Wikisource

“ Eclecticology (talk) 18:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC) We're happy for people to link to Wikisource, but I've think we've got consensus that we don't want to do the linking in-line, as if Wikisource were the reference for the article text, both because Wikipedia articles should reflect the opinions of secondary sources, rather than the interpretations made by Wikipedians of the meaning and significance of primary sources, and also because wikis (including Wikipedia of course) are never treated as reliable sources. ”

“ My impression of Wikisource is that the aim of the project is to preserve works for future generations. I suggest to that end, the aim of annotations at English Wiiksource be to aid people in understanding any history and culture that may be of significant influence in the source text. If Wikisource decides to allow interwoven annotations too, I think an untouched copy of the original text should be preserved on Wikisource as well. FWIW I came here in response to Wikisource discussion about annotated texts. ”

“ The small number of people who have an orgasm about bullying through policy changes and calling it "consensus" appear to have an inflated idea about their own importance. If it seems appropriate to me to make an inline link to a Wikisource article from a Wikipedia article, that's damn well what I'm going to do. If some Wikipedia policy wonk takes objection to my doing that he can damn well do the work of moving the link to where he thinks it belongs. Your interpretation of what Wikisource is about makes no sense at all. ”

“ At the same time it allows for simultaneous cooperative work on related source texts and their Wikisource annotations, and the transclusion of source-texts into the annotated edition. In general, the wiki way at its best is to be inclusive and encourage a wide variety of useful contributions. By the logic that "99% of people are not interested" (from the discussion at the talk page) , then we also should have only Wikipedia and not Wikisource, and we should have wikis in only a handful of languages. ”

“ Wikisource, run on the same wiki platform as Wikipedia, has a number of features that make it a great tool for transcribing documents. By the time it is completed, each document’s transcription will have been proofread by one human and then validated by another. ”

“ Wikipedia is a dynamic document that uses sources that are usually stable. This sister provides those, when possible. You are correct that translations are dynamic in a wiki environment. The question of course is whether that is terrible or a wonderful opportunity. If proofreading the only way for Wikisource to be a resource for Wikipedia? So again, if I've understood correctly, the single fundamental point that you are emphasizing is about proper scope within a given sister project. That is a point about which reasonable people can both disagree and hopefully find consensus. ”

“ Unfortunately there is no ready means to move between proofreading status of a complete work from its index page. Of course we also have our completely crap Wikisource:Works. As an example of how we do ourselves no favours, poke your eyes listed in Wikisource:Works/2017 and Wikisource:Works/2018 and see the poor use of portals and categories. It seems we prefer to transcribe and replicate the work of a typographer rather than present books to the public. ”

“ What Wikisource actually does is re-publishing. The question to my mind is how we can be most effective and useful in doing that. Limiting ourselves to proofreading makes us less effective and useful in my opinion. For example: Let us say we proofread and old translation of Aristotle. ”

“ Concerning information, again the Wikipedia reference isn't part of the template; if there's no Wikipedia article, you don't refer to it. Wikisource is a collection of texts, not an encyclopedia about texts. Relevant information is usually succintly summarised by the introductory paragraph of Wikipedia's article; if it exists, this should be quoted and linked to. Wikipedia is clearly superior to Wikisource in it's ability to provide information, rather than text. ”

“ Basic procedure Fully integrating works into Wikisource can be a very complicated process. We don't expect new users to learn the ins and outs of doing this before submitting texts. However, there is a basic procedure that should be followed when adding any texts.
Check that Wikisource doesn't already have the work by searching for it: Use the search box which is on every page. A drop-down list of titles will match the characters as typed. Look on the author's page, which should list their works. Perform an advanced search on the title, author, or a short phrase from the text. ”

“ Where does Wikisource go from here? I have no idea, time will answer that, but I can suggest some situations. The text here, extracted from books and images, can be heard by the blind. My wife is blind and she "reads" here via a professional screen reader. —Maury (talk) 07:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Where has Wikisource done well, and where can it improve? Wikisource is just starting! It will grow, and has been growing, as technology grows. People will learn about things they never imagined and will wonder and explore from the impetus started of works done here. ”

“ Wikisource as a reference top-icon I've been working with the new wikiproject Wikisource:WikiProject References to Wikisource started by Prosody, and I am proposing adding top icon in a similar vein as the featured icon. I think that having our work used as references reflect the growing trust of the site; even though we are a wiki which is by definition editable by anyone, what we host is reliable and in some cases preferred over any other of the many virtual libraries. ”

“ Still I would prefer the simpler, Portal:Religion. "Texts" is somewhat of a redundancy, since the whole of Wikisource is about texts. When editors need to link to something they are probably happier when it can be expressed in one word. I'll see if I can start developing the idea at Wikisource:Portal. (Probably more intuitive to have this named "Portals" in the plural.) ”

“ Wikisource is not really the place to create a fully-corrected version of the DNB: Wikisource exists to faithfully capture original sources. If we ultimately decide to create a modern corrected DNB, we should move to Wikibooks. In my view, we should instead rely in Wikipedia for a modern synthesis. NOTE: is should be possible to create multiple "views" of the same article here at Wikisource, by adding conditional wikisyntax. ”

“ I am aware Wikisource doesn't normally accept contributions which are purely reference material, as is the case here. However to the best of my knowledge this is the first time a museum has thought about directly releasing data (rather than media) to a Wikimedia project. I understand the concerns set out in the Inclusion policy, which says...
"Wikisource does not collect reference material unless it is published as part of a complete source text. Such information has not been previously published, is often user-compiled and unverified, and does not fit the goals of Wikisource." ”

“ Do you think that the articles published in academic journals are stand-alone or not? Do you think that your rule of thumb applies to all articles in all newspapers, all magazines, all academic journals, etc? If not, how to distinguish them? Only poems deserve to be stand-alone? Why? What's the logic? I think that it is very important to give Wikisource editors a clear guidence on what should be subpages and what should be stand-alone. It can help clarify the accurate number of the source texts in Wikisource. Accurately, a subpage is not an independant source text. A book is only one source. ”

“ Wikisource has kept its policies simple, and to a lesser number. We step into what is the principle of what we are doing and look to an outcome focus, and we have plenty of process and evidence for what we are doing as working well. Starting to get into blackletter law of what is in and what is out is just a recipe for disaster, and brings into play binary in or out. ”

“ Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia; and Wikisource is the library (fiction and non-fiction sections) . As an example, here you will find books by Alfred Tennyson, or articles about the person. If it has been published and is in the public domain, then we can host a copy, see Wikisource:What Wikisource includes. At Wikipedia you will find the encyclopaedic article about the person; you will find encyclopaedic articles about some of his works. Being an encyclopaedia they have a requirement for notability. What Wikipedia thinks it is We are sister sites, though joined through one mega-family. ”

“ They have, for the past several years, built a project that is both technologically and socially ideal to house, transcribe, and view documents on the web in a collaborative environment. As part of the National Archives’ efforts to increase the accessibility and visibility of its holdings, we are offering our high-quality scans of documents to Wikisource for transcription. Wikisource needs more than just documents, though: it needs love. And this is where we each come in. Wikisource is only as good as we make it, all of us together. ”

“ Wikisource’s most evident weaknesses stem from the comparatively small community of users of the site: by any measure, Wikisource is a tiny project compared with Wikipedia or Distributed Proofreaders. [155] The smaller number of users at the site translates into substantially greater time required to complete any given proofreading project and has also limited the number of texts that have been added to the site. Thus, Wikisource remains very far from approaching Professor Gallacher’s ideal of completeness for an open-access repository. ”

“ Perform a Wikisource-specific search using an external engine, e.g., Google Adding the scan Wikisource works usually start with a scanned version, either in DjVu or PDF format. Lots of scanned books can be found freely available on the Internet at websites such as the Internet Archive. If you need to scan a work yourself, see Help:Digitising texts and images for Wikisource for advice.
If Wikisource doesn't seem to have the work, find or create a scan of the work you want to add. Upload your scan to Wikimedia Commons. Create an Index page for the scan. ”

“ Wikisource User Group Wikisource, the free digital library is moving towards better implementation of book management, proofreading and uploading. All language communities are very important in Wikisource. We would like to propose a Wikisource User Group, which would be a loose, volunteer organization to facilitate outreach and foster technical development, join if you feel like helping out. ”

“ By virtue of its design, Wikisource comports with many (although certainly not all) of Professor Ian Gallacher’s proposed design standards for open-access archives of primary legal source materials. [151] Wikisource’s collection is universally accessible worldwide. It can be presented in a variety of formats (or downloaded freely and further processed to meet a user’s specific presentation needs) , and its contents are open to indexing by Google or other standard search engines. ”

“ Wikisource will indicate that "Wikisource does not have a page with this exact name". Click "Create" (or the "add Index:file name to Wikisource") to create this document. A page with fields to enter information about this document will appear. See the Wind in the Willows for an example. Populate each of the fields as in the table below. Click the "Show Preview" button near the bottom of the page. An Index: namespace page with an image of the book you just selected should appear. ”

“ Because of this current state of affairs there have been nominations for deletion for some of this data. However I feel we need discuss the larger questions of the place of reference material on Wikisource before we make any deletions. Some of this material may have more value than others. If we do decide to exclude certain things, there still may be a place for other material. I would like to approach this question differently from the past. Let us first try and figure out what kinds of material we want to include in Wikisource, and then work at separating out what doesn't belong here. ”

“ It is precisely because it is more difficult to make changes there that this is a necessary evil: there are more eyes and discussion on Wikipedia. While I have no doubt that Poetlisters change to our local page was a good one, if we let Wikisource regulars write "better" descriptions here on Wikisource, we will also have to allow everyone else to write "better" descriptions here, and then we will have Wikipedians using Wikisource as a weapon in their Wikipedia debates. It is far better that we are subseviant to Wikipedia, as opposed to importing and compounding their problems. ”

“ 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? It can make it easier for us to publicize the group, and what we can do, and with any luck help us to get some of the huge mountains of really useful material available to our readers. ”

“ The common practice on Wikisource is to keep the scanned page images available even after proofreading is complete in order to ease authentication [139] ; for most works recently added to the site, users may verify for themselves (by clicking a small page number link that typically appears in the margin of the displayed text) that the text displayed at the site matches the content of the scanned page image. ”