༄ᨒ𖠰 Pine (✉) 01:02, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

• See Wikisource:Bots for information about applying for a bot status
• See Wikisource:Bot requests if you require an existing bot to undertake a task

Designated for requests related to the repair of works (and scans of works) presented on Wikisource

See also Wikisource:Scan lab

Please move the following indexes to match file names.

• Index:Online Safety Act 2023 (Category 1, Category 2A and Category 2B Threshold Conditions) Regulations 2025.pdf --> Index:The Online Safety Act 2023 (Category 1, Category 2A and Category 2B Threshold Conditions) Regulations 2025 (UKSI 2025-226 kp).pdf
• Index:Online Safety Act 2023.pdf --> Index:Online Safety Act 2023 (UKPGA 2023-50 kp).pdf
• Index:Public Order Act 2023.pdf --> Index:Public Order Act 2023 (UKPGA 2023-15 kp).pdf
• Index:Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022.pdf --> Index:Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022 (UKPGA 2022-11 qp).pdf
• Index:Ireland Act 1949I (UKPGA Geo6-12-13-14-41 qp).pdf --> Index:Ireland Act 1949 (UKPGA Geo6-12-13-14-41 qp).pdf

ToxicPea (talk) 23:12, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done --Jan Kameníček (talk) 08:37, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Could someone move all of the connected pages to the Penny Cyclopædia seeing as the latter is the actual title? See Encyclopædia Britannica and New International Encyclopædia for examples. Nighfidelity (talk) 03:11, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Y Done. Yann (talk) 12:50, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Could someone move this to Index:William Mackintire Salter - 'Nietzsche the Thinker', 1917.djvu to match commons? ToxicPea (talk) 02:09, 14 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Now we can only move 100 subpages at a time, but settings should be changed, so that we can move more (at least 500 at a time). Yann (talk) 12:54, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done --Jan Kameníček (talk) 09:04, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

This and it's chapters should be moved to The Adventures of Captain Horn (which even the header itself uses). Nighfidelity (talk) 18:27, 24 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done. Please check.--TunnelESON (talk) 03:50, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks to User:Koavf's effort, the missing pages of Index:Customs and Excise Management Act 1979.pdf has been repaired. Consequently, can somebody help to move all pages of that index after page 6 (i.e. from the current p. 10) by 2 pages? For example, this page should be moved to p. 37 of the index, corresponding to the correct page number of the file.廣九直通車 (talk) 05:49, 29 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Yann: Notifying admins who might help with moving pages.廣九直通車 (talk) 14:33, 23 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

With so many pages, it should be done with a script. Yann (talk) 15:50, 23 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. So should I create a new request at WS:BR?廣九直通車 (talk) 13:52, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

This should be moved to Electoral Purity and Economy, which the title page uses. Nighfidelity (talk) 16:17, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Can the unproofread pages in The Statutes at Large (Ruffhead) be deleted? They haven't been touched since 2019. It's clear no work has been done there — it's just OCR text, so when someone remakes that page they'll get all the content back. In the meantime, they're a huge nest of lint errors. They also have no headers, and letting the pages get remade means that the header template can be used, which would make the project easier. Eievie (talk) 02:12, 21 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would support getting rid of the ones that have lint errors, (or ones that haven't been edited in the past 3 or so years) but I have done some work on a few of them that I didn't finish the whole page, but did individual statutes on those pages, and so I left it as not proofread. Erblanchard57 (talk) 18:40, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

There are a few strands of Mormonism/the Latter-Day Saints movement, with by far the largest being the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All Mormon groups have a compilation of what they consider sacred scripture known as the "Standard Works", which include Bible (King James) and the Book of Mormon, but also have varying editions of The Doctrine and Covenants and usual a compilation called The Pearl of Great Price. I'm not really sure how to represent the Standard Works as a kind of collective work here: I don't think that {{disambiguation}} or {{versions}} really makes sense, so I'm leaning toward a Portal page that represents what works we have hosted or scans on c: as well as listing how different groups arrange their standard works. Does anyone have a perspective on what the best practice would be here? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:50, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Based on your explanation, I would concur with your suggestion of a Portal, but I am no expert in the issues. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:06, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, this would be Portal material. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 23:28, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've been working on them a bit, and just have separated them by the group that published them (as in The Doctrine and Covenants.

Based on my understanding, pretty much all groups today accept the Book of Mormon but vary on whether or not it was divinely inspired/actually translated. The various groups have differing Doctrine and Covenants, and their various publications have different sections from their prophets/presidents following Joseph Smith. Only the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and any groups that split off from them, after arriving in Utah, accept The Pearl of Great Price as a standard work, though some portions of the material in it is accepted by the other various groups. And then they all accept the Bible, and I think that page is fine as is. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints just recently acknowledged the faithfulness of other translations to the original manuscripts, and expanded their list of approved translations (in Dec. 2025).

If the decision to do a portal is is what is accepted, I would just suggest having portals for the individual churches, and have their own accepted standard works and their various editions listed on their own portals. I do think a versions page works well though, if they are split by group like I've done on The Doctrine and Covenants. Because otherwise, we still have a ton of different editions from the various groups and I think it would get messy if we had to have individual pages such as The Doctrine and Covenants (Latter-day Saint) or The Doctrine and Covenants (Community of Christ), or The Book of Mormon (Latter-day Saint), etc. So I'd just have one Doctrine and Covenants page, one Book of Mormon page, etc. with the separation based on groups listed there. Especially since they would all accept the pre-1844 publications, and those would have to have their own page as well (or be duplicated across the various group pages for each book).

Hopefully that makes sense. Erblanchard57 (talk) 17:14, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

That does make sense, unfortunately, so it's hard to know what to do here. Is it helpful to have portals for twenty Mormon/LDS groups individually? Or to try to cram all of the info into one large portal that is about Standard Works? Both? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:05, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Based on what I've seen, I don't think that a lot of the various individual groups publish their own editions; most of the smaller groups just use the Latter-day Saint editions. So I don't think it would devolve into 20 or more different pages, if we just do it by the publishing group on the individual pages of the various Standard Works I don't think it will get much larger than the current Doctrine and Covenants page. On a related topic, I've talked about the whole giant amounts of groups in the Latter Day Saint movement a little bit with User:Eievie at Category talk:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I feel like we've come generally to a consensus there; I'm open to thoughts about that too. Erblanchard57 (talk) 18:30, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

D&C is also famous for being edited a lot over time, so the naming needs to account for edition/year too, not just sect. Eievie (talk) 00:03, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I am encouraging my community to be engaged with Wikisource. How can I modify my home page to display the same layout?

For example, I am using Vector Legacy 2010, and designed my home pages without this consideration and this is not what visitors see. Any suggestion / direction is welcome. — ineuw (talk) 19:12, 1 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Issue is solved. The default theme for visitors is Vectra 2020. — ineuw (talk) 08:14, 2 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Specifically this 1955 book, an apparently uncritical book on the Jehovah's Witnesses, which was a best-seller and didn't have its copyright renewed. However, it was published by Vantage Press, a noted vanity publisher. Nighfidelity (talk) 20:48, 1 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The book was later republished many times, including some established publishers, see e.g. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL19463270M/Jehovah's_Witnesses . So I would say it passes. -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 23:11, 1 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm generally fine with things like that, though I'm inherently skeptical of the "best-seller" claim; it's easily manipulated by groups with money, either by pushing sales in the in-group or outright buying many copies of books and reselling them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:45, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough. I was able to find a secondary source for the claim, though. Nighfidelity (talk) 12:41, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

What's the best method to display a list in columns, like on Page:A century of Birmingham life- or, A chronicle of local events, from 1741 to 1841 (IA centuryofbirming01lang).pdf/562? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:49, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Andy: I'd use {{div col|cols=4|width=15em}}...{{div col end}}, it's quite simple. • M-le-mot-dit (talk) 10:39, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:24, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Read this in another language

Hello everyone! I am glad to inform you that as the next step in the Parser Unification project, Parsoid will soon be turned on as the default article renderer on your wiki. We are gradually increasing the number of wikis using Parsoid, with the intention of making it the default wikitext parser for MediaWiki's next long-term support release. This will make our wikis more reliable and consistent for editors, readers, and tools to use, as well as making the development of future wikitext features easier.

If this disrupts your workflow, don’t worry! You can still opt out through a user preference or turn Parsoid off on the current page using the Tools submenu, as described in the Extension:ParserMigration documentation.

There is more information about our roll-out strategy available, including the testing done before we turn on Parsoid for a new wiki.

To report bugs and issues, please look at our known issues documentation and if you found a new bug please create a phab ticket and tag the Content Transform Team in Phabricator.

Content Transform Team 16:31, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@MSantos (WMF): could you please tell us whenever you have a date? We've had bad experience with being warned of a deployment only one week before the fact. — Alien  3
3 3 08:11, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 19:46, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I am copying here a concern raised at Talk:The Man in the Panther's Skin: "Both the PDF and EPUB versions of this ebook skip directly from the contents page to Chapter XXVIII." -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 09:00, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Jan.Kamenicek: it seems that the chapters are sorted in the order of the internal links in the Preface, which comes before the Table of contents in the main page. With the Preface in the subpage, it may solve the issue. • M-le-mot-dit (talk) 14:36, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I see. The contents was created as a common table and I was not sure know how to include an auxilliary entry with the Preface (after moving it to a subpage) into the contents table, so I reworked it using the TOC row templates. I also thought that thus it might not be necessary to move the Preface into a subpage as I had read somewhere that the ebook tool prioritizes these templates to other links. However, now it is not possible to create the PDF at all: after a long waiting time I received a proxy error: The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server. / The proxy server could not handle the request / Reason: Error reading from remote server. Is this error related to my change somehow? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 20:28, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Jan.Kamenicek: With the Preface as a subpage the epub export seems correct. The Pdf export is currently not working but it is not related to this particular book. • M-le-mot-dit (talk) 21:31, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I just successfully performed a PDF export. • M-le-mot-dit (talk) 11:05, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Great, thanks for solving this! --Jan Kameníček (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, For many pages, particularly in Index:Albert Einstein, a biographical portrait - Anton Reiser, 1930.pdf, I get this error: Unable to open [object Object] Error loading image... Any idea how to fix these? Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:01, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Now it seems to be displayed fine. Possibly related to an old bug, discussed e. g. at Wikisource:Scriptorium/Archives/2026-07#Problems with new index pages continue? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 08:58, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it is most probably a continuation of the same issue. But now, it seems completely erratic. Yann (talk) 09:28, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I have attended most of the meetings of the new WikiClub Canada since it started earlier this year. I have turned out to be the most active Wikisource user showing up to these (many/most people not even having heard of it 😶).

I missed the last one in June, but I was informed afterward that some people there were very interested in Wikisource and not really anyone to answer their questions. So I got asked if I would do a 15min presentation about "Wikisource and how it works" at the next meeting which is a week from today (12 Aug). I am more than willing to answer questions, not as sure about making a Presentation, but anyway

My main hesitation is that almost everyone at these meetings does their work in English (such that the separate FR/EN ones have been merged due to lack of interest in the french ones rip) BUT I do 99.5% of my contributions in French and know the French WS way better than the English one where I really have not done much at all, and most of my thoughts on en.ws are actually about like. The differences between the two. Which is perhaps not the best introductory material

SO I was wondering if anybody here who is Canadian (resident) would be interested in attending. Possibly to actually do a presentation overview of wikisource, but my main goal is just to do general promo of the club and hopefully ensure that there will be at least one experienced en.ws user there. Of course as it is "open to everyone based in Canada and interested in Wikimedia projects" you can (and should) just come even if not responding to my particular request

Link again to register Psephos (talk) 19:08, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I might be able to make it, and I can definitely answer questions, though I'm not generally much good at making presentations. (There's a reason I copy stuff other people write on Wikisource, rather than writing my own stuff on Wikipedia, lol) —Beleg Tâl (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I can email you a copy of the last presentation I did on Wikisource for the NZ equivalent. You can then tweak it as you desire, just flick me an email so that I can reply to it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:38, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, The words on the right were placed there for typographical reasons and no longer need to be there. Shouldn't we render the lignes properly? Yann (talk) 13:19, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes, unless you have a specific reason for replicating the specific layout, they should just be put onto the correct line, like on this page from the same work -- Page:An Index of Prohibited Books (1840).djvu/64. Qq1122qq (which looking at the edit history I see you were responsible for correcting!) (talk) 13:33, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

No, not on this page. But OK, done. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:49, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I am not sure what is the point of this page. External links are not scans, and the language of the proceedings is not English, except for the Congress in Cambridge and Toronto. Yann (talk) 20:27, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I am interested by the proceedings available from this list, but I can't get them. Any idea? I can't get the copies of Google Books either. Yann (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

OK, I found the files for the Cambridge Congress (on French Gallica ;o) ). Yann (talk) 21:00, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I would like to request the addition of a public-domain poem by Edgar A. Guest that does not appear to be available on Wikisource. Poem: Little Things Author: Edgar A. Guest Source: The Light of Faith. Chicago: Reilly & Lee Co., 1926, page 51. I own a copy of the 1926 book and can provide photographs of: the front cover, the table of contents showing the poem and page number, and the poem itself with the printed page number visible. If needed, I'm happy to upload those images to help verify the source. Text of the poem:

Thank you for considering adding this work to Wikisource so it will be searchable and preserved for future readers. If additional information or photographs are needed, I'd be happy to provide them. Kind regards, Jenelle Chaplin Jenelle Chaplin (talk) 01:37, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

In general, requests to add a work should be made at Wikisource:Requested texts, and only if the work in question doesn't have an easily-accessible source file.

Since you own a copy of the book and can provide photographs, I would suggest making a PDF of the entire book (photographs can qualify as scans). Then you can add the text yourself. Edderiofer (talk) 02:04, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

There are several copies of that book on Internet Archive. So the best thing is to import one of those onto Commons, and then we can start working on the transcription here. -- Beardo (talk) 02:34, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I must not have checked very well. Yeah, let's do that then. Edderiofer (talk) 02:43, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

It's at File:The Light of Faith (1926).pdf. Nighfidelity (talk) 19:34, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

That edition combines The Light of Faith and a separate book Harbor Lights of Home which has a copyright of 1928 - so this edition must be 1928 or later. -- Beardo (talk) 02:56, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Monthly Challenge stats for today are 0 0 0. Something is wrong... Yann (talk) 13:56, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've noticed the same thing but thought it was just a problem with the cache, but it seems that it might be broken. Nighfidelity (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

What is our current position on works when no scan images are available, but the text is?

The pamphlet "Recollections of New Street, Birmingham, in the Year 1817" was scanned and published by the British Library. The OCR file is still available via their API, but the PDF is no longer online, no doubt as a result of their recent hack problems.

I have taken the former and marked it up, for now, at User:Pigsonthewing/New Street 1817, and would like to move it to mainspace. No other online source appears to offer it in human-readable form. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:48, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Without a scan to back it, the text would probably be tagged with {{no source}} and/or {{fidelity}} at the least. Nighfidelity (talk) 21:15, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Neither would be true; but {{Second-hand}} might apply; I could live with that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:22, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Now published, as Recollections of New Street, Birmingham, in the Year 1817. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:53, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've replaced {{second-hand}} with {{no scan}}, since it's based on the OCR at least. If it was second-hand, it would not be allowed per WS:WWI#Second-hand transcriptions. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 02:21, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The British Library does have a record of the text at least. Nighfidelity (talk) 21:19, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 20:45, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

As of yesterday, I am Wikimedian in Residence at The Gazette (encompassing The London Gazette, The Belfast Gazette and The Edinburgh Gazette).

Please see w:Wikipedia:GLAM/The Gazette for details, and let me know if you have any suggestions or requests. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:14, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

That's great. My question is how you brokered this relationship. I think that interfacing with long-term periodicals/newspapers here in the States makes a lot of sense and I've never been able to get anyone to seem to care. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:18, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The project was advertised and I tendered. Wikimedia UK did the negotiation to set it up. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:11, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the info. Are all issues digitized and available online? That would be the main interest for Commons and Wikisource. Yann (talk) 19:30, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

They are, but I do not plan a bulk upload. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:10, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

This edit is spam, so keep an eye on the user @Activelife1234. Eievie (talk) 06:16, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for reporting. User blocked. Yann (talk) 06:27, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is the notes section of the template for a work meant to point out errors in dates or errors in names in the original text, and other notations like that? Or is it meant for something completely different? RAN (talk) 21:58, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The documentation for the Header template states that the Notes field is "notes to explain the work, to add context, or to impart concise information that adds value to the reader; for example, use of {{listen}}". In other words, bibliographic notes. The types of notes you mention belong on the Talk: page, if they are needed at all. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

• Pointing out errors in the original text, sure sounds like "context … concise information that adds value to the reader". That is exactly what I see when I see a reprint of an historical text. Can you explains why/how it does not provide "context … concise information that adds value to the reader"? I don't see the word "bibliographic" used in the definition. Why such an extremely narrow definition of what "context" is? And why would you want it on the talk page, where people leave non-contextual comments and anecdotes. I am not sure why adding "concise information that adds value to the reader" such as corrections to dates and names, somehow excludes using {{listen}} or even why {{listen}} is considered context. --RAN (talk) 01:09, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

  The documentation I quoted describes the intended use of the notes field. The examples and wording seem to me to be directed toward explanatory information about the work itself, its publication, provenance, and related matters. That's why I referred to them as bibliographic notes. I wasn't suggesting that "context" is limited to bibliographic information in the abstract, only that the Notes field appears to be intended for that sort of material. Corrections to mistakes in the original text are certainly information that may be useful to readers. The question is not whether they add value, but whether they are the sort of explanatory notes contemplated by the Header documentation, or whether they are better suited to the talk page.

  In respect of your comment about people leaving non-contextual comments and anecdotes on a Talk: page, that is not the purpose of our Talk: pages and such comments should be deleted. If that would leave the Talk page blank, then tag it for speedy deletion with {{sdelete}}. Talk pages are for recording more extended bibliographical information (via the {{Textinfo}} template)—including source for non-scanned texts—and for discussions about how to improve texts.

  As for {{listen}}, I agree that it is not "context" in the ordinary sense of the word. To me, that example suggests that the Notes field is intended for ancillary information about the work and its presentation, rather than for textual criticism, emendations, or corrections. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:32, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

  Re "errors" in the text, it helps to be clear what you mean. E.g. are we talking about the text attributing authorship mistakenly, or including a forgery / misunderstanding of current events (e.g. responding to a report about another country that turned out to be false)? Those are more bibliographical. While errors in particular parts of the text are better handled by WS:Annotations, e.g. getting specific facts wrong, struggling with a foreign language / names / locations, scientific inaccuracies etc. MarkLSteadman (talk) 22:55, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

