Summary

Song of Songs

What will the formation of the Wikisource Community User Group do to improve Wikisource, and do you think the addition of such an organization will change the site's culture in useful or adverse ways? Give new ideas a try and what works then keep. What doesn't work then discard. Always try to expand with new ideas and new technologies. "Will it change the site's culture in useful or adverse ways?"
Source: Wikisource

Song of Songs

In terms of texts, the Dictionary of National Biography and Popular Science Monthly projects seem the most successful so far. The Proofread Page extension that drives proofreading makes Wikisource possible, with reliable and sourced texts (it wasn't there in the first few years and texts from those days can often be unsourced copy-and-paste works with no way to determine fidelity) . As far as I know, we are the only digital library that offers both proofread texts and page scans (ie. Project Gutenberg just has the former and Internet Archive just has the latter) .
Source: Wikisource

Song of Songs

As someone who often reads DNB pages on Wikisource, I think that the new fixed page width is less than helpful.
The format forces a line of text to a specific width and on a wide screen device it is like reading a newspaper column. It involves lots of scrolling because my web window is filled with white space which previously contained text. Conversely if I am reading it on a small screen device that is narrower than the text, instead of adjusting the text to fit the screen, it forces the reader to scroll to the width set by the text formatter.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature