Talk:Main Page/Archive2

This is an archive for 2006 - please do not edit this page.

---

hr subdomain is not very serious

Tomislav Dretar: I estimate that at least 50% of the pages on hr.wikisource are empty. I will not update the hr pagecount until at least 90% of these pages are filled with text. I will also ask local admins to block you if you go on posting empty pages. That way, you can focus entirely on the job of filling up the empty pages you created. I do not know if you realize it, but the image given by the hr subdomain is not very serious, and this is affecting the community as a whole. ThomasV 19:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

ThomasV Votre estimation est fausse. Vous avez pris 50 page sur 4000 et vous avez pris la décision que 50 % de pages sont vides. Si Vouz avez pris une autre partie vous pourriez touver 100% pages achevés.Puis, ce n'est pas logique -empty pages you created: Comment on peut créer les pages vides? Puis, quelqun a dejoué. J'ai rétruvé mes pages achevés par simple changement de dates dans l'historique. Donc, en ce moment-ci Nouveau Testament n'a pas une seule page vide. Ancien Testament est vérifié jusqu'au Livre d'Ezékiel et là depuis la Génèse je n'ai pas trouvé que le pages vide par l'omission involontaire. Vous étés tombé au moment où j'ai fait la pause à me réposer - à pic! Puis ma traduction n'est pa seriée, selon Vous. La Bible entière et le Coran! Trois mille cinque cents pages traduits, c'est moi qui a fait durant 4 ans. Gratuitement et à la fin je suis insérieux! C'est le travail le plus important. Copie-coller c'est de la physique. Mes années de travail sont inserieuses. Puis; inserer de millieurs décorations sur chaque page "vide", c'est un travail très monoton et fatiguant.Bravo Monsieur! Volià nous de nouveau au même endroit. Je Vous récommande que vous changiez la méthodologie d'éstimation. Les articles dans l'encyclopédie générale sont differantes à compter par rapport des articles liès dans un seule livre. Faitez Vous ce que vous voulez. Je vais travailler jusquà'à la fin, je le fait en offrande à Dieu Unique - YHWH; pas à Vous; et j'ai encore à tout rélire, et faire revivre notes de pied de pages que Vous avez detruit par le démenagement depuis la Source anglais. Plusieurs mille notes! Vous pouvez imaginer ce" que vous m'avez fait?" Je travail dix heures par jour et je ne suis pas serieux!Merci aussi pour le vandalisme de celui qui a caché mes pages. 155.166|213.49.155.166]] 19:23, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Voilà Monsieur! Après la perte de milliers notes de pied de page, maintenant c'est une nouvelle perle de sérieux de l'oeuvre de programeurs. Ils m'ont transformés de milliers charactères "č" en "š" et cela dans le pages non-vides. Ils agit de qoui? Le sérieux? En tout cas c'est moi qui doit rétravailler. Merci.--213.49.151.184 08:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Hvratski ---> Hrvatski

The name of Croatian language is incorrect. It must be HRVATSKI, not HVRATSKI.

The Free Library

The Free Library to must be in Croatian Slobodna knjižnica|2600+ članaka

Hrvatski
Slobodna knjižnica

--Tomislav Dretar 17:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Dutch

Please put a link to the Dutch version of Wikisource on the main page.

It is already there. Yann 22:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Sanskrit "The Free Library"

Could be changed to: मुक्त पुस्तकालयं Deeptrivia 06:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 1700+ articles --> 1700+ लेखाः Deeptrivia 06:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. Yann 18:22, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

More than 10 main languages ?

Hi,

Seeing that there is a competition to be in the first 10 languages, I propose that we include more languages.

1. We could go up to 12 languages with the same design.

2. We could look for a new design for including more languages.

I propose we use the first solution as a start, and we evaluate the possibility to go for the second. Yann 18:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to the idea, but why up the number to 12? After a while, wouldn't the competition become "let's get in the top 12" and then we'd increase the total number to 14? And keep doing this until we have a top 20 languages?—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 19:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

It's a question of design. Depending of this we could fit more or less languages of the Home Page. Yann 23:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the 10 languages should stay. Some day there might be a competion "who is the number one?" (or maybe it already is). I would prefer to make "All Languages" bigger. Using a table and a bigger font makes it easier to find a language. --Jofi 01:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Croatian

• Croatian enter in the 3 333 articles.--Tomislav Dretar 08:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Beaucoup de pages sont vides, à ce qu'il semble... Marc 11:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

j'ai fait un sondage, en tirant 50 pages au hasard : 22 ne contenaient pas de texte. ThomasV 11:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I did the same thing and got a number of blank pages. The Croation WS should purge their database of all those blank pages to get a more accurate article count.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 19:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that the Croatian version needs help to fix their project namespace. They have some project pages in the main namespece with titles that begins with Wikizvor: and WikIzvor:. But the name of the project namespace is Wikisource:. /EnDumEn 20:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

• Est-ce que Vous avez vus qu'il se n'agit pas de pages vides mais de pages sous la construction? Il n'a pas de pages blanches comptées parmi les pages valides. S.V.P. affichez 3400 pages valides pour la langue croate.--Tomislav Dretar 14:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Même si vous travaillez sur plusieurs pages en même temps, vous ne travaillez pas sur 3400 pages en même temps. Il me semble aussi préférable que la page d'accueil reflète l'activité réelle d'un sous-domaine, i.e. le nombre de pages non vides. Yann 16:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Even if you work on several pages at the same time, you don't work on 3,400 pages at the same time. It seems better to me that the Main Page shows the real activity of a subdomain, the number of non empty pages. Yann 16:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• Aujourd'hui, p.ex., je travaile sur 166 pages en même temps. C'est n'est pas plusieurs. C'est presque 200. Ceci est possible parce que je fait 95% de travail entier à faire. Pour chaque page, après que j'ai l'avais crée comme "une page vide" il me ne fallait que 4 operations: copier,cliquer sur titre rouge,coller,sauvgarder le texte. Avant j'ai les d'abord traduits, corrigés et mis en page, puis collés dans Source, puis selectioné le titre, ce qui ouvre la page sous le titre (blanche), puis collé la decoration. Vous savez qu'aujourd'hui la fase préparatoir fait environ 80% de processus et elle coute, souvent, plus que le produit. Donc ayez cela en vu quand vous admirez mes pages vides. Et, S.V.P. Nolli turbare circulos meos!, avant que je les n'achève pas, c'est à dire que vous ne les effasiez pas même si vous les considerezcomme vides, je travaile encore sur elles. Merci, d'avance.--Tomislav Dretar 16:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Bonjour,

Aucun problème en ce qui concerne votre travail, et merci pour votre explication. Le point qui était obscur concernait le nombre de pages actuel et réel, cf. remarque de Yann. Marc 17:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I have seen a lot of page with almost the same content. For example s:hr:Kruh u kupa posljednje večere and s:hr:Kruh i kupa posljednje večere. I don'T know the Croatian language, but maybe there is something wrong with your page creation bot or whatever you use. --Jofi 01:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Jofi, You are right. There is some more of typing errors to be corrected. Originally is the first version of the translation. I made it on a Mac ImageWriter II in police Semitica conceived for the writing Hebraic. Then it was necessary it to convert in PC version. During the period of translation I was hard obliged to work as operation, having lost everything, the country, the work on the University. I was without force to make everything well. The keyboard was English and I, I wrote in Croatian and, in more absent-minded by my fate and the whole bankruptcy of the life I does not make the decent correction, and you know that the "u" and l "i" are neighbours on keyboard. But, good God made me avoid the death in the war and He saved me and reunited the family and I makes my offering to thank Him. Everything is free and in glory of God. Thus have of patience with my faults. I am going to order everything. But I am not any more a young man and I need of time. I am going to re-read everything and to correct. In more I still have several miles notes of foot of page to be made, because Wikipedia in everything destroys. Thank you for your understanding.

Diese Seite, wie die anderen, ist der Product von mein Zerstreuung. Ich werde die Bibel noch einmal lesen und die Redaction machen. Tschüss!

Il s'agit là d'une faute. J'ai d'abord collé un grand article qui sera-t-il divisé en petits articles (texte maître), puis les titres de petits articles étaient mis en lien de hypertexte, pleins des fautes. Puis, j'ai aménagé des petites articles et ai corrigé les titres. Mais les fautes sur les titres en cadre de grand article sont restés, parce que tout va étre effacé à la fin du travail. Combien de fois je me dois expliquer et dire qu'articles sont en travail, et que c'est la Bible en question et qu'il faut la considerer en livre et non pas en articles éncyclopédiques sans le lien entre eux? S.V.P., laissez moi à travailler. J'ai tappé et rétappé 10 millions characters. Et il n'y a pas une bourse d'êtat derier moi pour me récompenser.

Ils agit de mon offrande à Dieu et à WikiSource. Après je vais disparaitre de l'écran. Salutation distinguée, à tous et à toutes,--Tomislav Dretar 21:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Croate de nouveau

Donc, un mois après des intervention de la part des utilisateurs: ThomasV, Zhaladshar (Talk) , Jofi , Yann, Marc etc. et leurs exigeances de faire grand nettoyage, voilà que croate a 3700 pages. Il manques 400 pages "vides". Ce ne fait pas que 10% , au total, de nombre accusé. Vous m'avez accusé d'avoir fait la fausse représentation d'avancement de travail croate. Vous avez dit que 50% de travail , au moins, selon vos sondages, est faux. Vous avez vous trompés - de 400%, C'est pour ne pas dir que vous tous n'avez pas dit la vérité. Qu'est qu'il s'est passé? Vous avez cherchés sur faux endroit. La méthode est bien connu dans la simulation de la vérité. Mais pourquoi? Pour empecher une langue, petite en nombre des locuteurs, mais grande en capacités d'expression, qu'elle soit à le pari avec de "grandes" langues. J'ai vous bien averti que votre méthode est fausse. Mais,... votre objectif n'était-il pas - trouver la vérité, mais bien ce que je viens d'indiquer. Croatian, après grande nettoyage compte 3 700 page. Et pourquoi? Parce que j'ai effacé les pages importés de français (architecture, les vins, les événements etc.) pour être traduits après. En ne fait pas cela. C'est juste et il fallait les effacer. Mais, pourquoi il y avait telement de bruit. La publicité negative. Ha, ces Croates, c'est bien connu. Ils sont des....Et pour ce temps, les autres sont bien augmentés le nomber de leurs pages. L'événement en question a fait une belle chose. Il a inscité les autres à faire des efforts suplémentaires. Bien, c'est bien. Mais, dans ma bouche a resté un amertume. Vous avez fait, en concert, un bouclier contre un seul homme provenant d'une langue mal acceuilli depuis de temps où "les Croates ont mangès les cadavres" en sauvetage de l'Empéreur Napoléon I après son défaite en Russie. Pourquoi l'amertume? Parce que c'est de l'hypocrisie qui est à l'origine de vos interventions orchestrés. Merci bien, chers amis, les Européens.

Mon intervention est tombé à pic. Lisez ce texte cité plus bas. Est-ce que vous reconnaissez quelque chose : La rédaction , 01net., le 28/03/2006 à 17h10 : L'éditeur de l'illustre encyclopédie a décidé de contester une étude comparative parue en décembre dernier dans la revue scientifique Nature. Elle portait sur les performances en termes de fiabilité de l'Encyclopaedia Britannica et de sa concurrente (collaborative) en ligne, Wikipedia. La publication concluait à des résultats peu ou prou équivalents : 3,86 erreurs en moyenne pour Wikipedia contre 2,92 pour Britannica. Aujourd'hui, cette dernière vient d'adresser un document d'une vingtaine de pages réfutant point par point les conclusions de la revue, indique le site News.com. « Pratiquement tout, dans l'enquête du journal, des critères pour identifier les inexactitudes au décalage entre le corps de l'article et son gros titre, était faux et trompeur », affirme le document. De son côté la direction de Nature reste de marbre. « Nous rejetons ces accusations, et nous sommes confiants dans le fait que notre comparaison était juste », précise la revue dans un communiqué. --Tomislav Dretar 05:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Thus, one month after interventions on behalf of the users: ThomasV, Zhaladshar ( Talk), Jofi, Yann, Marc etc. language and your requirements to make spring cleaning, and Croatian has 3700 pages. 400 "empty" pages are missing. It does not make that 10 %, on the whole, of accused number. You accused me of having made the false representation of promotion of Croatian work. You said that 50 % of my work, at least, according to your soundings, is false. You deceived you - of 400 %, It is not to say that you did not all say the truth. That is that it took place? You looked on false place. The method is well known in the simulation of the truth. But why? To prevent a language, small in number of the speakers, but big in capacities of expression, whether it is in it bet with "big" languages. I warned well to you that your method is false. But.... Your objective was not - to find the truth, but indeed what I have just indicated. Croatian, later big cleaning account 3 700 pages. And why? Because I erased pages imported by French (architecture, wines, events etc.) To be later translated. In fact it. It is just and it was necessary to erase them. But, why there was so noise. The negative advertisement. Ha, these Croats, it is well known. They are... And for this time, the others are increased well the number of their pages. The event in question made a beautiful thing (matter). It incited the others to make supplementary efforts. Indeed, it's good. But, in my mouth stayed bitterness. You made, in concert, a shield against a single man resulting from a language badly welcomed since of time when «the Croats ate corpses «in rescue of the Emperor Napoleon I after the defeat in Russia. Why the bitterness? Because it is of the hypocrisy which is at the origin of your interventions orchestrated. Thank you indeed, dear friends, the Europeans.

What are you talking about? Are you saying we went on a witch hunt and picked on a small language community, all so that we could increase our own page counts without having to get competition from the Croatian Wikisource?—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 07:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

My intervention fell sheer. Read this text quoted more low. You recognize something: La rédaction , 01net., le 28/03/2006 à 17h10 : The editor of the illustrious encyclopedia decided to dispute a comparative study appeared last December in the Natural scientific review. She concerned the performances in terms of reliability of Encyclopaedia Britannica and her on-line collaborative, Wikipedia. The publication ended in results more or less equivalent: 3,86 errors on average for Wikipedia against 2,92 for Britannica. Today, this last one has just sent a document of about twenty pages refuting point by point the conclusions of the review, indicates the site News.com. « Practically everything, in the inquiry of the newspaper, the criteria to identify the inaccuracies with the gap between the body of the article and its banner headline, was false and misleading », asserts the document. From his part the direction stays of marble. « We throw reject these charges, and we are confident in the fact that our comparison was just », clarifies the review in a communiqué. --Tomislav Dretar 06:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Polski

in polish it should be

"Polski
Otwarta biblioteka
"

Done. Yann 16:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Croatian enter in the 4.136 articles

Croatian enter in the 4.136 articles. Users have made 14.222 edits, an average of 2,43 per page, since --Tomislav Dretar 13:30, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

indeed, the croatian site made some progress. I made a new poll: 21% of the pages on hr.wikisource are empty or near-empty. this is much better than the 50% I measured a few weeks ago. I also noticed that some other contributors than you started to add material on this site, which is very good.

For this poll I picked 100 random pages, so you may compute confidence intervals if you like (and if you can).

I encourage you to pursue this way. As stated above, I will update the pagecount only once you reach 90% of non-empty pages.

ThomasV 15:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

ThomsV, j'ai tort. J'ai trouvé la cause de mes fautes. J'ai entassé de textes à les travailler dans le future contarairement aux régles de ne pas coller les textes non-finis. Accepteriez Vous mes excuses? J'ai encore à travailler des années sur la Bible et le Coran. Et cela suffira de ma part. A la fin je voudrais ajouter la Bible de Jeruzalem en plus de dernière T.O.B.8parce que ce que je trqvqil c'est la première T.O.B., bien sûr si javais vecu jusqu'à 100 ans. ça peut aller pour ancien adèpte de Grand Barbu? Comme même - panta rhei et je ne crois plus que Hegel se tient-il droit sur sa tête pour être renverser. L'évolution c'est une réligion comme la révolution.

Et je ne suis pas faux Christe mais simple presentateur de cela qui est caché à la publique croate. Merci pour la compréhenssion.--Tomislav Dretar 19:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I just ran a query on hr.wikisource. 89% of the pages were non-empty. It's probably safe to update the Croation WS's page count now.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 21:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

ok, done, although I did not take time to recount. ThomasV 14:00, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

meanwhile, hr sysops have been cleaning Tomislav's mess. About 200 pages have been deleted in the last few days. ThomasV 05:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Welsh

According to http://cy.wikisource.org/wiki/Arbennig:Statistics, Welsh Wikisource has "1,397 total pages in the database. This includes "talk" pages, pages about Wikisource, minimal "stub" pages, redirects, and others that probably don't qualify as content pages. Excluding those, there are 18,446,744,073,709,551,613 pages that are probably legitimate content pages." Somehow I have trouble believing that there over 18 million million million pages there, but if so, I guess we need to update this main page accordingly... Angr/Talk 00:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

yeah, you need to ask developers to initialize this counter. ThomasV 08:40, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Linking sources to historical articles?

Hi,

I don't even know which forum this question should go to, but the Wikisources community sounds close enough.

It would be interesting to somehow link the information in historical articles to primary sources to let the reader understand how we know what we know. Eg, the information about the Hundred Years' War could refer to the Froissart chronicles, biography of Cicero could refer to Plutarch and so on.

In the ideal world, every sentence or paragraph of a historical article would be associated with certain tags. Then the paragraphs in primary sources would be marked up with the same tags so that the link between the two becomes obvious. So the phrase "Finding himself unable to outmanoeuvre Philip, Edward positioned his forces for battle, and Philip's army attacked him at the famous Battle of Crecy" could have a reference to the tag 'Crecy' in Froissart's chapter "OF THE BATTLE OF CRESSY BETWEEN THE KING OF ENGLAND AND THE FRENCH KING", and the relevant paragraph in the latter would be marked with tags 'Crecy', 'Cressy', 'Edward III', 'Philip VI', 'Battle' etc.

Obviously, to do it in a comprehensive way is an enormous undertaking. I'm trying to find out if anything like this has been proposed before or if someone knows of a framework to implement that. If there are other souls who think it's a good idea, I can tag a couple of articles to see what can be done.

I don't think I quite follow you. Could you work with one or two articles to indicate what you mean? From what I think you mean, you are referring to interwiki linking, but I'm not exactly sure. An example would be great.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 18:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

articles -> pages

I propose to replace 'articles' with 'pages'. 'Articles' is ok for an encyclopedia, but probably not for wikisource. I did write 'articles' in the first place, so I am to blame for the current situation... ThomasV 14:22, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, "pages" is more indicative of Wikisource's contents than "articles." Personally, I wish there were a way to only indicate the number of works we have (to give a more accurate account of WS's database), but "pages" is fine, since there is no way I can think of to do that.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 14:54, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I would favourite page instead of article, too, -jkb- 14:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

done for fr es en de. ThomasV 22:15, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

In Romanian it should be "pagini". -- 86.120.225.27 11:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I would prefer to use article or "Wiki article", because that is what is counted. For example there have been added about 900 pages from s:de:Zimmerische Chronik to de, but the article count did not increase because the pages have no links. They have only templates. That is why I changed the counting to a manual count of works at the de-Main Page. If we would call that what is counted simply "page" it would be even more confusing. --Jofi 22:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

"wiki articles" is not an easy to understand concept. keep in mind that front pages are read by many, who have no clue about the mediawiki software features... I know that the article count is not a perfect tool, but it might be the best we've got. ThomasV 09:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

The article count fits the needs of Wikipedia. It doesn't say much about the Wikisource projects. So it is "wrong" anyway. Maybe the developers will add an other variable some day (all pages in the main namespace or all characters/words etc.). BTW: I would prefer to update only every 1000th article at projects with more than 10,000. So it wouldn't be necessary to update the main page so often. --Jofi 14:10, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with that; three zeros is more cute! ThomasV 14:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes Sir. You guessed.

This topic is a continuation of a previous discussion Yes Sir. You guessed.

Hi, dear Tomislav Dretar. I must say, that sometimes I cannot follow the discussion. First, today, this section (Yes Sir...) is a bit out of place. Secondly, it seems for you to be a problem the number of articles the Croatian Wikisource have, what is a nonsence (we do not want quantity, but quality, ok?). And third, could you please make a short summary in English if you post here? I speak some five languages but not French, sorry. Thx, -jkb- 17:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Tomislav, we did not go on any kind of a witch hunt so that we could "keep the Croatian Wikisource down." Our actions were out of concern for the project as a whole. We care about quality and content, not sheer numbers, of articles. To advertise that a Wikisource sub-domain has an extra 500 hundred pages than it really does (because those 500 pages were all blank), hurts all of our credibility--most of all yours. We want people to take this project seriously, so we will not take actions that will be detrimental to that goal, even if it means we will not update the Croatian Wikisource's article count until an accurate one can be taken.—Zhaladshar ^(Talk) 21:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I am in the wrong!--Tomislav Dretar

New logo

Can someone please change the logo to reference http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Wikisource-nt.png seeing as though we now have a new logo? Thanks, 203.206.245.238 05:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Is there anyone with the sufficient privileges here? Andreas 14:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

creo que hablamos de lo mismo, EN ESTA PAGINA NO SE HA CAMBIADO EL LOGO

I tried to change it and hope it works not only in Firefox. -jkb- 09:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

It's OK in IE, LadyInGrey 16:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

nice to hear it. I hope you are OK, too, best wishes -jkb- 22:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Change of link

The Catalan link (català) should point to ca.wikisource.org Llull 11:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Done, LadyInGrey 16:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

New update

Please, update languages on Main page. According to this, Portuguese Wikisource have more text-units than Russian Wikisource. Thanks and sorry for my english. 555 13:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

link to Bulgarian Wikisource

Please change the link to Bulgarian, it got separated (http://bg.wikisource.org/). I am going to move the content from here to there. TIA, Bggoldie 20:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

done ThomasV 10:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Kurdish language

The Kurdish language has more than 2900 articles. Why is the Kurdish link not in this circle? It has more articles than Turkish and Russian. Please change this. Killaruna | talk 2 me

Kurdi Wikisource has only 15 texts (Category:Kurdî). The text counter on the Kurdish main page counts all texts here on the multilingual Wikisource domain. /81.229.37.183 23:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource in Portuguese

I would like to ask for that the Wikisource in Portuguese was enclosed enters the ten greaters of this page. Thanks. 201.24.11.125 22:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

done ThomasV 10:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Split "all languages"

Due to the increasing number of subdomains and languages: is it possible to split minor wikisource subdomain now in "all language" list, in 1000+ texts, 100+ texts, 10+ texts. As in wikipedia portal?

Statistics

Thanks! --Accurimbono 10:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Bosnian Wikisource

On main page there is no Bosnian Wikisource. Please add it. (bs.wikisource.org)

done ThomasV 06:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Number of English pages

I don't think English Wikisource really has 30000+ pages. The number should be adjusted down because of all the soft redirects. According to s:en:Special:Mostlinkedcategories there are more than 4000 of them so the real number of pages is ca 27000. /82.212.68.183 22:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Almost all of the 3000 new texts on the English wikisource in the recent update of the Main page are soft redirects. In July more than 2800 soft redirects were created, so there are now 7000 of them. A more accurate text count on English Wikipedia is 26000+. /82.212.68.183 09:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Text

The text below the spanish option is blocking the wikisource logo in firefox 1.5.0.1. --This unsigned comment was added by the person known as "Mac Lover" on wikipedia.

nothing like that in Firefox 1.0.7 - so I cannot help, sorry, -jkb- 08:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Undertitel of germn WS

Please change the Undertitel of german Wikisource to Die freie Quellensammlung. We are not using the translation of the english word Library. Thanks --Finanzer 11:38, 2 October 2006 (UTC) (Bureaucrat on german wikisource)

Thanks for changing :-) --Finanzer 22:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

How to add languages?

Our language (ru-sib:) has not subdomain, but it has sources. In Meta one sdvised me to post sources here. But how to add our language? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Obviously you do not need to wait for an answer - you are making this right. You add pages in your language here as you do, and you should categorize all of them by an outstanding category, i.e. Category:Siberian. This is very important when you will move them to your own subdomain. You can make subcategories to Category:Siberian, too, if you wish, but you should avoid that they could be confused with similaqr ones in other languages; so the best way is to make something like SibLiterature, SibLaw, SibHistory etc., I did it in the old Czech part as well and it functions. -jkb- 08:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Words for Indic script on main page

For the link to telugu wikisource http://te.wikisource.org/ the text is తెలుగు. More over indic languages doesnot render properly in firefox browser when the text is justified. __Mpradeep 11:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikiversity

The main page is missing a link to http://www.wikiversity.org 555 18:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Er... any Admin in the neighborhood?

Sorry to disturb, but am I the only one to read Vikiversity without doubleV? I suppose it's a typo. εΔω 13:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

missing publications

Dear collegues! We had four publication under http://wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Uwe_Kils/ which are now missing. Does anybody know how to find them? We put alot of work in creating them Uwe kils 12:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

they might be on en.ws.org ThomasV 14:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Sanskrit article on wikisource(Hindi)

The Ramcharitmanas was not written in Hindi but in Sanskrit. So it should not be included here. However, there is a traslation of the content in hindi written by someone elsewhich can be included here.

If you mean the Ramacharitamanas by Tulsi Das, it most certainly was not written in Sanskrit but written in Avadhi, which is considered, variously, a dialect-precursor of Hindi or a language in its own right. For those who know modern Hindi, reading the Ramacharitamanas will be made easier but still would require learning the grammar and vocabulary of medieval Avadhi. Someone who knows only Hindi will not find Tulsi's work intelligible although many individual words will be recognizable. Nonetheless, it is NOT in Sanskrit Interlingua 13:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the information. It is tagged as Hindi now. For now, it doesn't matter much, but when a Hindi subdomain is created, contributors will have to decide if they include it or not. Regards, Yann 18:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)