The Council of Law Reporting

Summary

The Council of Law Reporting The Public General Statutes (1896)

I was thinking of self-promotion differently than self-publication, and I think self-promotion is completely irrelevant. If the work is itself in scope (published, licensed, etc) , then the author should be more than welcome to add the workto Wikisource, improve the transcription, add to their own author page, promote the work's featured status if it might meet featured criteria, and any other action normally done on Wikisource, even if the only reason they are doing so is to promote themselves and increase visibility to their work.
Source: Wikisource

The Council of Law Reporting The Public General Statutes (1896)

However, if a work is not within scope for an article on Wikipedia, this has no bearing on whether it is within scope for hosting on Wikisource. Similarly, if a user is banned on Wikimedia, but they are the author of a work which is within scope for hosting on Wikisource, then their ban should have no bearing on whether the work should be hosted here.——When I spoke of irrelevance, I intended to separate the suitability of the work for inclusion, from the behaviour of the author on Wikimedia after publication.
Source: Wikisource

The Council of Law Reporting The Public General Statutes (1896)

We all have a call on the community's consensus ... I thought that we had the instruction in the pages, clearly not, so please feel welcome to add it to the naming conventions. I have just added it to Help:Disambiguation. My preference is for pages to be updated when able, as that reduces means for future confusion, and leaving redirects for the en dash pages to the hyphenated (redirects are system cheap) . People usually go past the double redirects page, so if you miss fixing any of those links, not to worry too much, we will fix.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature