of Wikisource, not the rules and goals of this or that Wikipedia (e.g. in the question of copyright/licensing still different one to each other). Therefore I think that the '''multilingual wikisource.org has still a huge significance'''. We should talk about what to improve here. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

:Do these things mean that we can no longer require bureaucrats in new Wikisource subdomains? Wiki sites without bureaucrats can ask Meta to grant adminship.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 07:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

:I totally agree with -jkb- here. And IMO, nothing changed regarding the creation of bureaucrats. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 16:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

== time out ==

I'm like to take a time out, see my page. I hope somebody else will look after the vandals, requests etc. Thx. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 19:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
:Hello,
:Don't worry. I will keep an eye after the vandals. See you later. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 21:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

== Zip Codes ==

Hello, I was wondering if a zip codes section, some of which is very detailed, would be included in WikiSource. It is right now up for deletion on English Wikipedia and there is a idea to move it here (if allowed by WikiSource rules) and I was wondering if that would be acceptable. Please that a look here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_56_ZIP_codes]. There were state-by-state pages (I figure those can be brought back up to be moved here (I also have them saved on my computer). You may contact me here or on my Wikipedia page (same name)[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Orangemonster2k1] Thanks....

:Hello,
:Sorry no. Wikisource doesn't accept raw data like ''zip codes''. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 21:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

== Common action of Non-US Wikisource chapters needed ==

No deletion of works published after 1922 and from authors who are died between 1927 and 1936!

*http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Licensing#Opinion_section ('''please vote''')
*http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthere#commons:Commons_talk:Licensing.23Pros_and_Cons
*http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/American_non-acceptance_of_the_rule_of_the_shorter_term#Wikisource --[[User:84.60.240.164|84.60.240.164]] 15:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

=== Discussions in local Wikisources ===

* http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Scriptorium#PD-old_non-us..._I.27m_confused
* http://pt.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Esplanada/Problemas_de_dom%C3%ADnio_p%C3%BAblico
* http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Skriptorium#Wichtig:_Wikisource_nur_noch_f.C3.BCr_Werke.2C_deren_Urheber_1925_oder_fr.C3.BCher_gestorben_sind
*http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Scriptorium/Mai_2007#Auteurs_de_oeuvres_publi.C3.A9es_apres_1922_et_mort_entre_1926_et_1936_-_no_domaine_publique_pour_Wikimedia.3F
*http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Caf%C3%A9#Action_needed
*http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Bar#Action_needed
--[[User:84.60.240.164|84.60.240.164]] 17:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

== It would be possible here? ==
I want to organize a transcription from a radio interview appeared in a local station (http://www.kiss108.com/main.html). Since the wiki features allows several people collaboration, I think WikiSource would be a good site to hold it. Is it allowed to create articles of such kind in WikiSource? --[[User:Annm|Annm]] 14:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

==Interwiki link to this "multilingual" wikisource ==
How to link here from another language wikipedia? The construct
<nowiki>
[[Wikisource:XXXX]]
</nowiki>
takes to the en.wikisource.
<nowiki>
[[Wikisource:??:XXXX]]
</nowiki>

--[[User:Urdutext|Urdutext]] 01:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

:Use <nowiki>[[oldwikisource:XXXX]]</nowiki>. - [[User:Teak|Teak]] 05:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

::But unfortunately it will not show on the left bar in subdomains.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 08:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

== Election Committee announces Wikimedia Election ==

On behalf of the Election Committee, I post the following announcement. Please consider to forward this message and bring to the language projects you take part in, thanks! --[[User:Aphaia|Aphaia]] 16:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

______________________

Dear all,

We, the election committee, hereby announce the opening of a new election for members of the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees. At least three positions will be filled from this election, with the elected members serving a two year term.

It is important to note that election processes are slightly different this year than in previous years: all candidates should be certain to thoroughly read the FAQ at:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/en

From today, June 10th, we're accepting candidates for the Board of Trustees. If
you're interested, you must make a candidate statement and list
yourself on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Candidates/en

We also need the help or translators for the elections, so if you're
fluent in any language other than English, and willing to help, please list yourself here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Translations

If you have any questions, please first read the FAQ, then list your questions to the talk page:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/FAQ/en

The official announcement is available on Meta:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/en

We are confident that this election will draw very qualified candidates, and we wish them the best of luck.

Regards,

Kizu Naoko (Aphaia)
Newyorkbrad
Philippe Beaudette
Jon Harald Søby

== Should we discontinue uploading new files right here and divert to Commons? ==

I would like to seek comments if we should discontinue uploading new files right here and divert to Commons. As I administer so many Wiki sites, I see more of them diverting all new uploads to Commons, though older files are not automatically deleted.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 16:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
:Should WS's redirect uploading to Commons? I think this is the best option, so other (even future) projects will be capable of using more resources, and avoid duplications. Should we saturate Commons with thousands of pages? (why not?) I think that the first pages or those with images are extremely suitable for Commons, and in a lesser way all 'just-text' images. In short, Commons for '''all''' files. [[User:Aleator|Aleator]] 17:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
::I am not familiar with MediaWiki, so I have to know which one to make "Upload file" in the toolbox direct to Commons.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Do you mean which MediaWiki ([[MediaWiki:Uploadtext]]) is the one that appears in the [[Special:Upload]] page?? [[User:Aleator|Aleator]] 17:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
:I would suggest only allowing upload to Commons. I don't see any advantage to upload files locally here. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 18:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

::::As there are approximately the same licence conditions here and at commons, and as many of the languages here will get own subdomains later (with the necessity to move everything), so uploading to commons only is the best solution. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
:MediaWiki:Uploadtext shows important uploading message. We have at least hundreds of images that are unused, uncategorized, or both. Shall we notify their uploaders before deleting them?--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 16:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
::Yes. Eventually using a category "to be moved to Commons" would be useful. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 22:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a really great idea! See also [[commons:Category:De Wikisource book]]. We've been doing this for over a year now. [[User:Jonathan Groß|Jonathan Groß]] 19:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I feel reluctant to upload thousands of scanned book pages to commons. These images would probably only be used on one specific wikisource. I am not against this solution, I am just making sure that this is really the concensus. Can someone give me some good arguments why we should upload to commons and not wikisource and I would feel more confortabe with uploading there! // [[User:Wellparp|Wellparp]] 22:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
:Uploading to Commons allows sharing with other Wiki sites, but if you have a good reason to upload to Wikisource, please specify the copyright status. For example, if you want to upload to English Wikisource, please use [[en:Help:copyright tags|copyright tags]]. Otherwise, there are so many untagged images.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 02:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, I know. I mean that it is very unlikely that scanned english language texts will be useful for other wikimedia projects. // [[User:Wellparp|Wellparp]] 12:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

== Proposed closure of ht.wikisource ==

Hello,

I have [[m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Haitian Creole Wikisource|proposed to close the Haitian Creole wikisource]], my motivations are exposed in this link. Please give your opinion on this page. This isn't anything against Wikisourcies (I love your work, guys !), but basically this Wikisource has no content (I mean, actually nothing !) and no activity but spam.

Thank you, [[w:ht:User:Korrigan]] ([[User:86.155.96.15|86.155.96.15]]) 19:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

== The huge leap ==

Dear co-workers at Wikisource!

In order to create a reliable database for texts which are in the public domain, we have a responsibility to present our content in a most appropriate and professional way. This includes:

#making the content easily accessible via categories, portals, and in-wiki links
#thoroughly providing bibliographic data to each site
#presenting all sources in a scholarly way, such as
##carefully choosing the base of the text: not any edition, but the student‘s reference edition or a last hand edition
##if possible, add scans from the original source of the text, in order to
##responsibly proofreading it, given that
##appropriate edition guidelines are set

Inspired by German librarian [[w:de:Elmar Mittler|Elmar Mittler]] at the Wikipedia Academy at Mainz in August 2007, who asked if Wikisource – a possible partner for libraries concerning digitalisation – had the same standards in every language. I thought about how we could manage to provide the standards above in all language editions of Wikisource. I have a few propositions about how to establish them:

#introduce a sophisticated sorting system
#creating and implementing a template such as [[s:de:Vorlage:Textdaten]]
##starting retro-digitalisation, as described in [[s:de:Hilfe:Laden von Büchern nach Commons]], or adding existent online sources
##implementing software functions for proofreading (as introduced at [[s:de:Hauptseite|German Wikisource]])
##establish state-of-the-art edition guidelines.

Please comment my appeal: State your ideas of how and at what scope to apply them at the single language editions. Discuss the subject on large scale and in detail. Tell what part of the suggestions above is already provided.

Becoming professional and reliable is our greatest chance. It‘s our future.

[[User:Jonathan Groß|Jonathan Groß]] 18:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

P.S. [[Wikisource:Wikisource and Project Gutenberg]] just came to my attention and might find its ultimate answer in this thread.

:Very interesting proposals; I'm working at italian Wikisource and I can gladly notice that many of your ideas are going to be implemented at our Source. We have projects related to text types and subjects and also a strict policy about references of our sources; a scanning-proofreading project has been implemented, but it's only at the beginning...
:Please, explain better what do you mean with point 3.1. with the sentence "not any edition, but the student‘s reference edition or a last hand edition": I think that this could be possible only for few, well-known texts, but for many others not so popular (but not less important!) it's pretty impossible to find a "modern" edition, particulary for what concerns translations (copyright matters, blah blah blah...). But maybe I have not understood well...
:I'm sorry for not being able to understand how your retro-digitalization system works, but I don't speak german!
:I think that we should consider to make some general policy for point 1 and 2 about _basics_ and _quality_ (for example: no texts without a reliable source) and only after trying to produce some guidelines for scanning, proofreading and sophisicated stuff like this ;-)
:[[User:Torredibabele|Torredibabele]] 00:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello,
Here is my opinion: state-funded digital libraries do not provide any guarantee. When they do OCR (rarely), they do not correct errors. Here are the value-added quality of Wikisource: manual verification by people. The most important point is to specify for each text, if it was proofread or not, along with the source and the edition used. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 13:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

:Yann: [http://mdz.bib-bvb.de/digbib/lexika/adelung/ Sometimes] [http://www.kruenitz1.uni-trier.de/ they] [http://germazope.uni-trier.de/Projects/WBB/woerterbuecher/dwb/wbgui?lemid=GA00001 do]. :-) [[User:Jonathan Groß|Jonathan Groß]] 13:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

:::My two pence; I'm OrbiliusMagister from it.wikisource. I'd like to thank Jonathan for his concern about quality, and on it.source we are very sensitive about it, so I'm going to follow this thread. Torredibabele wrote exactly what we are thinking and doing about quality. Our important advantages are:
:::*we are building an open free library without prejudice or POV; many sectorial or specific libraries are not that open and free.
:::**On the other side we ar accepting texts or editions according to their freedom or avalaibility, not according to their quality. Since on it.wikisource we use a policy of ''et-et'' more than ''aut-aut'' when better editions of a particular text become avalaible we shall add them to the preesxistent, leaving to the reader the task to choose the better (excluding a "worse" edition in favour of a "better edition" may lead to a POV war or an unwanted censorship). This is wikistyle.
:::*Until some time ago we had to rely on online publications (and only those with their printed source referenced) to have texts proofread, and I discovered that some of these online sources have a lot of typos and errors, so we began focusing on printed sources. The OCRed text-image edition are now beginning to take off, and we are releasing books never prevoiusly digitalized. On it.wikisource we are trying a bold approach, publishing the images without OCRing them and asking shamelessly the random navigator to donate a minute of transcription.
:::*What Yann wrote is perfect, our collective proofreading sets us apart from many bigger projects.
:::To conclude I'll say some obvious (but not that obvious) statements:
:::*The quality check [[image:00%.svg]] [[image:25%.svg]] [[image:50%.svg]] [[image:75%.svg]] [[image:100%.svg]] must be everywhere on our sites.
:::*Our point of weakness on it.wikisource is a lack of well written guidelines and policies: we are working them out taking the best from fr.wikisource, importing from Wikipedia proved less useful than writing from scratch,
:::*Most important: '''time is on our side'''.
:::**Maybe on 2010 will be invented a method to OCR and proofread a text with special "USB 10.0 eyeglasses connected via WI(ki)-Fi to our brain", I don't think that many digital libraries could keep their software updated as Mediawiki is now.
:::**User from Pedia or other projects looking for a flameproof Wikimedia project, some serious and rewarding dirty work and more quality than quantity are coming. I'm not concerned about the newbies or the number of texts, I'm concerned about keeping our quality high and our texts well referenced. Some "I already know" Wikipedians sometimes proved more dangerous than many newbies... - '''[[:it:s:Utente:OrbiliusMagister|εΔ]][[:it:s:Discussioni utente:OrbiliusMagister|ω]]''' 13:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:::P.S. Sorry for some OT...

Digitization projects can either "think like a library" and allow any kind of book on its shelves, sometimes two different editions side by side, and let the user pick what she wants, or "think like a publisher", carefully selecting what to digitize, taking full responsibility that every item in the collection is of good quality. Many scholars (and curiously also librarians) who dream of starting a digitization project emphasize the importance of thinking like a publisher, even though they don't use these words. On the contrary, most people who successfully operate large digitization projects (including Project Gutenberg, Google, Internet Archive, University of Michigan) are clearly thinking like a library. One problem with thinking like a publisher is that even if you take responsibility for selecting the one true printed edition for your digitization, you cannot take responsibility for the contents of the work. For example, it might contain outdated and dangerous medical or legal advice. And some user might want to reference the 2nd or 3rd edition of a novel rather than the 1st edition or "last hand", in which case the effort to select the "best" edition is a lost cause. This is not to say you shouldn't care which edition you digitize. You should carefully document which one (or ones) you use, and the best documentation is the scanned images. But please don't get obsessed about the "purity" of the project. --[[User:LA2|LA2]] 07:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC) ([[:m:User:LA2/Digitizing books with MediaWiki|meta]])

Agree with LA2 and couldn't put it better myself. In my view we should aim to include the best editions possible, but this in no way precludes including complemntary editions as well; even an edition of "lower" quality may have its use at times. In addition I would add that Wikisource can even add value to the "best" editions, especially in cases where the "best" edition has never been fully proofread, lacks punctuation or references. This is true of a lot of old text in non-Western languages. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 18:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

:I agree. There often is a confusion when we use the word 'quality'. Within this project, quality should refer to our ability to guarantee that the text we publish is correct with respect to a paper edition. It should not refer to the choice of a particular edition, and multiple choices are possible. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 19:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

== Siberian Wikisource ==
Siberian Wikipedia is closed, please remove "siberian" texts from Wikisource. Some of them are attack-texts. --[[User:217.77.53.13|217.77.53.13]] 13:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:Please could you make a list? Thanks, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 15:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
::Would [[Main Page:Siberian|this do]]? Or maybe [[:Category:Siberian|this]]? Note that none of this qualifies as a source, since there are no published original works in Siberian (the language is made-up), and the translations are self-made, mostly by Zolotaryov (i.e., again, not sources of previously published work). ― [[User:Teak|Teak]] 22:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
:Hi, I would like to second the call to delete the "Siberian" texts. They are in a private conlang and some of them are highly insulting, e.g. [[Москальска сволоч]] (appr. Muscovite scum/swines), a "poem" written and uploaded to wikisource, Yaroslav Zolotaryov, which contains quite strong insults against Russians. For more background about the "Siberian language" and Wikimedia, please have a look at [[m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Siberian Wikipedia]] and [[m:Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Siberian Wikipedia]]. --[[User:Johannes Rohr|Johannes Rohr]] 13:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

== ProofreadPage statistics ==

Here is the number of pages using the ProofreadPage format, at various subdomains:
{{:Wikisource:ProofreadPage Stats}}

The German Wikisource has adopted the extension recently,
and they are responsible for much of the current growth.

[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 12:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

:Damn right we are :D [[User:Jonathan Groß|Jonathan Groß]] 13:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

== Closure of Volapük Wikipedia ==
Hi everybody... Since some time ago some of you had suggested I try to get a Volapük version of Wikisource going (which didn't work...), I thought you might be interested in helping me in trying to keep the Volapük Wikipedia alive. There is now a [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Volap%C3%BCk_Wikipedia proposal for closing it] at meta. Would those of you who agree that a Volapük Wikipedia may be a sensible idea perhaps go there and cast a vote? Thanks! [[User:Smeira|Smeira]] 16:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC).

== Bengali wikisource now exists and fully imported ==

Hi, don't know what the procedures are regarding this, but the Bengali Wikisource is now open and have fully imported the pages, so you may feel free to delete all of the Bengali pages that are hosted here. [[User:Bastique|Bastique]] 19:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

==Petition==
Do you know about this: http://www.petitiononline.com/wikirrst/ ? It's a petition to reclaim the rule of the shorter term in US. I think that ''really'' interest all of us. You know the problems related about this. Can we agree? [[s:it:Utente:Aubrey|Aubrey]] 21:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
:While I certainly support the notion that the rule of the shorter term in the United States, and legislation would more quickly clarify this, it is still not clear that it does not apply. The major point where I disagree in the petition is in its reintroduction of registration as a condition for owning a copyright. I have no problem with the US provision that a work must be registered to sustain an infringement suit since this provision is evidentiary rather than substantive. The costs of registration should not be a factor, and introducing costs that are only nominal would increase the amount of work needed for processing these applications. If the costs of the additional work are less than the nominal fees it makes no administrative sense, and is fiscally irresponsible. [[User:Eclecticology|Eclecticology]] 08:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
::I started that petition along with [[m:American non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term]], a Meta page. In response to Eclecticology's comment and extremely limited signatures, I may consider faxing whatever the signatures I have in early November and restarting the petition. I plan to drop that part about reintroduction of registration as a condition for owning a copyright, which is covered by a [http://www.petitiononline.com/eldred/petition.html Reclaim the Public Domain Petition] signed by more than 22000 signatories. As mine is the first public petition that I have started with no prior experience, I was trying to persuade more opinions, but when things are not so good, I will adjust.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 03:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

==Ancient languages main page==
I understand that those languages that do not have their own subdomain can have main pages such as [[Main Page:Kurdî]]. Now, there is a body of texts of philological interest that is accessed by people not fluent in the text's language. A mainpage in [[:ang:]] is already humorous, but main pages in Akkadian, Ancient Egyptian, Sanskrit, Avestan, Ancient Greek, Gothic are (a) not feasible and (b) not desirable. I propose the creation of a "main page" that facilitates navigation between ancient texts. Perhaps at [[Main_Page:Ancient texts]], or [[Main_Page:Philology]] or similar. The question of course arises what langauge such a page should be ''in'', I opt for English for purely pragmatic reasons, it could also be Latin, or, of course, there could be such "Philology" main pages in several languages. Also, I realize that some random extinct/classical languages are already at individual subdomains (la, he, hy, grc apparently subsumed under el, goh under de, etc.) - there will be nothing for it but design the "Philology" page for navigation between subdomains: such a navigation aid is really needed to overcome the fragmentation along linguistic lines that was brought about by the introduction of subdomains. [[:en:User:Dbachmann]] 16:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

::it makes sense. I fully support the idea [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 19:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

:::Yes. It would make a better coordination necessary, something like that. But the ancient languages are languages, where many important sources have been written. So we should think about this - I would support this. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 19:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

::::I also really like the idea. If and when it is implemented it should have a very prominent link from the Main Page portal.

::::The only theoretical detail I question is the (lack of) feasibility of ancient Greek, which with the attention of classicists could become something very nice along the lines of Latin Wikisource. In any case the point is mute, since the material will likely stay at Greek Wikisource.

::::You are correct that Hebrew Wikisource, like Greek, does indeed contain ancient Hebrew texts. The vast majority of them are part of a live literary tradition that continues to this day and we are working on numerous ways to link, categorize, and present them together.

::::Thus, in terms of overcoming fragmentation, the primary tool for many of the texts is simply interwiki links. Therefore, the question you correctly pose is most important for the class of ancient languages whose texts did not have a defining influence on western civilization's literary heritage (at least not until the dawn of modern archaeology). It is for those languages (e.g. Ugaritic or Akkadian) that an interface is hard to conceive and is undesirable. These are indeed the languages that the idea of subdomains did not provide a clear solution for. That being said, it would still be fine to use a "Philology" main page to navigate between texts at subdomains as well.

::::One final point: English Wikisource accepts bilingual texts where the target language of a translation is English. It also accepts annotated texts. Therefore, a critically annotated text in Ancient Egyptian where the critical apparatus (introduction, variants, notes, etc.) is in English could be at English Wikisource. If the critical apparatus is in German perhaps it could be at German Wikisource. Thus, the only kind of text that really has no home but here at wikisource.org is a direct transcription ''without'' any translation or scholarly apparatus. But regardless, no matter where the texts are held, here or at the subdomains, the idea of having a navigation page here is fantastic. Go ahead! [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 19:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

== pkk vandal ==

I do not think we can do something else as to delete his edits every time. It makes no sense to list the IP addresses on [[Wikisource:Protected titles]] - he will find something new every time. I tried to use the [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~chm/blockcalc.php calculator], but it seems that we should block too many IP's. So, just to delete. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 18:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)‎

== Proofread Page Extension ==

Hi there, Would it be possible to activate the [[mw:Extension:Proofread_Page|Proofread Page]] Extension here at the oldwikisource? g.--[[User:Kajk|kajk]] <big>[[:de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Kajk|✉]]</big> 08:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

:I can ask for that. but if you want to translate hieroglyphs into English (or German), I would rather suggest that the translation be on the English (resp German) wikisources. For that you can use ProofreadPage. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 12:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

::Thank you. The main work is actually wikifying the hieroglyphs and make a transcription of it. The translation is actually just for practice and control... I'm actualy not totaly sure how this project is best build up... Thats why I started here to get some experience. Imho the proofred extension could also be useful for other languages, so I think it for sure wouldn't hurt ;-) g.--[[User:Kajk|kajk]] <big>[[:de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Kajk|✉]]</big> 14:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

:sure, we can file a bug to have it enabled here.
:concerning your project, I was wondering what the best way is to render translations. I guess you want to keep the original stone layout.
:maybe you want to edit [[:en:s:Page:Stele_Iuny_Louvre_C89.jpg|this page]] for the English translation.
:[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 14:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

::I checked the other two wikisources (de and en) and saw, the German Wikisource supports sources in different languages with a translation (See [[:de:s:Wikisource:Über_Wikisource#.C3.9Cbersetzungen]], but the English Wikisource doesn't (See [[:en:s:Help:Adding_texts]])... I now could move my work to the German Wikisource and just translate it to german or stay here and translate it to both languages... (finally it doesn't matter to me). I actually just started here at the Old-Wikisource, so I'm not in depth familiar with the idea of wikisource (the borderline). So I'm ask you which of these two possibilities better matches the idea of the wikisources (or just the old-wikisource)? g.--[[User:Kajk|kajk]] <big>[[:de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Kajk|✉]]</big> 09:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

::the English wikisource will accept a text in English, even if it is a translation.
::I think that the hiero text should be here, and translations should be in subdomains.
::[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 09:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

:::Ok, in this case I'll go on with wikifying&transcribing the hieroglyphs here at the old-wikisource and afterwards add translations to the according other wikisource. Thank you for the enlightenment ;-) In this case could we anyway enable the ''proofread page extension'', I any way think this also could be usefull for other projects here at the old-wikisource... thx&g.--[[User:Kajk|kajk]] <big>[[:de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Kajk|✉]]</big> 15:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

:I am currently making other requests to devs, and I do not want to overload them. you can request it yourself, just post a bug in bugzilla explaining why you need it. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 16:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

==Anglo Saxon Wikisource==
I was on English Wikisource and I clicked on one of the lanuage links and ended up on Anglo Saxon Wikisource which has been closed. I suugest that the tets are transferred to English Wikisource if this has not alread been done and then the link is removed. It does not look good to users if one of the highest language links takes them to a closed project, with little content.

[[User:John Cross|John Cross]] 17:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

==Logo==
Just a thought... I don't frequent Wikisource very often but something just struck me: the logo is simply impossible. Such an iceberg cannot stand this way, it would tip over. Now... maybe such scientific accuracy is not a priority for literary Wikisource, but I thought I should say it anyway. [[en:User:SeeSchloss|SeeSchloss]] ([[Special:Contributions/64.86.28.244|64.86.28.244]] 01:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC))
:You are the first one as I know to question our logo with an iceberg here. Whether to change it is up to the community. There were other different ideas, but they were not approved.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 00:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

== Request for new subdomains ==

I pointed to [[Wikisource:Language_domain_requests]] and I didn't understand whether that page is outdated or still active. If i's inactive (as i may infer) it'd be better for newcomers to put a big banner on top of the page pointing to meta. What's the current status of the page? - '''[[:it:s:Utente:OrbiliusMagister|εΔ]][[:it:s:Discussioni utente:OrbiliusMagister|ω]]''' 00:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

== Delete Armenian texts ==
Armenian texts have been imported into the newly created domain, see [http://hy.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=import&user=&page= the import log]. Please delete all the pages in the category [[:Category:Armenian]], and its subcategories, with the exception of [[Main Page:Armenian]], on which a redirect note has been put up. Thanks [[User:Teak|Teak]] 02:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

== Bible in Shona ==

Hi, the Shona Wikipedia currently hosts part of a bible in Shona, which should preferably be moved to oldwikisource. The pages to be imported are:

* [[sn:Bhaibheri]]
* [[sn:3 Johane 1]]
* [[sn:Mapisarema]]
* [[sn:Genesisi]]
* [[sn:Eksodo]]
* [[sn:Muprofita Isaya]]
* [[sn:Muprofita Jeremia]]
* [[sn:Zvakazarurwa]]
* [[sn:2 Johane]]
* [[sn:3 Johane]]
* [[sn:Mapisarema 23]]
* [[sn:Genesisi 1]]
* [[sn:Judi]]

-- [[Special:Contributions/84.178.250.7|84.178.250.7]] 18:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

:If it is really so, then only Tim Starling could import the pages at the moment - see [http://wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AListusers&username=&group=import&limit=250] (and I simply do not believe it), otherwise there must be made a request for general import from the domain. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

== [[Template:InterLingvLigoj]] ==
There are many "add language" requests in the [[Template_talk:InterLingvLigoj|discussion page]] of this protected template. Can an admin take a look please? Thanks, [[User:Malafaya|Malafaya]] 23:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

==Page: namespace, status of pages==

I have made changes to the Proofreadpage software, that will allow users to visualize the status of all pages of a book,
using colors, on the index page. A preview can be seen on [[:fr:s:Livre:Jules Vallès - L'Enfant.djvu]]. This
system works in combination with a new validation procedure, that is following the system used at de.ws.
The new validation procedure requires that two different users proofread a page, and it is described
here: [[:fr:s:Aide:Qualité des pages]]. There are 4 levels: 'Not proofread' (the default),
'Problematic', 'Proofread', 'Validated'. The button corresponding to 'validated' will not show up if the
page has not been previously marked as 'Proofread' by another user than the one doing the validation.
(this works by storing the name of proofreaders in the template, as can be seen [http://fr.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page:Jules_Vall%C3%A8s_-_L%27Enfant.djvu/81&curid=127417&diff=423321&oldid=412302&rcid=403838 here]).
The former 'Incomplete' level has been dropped, because it is not useful when describing single pages.

This new system will soon be available in all subdomains. The names of the different quality
levels can be modified by sysops using system messages. It will also be possible to disable
the system if a subdomain does agree with the idea of double proofreading. Feedback is welcome.

[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 17:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

== Copyright clarifications from Mike Godwin ==

Two clarifications on copyright concerns have come down from the WMF counsel
#[http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anthere&diff=677612&oldid=672062 Copyright regarding public speeches]
#[http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAnthere&diff=767102&oldid=762404 Status of the "rule of the shorter term" in the US]
Please spread this information to any subdomains which are confused on these issues.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

User:BirgitteSB

2007-06-03T16:31:54Z

BirgitteSB: save here

I am more active at [[en:User:BirgitteSB]].

*Sometime around May 25 I saw a notice on the Community portal to [[Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles]] and I was shocked that the backlog was so large that Articles tagged in Dec of 2005 where being worked on. I started to help out. I never sign up for these things even though I have pitched in with several, like the Biography Unassesed Article Drive, in the past.
*Most of what I did in the following days was retag articles which had {{tl|unreferenced}} with {{tl|refimprove}} or {{tl|primarysources}} working through various letters in the categories.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20070530162723&target=BirgitteSB sample contribs] The large majority of articles in these categories did actually have at least one source. However I also actually read through many articles and did other things as needed. I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:James_Villanueva&diff=prev&oldid=134373327 assesed articles], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohammed_Asif_Mohseni&diff=prev&oldid=133457668 removed unsourced accusations of killing people], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zachary_Baker&diff=prev&oldid=133505173 redirect to alternate named article on same subject], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jaime_Permuth&diff=prev&oldid=134320339 tagged copyvios], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saleh_Kebzabo&diff=prev&oldid=134826456 outright removed ref tags], etc. Basically I made several 100's of edits to these articles tagged for a year or more, with the approach that they likely need attention on several fronts. I watchlisted all the artilces I edited and when I see a good, significant, non-IP edit come up I unwatch them figuring that if there were concerns with my actions something would have been said by then. I was not looking out to mass-delete articles, although going through these categories I certianly saw the necessity for deletions. I was editing responsibly; improving Wikipedia.
*As I was going through these edits I was leaving truly unreferenced articles alone. I was think first clean up the category then deal with what truly belongs in the category. Other people taking part of the project quicky cleared out Dec 05-May 06. None of these where even close to the monster that is June 06. A good number of articles from those categories where run through prod. Maybe 20 or so, I can't link to them of course. I looked over those articles as they were in the waiting period and felt I understood which sort of non-notabilities or violations of [[WP:NOT]] would be appropriate for prod.
*I was hesistant to start putting article through prod because of the situation on my watchlist. I decided I should start an alt account with a clean watchlist so I would not miss any concerns over articles I prod, and would be able to watch for any recreations. I created [[User:Birgitte-prod]] and left a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:BirgitteSB&diff=prev&oldid=134899770 note] explaining why on my main user page.
*On two days (May 31 and June 2) I tagged about 27 articles with prod. I notified not only notified the creator, but also any other significant contirbuter I noticed in the history.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shiftchange&diff=prev&oldid=135344514 diff] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Figaro&diff=prev&oldid=135344568 diff] While looking through the history I dilgently checked previous prods and altered any I found to AFD. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Interactive_Information_System&diff=prev&oldid=135347824 oops needs afd]. I responded to remarks made on the talk page questioning my actions with a calm civil explantion[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Quezon_Avenue_MRT_Station&diff=prev&oldid=135351457 Notability - reply]. Of course I cannot show diffs for the articles I first checked the discussion of to find a previous AFD Keep/no consensus notice which I didn't prod or the many more articles which have been unreferenced since June 2006 that a simple reading of the article clearly convinced me that it was notable. On May 31st I read all these things as I went, spending a few minutes on each article. On June 2 I first checked articles and discussion pages making a list before tagging anything for prod which let me edit about once per minute (still hardly bot-speed). The point is I was editing in a careful and responsible manner and not like a bot. In all the alternate account has less than a hundred edits total over a three day period. Obviously Rebecca has contested some of these prods, so they were not the uncontroversial deletion candidates as I believed at the time. I understand that my judgement was in error in some cases and I am happy to readust my criteria for which articles are uncontroversial deletion candidates in response. After Rebecca reviews I still have 14 active prods and one AFD with no oppostion.
*Based on the prods Rebecca disagreed with she blocked [[User:BirgitteSB-prod]] indefinately, ''with IP blocking'', reasoning "Mass-prodding pages at random for being unreferenced, many indisputable notable." She left a note on my talk page stating she had [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABirgitteSB&diff=135446666&oldid=135175945 blocked your [[User:BirgitteSB-prod]] bot account for mass-prodding pages on the basis that they were unreferenced. . . Please find some other means of handling unreferenced articles]. She also uses rollback to revert about 7 of the prods I placed, despite the fact that it was not vandalism. Of course I think it is clear that my account was 1) Not a bot (<100 over three day, ''sometimes'' at 1 edit per minute) 2) Obviously not "prodding pages at random" 3) Proding page for being non-notable (plenty of non-refernced articles were '''not''' prodded and I mention the non-notabilty in my reason) 4)Obviously going to be on the same IP address as my main account. 5)I was also clearly "handling unrefeernced articles" by other means only prodding where I believed it to be appropriate. On top of the unsoundness of Rebecca's reasoning and her technical incompetence she blocked me A)Without first addresing her concerns with me B)Without any preventative purpose (indefinate block on an account not editing at the time). The mistakes I numbered show a lack of dilgence but the ones I lettered are completely unacceptable and inexcusable. Rebecca needs to understand that disscusion before a block and preventive motivations are an absolute neccessity when blocking established contributors.
*Eventually despite there being confusion and my auto-unblock request being declined someone unblocks my IP, but doesn't notify me so I leave some messages on my talk page to explain the truth of the situation and outlining why the block was inappropriate asking Rebecca to respond. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BirgitteSB&diff=next&oldid=135450229 OK you blocked an account that was not a bot, was not actively making edits at the time, without adressing the issue with me personally, AND you blocked my IP so I cannot edit at all. I expect you to seriously change your blocking procedures. The above block was completerly out of line and is quite an inconvience since I can't edit at all now.] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BirgitteSB&diff=next&oldid=135450783 Just to be clear (clarify issues) . . . I am signing off for the night but someone please copy this to Rebecca talk page. Rebecca, you seriously need to think about what you are doing with the block button. You need to be certain you resoning is sound and you need to know how blocking actually works regarding the IP.]
*Rebecca responds with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BirgitteSB&diff=next&oldid=135456444 I did not realise that it was a manually-operated account . . . How on earth did you get to the conclusion that they were "uncontroversial deletion candidates"? There is not a chance in hell that any of those I've listed would have even passed AfD.] Which is certainly less civil than anything I have written, and I was the one improperly blocked. She does not lift the improper block or address any of the issues I raised with her actions.
*I leave her [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARebecca&diff=135540420&oldid=133618606 note] with the explantion she asked for and reassuring her I will readjust my criteria based on her concerns. And asking her once again to adress my concerns about the inappropriate block.

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2007-04-10T19:45:50Z

BirgitteSB: /* Transwiki - Importing data */ reply

Wikisource:Proposed deletions

2007-04-03T14:00:52Z

BirgitteSB: /* April 2007 */ copyvio?

'''Other languages:''' [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Proposed_deletions en] - [http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Pages_à_supprimer fr] - [http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:删除投票 zh] - 
[[Category:Deletion requests]]

This page collects requests for '''deleting specific articles from Wikisource'''.
If you want a page deleted for copyright reasons please list it at [[Wikisource:Possible copyright violations]]. If you think a page should be deleted for any other reason, please list it here so it can be discussed. Articles remaining on this page should be deleted if there is no significant opposition. Use <nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>.

See also '''[[:Category:Deletion requests]]'''

'''[[Wikisource:Proposed deletions/Archive|Archive]]'''

== Requests ==

=== February 2006 ===

* [[List of Hangeul syllables]] - is this something really that we need? It falls in under "pointless list" category as well.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
** This is very useful for people who do not know how to romanize korean, I use this very often. [[User:BoAKaN|BoAKaN]] 17:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
***But why should this list be on Wikisource? The page itself has links to sites with the exact same content; this does not fall under our purview.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 04:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
*** maybe we could put it in wikibooks? [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 08:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
** I think this list is necessary in some form; maybe needy of expansion, or of better organization, or moving to wikibooks, or whatever. Is like a list of all Kana or Kanji (japanese alphabet stuff) with romanization, just... for Korean.
::::It is useful--I just came here looking for this, so that I could transliterate some Korean text, and the Wikipedia article was not helpful. This article was. Please keep. [[User:131.123.231.143|131.123.231.143]] 00:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
**Wikisource is under no obligation to keep pages just because people "find them useful." We collect '''source texts''' and should not have to carry pages that won't fit on any other sister project unless it fits our guidelines.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 18:15, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
:Wikisource is not the right place for this. Move to Commons, to Books, or delete. Romanisations benefits are very limited, as these are ''isolated'' syllables. You will have to refer to better sources than this to create decent romanisations. If you merely want to make a trans''literation'', [[:w:en:Hangul consonant and vowel tables|en:Hangul consonant and vowel tables]] is probably better for everybody who can read hangeul. For those who don't, this page has the benefit that you can just copy and paste hangeul syllables to see how they are romanised if they appear isolated. I cannot think of any other use. [[:commons:User talk:Dustsucker|User talk:Dustsucker]]
::Keep - if not here, then some-place else that is linked to by the Wik hangul page: Like another commentator, I came to it to check a particular combination(not all combinations are intuitive, and some-one can read hangul quite well with-out knowing the RR transcription). This is the sort fo information that Wik(ipedia/source, what-ever - but please not in the neverneverland of -commons) should be providing. [[User:211.225.32.219|211.225.32.219]] 07:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
***I suggest merging the content, including the romanization, into [[w:Hangul consonant and vowel tables]] or [[w:List of modern Hangul syllabic blocks]], and delete.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 16:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

=== October 2006 ===

Please note that [[:Category:Edmeston, New York Images]] have lots of images never moved to en. [[User:555|555]] 16:31, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
::it is difficult to do something, as there are mostly no sources and licences giver; probably it can be PD, but commons would not keep them I am afraid. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 08:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
:::I will try to have a look when I get the time. Mainwhile if somebody else want to do it, go! ;o) [[User:Yann|Yann]] 00:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

===December 2006===

* [[:Image:Principessa sul pisello2.jpg]]

:No source. Should be moved to Commons if it is free anyway. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 12:18, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

:Same for [[:Image:LupoAgnello.jpg]] and [[:Image:Uccello di fuoco.jpg]]. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 12:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

::Ok. How does it work to move them to Commons? TY [[User:Alexped|Alexped]] 12:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
:Create an account on [[:commons:Main Page|Commons]] and upload the file there '''with the source and the licence'''. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 13:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

::'''Transwiki''' if with proper license. Otherwise, '''delete'''. There was a PD template here, but it has been moved out of here. Please note that [[commons:template:PD]] is obsolete and the source is vital.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 18:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC) (admin here and at Commons)
:::Once more I asked the user if he will upload it to commons or not. Soon I will delete the images here - the licence is quite unclear anyway. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

===March 2007===
* We have a problem with [http://wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Uncategorizedpages this category] - more then 1000 pages are uncategorized. See please also [[Wikisource:Scriptorium#1000 uncategorized pages]], thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

* [[Complete Transcript of Wiretap Conversations with Gloria Macapagal Arroyo]] - I am afraid, this is not a text for wikisource, but can somebody help to clear it? (also, there is no source etc.). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

=== April 2007 ===
* Images [[:Image:UshacatsXostovanutyun.jpeg]], [[:Image:VorsordakanPatmvatsqner.jpg]] and [[:Image:MichurinyanTunker.jpg]], uploaded on April 1st by [[User:Վազգեն]], no source, no licence, User has been ionformed to tag the images or it will be deleted, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
::[[User:Վազգեն]] The source information is included now. With regards to license, they fall under the copyright protection of the former Soviet Union. The detailed discussion is about it is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:PD-USSR
::A quote:
::"For the U.S., the critical question is "was the work copyrighted on January 1, 1996 in its home country (or countries)?" If so, it is covered by U.S. copyright (with the U.S. copyright terms!), if not, we may consider it PD in the U.S. Lupo 08:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)"
:::OK, I will see there and proove it; in the meantime I blanked the delete-template, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 08:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

* [[Moscow agreement]] - notice in ensource made, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:keep --[[User:75.63.192.220|75.63.192.220]] 02:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
:what does it mean keep? It is English - if en.wiki wants it so transwiki it this week, I will delete it later as I announced on en.source's scriptorium, thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 08:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
:Looks to be copyvio on the translation. It is from a 1984 english language book.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 14:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

* The page [[Kanitil]] has been transfered to another location and show now be deleted (the old content is now in [[Kanitil (1)]]). --[[User:Smeira|Smeira]] 13:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2007-04-03T13:35:34Z

BirgitteSB: /* Transwiki - Importing data */ thanks

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2007-04-02T21:11:27Z

BirgitteSB: /* category multilingual */ reply

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2007-04-02T21:06:59Z

BirgitteSB: /* Transwiki - Importing data */ question

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2007-04-02T21:00:37Z

BirgitteSB: /* Wikisource:Language domain requests versus :m:Meta:Language proposal policy */

Wikisource:Main Page/English

2007-02-07T01:51:22Z

BirgitteSB: Undo revision 211926 by 86.122.191.200 (Talk)

Template:Shortcut

2006-12-03T06:40:09Z

BirgitteSB: Reverted changes by Three Foot Fred (talk) to last version by 555

{| id="shortcut" class="noprint" style="border: 1px solid #999; background: #fff; margin: 0 0 .5em 1em; text-align: center; padding: 5px; float: {{{float|right}}}; clear: {{{clear|right}}}; font-size: smaller;"
|-
! [[Wikisource:Shortcut|Shortcut]]: {{{1}}}
|-
|} <noinclude>[[Category:Internal link templates|Shortcut]][[no:Mal:Snarvei]]</noinclude>

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-10-22T19:49:36Z

BirgitteSB: /* Global logo */ reply

{{Scriptorium-side}}


'''[http://sources.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium&action=edit&section=new Edit(+) / Seite bearbeiten(+) / Modifier(+) / Pagina bewerken (+) / Düzenle (+)]'''
See Scriptoria in other language sub-domains: 

[[cs:s:Wikisource:Pod pramenitou lípou|Česky:Pod pramenitou lípou]] -
[[da:s:Wikisource:Skriptoriet|Dansk:Skriptoriet]] -
[[de:s:Wikisource:Skriptorium|Deutsch:Skriptorium]] -
[[en:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|En:Scriptorium]] -
[[es:s:Wikisource:Café|Español:Café]] -
[[fr:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|Français:Scriptorium]] -
[[he:s:ויקיטקסט:מזנון|עברית:מזנון]] -
[[it:s:Wikisource:Bar|Italiano:Bar]] -
[[nl:s:Wikisource:De kroeg|Nederlands:De kroeg]] -
[[pl:s:Wikiźródła:Skryptorium|Polski:Skryptorium]] -
[[ru:s:Wikisource:Форум|Русский:Форум]] -
[[tr:s:VikiKaynak:Köy çeşmesi|Türkçe:Köy çeşmesi]]
[[zh:s:Wikisource:写字间|中文:写字间]]

==Wikisource project pages==
*[[Wikisource:What is Wikisource?|What is Wikisource?]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks|Wikisource and Wikibooks]]
*[[Wikisource:Votes|Votes]]
*[[Wikisource:Multilingual statistics|Statistics]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright|Copyright]]
*[[Wikisource:Possible copyright violations|Possible copyright violations]]
*[[Wikisource:Proposed deletions|Proposed deletions]]
*[[Wikisource talk:Index|Cataloging]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Project Gutenberg|Wikisource and Project Gutenberg]]
*Languages - see below

==Separate discussions==
'''Verschobene Diskussionen / Discussions déplacées / verschoven besprekingen / 移动的讨论 / Discussioni spostate'''

===Logo===
*[[Wikisource:Logo]]
*[[Wikisource:New_Wikisource_logo]]

===Languages===
*[[Wikisource:Language policy|Language policy]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests|Language domain requests]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/Rules for voting|Language domain requests/Rules for voting]]
*[[Main Page|List of Wikisource Languages]] (=[[Main Page]])
'''The language domain vote (over now):'''
*[[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)
*[[Wikisource:New discussion on language subdomains|New discussion on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)

===Archives===
'''Archive / 存 / Archivi'''
(oldest first)
*[[:m:Wikisource]] (Pre-launch discussions)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/November 2003 to January 2004|November 2003 to January 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2004 - Jun 2004|Feb 2004 - Jun 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jul 2004 - Oct 2004|Jul 2004 - Oct 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Oct 2004 - Feb 2005|Oct 2004 - Feb 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2005 - Apr 2005|Feb 2005 - Apr 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Apr 2005 - Aug 2005|Apr 2005 - Aug 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Aug 2005 - Sep 2005|Aug 2005 - Sep 2005]] (through the move to language subdomains)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Sep 2005 - Jan 2006]] (months following the move language subdomains)

;==================================================

== Note for people following an old link ==

Could an admin add a note to [[MediaWiki:Noarticletext]], mentioning the language subdomains. I have so often clicked on links at Wikipedia and got this simple note. I know that it were outdated links and that the text now is in a subdomain, but most other people will think the article doesn't exist (anymore) and delete the link. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
:Done. However explainations could be improved. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

::Perhaps "other language subdomains", because some people might not know what a subdomain is? Unfortunately Google still displays the old pages, and often the ranking of the old, long deleted pages is higher than of the new ones in the subdomains. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 01:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

== [[Wikisource:New Wikisource logo]] ==

There's a new discussion and a soon-to-come vote on the new logo of Wikisource. Please discuss it on the talk page, and discuss the seperate logos there. [[User:Datrio|Datrio]] 14:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

== A Quick Survey of Languages ==

Out of curiousity, I did a quick survey of activity and progress on the various subdomains using RecentChanges and looking at Main Pages.

If I am not mistaken, there are currently 27 languages with Wikisource subdomains. Of those, I found only ''one'' that seems largely inactive, namely [http://cy.wikisource.org/wiki/Prif_tudalen cy.wikisource.org]. Besides cy.wikisource, there are just 2-3 others with only minimal recent activity (i.e. an average of just 1-2 edits per day), but all of those have nevertheless added significant content over the past few months and have useful Main Pages.

This means that nearly two dozen languages are flourishing, less than five months after the transfer. All of the larger languages (e.g. English, French, German) seem to have recovered completely from the move and done a great deal to revamp their infrastructures. Other languages have to have managed to do so to a large extent from scratch.

This is something very positive and wonderful. Would be good to get specific feedback from various languages. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 19:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

:de: It has completely recovered from the move, the only (and serious) problem are many external links that link to the old domain. Contributions at de vary very much, but really increased in comparison to before the move. Biggest problem at the moment: There is no community, people come, contribute their sources and are gone again. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Language comparisons by dump size ==

I took a look at the compressed database sizes (dumps from 22 Jan - 1 Feb). These are the file sizes of pages-articles.xml.bz2

1 enwikisource 93.0 MB
2 frwikisource 52.6 MB
3 arwikisource 23.2 MB
4 eswikisource 17.4 MB
5 dewikisource 14.1 MB
6 lawikisource 13.1 MB
sourceswiki 12.0 MB
7 zhwikisource 9.4 MB
8 rowikisource 8.2 MB
9 itwikisource 7.8 MB
10 plwikisource 7.0 MB
11 elwikisource 6.1 MB
12 ruwikisource 5.9 MB
13 hrwikisource 4.3 MB
14 hewikisource 3.6 MB
15 ptwikisource 1.6 MB
16 nlwikisource 1.5 MB
17 jawikisource 1.2 MB
18 srwikisource 1.1 MB
19 dawikisource 783 KB
20 svwikisource 693 KB
21 kowikisource 649 KB
22 glwikisource 266 KB
23 idwikisource 265 KB
24 trwikisource 257 KB
25 fawikisource 168 KB
26 iswikisource 150 KB
27 cywikisource 66 KB

At the moment cy seems to be the only subdomain that has so little contributions, that it might be necessary to shut it down and merge with the international part again (see contribution above). Surprising results in comparison to the article statistics at [[Main Page]]: "ar" and "la" have much content, but little articles, the same at "el". The opposite with "hr": There are many articles with rather little content. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I neither support nor oppose merging inactive language subdomains back to multilingual Wikisource, but I hope that we make a written rule.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 09:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Unless it starts collecting spam, there is no need to do such a thing. And even then it would be locked, not "moved back." Plus, the cy.wikipedia has a reasonable amount of activity, so people who know the language will be looking at that Wikisource from time to time.

But the focus of my comments were not on cy.wikisource, rather on the two dozen wikis that seem to be doing not just well (which all of us had hoped would happen), but far better than I personally expected! This is a great thing, and thanks also to Jofi for his stats, which make it even clearer.

As far as community - on en.wikisource I think that has really happened, and quite nicely too, not just people "stopping by" to leave texts. At he.wikisource too, though of course the number of people is much smaller. What really seems to make it happen is working together on infrastucture - policies, templates, cleanup, Main Page and other central pages, categories and classification systems, and of course helping out others with questions and problems. In other words, it seems like the people who want to be ''librarians'' make up the steady community, which seems rather appropriate... [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 09:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I certainly generally support language domains. But at "cy" there were no real contributions since December, 11th and the only real contributions have been made in the first 26 hours after the creation of the subdomain. The only admin is Brion VIBBER. I don't know if he really wants to maintain the domain, but the spam on one page kept unreverted for about 3 weeks. If the contributions to "cy" don't increase, there is no reason why we should keep the multilangual part of Wikisource. The activity of "cy" could be reached by almost any language subdomain, and there would be no argument to refuse any of the requests. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:Just a small point: when comparing database size, remember that non Latin alphabet languages (i.e. Arabic, Chinese, Indian languages, etc.) use much more space (x 2 ?) than Latin alphabet languages. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:: Also, Latin alphabet languages get a much better compression rate. [[User:Bogdan|Bogdan]] 11:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, the comparison is not very precise. But "la" does use Latin alphabet (what else ;-)) and "ar" has less than 800 counted articles. So it's still remarkable. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Question ==

Hi there! I was setting up an account here to be of some help, but noticed it doesnt work for the language subdomains. Then I wonder, what is the point of starting an account here in the first place? Is the top-level just a shell for the lower levels? Why isnt it linked? I'll probably want to add stuff in English, and occasionally in Dutch; so what accounts should I create?

And, consequently, perhaps it might be worth it to streamline the accounts so that one single account works on different subdomains? Certainly it might be worth it to use signal more clearly that this ''is'' the top-level in the first place, as there is no visual difference whatsoever.

Cheers! [[en:User:The Minister of War|The Minister of War]] 12:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

:Hi,
:The old main WS is used to host documents in languages which do not have a subdomain. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 13:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

It '''is''' linked. If you check the option ''remember me'' you can use the same account and password combination on most projects. For me it works here and on most Wikipedias except English, I happen to have a different name there, bc this one was taken :(

:::I am afraid you are not right. You can use the same '''user name and password''' in every project, but unless you create an '''account''' in every project, you cannot log in. The button ''remember me'' BTW is something quite else, it makes your log in automatically every time you visit the project. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] ==
According to the page for this image, its copyright has just been released to the Wikimedia Foundation. How can we verify that WMF actually has the copyright for this work? We might need to contact someone to get this finalized. But this opens up a number of possible works for our new logo if this is the case (such as the stylized version and other derivatives of the stylized iceberg).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 04:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:The author has left the same message on his own page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kils&diff=42335724&oldid=42057043 see here]. Since he was logged in when he wrote that, I guess we have a proof that it was him and not someone else. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:: I don't believe the copyright status of the image affects any stylized versions of the image - only versions that directly use the image itself (which is currently just the current logo). The stylized versions fall under whatever license their creators grant, irrespective of how the original image is licensed as they are not derivative works in the legal sense. (Note, ianal, but that is my understanding, anyway) --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 23:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

:My understanding was that if someone stylized the iceberg logo, that would be considered a derivative work, since they're taking the iceberg as a source of ideas and expanding on it to produce something new. As such they would have to obtain permission from the current copyright holder to create a stylized version. I'm not a lawyer, either, so I may have a wrong understanding, but that was how I understood it to be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
:: I'm not sure. Taking your ideas from a source is different from using the image ''_as_'' the source. A moot point in the current situation, but I'd be interested to know what the actual legal position would be if permission had not been granted. --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 00:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

==new subdomains==

new subdomains were created :
*yi.wikisource.org
*sk.wikisource.org
*cs.wikisource.org
*ml.wikisource.org

congratulations and good luck! [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

:Thank a lot, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== References ==
Cite.php: for references in the same page. You can read more [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cite/Cite.php here]. Used at spanish wikisource [[s:es:Las mil y una noches: 2|in this article]]. --[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 22:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== Wikisource-I mailing list ==

I've noticed that most of our sister projects have a mailing list of their own yet we do not. I was wondering what people would think of having a mailing list for us to make discussions and whatnot on. It would probably be a much better method than relying on this Scriptorium (let's be realistic: very few discussions ever happen here anymore, since many contributors do not regularly check this site)--discussions stand a much better chance of not stalling and dying. Also, it would be a way to let people see what sorts of things are going on at WS. What are your thoughts?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:I support a mailing list. Previously, you, I, and other administrators could oversee all pages, so we could delete copyvios in any languages, but as more language subdomains break away from this multilingual site, a mailing list becomes even more important to co-ordinate things at Wikisource subdomains.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

::I agree. would be useful. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 20:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:::support from me, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

:The list has been created. For those interested, subscription information can be found [http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l here].—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 18:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

:: For those who may be interested in subscribing, the first mailing list discussion to begin concerns the creation of a Wikisource <big><</big>format<big>></big>-to-wikimarkup conversion script (see the [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-April/thread.html archives]). // [[User:Pathoschild|Pathoschild]] 13:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Lets try and advertise this in the subdomains too. I put a message in the Spanish Cafe. Anyone that can translate various languages, please advertise this to people at those subdomains too. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 18:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

==Policy pages==
Since this wiki is still active, I think it would be good to add some documentation to it and give it a bit of a backbone. Recently, on the English sub-domain, we've written a lot of policies, and I think a few would be beneficial here. I think we should definitely port over [[s:en:WS:WWI|the inclusion policy]] once it's been established and [[s:en:WS:DP|the deletion policy]] at the least so that we can have some official documents to point to should people ask.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 20:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

::Zhaladshar!!!!!!! Yes!!!!! First, I miss such pages here. Secondly, I think in the process of creating new language Wikisources they would be very usefull for the new ones. Now i mus search in all projects to find something on deletion, on blocking, is a xx.wikisource more close to xx.wikipedia or to wikisource.org, on copyright (in fact, there are some serious differences between the page here and the page on the en.wikisource) etc. I think we need it. Urgently. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::Agreed. The great work done on en.ws would be beneficial here. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 15:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:I'm hoping to porting over deletion, copyright, inclusion, administrator, and blocking policies to begin with. We can change them as we need to fit this sub-domain, and it would allow us to have an actual, hard copy policy to point to and allow newer sub-domains to have an established document to refer to/translate and adopt on their own project. That way, some of the growing pains can be avoided.

:I'll also revamp many of the pages in our "Wikisource:" namespace which are so out of date that it's embarrassing. Once school lets out, I can dedicate much more time to this project. But I expect to have policies over here by the end of the week.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::OK. I am not like to promise I will help by writing some pages on this – 1. my english is ok but other speak better, 2. some of you are longer time here as me so you can judge the questions better, 3. I still have much to do with the new cs.wikisource. But if there is something I could help so i will do so. As fitst I would like to mention that there are some differences on the use of the fair use licence:
::* [[Wikisource:Copyright]] – probably limited
::* [[:s:en:Help:Copyright and Wikisource]] - ???
::* [[:en:Wikisource:Wikisource:Copyright]] explicitly prohibited on Wikisource.
::So, what with fair use??? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Fair use doesn't make sense here, as it usually means "part of a work" included in other related document, but we want to publish whole works independently. The exception may be book covers or photos of the author. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 18:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
::::Yes, one of the things the copyright policy will formalize is that (1) ''all texts'' must be public domain, GFDL, or GFDL-compatible. WS has been lax on this and it caused us some frustration and problems a little while ago; (2) it will prohibit fair use (I prefer in its entirety, but at least no fair use texts) to an extent we can decide upon later. For a site like WS, copyright should have been the first thing we nailed down, but it's pretty much turned into the very last thing. Ironic...—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::I support disallowing fair use that will not fit here. Is there any draft policy here to disallow non-commercial licenses as well? Fair use and non-commercial licenses are now disallowed at English Wikisource, but this policy has not been uniformly enforced at other subdomains, including Chinese Wikisource.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Copyright policy? Delete all Creative Commons works? ===
I recently wrote '''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000018.html a very long email to wikisource-l]''' to express desire for establishing consistency across subdomains: "Currently it seems that some licenses are valid on some subdomains but not others. (English Wikisource) requires all content to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License. However, maybe some other language subdomains do not have this policy?" In the same email, I went to explain that CC-BY and CC-BY-SA are free but not compatible with the GFDL.

'''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000019.html The first reply]''' was from Erik Moeller (Eloquence), who wrote: "Wikisource should instead follow similar principles as the Wikimedia Commons and allow any free content license to be used for added works." That said, I thought that someone high up in Wikimedia said that we must have GFDL-compatibility, which implies that Creative Commons works must leave Wikisource? --[[User:Kernigh|Kernigh]] 19:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

== Putting Hindi sources and Scriptorium out of Wikisource? ==

Isn't it time to move Hindi pages out of the main domain?
Almost all pages found by "random page" in the main domain are in Hindi (and their number growing), and this does not help looking for other sources in more rare languages. Additionally the Hindi script URLs are much harder to work with, and the community Scriptorium gets in fact "polluted" by the inability to locate appropriate categories.

Most of the Scriptorium should also go to Meta-Wiki as it is already cross-project, and contains much more tools and management templates or help pages already written there for specific languages.

The main Wikisource sites hould just include the multilingual portal, and the initial sections for rare languages, properly organized into language categories, for easier transfer to another domain later when this content becomes significant. To ease this transition, a minimum set of international common (meta-)pages and templates should be created that will be transfered to the new domain translated later with the articles.

So the main wikisource should remain small and manageable.
(note that new domain names could be created early as equivalents to the main site. This would make interwikis to Wikisource already working for those languages that still have not been transfered into a separate database.) 20:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
:Hi,
:I did most of the work regarding Hindi and Sanskrit here. And most of the pages are Sanskrit, not Hindi. I am totally against separating languages unless there is a significant community to support a subdomain. In cases of Hindi and Sanskrit, I doubt that such a community exists, seeing the edits made upto now, and the number of editors on corresponding Wikipedia languages. And please, logging in and sign your comments. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 20:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
::Agreed with Yann. Unless there are a number of people who are willing to start up a new language Wikisource, a sub-domain should not be made.

::The Scriptorium is not a place to locate language categories (I'm assuming you mean here to locate works written in a particular language). This is to discuss local issues on this wiki is sometimes used to coordinate between the different languages.

::The current wiki is small and scaleable, and should remain entirely open for works of a particular language which will likely never get its own sub-domain. I see no reason why any of this should be ported over to Meta.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with this anonymous contributor that moving these pages out to a subdomain would clarify the situation here... [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 08:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't see a Hindi sub-domain as a project that will be all that active. It seems to be the case that inactive projects collect more vandalism than anything else. I seems safer to keep them here where a number of people watch the project than to move it to a new domain which might only be frequented by a very few people and only at irregular intervals. I would love to see a Hindi sub-domain, don't get me wrong, but I believe there should be support from people who will be active for it.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

:sure. all I wanted to say is that there would be advantages to it. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 21:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

==languages main pages==

For those wikis that do not have a subdomain, I would like to proceed with a reorganization.
Currently we have a [[:Category:Main Pages|set of main pages]] for each languages, and a [[:Category:Languages|set of categories]].
This has two drawbacks :
# it is redundant.
# it is difficult to locate a document, or to access the list, for someone who does not understand a language.
Since the number of pages in languages that are here is in general small,
it would be possible to have the whole list of texts directly on their corresponding main page.
So, I propose to use the category pages as the main pages. That is, move the content of each
main page to the corresponding category page, where it would be used as a header.
It would make it more direct to access the list of pages written in a given language.
What do you guys think?
[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
:It is good, but someone must be able to identify which language an article belongs to.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 15:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

:ok, I am starting to move a few of those, and to have a unified design.[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

== Change Logos to SVG-Version ==

Hi there! There are SVG-Versions available for [[:Image:Wikimedia without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Wikibooks without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Commons without text-35px.png]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote without text-35px.png]]. Would be lovely if one of the admins could change those images in [[Template:Sisterprojects No Text]] and [[Main Page]]. The new logos are [[:Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Wikibooks-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Commons-logo.svg]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote-logo.svg]]. Thank you very much! Regards, [[User:217.225.124.149|217.225.124.149]] 20:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't get what the big deal about the SVG versions are. What's wrong with the PNG ones?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:I think that there may be some browsers/systems which do not support SVG, so I would not change the logos. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Browsers without SVG support should not be a problem. The MediaWiki software should render the images as PNG. I know that there was a problem with transparency in PNG, but was not that fixed? I think the advantage of SVG is that scaled versions of scalable SVG graphics are more accurate than scaled verions of portable PNG graphics. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 15:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

== Important change in the policy of de.wikisource ==

At de.wikisource there is a majority of those, who don't want to have texts without source or texts copied from other websites any longer (see [[s:de:Wikisource:Skriptorium#Texte_ohne_Quellen_oder_aus_dem_Internet|here]]). So, if you contributed German texts in the last years, I strongly encourage you to add your source to the text. If you cannot do this or if you copied the text from another website and you want to keep your wikified version of it, then now is the right time to copy your text from de and to transfer ist elsewhere. It most likely will be deleted at de. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

:Why does the German Wikisource want to delete web sources? Does this mean that if a text (such as Kafka's ''The Metamorphosis'' were copied to de.wikisource from a website it will be deleted simply because it's an internet source?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Yes, I really do not understand what de.wikisource wants to do. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:I can agree that the purpose of Wikisource is not to be a copy of Project good mountain or any other website. But works copied from other sites on the web can still be useful on Wikisource. So I see no reason to delete those works or to forbid copying more works. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 14:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

If you forbid copying works from websites, the number of works the German Wikisource has will become virtually nil. How many people have access to old books and decent OCR material that they can scan in works and edit them? Such a process is extremely time consuming--just as much as transcribing them would be. I'm hoping that we are just not understanding what is happening (maybe they are forbidding a certain kind of web document?) and it's not an all out ban on web sources.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:At de.wikisource there are some projects that OCR works and edit them. And that is nice. But in fact you did understand correctly what is happening: Most likely anything else shall be deleted. Certainly that means, that thousands of pages will be deleted. In fact the whole process of transfering the texts from multilangual wikisource to de was unnecessary: Almost everything of those texts have no source or are copied from other websites. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::I'm curious as to what is causing this change. How and why was this decided upon? It is an extremely dramatic change in policy, and I wonder about the ramifications. The biggest I'm concerned about (it's the only one I can think of right now; I'm sure I can come up with more later) is that user involvement in de.wikisource will drop dramatically. If all web-based contributions are excluded, most people who do not have decent OCR software or the rare books will be turned off of the project, because they've got no opportunity to be involved. Sure, some will stay, because they've got the required tools to allow them to be useful, but what about the newbies? Saying to them, "Oh, I'm sorry. We do not accept what you are uploading to our project. Please do not continue to add those works" would not put de.wikisource in a very good light and will cause growth in that project to all but halt. This is the reverse direction of what any Wikimedia project should want.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 00:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that it is entirely contrary with the rules of wikisource. For me, it is a nonsense. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:apparently this policy was "decided" in order to ensure quality of their texts. For that they proposed to remove all texts for which the source is unknown. In addition, some people proposed to remove texts that exist already elsewhere on the internet. I did not really understand the reason for that latter decision. I think that such a policy would terribly harm de.wikisource. I wonder if we can/should oppose that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC) PS: why is the logo at de.wikisource different from other sites?

::I'm a fan of opposing it. It goes entirely against the whole purpose of WS, and I imagine if this gets executed, there will be some bad light shone on Wikisource. I'm not against removing texts whose source is unknown. Many other sister projects have similar policies. But to ''entirely remove '''all''''' texts that exist elsewhere on the web will hamstring the project. What about texts which a person scans in, but exist on a website somewhere? Are those not accepted?

::To remove all web-based works completely overlooks the benefits that WS can give those texts. Sure, they exist on Gutenberg or Bartleby, but we can interlink them, add multimedia content (if it exists), and many other things which give those works value no other website has given it. I would rather not see this policy happen.

::Was this policy ever voted upon? How many people supported it? Is there any course of action that can keep such a detrimental policy from taking effect?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Sorry, i am a bit short of time and then when I have it I try do to something on cs.source... So it is the first time i hear about this nonsence. Sure, it must be clear that a text or a document from some webpages is free licensed and OK, but not this! If there is any chance to oppose it i support it. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Its not correct, what jofi here has written. Nobody wants delete tomorow thousands of pages in de-Wikisource. We are in a discussion process which sense have textes without any sources and which sense makes it to copy textes from any webpages to wikisource. And we have duscussed some solutions for it. Yes the radical solution is to delete all these textes and search original sources, like first editions or other historical important editions o a text. Another solution is, to find to all texts (you can imagine what work this is) a source (see above) and to compare these editions with the text in Wikisource. And also other solutions are discussed. But to say its clear the most active editors wants sometimes only texts with clear and good source in de-Wikisource. And copy&paste from any webpages is not good to reach this target.

That we want remove all Texts is not true, this is one of possible Solutions. And when we should delete these text, we want these texts back, based on clear sources and with high scientific Level. Short abstract: what jofi here says is not true an he is making panic without an base. Greetings --[[User:213.54.67.220|213.54.67.220]] 21:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC) [[s:de:Benutzer:Finanzer]]

Agree with Finanzer s:de:Benutzer:FrobenChristoph --[[User:84.60.205.115|84.60.205.115]] 22:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It seems that the positions in the discussion are not as radical as it first seemed to me. But nevertheless I still encourage all people who added German texts to add their source to it. In my opinion it is still clear, that there is a majority supporting the deletion of some of the texts that have been added in the last years, if they don't fullfill some quality criterias. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* I think it is a good goal to be '''source''' for quality high level textes. One of criteria for a good text is to know where ist does come from. To achive this, there is a need for information about the source. There is no need for another haystack of nonvalidated information called ws. I think it is usefull to bring the ws to a higher level of quality, by retrieving these informations. If a text is nearly unavailable, it may be really usefull to keep it and state clearly that the source information is missing and searched for. If a text has an high availability in the net, there is no need to keep it without the source information, the best solution is to find the missing information and to add it, or as a last step delete it. To be just another mirror of low quality information may be the goal of other projects not of ws. sincerly --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 08:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I fully agree that texts should be sourced whenever possible. I am currently doing just that on fr.wikisource. However deleting a text already copied seems a solution a bit extrem to me. The source and validation can be added later. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 08:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
* Is there any sense in a text, that is copied from somewhere in the net, wihout a source. Is it the full text, or is it an edited version. Which is the right bible (that has nothing to do with religion here, it is just a well known big example)? The Roman Catholic version, the Martin Luther version, the protestant version, the Anglican version.... When one of this chosen, for example catholic. The next question is before or after the 2. vatican synod. These are all bibles with a ''slightly'' differennt content. Hopefully you see without the citation of the source - where does it come from - the text is absolut useless. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 09:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::Well, I will take another example. Say that somebody copied a text from a another website without giving the source (or not), for example a text of Goethe. If the orther site doesn't give itself the source, what would you do? The text should be verified with a paper version, but that will take time if it's a big work. Deleting the text doesn't improve the situation. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::I fully agree that ''not only the licence but also the source'' must be clear. We need a high level quality. I am just hardly working to change it on cs.source. But the fact a document comes from internet can not be the criterium! In this case, what shall you do with the most old lithurgical texts and the most juristic ones? They are all PD, and i do not think, that somebody will scan or retype them, when you can find all on internet. Therefore if the first reports here are not true, it would be good, but probably there is a need of discussion on some principles like licence in wikisource etc. Zhaladzhar wanted to prepare something, i think. And i suggest, that such serious policies would be discussed also in other Wikisources as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* The criteria isn´t it comes from the internet. The criteria is the source is missing. If someone does the work do digitise a book, he mormally has the source und will tell it. Most of the problems come from
:*"I found the book in the internet, it´s interessting, lets copy it to ws". This internet page dosn´t has any source information, so why should i provide one. "I´m a real big guy by copying this big book." .
:*Oh a real nice poem, i like it. Who is the author, I don´t know. Is it free, I don´t know. But there is a webspace container called ws, lets copy it. What´s about URV without a source?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

@yann It must be verified. Mayby it is reprint with some amendments and a foreword. Are these copied wiht the text. If yes are the amendments and the foreword free or is it a URV because of the add ons. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Joergens.mi, I understand what you mean. And I also have some texts on cs.source where I have to do something - as I said, the source is in my eyes as important as the licence. But: If somebody copied the Grundgesetz or the Declaration of the USA onto your de.wikisource without given the source so it is no reason to delete it. Both text are undoubtly PD, I must just compare it with a source and if it is the same, so I have the source or i copy it one time more if there are difference in the text. But this can be done later. In such cases I use a special template saying we know about the problem and we shall solve it. (And I think an URL is sifficient source in cases of some juristic sites which offer laws etc.). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:38, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@-jkb- What you said is ok, such an url may be an good entry to the source definition. but the problem ist in a lot of cases even this start is missing. Look here: http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Der_Geier and these things are the problems. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 11:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, Der Geier... Sure, i know it, too, and you can see many texts like this also in Wikipedias... Here it is no great problem - everything is missing: no licence, no source, no author, no wiki to an article with explanation what it is etc. Either, I would try to find something by myself if I think it is important, or I would suggest to delete it indeed. In this case. But not if it were a law where I know at least, it is PD and i can use it for an article in Wikipedia. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::* This are the things (Der Geier) we are talking about, nothing else. To make a usefull cleanup, by searching for articles of this type, and put them on a good base. If this is not possible, then and only then a deletion is intended. This is all we are argueing about at de.WS and we are at the beginning of that process not at the end. Even with the laws youre a talking about some information will be usefull, because there are changes from time to time, therefore the year of the issue or the version should be mentioned. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 13:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::This isn't nearly as drastic as it sounded at first glance (phew!). I actually think this is a noble effort. All texts should be sourced (author information, edition--make it as fleshed as possible) in order to help give WS a high quality of source texts and to make us more than just a copy and paste website.

:::However, I would like to suggest instead of mass deletion of unsourced texts, you simply place a template on the text like <nowiki>{{unsourced}}</nowiki> (or whatever the word would be in German). That way, editors who want to do a little bit of house cleaning will know that there are some texts that need to be worked on to be considered appropriate for WS. But just because there is no source right now does not mean the work should be deleted anytime soon. Each deletion need to be specific to the text in question--maybe one text is a very rare one (maybe a very old manuscript) that doesn't ''have'' any (or much) source information, and such information is quite hard to find. It should be kept, due to its nature, even though it doesn't have the requisite information on it. Of course, for more common texts, the source information won't be hard to find at all.

:::I think of unsourced texts as analogous to Wikipedia's "stub article." Unsourced texts are by no means complete, but deleting them is unwise as it prohibits further growth of that text. Just as a good Wikipedia article (in general) won't be written over night, nor should we expect a good source text to be so easy to add that we can add ''everything'' in one go. Sometimes searching will be necessary, sometimes it won't be fruitful at all, but if you keep it, you will allow others to also check that work, and maybe something will happen many months/years down the future.

:::-jkb-: I'll eventually get those documents over here. en.wikisource has been keeping me busy lately, and many of the policies I want to bring over have been getting changed slightly here and there. I want to bring a static text, not one that is getting changed every few weeks. I should be able to get them over here within a short time, though.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Don't hurry be happy (or was it don't worry be happy???), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:We don´t hurry. I think we have statet clearly our intention. We are at the moment at the '''beginning'' of an discussion process how to improve the quality not at the end. The result will be some rules, how to proceed. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 18:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

== Logo update ==

After one admin on the german wikisource had unilaterally changed the logo to a self made version but - rightly complained - that the old wikisource logo didn't even contain the project name, Zanimum was so friendly to create a clean redraw of the iceberg together with the project name and formally hand over the copyright to the Wikimedia Foundation. A version suitable for use as logo can be found [http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Bild:Wiki.png here], bigger versions are uploaded on commons: [[:Image:Wikisource-newberg-de.png|Wikisource-newberg-de.png]] and [[:Image:Wikisource-nt.png]], EPS versions are available from Zanimum. It would be nice if the local project admins could update it. greetings,--[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]
:I like this versoin alot. Can we try to achieve consensus to adopt this without a full contest? It is not very different from our current design and it appears that de.wikisource.org already has consensus on it. However I cannot read German, that needs to be confirmed.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't know if there ever was a bigger discussion on this topic. The temporary logo at DE was supported by 3 people and opposed by none. The replace of the old logo was earlier supported by about 3 people and opposed by none. The "new" logo was already used at some Wikimedia pages as far as I know. The community at DE is not that big and most of them don't seem to be interested in a logo discussion that much. If nobody complains about the new logo, this can be called a consensus. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:it will not help wikisource if each subdomains starts to have its own logo. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:These methods are not really adapted. The logo concerns all subdomains of wikisource, and must be voted by all and not by only one . [[User:Marc|Marc]] 07:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::Please have a look at it. Actually it ''is'' the old iceberg logo. Just in a clean redrawn version. To date all subdomains – also the german – use the same logo. The subdomains never used the same ''file''. And I agree to BirgitteSB: I also like the discussed version very much. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 07:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::No :
::This is not the official logo ;
::there was no vote. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::The well-known iceberg is not the official logo? *puzzled* By the way: Do you actually know whether the file [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] (on [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikisource Commons]: "Original photo") is protected by trademark? --

On these page, you can see the exact form of the official logo : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo

if you want to change it, you could have the courtesy to make a vote. [[Benutzer:Marc|Marc]] 08:27, 22. Mai 2006 (UTC)

:The Wikisource iceberg is a nice logo. I don't want to change it. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 09:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

There must be a vote in order to change the logo. In the meantime, I ask the german admins to revert back to the official logo. Those who want to change the logo should take part in the discussion [[Wikisource_talk:New_Wikisource_logo|here]] instead of taking unilateral actions. I wrote there that I am willing to organize a vote '''if''' the logo proposals are made before the vote, not during the vote. The reason is that I find it tricky to organize a vote when the set of options is not known. So far I received very little feedback on that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 09:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I also agree that there must be a vote before the official loge is changed. But secondly, It is not OK when somebody starts to change the logos in different Wikipedias - Zanimum did so at least twice in cs.wiki wothout consulting the people there. Next time we need a lear vote. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

So far all the votes held about logos on wikisource yielded no results. On the other hand, there are several problems with the picture used as logo now:
* copyright was never transfered to the Wikimedia Foundation, instead it was published under GFDL (this goes against our logo policy)
* the image is a bitmap and as such not suitable for print in large versions.
* it doesn't contain the project name
The new variant (it's not a totally different logo for which - I agree - a vote or a contest would be necessary) was created to solve these problems. As the designer of the promotion materials for the Wikimedia Foundation I was very happy that Zanimum provided this printable version. If you're not happy with this logo at all, you're free to organize a contest in the community and select another logo which also fullfills these conditions (copyright wikimedia, vector version, including project name), but the current thing confronts the wikimedia foundation and the promotion department with so many problems that it should be changed, now when there's finally a variant which solves these problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

:::Elian, i do not say if I am happy with the logo or not, i even do not say if I am happy with the old one. But a logo is central for an identification. not only here, also on Wikipedias, Wikcionaries etc. If every server would start to make an own logo, it would be awful. And, these logos are to be found enywhere on main pages where there is an redirect to other projects. So, we nee it to be unified, somehow. And secondly, as i said above, every project can decide what it shall do. It is not possible, that somebody change the logo and then he changes it in other projects. Really, I do not argue against the new image. But agains the way it has been done. OK? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with the unification, and the new version of the logo should be used on all wikisource projects without delay. Of course if people are unhappy with the logo, then as always, we should be open to a discussion of positive change, including a logo contest if that is warranted. The idea that logos have to be voted on is just mistaken, though.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 13:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Well, it is for me good to hear here that we should unificate the logo (in the mean time there are some dozens of wikipedias and wikisources on the internet, and therefore we must show who we are). Just to explain the other point, ''to vote or not to vote'' (existentially not as bad as ''to be or not to be'' :-)): sure, i know the rule ''Voting is evil'' or so, but here in Wikisource we have some three hundreds of logos and since about 6 months we are preparing a voting (that never took part... I know). So we must now find a way to make all happy or "half happy" at least. But first condition indeed: all Wikisources of this Wikimedia project shoud have the same logo. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:Since the logo finding process lasts for almost 2 years and nobody knows when it ends, and because the current logo not even contains the name of the project, I would like to start a short vote to add "Wikisource" to the logo. I think this is absolutely necessary because otherwise people can't see where they are. I think it is no big deal to make such a change. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 16:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::it should be no big deal, right. And it was done already in a professional way. You're welcome to organize a new logo contest, but for the time being, I think the logo should just be changed to the one with project name. This gives us enough leeway to look for a new good logo while we're free of the problems of the old logo. --[[User:84.153.74.172|84.153.74.172]] 16:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@ Jofi: Well, sure, this would be necessay. The only one problem is: some Wikisources do not call themselves Wikisource but the use this expression in their language or even they have something different. What shall we do with it?? Otherwise support for Jofi. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::They could adapt the image to add their text, as it is done in other Wikimedia project.
I know added this: [[Image:Sourceberg-text.png]]

It is the same image as in the current logo, only the text "Wikisource" is added. Absolutely irrespective of the logo discussion I would like to have it used instead of the current one. I support replacing it by a better logo. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::sorry Jofi, this solves the problem with the missing name, but it doesn't solve the copyright problems and the printing problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

::::::Elian I thought the copyrights had been transfered to WMF already. If they have not been then neither the current iceberg or the one Zanimum redrew would be acceptable, since the latter is a derivation of the former.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 21:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:::::::Maybe this has been said before. The current logo is licensed under the GFDL, transferring the copyright will not change that. But the copyright holder can authorise derivative works that are not GFDL-licensed. So if Zanimum got permission, he did not have to license his derivation under GFDL. So if everthing was done correctly that version is still acceptable as a logo. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 22:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

* It´s a real curiosity.
:*There are several projekts (wikibooks) which added text to their logos, without any discussion.
:*Just such a text addition at de.WS gives a big discussion.
:*Some people defines a new logo. (personnally I don´t like it, but that doesn´t matters)
:*Other say it schould be adapted immediatily.
*But here the old logo is still the logo, why hasn´t it changed here (as a good example) to the new form?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:following the above diktat by Jimbo Wales I uploaded [[:Image:Wiki.png]]. I guess some developer has to set it up as logo now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Wouldn't it be better if the words ''Wikisource'' were included in the image, not out of it ? Is it too late to do that ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 08:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
.

Something like this :

[[Image:Wiki2essai.png|Word Wikisource inside logo]]

:These images are all fairly ugly. If we're going to keep the iceberg logo, I'd prefer Zanimum's stylized version, or the version the English WS uses for its [[s:en:WS:NEWS|news]] page. I believe that Uwe Kils has given copyright of the current logo to the WMF, however.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:I too prefer the version on the news page; the colors are better, and the shape has more style. but I do not think that we have the power to change a decision that comes from above us. Anyway, I am happy that we will not have to organize a vote, thanks to jimbo [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 14:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::I like Kcyclopedists' logo for WikisourceNews too. Could he make another one for Wikisource without news ? Can you do that, Kcyclopedist ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 05:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

* I prefer the version on the news page,too. I don´t think it´s a goot idea to put wikisource in the center of the Logo. if you look at most of the examples, putting the text above or below is much smarter [[Image:89px-WikisourceNews.png|left|Wiki News logo]] --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 15:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Yes. Not in the middle. First, some ones use the logo for other purposes too, where it could be disturbing. Secondly, I would suggest, we should have two sorts of an official logo: one with and one without the text (say for those Wikisources who would want to make another text). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
:ThomasV: What decision is being made above our heads?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 02:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

::Z: I was referring to the request by Jimbo. Anyway, I am quite happy that the issue is solved now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't think I quite understood what Jimbo was saying. Is he saying we can all choose our own logo?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:::In contrary, he said he agrees with my suggestion to unificate all daomains, i.e. one logo for all wikisources. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

== Languages and categories==
Some times I have some problems with the language of a text – I simply do not know: is it a document or is it some sort of vandalism?? The last exmple is [[Ein Tad]]. Undoubtly, it could be a language. In times the Czech Wikisource was here I started to use a category ''Czech'' (or ''Česky'') for all pages as a main category, other categories were subcategories of this one. By the way, in the moment you decide to create a new domain, you have an advantage when moving your wikisource to the new one: a developer must have a look in this category and move everything he finds. I would suggest the same for all languages here, maybe this category should be in English (it is also possible to use the abbreviations like de, en, mt etc); and more over there could be a notice in the edit window, something like do not forget to give here your language code / category... [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:Most [[:Category:Languages|language categories]] here use the local name of the language. I think that makes sense, since persons looking for texts in a language will probably know at least so much of that language that they know the local name of that language.
:[[Ein Tad]] can be deleted here since it is already present att the welsh subdomain.--[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 09:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Done for [[Ein Tad]]. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

== Ported over some policies from en.wikisource ==
Okay, I'm making good on my promise. I've now brought over an inclusion policy and a copyright policy. They can be located here:
*[[Wikisource:What Wikisource includes]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright policy]]

I've made almost no changes to it (meaning non-existent templates are dead, many shortcut links are dead, etc.). I didn't want to make any changes until I brought it up here (maybe we will bring over the templates from en.ws, maybe get rid of them--it's all up to discussion). Read it, and say what you like, dislike, what should be changed (whether it relates to actual policy or presentation), or make the changes yourself.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 23:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

:I support both policies to be applied here based on English Wikisource. There are several works here with non-commercial licenses that will have to go. Based on [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2006-February/006015.html], it seems that Angela has suggested that non-commercial licenses are to be disallowed at all Wikisource sites. When we have the policy officialized, I will nominate articles with non-commercial licenses for deletion.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 14:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

::I think I have to read it once more but now I can say I'm like to support it (hmm, and then to translate it for cs.source... good job), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
:I'll begin working with these to make them more Wikisource-general instead of English specific. That way, the transition to using them on other WS (should that happen) will be easier to do.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

::BTW, what shall happen with the old draft [[Wikisource:Copyright]] which is still here? We should not have two different pages on copyright :-), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
:::Because the page was so out of date, we blanked it and redirected it to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]], which encompassed some elements from [[Wikisource:Copyright]] and many new elements which reflected better what a good copyright policy should be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
::::The old draft of [[Wikisource:Copyright]] is still there as of this writing of mine.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 04:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
:::On en.wikisource? It's a redirect over there. Here, it should probably be redirect to remove mention of fair use.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::::No, not at en.wikisource but at this multilingual site.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
:I have redirected [[Wikisource:Copyright]] to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]] and moved the talk page, but I have not merged the history of two project pages.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 03:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

==Copyright question==
I'm thinking of ading portions or all of the [[w:AASHO|AASHO]] 1927 list of [[w:United States Numbered Highways|United States Numbered Highways]] - an excerpt is [http://www.us-highways.com/2766lst.jpg here]. What if anything of this is copyrightable? Would I have to condense it into a simple list of cities, or would even that not be OK?

Background: the list was compiled by AASHO, a private organization forwed of members from all state highway departments. The individual towns listed along the route were chosen by AASHO, and a relocation away from one required AASHO approval. It was copyrighted and the copyright (at least for the 1929 edition) has been [http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~lesk/copyrenew.html renewed]:
:CLNA: AMERICAN ASSN. OF STATE HIGHWAY OFFICIALS.
:TITL: United States numbered highways, by W. C. Markham.
:ODAT: 19Aug29; AA23426 RREG: American Assn. of State Highway Officials ; 24Jul57; R196400.
Hmmm... that also means that the 1927 edition (which has no mention of a "W. C. Markham") was not renewed, and so should be OK. I'm also interested in the bigger question though. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] 00:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

:If there is no copyright and if the text is only English you should put it at [[:en:s:Main Page|English Wikisource]]. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 08:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

== new subdomains==

the following subdomains have been created:

* http://ang.wikisource.org/
* http://az.wikisource.org/
* http://bg.wikisource.org/
* http://bs.wikisource.org/
* http://ca.wikisource.org/
* http://et.wikisource.org/
* http://fi.wikisource.org/
* http://fo.wikisource.org/
* http://ht.wikisource.org/
* http://hu.wikisource.org/
* http://kn.wikisource.org/
* http://lt.wikisource.org/
* http://no.wikisource.org/
* http://sl.wikisource.org/
* http://te.wikisource.org/
* http://th.wikisource.org/
* http://uk.wikisource.org/
* http://vi.wikisource.org/
* http://zh-min-nan.wikisource.org/

I would like to ask those who use these subdomains to move content from here to there.
In addition, pages have to be deleted on this site; otherwise there will be duplicate copies and chaos.
For that reason, it would be great to have one person in charge per subdomain, who blanks the pages
that have been moved, so that I can later delete them.

To do that, please replace the text on the pages that were moved with "<nowiki>[[Category:Moved to xx]]</nowiki>",
where "xx" is the name of the subdomain the pages were moved to.

[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
:Also, remember, if you want to keep the page histories, ask a developer (probably Brion) to do the page transfers.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::Please remember to check the copyright status of moved articles as well.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Why not not to transfer the pages from here to the new domains by transwiki? It has been activated, I made one or two trials today from cs.wiki to cs.source, and it it fully OK incl. the history. Sure, it must bve activated for each subdomain, i.e. somebody must get the access, and he must get also the access for transfers from here (normally, it is activated only for transfers from xx.wiki to ss.xource). But it should not be a problem, and we must then find a list here, what can be deleted. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- - - P.S. like Gububu does for the hu.source

== Creating new subdomains ==
It was requested on IRC that we clearly list approved subdomains seperately from the ongoing or inactive disscusions. Also I was told that the procedure of filing a bug to create new subdomains is not good for the developers. I am on IRC regularly and can make direct requests to them if someone will leave a message on my talk page at [[:en:User talk:BirgitteSB]]. I looked at [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] and I think we could make a seperate section for approved domains and move the disscusions to it as they gain consensus. Does anyone else have ideas on how to make the page clearer? --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

== Sysop for a while ==

Hi, some time ago a made a proposal in meta - [[:m:Meta:Babel#Sysop for a while]] -, and today a tzried to start a new discussion on this topic. Everybody who would like to say something to it, please go there and make it. Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

== Side-by-side alignment tags for translations? ==

Hi, all, I'm relatively new, so forgive me if this isn't the right forum for asking this question.

I've been transcribing some old texts onto the Latin and French wikisources, and then adding my translations at the English wikisource. Someone very nice at the Latin Wikisource started adding mysterious tags to my contributions, such as

<pre>
[[la:Confessio philosophi]]
{{interwiki-info|la|(vo)}}
</pre>

which [[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] explained gives a side-by-side view of the original and translated texts. So cool!

I'm wondering, though, whether it's possible to introduce matching tags into the two texts to help them align better. It might be helpful for students if they could see paragraphs of the original and translated texts ''exactly'' opposite to one another. A good test case would be the dialog [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]]. Thanks for your help! :) [[User:WillowW|WillowW]] 08:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
:Hi Willow,
:For that, you need that the div class=text to be exactly at the same place on both documents, and of course, the paragraphs should match each other. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 09:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, [[User:Yann|Yann]], thanks for the suggestions! I added the <pre><div class=text></pre> at the beginning and <pre></div></pre> at the end of the text that should be aligned in both dialogs, but that doesn't seem to have helped. The paragraphs still don't line up in the two-column format; the text gradually gets out of sync starting from the beginning until the end, where there are huge gaps. The paragraph boundaries (2 carriage returns) in the two texts seem to be identical, although the lengths of each paragraph might differ somewhat. Could someone please look at the dialogs and see whether I'm doing something wrong? I really would like to have the dialog lines match up. Once we get these dialogs to work, I'll copy the solution over to my other translations. Thanks for all your trouble! :) [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 19:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. Am I allowed to make a user page here? I was going to, but it seemed to suggest that I shouldn't if I already have a page at other wikisources, which I do (en,fr,la,de). Thanks for any tips for a hopeless new-b! ;)

:Willow, look at it now. I've tweaked the Latin side a bit and now it all meets up. It seems that you have to manually add line breaks (I'm initially thinking that the header templates are screwing things up). I need to look more into it, though. (Oh, and you can go ahead and create a user space--this is a fully operational wiki).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 22:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much, [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]], for looking into it and trying to get it to work! Unfortunately, it still doesn't work for me; the two columns start off OK but get out of sync after a short while and get really bad at the end. :( Interestingly, going to the double-column format from the Latin side seems to give a slightly better alignment than going from the English page. I tried it in two different browsers (Mozilla and Firefox). The hermit-devil dialog near the end has single linespaces between the paragraphs; perhaps that might throw it off? I'm totally willing to go through the text, though, and put tags in if they'll help it align better. I appreciate all your help! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 00:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

:I am the ''"Someone"'' that add the interwikilink on '''en:''' but I was not logged in... :)
:I see that [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] insert in the [[la:Formula:Titulus2|Template:Titulus2]] '''<nowiki> </nowiki>'''
:Can you explane me how work this? I'm not an expert with the tags.
:Thank you very much!
:Please, make attention when you modify this template because is used by quite all the text in la.wikisource.
:Hi! --[[User:Francesco Gabrielli|Francesco Gabrielli]] 09:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

::I have had the same problem at the same time. Here is another page which seems to have solved the problem : 
::I don't know why it works with Epictete and doesn't work with Horace, Epictete hadn't suppressed the title templates though. 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Manuel?match=el Epictete] 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.3_-_Au_vaisseau_qui_portait_Virgile_en_Attique?match=la Horace] 
::--[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 09:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
==Side by side alignment (continued) : main pages same problem ?==
[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page?match=fr Another gap here]. Is there some 'div' that we ought to use to correct this gap, and would it be on the English page or on the French page ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 04:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

::I am the author of this very imperfect piece of software. you can use tags to align paragraphs. The help is here : [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

:::This "very imperfect piece of software" is very useful and well thought even as it is ! But you know me, Thomas, you know that I am a not very gifted beginner, do you think I would be able to better it ? Should I try some experiments myself, or should I wait for others to do it ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 11:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I got it to work! Check out [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] -- yeay, yeay, yeay! :D

:It works for me too, [http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.1_-_%C3%80_M%C3%A9c%C3%A8ne?match=la here]. Thank you ThomasV and WillowW ! --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 13:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The "div class=text" tags at the beginning and end didn't help, presumably because of the different title templates on the two different Wikisources. The "title" div tags worked great, although they seem to need a forward slash at the end, e.g.,
<pre>
<div title="Beginning of text" />
</pre>
Should the [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension|Help page]] be changed? There's no forward slash after "Wright brothers". Thanks again, [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]]! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 11:20, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

:hey. I did not put it in the help, because I thought it was obvious : a div must always be closed. not closing divs can cause really bad things. I usually use <nowiki></div></nowiki> to close my divs, but the slash is another good way to do it. feel free to improve the help. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

::I don't think <nowiki><div/> is valid HTML, but it is cleaned up and rendered as <div></div></nowiki> by the MediaWiki software. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 12:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Might be I did not understand it well, I am bad in programming. I wanted to install the '''bilingual feature''' in cs.source and i followed the guide in '''[[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]''', but nothing happens - no double arrows, not bilingual... Did i forget to install something esle? (I copied just the script from fr.source, that's all). Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:yes you did. addLoadEvent is missing, as well as the file header. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh gosh. And where is it? addLoadEvent is there, as I can see, and what is header? And where? We are now at the point that through our extremely growth we shall override de.source and en.source very soon :-), but such marginal problems... Can you help? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:it is not there. check carefully. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 18:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:If you want to use addLoadEvent you need a definition of that function in your script. It should be easier to use addOnloadHook (a function that is defined by the MediaWiki software). I think the script will work if you change "addLoadEvent(BilingualLink);" into "addOnloadHook(BilingualLink);". /[[User:EnDumEn|EnDumEn]] 21:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

@ EnDumEn: thx, it works; @ ThomasV: well you were right, there was a space, but it was copy&paste from somewhere, so... anyway thx as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

-----

Did something happen with this utility?? It worked fine (see above), but this week something changed, there are no double extensions on the left column - it is away. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

:please update your monobook.js from fr.ws [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, so there is something new in the west... Do you think it will work with the ''addOnloadHook(BilingualLink)'' instead of ''addLoadEvent(BilingualLink)'' (see EnDummEn's advice above)?? Anyway, thx much, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

== Spoken Wikisource ==

The German branch of Wikisource has uploaded two audio files at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spoken_Wikisource_German . If anyone would like to participate on building a library of audio files with spoken Wikisource texts under free licenses feel free to use the Commons category ''Spoken Wikisource'' and to share your thoughts on this topic with the German community at http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Gesprochene_Wikisource . Greetings from Germany! Wikisource-de-User FrobenChristoph --[[User:172.182.5.236|172.182.5.236]] 18:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
:Also, I'd like to bring to everyone's attention a site which does a similar thing: [http://www.librivox.org LibriVox.org]. All of their audio books are released immediately into the public domain. It might be worth going over and giving them a look.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

== Frisian sources ==

Now that subdomains have been created, how do I reach the pages that are in the main domain, from elsewhere? [[ws:Main Page:Frysk]] does not get me to [[Main Page:Frysk]] for some reason, but at [[s:Main Page:Frysk]] the subdomain translation kicks in. Thus, using it from a fy: wiki you end up on the non-existent fy: subdomain, without a redirect back from http://fy.wikisource.org it seems. (I can't demonstrate this here; I always held s:xx:pagename to be a switch to xx subdomain, but apparently it, now, isn't.) So how do I link the main pages of the various Frisian projects? Or should we subdomain Wikiboarne for that? [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 22:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

: <nowiki>[[oldwikisource:Foo]]</nowiki> [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 22:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. (Indeed, so much more elegant than ''ws:'', wouldn't you agree? Not to mention that "old" is a misnover, here.) 
And I see that, while the problem with things like w:fy: is that they link to the wrong computeradress, this is fixed by translating it to the correct wiki serverside on each request (the usual disadvantages), so I have the solution there as well.

My original problem is solved, then. Now I just have to find the Wikiboarne references in the Wikipedy to make them link to these fine new/old internal links. [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 19:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

::Some links to and from Wikisource are a bit complicated and/or strange, indeed; but see my page in cs.source [[:s:cs:Nápověda:Odkazy#Odkazy v textu]] - although it is written in Czech you will understand the syntaxes for more examples. Good luck, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

== [[m:Wikisource]] ==

I was asked at Wikimania if I could help get the Wikisource description on Meta updated. I have failed to do this and it looks as though the projects have been moved to there own pages now. The new Wikisource page is lacking any general descriptions at the moment and I was hoping we could work on that here. Once the english desricpption is put up, it will be translated to main languages in use at Meta. So it is important that this description does not solely refelect en.WS. Also I think would be nice to really put some thought into this presentation of Wikisource. So does anyone has any thoughts on this?--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

:why don't they use [[w:wikisource|wikisource]] ? [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 04:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

::I don't know, maybe they wanted something endorsed by the community. Maybe they heard rumors about the "slogan/description flap" and thought it had something to do with that page. If no one is interested in working on this I can reccomend using that. --[[User:71.81.70.212|71.81.70.212]] 12:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

:::Well, what means endorsed... Obviously it is endorsed or something like that as nobody from the community protested against it. And, in fact, I cannot imagine that somebody would be able to create another text which would be quite different from this one. Sure, it can be made shorter if necessary, but Wikisource is good described there - my oppinion. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

::Please tell me that those stats are automatically updated...It will suck to have to go through and manually update ALL the WS domains with new page/admin/user counts.

::Birgitte: What all needs to be added to the Meta page? I'm willing to help, although my amount of free time right now is pretty dismal.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 17:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Basically the About Wikisource section. [[m:Wikipedia]] just covers the history other sister projects tell about their goals and mission. I don't know exactly what we should, but I would like it to be reflective of things all lang subdomains share. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 22:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

== Democracy and Education ==

Where, oh where, is my Bible: [[Democracy and Education]] by [[w:John Dewey|John Dewey]]? It was here the last time I looked... :-( (It was first published in 1916, so shouldn't it be out of copyright?) [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] 10:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:Oops, ignore - somehow, I didn't realise I was on the multingual portal Scriptorium - sorry :-) [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] 10:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

== <s>Middle</s> Old English Wikisource ==

ang.wikisource.org ([[:w:Old English language|Middle English]] Wikisource) is a dead wiki for a dead language/english variation. The most frequent action is user creation. See the complete listing of all editions that this wiki has received up today in http://ang.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&limit=100&days=300.

According to [[:ang:Special:Statistics]], ''There are 11 total pages in the database. This includes "talk" pages, pages about Wicifruma, minimal "stub" pages, redirects, and others that probably don't qualify as content pages. Excluding those, there are 0 pages that are probably legitimate content pages.''

This is the full list of articles on Main namespace:
# [[:s:ang:Brunanburh]], copy-and-paste from [[:s:en:Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader/The Battle of Brunanburh]]
# [[:s:ang:Cnēorisbōc]] is copyvio? (see [[:s:ang:Talk:Cnēorisbōc]])
# [[:s:ang:Dēor]]
# [[:s:ang:Main Page]] redirects to [[:s:ang:Hēafodsīde]]
# [[:s:ang:Hēafodsīde]] is the Main page
# [[:s:ang:Se Wīdfarend]], copy-and-paste from [[:s:ang:Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader/The Wanderer]]

English Wikisource maintain acceptance of texts in Middle English. See [[:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2005/10#Middle English]] (and [[:s:Category:Middle English Fiction]]). Any reason to keep this wiki open? [[User:555|555]] 19:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

:When you put this question so I could do the same on one dozen of other wikisources with 3 edits a months (=3 new users). Big problem. See also the discussion on cration of new wikisources. But I agree, I do. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

::IMHO this subdomian should never have been created. The texts are welcome at en.WS. However I will point out the language in question is Old English or Anglo-Saxon not Middle English. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 22:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Following Birgitte, please note that the very last wave of language domain creations simply created ''everything'' that had a request at the time, even things that did not meet the basic criterion spelled out on the page itself.
:::In general, this is not overly troubling, because if a wiki exists in a real language then someone can always come and get it moving, as has happened in many projects that were slow-to-start. But in this case it is a policy matter, and I think it would have been better not to have created it until there was some kind of community decision. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 12:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

== To subdomain or not to subdomain :-) ==

(This is not Shakespeare, but -jkb-)

{| border="1" style="float:right;"
|----
| domain || 30 days || good 19.8. || good 13.9. || admins
|----
| [http://yi.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges yi] || 15 ||24 || 24 || 2
|----
| [http://sk.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges sk] ||2 || 71 || 71 || 2
|----
| [http://cs.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges cs] || ~2500 || 351 || 419 || 4
|----
| [http://ml.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges ml] || 30 || 19 || 19 || 1
|----
| [http://ang.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges ang] || 1 || 0 || 0 || 0
|----
| [http://az.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges az] || 2 || 1|| 0 || 0
|----
| [http://bg.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges bg] || 41 || 57|| 63 || 5
|----
| [http://bs.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges bs] || >500 ||264 || 279 || 2
|----
| [http://ca.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges ca] ||30 || 50 || 52 || 1
|----
| [http://et.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges et] || 53 || 52 || 52 || 1
|----
| [http://fi.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges fi] || >500 ||935 || 1458 || 3
|----
| [http://fo.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges fo] || 14 || 2 || 5 ||0
|----
| [http://ht.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges ht] || 1 || 0 || 1 || 0
|----
| [http://hu.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges hu] || >500 || 222 || 256 || 2
|----
| [http://kn.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges kn] || ? || 110 || 142 || 2
|----
| [http://lt.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges lt] || 13 || 22 || 25 || 1
|----
| [http://no.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges no] || 83 || 114 || 129 || 2
|----
| [http://sl.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges sl] ||12 || 13 || 14 || 0
|----
| [http://te.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges te] || 10+490 || 107 || 429 || 1
|----
| [http://th.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges th] ||?+460 || 1523 || 1524 || 1
|----
| [http://uk.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges uk] || 28 || 86 || 87 || 1
|----
| [http://vi.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges vi] || ~90 || 26 || 27 || 1
|----
| [http://zh-min-nan.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges zh-m.] || ? || 18 || 18 || 1
|----
|}
As a reaction on [[Scriptorium#Middle Old English Wikisource]] I decided to investigate a bit. In last time there were created 23 new subdomains: March 19th 2006 – 4 ones (the rop four in the table), June 15th 2006 – 19 ones. I made a short investigation how they are :-). Hereby I looked after the number of edits in last 30 days, number of articles August 19th, number of articles Sept 13th and number of sysops. See the table on the right side.
* Number of '''edits in last 30 days''' (I visited RC pages): in some cases these edits are no real edits but e.g. the creation of new users. In three cases there are more than 500 edits but I am not logged and cannot see all; in two cases (te: and th:í there are nearly 500 edits, but 490 respectively 460 of them are made by a bot on one day or so. But: there are only 4 subdomains with more than 100 edits per month (+te: and th:).
* '''Number of articles''' (total, good): it is a comparison between August 19th ([http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikisource#List_of_Wikisources_by_size]) and September 13th ([http://s23.org/wikistats/wikisources_html.php]), where you can see the growth.
* '''Sysops''' ([http://s23.org/wikistats/wikisources_html.php]): I think it does not matter how many admins a subdomain has, but it DOES matter if there is no one. We have six subdomains without any admin (and 13 with one admin only). I wonder how they can work. To make a domain functionally there must be made hundreds of edits in locked namespace of MediaWiki, I still am not ready with this, every day there is something to translate or so.
Beside the fact that a subdomain without an admin cannot work properly, we cannot hope we shall have good connestions to the domain as there is nobody to contact; and, i think, ThomasV will agree, we have a lot of rubish here on wikisource.org: not deleted pages, chaotic structures, etc. I think, next time it must bee clear that for the creating of a new subdomain there must be clear conditions, e.g. one or more admins incl. a buraucrat (somebody, who is working here a bit for a longer time), a sufficient stuff of users, a sufficient stuff of pages here, etc. I am not sure what to do with the subdomains which exist virtually but do not exist in fact (are not working since months). To bring them back??? To ask somebody from the Wikipedia to start an action and bring some people to their Wikisource??? I am not sure. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

:IMHO, now is time to impose some rules in creation of new domains (including in the current votes) and to turn wikisource.org as a really multilingual wiki (using some ideas from meta-wiki, commons and beta-wikiversity). Imposing to have at least 100 text-units and 3 active users here after one-two months of editions, for example. And proposing to close the current smallest Wikisources on [[:meta:Proposals for closing projects]] (or some equivalent page to be created here) if after three-five months that wikis have less than 40 text units and two active users, moving back to here all of these texts. [[User:555|555]] 17:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

::-jkb-: First, thank you very much for this research. It really shines a light on the subdomains of WS, and puts in stone what many of us had been assuming for quite some time.

::These are my suggestions for new rules concerning creating new subdomains:

::#There must be ''at least'' one approved bureaucrat candidate. This way, all admin and bureaucratic functions can be dealt with right away.
::#There must be a language category so that all the pages can be imported into the new subdomain (by either the admin or a developer)

::(These are in addition to the rules we've already established on the language domain page.)

::About the inactive domains we already have. I say we try to contact their respective sister projects and try to get some of them to become more active on the WS in their language. I mean, many of the currently inactive subdomains had a reasonably sized list of people who wanted its creation. If after a month (or whatever length of time we decide is good) nothing has happened, we request to have the subdomain turned off, and we will absorb all of its texts again.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

:I agree. However my main concern is not inactive subdomains, but those subdomains for which a high number of pages remain here because they were not imported, or because they were not categorized (eg. thai, hungarian, catalan...). [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

That is right. But I think it is only the other side of the same coin (=problem): if a subdomain is inactive means (mostly) that it was inactive here, too; that means, nobody prepared the pages for the new subdomain (list of files, or better language categories); and nobody took care off the pages that remeined here; that means, that the new subdomain doesn't work good in developing the new subdomain and doesn't work good in cooperating with the old one. Therefore, if we get new rules, and if we say there must be somebody whom we know and who is working here good for a certain time, so this person should get our support in preparing the transfer (categorizing...) and in geting a admin or bureaucrat in the new soubdomain. And we shall agree with the new subdomain only if the work here is done, otherwise NO. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Not to let this asleep I started '''[[Wikisource:Language domain request/New rules proposal|New rules proposal]]''' to discuss this problem. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

==New requests==

[[:m:Requests_for_new_languages#Aragonese_Wikisource]] and [[:m:Requests for new languages/Siberian wikisource]]: apparently someone missed the rules for create a new subdomain... [[User:555|555]] 14:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

:Aragonese WS - that is new for me; the other one: see [[Wikisource:Language domain requests#Domain requests (ru-sib.wikisource.org)]] and [[Talk:Main Page#How to add languages?]], [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:08, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

== Bots on Wikisources ==

Is it usual that on Wikisources bots are working like on Wikipedias, too, in the same way? Sure, I have about two bots from the cs.wiki in our cs.source, when i would need something so they can do it; but what is the experience when somebody ask to get the status of a bot - what can he do when he didn't work in any Wikisource beofre? (I mean, the structure of a Wikipedia is a bit different from that one here...). It was just a question. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 18:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

:On the English WS we have a number of bots that do (I think -- I'm not too familiar with en:wp) the same thing as Wikipedia bots would. We've got bots that convert old templates to newer ones, categorize pages, (temporarily) delete pages, convert HTML markup to WikiML, etc. On en:ws, it's not too difficult to get a bot account, but the only ones who ask are people who are trusted (I think all bot operators right now are admins, but that's not a rule) so we know that whatever their bot does, it won't massively screw up the project.

:If a person is asking for a bot account when he's new to WS, I'd say the best thing he can do is maintenance tasks (clean up double redirects) or maybe have the bot add pages from other sources on the internet (sometimes bots at WS port over texts from, say, Gutenberg to save the contributor some time).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

::We have also another kind of bot: see [[User:ThomasBot]] here, [[s:User:ThomasBot]] on en.wikisource, [[s:fr:Utilisateur:ThomasBot]] and [[s:fr:Utilisateur:YannBot]] on fr.wikisource. These can be used by other contributors for tasks like search and replace, deleting text with a regular expression, importing, spliting a book, etc. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 19:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Thx to all, this was something what I was thinking, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 23:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

===Alternate medias===
Conversion of major/all works to downloadable format. e.g PDF

== Logo for la.wikisource ==
The user Zanimum uploaded a [http://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Imago:Logo-la.png new logo] for latin wikisource with the latin name '''Vicifons''' instead of the english '''Wikisource'''.

Is it possible to use it as for [http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E9%A6%96%E9%A1%B5 zh.wikisource]?

Thanks for your help! --[[User:Francesco Gabrielli|Francesco Gabrielli]] 12:12, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
:ask on [[:bugzilla:]]. [[User:555|555]] 20:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

::Thanks. --[[User:Francesco Gabrielli|Francesco Gabrielli]] 10:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

:the colors are changed. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

=== Global logo ===
Jimmy, on 22 May 2006, said "''Of course if people are unhappy with the logo, then as always, we should be open to a discussion of positive change, including a logo contest if that is warranted''" [http://wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource%3AScriptorium&diff=202845&oldid=202844]. IMHO now is a good time to organize a small poll on the local Wikisources to keep the current modified version of the original logo or to try to organize a new logo contest. IMHO the current logo don't have nothing related to the Wikisource project. And, IMHO again, something like <big><nowiki>[[</nowiki></big>[[Image:Source3.png|15px]]<big><nowiki>]]</nowiki></big> (''<nowiki>[[scroll]]</nowiki>'') may be a really good logo. [[User:555|555]] 16:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
:When a similar poll was done in the past, nothing became of the results because no one was prepared to take on organizing a global contest after the poll concluded. This is what led to the current situation. I would like to see at least three people from different languages volunteer to organize the next step before any local polls are started. Once we have these three organizers, they can agree on the wording of the poll. I suggest this be emailed to translators-l with a list of needed tranlations. Then we should give them a week to produce any translations before starting any polls. At that point we should start the polls and see what people think. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-09-11T22:40:43Z

BirgitteSB: /* m:Wikisource */

{{Scriptorium-side}}


'''[http://sources.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium&action=edit&section=new Edit(+) / Seite bearbeiten(+) / Modifier(+) / Pagina bewerken (+) / Düzenle (+)]'''
See Scriptoria in other language sub-domains: 

[[cs:s:Wikisource:Pod pramenitou lípou|Česky:Pod pramenitou lípou]] -
[[da:s:Wikisource:Skriptoriet|Dansk:Skriptoriet]] -
[[de:s:Wikisource:Skriptorium|Deutsch:Skriptorium]] -
[[en:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|En:Scriptorium]] -
[[es:s:Wikisource:Café|Español:Café]] -
[[fr:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|Français:Scriptorium]] -
[[he:s:ויקיטקסט:מזנון|עברית:מזנון]] -
[[it:s:Wikisource:Bar|Italiano:Bar]] -
[[nl:s:Wikisource:De kroeg|Nederlands:De kroeg]] -
[[pl:s:Wikiźródła:Skryptorium|Polski:Skryptorium]] -
[[ru:s:Wikisource:Форум|Русский:Форум]] -
[[tr:s:VikiKaynak:Köy çeşmesi|Türkçe:Köy çeşmesi]]
[[zh:s:Wikisource:写字间|中文:写字间]]

==Wikisource project pages==
*[[Wikisource:What is Wikisource?|What is Wikisource?]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks|Wikisource and Wikibooks]]
*[[Wikisource:Votes|Votes]]
*[[Wikisource:Multilingual statistics|Statistics]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright|Copyright]]
*[[Wikisource:Possible copyright violations|Possible copyright violations]]
*[[Wikisource:Proposed deletions|Proposed deletions]]
*[[Wikisource talk:Index|Cataloging]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Project Gutenberg|Wikisource and Project Gutenberg]]
*Languages - see below

==Separate discussions==
'''Verschobene Diskussionen / Discussions déplacées / verschoven besprekingen / 移动的讨论 / Discussioni spostate'''

===Logo===
*[[Wikisource:Logo]]
*[[Wikisource:New_Wikisource_logo]]

===Languages===
*[[Wikisource:Language policy|Language policy]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests|Language domain requests]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/Rules for voting|Language domain requests/Rules for voting]]
*[[Main Page|List of Wikisource Languages]] (=[[Main Page]])
'''The language domain vote (over now):'''
*[[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)
*[[Wikisource:New discussion on language subdomains|New discussion on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)

===Archives===
'''Archive / 存 / Archivi'''
(oldest first)
*[[:m:Wikisource]] (Pre-launch discussions)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/November 2003 to January 2004|November 2003 to January 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2004 - Jun 2004|Feb 2004 - Jun 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jul 2004 - Oct 2004|Jul 2004 - Oct 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Oct 2004 - Feb 2005|Oct 2004 - Feb 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2005 - Apr 2005|Feb 2005 - Apr 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Apr 2005 - Aug 2005|Apr 2005 - Aug 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Aug 2005 - Sep 2005|Aug 2005 - Sep 2005]] (through the move to language subdomains)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Sep 2005 - Jan 2006]] (months following the move language subdomains)

;==================================================

== Note for people following an old link ==

Could an admin add a note to [[MediaWiki:Noarticletext]], mentioning the language subdomains. I have so often clicked on links at Wikipedia and got this simple note. I know that it were outdated links and that the text now is in a subdomain, but most other people will think the article doesn't exist (anymore) and delete the link. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
:Done. However explainations could be improved. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

::Perhaps "other language subdomains", because some people might not know what a subdomain is? Unfortunately Google still displays the old pages, and often the ranking of the old, long deleted pages is higher than of the new ones in the subdomains. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 01:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

== [[Wikisource:New Wikisource logo]] ==

There's a new discussion and a soon-to-come vote on the new logo of Wikisource. Please discuss it on the talk page, and discuss the seperate logos there. [[User:Datrio|Datrio]] 14:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

== A Quick Survey of Languages ==

Out of curiousity, I did a quick survey of activity and progress on the various subdomains using RecentChanges and looking at Main Pages.

If I am not mistaken, there are currently 27 languages with Wikisource subdomains. Of those, I found only ''one'' that seems largely inactive, namely [http://cy.wikisource.org/wiki/Prif_tudalen cy.wikisource.org]. Besides cy.wikisource, there are just 2-3 others with only minimal recent activity (i.e. an average of just 1-2 edits per day), but all of those have nevertheless added significant content over the past few months and have useful Main Pages.

This means that nearly two dozen languages are flourishing, less than five months after the transfer. All of the larger languages (e.g. English, French, German) seem to have recovered completely from the move and done a great deal to revamp their infrastructures. Other languages have to have managed to do so to a large extent from scratch.

This is something very positive and wonderful. Would be good to get specific feedback from various languages. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 19:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

:de: It has completely recovered from the move, the only (and serious) problem are many external links that link to the old domain. Contributions at de vary very much, but really increased in comparison to before the move. Biggest problem at the moment: There is no community, people come, contribute their sources and are gone again. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Language comparisons by dump size ==

I took a look at the compressed database sizes (dumps from 22 Jan - 1 Feb). These are the file sizes of pages-articles.xml.bz2

1 enwikisource 93.0 MB
2 frwikisource 52.6 MB
3 arwikisource 23.2 MB
4 eswikisource 17.4 MB
5 dewikisource 14.1 MB
6 lawikisource 13.1 MB
sourceswiki 12.0 MB
7 zhwikisource 9.4 MB
8 rowikisource 8.2 MB
9 itwikisource 7.8 MB
10 plwikisource 7.0 MB
11 elwikisource 6.1 MB
12 ruwikisource 5.9 MB
13 hrwikisource 4.3 MB
14 hewikisource 3.6 MB
15 ptwikisource 1.6 MB
16 nlwikisource 1.5 MB
17 jawikisource 1.2 MB
18 srwikisource 1.1 MB
19 dawikisource 783 KB
20 svwikisource 693 KB
21 kowikisource 649 KB
22 glwikisource 266 KB
23 idwikisource 265 KB
24 trwikisource 257 KB
25 fawikisource 168 KB
26 iswikisource 150 KB
27 cywikisource 66 KB

At the moment cy seems to be the only subdomain that has so little contributions, that it might be necessary to shut it down and merge with the international part again (see contribution above). Surprising results in comparison to the article statistics at [[Main Page]]: "ar" and "la" have much content, but little articles, the same at "el". The opposite with "hr": There are many articles with rather little content. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I neither support nor oppose merging inactive language subdomains back to multilingual Wikisource, but I hope that we make a written rule.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 09:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Unless it starts collecting spam, there is no need to do such a thing. And even then it would be locked, not "moved back." Plus, the cy.wikipedia has a reasonable amount of activity, so people who know the language will be looking at that Wikisource from time to time.

But the focus of my comments were not on cy.wikisource, rather on the two dozen wikis that seem to be doing not just well (which all of us had hoped would happen), but far better than I personally expected! This is a great thing, and thanks also to Jofi for his stats, which make it even clearer.

As far as community - on en.wikisource I think that has really happened, and quite nicely too, not just people "stopping by" to leave texts. At he.wikisource too, though of course the number of people is much smaller. What really seems to make it happen is working together on infrastucture - policies, templates, cleanup, Main Page and other central pages, categories and classification systems, and of course helping out others with questions and problems. In other words, it seems like the people who want to be ''librarians'' make up the steady community, which seems rather appropriate... [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 09:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I certainly generally support language domains. But at "cy" there were no real contributions since December, 11th and the only real contributions have been made in the first 26 hours after the creation of the subdomain. The only admin is Brion VIBBER. I don't know if he really wants to maintain the domain, but the spam on one page kept unreverted for about 3 weeks. If the contributions to "cy" don't increase, there is no reason why we should keep the multilangual part of Wikisource. The activity of "cy" could be reached by almost any language subdomain, and there would be no argument to refuse any of the requests. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:Just a small point: when comparing database size, remember that non Latin alphabet languages (i.e. Arabic, Chinese, Indian languages, etc.) use much more space (x 2 ?) than Latin alphabet languages. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:: Also, Latin alphabet languages get a much better compression rate. [[User:Bogdan|Bogdan]] 11:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, the comparison is not very precise. But "la" does use Latin alphabet (what else ;-)) and "ar" has less than 800 counted articles. So it's still remarkable. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Question ==

Hi there! I was setting up an account here to be of some help, but noticed it doesnt work for the language subdomains. Then I wonder, what is the point of starting an account here in the first place? Is the top-level just a shell for the lower levels? Why isnt it linked? I'll probably want to add stuff in English, and occasionally in Dutch; so what accounts should I create?

And, consequently, perhaps it might be worth it to streamline the accounts so that one single account works on different subdomains? Certainly it might be worth it to use signal more clearly that this ''is'' the top-level in the first place, as there is no visual difference whatsoever.

Cheers! [[en:User:The Minister of War|The Minister of War]] 12:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

:Hi,
:The old main WS is used to host documents in languages which do not have a subdomain. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 13:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

It '''is''' linked. If you check the option ''remember me'' you can use the same account and password combination on most projects. For me it works here and on most Wikipedias except English, I happen to have a different name there, bc this one was taken :(

:::I am afraid you are not right. You can use the same '''user name and password''' in every project, but unless you create an '''account''' in every project, you cannot log in. The button ''remember me'' BTW is something quite else, it makes your log in automatically every time you visit the project. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] ==
According to the page for this image, its copyright has just been released to the Wikimedia Foundation. How can we verify that WMF actually has the copyright for this work? We might need to contact someone to get this finalized. But this opens up a number of possible works for our new logo if this is the case (such as the stylized version and other derivatives of the stylized iceberg).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 04:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:The author has left the same message on his own page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kils&diff=42335724&oldid=42057043 see here]. Since he was logged in when he wrote that, I guess we have a proof that it was him and not someone else. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:: I don't believe the copyright status of the image affects any stylized versions of the image - only versions that directly use the image itself (which is currently just the current logo). The stylized versions fall under whatever license their creators grant, irrespective of how the original image is licensed as they are not derivative works in the legal sense. (Note, ianal, but that is my understanding, anyway) --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 23:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

:My understanding was that if someone stylized the iceberg logo, that would be considered a derivative work, since they're taking the iceberg as a source of ideas and expanding on it to produce something new. As such they would have to obtain permission from the current copyright holder to create a stylized version. I'm not a lawyer, either, so I may have a wrong understanding, but that was how I understood it to be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
:: I'm not sure. Taking your ideas from a source is different from using the image ''_as_'' the source. A moot point in the current situation, but I'd be interested to know what the actual legal position would be if permission had not been granted. --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 00:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

==new subdomains==

new subdomains were created :
*yi.wikisource.org
*sk.wikisource.org
*cs.wikisource.org
*ml.wikisource.org

congratulations and good luck! [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

:Thank a lot, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== References ==
Cite.php: for references in the same page. You can read more [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cite/Cite.php here]. Used at spanish wikisource [[s:es:Las mil y una noches: 2|in this article]]. --[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 22:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== Wikisource-I mailing list ==

I've noticed that most of our sister projects have a mailing list of their own yet we do not. I was wondering what people would think of having a mailing list for us to make discussions and whatnot on. It would probably be a much better method than relying on this Scriptorium (let's be realistic: very few discussions ever happen here anymore, since many contributors do not regularly check this site)--discussions stand a much better chance of not stalling and dying. Also, it would be a way to let people see what sorts of things are going on at WS. What are your thoughts?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:I support a mailing list. Previously, you, I, and other administrators could oversee all pages, so we could delete copyvios in any languages, but as more language subdomains break away from this multilingual site, a mailing list becomes even more important to co-ordinate things at Wikisource subdomains.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

::I agree. would be useful. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 20:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:::support from me, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

:The list has been created. For those interested, subscription information can be found [http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l here].—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 18:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

:: For those who may be interested in subscribing, the first mailing list discussion to begin concerns the creation of a Wikisource <big><</big>format<big>></big>-to-wikimarkup conversion script (see the [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-April/thread.html archives]). // [[User:Pathoschild|Pathoschild]] 13:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Lets try and advertise this in the subdomains too. I put a message in the Spanish Cafe. Anyone that can translate various languages, please advertise this to people at those subdomains too. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 18:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

==Policy pages==
Since this wiki is still active, I think it would be good to add some documentation to it and give it a bit of a backbone. Recently, on the English sub-domain, we've written a lot of policies, and I think a few would be beneficial here. I think we should definitely port over [[s:en:WS:WWI|the inclusion policy]] once it's been established and [[s:en:WS:DP|the deletion policy]] at the least so that we can have some official documents to point to should people ask.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 20:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

::Zhaladshar!!!!!!! Yes!!!!! First, I miss such pages here. Secondly, I think in the process of creating new language Wikisources they would be very usefull for the new ones. Now i mus search in all projects to find something on deletion, on blocking, is a xx.wikisource more close to xx.wikipedia or to wikisource.org, on copyright (in fact, there are some serious differences between the page here and the page on the en.wikisource) etc. I think we need it. Urgently. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::Agreed. The great work done on en.ws would be beneficial here. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 15:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:I'm hoping to porting over deletion, copyright, inclusion, administrator, and blocking policies to begin with. We can change them as we need to fit this sub-domain, and it would allow us to have an actual, hard copy policy to point to and allow newer sub-domains to have an established document to refer to/translate and adopt on their own project. That way, some of the growing pains can be avoided.

:I'll also revamp many of the pages in our "Wikisource:" namespace which are so out of date that it's embarrassing. Once school lets out, I can dedicate much more time to this project. But I expect to have policies over here by the end of the week.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::OK. I am not like to promise I will help by writing some pages on this – 1. my english is ok but other speak better, 2. some of you are longer time here as me so you can judge the questions better, 3. I still have much to do with the new cs.wikisource. But if there is something I could help so i will do so. As fitst I would like to mention that there are some differences on the use of the fair use licence:
::* [[Wikisource:Copyright]] – probably limited
::* [[:s:en:Help:Copyright and Wikisource]] - ???
::* [[:en:Wikisource:Wikisource:Copyright]] explicitly prohibited on Wikisource.
::So, what with fair use??? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Fair use doesn't make sense here, as it usually means "part of a work" included in other related document, but we want to publish whole works independently. The exception may be book covers or photos of the author. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 18:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
::::Yes, one of the things the copyright policy will formalize is that (1) ''all texts'' must be public domain, GFDL, or GFDL-compatible. WS has been lax on this and it caused us some frustration and problems a little while ago; (2) it will prohibit fair use (I prefer in its entirety, but at least no fair use texts) to an extent we can decide upon later. For a site like WS, copyright should have been the first thing we nailed down, but it's pretty much turned into the very last thing. Ironic...—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::I support disallowing fair use that will not fit here. Is there any draft policy here to disallow non-commercial licenses as well? Fair use and non-commercial licenses are now disallowed at English Wikisource, but this policy has not been uniformly enforced at other subdomains, including Chinese Wikisource.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Copyright policy? Delete all Creative Commons works? ===
I recently wrote '''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000018.html a very long email to wikisource-l]''' to express desire for establishing consistency across subdomains: "Currently it seems that some licenses are valid on some subdomains but not others. (English Wikisource) requires all content to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License. However, maybe some other language subdomains do not have this policy?" In the same email, I went to explain that CC-BY and CC-BY-SA are free but not compatible with the GFDL.

'''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000019.html The first reply]''' was from Erik Moeller (Eloquence), who wrote: "Wikisource should instead follow similar principles as the Wikimedia Commons and allow any free content license to be used for added works." That said, I thought that someone high up in Wikimedia said that we must have GFDL-compatibility, which implies that Creative Commons works must leave Wikisource? --[[User:Kernigh|Kernigh]] 19:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

== Putting Hindi sources and Scriptorium out of Wikisource? ==

Isn't it time to move Hindi pages out of the main domain?
Almost all pages found by "random page" in the main domain are in Hindi (and their number growing), and this does not help looking for other sources in more rare languages. Additionally the Hindi script URLs are much harder to work with, and the community Scriptorium gets in fact "polluted" by the inability to locate appropriate categories.

Most of the Scriptorium should also go to Meta-Wiki as it is already cross-project, and contains much more tools and management templates or help pages already written there for specific languages.

The main Wikisource sites hould just include the multilingual portal, and the initial sections for rare languages, properly organized into language categories, for easier transfer to another domain later when this content becomes significant. To ease this transition, a minimum set of international common (meta-)pages and templates should be created that will be transfered to the new domain translated later with the articles.

So the main wikisource should remain small and manageable.
(note that new domain names could be created early as equivalents to the main site. This would make interwikis to Wikisource already working for those languages that still have not been transfered into a separate database.) 20:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
:Hi,
:I did most of the work regarding Hindi and Sanskrit here. And most of the pages are Sanskrit, not Hindi. I am totally against separating languages unless there is a significant community to support a subdomain. In cases of Hindi and Sanskrit, I doubt that such a community exists, seeing the edits made upto now, and the number of editors on corresponding Wikipedia languages. And please, logging in and sign your comments. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 20:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
::Agreed with Yann. Unless there are a number of people who are willing to start up a new language Wikisource, a sub-domain should not be made.

::The Scriptorium is not a place to locate language categories (I'm assuming you mean here to locate works written in a particular language). This is to discuss local issues on this wiki is sometimes used to coordinate between the different languages.

::The current wiki is small and scaleable, and should remain entirely open for works of a particular language which will likely never get its own sub-domain. I see no reason why any of this should be ported over to Meta.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with this anonymous contributor that moving these pages out to a subdomain would clarify the situation here... [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 08:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't see a Hindi sub-domain as a project that will be all that active. It seems to be the case that inactive projects collect more vandalism than anything else. I seems safer to keep them here where a number of people watch the project than to move it to a new domain which might only be frequented by a very few people and only at irregular intervals. I would love to see a Hindi sub-domain, don't get me wrong, but I believe there should be support from people who will be active for it.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

:sure. all I wanted to say is that there would be advantages to it. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 21:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

==languages main pages==

For those wikis that do not have a subdomain, I would like to proceed with a reorganization.
Currently we have a [[:Category:Main Pages|set of main pages]] for each languages, and a [[:Category:Languages|set of categories]].
This has two drawbacks :
# it is redundant.
# it is difficult to locate a document, or to access the list, for someone who does not understand a language.
Since the number of pages in languages that are here is in general small,
it would be possible to have the whole list of texts directly on their corresponding main page.
So, I propose to use the category pages as the main pages. That is, move the content of each
main page to the corresponding category page, where it would be used as a header.
It would make it more direct to access the list of pages written in a given language.
What do you guys think?
[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
:It is good, but someone must be able to identify which language an article belongs to.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 15:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

:ok, I am starting to move a few of those, and to have a unified design.[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

== Change Logos to SVG-Version ==

Hi there! There are SVG-Versions available for [[:Image:Wikimedia without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Wikibooks without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Commons without text-35px.png]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote without text-35px.png]]. Would be lovely if one of the admins could change those images in [[Template:Sisterprojects No Text]] and [[Main Page]]. The new logos are [[:Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Wikibooks-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Commons-logo.svg]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote-logo.svg]]. Thank you very much! Regards, [[User:217.225.124.149|217.225.124.149]] 20:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't get what the big deal about the SVG versions are. What's wrong with the PNG ones?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:I think that there may be some browsers/systems which do not support SVG, so I would not change the logos. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Browsers without SVG support should not be a problem. The MediaWiki software should render the images as PNG. I know that there was a problem with transparency in PNG, but was not that fixed? I think the advantage of SVG is that scaled versions of scalable SVG graphics are more accurate than scaled verions of portable PNG graphics. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 15:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

== Important change in the policy of de.wikisource ==

At de.wikisource there is a majority of those, who don't want to have texts without source or texts copied from other websites any longer (see [[s:de:Wikisource:Skriptorium#Texte_ohne_Quellen_oder_aus_dem_Internet|here]]). So, if you contributed German texts in the last years, I strongly encourage you to add your source to the text. If you cannot do this or if you copied the text from another website and you want to keep your wikified version of it, then now is the right time to copy your text from de and to transfer ist elsewhere. It most likely will be deleted at de. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

:Why does the German Wikisource want to delete web sources? Does this mean that if a text (such as Kafka's ''The Metamorphosis'' were copied to de.wikisource from a website it will be deleted simply because it's an internet source?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Yes, I really do not understand what de.wikisource wants to do. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:I can agree that the purpose of Wikisource is not to be a copy of Project good mountain or any other website. But works copied from other sites on the web can still be useful on Wikisource. So I see no reason to delete those works or to forbid copying more works. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 14:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

If you forbid copying works from websites, the number of works the German Wikisource has will become virtually nil. How many people have access to old books and decent OCR material that they can scan in works and edit them? Such a process is extremely time consuming--just as much as transcribing them would be. I'm hoping that we are just not understanding what is happening (maybe they are forbidding a certain kind of web document?) and it's not an all out ban on web sources.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:At de.wikisource there are some projects that OCR works and edit them. And that is nice. But in fact you did understand correctly what is happening: Most likely anything else shall be deleted. Certainly that means, that thousands of pages will be deleted. In fact the whole process of transfering the texts from multilangual wikisource to de was unnecessary: Almost everything of those texts have no source or are copied from other websites. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::I'm curious as to what is causing this change. How and why was this decided upon? It is an extremely dramatic change in policy, and I wonder about the ramifications. The biggest I'm concerned about (it's the only one I can think of right now; I'm sure I can come up with more later) is that user involvement in de.wikisource will drop dramatically. If all web-based contributions are excluded, most people who do not have decent OCR software or the rare books will be turned off of the project, because they've got no opportunity to be involved. Sure, some will stay, because they've got the required tools to allow them to be useful, but what about the newbies? Saying to them, "Oh, I'm sorry. We do not accept what you are uploading to our project. Please do not continue to add those works" would not put de.wikisource in a very good light and will cause growth in that project to all but halt. This is the reverse direction of what any Wikimedia project should want.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 00:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that it is entirely contrary with the rules of wikisource. For me, it is a nonsense. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:apparently this policy was "decided" in order to ensure quality of their texts. For that they proposed to remove all texts for which the source is unknown. In addition, some people proposed to remove texts that exist already elsewhere on the internet. I did not really understand the reason for that latter decision. I think that such a policy would terribly harm de.wikisource. I wonder if we can/should oppose that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC) PS: why is the logo at de.wikisource different from other sites?

::I'm a fan of opposing it. It goes entirely against the whole purpose of WS, and I imagine if this gets executed, there will be some bad light shone on Wikisource. I'm not against removing texts whose source is unknown. Many other sister projects have similar policies. But to ''entirely remove '''all''''' texts that exist elsewhere on the web will hamstring the project. What about texts which a person scans in, but exist on a website somewhere? Are those not accepted?

::To remove all web-based works completely overlooks the benefits that WS can give those texts. Sure, they exist on Gutenberg or Bartleby, but we can interlink them, add multimedia content (if it exists), and many other things which give those works value no other website has given it. I would rather not see this policy happen.

::Was this policy ever voted upon? How many people supported it? Is there any course of action that can keep such a detrimental policy from taking effect?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Sorry, i am a bit short of time and then when I have it I try do to something on cs.source... So it is the first time i hear about this nonsence. Sure, it must be clear that a text or a document from some webpages is free licensed and OK, but not this! If there is any chance to oppose it i support it. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Its not correct, what jofi here has written. Nobody wants delete tomorow thousands of pages in de-Wikisource. We are in a discussion process which sense have textes without any sources and which sense makes it to copy textes from any webpages to wikisource. And we have duscussed some solutions for it. Yes the radical solution is to delete all these textes and search original sources, like first editions or other historical important editions o a text. Another solution is, to find to all texts (you can imagine what work this is) a source (see above) and to compare these editions with the text in Wikisource. And also other solutions are discussed. But to say its clear the most active editors wants sometimes only texts with clear and good source in de-Wikisource. And copy&paste from any webpages is not good to reach this target.

That we want remove all Texts is not true, this is one of possible Solutions. And when we should delete these text, we want these texts back, based on clear sources and with high scientific Level. Short abstract: what jofi here says is not true an he is making panic without an base. Greetings --[[User:213.54.67.220|213.54.67.220]] 21:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC) [[s:de:Benutzer:Finanzer]]

Agree with Finanzer s:de:Benutzer:FrobenChristoph --[[User:84.60.205.115|84.60.205.115]] 22:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It seems that the positions in the discussion are not as radical as it first seemed to me. But nevertheless I still encourage all people who added German texts to add their source to it. In my opinion it is still clear, that there is a majority supporting the deletion of some of the texts that have been added in the last years, if they don't fullfill some quality criterias. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* I think it is a good goal to be '''source''' for quality high level textes. One of criteria for a good text is to know where ist does come from. To achive this, there is a need for information about the source. There is no need for another haystack of nonvalidated information called ws. I think it is usefull to bring the ws to a higher level of quality, by retrieving these informations. If a text is nearly unavailable, it may be really usefull to keep it and state clearly that the source information is missing and searched for. If a text has an high availability in the net, there is no need to keep it without the source information, the best solution is to find the missing information and to add it, or as a last step delete it. To be just another mirror of low quality information may be the goal of other projects not of ws. sincerly --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 08:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I fully agree that texts should be sourced whenever possible. I am currently doing just that on fr.wikisource. However deleting a text already copied seems a solution a bit extrem to me. The source and validation can be added later. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 08:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
* Is there any sense in a text, that is copied from somewhere in the net, wihout a source. Is it the full text, or is it an edited version. Which is the right bible (that has nothing to do with religion here, it is just a well known big example)? The Roman Catholic version, the Martin Luther version, the protestant version, the Anglican version.... When one of this chosen, for example catholic. The next question is before or after the 2. vatican synod. These are all bibles with a ''slightly'' differennt content. Hopefully you see without the citation of the source - where does it come from - the text is absolut useless. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 09:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::Well, I will take another example. Say that somebody copied a text from a another website without giving the source (or not), for example a text of Goethe. If the orther site doesn't give itself the source, what would you do? The text should be verified with a paper version, but that will take time if it's a big work. Deleting the text doesn't improve the situation. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::I fully agree that ''not only the licence but also the source'' must be clear. We need a high level quality. I am just hardly working to change it on cs.source. But the fact a document comes from internet can not be the criterium! In this case, what shall you do with the most old lithurgical texts and the most juristic ones? They are all PD, and i do not think, that somebody will scan or retype them, when you can find all on internet. Therefore if the first reports here are not true, it would be good, but probably there is a need of discussion on some principles like licence in wikisource etc. Zhaladzhar wanted to prepare something, i think. And i suggest, that such serious policies would be discussed also in other Wikisources as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* The criteria isn´t it comes from the internet. The criteria is the source is missing. If someone does the work do digitise a book, he mormally has the source und will tell it. Most of the problems come from
:*"I found the book in the internet, it´s interessting, lets copy it to ws". This internet page dosn´t has any source information, so why should i provide one. "I´m a real big guy by copying this big book." .
:*Oh a real nice poem, i like it. Who is the author, I don´t know. Is it free, I don´t know. But there is a webspace container called ws, lets copy it. What´s about URV without a source?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

@yann It must be verified. Mayby it is reprint with some amendments and a foreword. Are these copied wiht the text. If yes are the amendments and the foreword free or is it a URV because of the add ons. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Joergens.mi, I understand what you mean. And I also have some texts on cs.source where I have to do something - as I said, the source is in my eyes as important as the licence. But: If somebody copied the Grundgesetz or the Declaration of the USA onto your de.wikisource without given the source so it is no reason to delete it. Both text are undoubtly PD, I must just compare it with a source and if it is the same, so I have the source or i copy it one time more if there are difference in the text. But this can be done later. In such cases I use a special template saying we know about the problem and we shall solve it. (And I think an URL is sifficient source in cases of some juristic sites which offer laws etc.). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:38, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@-jkb- What you said is ok, such an url may be an good entry to the source definition. but the problem ist in a lot of cases even this start is missing. Look here: http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Der_Geier and these things are the problems. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 11:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, Der Geier... Sure, i know it, too, and you can see many texts like this also in Wikipedias... Here it is no great problem - everything is missing: no licence, no source, no author, no wiki to an article with explanation what it is etc. Either, I would try to find something by myself if I think it is important, or I would suggest to delete it indeed. In this case. But not if it were a law where I know at least, it is PD and i can use it for an article in Wikipedia. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::* This are the things (Der Geier) we are talking about, nothing else. To make a usefull cleanup, by searching for articles of this type, and put them on a good base. If this is not possible, then and only then a deletion is intended. This is all we are argueing about at de.WS and we are at the beginning of that process not at the end. Even with the laws youre a talking about some information will be usefull, because there are changes from time to time, therefore the year of the issue or the version should be mentioned. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 13:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::This isn't nearly as drastic as it sounded at first glance (phew!). I actually think this is a noble effort. All texts should be sourced (author information, edition--make it as fleshed as possible) in order to help give WS a high quality of source texts and to make us more than just a copy and paste website.

:::However, I would like to suggest instead of mass deletion of unsourced texts, you simply place a template on the text like <nowiki>{{unsourced}}</nowiki> (or whatever the word would be in German). That way, editors who want to do a little bit of house cleaning will know that there are some texts that need to be worked on to be considered appropriate for WS. But just because there is no source right now does not mean the work should be deleted anytime soon. Each deletion need to be specific to the text in question--maybe one text is a very rare one (maybe a very old manuscript) that doesn't ''have'' any (or much) source information, and such information is quite hard to find. It should be kept, due to its nature, even though it doesn't have the requisite information on it. Of course, for more common texts, the source information won't be hard to find at all.

:::I think of unsourced texts as analogous to Wikipedia's "stub article." Unsourced texts are by no means complete, but deleting them is unwise as it prohibits further growth of that text. Just as a good Wikipedia article (in general) won't be written over night, nor should we expect a good source text to be so easy to add that we can add ''everything'' in one go. Sometimes searching will be necessary, sometimes it won't be fruitful at all, but if you keep it, you will allow others to also check that work, and maybe something will happen many months/years down the future.

:::-jkb-: I'll eventually get those documents over here. en.wikisource has been keeping me busy lately, and many of the policies I want to bring over have been getting changed slightly here and there. I want to bring a static text, not one that is getting changed every few weeks. I should be able to get them over here within a short time, though.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Don't hurry be happy (or was it don't worry be happy???), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:We don´t hurry. I think we have statet clearly our intention. We are at the moment at the '''beginning'' of an discussion process how to improve the quality not at the end. The result will be some rules, how to proceed. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 18:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

== Logo update ==

After one admin on the german wikisource had unilaterally changed the logo to a self made version but - rightly complained - that the old wikisource logo didn't even contain the project name, Zanimum was so friendly to create a clean redraw of the iceberg together with the project name and formally hand over the copyright to the Wikimedia Foundation. A version suitable for use as logo can be found [http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Bild:Wiki.png here], bigger versions are uploaded on commons: [[:Image:Wikisource-newberg-de.png|Wikisource-newberg-de.png]] and [[:Image:Wikisource-nt.png]], EPS versions are available from Zanimum. It would be nice if the local project admins could update it. greetings,--[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]
:I like this versoin alot. Can we try to achieve consensus to adopt this without a full contest? It is not very different from our current design and it appears that de.wikisource.org already has consensus on it. However I cannot read German, that needs to be confirmed.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't know if there ever was a bigger discussion on this topic. The temporary logo at DE was supported by 3 people and opposed by none. The replace of the old logo was earlier supported by about 3 people and opposed by none. The "new" logo was already used at some Wikimedia pages as far as I know. The community at DE is not that big and most of them don't seem to be interested in a logo discussion that much. If nobody complains about the new logo, this can be called a consensus. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:it will not help wikisource if each subdomains starts to have its own logo. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:These methods are not really adapted. The logo concerns all subdomains of wikisource, and must be voted by all and not by only one . [[User:Marc|Marc]] 07:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::Please have a look at it. Actually it ''is'' the old iceberg logo. Just in a clean redrawn version. To date all subdomains – also the german – use the same logo. The subdomains never used the same ''file''. And I agree to BirgitteSB: I also like the discussed version very much. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 07:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::No :
::This is not the official logo ;
::there was no vote. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::The well-known iceberg is not the official logo? *puzzled* By the way: Do you actually know whether the file [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] (on [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikisource Commons]: "Original photo") is protected by trademark? --

On these page, you can see the exact form of the official logo : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo

if you want to change it, you could have the courtesy to make a vote. [[Benutzer:Marc|Marc]] 08:27, 22. Mai 2006 (UTC)

:The Wikisource iceberg is a nice logo. I don't want to change it. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 09:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

There must be a vote in order to change the logo. In the meantime, I ask the german admins to revert back to the official logo. Those who want to change the logo should take part in the discussion [[Wikisource_talk:New_Wikisource_logo|here]] instead of taking unilateral actions. I wrote there that I am willing to organize a vote '''if''' the logo proposals are made before the vote, not during the vote. The reason is that I find it tricky to organize a vote when the set of options is not known. So far I received very little feedback on that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 09:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I also agree that there must be a vote before the official loge is changed. But secondly, It is not OK when somebody starts to change the logos in different Wikipedias - Zanimum did so at least twice in cs.wiki wothout consulting the people there. Next time we need a lear vote. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

So far all the votes held about logos on wikisource yielded no results. On the other hand, there are several problems with the picture used as logo now:
* copyright was never transfered to the Wikimedia Foundation, instead it was published under GFDL (this goes against our logo policy)
* the image is a bitmap and as such not suitable for print in large versions.
* it doesn't contain the project name
The new variant (it's not a totally different logo for which - I agree - a vote or a contest would be necessary) was created to solve these problems. As the designer of the promotion materials for the Wikimedia Foundation I was very happy that Zanimum provided this printable version. If you're not happy with this logo at all, you're free to organize a contest in the community and select another logo which also fullfills these conditions (copyright wikimedia, vector version, including project name), but the current thing confronts the wikimedia foundation and the promotion department with so many problems that it should be changed, now when there's finally a variant which solves these problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

:::Elian, i do not say if I am happy with the logo or not, i even do not say if I am happy with the old one. But a logo is central for an identification. not only here, also on Wikipedias, Wikcionaries etc. If every server would start to make an own logo, it would be awful. And, these logos are to be found enywhere on main pages where there is an redirect to other projects. So, we nee it to be unified, somehow. And secondly, as i said above, every project can decide what it shall do. It is not possible, that somebody change the logo and then he changes it in other projects. Really, I do not argue against the new image. But agains the way it has been done. OK? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with the unification, and the new version of the logo should be used on all wikisource projects without delay. Of course if people are unhappy with the logo, then as always, we should be open to a discussion of positive change, including a logo contest if that is warranted. The idea that logos have to be voted on is just mistaken, though.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 13:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Well, it is for me good to hear here that we should unificate the logo (in the mean time there are some dozens of wikipedias and wikisources on the internet, and therefore we must show who we are). Just to explain the other point, ''to vote or not to vote'' (existentially not as bad as ''to be or not to be'' :-)): sure, i know the rule ''Voting is evil'' or so, but here in Wikisource we have some three hundreds of logos and since about 6 months we are preparing a voting (that never took part... I know). So we must now find a way to make all happy or "half happy" at least. But first condition indeed: all Wikisources of this Wikimedia project shoud have the same logo. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:Since the logo finding process lasts for almost 2 years and nobody knows when it ends, and because the current logo not even contains the name of the project, I would like to start a short vote to add "Wikisource" to the logo. I think this is absolutely necessary because otherwise people can't see where they are. I think it is no big deal to make such a change. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 16:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::it should be no big deal, right. And it was done already in a professional way. You're welcome to organize a new logo contest, but for the time being, I think the logo should just be changed to the one with project name. This gives us enough leeway to look for a new good logo while we're free of the problems of the old logo. --[[User:84.153.74.172|84.153.74.172]] 16:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@ Jofi: Well, sure, this would be necessay. The only one problem is: some Wikisources do not call themselves Wikisource but the use this expression in their language or even they have something different. What shall we do with it?? Otherwise support for Jofi. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::They could adapt the image to add their text, as it is done in other Wikimedia project.
I know added this: [[Image:Sourceberg-text.png]]

It is the same image as in the current logo, only the text "Wikisource" is added. Absolutely irrespective of the logo discussion I would like to have it used instead of the current one. I support replacing it by a better logo. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::sorry Jofi, this solves the problem with the missing name, but it doesn't solve the copyright problems and the printing problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

::::::Elian I thought the copyrights had been transfered to WMF already. If they have not been then neither the current iceberg or the one Zanimum redrew would be acceptable, since the latter is a derivation of the former.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 21:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:::::::Maybe this has been said before. The current logo is licensed under the GFDL, transferring the copyright will not change that. But the copyright holder can authorise derivative works that are not GFDL-licensed. So if Zanimum got permission, he did not have to license his derivation under GFDL. So if everthing was done correctly that version is still acceptable as a logo. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 22:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

* It´s a real curiosity.
:*There are several projekts (wikibooks) which added text to their logos, without any discussion.
:*Just such a text addition at de.WS gives a big discussion.
:*Some people defines a new logo. (personnally I don´t like it, but that doesn´t matters)
:*Other say it schould be adapted immediatily.
*But here the old logo is still the logo, why hasn´t it changed here (as a good example) to the new form?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:following the above diktat by Jimbo Wales I uploaded [[:Image:Wiki.png]]. I guess some developer has to set it up as logo now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Wouldn't it be better if the words ''Wikisource'' were included in the image, not out of it ? Is it too late to do that ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 08:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
.

Something like this :

[[Image:Wiki2essai.png|Word Wikisource inside logo]]

:These images are all fairly ugly. If we're going to keep the iceberg logo, I'd prefer Zanimum's stylized version, or the version the English WS uses for its [[s:en:WS:NEWS|news]] page. I believe that Uwe Kils has given copyright of the current logo to the WMF, however.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:I too prefer the version on the news page; the colors are better, and the shape has more style. but I do not think that we have the power to change a decision that comes from above us. Anyway, I am happy that we will not have to organize a vote, thanks to jimbo [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 14:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::I like Kcyclopedists' logo for WikisourceNews too. Could he make another one for Wikisource without news ? Can you do that, Kcyclopedist ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 05:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

* I prefer the version on the news page,too. I don´t think it´s a goot idea to put wikisource in the center of the Logo. if you look at most of the examples, putting the text above or below is much smarter [[Image:89px-WikisourceNews.png|left|Wiki News logo]] --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 15:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Yes. Not in the middle. First, some ones use the logo for other purposes too, where it could be disturbing. Secondly, I would suggest, we should have two sorts of an official logo: one with and one without the text (say for those Wikisources who would want to make another text). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
:ThomasV: What decision is being made above our heads?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 02:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

::Z: I was referring to the request by Jimbo. Anyway, I am quite happy that the issue is solved now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't think I quite understood what Jimbo was saying. Is he saying we can all choose our own logo?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:::In contrary, he said he agrees with my suggestion to unificate all daomains, i.e. one logo for all wikisources. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

== Languages and categories==
Some times I have some problems with the language of a text – I simply do not know: is it a document or is it some sort of vandalism?? The last exmple is [[Ein Tad]]. Undoubtly, it could be a language. In times the Czech Wikisource was here I started to use a category ''Czech'' (or ''Česky'') for all pages as a main category, other categories were subcategories of this one. By the way, in the moment you decide to create a new domain, you have an advantage when moving your wikisource to the new one: a developer must have a look in this category and move everything he finds. I would suggest the same for all languages here, maybe this category should be in English (it is also possible to use the abbreviations like de, en, mt etc); and more over there could be a notice in the edit window, something like do not forget to give here your language code / category... [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:Most [[:Category:Languages|language categories]] here use the local name of the language. I think that makes sense, since persons looking for texts in a language will probably know at least so much of that language that they know the local name of that language.
:[[Ein Tad]] can be deleted here since it is already present att the welsh subdomain.--[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 09:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Done for [[Ein Tad]]. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

== Ported over some policies from en.wikisource ==
Okay, I'm making good on my promise. I've now brought over an inclusion policy and a copyright policy. They can be located here:
*[[Wikisource:What Wikisource includes]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright policy]]

I've made almost no changes to it (meaning non-existent templates are dead, many shortcut links are dead, etc.). I didn't want to make any changes until I brought it up here (maybe we will bring over the templates from en.ws, maybe get rid of them--it's all up to discussion). Read it, and say what you like, dislike, what should be changed (whether it relates to actual policy or presentation), or make the changes yourself.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 23:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

:I support both policies to be applied here based on English Wikisource. There are several works here with non-commercial licenses that will have to go. Based on [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2006-February/006015.html], it seems that Angela has suggested that non-commercial licenses are to be disallowed at all Wikisource sites. When we have the policy officialized, I will nominate articles with non-commercial licenses for deletion.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 14:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

::I think I have to read it once more but now I can say I'm like to support it (hmm, and then to translate it for cs.source... good job), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
:I'll begin working with these to make them more Wikisource-general instead of English specific. That way, the transition to using them on other WS (should that happen) will be easier to do.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

::BTW, what shall happen with the old draft [[Wikisource:Copyright]] which is still here? We should not have two different pages on copyright :-), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
:::Because the page was so out of date, we blanked it and redirected it to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]], which encompassed some elements from [[Wikisource:Copyright]] and many new elements which reflected better what a good copyright policy should be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
::::The old draft of [[Wikisource:Copyright]] is still there as of this writing of mine.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 04:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
:::On en.wikisource? It's a redirect over there. Here, it should probably be redirect to remove mention of fair use.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::::No, not at en.wikisource but at this multilingual site.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
:I have redirected [[Wikisource:Copyright]] to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]] and moved the talk page, but I have not merged the history of two project pages.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 03:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

==Copyright question==
I'm thinking of ading portions or all of the [[w:AASHO|AASHO]] 1927 list of [[w:United States Numbered Highways|United States Numbered Highways]] - an excerpt is [http://www.us-highways.com/2766lst.jpg here]. What if anything of this is copyrightable? Would I have to condense it into a simple list of cities, or would even that not be OK?

Background: the list was compiled by AASHO, a private organization forwed of members from all state highway departments. The individual towns listed along the route were chosen by AASHO, and a relocation away from one required AASHO approval. It was copyrighted and the copyright (at least for the 1929 edition) has been [http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~lesk/copyrenew.html renewed]:
:CLNA: AMERICAN ASSN. OF STATE HIGHWAY OFFICIALS.
:TITL: United States numbered highways, by W. C. Markham.
:ODAT: 19Aug29; AA23426 RREG: American Assn. of State Highway Officials ; 24Jul57; R196400.
Hmmm... that also means that the 1927 edition (which has no mention of a "W. C. Markham") was not renewed, and so should be OK. I'm also interested in the bigger question though. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] 00:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

:If there is no copyright and if the text is only English you should put it at [[:en:s:Main Page|English Wikisource]]. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 08:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

== new subdomains==

the following subdomains have been created:

* http://ang.wikisource.org/
* http://az.wikisource.org/
* http://bg.wikisource.org/
* http://bs.wikisource.org/
* http://ca.wikisource.org/
* http://et.wikisource.org/
* http://fi.wikisource.org/
* http://fo.wikisource.org/
* http://ht.wikisource.org/
* http://hu.wikisource.org/
* http://kn.wikisource.org/
* http://lt.wikisource.org/
* http://no.wikisource.org/
* http://sl.wikisource.org/
* http://te.wikisource.org/
* http://th.wikisource.org/
* http://uk.wikisource.org/
* http://vi.wikisource.org/
* http://zh-min-nan.wikisource.org/

I would like to ask those who use these subdomains to move content from here to there.
In addition, pages have to be deleted on this site; otherwise there will be duplicate copies and chaos.
For that reason, it would be great to have one person in charge per subdomain, who blanks the pages
that have been moved, so that I can later delete them.

To do that, please replace the text on the pages that were moved with "<nowiki>[[Category:Moved to xx]]</nowiki>",
where "xx" is the name of the subdomain the pages were moved to.

[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
:Also, remember, if you want to keep the page histories, ask a developer (probably Brion) to do the page transfers.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::Please remember to check the copyright status of moved articles as well.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Why not not to transfer the pages from here to the new domains by transwiki? It has been activated, I made one or two trials today from cs.wiki to cs.source, and it it fully OK incl. the history. Sure, it must bve activated for each subdomain, i.e. somebody must get the access, and he must get also the access for transfers from here (normally, it is activated only for transfers from xx.wiki to ss.xource). But it should not be a problem, and we must then find a list here, what can be deleted. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- - - P.S. like Gububu does for the hu.source

== Creating new subdomains ==
It was requested on IRC that we clearly list approved subdomains seperately from the ongoing or inactive disscusions. Also I was told that the procedure of filing a bug to create new subdomains is not good for the developers. I am on IRC regularly and can make direct requests to them if someone will leave a message on my talk page at [[:en:User talk:BirgitteSB]]. I looked at [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] and I think we could make a seperate section for approved domains and move the disscusions to it as they gain consensus. Does anyone else have ideas on how to make the page clearer? --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

== Sysop for a while ==

Hi, some time ago a made a proposal in meta - [[:m:Meta:Babel#Sysop for a while]] -, and today a tzried to start a new discussion on this topic. Everybody who would like to say something to it, please go there and make it. Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

== Side-by-side alignment tags for translations? ==

Hi, all, I'm relatively new, so forgive me if this isn't the right forum for asking this question.

I've been transcribing some old texts onto the Latin and French wikisources, and then adding my translations at the English wikisource. Someone very nice at the Latin Wikisource started adding mysterious tags to my contributions, such as

<pre>
[[la:Confessio philosophi]]
{{interwiki-info|la|(vo)}}
</pre>

which [[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] explained gives a side-by-side view of the original and translated texts. So cool!

I'm wondering, though, whether it's possible to introduce matching tags into the two texts to help them align better. It might be helpful for students if they could see paragraphs of the original and translated texts ''exactly'' opposite to one another. A good test case would be the dialog [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]]. Thanks for your help! :) [[User:WillowW|WillowW]] 08:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
:Hi Willow,
:For that, you need that the div class=text to be exactly at the same place on both documents, and of course, the paragraphs should match each other. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 09:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, [[User:Yann|Yann]], thanks for the suggestions! I added the <pre><div class=text></pre> at the beginning and <pre></div></pre> at the end of the text that should be aligned in both dialogs, but that doesn't seem to have helped. The paragraphs still don't line up in the two-column format; the text gradually gets out of sync starting from the beginning until the end, where there are huge gaps. The paragraph boundaries (2 carriage returns) in the two texts seem to be identical, although the lengths of each paragraph might differ somewhat. Could someone please look at the dialogs and see whether I'm doing something wrong? I really would like to have the dialog lines match up. Once we get these dialogs to work, I'll copy the solution over to my other translations. Thanks for all your trouble! :) [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 19:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. Am I allowed to make a user page here? I was going to, but it seemed to suggest that I shouldn't if I already have a page at other wikisources, which I do (en,fr,la,de). Thanks for any tips for a hopeless new-b! ;)

:Willow, look at it now. I've tweaked the Latin side a bit and now it all meets up. It seems that you have to manually add line breaks (I'm initially thinking that the header templates are screwing things up). I need to look more into it, though. (Oh, and you can go ahead and create a user space--this is a fully operational wiki).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 22:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much, [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]], for looking into it and trying to get it to work! Unfortunately, it still doesn't work for me; the two columns start off OK but get out of sync after a short while and get really bad at the end. :( Interestingly, going to the double-column format from the Latin side seems to give a slightly better alignment than going from the English page. I tried it in two different browsers (Mozilla and Firefox). The hermit-devil dialog near the end has single linespaces between the paragraphs; perhaps that might throw it off? I'm totally willing to go through the text, though, and put tags in if they'll help it align better. I appreciate all your help! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 00:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

:I am the ''"Someone"'' that add the interwikilink on '''en:''' but I was not logged in... :)
:I see that [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] insert in the [[la:Formula:Titulus2|Template:Titulus2]] '''<nowiki> </nowiki>'''
:Can you explane me how work this? I'm not an expert with the tags.
:Thank you very much!
:Please, make attention when you modify this template because is used by quite all the text in la.wikisource.
:Hi! --[[User:Francesco Gabrielli|Francesco Gabrielli]] 09:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

::I have had the same problem at the same time. Here is another page which seems to have solved the problem : 
::I don't know why it works with Epictete and doesn't work with Horace, Epictete hadn't suppressed the title templates though. 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Manuel?match=el Epictete] 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.3_-_Au_vaisseau_qui_portait_Virgile_en_Attique?match=la Horace] 
::--[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 09:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
==Side by side alignment (continued) : main pages same problem ?==
[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page?match=fr Another gap here]. Is there some 'div' that we ought to use to correct this gap, and would it be on the English page or on the French page ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 04:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

::I am the author of this very imperfect piece of software. you can use tags to align paragraphs. The help is here : [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

:::This "very imperfect piece of software" is very useful and well thought even as it is ! But you know me, Thomas, you know that I am a not very gifted beginner, do you think I would be able to better it ? Should I try some experiments myself, or should I wait for others to do it ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 11:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I got it to work! Check out [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] -- yeay, yeay, yeay! :D

:It works for me too, [http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.1_-_%C3%80_M%C3%A9c%C3%A8ne?match=la here]. Thank you ThomasV and WillowW ! --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 13:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The "div class=text" tags at the beginning and end didn't help, presumably because of the different title templates on the two different Wikisources. The "title" div tags worked great, although they seem to need a forward slash at the end, e.g.,
<pre>
<div title="Beginning of text" />
</pre>
Should the [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension|Help page]] be changed? There's no forward slash after "Wright brothers". Thanks again, [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]]! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 11:20, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

:hey. I did not put it in the help, because I thought it was obvious : a div must always be closed. not closing divs can cause really bad things. I usually use <nowiki></div></nowiki> to close my divs, but the slash is another good way to do it. feel free to improve the help. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

::I don't think <nowiki><div/> is valid HTML, but it is cleaned up and rendered as <div></div></nowiki> by the MediaWiki software. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 12:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Might be I did not understand it well, I am bad in programming. I wanted to install the '''bilingual feature''' in cs.source and i followed the guide in '''[[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]''', but nothing happens - no double arrows, not bilingual... Did i forget to install something esle? (I copied just the script from fr.source, that's all). Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:yes you did. addLoadEvent is missing, as well as the file header. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh gosh. And where is it? addLoadEvent is there, as I can see, and what is header? And where? We are now at the point that through our extremely growth we shall override de.source and en.source very soon :-), but such marginal problems... Can you help? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:it is not there. check carefully. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 18:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:If you want to use addLoadEvent you need a definition of that function in your script. It should be easier to use addOnloadHook (a function that is defined by the MediaWiki software). I think the script will work if you change "addLoadEvent(BilingualLink);" into "addOnloadHook(BilingualLink);". /[[User:EnDumEn|EnDumEn]] 21:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

@ EnDumEn: thx, it works; @ ThomasV: well you were right, there was a space, but it was copy&paste from somewhere, so... anyway thx as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

-----

Did something happen with this utility?? It worked fine (see above), but this week something changed, there are no double extensions on the left column - it is away. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

:please update your monobook.js from fr.ws [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, so there is something new in the west... Do you think it will work with the ''addOnloadHook(BilingualLink)'' instead of ''addLoadEvent(BilingualLink)'' (see EnDummEn's advice above)?? Anyway, thx much, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

== Spoken Wikisource ==

The German branch of Wikisource has uploaded two audio files at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spoken_Wikisource_German . If anyone would like to participate on building a library of audio files with spoken Wikisource texts under free licenses feel free to use the Commons category ''Spoken Wikisource'' and to share your thoughts on this topic with the German community at http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Gesprochene_Wikisource . Greetings from Germany! Wikisource-de-User FrobenChristoph --[[User:172.182.5.236|172.182.5.236]] 18:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
:Also, I'd like to bring to everyone's attention a site which does a similar thing: [http://www.librivox.org LibriVox.org]. All of their audio books are released immediately into the public domain. It might be worth going over and giving them a look.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

== Frisian sources ==

Now that subdomains have been created, how do I reach the pages that are in the main domain, from elsewhere? [[ws:Main Page:Frysk]] does not get me to [[Main Page:Frysk]] for some reason, but at [[s:Main Page:Frysk]] the subdomain translation kicks in. Thus, using it from a fy: wiki you end up on the non-existent fy: subdomain, without a redirect back from http://fy.wikisource.org it seems. (I can't demonstrate this here; I always held s:xx:pagename to be a switch to xx subdomain, but apparently it, now, isn't.) So how do I link the main pages of the various Frisian projects? Or should we subdomain Wikiboarne for that? [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 22:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

: <nowiki>[[oldwikisource:Foo]]</nowiki> [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 22:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. (Indeed, so much more elegant than ''ws:'', wouldn't you agree? Not to mention that "old" is a misnover, here.) 
And I see that, while the problem with things like w:fy: is that they link to the wrong computeradress, this is fixed by translating it to the correct wiki serverside on each request (the usual disadvantages), so I have the solution there as well.

My original problem is solved, then. Now I just have to find the Wikiboarne references in the Wikipedy to make them link to these fine new/old internal links. [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 19:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

::Some links to and from Wikisource are a bit complicated and/or strange, indeed; but see my page in cs.source [[:s:cs:Nápověda:Odkazy#Odkazy v textu]] - although it is written in Czech you will understand the syntaxes for more examples. Good luck, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

== [[m:Wikisource]] ==

I was asked at Wikimania if I could help get the Wikisource description on Meta updated. I have failed to do this and it looks as though the projects have been moved to there own pages now. The new Wikisource page is lacking any general descriptions at the moment and I was hoping we could work on that here. Once the english desricpption is put up, it will be translated to main languages in use at Meta. So it is important that this description does not solely refelect en.WS. Also I think would be nice to really put some thought into this presentation of Wikisource. So does anyone has any thoughts on this?--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

:why don't they use [[w:wikisource|wikisource]] ? [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 04:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

::I don't know, maybe they wanted something endorsed by the community. Maybe they heard rumors about the "slogan/description flap" and thought it had something to do with that page. If no one is interested in working on this I can reccomend using that. --[[User:71.81.70.212|71.81.70.212]] 12:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

:::Well, what means endorsed... Obviously it is endorsed or something like that as nobody from the community protested against it. And, in fact, I cannot imagine that somebody would be able to create another text which would be quite different from this one. Sure, it can be made shorter if necessary, but Wikisource is good described there - my oppinion. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

::Please tell me that those stats are automatically updated...It will suck to have to go through and manually update ALL the WS domains with new page/admin/user counts.

::Birgitte: What all needs to be added to the Meta page? I'm willing to help, although my amount of free time right now is pretty dismal.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 17:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Basically the About Wikisource section. [[m:Wikipedia]] just covers the history other sister projects tell about their goals and mission. I don't know exactly what we should, but I would like it to be reflective of things all lang subdomains share. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 22:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

== Democracy and Education ==

Where, oh where, is my Bible: [[Democracy and Education]] by [[w:John Dewey|John Dewey]]? It was here the last time I looked... :-( (It was first published in 1916, so shouldn't it be out of copyright?) [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] 10:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:Oops, ignore - somehow, I didn't realise I was on the multingual portal Scriptorium - sorry :-) [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] 10:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

== <s>Middle</s> Old English Wikisource ==

ang.wikisource.org ([[:w:Old English language|Middle English]] Wikisource) is a dead wiki for a dead language/english variation. The most frequent action is user creation. See the complete listing of all editions that this wiki has received up today in http://ang.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&limit=100&days=300.

According to [[:ang:Special:Statistics]], ''There are 11 total pages in the database. This includes "talk" pages, pages about Wicifruma, minimal "stub" pages, redirects, and others that probably don't qualify as content pages. Excluding those, there are 0 pages that are probably legitimate content pages.''

This is the full list of articles on Main namespace:
# [[:s:ang:Brunanburh]], copy-and-paste from [[:s:en:Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader/The Battle of Brunanburh]]
# [[:s:ang:Cnēorisbōc]] is copyvio? (see [[:s:ang:Talk:Cnēorisbōc]])
# [[:s:ang:Dēor]]
# [[:s:ang:Main Page]] redirects to [[:s:ang:Hēafodsīde]]
# [[:s:ang:Hēafodsīde]] is the Main page
# [[:s:ang:Se Wīdfarend]], copy-and-paste from [[:s:ang:Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader/The Wanderer]]

English Wikisource maintain acceptance of texts in Middle English. See [[:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2005/10#Middle English]] (and [[:s:Category:Middle English Fiction]]). Any reason to keep this wiki open? [[User:555|555]] 19:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

:When you put this question so I could do the same on one dozen of other wikisources with 3 edits a months (=3 new users). Big problem. See also the discussion on cration of new wikisources. But I agree, I do. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

::IMHO this subdomian should never have been created. The texts are welcome at en.WS. However I will point out the language in question is Old English or Anglo-Saxon not Middle English. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 22:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-09-11T22:32:19Z

BirgitteSB: /* Middle English Wikisource */

{{Scriptorium-side}}


'''[http://sources.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium&action=edit&section=new Edit(+) / Seite bearbeiten(+) / Modifier(+) / Pagina bewerken (+) / Düzenle (+)]'''
See Scriptoria in other language sub-domains: 

[[cs:s:Wikisource:Pod pramenitou lípou|Česky:Pod pramenitou lípou]] -
[[da:s:Wikisource:Skriptoriet|Dansk:Skriptoriet]] -
[[de:s:Wikisource:Skriptorium|Deutsch:Skriptorium]] -
[[en:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|En:Scriptorium]] -
[[es:s:Wikisource:Café|Español:Café]] -
[[fr:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|Français:Scriptorium]] -
[[he:s:ויקיטקסט:מזנון|עברית:מזנון]] -
[[it:s:Wikisource:Bar|Italiano:Bar]] -
[[nl:s:Wikisource:De kroeg|Nederlands:De kroeg]] -
[[pl:s:Wikiźródła:Skryptorium|Polski:Skryptorium]] -
[[ru:s:Wikisource:Форум|Русский:Форум]] -
[[tr:s:VikiKaynak:Köy çeşmesi|Türkçe:Köy çeşmesi]]
[[zh:s:Wikisource:写字间|中文:写字间]]

==Wikisource project pages==
*[[Wikisource:What is Wikisource?|What is Wikisource?]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks|Wikisource and Wikibooks]]
*[[Wikisource:Votes|Votes]]
*[[Wikisource:Multilingual statistics|Statistics]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright|Copyright]]
*[[Wikisource:Possible copyright violations|Possible copyright violations]]
*[[Wikisource:Proposed deletions|Proposed deletions]]
*[[Wikisource talk:Index|Cataloging]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Project Gutenberg|Wikisource and Project Gutenberg]]
*Languages - see below

==Separate discussions==
'''Verschobene Diskussionen / Discussions déplacées / verschoven besprekingen / 移动的讨论 / Discussioni spostate'''

===Logo===
*[[Wikisource:Logo]]
*[[Wikisource:New_Wikisource_logo]]

===Languages===
*[[Wikisource:Language policy|Language policy]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests|Language domain requests]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/Rules for voting|Language domain requests/Rules for voting]]
*[[Main Page|List of Wikisource Languages]] (=[[Main Page]])
'''The language domain vote (over now):'''
*[[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)
*[[Wikisource:New discussion on language subdomains|New discussion on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)

===Archives===
'''Archive / 存 / Archivi'''
(oldest first)
*[[:m:Wikisource]] (Pre-launch discussions)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/November 2003 to January 2004|November 2003 to January 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2004 - Jun 2004|Feb 2004 - Jun 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jul 2004 - Oct 2004|Jul 2004 - Oct 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Oct 2004 - Feb 2005|Oct 2004 - Feb 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2005 - Apr 2005|Feb 2005 - Apr 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Apr 2005 - Aug 2005|Apr 2005 - Aug 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Aug 2005 - Sep 2005|Aug 2005 - Sep 2005]] (through the move to language subdomains)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Sep 2005 - Jan 2006]] (months following the move language subdomains)

;==================================================

== Note for people following an old link ==

Could an admin add a note to [[MediaWiki:Noarticletext]], mentioning the language subdomains. I have so often clicked on links at Wikipedia and got this simple note. I know that it were outdated links and that the text now is in a subdomain, but most other people will think the article doesn't exist (anymore) and delete the link. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
:Done. However explainations could be improved. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

::Perhaps "other language subdomains", because some people might not know what a subdomain is? Unfortunately Google still displays the old pages, and often the ranking of the old, long deleted pages is higher than of the new ones in the subdomains. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 01:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

== [[Wikisource:New Wikisource logo]] ==

There's a new discussion and a soon-to-come vote on the new logo of Wikisource. Please discuss it on the talk page, and discuss the seperate logos there. [[User:Datrio|Datrio]] 14:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

== A Quick Survey of Languages ==

Out of curiousity, I did a quick survey of activity and progress on the various subdomains using RecentChanges and looking at Main Pages.

If I am not mistaken, there are currently 27 languages with Wikisource subdomains. Of those, I found only ''one'' that seems largely inactive, namely [http://cy.wikisource.org/wiki/Prif_tudalen cy.wikisource.org]. Besides cy.wikisource, there are just 2-3 others with only minimal recent activity (i.e. an average of just 1-2 edits per day), but all of those have nevertheless added significant content over the past few months and have useful Main Pages.

This means that nearly two dozen languages are flourishing, less than five months after the transfer. All of the larger languages (e.g. English, French, German) seem to have recovered completely from the move and done a great deal to revamp their infrastructures. Other languages have to have managed to do so to a large extent from scratch.

This is something very positive and wonderful. Would be good to get specific feedback from various languages. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 19:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

:de: It has completely recovered from the move, the only (and serious) problem are many external links that link to the old domain. Contributions at de vary very much, but really increased in comparison to before the move. Biggest problem at the moment: There is no community, people come, contribute their sources and are gone again. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Language comparisons by dump size ==

I took a look at the compressed database sizes (dumps from 22 Jan - 1 Feb). These are the file sizes of pages-articles.xml.bz2

1 enwikisource 93.0 MB
2 frwikisource 52.6 MB
3 arwikisource 23.2 MB
4 eswikisource 17.4 MB
5 dewikisource 14.1 MB
6 lawikisource 13.1 MB
sourceswiki 12.0 MB
7 zhwikisource 9.4 MB
8 rowikisource 8.2 MB
9 itwikisource 7.8 MB
10 plwikisource 7.0 MB
11 elwikisource 6.1 MB
12 ruwikisource 5.9 MB
13 hrwikisource 4.3 MB
14 hewikisource 3.6 MB
15 ptwikisource 1.6 MB
16 nlwikisource 1.5 MB
17 jawikisource 1.2 MB
18 srwikisource 1.1 MB
19 dawikisource 783 KB
20 svwikisource 693 KB
21 kowikisource 649 KB
22 glwikisource 266 KB
23 idwikisource 265 KB
24 trwikisource 257 KB
25 fawikisource 168 KB
26 iswikisource 150 KB
27 cywikisource 66 KB

At the moment cy seems to be the only subdomain that has so little contributions, that it might be necessary to shut it down and merge with the international part again (see contribution above). Surprising results in comparison to the article statistics at [[Main Page]]: "ar" and "la" have much content, but little articles, the same at "el". The opposite with "hr": There are many articles with rather little content. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I neither support nor oppose merging inactive language subdomains back to multilingual Wikisource, but I hope that we make a written rule.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 09:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Unless it starts collecting spam, there is no need to do such a thing. And even then it would be locked, not "moved back." Plus, the cy.wikipedia has a reasonable amount of activity, so people who know the language will be looking at that Wikisource from time to time.

But the focus of my comments were not on cy.wikisource, rather on the two dozen wikis that seem to be doing not just well (which all of us had hoped would happen), but far better than I personally expected! This is a great thing, and thanks also to Jofi for his stats, which make it even clearer.

As far as community - on en.wikisource I think that has really happened, and quite nicely too, not just people "stopping by" to leave texts. At he.wikisource too, though of course the number of people is much smaller. What really seems to make it happen is working together on infrastucture - policies, templates, cleanup, Main Page and other central pages, categories and classification systems, and of course helping out others with questions and problems. In other words, it seems like the people who want to be ''librarians'' make up the steady community, which seems rather appropriate... [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 09:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I certainly generally support language domains. But at "cy" there were no real contributions since December, 11th and the only real contributions have been made in the first 26 hours after the creation of the subdomain. The only admin is Brion VIBBER. I don't know if he really wants to maintain the domain, but the spam on one page kept unreverted for about 3 weeks. If the contributions to "cy" don't increase, there is no reason why we should keep the multilangual part of Wikisource. The activity of "cy" could be reached by almost any language subdomain, and there would be no argument to refuse any of the requests. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:Just a small point: when comparing database size, remember that non Latin alphabet languages (i.e. Arabic, Chinese, Indian languages, etc.) use much more space (x 2 ?) than Latin alphabet languages. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:: Also, Latin alphabet languages get a much better compression rate. [[User:Bogdan|Bogdan]] 11:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, the comparison is not very precise. But "la" does use Latin alphabet (what else ;-)) and "ar" has less than 800 counted articles. So it's still remarkable. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Question ==

Hi there! I was setting up an account here to be of some help, but noticed it doesnt work for the language subdomains. Then I wonder, what is the point of starting an account here in the first place? Is the top-level just a shell for the lower levels? Why isnt it linked? I'll probably want to add stuff in English, and occasionally in Dutch; so what accounts should I create?

And, consequently, perhaps it might be worth it to streamline the accounts so that one single account works on different subdomains? Certainly it might be worth it to use signal more clearly that this ''is'' the top-level in the first place, as there is no visual difference whatsoever.

Cheers! [[en:User:The Minister of War|The Minister of War]] 12:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

:Hi,
:The old main WS is used to host documents in languages which do not have a subdomain. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 13:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

It '''is''' linked. If you check the option ''remember me'' you can use the same account and password combination on most projects. For me it works here and on most Wikipedias except English, I happen to have a different name there, bc this one was taken :(

:::I am afraid you are not right. You can use the same '''user name and password''' in every project, but unless you create an '''account''' in every project, you cannot log in. The button ''remember me'' BTW is something quite else, it makes your log in automatically every time you visit the project. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] ==
According to the page for this image, its copyright has just been released to the Wikimedia Foundation. How can we verify that WMF actually has the copyright for this work? We might need to contact someone to get this finalized. But this opens up a number of possible works for our new logo if this is the case (such as the stylized version and other derivatives of the stylized iceberg).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 04:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:The author has left the same message on his own page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kils&diff=42335724&oldid=42057043 see here]. Since he was logged in when he wrote that, I guess we have a proof that it was him and not someone else. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:: I don't believe the copyright status of the image affects any stylized versions of the image - only versions that directly use the image itself (which is currently just the current logo). The stylized versions fall under whatever license their creators grant, irrespective of how the original image is licensed as they are not derivative works in the legal sense. (Note, ianal, but that is my understanding, anyway) --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 23:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

:My understanding was that if someone stylized the iceberg logo, that would be considered a derivative work, since they're taking the iceberg as a source of ideas and expanding on it to produce something new. As such they would have to obtain permission from the current copyright holder to create a stylized version. I'm not a lawyer, either, so I may have a wrong understanding, but that was how I understood it to be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
:: I'm not sure. Taking your ideas from a source is different from using the image ''_as_'' the source. A moot point in the current situation, but I'd be interested to know what the actual legal position would be if permission had not been granted. --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 00:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

==new subdomains==

new subdomains were created :
*yi.wikisource.org
*sk.wikisource.org
*cs.wikisource.org
*ml.wikisource.org

congratulations and good luck! [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

:Thank a lot, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== References ==
Cite.php: for references in the same page. You can read more [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cite/Cite.php here]. Used at spanish wikisource [[s:es:Las mil y una noches: 2|in this article]]. --[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 22:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== Wikisource-I mailing list ==

I've noticed that most of our sister projects have a mailing list of their own yet we do not. I was wondering what people would think of having a mailing list for us to make discussions and whatnot on. It would probably be a much better method than relying on this Scriptorium (let's be realistic: very few discussions ever happen here anymore, since many contributors do not regularly check this site)--discussions stand a much better chance of not stalling and dying. Also, it would be a way to let people see what sorts of things are going on at WS. What are your thoughts?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:I support a mailing list. Previously, you, I, and other administrators could oversee all pages, so we could delete copyvios in any languages, but as more language subdomains break away from this multilingual site, a mailing list becomes even more important to co-ordinate things at Wikisource subdomains.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

::I agree. would be useful. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 20:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:::support from me, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

:The list has been created. For those interested, subscription information can be found [http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l here].—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 18:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

:: For those who may be interested in subscribing, the first mailing list discussion to begin concerns the creation of a Wikisource <big><</big>format<big>></big>-to-wikimarkup conversion script (see the [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-April/thread.html archives]). // [[User:Pathoschild|Pathoschild]] 13:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Lets try and advertise this in the subdomains too. I put a message in the Spanish Cafe. Anyone that can translate various languages, please advertise this to people at those subdomains too. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 18:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

==Policy pages==
Since this wiki is still active, I think it would be good to add some documentation to it and give it a bit of a backbone. Recently, on the English sub-domain, we've written a lot of policies, and I think a few would be beneficial here. I think we should definitely port over [[s:en:WS:WWI|the inclusion policy]] once it's been established and [[s:en:WS:DP|the deletion policy]] at the least so that we can have some official documents to point to should people ask.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 20:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

::Zhaladshar!!!!!!! Yes!!!!! First, I miss such pages here. Secondly, I think in the process of creating new language Wikisources they would be very usefull for the new ones. Now i mus search in all projects to find something on deletion, on blocking, is a xx.wikisource more close to xx.wikipedia or to wikisource.org, on copyright (in fact, there are some serious differences between the page here and the page on the en.wikisource) etc. I think we need it. Urgently. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::Agreed. The great work done on en.ws would be beneficial here. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 15:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:I'm hoping to porting over deletion, copyright, inclusion, administrator, and blocking policies to begin with. We can change them as we need to fit this sub-domain, and it would allow us to have an actual, hard copy policy to point to and allow newer sub-domains to have an established document to refer to/translate and adopt on their own project. That way, some of the growing pains can be avoided.

:I'll also revamp many of the pages in our "Wikisource:" namespace which are so out of date that it's embarrassing. Once school lets out, I can dedicate much more time to this project. But I expect to have policies over here by the end of the week.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::OK. I am not like to promise I will help by writing some pages on this – 1. my english is ok but other speak better, 2. some of you are longer time here as me so you can judge the questions better, 3. I still have much to do with the new cs.wikisource. But if there is something I could help so i will do so. As fitst I would like to mention that there are some differences on the use of the fair use licence:
::* [[Wikisource:Copyright]] – probably limited
::* [[:s:en:Help:Copyright and Wikisource]] - ???
::* [[:en:Wikisource:Wikisource:Copyright]] explicitly prohibited on Wikisource.
::So, what with fair use??? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Fair use doesn't make sense here, as it usually means "part of a work" included in other related document, but we want to publish whole works independently. The exception may be book covers or photos of the author. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 18:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
::::Yes, one of the things the copyright policy will formalize is that (1) ''all texts'' must be public domain, GFDL, or GFDL-compatible. WS has been lax on this and it caused us some frustration and problems a little while ago; (2) it will prohibit fair use (I prefer in its entirety, but at least no fair use texts) to an extent we can decide upon later. For a site like WS, copyright should have been the first thing we nailed down, but it's pretty much turned into the very last thing. Ironic...—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::I support disallowing fair use that will not fit here. Is there any draft policy here to disallow non-commercial licenses as well? Fair use and non-commercial licenses are now disallowed at English Wikisource, but this policy has not been uniformly enforced at other subdomains, including Chinese Wikisource.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Copyright policy? Delete all Creative Commons works? ===
I recently wrote '''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000018.html a very long email to wikisource-l]''' to express desire for establishing consistency across subdomains: "Currently it seems that some licenses are valid on some subdomains but not others. (English Wikisource) requires all content to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License. However, maybe some other language subdomains do not have this policy?" In the same email, I went to explain that CC-BY and CC-BY-SA are free but not compatible with the GFDL.

'''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000019.html The first reply]''' was from Erik Moeller (Eloquence), who wrote: "Wikisource should instead follow similar principles as the Wikimedia Commons and allow any free content license to be used for added works." That said, I thought that someone high up in Wikimedia said that we must have GFDL-compatibility, which implies that Creative Commons works must leave Wikisource? --[[User:Kernigh|Kernigh]] 19:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

== Putting Hindi sources and Scriptorium out of Wikisource? ==

Isn't it time to move Hindi pages out of the main domain?
Almost all pages found by "random page" in the main domain are in Hindi (and their number growing), and this does not help looking for other sources in more rare languages. Additionally the Hindi script URLs are much harder to work with, and the community Scriptorium gets in fact "polluted" by the inability to locate appropriate categories.

Most of the Scriptorium should also go to Meta-Wiki as it is already cross-project, and contains much more tools and management templates or help pages already written there for specific languages.

The main Wikisource sites hould just include the multilingual portal, and the initial sections for rare languages, properly organized into language categories, for easier transfer to another domain later when this content becomes significant. To ease this transition, a minimum set of international common (meta-)pages and templates should be created that will be transfered to the new domain translated later with the articles.

So the main wikisource should remain small and manageable.
(note that new domain names could be created early as equivalents to the main site. This would make interwikis to Wikisource already working for those languages that still have not been transfered into a separate database.) 20:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
:Hi,
:I did most of the work regarding Hindi and Sanskrit here. And most of the pages are Sanskrit, not Hindi. I am totally against separating languages unless there is a significant community to support a subdomain. In cases of Hindi and Sanskrit, I doubt that such a community exists, seeing the edits made upto now, and the number of editors on corresponding Wikipedia languages. And please, logging in and sign your comments. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 20:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
::Agreed with Yann. Unless there are a number of people who are willing to start up a new language Wikisource, a sub-domain should not be made.

::The Scriptorium is not a place to locate language categories (I'm assuming you mean here to locate works written in a particular language). This is to discuss local issues on this wiki is sometimes used to coordinate between the different languages.

::The current wiki is small and scaleable, and should remain entirely open for works of a particular language which will likely never get its own sub-domain. I see no reason why any of this should be ported over to Meta.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with this anonymous contributor that moving these pages out to a subdomain would clarify the situation here... [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 08:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't see a Hindi sub-domain as a project that will be all that active. It seems to be the case that inactive projects collect more vandalism than anything else. I seems safer to keep them here where a number of people watch the project than to move it to a new domain which might only be frequented by a very few people and only at irregular intervals. I would love to see a Hindi sub-domain, don't get me wrong, but I believe there should be support from people who will be active for it.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

:sure. all I wanted to say is that there would be advantages to it. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 21:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

==languages main pages==

For those wikis that do not have a subdomain, I would like to proceed with a reorganization.
Currently we have a [[:Category:Main Pages|set of main pages]] for each languages, and a [[:Category:Languages|set of categories]].
This has two drawbacks :
# it is redundant.
# it is difficult to locate a document, or to access the list, for someone who does not understand a language.
Since the number of pages in languages that are here is in general small,
it would be possible to have the whole list of texts directly on their corresponding main page.
So, I propose to use the category pages as the main pages. That is, move the content of each
main page to the corresponding category page, where it would be used as a header.
It would make it more direct to access the list of pages written in a given language.
What do you guys think?
[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
:It is good, but someone must be able to identify which language an article belongs to.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 15:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

:ok, I am starting to move a few of those, and to have a unified design.[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

== Change Logos to SVG-Version ==

Hi there! There are SVG-Versions available for [[:Image:Wikimedia without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Wikibooks without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Commons without text-35px.png]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote without text-35px.png]]. Would be lovely if one of the admins could change those images in [[Template:Sisterprojects No Text]] and [[Main Page]]. The new logos are [[:Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Wikibooks-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Commons-logo.svg]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote-logo.svg]]. Thank you very much! Regards, [[User:217.225.124.149|217.225.124.149]] 20:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't get what the big deal about the SVG versions are. What's wrong with the PNG ones?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:I think that there may be some browsers/systems which do not support SVG, so I would not change the logos. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Browsers without SVG support should not be a problem. The MediaWiki software should render the images as PNG. I know that there was a problem with transparency in PNG, but was not that fixed? I think the advantage of SVG is that scaled versions of scalable SVG graphics are more accurate than scaled verions of portable PNG graphics. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 15:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

== Important change in the policy of de.wikisource ==

At de.wikisource there is a majority of those, who don't want to have texts without source or texts copied from other websites any longer (see [[s:de:Wikisource:Skriptorium#Texte_ohne_Quellen_oder_aus_dem_Internet|here]]). So, if you contributed German texts in the last years, I strongly encourage you to add your source to the text. If you cannot do this or if you copied the text from another website and you want to keep your wikified version of it, then now is the right time to copy your text from de and to transfer ist elsewhere. It most likely will be deleted at de. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

:Why does the German Wikisource want to delete web sources? Does this mean that if a text (such as Kafka's ''The Metamorphosis'' were copied to de.wikisource from a website it will be deleted simply because it's an internet source?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Yes, I really do not understand what de.wikisource wants to do. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:I can agree that the purpose of Wikisource is not to be a copy of Project good mountain or any other website. But works copied from other sites on the web can still be useful on Wikisource. So I see no reason to delete those works or to forbid copying more works. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 14:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

If you forbid copying works from websites, the number of works the German Wikisource has will become virtually nil. How many people have access to old books and decent OCR material that they can scan in works and edit them? Such a process is extremely time consuming--just as much as transcribing them would be. I'm hoping that we are just not understanding what is happening (maybe they are forbidding a certain kind of web document?) and it's not an all out ban on web sources.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:At de.wikisource there are some projects that OCR works and edit them. And that is nice. But in fact you did understand correctly what is happening: Most likely anything else shall be deleted. Certainly that means, that thousands of pages will be deleted. In fact the whole process of transfering the texts from multilangual wikisource to de was unnecessary: Almost everything of those texts have no source or are copied from other websites. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::I'm curious as to what is causing this change. How and why was this decided upon? It is an extremely dramatic change in policy, and I wonder about the ramifications. The biggest I'm concerned about (it's the only one I can think of right now; I'm sure I can come up with more later) is that user involvement in de.wikisource will drop dramatically. If all web-based contributions are excluded, most people who do not have decent OCR software or the rare books will be turned off of the project, because they've got no opportunity to be involved. Sure, some will stay, because they've got the required tools to allow them to be useful, but what about the newbies? Saying to them, "Oh, I'm sorry. We do not accept what you are uploading to our project. Please do not continue to add those works" would not put de.wikisource in a very good light and will cause growth in that project to all but halt. This is the reverse direction of what any Wikimedia project should want.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 00:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that it is entirely contrary with the rules of wikisource. For me, it is a nonsense. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:apparently this policy was "decided" in order to ensure quality of their texts. For that they proposed to remove all texts for which the source is unknown. In addition, some people proposed to remove texts that exist already elsewhere on the internet. I did not really understand the reason for that latter decision. I think that such a policy would terribly harm de.wikisource. I wonder if we can/should oppose that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC) PS: why is the logo at de.wikisource different from other sites?

::I'm a fan of opposing it. It goes entirely against the whole purpose of WS, and I imagine if this gets executed, there will be some bad light shone on Wikisource. I'm not against removing texts whose source is unknown. Many other sister projects have similar policies. But to ''entirely remove '''all''''' texts that exist elsewhere on the web will hamstring the project. What about texts which a person scans in, but exist on a website somewhere? Are those not accepted?

::To remove all web-based works completely overlooks the benefits that WS can give those texts. Sure, they exist on Gutenberg or Bartleby, but we can interlink them, add multimedia content (if it exists), and many other things which give those works value no other website has given it. I would rather not see this policy happen.

::Was this policy ever voted upon? How many people supported it? Is there any course of action that can keep such a detrimental policy from taking effect?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Sorry, i am a bit short of time and then when I have it I try do to something on cs.source... So it is the first time i hear about this nonsence. Sure, it must be clear that a text or a document from some webpages is free licensed and OK, but not this! If there is any chance to oppose it i support it. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Its not correct, what jofi here has written. Nobody wants delete tomorow thousands of pages in de-Wikisource. We are in a discussion process which sense have textes without any sources and which sense makes it to copy textes from any webpages to wikisource. And we have duscussed some solutions for it. Yes the radical solution is to delete all these textes and search original sources, like first editions or other historical important editions o a text. Another solution is, to find to all texts (you can imagine what work this is) a source (see above) and to compare these editions with the text in Wikisource. And also other solutions are discussed. But to say its clear the most active editors wants sometimes only texts with clear and good source in de-Wikisource. And copy&paste from any webpages is not good to reach this target.

That we want remove all Texts is not true, this is one of possible Solutions. And when we should delete these text, we want these texts back, based on clear sources and with high scientific Level. Short abstract: what jofi here says is not true an he is making panic without an base. Greetings --[[User:213.54.67.220|213.54.67.220]] 21:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC) [[s:de:Benutzer:Finanzer]]

Agree with Finanzer s:de:Benutzer:FrobenChristoph --[[User:84.60.205.115|84.60.205.115]] 22:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It seems that the positions in the discussion are not as radical as it first seemed to me. But nevertheless I still encourage all people who added German texts to add their source to it. In my opinion it is still clear, that there is a majority supporting the deletion of some of the texts that have been added in the last years, if they don't fullfill some quality criterias. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* I think it is a good goal to be '''source''' for quality high level textes. One of criteria for a good text is to know where ist does come from. To achive this, there is a need for information about the source. There is no need for another haystack of nonvalidated information called ws. I think it is usefull to bring the ws to a higher level of quality, by retrieving these informations. If a text is nearly unavailable, it may be really usefull to keep it and state clearly that the source information is missing and searched for. If a text has an high availability in the net, there is no need to keep it without the source information, the best solution is to find the missing information and to add it, or as a last step delete it. To be just another mirror of low quality information may be the goal of other projects not of ws. sincerly --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 08:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I fully agree that texts should be sourced whenever possible. I am currently doing just that on fr.wikisource. However deleting a text already copied seems a solution a bit extrem to me. The source and validation can be added later. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 08:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
* Is there any sense in a text, that is copied from somewhere in the net, wihout a source. Is it the full text, or is it an edited version. Which is the right bible (that has nothing to do with religion here, it is just a well known big example)? The Roman Catholic version, the Martin Luther version, the protestant version, the Anglican version.... When one of this chosen, for example catholic. The next question is before or after the 2. vatican synod. These are all bibles with a ''slightly'' differennt content. Hopefully you see without the citation of the source - where does it come from - the text is absolut useless. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 09:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::Well, I will take another example. Say that somebody copied a text from a another website without giving the source (or not), for example a text of Goethe. If the orther site doesn't give itself the source, what would you do? The text should be verified with a paper version, but that will take time if it's a big work. Deleting the text doesn't improve the situation. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::I fully agree that ''not only the licence but also the source'' must be clear. We need a high level quality. I am just hardly working to change it on cs.source. But the fact a document comes from internet can not be the criterium! In this case, what shall you do with the most old lithurgical texts and the most juristic ones? They are all PD, and i do not think, that somebody will scan or retype them, when you can find all on internet. Therefore if the first reports here are not true, it would be good, but probably there is a need of discussion on some principles like licence in wikisource etc. Zhaladzhar wanted to prepare something, i think. And i suggest, that such serious policies would be discussed also in other Wikisources as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* The criteria isn´t it comes from the internet. The criteria is the source is missing. If someone does the work do digitise a book, he mormally has the source und will tell it. Most of the problems come from
:*"I found the book in the internet, it´s interessting, lets copy it to ws". This internet page dosn´t has any source information, so why should i provide one. "I´m a real big guy by copying this big book." .
:*Oh a real nice poem, i like it. Who is the author, I don´t know. Is it free, I don´t know. But there is a webspace container called ws, lets copy it. What´s about URV without a source?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

@yann It must be verified. Mayby it is reprint with some amendments and a foreword. Are these copied wiht the text. If yes are the amendments and the foreword free or is it a URV because of the add ons. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Joergens.mi, I understand what you mean. And I also have some texts on cs.source where I have to do something - as I said, the source is in my eyes as important as the licence. But: If somebody copied the Grundgesetz or the Declaration of the USA onto your de.wikisource without given the source so it is no reason to delete it. Both text are undoubtly PD, I must just compare it with a source and if it is the same, so I have the source or i copy it one time more if there are difference in the text. But this can be done later. In such cases I use a special template saying we know about the problem and we shall solve it. (And I think an URL is sifficient source in cases of some juristic sites which offer laws etc.). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:38, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@-jkb- What you said is ok, such an url may be an good entry to the source definition. but the problem ist in a lot of cases even this start is missing. Look here: http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Der_Geier and these things are the problems. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 11:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, Der Geier... Sure, i know it, too, and you can see many texts like this also in Wikipedias... Here it is no great problem - everything is missing: no licence, no source, no author, no wiki to an article with explanation what it is etc. Either, I would try to find something by myself if I think it is important, or I would suggest to delete it indeed. In this case. But not if it were a law where I know at least, it is PD and i can use it for an article in Wikipedia. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::* This are the things (Der Geier) we are talking about, nothing else. To make a usefull cleanup, by searching for articles of this type, and put them on a good base. If this is not possible, then and only then a deletion is intended. This is all we are argueing about at de.WS and we are at the beginning of that process not at the end. Even with the laws youre a talking about some information will be usefull, because there are changes from time to time, therefore the year of the issue or the version should be mentioned. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 13:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::This isn't nearly as drastic as it sounded at first glance (phew!). I actually think this is a noble effort. All texts should be sourced (author information, edition--make it as fleshed as possible) in order to help give WS a high quality of source texts and to make us more than just a copy and paste website.

:::However, I would like to suggest instead of mass deletion of unsourced texts, you simply place a template on the text like <nowiki>{{unsourced}}</nowiki> (or whatever the word would be in German). That way, editors who want to do a little bit of house cleaning will know that there are some texts that need to be worked on to be considered appropriate for WS. But just because there is no source right now does not mean the work should be deleted anytime soon. Each deletion need to be specific to the text in question--maybe one text is a very rare one (maybe a very old manuscript) that doesn't ''have'' any (or much) source information, and such information is quite hard to find. It should be kept, due to its nature, even though it doesn't have the requisite information on it. Of course, for more common texts, the source information won't be hard to find at all.

:::I think of unsourced texts as analogous to Wikipedia's "stub article." Unsourced texts are by no means complete, but deleting them is unwise as it prohibits further growth of that text. Just as a good Wikipedia article (in general) won't be written over night, nor should we expect a good source text to be so easy to add that we can add ''everything'' in one go. Sometimes searching will be necessary, sometimes it won't be fruitful at all, but if you keep it, you will allow others to also check that work, and maybe something will happen many months/years down the future.

:::-jkb-: I'll eventually get those documents over here. en.wikisource has been keeping me busy lately, and many of the policies I want to bring over have been getting changed slightly here and there. I want to bring a static text, not one that is getting changed every few weeks. I should be able to get them over here within a short time, though.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Don't hurry be happy (or was it don't worry be happy???), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:We don´t hurry. I think we have statet clearly our intention. We are at the moment at the '''beginning'' of an discussion process how to improve the quality not at the end. The result will be some rules, how to proceed. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 18:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

== Logo update ==

After one admin on the german wikisource had unilaterally changed the logo to a self made version but - rightly complained - that the old wikisource logo didn't even contain the project name, Zanimum was so friendly to create a clean redraw of the iceberg together with the project name and formally hand over the copyright to the Wikimedia Foundation. A version suitable for use as logo can be found [http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Bild:Wiki.png here], bigger versions are uploaded on commons: [[:Image:Wikisource-newberg-de.png|Wikisource-newberg-de.png]] and [[:Image:Wikisource-nt.png]], EPS versions are available from Zanimum. It would be nice if the local project admins could update it. greetings,--[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]
:I like this versoin alot. Can we try to achieve consensus to adopt this without a full contest? It is not very different from our current design and it appears that de.wikisource.org already has consensus on it. However I cannot read German, that needs to be confirmed.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't know if there ever was a bigger discussion on this topic. The temporary logo at DE was supported by 3 people and opposed by none. The replace of the old logo was earlier supported by about 3 people and opposed by none. The "new" logo was already used at some Wikimedia pages as far as I know. The community at DE is not that big and most of them don't seem to be interested in a logo discussion that much. If nobody complains about the new logo, this can be called a consensus. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:it will not help wikisource if each subdomains starts to have its own logo. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:These methods are not really adapted. The logo concerns all subdomains of wikisource, and must be voted by all and not by only one . [[User:Marc|Marc]] 07:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::Please have a look at it. Actually it ''is'' the old iceberg logo. Just in a clean redrawn version. To date all subdomains – also the german – use the same logo. The subdomains never used the same ''file''. And I agree to BirgitteSB: I also like the discussed version very much. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 07:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::No :
::This is not the official logo ;
::there was no vote. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::The well-known iceberg is not the official logo? *puzzled* By the way: Do you actually know whether the file [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] (on [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikisource Commons]: "Original photo") is protected by trademark? --

On these page, you can see the exact form of the official logo : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo

if you want to change it, you could have the courtesy to make a vote. [[Benutzer:Marc|Marc]] 08:27, 22. Mai 2006 (UTC)

:The Wikisource iceberg is a nice logo. I don't want to change it. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 09:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

There must be a vote in order to change the logo. In the meantime, I ask the german admins to revert back to the official logo. Those who want to change the logo should take part in the discussion [[Wikisource_talk:New_Wikisource_logo|here]] instead of taking unilateral actions. I wrote there that I am willing to organize a vote '''if''' the logo proposals are made before the vote, not during the vote. The reason is that I find it tricky to organize a vote when the set of options is not known. So far I received very little feedback on that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 09:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I also agree that there must be a vote before the official loge is changed. But secondly, It is not OK when somebody starts to change the logos in different Wikipedias - Zanimum did so at least twice in cs.wiki wothout consulting the people there. Next time we need a lear vote. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

So far all the votes held about logos on wikisource yielded no results. On the other hand, there are several problems with the picture used as logo now:
* copyright was never transfered to the Wikimedia Foundation, instead it was published under GFDL (this goes against our logo policy)
* the image is a bitmap and as such not suitable for print in large versions.
* it doesn't contain the project name
The new variant (it's not a totally different logo for which - I agree - a vote or a contest would be necessary) was created to solve these problems. As the designer of the promotion materials for the Wikimedia Foundation I was very happy that Zanimum provided this printable version. If you're not happy with this logo at all, you're free to organize a contest in the community and select another logo which also fullfills these conditions (copyright wikimedia, vector version, including project name), but the current thing confronts the wikimedia foundation and the promotion department with so many problems that it should be changed, now when there's finally a variant which solves these problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

:::Elian, i do not say if I am happy with the logo or not, i even do not say if I am happy with the old one. But a logo is central for an identification. not only here, also on Wikipedias, Wikcionaries etc. If every server would start to make an own logo, it would be awful. And, these logos are to be found enywhere on main pages where there is an redirect to other projects. So, we nee it to be unified, somehow. And secondly, as i said above, every project can decide what it shall do. It is not possible, that somebody change the logo and then he changes it in other projects. Really, I do not argue against the new image. But agains the way it has been done. OK? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with the unification, and the new version of the logo should be used on all wikisource projects without delay. Of course if people are unhappy with the logo, then as always, we should be open to a discussion of positive change, including a logo contest if that is warranted. The idea that logos have to be voted on is just mistaken, though.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 13:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Well, it is for me good to hear here that we should unificate the logo (in the mean time there are some dozens of wikipedias and wikisources on the internet, and therefore we must show who we are). Just to explain the other point, ''to vote or not to vote'' (existentially not as bad as ''to be or not to be'' :-)): sure, i know the rule ''Voting is evil'' or so, but here in Wikisource we have some three hundreds of logos and since about 6 months we are preparing a voting (that never took part... I know). So we must now find a way to make all happy or "half happy" at least. But first condition indeed: all Wikisources of this Wikimedia project shoud have the same logo. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:Since the logo finding process lasts for almost 2 years and nobody knows when it ends, and because the current logo not even contains the name of the project, I would like to start a short vote to add "Wikisource" to the logo. I think this is absolutely necessary because otherwise people can't see where they are. I think it is no big deal to make such a change. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 16:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::it should be no big deal, right. And it was done already in a professional way. You're welcome to organize a new logo contest, but for the time being, I think the logo should just be changed to the one with project name. This gives us enough leeway to look for a new good logo while we're free of the problems of the old logo. --[[User:84.153.74.172|84.153.74.172]] 16:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@ Jofi: Well, sure, this would be necessay. The only one problem is: some Wikisources do not call themselves Wikisource but the use this expression in their language or even they have something different. What shall we do with it?? Otherwise support for Jofi. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::They could adapt the image to add their text, as it is done in other Wikimedia project.
I know added this: [[Image:Sourceberg-text.png]]

It is the same image as in the current logo, only the text "Wikisource" is added. Absolutely irrespective of the logo discussion I would like to have it used instead of the current one. I support replacing it by a better logo. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::sorry Jofi, this solves the problem with the missing name, but it doesn't solve the copyright problems and the printing problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

::::::Elian I thought the copyrights had been transfered to WMF already. If they have not been then neither the current iceberg or the one Zanimum redrew would be acceptable, since the latter is a derivation of the former.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 21:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:::::::Maybe this has been said before. The current logo is licensed under the GFDL, transferring the copyright will not change that. But the copyright holder can authorise derivative works that are not GFDL-licensed. So if Zanimum got permission, he did not have to license his derivation under GFDL. So if everthing was done correctly that version is still acceptable as a logo. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 22:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

* It´s a real curiosity.
:*There are several projekts (wikibooks) which added text to their logos, without any discussion.
:*Just such a text addition at de.WS gives a big discussion.
:*Some people defines a new logo. (personnally I don´t like it, but that doesn´t matters)
:*Other say it schould be adapted immediatily.
*But here the old logo is still the logo, why hasn´t it changed here (as a good example) to the new form?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:following the above diktat by Jimbo Wales I uploaded [[:Image:Wiki.png]]. I guess some developer has to set it up as logo now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Wouldn't it be better if the words ''Wikisource'' were included in the image, not out of it ? Is it too late to do that ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 08:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
.

Something like this :

[[Image:Wiki2essai.png|Word Wikisource inside logo]]

:These images are all fairly ugly. If we're going to keep the iceberg logo, I'd prefer Zanimum's stylized version, or the version the English WS uses for its [[s:en:WS:NEWS|news]] page. I believe that Uwe Kils has given copyright of the current logo to the WMF, however.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:I too prefer the version on the news page; the colors are better, and the shape has more style. but I do not think that we have the power to change a decision that comes from above us. Anyway, I am happy that we will not have to organize a vote, thanks to jimbo [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 14:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::I like Kcyclopedists' logo for WikisourceNews too. Could he make another one for Wikisource without news ? Can you do that, Kcyclopedist ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 05:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

* I prefer the version on the news page,too. I don´t think it´s a goot idea to put wikisource in the center of the Logo. if you look at most of the examples, putting the text above or below is much smarter [[Image:89px-WikisourceNews.png|left|Wiki News logo]] --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 15:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Yes. Not in the middle. First, some ones use the logo for other purposes too, where it could be disturbing. Secondly, I would suggest, we should have two sorts of an official logo: one with and one without the text (say for those Wikisources who would want to make another text). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
:ThomasV: What decision is being made above our heads?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 02:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

::Z: I was referring to the request by Jimbo. Anyway, I am quite happy that the issue is solved now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't think I quite understood what Jimbo was saying. Is he saying we can all choose our own logo?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:::In contrary, he said he agrees with my suggestion to unificate all daomains, i.e. one logo for all wikisources. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

== Languages and categories==
Some times I have some problems with the language of a text – I simply do not know: is it a document or is it some sort of vandalism?? The last exmple is [[Ein Tad]]. Undoubtly, it could be a language. In times the Czech Wikisource was here I started to use a category ''Czech'' (or ''Česky'') for all pages as a main category, other categories were subcategories of this one. By the way, in the moment you decide to create a new domain, you have an advantage when moving your wikisource to the new one: a developer must have a look in this category and move everything he finds. I would suggest the same for all languages here, maybe this category should be in English (it is also possible to use the abbreviations like de, en, mt etc); and more over there could be a notice in the edit window, something like do not forget to give here your language code / category... [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:Most [[:Category:Languages|language categories]] here use the local name of the language. I think that makes sense, since persons looking for texts in a language will probably know at least so much of that language that they know the local name of that language.
:[[Ein Tad]] can be deleted here since it is already present att the welsh subdomain.--[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 09:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Done for [[Ein Tad]]. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

== Ported over some policies from en.wikisource ==
Okay, I'm making good on my promise. I've now brought over an inclusion policy and a copyright policy. They can be located here:
*[[Wikisource:What Wikisource includes]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright policy]]

I've made almost no changes to it (meaning non-existent templates are dead, many shortcut links are dead, etc.). I didn't want to make any changes until I brought it up here (maybe we will bring over the templates from en.ws, maybe get rid of them--it's all up to discussion). Read it, and say what you like, dislike, what should be changed (whether it relates to actual policy or presentation), or make the changes yourself.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 23:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

:I support both policies to be applied here based on English Wikisource. There are several works here with non-commercial licenses that will have to go. Based on [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2006-February/006015.html], it seems that Angela has suggested that non-commercial licenses are to be disallowed at all Wikisource sites. When we have the policy officialized, I will nominate articles with non-commercial licenses for deletion.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 14:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

::I think I have to read it once more but now I can say I'm like to support it (hmm, and then to translate it for cs.source... good job), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
:I'll begin working with these to make them more Wikisource-general instead of English specific. That way, the transition to using them on other WS (should that happen) will be easier to do.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

::BTW, what shall happen with the old draft [[Wikisource:Copyright]] which is still here? We should not have two different pages on copyright :-), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
:::Because the page was so out of date, we blanked it and redirected it to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]], which encompassed some elements from [[Wikisource:Copyright]] and many new elements which reflected better what a good copyright policy should be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
::::The old draft of [[Wikisource:Copyright]] is still there as of this writing of mine.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 04:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
:::On en.wikisource? It's a redirect over there. Here, it should probably be redirect to remove mention of fair use.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::::No, not at en.wikisource but at this multilingual site.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
:I have redirected [[Wikisource:Copyright]] to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]] and moved the talk page, but I have not merged the history of two project pages.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 03:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

==Copyright question==
I'm thinking of ading portions or all of the [[w:AASHO|AASHO]] 1927 list of [[w:United States Numbered Highways|United States Numbered Highways]] - an excerpt is [http://www.us-highways.com/2766lst.jpg here]. What if anything of this is copyrightable? Would I have to condense it into a simple list of cities, or would even that not be OK?

Background: the list was compiled by AASHO, a private organization forwed of members from all state highway departments. The individual towns listed along the route were chosen by AASHO, and a relocation away from one required AASHO approval. It was copyrighted and the copyright (at least for the 1929 edition) has been [http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~lesk/copyrenew.html renewed]:
:CLNA: AMERICAN ASSN. OF STATE HIGHWAY OFFICIALS.
:TITL: United States numbered highways, by W. C. Markham.
:ODAT: 19Aug29; AA23426 RREG: American Assn. of State Highway Officials ; 24Jul57; R196400.
Hmmm... that also means that the 1927 edition (which has no mention of a "W. C. Markham") was not renewed, and so should be OK. I'm also interested in the bigger question though. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] 00:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

:If there is no copyright and if the text is only English you should put it at [[:en:s:Main Page|English Wikisource]]. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 08:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

== new subdomains==

the following subdomains have been created:

* http://ang.wikisource.org/
* http://az.wikisource.org/
* http://bg.wikisource.org/
* http://bs.wikisource.org/
* http://ca.wikisource.org/
* http://et.wikisource.org/
* http://fi.wikisource.org/
* http://fo.wikisource.org/
* http://ht.wikisource.org/
* http://hu.wikisource.org/
* http://kn.wikisource.org/
* http://lt.wikisource.org/
* http://no.wikisource.org/
* http://sl.wikisource.org/
* http://te.wikisource.org/
* http://th.wikisource.org/
* http://uk.wikisource.org/
* http://vi.wikisource.org/
* http://zh-min-nan.wikisource.org/

I would like to ask those who use these subdomains to move content from here to there.
In addition, pages have to be deleted on this site; otherwise there will be duplicate copies and chaos.
For that reason, it would be great to have one person in charge per subdomain, who blanks the pages
that have been moved, so that I can later delete them.

To do that, please replace the text on the pages that were moved with "<nowiki>[[Category:Moved to xx]]</nowiki>",
where "xx" is the name of the subdomain the pages were moved to.

[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
:Also, remember, if you want to keep the page histories, ask a developer (probably Brion) to do the page transfers.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::Please remember to check the copyright status of moved articles as well.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Why not not to transfer the pages from here to the new domains by transwiki? It has been activated, I made one or two trials today from cs.wiki to cs.source, and it it fully OK incl. the history. Sure, it must bve activated for each subdomain, i.e. somebody must get the access, and he must get also the access for transfers from here (normally, it is activated only for transfers from xx.wiki to ss.xource). But it should not be a problem, and we must then find a list here, what can be deleted. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- - - P.S. like Gububu does for the hu.source

== Creating new subdomains ==
It was requested on IRC that we clearly list approved subdomains seperately from the ongoing or inactive disscusions. Also I was told that the procedure of filing a bug to create new subdomains is not good for the developers. I am on IRC regularly and can make direct requests to them if someone will leave a message on my talk page at [[:en:User talk:BirgitteSB]]. I looked at [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] and I think we could make a seperate section for approved domains and move the disscusions to it as they gain consensus. Does anyone else have ideas on how to make the page clearer? --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

== Sysop for a while ==

Hi, some time ago a made a proposal in meta - [[:m:Meta:Babel#Sysop for a while]] -, and today a tzried to start a new discussion on this topic. Everybody who would like to say something to it, please go there and make it. Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

== Side-by-side alignment tags for translations? ==

Hi, all, I'm relatively new, so forgive me if this isn't the right forum for asking this question.

I've been transcribing some old texts onto the Latin and French wikisources, and then adding my translations at the English wikisource. Someone very nice at the Latin Wikisource started adding mysterious tags to my contributions, such as

<pre>
[[la:Confessio philosophi]]
{{interwiki-info|la|(vo)}}
</pre>

which [[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] explained gives a side-by-side view of the original and translated texts. So cool!

I'm wondering, though, whether it's possible to introduce matching tags into the two texts to help them align better. It might be helpful for students if they could see paragraphs of the original and translated texts ''exactly'' opposite to one another. A good test case would be the dialog [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]]. Thanks for your help! :) [[User:WillowW|WillowW]] 08:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
:Hi Willow,
:For that, you need that the div class=text to be exactly at the same place on both documents, and of course, the paragraphs should match each other. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 09:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, [[User:Yann|Yann]], thanks for the suggestions! I added the <pre><div class=text></pre> at the beginning and <pre></div></pre> at the end of the text that should be aligned in both dialogs, but that doesn't seem to have helped. The paragraphs still don't line up in the two-column format; the text gradually gets out of sync starting from the beginning until the end, where there are huge gaps. The paragraph boundaries (2 carriage returns) in the two texts seem to be identical, although the lengths of each paragraph might differ somewhat. Could someone please look at the dialogs and see whether I'm doing something wrong? I really would like to have the dialog lines match up. Once we get these dialogs to work, I'll copy the solution over to my other translations. Thanks for all your trouble! :) [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 19:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. Am I allowed to make a user page here? I was going to, but it seemed to suggest that I shouldn't if I already have a page at other wikisources, which I do (en,fr,la,de). Thanks for any tips for a hopeless new-b! ;)

:Willow, look at it now. I've tweaked the Latin side a bit and now it all meets up. It seems that you have to manually add line breaks (I'm initially thinking that the header templates are screwing things up). I need to look more into it, though. (Oh, and you can go ahead and create a user space--this is a fully operational wiki).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 22:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much, [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]], for looking into it and trying to get it to work! Unfortunately, it still doesn't work for me; the two columns start off OK but get out of sync after a short while and get really bad at the end. :( Interestingly, going to the double-column format from the Latin side seems to give a slightly better alignment than going from the English page. I tried it in two different browsers (Mozilla and Firefox). The hermit-devil dialog near the end has single linespaces between the paragraphs; perhaps that might throw it off? I'm totally willing to go through the text, though, and put tags in if they'll help it align better. I appreciate all your help! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 00:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

:I am the ''"Someone"'' that add the interwikilink on '''en:''' but I was not logged in... :)
:I see that [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] insert in the [[la:Formula:Titulus2|Template:Titulus2]] '''<nowiki> </nowiki>'''
:Can you explane me how work this? I'm not an expert with the tags.
:Thank you very much!
:Please, make attention when you modify this template because is used by quite all the text in la.wikisource.
:Hi! --[[User:Francesco Gabrielli|Francesco Gabrielli]] 09:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

::I have had the same problem at the same time. Here is another page which seems to have solved the problem : 
::I don't know why it works with Epictete and doesn't work with Horace, Epictete hadn't suppressed the title templates though. 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Manuel?match=el Epictete] 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.3_-_Au_vaisseau_qui_portait_Virgile_en_Attique?match=la Horace] 
::--[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 09:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
==Side by side alignment (continued) : main pages same problem ?==
[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page?match=fr Another gap here]. Is there some 'div' that we ought to use to correct this gap, and would it be on the English page or on the French page ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 04:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

::I am the author of this very imperfect piece of software. you can use tags to align paragraphs. The help is here : [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

:::This "very imperfect piece of software" is very useful and well thought even as it is ! But you know me, Thomas, you know that I am a not very gifted beginner, do you think I would be able to better it ? Should I try some experiments myself, or should I wait for others to do it ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 11:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I got it to work! Check out [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] -- yeay, yeay, yeay! :D

:It works for me too, [http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.1_-_%C3%80_M%C3%A9c%C3%A8ne?match=la here]. Thank you ThomasV and WillowW ! --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 13:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The "div class=text" tags at the beginning and end didn't help, presumably because of the different title templates on the two different Wikisources. The "title" div tags worked great, although they seem to need a forward slash at the end, e.g.,
<pre>
<div title="Beginning of text" />
</pre>
Should the [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension|Help page]] be changed? There's no forward slash after "Wright brothers". Thanks again, [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]]! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 11:20, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

:hey. I did not put it in the help, because I thought it was obvious : a div must always be closed. not closing divs can cause really bad things. I usually use <nowiki></div></nowiki> to close my divs, but the slash is another good way to do it. feel free to improve the help. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

::I don't think <nowiki><div/> is valid HTML, but it is cleaned up and rendered as <div></div></nowiki> by the MediaWiki software. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 12:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Might be I did not understand it well, I am bad in programming. I wanted to install the '''bilingual feature''' in cs.source and i followed the guide in '''[[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]''', but nothing happens - no double arrows, not bilingual... Did i forget to install something esle? (I copied just the script from fr.source, that's all). Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:yes you did. addLoadEvent is missing, as well as the file header. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh gosh. And where is it? addLoadEvent is there, as I can see, and what is header? And where? We are now at the point that through our extremely growth we shall override de.source and en.source very soon :-), but such marginal problems... Can you help? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:it is not there. check carefully. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 18:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:If you want to use addLoadEvent you need a definition of that function in your script. It should be easier to use addOnloadHook (a function that is defined by the MediaWiki software). I think the script will work if you change "addLoadEvent(BilingualLink);" into "addOnloadHook(BilingualLink);". /[[User:EnDumEn|EnDumEn]] 21:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

@ EnDumEn: thx, it works; @ ThomasV: well you were right, there was a space, but it was copy&paste from somewhere, so... anyway thx as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

-----

Did something happen with this utility?? It worked fine (see above), but this week something changed, there are no double extensions on the left column - it is away. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

:please update your monobook.js from fr.ws [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, so there is something new in the west... Do you think it will work with the ''addOnloadHook(BilingualLink)'' instead of ''addLoadEvent(BilingualLink)'' (see EnDummEn's advice above)?? Anyway, thx much, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

== Spoken Wikisource ==

The German branch of Wikisource has uploaded two audio files at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spoken_Wikisource_German . If anyone would like to participate on building a library of audio files with spoken Wikisource texts under free licenses feel free to use the Commons category ''Spoken Wikisource'' and to share your thoughts on this topic with the German community at http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Gesprochene_Wikisource . Greetings from Germany! Wikisource-de-User FrobenChristoph --[[User:172.182.5.236|172.182.5.236]] 18:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
:Also, I'd like to bring to everyone's attention a site which does a similar thing: [http://www.librivox.org LibriVox.org]. All of their audio books are released immediately into the public domain. It might be worth going over and giving them a look.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

== Frisian sources ==

Now that subdomains have been created, how do I reach the pages that are in the main domain, from elsewhere? [[ws:Main Page:Frysk]] does not get me to [[Main Page:Frysk]] for some reason, but at [[s:Main Page:Frysk]] the subdomain translation kicks in. Thus, using it from a fy: wiki you end up on the non-existent fy: subdomain, without a redirect back from http://fy.wikisource.org it seems. (I can't demonstrate this here; I always held s:xx:pagename to be a switch to xx subdomain, but apparently it, now, isn't.) So how do I link the main pages of the various Frisian projects? Or should we subdomain Wikiboarne for that? [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 22:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

: <nowiki>[[oldwikisource:Foo]]</nowiki> [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 22:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. (Indeed, so much more elegant than ''ws:'', wouldn't you agree? Not to mention that "old" is a misnover, here.) 
And I see that, while the problem with things like w:fy: is that they link to the wrong computeradress, this is fixed by translating it to the correct wiki serverside on each request (the usual disadvantages), so I have the solution there as well.

My original problem is solved, then. Now I just have to find the Wikiboarne references in the Wikipedy to make them link to these fine new/old internal links. [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 19:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

::Some links to and from Wikisource are a bit complicated and/or strange, indeed; but see my page in cs.source [[:s:cs:Nápověda:Odkazy#Odkazy v textu]] - although it is written in Czech you will understand the syntaxes for more examples. Good luck, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

== [[m:Wikisource]] ==

I was asked at Wikimania if I could help get the Wikisource description on Meta updated. I have failed to do this and it looks as though the projects have been moved to there own pages now. The new Wikisource page is lacking any general descriptions at the moment and I was hoping we could work on that here. Once the english desricpption is put up, it will be translated to main languages in use at Meta. So it is important that this description does not solely refelect en.WS. Also I think would be nice to really put some thought into this presentation of Wikisource. So does anyone has any thoughts on this?--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

:why don't they use [[w:wikisource|wikisource]] ? [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 04:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

::I don't know, maybe they wanted something endorsed by the community. Maybe they heard rumors about the "slogan/description flap" and thought it had something to do with that page. If no one is interested in working on this I can reccomend using that. --[[User:71.81.70.212|71.81.70.212]] 12:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

:::Well, what means endorsed... Obviously it is endorsed or something like that as nobody from the community protested against it. And, in fact, I cannot imagine that somebody would be able to create another text which would be quite different from this one. Sure, it can be made shorter if necessary, but Wikisource is good described there - my oppinion. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

::Please tell me that those stats are automatically updated...It will suck to have to go through and manually update ALL the WS domains with new page/admin/user counts.

::Birgitte: What all needs to be added to the Meta page? I'm willing to help, although my amount of free time right now is pretty dismal.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 17:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

== Democracy and Education ==

Where, oh where, is my Bible: [[Democracy and Education]] by [[w:John Dewey|John Dewey]]? It was here the last time I looked... :-( (It was first published in 1916, so shouldn't it be out of copyright?) [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] 10:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:Oops, ignore - somehow, I didn't realise I was on the multingual portal Scriptorium - sorry :-) [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] 10:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

== <s>Middle</s> Old English Wikisource ==

ang.wikisource.org ([[:w:Old English language|Middle English]] Wikisource) is a dead wiki for a dead language/english variation. The most frequent action is user creation. See the complete listing of all editions that this wiki has received up today in http://ang.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&limit=100&days=300.

According to [[:ang:Special:Statistics]], ''There are 11 total pages in the database. This includes "talk" pages, pages about Wicifruma, minimal "stub" pages, redirects, and others that probably don't qualify as content pages. Excluding those, there are 0 pages that are probably legitimate content pages.''

This is the full list of articles on Main namespace:
# [[:s:ang:Brunanburh]], copy-and-paste from [[:s:en:Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader/The Battle of Brunanburh]]
# [[:s:ang:Cnēorisbōc]] is copyvio? (see [[:s:ang:Talk:Cnēorisbōc]])
# [[:s:ang:Dēor]]
# [[:s:ang:Main Page]] redirects to [[:s:ang:Hēafodsīde]]
# [[:s:ang:Hēafodsīde]] is the Main page
# [[:s:ang:Se Wīdfarend]], copy-and-paste from [[:s:ang:Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader/The Wanderer]]

English Wikisource maintain acceptance of texts in Middle English. See [[:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2005/10#Middle English]] (and [[:s:Category:Middle English Fiction]]). Any reason to keep this wiki open? [[User:555|555]] 19:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

:When you put this question so I could do the same on one dozen of other wikisources with 3 edits a months (=3 new users). Big problem. See also the discussion on cration of new wikisources. But I agree, I do. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

::IMHO this subdomian should never have been created. The texts are welcome at en.WS. However I will point out the language in question is Old English or Anglo-Saxon not Middle English. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 22:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource:2006 (Archive)

2006-08-25T19:58:38Z

BirgitteSB: /* en: */

__NOTOC__
[[Wikisource:2005|Wikisource 2005]]
<center>
<big>'''WIKISOURCE 2006'''</big> 

'''[[Main Page|xx.wikisource.org:]]''' [[#ar:|ar:]] | [[#cy:|cy:]] | [[#cs:|cs:]] | [[#de:|de:]] | [[#el:|el:]] | [[#en:|en:]] | [[#es:|es:]] | [[#fr:|fr:]] | [[#gl:|gl:]] | [[#he:|he:]] | [[#hr:|hr:]] | [[#id:|id:]] | [[#it:|it:]] | [[#ja:|ja:]] | [[#ko:|ko:]] | [[#la:|la:]] | [[#nl:|nl:]] | [[#pl:|pl:]] | [[#pt:|pt:]] | [[#ro:|ro:]] | [[#ru:|ru:]] | [[#sr:|sr:]] | [[#sv:|sv:]] | [[#zh:|zh:]]

'''[[#wikisource.org|wikisource.org]]''': [[#sa:|sa:]]
</center>

==Wikisource 2006 FAQ==

'''en:'''

:'''Question:''' What is Wikisource 2006 and how should it be used?

:'''Answer:''' Wikisource 2006 is a news and announcements page for Wikisource in all languages. Please add updates to this page on the '''Wikisource''' in your language! Include special projects, special milestones, and even funny happenings. Updates can be in the language of your wiki or in any other languaage. Remember to sign each entry with your name and date by using <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> (four times) so that this page can chart dated events and progress on your wiki over the course of the entire year!

:'''Question:''' How can I publicize Wikisource 2006 so that people on my Wikisource will add updates?

:'''Answer:''' Please put a link to Wikisource 2006 on the Main Page of your language's Wikisource. (You can copy the following link: [[oldwikisource:Wikisource:2006]]; see how it was done on the [[:s:|English Main Page]].)

-----

==ar:==

==cy:==

==cs:==
* On 29. March 2006 the [[:s:cs:Hlavní strana|Czech Wikisource]] has been created; the new domain contains 30 pages
* 10. June 2006: the domain reached 100 pages, 21. August 2006: the domain reached 360 pages

==da:==
11:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC) The Danish Wikisource started the new year with 179 source texts.

On April 8th 2006 the Danish Wikisource reached 250 articles. Article number 250 was [[s:da:Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49|Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49]] uploaded by [[s:da:Bruger:Bisgaard|Bisgaard]].

Den 8. april 2006 rundede den danske del af Wikisource 250 artikler. Artikel nr. 250 blev [[s:da:Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49|Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49]], der blev lagt op af [[s:da:Bruger:Bisgaard|Bisgaard]]. 
[[User:Christian S|Christian S]] 19:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

==de:==

==el:==

==en:==
The English Wikisource began a much needed revamp of its internal structure. Help pages, policies, and category structures were entirely revamped or rewritten.

August: The revamp of policy and help pages has been completed for some time. Categories still need work. We have also nearly complete the migration all chapters to subpages. Along with that there has been a massive effort to add a standardized header with title, author, etc. to ALL pages. Currently only 2,000 pages out of over 20,000 are left without headers. We have found these headers very useful for navigation as well standardizing the look of the website. I encourage all other subdomains think about using a similar template ''before'' reaching 20,000 pages.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

==es:==
* On March 13, Spanish Wikisource had reached 10,000 pages. '''News:'''
#We have homage (or tribute) pages in our [[s:es:Portada|main page]] (one for each month).
#Main page about themes: (See: [[s:es:Historia|History]], [[s:es:Poesías|Poetry]], [[s:es:Cuentos|Tales]], [[s:es:Novelas|Novels]] and others genres).
#We have incorporated "The End" of a work (See: [[s:es:Wikisource:Fin de libro|Fin de libro]]).
#Year of Birth, died and publishing works categorized by year. (Example: [[s:es:Categoría:1911|1911]])
--[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 17:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

* 99% pages categorized: [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikisource/ES/TablesWikipediaES.htm] --[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 15:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

* On August 8, Spanish Wikisource had reached 15,000 pages.

==fr:==

Since the beginning of 2006, the French language Wikisource has seen a impressive growth with new contributors and the help of a bot made by ThomasV. It has notably reached 10,000 articles. Also new initiatives started to add texts collectively ocred and proofread by contributors. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 15:08, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

July and August have seen great changes for the French language Wikisource. Many new contributors are active. Two important and voluminous works are in the making, both with a complete set of scans of the original: Montaigne's Essays and the Encyclopedy of the Enlighment, from Diderot and d'Alembert. We started to have a weekly renewable extract of a work on the Main Page, and we expect that it will attract new readers and contributors. We also started to discuss a validation procedure. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 18:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

==gl:==

==he:==

<div dir="rtl">
ויקיטקסט עברית התחילה את השנה האזרחית עם 686 יחידות טקסט, ועם סיום מערכת התבניות לכישורי לשון שנעשה על ידי רותם.[[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 14:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

</div>

'''en:''' Hebrew began the civil year with 682 articles, and the completion of [[:he:User:Rotemliss]]'s template system for language proficiency. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 14:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

* Hebrew wikisource has reached 1,400 articles. Congratulations! Most pages have been typed in manually.

==hr:==
06 January 2006: hr.wikisource had 2517 pages. --[[User:Tomislav Dretar|Tomislav Dretar]] 21:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

==id:==

==it:==
*february: Acceptance of protection policy
*May: Beginning of a thorough discussion to strengthen consensus about all the proposed policies.
*Summer: categories underwent a complete overhaul.
*August: reached 3,000 volumes (most of which divided in uncategorized subpages - many more pages are actually written).

==ja:==

==ko:==

==la:==

==nl:==

==pl:==

==pt:==
Portuguese Wikisource finally is a active wiki. From 700 text-units to 3400+ (August 2006), from 1 admin to 6 admins and one bureaucrat. More news from that wiki in [[:s:pt:Wikisource:Notícias]] (current news, in portuguese; [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fpt.wikisource.org%2Fwiki%2FWikisource%3ANot%25C3%25ADcias&langpair=pt%7Cen&hl=pt-BR&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools google translation]) and [[:s:pt:Wikisource:Notícias/Arquivo]] (archive, in portuguese; [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fpt.wikisource.org%2Fwiki%2FWikisource%3ANot%25C3%25ADcias%2FArquivo&langpair=pt%7Cen&hl=pt-BR&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools google translation]). [[User:555|555]] 03:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

==ro:==

January 1: ~3200

==ru:==

==sa:==

==sr:==

==sv:==

==zh:==

==wikisource.org==

Wikisource:2006 (Archive)

2006-08-25T19:58:25Z

BirgitteSB: /* en: */

__NOTOC__
[[Wikisource:2005|Wikisource 2005]]
<center>
<big>'''WIKISOURCE 2006'''</big> 

'''[[Main Page|xx.wikisource.org:]]''' [[#ar:|ar:]] | [[#cy:|cy:]] | [[#cs:|cs:]] | [[#de:|de:]] | [[#el:|el:]] | [[#en:|en:]] | [[#es:|es:]] | [[#fr:|fr:]] | [[#gl:|gl:]] | [[#he:|he:]] | [[#hr:|hr:]] | [[#id:|id:]] | [[#it:|it:]] | [[#ja:|ja:]] | [[#ko:|ko:]] | [[#la:|la:]] | [[#nl:|nl:]] | [[#pl:|pl:]] | [[#pt:|pt:]] | [[#ro:|ro:]] | [[#ru:|ru:]] | [[#sr:|sr:]] | [[#sv:|sv:]] | [[#zh:|zh:]]

'''[[#wikisource.org|wikisource.org]]''': [[#sa:|sa:]]
</center>

==Wikisource 2006 FAQ==

'''en:'''

:'''Question:''' What is Wikisource 2006 and how should it be used?

:'''Answer:''' Wikisource 2006 is a news and announcements page for Wikisource in all languages. Please add updates to this page on the '''Wikisource''' in your language! Include special projects, special milestones, and even funny happenings. Updates can be in the language of your wiki or in any other languaage. Remember to sign each entry with your name and date by using <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> (four times) so that this page can chart dated events and progress on your wiki over the course of the entire year!

:'''Question:''' How can I publicize Wikisource 2006 so that people on my Wikisource will add updates?

:'''Answer:''' Please put a link to Wikisource 2006 on the Main Page of your language's Wikisource. (You can copy the following link: [[oldwikisource:Wikisource:2006]]; see how it was done on the [[:s:|English Main Page]].)

-----

==ar:==

==cy:==

==cs:==
* On 29. March 2006 the [[:s:cs:Hlavní strana|Czech Wikisource]] has been created; the new domain contains 30 pages
* 10. June 2006: the domain reached 100 pages, 21. August 2006: the domain reached 360 pages

==da:==
11:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC) The Danish Wikisource started the new year with 179 source texts.

On April 8th 2006 the Danish Wikisource reached 250 articles. Article number 250 was [[s:da:Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49|Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49]] uploaded by [[s:da:Bruger:Bisgaard|Bisgaard]].

Den 8. april 2006 rundede den danske del af Wikisource 250 artikler. Artikel nr. 250 blev [[s:da:Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49|Mangors Kogebog for smaa huusholdninger/Side 40-49]], der blev lagt op af [[s:da:Bruger:Bisgaard|Bisgaard]]. 
[[User:Christian S|Christian S]] 19:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

==de:==

==el:==

==en:==
The English Wikisource began a much needed revamp of its internal structure. Help pages, policies, and category structures were entirely revamped or rewritten.

August: The revamp of policy and help pages has been completed for some time. Categories still need work. We have also nearly complete the migration all chapters to subpages. Along with that there has been a massive effort to add a standardized header with title, author, etc. to ALL pages. Currently only 2,000 pages out of over 20,000 are left without headers. We have found these headers very useful for navigation as well standardizing the look of the website. I encourage all other subdomains think about using a similar template ''before'' reaching 20,000 pages.

==es:==
* On March 13, Spanish Wikisource had reached 10,000 pages. '''News:'''
#We have homage (or tribute) pages in our [[s:es:Portada|main page]] (one for each month).
#Main page about themes: (See: [[s:es:Historia|History]], [[s:es:Poesías|Poetry]], [[s:es:Cuentos|Tales]], [[s:es:Novelas|Novels]] and others genres).
#We have incorporated "The End" of a work (See: [[s:es:Wikisource:Fin de libro|Fin de libro]]).
#Year of Birth, died and publishing works categorized by year. (Example: [[s:es:Categoría:1911|1911]])
--[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 17:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

* 99% pages categorized: [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikisource/ES/TablesWikipediaES.htm] --[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 15:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

* On August 8, Spanish Wikisource had reached 15,000 pages.

==fr:==

Since the beginning of 2006, the French language Wikisource has seen a impressive growth with new contributors and the help of a bot made by ThomasV. It has notably reached 10,000 articles. Also new initiatives started to add texts collectively ocred and proofread by contributors. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 15:08, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

July and August have seen great changes for the French language Wikisource. Many new contributors are active. Two important and voluminous works are in the making, both with a complete set of scans of the original: Montaigne's Essays and the Encyclopedy of the Enlighment, from Diderot and d'Alembert. We started to have a weekly renewable extract of a work on the Main Page, and we expect that it will attract new readers and contributors. We also started to discuss a validation procedure. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 18:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

==gl:==

==he:==

<div dir="rtl">
ויקיטקסט עברית התחילה את השנה האזרחית עם 686 יחידות טקסט, ועם סיום מערכת התבניות לכישורי לשון שנעשה על ידי רותם.[[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 14:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

</div>

'''en:''' Hebrew began the civil year with 682 articles, and the completion of [[:he:User:Rotemliss]]'s template system for language proficiency. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 14:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

* Hebrew wikisource has reached 1,400 articles. Congratulations! Most pages have been typed in manually.

==hr:==
06 January 2006: hr.wikisource had 2517 pages. --[[User:Tomislav Dretar|Tomislav Dretar]] 21:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

==id:==

==it:==
*february: Acceptance of protection policy
*May: Beginning of a thorough discussion to strengthen consensus about all the proposed policies.
*Summer: categories underwent a complete overhaul.
*August: reached 3,000 volumes (most of which divided in uncategorized subpages - many more pages are actually written).

==ja:==

==ko:==

==la:==

==nl:==

==pl:==

==pt:==
Portuguese Wikisource finally is a active wiki. From 700 text-units to 3400+ (August 2006), from 1 admin to 6 admins and one bureaucrat. More news from that wiki in [[:s:pt:Wikisource:Notícias]] (current news, in portuguese; [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fpt.wikisource.org%2Fwiki%2FWikisource%3ANot%25C3%25ADcias&langpair=pt%7Cen&hl=pt-BR&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools google translation]) and [[:s:pt:Wikisource:Notícias/Arquivo]] (archive, in portuguese; [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fpt.wikisource.org%2Fwiki%2FWikisource%3ANot%25C3%25ADcias%2FArquivo&langpair=pt%7Cen&hl=pt-BR&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools google translation]). [[User:555|555]] 03:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

==ro:==

January 1: ~3200

==ru:==

==sa:==

==sr:==

==sv:==

==zh:==

==wikisource.org==

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-08-25T19:37:39Z

BirgitteSB: m:Wikisource

{{Scriptorium-side}}


'''[http://sources.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium&action=edit&section=new Edit(+) / Seite bearbeiten(+) / Modifier(+) / Pagina bewerken (+) / Düzenle (+)]'''
See Scriptoria in other language sub-domains: 

[[cs:s:Wikisource:Pod pramenitou lípou|Česky:Pod pramenitou lípou]] -
[[da:s:Wikisource:Skriptoriet|Dansk:Skriptoriet]] -
[[de:s:Wikisource:Skriptorium|Deutsch:Skriptorium]] -
[[en:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|En:Scriptorium]] -
[[es:s:Wikisource:Café|Español:Café]] -
[[fr:s:Wikisource:Scriptorium|Français:Scriptorium]] -
[[he:s:ויקיטקסט:מזנון|עברית:מזנון]] -
[[it:s:Wikisource:Bar|Italiano:Bar]] -
[[nl:s:Wikisource:De kroeg|Nederlands:De kroeg]] -
[[pl:s:Wikiźródła:Skryptorium|Polski:Skryptorium]] -
[[ru:s:Wikisource:Форум|Русский:Форум]] -
[[tr:s:VikiKaynak:Köy çeşmesi|Türkçe:Köy çeşmesi]]
[[zh:s:Wikisource:写字间|中文:写字间]]

==Wikisource project pages==
*[[Wikisource:What is Wikisource?|What is Wikisource?]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks|Wikisource and Wikibooks]]
*[[Wikisource:Votes|Votes]]
*[[Wikisource:Multilingual statistics|Statistics]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright|Copyright]]
*[[Wikisource:Possible copyright violations|Possible copyright violations]]
*[[Wikisource:Proposed deletions|Proposed deletions]]
*[[Wikisource talk:Index|Cataloging]]
*[[Wikisource:Wikisource and Project Gutenberg|Wikisource and Project Gutenberg]]
*Languages - see below

==Separate discussions==
'''Verschobene Diskussionen / Discussions déplacées / verschoven besprekingen / 移动的讨论 / Discussioni spostate'''

===Logo===
*[[Wikisource:Logo]]
*[[Wikisource:New_Wikisource_logo]]

===Languages===
*[[Wikisource:Language policy|Language policy]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests|Language domain requests]]
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/Rules for voting|Language domain requests/Rules for voting]]
*[[Main Page|List of Wikisource Languages]] (=[[Main Page]])
'''The language domain vote (over now):'''
*[[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)
*[[Wikisource:New discussion on language subdomains|New discussion on language subdomains]] (vote has concluded)

===Archives===
'''Archive / 存 / Archivi'''
(oldest first)
*[[:m:Wikisource]] (Pre-launch discussions)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/November 2003 to January 2004|November 2003 to January 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2004 - Jun 2004|Feb 2004 - Jun 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Jul 2004 - Oct 2004|Jul 2004 - Oct 2004]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Oct 2004 - Feb 2005|Oct 2004 - Feb 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Feb 2005 - Apr 2005|Feb 2005 - Apr 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Apr 2005 - Aug 2005|Apr 2005 - Aug 2005]]
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Aug 2005 - Sep 2005|Aug 2005 - Sep 2005]] (through the move to language subdomains)
*[[Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/Sep 2005 - Jan 2006]] (months following the move language subdomains)

;==================================================

== Note for people following an old link ==

Could an admin add a note to [[MediaWiki:Noarticletext]], mentioning the language subdomains. I have so often clicked on links at Wikipedia and got this simple note. I know that it were outdated links and that the text now is in a subdomain, but most other people will think the article doesn't exist (anymore) and delete the link. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
:Done. However explainations could be improved. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

::Perhaps "other language subdomains", because some people might not know what a subdomain is? Unfortunately Google still displays the old pages, and often the ranking of the old, long deleted pages is higher than of the new ones in the subdomains. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 01:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

== [[Wikisource:New Wikisource logo]] ==

There's a new discussion and a soon-to-come vote on the new logo of Wikisource. Please discuss it on the talk page, and discuss the seperate logos there. [[User:Datrio|Datrio]] 14:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

== A Quick Survey of Languages ==

Out of curiousity, I did a quick survey of activity and progress on the various subdomains using RecentChanges and looking at Main Pages.

If I am not mistaken, there are currently 27 languages with Wikisource subdomains. Of those, I found only ''one'' that seems largely inactive, namely [http://cy.wikisource.org/wiki/Prif_tudalen cy.wikisource.org]. Besides cy.wikisource, there are just 2-3 others with only minimal recent activity (i.e. an average of just 1-2 edits per day), but all of those have nevertheless added significant content over the past few months and have useful Main Pages.

This means that nearly two dozen languages are flourishing, less than five months after the transfer. All of the larger languages (e.g. English, French, German) seem to have recovered completely from the move and done a great deal to revamp their infrastructures. Other languages have to have managed to do so to a large extent from scratch.

This is something very positive and wonderful. Would be good to get specific feedback from various languages. [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 19:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

:de: It has completely recovered from the move, the only (and serious) problem are many external links that link to the old domain. Contributions at de vary very much, but really increased in comparison to before the move. Biggest problem at the moment: There is no community, people come, contribute their sources and are gone again. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Language comparisons by dump size ==

I took a look at the compressed database sizes (dumps from 22 Jan - 1 Feb). These are the file sizes of pages-articles.xml.bz2

1 enwikisource 93.0 MB
2 frwikisource 52.6 MB
3 arwikisource 23.2 MB
4 eswikisource 17.4 MB
5 dewikisource 14.1 MB
6 lawikisource 13.1 MB
sourceswiki 12.0 MB
7 zhwikisource 9.4 MB
8 rowikisource 8.2 MB
9 itwikisource 7.8 MB
10 plwikisource 7.0 MB
11 elwikisource 6.1 MB
12 ruwikisource 5.9 MB
13 hrwikisource 4.3 MB
14 hewikisource 3.6 MB
15 ptwikisource 1.6 MB
16 nlwikisource 1.5 MB
17 jawikisource 1.2 MB
18 srwikisource 1.1 MB
19 dawikisource 783 KB
20 svwikisource 693 KB
21 kowikisource 649 KB
22 glwikisource 266 KB
23 idwikisource 265 KB
24 trwikisource 257 KB
25 fawikisource 168 KB
26 iswikisource 150 KB
27 cywikisource 66 KB

At the moment cy seems to be the only subdomain that has so little contributions, that it might be necessary to shut it down and merge with the international part again (see contribution above). Surprising results in comparison to the article statistics at [[Main Page]]: "ar" and "la" have much content, but little articles, the same at "el". The opposite with "hr": There are many articles with rather little content. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I neither support nor oppose merging inactive language subdomains back to multilingual Wikisource, but I hope that we make a written rule.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 09:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Unless it starts collecting spam, there is no need to do such a thing. And even then it would be locked, not "moved back." Plus, the cy.wikipedia has a reasonable amount of activity, so people who know the language will be looking at that Wikisource from time to time.

But the focus of my comments were not on cy.wikisource, rather on the two dozen wikis that seem to be doing not just well (which all of us had hoped would happen), but far better than I personally expected! This is a great thing, and thanks also to Jofi for his stats, which make it even clearer.

As far as community - on en.wikisource I think that has really happened, and quite nicely too, not just people "stopping by" to leave texts. At he.wikisource too, though of course the number of people is much smaller. What really seems to make it happen is working together on infrastucture - policies, templates, cleanup, Main Page and other central pages, categories and classification systems, and of course helping out others with questions and problems. In other words, it seems like the people who want to be ''librarians'' make up the steady community, which seems rather appropriate... [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 09:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:I certainly generally support language domains. But at "cy" there were no real contributions since December, 11th and the only real contributions have been made in the first 26 hours after the creation of the subdomain. The only admin is Brion VIBBER. I don't know if he really wants to maintain the domain, but the spam on one page kept unreverted for about 3 weeks. If the contributions to "cy" don't increase, there is no reason why we should keep the multilangual part of Wikisource. The activity of "cy" could be reached by almost any language subdomain, and there would be no argument to refuse any of the requests. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:Just a small point: when comparing database size, remember that non Latin alphabet languages (i.e. Arabic, Chinese, Indian languages, etc.) use much more space (x 2 ?) than Latin alphabet languages. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:: Also, Latin alphabet languages get a much better compression rate. [[User:Bogdan|Bogdan]] 11:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, the comparison is not very precise. But "la" does use Latin alphabet (what else ;-)) and "ar" has less than 800 counted articles. So it's still remarkable. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Question ==

Hi there! I was setting up an account here to be of some help, but noticed it doesnt work for the language subdomains. Then I wonder, what is the point of starting an account here in the first place? Is the top-level just a shell for the lower levels? Why isnt it linked? I'll probably want to add stuff in English, and occasionally in Dutch; so what accounts should I create?

And, consequently, perhaps it might be worth it to streamline the accounts so that one single account works on different subdomains? Certainly it might be worth it to use signal more clearly that this ''is'' the top-level in the first place, as there is no visual difference whatsoever.

Cheers! [[en:User:The Minister of War|The Minister of War]] 12:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

:Hi,
:The old main WS is used to host documents in languages which do not have a subdomain. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 13:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

It '''is''' linked. If you check the option ''remember me'' you can use the same account and password combination on most projects. For me it works here and on most Wikipedias except English, I happen to have a different name there, bc this one was taken :(

:::I am afraid you are not right. You can use the same '''user name and password''' in every project, but unless you create an '''account''' in every project, you cannot log in. The button ''remember me'' BTW is something quite else, it makes your log in automatically every time you visit the project. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] ==
According to the page for this image, its copyright has just been released to the Wikimedia Foundation. How can we verify that WMF actually has the copyright for this work? We might need to contact someone to get this finalized. But this opens up a number of possible works for our new logo if this is the case (such as the stylized version and other derivatives of the stylized iceberg).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 04:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:The author has left the same message on his own page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kils&diff=42335724&oldid=42057043 see here]. Since he was logged in when he wrote that, I guess we have a proof that it was him and not someone else. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:: I don't believe the copyright status of the image affects any stylized versions of the image - only versions that directly use the image itself (which is currently just the current logo). The stylized versions fall under whatever license their creators grant, irrespective of how the original image is licensed as they are not derivative works in the legal sense. (Note, ianal, but that is my understanding, anyway) --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 23:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

:My understanding was that if someone stylized the iceberg logo, that would be considered a derivative work, since they're taking the iceberg as a source of ideas and expanding on it to produce something new. As such they would have to obtain permission from the current copyright holder to create a stylized version. I'm not a lawyer, either, so I may have a wrong understanding, but that was how I understood it to be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
:: I'm not sure. Taking your ideas from a source is different from using the image ''_as_'' the source. A moot point in the current situation, but I'd be interested to know what the actual legal position would be if permission had not been granted. --[[User:HappyDog|HappyDog]] 00:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

==new subdomains==

new subdomains were created :
*yi.wikisource.org
*sk.wikisource.org
*cs.wikisource.org
*ml.wikisource.org

congratulations and good luck! [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

:Thank a lot, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== References ==
Cite.php: for references in the same page. You can read more [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cite/Cite.php here]. Used at spanish wikisource [[s:es:Las mil y una noches: 2|in this article]]. --[[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 22:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== Wikisource-I mailing list ==

I've noticed that most of our sister projects have a mailing list of their own yet we do not. I was wondering what people would think of having a mailing list for us to make discussions and whatnot on. It would probably be a much better method than relying on this Scriptorium (let's be realistic: very few discussions ever happen here anymore, since many contributors do not regularly check this site)--discussions stand a much better chance of not stalling and dying. Also, it would be a way to let people see what sorts of things are going on at WS. What are your thoughts?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:I support a mailing list. Previously, you, I, and other administrators could oversee all pages, so we could delete copyvios in any languages, but as more language subdomains break away from this multilingual site, a mailing list becomes even more important to co-ordinate things at Wikisource subdomains.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

::I agree. would be useful. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 20:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

:::support from me, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

:The list has been created. For those interested, subscription information can be found [http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l here].—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 18:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

:: For those who may be interested in subscribing, the first mailing list discussion to begin concerns the creation of a Wikisource <big><</big>format<big>></big>-to-wikimarkup conversion script (see the [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-April/thread.html archives]). // [[User:Pathoschild|Pathoschild]] 13:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Lets try and advertise this in the subdomains too. I put a message in the Spanish Cafe. Anyone that can translate various languages, please advertise this to people at those subdomains too. --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 18:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

==Policy pages==
Since this wiki is still active, I think it would be good to add some documentation to it and give it a bit of a backbone. Recently, on the English sub-domain, we've written a lot of policies, and I think a few would be beneficial here. I think we should definitely port over [[s:en:WS:WWI|the inclusion policy]] once it's been established and [[s:en:WS:DP|the deletion policy]] at the least so that we can have some official documents to point to should people ask.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 20:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

::Zhaladshar!!!!!!! Yes!!!!! First, I miss such pages here. Secondly, I think in the process of creating new language Wikisources they would be very usefull for the new ones. Now i mus search in all projects to find something on deletion, on blocking, is a xx.wikisource more close to xx.wikipedia or to wikisource.org, on copyright (in fact, there are some serious differences between the page here and the page on the en.wikisource) etc. I think we need it. Urgently. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::Agreed. The great work done on en.ws would be beneficial here. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 15:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:I'm hoping to porting over deletion, copyright, inclusion, administrator, and blocking policies to begin with. We can change them as we need to fit this sub-domain, and it would allow us to have an actual, hard copy policy to point to and allow newer sub-domains to have an established document to refer to/translate and adopt on their own project. That way, some of the growing pains can be avoided.

:I'll also revamp many of the pages in our "Wikisource:" namespace which are so out of date that it's embarrassing. Once school lets out, I can dedicate much more time to this project. But I expect to have policies over here by the end of the week.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::OK. I am not like to promise I will help by writing some pages on this – 1. my english is ok but other speak better, 2. some of you are longer time here as me so you can judge the questions better, 3. I still have much to do with the new cs.wikisource. But if there is something I could help so i will do so. As fitst I would like to mention that there are some differences on the use of the fair use licence:
::* [[Wikisource:Copyright]] – probably limited
::* [[:s:en:Help:Copyright and Wikisource]] - ???
::* [[:en:Wikisource:Wikisource:Copyright]] explicitly prohibited on Wikisource.
::So, what with fair use??? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Fair use doesn't make sense here, as it usually means "part of a work" included in other related document, but we want to publish whole works independently. The exception may be book covers or photos of the author. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 18:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
::::Yes, one of the things the copyright policy will formalize is that (1) ''all texts'' must be public domain, GFDL, or GFDL-compatible. WS has been lax on this and it caused us some frustration and problems a little while ago; (2) it will prohibit fair use (I prefer in its entirety, but at least no fair use texts) to an extent we can decide upon later. For a site like WS, copyright should have been the first thing we nailed down, but it's pretty much turned into the very last thing. Ironic...—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::I support disallowing fair use that will not fit here. Is there any draft policy here to disallow non-commercial licenses as well? Fair use and non-commercial licenses are now disallowed at English Wikisource, but this policy has not been uniformly enforced at other subdomains, including Chinese Wikisource.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 17:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Copyright policy? Delete all Creative Commons works? ===
I recently wrote '''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000018.html a very long email to wikisource-l]''' to express desire for establishing consistency across subdomains: "Currently it seems that some licenses are valid on some subdomains but not others. (English Wikisource) requires all content to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License. However, maybe some other language subdomains do not have this policy?" In the same email, I went to explain that CC-BY and CC-BY-SA are free but not compatible with the GFDL.

'''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikisource-l/2006-May/000019.html The first reply]''' was from Erik Moeller (Eloquence), who wrote: "Wikisource should instead follow similar principles as the Wikimedia Commons and allow any free content license to be used for added works." That said, I thought that someone high up in Wikimedia said that we must have GFDL-compatibility, which implies that Creative Commons works must leave Wikisource? --[[User:Kernigh|Kernigh]] 19:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

== Putting Hindi sources and Scriptorium out of Wikisource? ==

Isn't it time to move Hindi pages out of the main domain?
Almost all pages found by "random page" in the main domain are in Hindi (and their number growing), and this does not help looking for other sources in more rare languages. Additionally the Hindi script URLs are much harder to work with, and the community Scriptorium gets in fact "polluted" by the inability to locate appropriate categories.

Most of the Scriptorium should also go to Meta-Wiki as it is already cross-project, and contains much more tools and management templates or help pages already written there for specific languages.

The main Wikisource sites hould just include the multilingual portal, and the initial sections for rare languages, properly organized into language categories, for easier transfer to another domain later when this content becomes significant. To ease this transition, a minimum set of international common (meta-)pages and templates should be created that will be transfered to the new domain translated later with the articles.

So the main wikisource should remain small and manageable.
(note that new domain names could be created early as equivalents to the main site. This would make interwikis to Wikisource already working for those languages that still have not been transfered into a separate database.) 20:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
:Hi,
:I did most of the work regarding Hindi and Sanskrit here. And most of the pages are Sanskrit, not Hindi. I am totally against separating languages unless there is a significant community to support a subdomain. In cases of Hindi and Sanskrit, I doubt that such a community exists, seeing the edits made upto now, and the number of editors on corresponding Wikipedia languages. And please, logging in and sign your comments. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 20:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
::Agreed with Yann. Unless there are a number of people who are willing to start up a new language Wikisource, a sub-domain should not be made.

::The Scriptorium is not a place to locate language categories (I'm assuming you mean here to locate works written in a particular language). This is to discuss local issues on this wiki is sometimes used to coordinate between the different languages.

::The current wiki is small and scaleable, and should remain entirely open for works of a particular language which will likely never get its own sub-domain. I see no reason why any of this should be ported over to Meta.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with this anonymous contributor that moving these pages out to a subdomain would clarify the situation here... [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 08:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't see a Hindi sub-domain as a project that will be all that active. It seems to be the case that inactive projects collect more vandalism than anything else. I seems safer to keep them here where a number of people watch the project than to move it to a new domain which might only be frequented by a very few people and only at irregular intervals. I would love to see a Hindi sub-domain, don't get me wrong, but I believe there should be support from people who will be active for it.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

:sure. all I wanted to say is that there would be advantages to it. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 21:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

==languages main pages==

For those wikis that do not have a subdomain, I would like to proceed with a reorganization.
Currently we have a [[:Category:Main Pages|set of main pages]] for each languages, and a [[:Category:Languages|set of categories]].
This has two drawbacks :
# it is redundant.
# it is difficult to locate a document, or to access the list, for someone who does not understand a language.
Since the number of pages in languages that are here is in general small,
it would be possible to have the whole list of texts directly on their corresponding main page.
So, I propose to use the category pages as the main pages. That is, move the content of each
main page to the corresponding category page, where it would be used as a header.
It would make it more direct to access the list of pages written in a given language.
What do you guys think?
[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
:It is good, but someone must be able to identify which language an article belongs to.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 15:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

:ok, I am starting to move a few of those, and to have a unified design.[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

== Change Logos to SVG-Version ==

Hi there! There are SVG-Versions available for [[:Image:Wikimedia without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Wikibooks without text-35px.png]], [[:Image:Commons without text-35px.png]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote without text-35px.png]]. Would be lovely if one of the admins could change those images in [[Template:Sisterprojects No Text]] and [[Main Page]]. The new logos are [[:Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Wikibooks-logo.svg]], [[:Image:Commons-logo.svg]] and [[:Image:Wikiquote-logo.svg]]. Thank you very much! Regards, [[User:217.225.124.149|217.225.124.149]] 20:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't get what the big deal about the SVG versions are. What's wrong with the PNG ones?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:I think that there may be some browsers/systems which do not support SVG, so I would not change the logos. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Browsers without SVG support should not be a problem. The MediaWiki software should render the images as PNG. I know that there was a problem with transparency in PNG, but was not that fixed? I think the advantage of SVG is that scaled versions of scalable SVG graphics are more accurate than scaled verions of portable PNG graphics. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 15:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

== Important change in the policy of de.wikisource ==

At de.wikisource there is a majority of those, who don't want to have texts without source or texts copied from other websites any longer (see [[s:de:Wikisource:Skriptorium#Texte_ohne_Quellen_oder_aus_dem_Internet|here]]). So, if you contributed German texts in the last years, I strongly encourage you to add your source to the text. If you cannot do this or if you copied the text from another website and you want to keep your wikified version of it, then now is the right time to copy your text from de and to transfer ist elsewhere. It most likely will be deleted at de. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

:Why does the German Wikisource want to delete web sources? Does this mean that if a text (such as Kafka's ''The Metamorphosis'' were copied to de.wikisource from a website it will be deleted simply because it's an internet source?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::Yes, I really do not understand what de.wikisource wants to do. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:I can agree that the purpose of Wikisource is not to be a copy of Project good mountain or any other website. But works copied from other sites on the web can still be useful on Wikisource. So I see no reason to delete those works or to forbid copying more works. [[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 14:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

If you forbid copying works from websites, the number of works the German Wikisource has will become virtually nil. How many people have access to old books and decent OCR material that they can scan in works and edit them? Such a process is extremely time consuming--just as much as transcribing them would be. I'm hoping that we are just not understanding what is happening (maybe they are forbidding a certain kind of web document?) and it's not an all out ban on web sources.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 19:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

:At de.wikisource there are some projects that OCR works and edit them. And that is nice. But in fact you did understand correctly what is happening: Most likely anything else shall be deleted. Certainly that means, that thousands of pages will be deleted. In fact the whole process of transfering the texts from multilangual wikisource to de was unnecessary: Almost everything of those texts have no source or are copied from other websites. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 23:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::I'm curious as to what is causing this change. How and why was this decided upon? It is an extremely dramatic change in policy, and I wonder about the ramifications. The biggest I'm concerned about (it's the only one I can think of right now; I'm sure I can come up with more later) is that user involvement in de.wikisource will drop dramatically. If all web-based contributions are excluded, most people who do not have decent OCR software or the rare books will be turned off of the project, because they've got no opportunity to be involved. Sure, some will stay, because they've got the required tools to allow them to be useful, but what about the newbies? Saying to them, "Oh, I'm sorry. We do not accept what you are uploading to our project. Please do not continue to add those works" would not put de.wikisource in a very good light and will cause growth in that project to all but halt. This is the reverse direction of what any Wikimedia project should want.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 00:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that it is entirely contrary with the rules of wikisource. For me, it is a nonsense. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:apparently this policy was "decided" in order to ensure quality of their texts. For that they proposed to remove all texts for which the source is unknown. In addition, some people proposed to remove texts that exist already elsewhere on the internet. I did not really understand the reason for that latter decision. I think that such a policy would terribly harm de.wikisource. I wonder if we can/should oppose that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC) PS: why is the logo at de.wikisource different from other sites?

::I'm a fan of opposing it. It goes entirely against the whole purpose of WS, and I imagine if this gets executed, there will be some bad light shone on Wikisource. I'm not against removing texts whose source is unknown. Many other sister projects have similar policies. But to ''entirely remove '''all''''' texts that exist elsewhere on the web will hamstring the project. What about texts which a person scans in, but exist on a website somewhere? Are those not accepted?

::To remove all web-based works completely overlooks the benefits that WS can give those texts. Sure, they exist on Gutenberg or Bartleby, but we can interlink them, add multimedia content (if it exists), and many other things which give those works value no other website has given it. I would rather not see this policy happen.

::Was this policy ever voted upon? How many people supported it? Is there any course of action that can keep such a detrimental policy from taking effect?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 16:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Sorry, i am a bit short of time and then when I have it I try do to something on cs.source... So it is the first time i hear about this nonsence. Sure, it must be clear that a text or a document from some webpages is free licensed and OK, but not this! If there is any chance to oppose it i support it. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Its not correct, what jofi here has written. Nobody wants delete tomorow thousands of pages in de-Wikisource. We are in a discussion process which sense have textes without any sources and which sense makes it to copy textes from any webpages to wikisource. And we have duscussed some solutions for it. Yes the radical solution is to delete all these textes and search original sources, like first editions or other historical important editions o a text. Another solution is, to find to all texts (you can imagine what work this is) a source (see above) and to compare these editions with the text in Wikisource. And also other solutions are discussed. But to say its clear the most active editors wants sometimes only texts with clear and good source in de-Wikisource. And copy&paste from any webpages is not good to reach this target.

That we want remove all Texts is not true, this is one of possible Solutions. And when we should delete these text, we want these texts back, based on clear sources and with high scientific Level. Short abstract: what jofi here says is not true an he is making panic without an base. Greetings --[[User:213.54.67.220|213.54.67.220]] 21:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC) [[s:de:Benutzer:Finanzer]]

Agree with Finanzer s:de:Benutzer:FrobenChristoph --[[User:84.60.205.115|84.60.205.115]] 22:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It seems that the positions in the discussion are not as radical as it first seemed to me. But nevertheless I still encourage all people who added German texts to add their source to it. In my opinion it is still clear, that there is a majority supporting the deletion of some of the texts that have been added in the last years, if they don't fullfill some quality criterias. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* I think it is a good goal to be '''source''' for quality high level textes. One of criteria for a good text is to know where ist does come from. To achive this, there is a need for information about the source. There is no need for another haystack of nonvalidated information called ws. I think it is usefull to bring the ws to a higher level of quality, by retrieving these informations. If a text is nearly unavailable, it may be really usefull to keep it and state clearly that the source information is missing and searched for. If a text has an high availability in the net, there is no need to keep it without the source information, the best solution is to find the missing information and to add it, or as a last step delete it. To be just another mirror of low quality information may be the goal of other projects not of ws. sincerly --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 08:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I fully agree that texts should be sourced whenever possible. I am currently doing just that on fr.wikisource. However deleting a text already copied seems a solution a bit extrem to me. The source and validation can be added later. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 08:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
* Is there any sense in a text, that is copied from somewhere in the net, wihout a source. Is it the full text, or is it an edited version. Which is the right bible (that has nothing to do with religion here, it is just a well known big example)? The Roman Catholic version, the Martin Luther version, the protestant version, the Anglican version.... When one of this chosen, for example catholic. The next question is before or after the 2. vatican synod. These are all bibles with a ''slightly'' differennt content. Hopefully you see without the citation of the source - where does it come from - the text is absolut useless. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 09:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::Well, I will take another example. Say that somebody copied a text from a another website without giving the source (or not), for example a text of Goethe. If the orther site doesn't give itself the source, what would you do? The text should be verified with a paper version, but that will take time if it's a big work. Deleting the text doesn't improve the situation. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 10:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::I fully agree that ''not only the licence but also the source'' must be clear. We need a high level quality. I am just hardly working to change it on cs.source. But the fact a document comes from internet can not be the criterium! In this case, what shall you do with the most old lithurgical texts and the most juristic ones? They are all PD, and i do not think, that somebody will scan or retype them, when you can find all on internet. Therefore if the first reports here are not true, it would be good, but probably there is a need of discussion on some principles like licence in wikisource etc. Zhaladzhar wanted to prepare something, i think. And i suggest, that such serious policies would be discussed also in other Wikisources as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

* The criteria isn´t it comes from the internet. The criteria is the source is missing. If someone does the work do digitise a book, he mormally has the source und will tell it. Most of the problems come from
:*"I found the book in the internet, it´s interessting, lets copy it to ws". This internet page dosn´t has any source information, so why should i provide one. "I´m a real big guy by copying this big book." .
:*Oh a real nice poem, i like it. Who is the author, I don´t know. Is it free, I don´t know. But there is a webspace container called ws, lets copy it. What´s about URV without a source?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

@yann It must be verified. Mayby it is reprint with some amendments and a foreword. Are these copied wiht the text. If yes are the amendments and the foreword free or is it a URV because of the add ons. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Joergens.mi, I understand what you mean. And I also have some texts on cs.source where I have to do something - as I said, the source is in my eyes as important as the licence. But: If somebody copied the Grundgesetz or the Declaration of the USA onto your de.wikisource without given the source so it is no reason to delete it. Both text are undoubtly PD, I must just compare it with a source and if it is the same, so I have the source or i copy it one time more if there are difference in the text. But this can be done later. In such cases I use a special template saying we know about the problem and we shall solve it. (And I think an URL is sifficient source in cases of some juristic sites which offer laws etc.). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 10:38, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@-jkb- What you said is ok, such an url may be an good entry to the source definition. but the problem ist in a lot of cases even this start is missing. Look here: http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Der_Geier and these things are the problems. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 11:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, Der Geier... Sure, i know it, too, and you can see many texts like this also in Wikipedias... Here it is no great problem - everything is missing: no licence, no source, no author, no wiki to an article with explanation what it is etc. Either, I would try to find something by myself if I think it is important, or I would suggest to delete it indeed. In this case. But not if it were a law where I know at least, it is PD and i can use it for an article in Wikipedia. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::* This are the things (Der Geier) we are talking about, nothing else. To make a usefull cleanup, by searching for articles of this type, and put them on a good base. If this is not possible, then and only then a deletion is intended. This is all we are argueing about at de.WS and we are at the beginning of that process not at the end. Even with the laws youre a talking about some information will be usefull, because there are changes from time to time, therefore the year of the issue or the version should be mentioned. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 13:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::This isn't nearly as drastic as it sounded at first glance (phew!). I actually think this is a noble effort. All texts should be sourced (author information, edition--make it as fleshed as possible) in order to help give WS a high quality of source texts and to make us more than just a copy and paste website.

:::However, I would like to suggest instead of mass deletion of unsourced texts, you simply place a template on the text like <nowiki>{{unsourced}}</nowiki> (or whatever the word would be in German). That way, editors who want to do a little bit of house cleaning will know that there are some texts that need to be worked on to be considered appropriate for WS. But just because there is no source right now does not mean the work should be deleted anytime soon. Each deletion need to be specific to the text in question--maybe one text is a very rare one (maybe a very old manuscript) that doesn't ''have'' any (or much) source information, and such information is quite hard to find. It should be kept, due to its nature, even though it doesn't have the requisite information on it. Of course, for more common texts, the source information won't be hard to find at all.

:::I think of unsourced texts as analogous to Wikipedia's "stub article." Unsourced texts are by no means complete, but deleting them is unwise as it prohibits further growth of that text. Just as a good Wikipedia article (in general) won't be written over night, nor should we expect a good source text to be so easy to add that we can add ''everything'' in one go. Sometimes searching will be necessary, sometimes it won't be fruitful at all, but if you keep it, you will allow others to also check that work, and maybe something will happen many months/years down the future.

:::-jkb-: I'll eventually get those documents over here. en.wikisource has been keeping me busy lately, and many of the policies I want to bring over have been getting changed slightly here and there. I want to bring a static text, not one that is getting changed every few weeks. I should be able to get them over here within a short time, though.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Don't hurry be happy (or was it don't worry be happy???), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:We don´t hurry. I think we have statet clearly our intention. We are at the moment at the '''beginning'' of an discussion process how to improve the quality not at the end. The result will be some rules, how to proceed. --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 18:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

== Logo update ==

After one admin on the german wikisource had unilaterally changed the logo to a self made version but - rightly complained - that the old wikisource logo didn't even contain the project name, Zanimum was so friendly to create a clean redraw of the iceberg together with the project name and formally hand over the copyright to the Wikimedia Foundation. A version suitable for use as logo can be found [http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Bild:Wiki.png here], bigger versions are uploaded on commons: [[:Image:Wikisource-newberg-de.png|Wikisource-newberg-de.png]] and [[:Image:Wikisource-nt.png]], EPS versions are available from Zanimum. It would be nice if the local project admins could update it. greetings,--[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]
:I like this versoin alot. Can we try to achieve consensus to adopt this without a full contest? It is not very different from our current design and it appears that de.wikisource.org already has consensus on it. However I cannot read German, that needs to be confirmed.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
::I don't know if there ever was a bigger discussion on this topic. The temporary logo at DE was supported by 3 people and opposed by none. The replace of the old logo was earlier supported by about 3 people and opposed by none. The "new" logo was already used at some Wikimedia pages as far as I know. The community at DE is not that big and most of them don't seem to be interested in a logo discussion that much. If nobody complains about the new logo, this can be called a consensus. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 00:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:it will not help wikisource if each subdomains starts to have its own logo. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:These methods are not really adapted. The logo concerns all subdomains of wikisource, and must be voted by all and not by only one . [[User:Marc|Marc]] 07:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::Please have a look at it. Actually it ''is'' the old iceberg logo. Just in a clean redrawn version. To date all subdomains – also the german – use the same logo. The subdomains never used the same ''file''. And I agree to BirgitteSB: I also like the discussed version very much. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 07:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::No :
::This is not the official logo ;
::there was no vote. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 08:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::The well-known iceberg is not the official logo? *puzzled* By the way: Do you actually know whether the file [[:Image:Wikisource-logo.jpg]] (on [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikisource Commons]: "Original photo") is protected by trademark? --

On these page, you can see the exact form of the official logo : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo

if you want to change it, you could have the courtesy to make a vote. [[Benutzer:Marc|Marc]] 08:27, 22. Mai 2006 (UTC)

:The Wikisource iceberg is a nice logo. I don't want to change it. --[[User:Frank Schulenburg|Frank Schulenburg]] 09:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

There must be a vote in order to change the logo. In the meantime, I ask the german admins to revert back to the official logo. Those who want to change the logo should take part in the discussion [[Wikisource_talk:New_Wikisource_logo|here]] instead of taking unilateral actions. I wrote there that I am willing to organize a vote '''if''' the logo proposals are made before the vote, not during the vote. The reason is that I find it tricky to organize a vote when the set of options is not known. So far I received very little feedback on that. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 09:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I also agree that there must be a vote before the official loge is changed. But secondly, It is not OK when somebody starts to change the logos in different Wikipedias - Zanimum did so at least twice in cs.wiki wothout consulting the people there. Next time we need a lear vote. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

So far all the votes held about logos on wikisource yielded no results. On the other hand, there are several problems with the picture used as logo now:
* copyright was never transfered to the Wikimedia Foundation, instead it was published under GFDL (this goes against our logo policy)
* the image is a bitmap and as such not suitable for print in large versions.
* it doesn't contain the project name
The new variant (it's not a totally different logo for which - I agree - a vote or a contest would be necessary) was created to solve these problems. As the designer of the promotion materials for the Wikimedia Foundation I was very happy that Zanimum provided this printable version. If you're not happy with this logo at all, you're free to organize a contest in the community and select another logo which also fullfills these conditions (copyright wikimedia, vector version, including project name), but the current thing confronts the wikimedia foundation and the promotion department with so many problems that it should be changed, now when there's finally a variant which solves these problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

:::Elian, i do not say if I am happy with the logo or not, i even do not say if I am happy with the old one. But a logo is central for an identification. not only here, also on Wikipedias, Wikcionaries etc. If every server would start to make an own logo, it would be awful. And, these logos are to be found enywhere on main pages where there is an redirect to other projects. So, we nee it to be unified, somehow. And secondly, as i said above, every project can decide what it shall do. It is not possible, that somebody change the logo and then he changes it in other projects. Really, I do not argue against the new image. But agains the way it has been done. OK? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:I agree with the unification, and the new version of the logo should be used on all wikisource projects without delay. Of course if people are unhappy with the logo, then as always, we should be open to a discussion of positive change, including a logo contest if that is warranted. The idea that logos have to be voted on is just mistaken, though.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 13:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Well, it is for me good to hear here that we should unificate the logo (in the mean time there are some dozens of wikipedias and wikisources on the internet, and therefore we must show who we are). Just to explain the other point, ''to vote or not to vote'' (existentially not as bad as ''to be or not to be'' :-)): sure, i know the rule ''Voting is evil'' or so, but here in Wikisource we have some three hundreds of logos and since about 6 months we are preparing a voting (that never took part... I know). So we must now find a way to make all happy or "half happy" at least. But first condition indeed: all Wikisources of this Wikimedia project shoud have the same logo. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:Since the logo finding process lasts for almost 2 years and nobody knows when it ends, and because the current logo not even contains the name of the project, I would like to start a short vote to add "Wikisource" to the logo. I think this is absolutely necessary because otherwise people can't see where they are. I think it is no big deal to make such a change. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 16:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::it should be no big deal, right. And it was done already in a professional way. You're welcome to organize a new logo contest, but for the time being, I think the logo should just be changed to the one with project name. This gives us enough leeway to look for a new good logo while we're free of the problems of the old logo. --[[User:84.153.74.172|84.153.74.172]] 16:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

:::@ Jofi: Well, sure, this would be necessay. The only one problem is: some Wikisources do not call themselves Wikisource but the use this expression in their language or even they have something different. What shall we do with it?? Otherwise support for Jofi. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

::::They could adapt the image to add their text, as it is done in other Wikimedia project.
I know added this: [[Image:Sourceberg-text.png]]

It is the same image as in the current logo, only the text "Wikisource" is added. Absolutely irrespective of the logo discussion I would like to have it used instead of the current one. I support replacing it by a better logo. --[[User:Jofi|Jofi]] 21:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
:::::sorry Jofi, this solves the problem with the missing name, but it doesn't solve the copyright problems and the printing problems. --[[:Wikimedia:User:Elian|Elian]]

::::::Elian I thought the copyrights had been transfered to WMF already. If they have not been then neither the current iceberg or the one Zanimum redrew would be acceptable, since the latter is a derivation of the former.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 21:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:::::::Maybe this has been said before. The current logo is licensed under the GFDL, transferring the copyright will not change that. But the copyright holder can authorise derivative works that are not GFDL-licensed. So if Zanimum got permission, he did not have to license his derivation under GFDL. So if everthing was done correctly that version is still acceptable as a logo. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 22:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

* It´s a real curiosity.
:*There are several projekts (wikibooks) which added text to their logos, without any discussion.
:*Just such a text addition at de.WS gives a big discussion.
:*Some people defines a new logo. (personnally I don´t like it, but that doesn´t matters)
:*Other say it schould be adapted immediatily.
*But here the old logo is still the logo, why hasn´t it changed here (as a good example) to the new form?
--[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 10:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

:following the above diktat by Jimbo Wales I uploaded [[:Image:Wiki.png]]. I guess some developer has to set it up as logo now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Wouldn't it be better if the words ''Wikisource'' were included in the image, not out of it ? Is it too late to do that ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 08:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
.

Something like this :

[[Image:Wiki2essai.png|Word Wikisource inside logo]]

:These images are all fairly ugly. If we're going to keep the iceberg logo, I'd prefer Zanimum's stylized version, or the version the English WS uses for its [[s:en:WS:NEWS|news]] page. I believe that Uwe Kils has given copyright of the current logo to the WMF, however.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:I too prefer the version on the news page; the colors are better, and the shape has more style. but I do not think that we have the power to change a decision that comes from above us. Anyway, I am happy that we will not have to organize a vote, thanks to jimbo [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 14:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::I like Kcyclopedists' logo for WikisourceNews too. Could he make another one for Wikisource without news ? Can you do that, Kcyclopedist ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 05:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

* I prefer the version on the news page,too. I don´t think it´s a goot idea to put wikisource in the center of the Logo. if you look at most of the examples, putting the text above or below is much smarter [[Image:89px-WikisourceNews.png|left|Wiki News logo]] --[[User:Joergens.mi|Joergens.mi]] 15:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Yes. Not in the middle. First, some ones use the logo for other purposes too, where it could be disturbing. Secondly, I would suggest, we should have two sorts of an official logo: one with and one without the text (say for those Wikisources who would want to make another text). [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 16:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
:ThomasV: What decision is being made above our heads?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 02:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

::Z: I was referring to the request by Jimbo. Anyway, I am quite happy that the issue is solved now. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 06:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:I don't think I quite understood what Jimbo was saying. Is he saying we can all choose our own logo?—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:::In contrary, he said he agrees with my suggestion to unificate all daomains, i.e. one logo for all wikisources. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 14:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

== Languages and categories==
Some times I have some problems with the language of a text – I simply do not know: is it a document or is it some sort of vandalism?? The last exmple is [[Ein Tad]]. Undoubtly, it could be a language. In times the Czech Wikisource was here I started to use a category ''Czech'' (or ''Česky'') for all pages as a main category, other categories were subcategories of this one. By the way, in the moment you decide to create a new domain, you have an advantage when moving your wikisource to the new one: a developer must have a look in this category and move everything he finds. I would suggest the same for all languages here, maybe this category should be in English (it is also possible to use the abbreviations like de, en, mt etc); and more over there could be a notice in the edit window, something like do not forget to give here your language code / category... [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:Most [[:Category:Languages|language categories]] here use the local name of the language. I think that makes sense, since persons looking for texts in a language will probably know at least so much of that language that they know the local name of that language.
:[[Ein Tad]] can be deleted here since it is already present att the welsh subdomain.--[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 09:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
::Done for [[Ein Tad]]. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 14:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

== Ported over some policies from en.wikisource ==
Okay, I'm making good on my promise. I've now brought over an inclusion policy and a copyright policy. They can be located here:
*[[Wikisource:What Wikisource includes]]
*[[Wikisource:Copyright policy]]

I've made almost no changes to it (meaning non-existent templates are dead, many shortcut links are dead, etc.). I didn't want to make any changes until I brought it up here (maybe we will bring over the templates from en.ws, maybe get rid of them--it's all up to discussion). Read it, and say what you like, dislike, what should be changed (whether it relates to actual policy or presentation), or make the changes yourself.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 23:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

:I support both policies to be applied here based on English Wikisource. There are several works here with non-commercial licenses that will have to go. Based on [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2006-February/006015.html], it seems that Angela has suggested that non-commercial licenses are to be disallowed at all Wikisource sites. When we have the policy officialized, I will nominate articles with non-commercial licenses for deletion.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 14:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

::I think I have to read it once more but now I can say I'm like to support it (hmm, and then to translate it for cs.source... good job), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
:I'll begin working with these to make them more Wikisource-general instead of English specific. That way, the transition to using them on other WS (should that happen) will be easier to do.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

::BTW, what shall happen with the old draft [[Wikisource:Copyright]] which is still here? We should not have two different pages on copyright :-), [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 09:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
:::Because the page was so out of date, we blanked it and redirected it to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]], which encompassed some elements from [[Wikisource:Copyright]] and many new elements which reflected better what a good copyright policy should be.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 14:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
::::The old draft of [[Wikisource:Copyright]] is still there as of this writing of mine.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 04:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
:::On en.wikisource? It's a redirect over there. Here, it should probably be redirect to remove mention of fair use.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::::No, not at en.wikisource but at this multilingual site.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
:I have redirected [[Wikisource:Copyright]] to [[Wikisource:Copyright policy]] and moved the talk page, but I have not merged the history of two project pages.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 03:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

==Copyright question==
I'm thinking of ading portions or all of the [[w:AASHO|AASHO]] 1927 list of [[w:United States Numbered Highways|United States Numbered Highways]] - an excerpt is [http://www.us-highways.com/2766lst.jpg here]. What if anything of this is copyrightable? Would I have to condense it into a simple list of cities, or would even that not be OK?

Background: the list was compiled by AASHO, a private organization forwed of members from all state highway departments. The individual towns listed along the route were chosen by AASHO, and a relocation away from one required AASHO approval. It was copyrighted and the copyright (at least for the 1929 edition) has been [http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~lesk/copyrenew.html renewed]:
:CLNA: AMERICAN ASSN. OF STATE HIGHWAY OFFICIALS.
:TITL: United States numbered highways, by W. C. Markham.
:ODAT: 19Aug29; AA23426 RREG: American Assn. of State Highway Officials ; 24Jul57; R196400.
Hmmm... that also means that the 1927 edition (which has no mention of a "W. C. Markham") was not renewed, and so should be OK. I'm also interested in the bigger question though. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] 00:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

:If there is no copyright and if the text is only English you should put it at [[:en:s:Main Page|English Wikisource]]. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 08:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

== new subdomains==

the following subdomains have been created:

* http://ang.wikisource.org/
* http://az.wikisource.org/
* http://bg.wikisource.org/
* http://bs.wikisource.org/
* http://ca.wikisource.org/
* http://et.wikisource.org/
* http://fi.wikisource.org/
* http://fo.wikisource.org/
* http://ht.wikisource.org/
* http://hu.wikisource.org/
* http://kn.wikisource.org/
* http://lt.wikisource.org/
* http://no.wikisource.org/
* http://sl.wikisource.org/
* http://te.wikisource.org/
* http://th.wikisource.org/
* http://uk.wikisource.org/
* http://vi.wikisource.org/
* http://zh-min-nan.wikisource.org/

I would like to ask those who use these subdomains to move content from here to there.
In addition, pages have to be deleted on this site; otherwise there will be duplicate copies and chaos.
For that reason, it would be great to have one person in charge per subdomain, who blanks the pages
that have been moved, so that I can later delete them.

To do that, please replace the text on the pages that were moved with "<nowiki>[[Category:Moved to xx]]</nowiki>",
where "xx" is the name of the subdomain the pages were moved to.

[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
:Also, remember, if you want to keep the page histories, ask a developer (probably Brion) to do the page transfers.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 15:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
::Please remember to check the copyright status of moved articles as well.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] 06:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Why not not to transfer the pages from here to the new domains by transwiki? It has been activated, I made one or two trials today from cs.wiki to cs.source, and it it fully OK incl. the history. Sure, it must bve activated for each subdomain, i.e. somebody must get the access, and he must get also the access for transfers from here (normally, it is activated only for transfers from xx.wiki to ss.xource). But it should not be a problem, and we must then find a list here, what can be deleted. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 22:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- - - P.S. like Gububu does for the hu.source

== Creating new subdomains ==
It was requested on IRC that we clearly list approved subdomains seperately from the ongoing or inactive disscusions. Also I was told that the procedure of filing a bug to create new subdomains is not good for the developers. I am on IRC regularly and can make direct requests to them if someone will leave a message on my talk page at [[:en:User talk:BirgitteSB]]. I looked at [[Wikisource:Language domain requests]] and I think we could make a seperate section for approved domains and move the disscusions to it as they gain consensus. Does anyone else have ideas on how to make the page clearer? --[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 23:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

== Sysop for a while ==

Hi, some time ago a made a proposal in meta - [[:m:Meta:Babel#Sysop for a while]] -, and today a tzried to start a new discussion on this topic. Everybody who would like to say something to it, please go there and make it. Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 15:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

== Side-by-side alignment tags for translations? ==

Hi, all, I'm relatively new, so forgive me if this isn't the right forum for asking this question.

I've been transcribing some old texts onto the Latin and French wikisources, and then adding my translations at the English wikisource. Someone very nice at the Latin Wikisource started adding mysterious tags to my contributions, such as

<pre>
[[la:Confessio philosophi]]
{{interwiki-info|la|(vo)}}
</pre>

which [[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] explained gives a side-by-side view of the original and translated texts. So cool!

I'm wondering, though, whether it's possible to introduce matching tags into the two texts to help them align better. It might be helpful for students if they could see paragraphs of the original and translated texts ''exactly'' opposite to one another. A good test case would be the dialog [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]]. Thanks for your help! :) [[User:WillowW|WillowW]] 08:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
:Hi Willow,
:For that, you need that the div class=text to be exactly at the same place on both documents, and of course, the paragraphs should match each other. Regards, [[User:Yann|Yann]] 09:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, [[User:Yann|Yann]], thanks for the suggestions! I added the <pre><div class=text></pre> at the beginning and <pre></div></pre> at the end of the text that should be aligned in both dialogs, but that doesn't seem to have helped. The paragraphs still don't line up in the two-column format; the text gradually gets out of sync starting from the beginning until the end, where there are huge gaps. The paragraph boundaries (2 carriage returns) in the two texts seem to be identical, although the lengths of each paragraph might differ somewhat. Could someone please look at the dialogs and see whether I'm doing something wrong? I really would like to have the dialog lines match up. Once we get these dialogs to work, I'll copy the solution over to my other translations. Thanks for all your trouble! :) [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 19:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. Am I allowed to make a user page here? I was going to, but it seemed to suggest that I shouldn't if I already have a page at other wikisources, which I do (en,fr,la,de). Thanks for any tips for a hopeless new-b! ;)

:Willow, look at it now. I've tweaked the Latin side a bit and now it all meets up. It seems that you have to manually add line breaks (I'm initially thinking that the header templates are screwing things up). I need to look more into it, though. (Oh, and you can go ahead and create a user space--this is a fully operational wiki).—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 22:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much, [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]], for looking into it and trying to get it to work! Unfortunately, it still doesn't work for me; the two columns start off OK but get out of sync after a short while and get really bad at the end. :( Interestingly, going to the double-column format from the Latin side seems to give a slightly better alignment than going from the English page. I tried it in two different browsers (Mozilla and Firefox). The hermit-devil dialog near the end has single linespaces between the paragraphs; perhaps that might throw it off? I'm totally willing to go through the text, though, and put tags in if they'll help it align better. I appreciate all your help! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 00:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

:I am the ''"Someone"'' that add the interwikilink on '''en:''' but I was not logged in... :)
:I see that [[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] insert in the [[la:Formula:Titulus2|Template:Titulus2]] '''<nowiki> </nowiki>'''
:Can you explane me how work this? I'm not an expert with the tags.
:Thank you very much!
:Please, make attention when you modify this template because is used by quite all the text in la.wikisource.
:Hi! --[[User:Francesco Gabrielli|Francesco Gabrielli]] 09:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

::I have had the same problem at the same time. Here is another page which seems to have solved the problem : 
::I don't know why it works with Epictete and doesn't work with Horace, Epictete hadn't suppressed the title templates though. 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Manuel?match=el Epictete] 
::[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.3_-_Au_vaisseau_qui_portait_Virgile_en_Attique?match=la Horace] 
::--[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 09:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
==Side by side alignment (continued) : main pages same problem ?==
[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page?match=fr Another gap here]. Is there some 'div' that we ought to use to correct this gap, and would it be on the English page or on the French page ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 04:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

::I am the author of this very imperfect piece of software. you can use tags to align paragraphs. The help is here : [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

:::This "very imperfect piece of software" is very useful and well thought even as it is ! But you know me, Thomas, you know that I am a not very gifted beginner, do you think I would be able to better it ? Should I try some experiments myself, or should I wait for others to do it ? --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 11:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I got it to work! Check out [[s:en:Confessio philosophi]] and [[s:la:Confessio philosophi]] -- yeay, yeay, yeay! :D

:It works for me too, [http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Ode_I.1_-_%C3%80_M%C3%A9c%C3%A8ne?match=la here]. Thank you ThomasV and WillowW ! --[[User:Zephyrus|Zephyrus]] 13:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The "div class=text" tags at the beginning and end didn't help, presumably because of the different title templates on the two different Wikisources. The "title" div tags worked great, although they seem to need a forward slash at the end, e.g.,
<pre>
<div title="Beginning of text" />
</pre>
Should the [[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension|Help page]] be changed? There's no forward slash after "Wright brothers". Thanks again, [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]]! [[User:WillowW|Willow]] 11:20, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

:hey. I did not put it in the help, because I thought it was obvious : a div must always be closed. not closing divs can cause really bad things. I usually use <nowiki></div></nowiki> to close my divs, but the slash is another good way to do it. feel free to improve the help. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 11:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

::I don't think <nowiki><div/> is valid HTML, but it is cleaned up and rendered as <div></div></nowiki> by the MediaWiki software. /[[User:82.212.68.183|82.212.68.183]] 12:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Might be I did not understand it well, I am bad in programming. I wanted to install the '''bilingual feature''' in cs.source and i followed the guide in '''[[Wikisource:DoubleWiki Extension]]''', but nothing happens - no double arrows, not bilingual... Did i forget to install something esle? (I copied just the script from fr.source, that's all). Thx, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 13:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:yes you did. addLoadEvent is missing, as well as the file header. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 13:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh gosh. And where is it? addLoadEvent is there, as I can see, and what is header? And where? We are now at the point that through our extremely growth we shall override de.source and en.source very soon :-), but such marginal problems... Can you help? [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 17:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:it is not there. check carefully. [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 18:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:If you want to use addLoadEvent you need a definition of that function in your script. It should be easier to use addOnloadHook (a function that is defined by the MediaWiki software). I think the script will work if you change "addLoadEvent(BilingualLink);" into "addOnloadHook(BilingualLink);". /[[User:EnDumEn|EnDumEn]] 21:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

@ EnDumEn: thx, it works; @ ThomasV: well you were right, there was a space, but it was copy&paste from somewhere, so... anyway thx as well. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 12:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

== Spoken Wikisource ==

The German branch of Wikisource has uploaded two audio files at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spoken_Wikisource_German . If anyone would like to participate on building a library of audio files with spoken Wikisource texts under free licenses feel free to use the Commons category ''Spoken Wikisource'' and to share your thoughts on this topic with the German community at http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Gesprochene_Wikisource . Greetings from Germany! Wikisource-de-User FrobenChristoph --[[User:172.182.5.236|172.182.5.236]] 18:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
:Also, I'd like to bring to everyone's attention a site which does a similar thing: [http://www.librivox.org LibriVox.org]. All of their audio books are released immediately into the public domain. It might be worth going over and giving them a look.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 13:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

== Frisian sources ==

Now that subdomains have been created, how do I reach the pages that are in the main domain, from elsewhere? [[ws:Main Page:Frysk]] does not get me to [[Main Page:Frysk]] for some reason, but at [[s:Main Page:Frysk]] the subdomain translation kicks in. Thus, using it from a fy: wiki you end up on the non-existent fy: subdomain, without a redirect back from http://fy.wikisource.org it seems. (I can't demonstrate this here; I always held s:xx:pagename to be a switch to xx subdomain, but apparently it, now, isn't.) So how do I link the main pages of the various Frisian projects? Or should we subdomain Wikiboarne for that? [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 22:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

: <nowiki>[[oldwikisource:Foo]]</nowiki> [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 22:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. (Indeed, so much more elegant than ''ws:'', wouldn't you agree? Not to mention that "old" is a misnover, here.) 
And I see that, while the problem with things like w:fy: is that they link to the wrong computeradress, this is fixed by translating it to the correct wiki serverside on each request (the usual disadvantages), so I have the solution there as well.

My original problem is solved, then. Now I just have to find the Wikiboarne references in the Wikipedy to make them link to these fine new/old internal links. [[User:Aliter|Aliter]] 19:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

::Some links to and from Wikisource are a bit complicated and/or strange, indeed; but see my page in cs.source [[:s:cs:Nápověda:Odkazy#Odkazy v textu]] - although it is written in Czech you will understand the syntaxes for more examples. Good luck, [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] 11:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

== [[m:Wikisource]] ==

I was asked at Wikimania if I could help get the Wikisource description on Meta updated. I have failed to do this and it looks as though the projects have been moved to there own pages now. The new Wikisource page is lacking any general descriptions at the moment and I was hoping we could work on that here. Once the english desricpption is put up, it will be translated to main languages in use at Meta. So it is important that this description does not solely refelect en.WS. Also I think would be nice to really put some thought into this presentation of Wikisource. So does anyone has any thoughts on this?--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 19:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-06-16T23:13:46Z

BirgitteSB: /* new subdomains */

Wikisource:Former language domain requests

2006-06-16T22:55:46Z

BirgitteSB:

'''Language Domain Requests - Antrag für eine Sprachdomain - Solicitudes de dominios por idiomas - Richieste di domini per lingua - Taaldomeinverzoek - Requisições de domínios de idiomas - 語言子域請求 - 言語ドメインのリクエスト'''

==About this page==
<div dir="rtl">'''AR''': الرجاء إضافة أصواتكم تحت اللغة اللتي تريدون أن تصوتوا لها من خلال وضع توقيعكم و ذكر مشروع الويكي اللذين أنتم به نشطون لكي نقدر أن نحدد مدى ثقل صوتكم. التصويتات بدون تواقيع أو مراجع لا تؤخذ بالإعتبار. من خلال هذا التصويت سيمكن الحصول على عنوان انترنت منفصل عن عنوان ويكيمصدر الرئيسية للغتكم.</div>

'''BG''': Тази страница е за официални заявки на домейни на нови езици. Моля добавете своята заявка за за езиков поддомейн тук и/или вашата заявка за бюрократ. Поддомейни без кандидат(и) за бюрократ няма да се разглеждат за гласуване.

'''CA''': Aquesta pàgina és per a demanar dominis lingüístics. Si us plau, afegiu ací la vostra sol·licitud per a un nou subdomini lingüístic, i/o la vostra sol·licitud per a ser un buròcrata d'algun d'ells. En aquesta votació no es consideraran els subdominis sense candidat a buròcrata.

'''DE''': Bitte füge hier deine Bitte für eine Sprach-Subdomain hinzu, und/oder deine Bitte für eine Verwaltungstätigkeit bei einer Domain. Subdomains ohne einen Kandidaten für die Verwaltungstätigkeiten werden bei der Abstimmung nicht bedacht.

'''EL''': Παρακαλούμε προσθέστε εδώ το αίτημά σας για την υποκατηγορία της ελληνικής γλώσσας, και/ή την αίτησή σας για τη διαχείρισή μιας κατηγορίας.
Υποκατηγορίες χωρίς υπηψοψηφιότητα διαχείρισης δε θα ληφθούν υπ' όψιν για την ψηφοφορία.

'''EN''': This page is for language domain requests. Please add your request here for a language subdomain, and/or your request for bureaucratship for a domain. Subdomains with no bureaucrat candidate will not be considered for the vote. Now that the [[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language subdomains]] has concluded by allowing subdomains, the requests on this page have become official requests.

'''ES''': Por favor, agrega aquí tu solicitud de un subdominio por idioma, o tu solicitud de ser burócrata para un dominio.
Los subdominios sin un candidato a burócrata no serán admitidos para su votación.

'''ET''': Palun lisa siia oma palve eestikeelse alldomeeni jaoks ja/või palve domeeni bürokraatluse jaoks. Alldomeenid, millel puudub bürokraadikandidaat, ei lähe hääletamisele.

'''FI''': Tämä sivu on uusille domainpyynnöille. Lisää tänne kielialidomainipyyntösi, ja/tai pyyntösi byrokraatiksi domainilla. Alidomaineilla, joilla ei ole byrokraattikandidaatteja, byrokraatiksi pääsemisestä ei äänestetä. Nyt uudessa äänestyksessä kielialidomaineista on päätetty sallia alidomainit, joten tämän sivun pyynnöistä tulee virallisia pyyntöjä.

'''IT''': Per favore aggiungete qui la vostra richiesta per un sottodominio per lingua, e/o la vostra richiesta per diventare burocrati per il dominio. I sottodomini senza un candidato burocrate non saranno considerati per la votazione.

'''JA''': このページは言語サブドメインのリクエストです。ここに言語サブドメインへのリクエスト、またビューロクラット権のリクエストを追加してください。ビューロクラットの候補がいない投票は、無効です。

'''MK''': Оваа е страница за поставување на барања за домени. Ве молиме да го додадете вашето барање за под-домен на вашиот јазик, и/или вашето барање за бирократ на доменот. Под-домени без кандидат за бирократ нема да бидат земени во предвид при гласањето. Сега откако [[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|новото гласање за под-домени]] е завршено, во полза на доделување под-домени, барањата на оваа страница стануваат полноважни.

'''NL''':Voeg alsjeblieft je verzoek voor een taalsubdomein e/o verzoek om beheersrecht voor een domein hier toe. Subdomeinverzoeken zonder beheerskandididaat kunnen niet in behandeling worden genomen.

'''PL''': Prosimy o dodanie tutaj propozycji utworzenia nowych domen językowych i swoich kandydatur na biurokratę. Poddomeny bez kandydatów na biurokratów nie będą brane pod uwagę.

'''PT''': Por favor adicione sua requisição para um domínio de idioma, e/ou sua requisição para ser burocrata deste domínio.
Subdomínios sem candidatos a burocratas não serão considerados para a votação.

<div dir="rtl">'''SD'''： ھيءُ صفحو ٻولي ڊومين يعني لينگويج ڊومين خاطر درخواست ڪرڻ لاءِ آھي. براءِ مھرباني ٻولي ڊومين لاءِ پنھنجي درخواست ھتي جمع ڪندا، ۽ (يا) ڪنھن ڊومين جي انتظام ڪاريءَ لاءِ درخواست ڏيندا. اھڙيون ڊوکينس جن جي انتظامڪاريءَ لاءِ ڪو بھ اکيدوار نھ ھوندو، تنھن لاءِ ڪا بھ درخواست غور ھيٺ نھ آندي ويندي. ھن صفحي تي جمع ٿيندڙ سموريون درخواستون رسمي درخواست جي حصثيت ماڻي چڪيون آھن. </div>

'''SV''': Denna sida är till för begäran om språkdomän. Här man man lägga in en begäran om en subdomän för ett språk, och/eller för byråkratskap för en domän. Subdomäner som saknar kandidat till byråkratposten kommer inte att tas i beaktande. Sedan beslut tagits om att de olika språken ska få egna domäner, har listningar på den här sidan blivit till en officiell begäran.

'''ZH'''：請在下面加入你所請求的語言子域，或者你對行政管理員（bureaucrat）資格的申請。沒有行政管理員候選人的語言子域，其投票視為無效。

==Rules for voting==
On this page you may put your '''actual vote''' to request a language domain. The specific rules for voting (who may vote, how many votes are needed) are currently being formulated at the subpage on "rules for voting":
*'''[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/Rules for voting]]'''
Please '''[[Wikisource talk:Language domain requests/Rules for voting|discuss]]''' the rules found on that page, and participate in their formulation!

== Domain requests (??.wikisource.org)==

=== Domain requests (mk.wikisource.org)===

Can you, please, create a Macedonian domain. We already have several books at www.mk.wikibooks.org, that would fit better at www.mk.wikisource.org. --[[User:Filip M|Filip M]] 15:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

* requested by: --[[User:Filip M|Filip M]] 15:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

* Bureaucrat candidates
:* --[[User:Filip M|Filip M]] 15:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

* Support
:* --[[User:Filip M|Filip M]] 15:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

* site name: Викизвор
:* support. --[[User:Filip M|Filip M]] 15:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

* Main page: Главна страница

== Starting a subdomain==

<big>'''Once you have added your request to this page, if there is consensus for it, please contact developers in order to have your subdomain created.'''</big>

You can post a bug in http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/, or talk to them on IRC, channel #wikimedia-tech.

Developers can move pages from here to your subdomain, in a way that
preserves edit history. For that, it is better to prepare in advance
a list of the pages that you want to be moved to your subdomain,
'''before''' the new subdomain is created. You may get help from
[[user:ThomasBot]] if you wish.

After your subdomain is created, please blank the pages that
were moved with a redirect to the new wiki, so that users will
stop editing these pages on the main site. Please also put these
pages in a category, such as <nowiki>[[Category:Moved to xx]]</nowiki>,
where "xx" is your subdomain. This category will be used to delete
pages once they are not needed anymore.

== Making sysops on new wikis ==

'''For all people requested rights on new wikis, please create an account on the new created wiki and post a message on Meta : [[m:Requests_for_permissions#Admin_for_Wikisource]]. Thanks. [[User:Yann|Yann]] 19:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

==Archive (previous requests)==
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/archive1|archive 1]] - This was the previous "requests" page from '''before''' the [[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language domains]]. The page is no longer active, but it includes lengthy discussion. '''Do not put language requests in this archive.'''
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/archive2|archive 2]] - This archive is for requests which have been honored since '''after''' the [[Wikisource:New vote on language subdomains|New vote on language domains]]. When the language subdomain is actually set up, the requests for that language and its votes will be moved to this archive.
*[[Wikisource:Language domain requests/archive3|archive 3]] - Archive for 19 languages set up on 2 June, 2006.

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-05-23T21:24:15Z

BirgitteSB: /* Logo update */ copyrights

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-05-21T23:19:26Z

BirgitteSB: /* Logo update */ I like this

Wikisource:Scriptorium

2006-04-23T18:12:47Z

BirgitteSB: /* Wikisource-I mailing list */

Template:Welcome

2006-04-13T19:20:18Z

BirgitteSB: rv to agreed on version which is fine now

<div style="border:solid 1px tan; background:antiquewhite; padding:3px;">Hello, {{PAGENAME}}, welcome to Wikisource! Thanks for your interest in the project; we hope you'll enjoy the community and your work here. If you need help, see our [[Help:Contents|help pages]] (especially [[Help:Adding texts|Adding texts]] and [[Wikisource:Style guide|Wikisource's style guide]]). You can discuss or ask questions from the community in general at the [[Wikisource:Scriptorium|Scriptorium]]. The [[Wikisource:Community Portal|Community Portal]] lists tasks you can help with if you wish. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page. :)</div>

Wikisource talk:New Wikisource logo

2006-02-02T02:14:07Z

BirgitteSB: /* who wants a new logo? who should decide about it? */

process approved. Glad we move forward here and to see there are already good choices :-) [[User:Anthere|Anthere]] 21:37, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

:may I know when and by whom this process was submitted? by whom was it approved? [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 07:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget to add the old logo to the list of choices! (or you might end up with an inferior replacement :-P) -- [[:en:User:Kim Bruning|Kim Bruning]] / [[User:80.126.238.189|80.126.238.189]] 22:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

==First vote on CONCEPT instead of a particular logo==

This is how the Wikipedia logo was chosen and worked really well. Compare the concept winner at [[meta:Logo history#Paullusmagnus_logo]] with the one that won ratification. The first was an unpolished idea, and the second was a polished professional image. I'd hate to see a great concept lose here only due to a poor implementation. --[[User:Maveric149|Maveric149]] 02:23, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

:I agree 100% and hope the selection will proceed in this manner. There are several outstanding concepts here that are not well-implemented. But regardless, I'm really glad to see that someone is finally pushing us to move forward on the selection of new logo!! [[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 09:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

==who wants a new logo? who should decide about it?==

I believe the decision about a new logo should be taken by the wikisource community.
By this, I mean the people who contribute to wikisource. Not people whose only
contribution here is to give their advice on the logo.

Agreeing on rules, in my opinion, is a preliminary step before any vote can be organized.
[[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 10:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
:I would agree with [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]], I don't recognise any the usernames I see voting on the project page as wikisource contributors & question their suitability to decide that we even need a new logo, let alone which one it should be. Can someone tell me who decided to call a new vote on a new wikisource logo in the first place and post a link to the rules you want to be used to decide this contest? [[User:AllanHainey|AllanHainey]] 11:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
::It looks like someone was just "bold"... As far as actual contributors deciding, I agree with Thomas. Thomas, what do you think of using the exact same voting system for this as you brilliantly implemented for the language domains issue?
::As far as whether we need a new logo in the first place, either that can be voted on first separately, or else it can be included within a larger decision (since the current logo is there is an option too).[[User:Dovi|Dovi]] 11:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

: As a rare contributor to Wikisource, I should like to point out the Wikisource project is a part of the larger Wikimedia community, which supports it by providing the vast majority of its resources. All other projects have selected their logos through a Wikimedia-wide discussion, most of them taking place on Meta. It's important to engage with the larger Wikimedia community because this helps others be aware of what your project is doing, increases both traffic and contributors to the project, and reduces divergence between what the project sees as its goals and missions and the views of the larger community of its goals and missions. - [[User:Amgine|Amgine]] 18:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

::It's not a question of "who wants a new logo" - as it was mentioned many times, we currently don't have a logo. The image you see in the top-left corner of the page isn't a logo - it's a free graphic released under the GFDL - the Foundation cannot use it as a Wikisource logo.
::Secondly, who choses it - same as above, the Foundation, or to be more precise, the Foundation's Board. As you're probably aware, some time ago a new Wikispecies logo was chosen without the Foundation's approval. There was some ruckus about it, but luckily, the author agreed to give his copyrights to the graphic to the Foundation, and all was well.
::As to who should vote on the logo - it's been said on the main page of this article - anyone who has an account. Like Amgine said, it's not only important that the Wikisource community will choose it - this logo has to be chosen by the international Wikimedia community, to get as much feedback as possible, along with new design ideas and professional input. This isn't a normal vote, this is a very important vote not only for the community, but for the Foundation in whole.
::I'm sorry that I was, like Dovi stated, ''being bold''. But the logo discussion went on for more then a year without a clear consensus, without any decision. Something had to be done about it, and once more - the logo has to be changed. I hope the community will understand the importance of this for the Foundation. [[User:Datrio|Datrio]] 20:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

:For this, I agree (reluctantly) that this should be more than just a community-wide vote, as this is a publicity measure, in a way. When new people see Wikimedia's projects, the logo will be what initially attracts them. That said, I am opposed to the idea of being flooded with votes from other projects who have never (or rarely) contributed to this project, and would like to see some voting standards implemented, such as a form of weighted voting, as was done for the sub-domains.

:And can we have a different voting method as well? If everyone can vote for as many logos as they desire, and can't oppose a logo except on the discussion page, it seems that the choice for the Foundation's Board will be according to their sole whims, since there won't be an actual consensus here (because we've flooded the page with approvals and "like everything"). The voting should be restricted to a very small number of votes per user to get the best outcomes, in my opinion.—[[User:Zhaladshar|Zhaladshar]] [[User talk:Zhaladshar|(Talk)]] 21:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree about a different voting method, this is really not the best way to go about it. I understand the Foundation's position, but how about giving the community a heads up. Do you officialy speak for the Foundation? I didn't see anything noted on your user page but I am getting that impression from your comments. Obviously there was a discussion somewhere outside of Wikisource about the need to jump-start the loge vote. It would have proper to put a note in the Scriptorium showing a link to that disscusion while it was ongoing. I don't many people inside he community ever realized the iceberg was truly not an option. As for ruckus about Wikispecies "we are probably aware of"-I am not, so please fill us in so we can avoid those same pitfalls. I really think we have to take a step back now and have a discussion about how we are going to arrange finding a consensus because the ''vote'' that is taking place right now is out of line. How so many people outside the community knew to come vote ''before'' the people who work on these sites daily knew really makes it hard to understand that you have any respect for us as a community. As far as the international community having to agree to this, I think you would be hard pressed to find a sister project with as much international cooperation as Wikisource. If the Sourcers from here agree to the logo, I have no doubt all international corcerns will have been raised and answered. So please have some faith in us and pretty please keep us informed.--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 02:14, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Help:Introduction

2006-01-25T23:48:36Z

BirgitteSB: /* Wikisource's features */ ]]

<div style="position:relative; border:2px solid #ADA; padding:10px; margin-top:1em;">
<div style="position:absolute; top:-1em; background:#FFF; border:2px solid #ADA; font-size:1.2em; padding:3px;">[[Help:Introduction|General introduction]] | [[Help:Reading|Reading]] | [[Help:Editing Wikisource|Editing]] | [[Help:Adding texts|Adding new texts]] | [[Help:Contents|Other help]]</div>

This is a general introduction to Wikisource. The links above lead to more specific introductory pages about particular aspects of Wikisource; if you're new, please read this page first.

== About Wikisource ==
'''Wikisource''' is a project that seeks to apply the wiki approach to collecting English primary source texts. That is, Wikisource is a project that ''anyone can edit.'' Wikisource is part of the [[W:en:Wikimedia|Wikimedia Foundation]] and is a sister site of [[W:en:Wikipedia|Wikipedia]], the free encyclopedia. Wikisource primary sources can often be used in conjunction with Wikipedia's encyclopedia articles for effective research.

== Getting involved ==
'''Don't be afraid to contribute.''' If you make a mistake, someone else will correct it for you; we are a community of contributors and we will be glad to help you if you need help. You can add or edit source texts whenever you want, whether you are logged in or not. You can contact the community by posting a comment at the community page, the [[Wikisource:Scriptorium|Scriptorium]].

People are constantly improving Wikisource by completing current texts or adding new texts. The [[Special:Recentchanges|recent changes]] page lists some of the most recent of these edits. So far we have '''{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}''' pages of primary sources! Before adding your own texts, please review the other introduction pages above.

== Wikisource's features ==
'''Tabs:''' At the top of every pages, there are links that are called 'tabs' on Wikisource. These tabs give you access to pages related to the page you are viewing. Click on 'discussion' to see the talk page, where you can comment about the page. The 'edit' button lets you edit almost any page on Wikisource. You can see who edited the page before and even view older versions of the page from the 'history' tab. If you're [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]], you can move a page to a new title by click 'move'.

Along the side of the page are four sections.

'''Navigation menu:''' The 'navigation' section is the main menu for Wikisource, and leads to various important pages on Wikisource. The [[main page]] links to various important pages on Wikisource as well as displaying recent news or events. The [[Wikisource:Community Portal|Community Portal]] links to community pages, tasks that anyone can help with, and other community-related pages. The [[Wikisource:Scriptorium|Scriptorium]] is the community discussion page, and is the place to post to if you need help or otherwise wish to contact the community. [[Special:Recentchanges|Recent changes]] lists the latest edits to Wikisource, [[Special:Random|Random page]] will choose a page to display at random, and [[Help:Contents|Help]] leads to the help pages (including this one).

'''Search:''' The search form allows you to look for articles on Wikisource. If you know the exact name of an article, type it into the box and click [Go]. If you would like to search for an article using keywords, type it or them in and click [Search]. For advanced usage of the search bar, see [[m:Help:Search|Help:Search]] on the [[m:Main page|Meta-Wiki]].

'''Toolbox:''' This menu lists various tools. '''What links here''' will display a list of pages on Wikisource that contain links to the page you're currently viewing. '''Related changes''' will list recent changes to pages the current page has links to. '''Upload file''' allows you to add an image or other media file to Wikisource. '''Special pages''' lists various pages automatically created and updated by Wikisource; these pages cannot be edited.

'''In other languages:''' This menu links to the equivalent page on Wikisource projects in other languages.</div>
[[Category:Help]]
[[pt:Wikisource:Introdução]]

Wikisource:Vote on enabling the ProtectSection extension

2006-01-16T22:00:04Z

BirgitteSB: /* en */

The purpose of this page is to determine whether there is consensus about enabling the ProtectSection extension in Wikisource subdomains.

===What is ProtectSection?===

This extension allows sysops to protect parts of a page,
while allowing normal users and anons to edit other parts of this page.

Text to be protected is delimited by <protect> tags.
Only sysops are allowed to modify text inside those tags, or to add/remove those tags.

===Why?===

Currently, if we want to protect a text, the only option is to freeze the whole page
that hosts it. When a page is frozen, normal users cannot improve its formatting anymore.
This all-or-nothing situation refrains sysops from protecting texts.

This extension will allow sysops to protect texts against vandals,
while giving all users the possibility to change the formatting
of the page, add or update categories, interwiki links, templates, etc.
It will give us the possibility to protect content while keeping formatting open to everyone.

===Why a vote?===

The extension was posted here: http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4375.
It is now installed in cvs.

However, developers do not want to enable it unless there is a consensus for it.

==Vote==

Please indicate whether you support or oppose enabling this extension.
Please also indicate your number of edits in each subdomain.
Voters with less than 50 edits and anonymous voters will be discarded.

you may use this page to count your edits: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~kate/cgi-bin/count_edits

===ws.org===

#'''Support''' [[User:Yann|Yann]] 19:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 3414 edits
#'''Support''' [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 19:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (1065 edits)
#'''Support''' [[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 20:33, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (700 edits)

===de===

#'''Support''' [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 15:01, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 250 edits

===en===

#'''Support''' [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 14:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 1084 edits
#'''Support'''. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 14:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (93 edits)
#'''Support''' [[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 18:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (287 edits)
#'''Support''' [[User:ChristianEdwardGruber|ChristianEdwardGruber]] 21:33, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (236 edits)
#'''Support'''--[[User:BirgitteSB|BirgitteSB]] 22:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (544 edits)

===es===

# '''Support'''. [[User:LadyInGrey|LadyInGrey]] 18:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (9670 edits)

===fr===

#'''Support''' [[User:ThomasV|ThomasV]] 14:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 6970 edits
#'''Support'''. [[User:Marc|Marc]] 14:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (6070 + 3497 (Caton) edits)
#'''Support''' [[User:François Rey|François Rey]] 19:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 90 + 837 (François) edits
#'''Support''' [[User:Yann|Yann]] 19:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2644 edits
#'''Support''' [[User:Greudin|Greudin]] 21:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC) about 55 edits

===gl===
#'''Support''' --[[User:Rocastelo|Rocastelo]] 20:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 417 edits
#'''Support''' --[[User:Prevert|Prevert]] 20:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (177 edits)
#'''Support''' --[[User:Alyssalover|Alyssalover]] 21:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC) (212 edits)

User:BirgitteSB

2006-01-16T21:54:47Z

BirgitteSB: creation

I am more active at [[en:User:BirgitteSB]].

Help:Introduction

2005-12-29T14:38:10Z

BirgitteSB: /* What is Wikisource? */

==What is Wikisource?==

'''Wikisource is a growing collection of primary source texts in any language, as well as translations of source texts.'''

Most of the texts on Wikisource are in the [[W:en:Public_domain|public domain]] and not protected by any copyright or license. However, some are copyrighted and available only with restrictions.

Wikisource is part of the [[W:en:Wikimedia|Wikimedia Foundation]] and is a sister site of [[W:en:Wikipedia|Wikipedia]], the free encyclopedia. Wikisource primary sources can often be used in conjunction with Wikipedia's encyclopedia articles for effective research.

==How can I get involved?==

'''On Wikisource, you can add or edit source texts whenever you want, whether you are logged in or not.'''

Don't be afraid to add source texts as long as they are in the [[W:en:Public_domain|public domain]] or they are available under the [[W:en:Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License|GNU Free Documentation License]]. It doesn't matter what language the text is in! However, wikisource [[What_is_Wikisource?#What_do_we_exclude?|excludes]] "Original writings by a contributor to the project".

People are constantly improving Wikisource by completing current texts or adding new texts. The [[Special:Recentchanges|recent changes]] page lists some of the most recent of these edits. So far we have '''{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}''' pages of primary sources!

'''Editing is simple. Its as easy as 1, 2, 3!'''

[[Image:Wikisource_edit.jpg|left|frame|'''1. Click ''Edit'' at the top of the page.''']][[Image:Wikisource_edit2.jpg|100px|left|frame|'''2. Add or change text in the text box.''']][[Image:Wikisource_edit3.jpg|100px|left|frame|'''3. Click ''Save page'' at the bottom of the page to save the page, or ''Show preview'' to test your changes.''']]
[[Category:Wikisource]]