• Wikisource:Annotations covers changes made within the text like a wikilink or using the sic template within the text for typos. This is about adding a note in the "| notes = " area of the header to provide "context … concise information that adds value to the reader". Beeswaxcandle believes these notes belong on the talk page mixed in with other editor's comments or questions. I believe notes belong in the notes section of the header. If it comes down to personal taste, rather than a strict rule, we should side with the person doing the scanning and transcription and research. For instance, if an obituary states that a person was 75 when they died, but a birth certificate or a well researched biography shows that they were still 74, and would not have been 75 until their next birthday, that should be a note in the notes section because it provides "concise information that adds value to the reader". Not taking note of it, allows the error to be propagated. Hiding it on the talk page does not add value to the reader. No reader will see it there, only another editor specifically looking for it. --RAN (talk) 22:40, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I am getting this error when I try to create any page from Index:Anaximander and the Origins of Greek Cosmology.pdf, even though the Index was created two months ago. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:21, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Comment Note that I can see the File just fine on Commons, and can view pages there, but the File does not show up on the local "File" page, nor does any image appear on the Index page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:47, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@EncycloPetey: Solved. I've purged the cache of the file in Wikisource (adding ?action=purge to the URL). • M-le-mot-dit (talk) 16:23, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I had tried that and several other Purge methods both here and at Commons, but to no effect. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:25, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Should this be deprecated seeing as linking to Project Gutenberg (despite what Help:Project Gutenberg says) has been discouraged for a while? Nighfidelity (talk) 21:07, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think we should definitely be consistent, but I also think that we should link to that site, particularly for works that we don't have here--that provides clear value to our readers who can access a work that is in the public domain and isn't here yet. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:10, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I agree with Justin. Yann (talk) 21:22, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Strongly disagree with linking to PG for works that we don't host yet. We have evolved a long way from the state in 2006 when this template was set up—the major change being the introduction of ProofreadPage. The current uses of the template are historical and are gradually being replaced with scans, we don't need to add more to that backlog. It's also not our mission to provide a single bibliographical source for all available PD texts that are somewhere on the web. Even if new uses of this template were only on Portal and Author pages, it would derogate from the real value that we provide through our processes of making texts available here. So, yes, we should deprecate the template and mark the Help page as for historical interest only. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 21:50, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Disagree with linking to PG works. If someone wants to curate links to Gutenberg works the correct place to do that is Wikidata/Wikipedia, not WS. In addition, it is awkward with our flow: When should the links be removed? When the Index is created? When it is validated? But even then it might be from a different edition, so does it need to be that edition? Unlike scan link --> Index link which has a natural and intuitive transition. And lastly, why not other sites? If you can link to [10] what about [11]. Having Project Gutenberg as a sui generis place is problematic as well as getting into quality curation of sites. 22:25, 15 August 2026 (UTC) MarkLSteadman (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Also disagree to linking to PG works. Our role is not to maintain an index of transcriptions elsewhere. So yes to deprecation. — Alien  3
3 3 11:33, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, The scan was defective. I fixed it, but there are 2 pages only to validate. Thanks, Yann (talk) 16:42, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done. Thanks to everyone else who did much more work. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:22, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I think breadcrumbs would be more intuitive, compact and cleaner if they were integrated into the title rather than below it, like so:

• 
  Current breadcrumbs
• 
  Proposed breadcrumbs

What do you think? Sophivorus (talk) 16:03, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I support this, because it makes the links more visible. prospectprospekt (talk) 19:37, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is there a reason this isn't called Mr. William Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies? Nighfidelity (talk) 20:11, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 21:03, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is the text in {{Display none}} read by screen-reading software? If not, do we have a template where that is the case?

My use case is for tables and column-headings which are empty in originals, but need to be described for users with a visual impairment. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:05, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Andy: wihth Edge, the text in {{Display none}} and {{Hidden text}} is not read aloud, but it is the case when using {{Transparent}}. • M-le-mot-dit (talk) 09:37, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

We have:

• Author:Cuthbert Collingwood
• Author:Cuthbert Collingwood, 1st Baron Collingwood

of which I just created the latter. Is it correctly titled, and how do we link to it from the former? Or should there be a disambiguation page? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:24, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Per Help:Author pages#Page name - "The name of the page should not include titles." So yours should be Cuthbert Collingwood (1748-1810) and the other needs to be moved, with a disambiguation page created. -- Beardo (talk) 16:50, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. All done I'd be grateful if someone could check. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:48, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello all. I'm still new here, but I'd like to transclude the letters that Einstein sent to Brunauer (see commons). I've now made an attempt at one handwritten letter: Albert Einstein to Stephen Brunauer - August 22, 1943 and wanted to ask if someone could have a look at both the transclusion and index and generally give me some advice or impression on how I've done. I have read through the guides and templates, but I'm sure I still missed some things. Also I know that the image files aren't great yet, but my skills are lacking in that area.

I thought about creating and adding all the letters in Einstein–Brunauer Letters, similarly the way you'd have an overview of volumes from a magazine. Although I haven't seen this done for letters here before, so I'm not sure if that's a good idea. Thanks in advance :) Neon700 (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Could someone please mark all the non-patrolled pages of this work as not proofread. Most of the pages have been marked as validated but they very clearly aren't. ToxicPea (talk) 07:32, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

On these pages (Spherical Trigonometry (1914), p. 65 and 66) I'm having issues making a <math> block span the page break. Help:Fractions and functions doesn't say anything about such sitations. Has anyone done it successfully anywhere else? Eievie (talk) 19:10, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Eievie Unless a template has "/s" and "/e" variants, it won't by default work across pages (even if you close the template in the footer and open it in the header).

In this situation, I could see two non-ideal options. I have implemented one, which is just using noinclude/includeonly, and so required copying (validated) text from the second page to the former. The other option would be not using align, and, e.g. use a table for the alignment instead. This would have avoided needing to copy text, but might have introduced slight differences in styles between earlier (aligned) equations. If someone has a better approach, feel free to revert my edits. Regards, TeysaKarlov (talk) 21:00, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@TeysaKarlov To clarify, this isn't a template, it's a tag. Does that make a difference? Eievie (talk) 21:09, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Eievie When I said about "/s" and "/e" variants, it was more just as a general heads up. But yes, the difference between template/tag does make a difference, and some tags should work as intended if placed in headers/footers (though I am not an expert). However, you were using both a tag (math) and part of the latex math interpreter (begin/end align). I don't think the latex interpreter part knows much, if anything, about how proofread page (or Wikisource) works, so I think it would have been a miracle if the align carried across pages. Regards, TeysaKarlov (talk) 21:25, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Gunjounoame Just pinging you to loop you in on this conversation. Eievie (talk) 21:16, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 20:45, 24 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

H, One page left to validate. Thanks for your help, Yann (talk) 14:56, 25 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I am validating this work. Shouldn't the chapters (in capitals) in the table of content link to chapters? Yann (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The links right after already link to the top of the chapter pages, so I don't think it'd be necessary. — Alien  3
3 3 18:20, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

OK. Thanks for answering. Yann (talk) 18:23, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Yann: I agree that they are not done correctly. The link to "Chapter 10" actually links to Scrambles_amongst_the_Alps/Chapter_10#pageindex_266. It should not be linking to page indices, but simply to the actual chapter in Mainspace. The Table of Contents links require cleanup. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:34, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@EncycloPetey: 266 is the first page of that chapter, so it doesn't really change anything. — Alien  3
3 3 08:03, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

No, the first page is page 222. Scan page 266 is the page of the scan which is page 222. This will confuse people, and it also means that someone arriving at the chapter from the link will not see the page header. So it does change several things. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:04, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The original scan's page is not displayed at Page:A pickle for the knowing ones (IA pickleforknowing00dextrich).pdf/36. What might be the reason? -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 15:18, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

• The image is dynamically resized based on the text; if there is a string of text too long (or with table formatting, the longest words in each column are too long), then the image will be smaller. In this case, the long list of commas pushes off of the screen, thus taking up all of the room where the image would have been. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:28, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would like to link, for example, the string "Monteiths" to the Wiktionary entry "monteith" (in other words [[:wikt:monteith|Monteiths]]). {{Wikt}} does not offer that facility. Could we make it do so? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

• We have {{Wikt2}} for such use cases. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:11, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Chapter 13 of Part 2 is titled What It Is to be a Coolie. Shouldn't it be What It Is to Be a Coolie with a capital B? Yann (talk) 09:58, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I have been having an argument with User:Pigsonthewing regarding this page, and we are at an impasse, so I am bringing it to the community at large for discussion.

• I told Pigsonthewing that if this page represents the work Bradshaw's Guide itself, then it MUST have a license tag (such as {{PD-US-periodical}}); whereas if it is a page "about" Bradshaw's Guide then it must be moved to Portal namespace where it belongs.
• Pigsonthewing disagreed with what I told them, and claims that the page does NOT need a license tag, despite being in Mainspace.

What is the community's consensus regarding this page? Does it require a license tag due to being a work in Mainspace? Does it need to be moved to Portal space due to the page not being a work? Or should we make an exemption to our standard practices and leave it as it is? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:08, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

For the record, it is my understanding that this page CANNOT be allowed to remain in mainspace with no license tag, and though we can make exceptions when supported by community consensus, I strongly oppose making any such exception. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Prior discussion is at User talk:Pigsonthewing#Bradshaw's Monthly Railway and Steam Navigation Guide.

I have already invited User:Beleg Tâl to nominate the page for deletion, as their tag threatens to do; they have not done so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:13, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

You will note that deleting the page is not among the options that I suggested for resolving this issue. (This is tangential to the current discussion, but I have proposed rewording the text of {{no license}} to reflect the fact that deletion is generally not the appropriate action to be taken, but the consensus was to keep the current wording) —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:16, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The tag you have repeatedly added to the page says "Pages with no license information may be nominated for deletion." Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:26, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

That is correct, the maintenance tag {{no license}}, which is used on pages with no license tag, mentions that such pages may be nominated for deletion. This page has no license tag, and as such may be nominated for deletion—but at no point did I ever say that I intended to do so, nor did I say that this would be the correct action. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:31, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

At the conversation linked above, Pigs/Andy notes correctly that many pages in the main namespace do not have a license tag, but all of those are some kind of version, translation, or disambiguation page (e.g. Bible). I don't know of any works in the main namespace that lack a copyright tag. If I'm reading this correctly, the work in question is a periodical, like The New Yorker or Harper's Magazine and those have license tags. Why wouldn't this periodical? I just don't see why this page is better off without a license tag. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:27, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The page in question is not "a work". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:30, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Okay, but I am reading this correctly that it's a monthly magazine, similar to The New Yorker, correct? I just want to make sure that I know what it is that I'm seeing. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:13, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

"Bradshaw's Monthly Railway and Steam Navigation Guide" was a monthly publication; whether it was a magazine or a book with many editions is up for debate.

The page in question is a list of such editions, not a transcluded work, and is the original work of Wikisource contributors, never having previously been published; so—like this discussion page—carries an "available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License..." statement which is entirely correct and adequate for the content of the page.

There are no grounds for nominating the page for deletion (much less deleting it) as the template it is still tagged with claims; and no grounds for moving it to Portal space, as Beleg Tâl has suggested doing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:30, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I further note that the template currently on the page is causing the page to be in Category:Works with no license template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:34, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I can understand both views.
A periodical is not a work in itself, as in it's not a published unit of text. Licenses in mainspace often correspond to a published unit of text. Different issues of a periodical could theoretically have different licenses.
(Goes without saying, it makes more sense to have individual issues be a subpage of a parent mainspace page, than to not have such a parent.)
However, when possible, putting a license on the parent page, as a global indicator of the copyright status of the contents hosted under that root page, is useful and helps organise content, and should generally be done.
(Also, maybe stop arguing? You've been at it for a while and clearly you're not going to convince each other of anything anytime soon.) — Alien  3
3 3 15:28, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've given up arguing, that's why I'm leaving it in the hands of the community. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 15:35, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

My personal opinion. For serial works, they should be tagged with the most permissive license like we tag authors, justifying the presence of the series at all. No valid parts of the series, no hosting. I would be in favor of adding a series flag to our license as a warning that individual volumes in the series may have their own licenses and that it is required to tag any volume specifically that is more restrictive. MarkLSteadman (talk) 16:31, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Regarding a warning that individual volumes in the series may have their own licenses, &c.—this is exactly the function of {{PD-US-periodical}}, which is the tag I indicated should be placed on the page under discussion. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 23:03, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

It's not just for periodicals, a multi-volume history, biography, collection of papers, translation etc. may have different authors / publication dates. MarkLSteadman (talk) 02:01, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

The OCR tool is not working for me. It returns the following error.

Error from the OCR tool: Image URL must be for one of the following domain names: upload_wikimedia.org and uploadwikimedia-betawmflabs.org Chrisguise (talk) 18:55, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm getting the same. I've had that (or something similar before) but it cleared shortly after. -- Beardo (talk) 19:10, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Same for everyone everywhere it would seem; it has been flagged and will apparently be fixed in a few hrs: phab:T436551 Psephos (talk) 20:08, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 20:53, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I began proofreading Index:Anaximander and the Origins of Greek Cosmology (1960).djvu for this month's MC, then suddenly lost the ability to see pages from the scan. Purging / refreshing has not helped. This is the first time this has happened for a DjVu, and (as I say) it was working until a few minutes ago. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:22, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

• For me, the pages don’t load on first glance, but will load if the page is refreshed. This has also happened with other DjVu files on which I have worked relatively recently, but it is very inconsistent. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:57, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

  Loads for me fine, but takes 1-2s. MarkLSteadman (talk) MarkLSteadman (talk) 02:02, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

  It's working again for me now. shrug --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:20, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply