User talk:John Vandenberg

mention

Your name has been mentioned on my talk. cygnis insignis 00:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

cygnis insignis has outed me and I am terrified. Wikisource as a refuge for me is gone. can I change my name so he will not know what it is? And change it on the Commons too, as that is where he tracked it down in order to follow me? Is there any way I can get away from the bullying clique? You have given me wonderful advice so far, but now this outing has happened and I will be a target again. What am I to do? I cannot edit on Wikisource any more. I am terrified. Another editor (talk) 13:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I may just give up. This is not a safe place and I am growing tired of trying. No amount of excellent work will redeem me. Another editor (talk) 11:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

DNB01

Hi John...thought you might be of some help getting started with the three 1901 supplements based upon your errata work in '08. Will need help with setting up the three index pages and also setting up the associated djvu files anything beyond that would be bonus. Was planning on connecting back to the project through the internal links page. Thanks in advance...looking forward to working with you.JamAKiska (talk) 19:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

(Step 1 - establishing index pages for transclusion) This represents my research to date...Need to fit within established DNB structure to include file naming conventions and the like...so my request for help is one of review...I will also be inviting other DNB reviewers as well to improve likelihood of success. Thank-you for your help with this.

• From my reading, the second License is better choice for our situation and should clear commons.

{{PD-1923}} only applies to US, internationally better to use Non-US Work tag {{PD/1923|1926}} Public Domain License (WS author page) which informs all concerned publication was prior to 1923 and the author died over 80 years ago.

Volume III specifics:

• (Djvu file) Index:Dictionary of National Biography. Sup. Vol III (1901).djvu
• Official name volume 3: Dictionary of National Biography, Supplement Vol III How-Woodward

g – p - - - - - - t – t – T – v_vi Pages 1 – 522 [540vu] needs index pg of at least 530 pages (Vol 3 has the most pages)

• (source) Supp III⁠Condition of Vol 3 is fair to good, at least 5 missing pages...other 2 volumes in better shape...
• (Description) English: The Dictionary of National Biography (DNB) is a standard work of reference on notable figures from British history. The original 63 volumes were published between 1885 and 1900. Three supplementary volumes were published in 1901. Supplement Volume III How - Woodward

The matching data for volumes I and II will mirror that of volume III above and is located on the discussion page of DNB01.

(Step 2) will be template work on DNB01 to mirror DNB00.JamAKiska (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Created documentation Template:DNB01/doc and have asked Kathleen, the most recent editor of that file, to include this documentation to ease the explanation to new editors learning the ropes at DNB01. Documentation has been transcluded into DNB01 template which does not behave in a manner similar to DNB01 in that Wiki-article defaults to on, the volume indicator is missing and the lateral links don't illuminate as with DNB00 template. Kathleen got the transclusion portion squared away and Charles is working the other aspects of this template. Suspect this may be in-work for some time.

(Step 3) located seven non-transcluded DNB01 articles for later transclusion and posted for the time being onto DNB01 page, added one of my own as well.

(Step 4) was establishing "Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement" page with assorted links back to Wikisource:WikiProject DNB. Established link to Errata index to include that step into the article creation process. JamAKiska (talk) 00:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

My memory is going; could you point me towards my "errata work in '08."? (I've found Index:Dictionary of National Biography. Errata (1904).djvu)

I've put aside some time this evening to try to work out how I may help you. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I have those three DJVU files you've pointed out, and am checking them using your notes about missing, hidden and unreadable pages. Have you looked for duplicates of these three volumes on archive.org? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

That would be good to do for the 2nd and 3rd volumes as a minimum.JamAKiska (talk) 04:25, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

While we are doing the supplementary works, we should also set up the original (dup) and later epitome. (pdf->djvu conversion in progress) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The duplicate volumes II and III are VERY readable.JamAKiska (talk) 05:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC) It seems to me that we initially have the three supplements ready to start the process. I do not expect any resistance with this License. I am also comfortable that the License applies to all the documents discussed at this setting. Might have to find alternatives if we discover an index page has a storage limit, and the 2nd Supplement would currently require a conversion to the djvu format.JamAKiska (talk) 06:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The 'Google' scansets are often problematic, and it is rare that there is a Google scanset without a non-Google scanset. I've now found a non-Google scanset for Volume 1 as well. If we are both happy with the quality of the ones I have found, I will upload them tomorrow. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, those are great source files. What can I do to help? JamAKiska (talk) 06:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I need to stitch together a new vol 1 consisting of the good pages from each. I can also scan a copy of any pages which are not useful from either scanset. The duplicate vol 2 & 3 look perfect, but I haven't checked for omitted pages. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

-Thats great news!...thanks...I'd be glad to spend time in that effort (generate a list of any replacement pages. I will need a steer. JamAKiska (talk) 03:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Navigation pages completed for the three volumes...am transferring article links alphabetically from author pages to the the 1901 Supplement page prior to populating Navigation pages. Discovered DNB lkpl link will need to be modified for DNB01 use, as the piped link footprint takes more space.

Article transfer from Author pages complete thanks to Charles's lighting moves.

Going through Vol. II. WOW ! JamAKiska (talk) 11:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Completed proofreading of volumes II and III. WOW ! Added links, pagelists, and background information to those 2 volumes and the errata volume as well. JamAKiska (talk) 17:53, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Am helping update the {{DNB link}} template to properly cite 1901, 1903, 1904 and 1912 DNB publications. Just in case your schedule permits the creation of those djvu files. I'll start searching for backup files to those you have already provided. Planning on leaving Volume II and III index pages off-line to enable a simultaneous three volume release. JamAKiska (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

It looks likes I wont be uploading Vol 1 this weekend. My apologies. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries...Keep up the great work ! Let me know what help you need, if any, from this end. JamAKiska (talk) 11:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

• Volume II is currently available for proofreading. With Volume III, the OCR text layer does not fill in yet so I switched the status back to needs OCR text layer. The image quality in both Volumes is exceptional. JamAKiska (talk) 22:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Errata

Errata- still trying to visualize how they will best be included in DNB articles...currently they can be included as notes...though as we move forward...transclusion (or hover script (?))...in which case not sure if a navigation page is needed (though it may be as an interim step [scaffolding]). The format seems to lend itself to a four column structure (3 columns of shorthand followed by a lengthy comment). Mr. Burton completed the preface last month. I am only able to visualize this with a lot of section links on each page (which is why I am pausing to explore options). JamAKiska (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

A sidenote or hover would work well. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

-I like both those options too, as it would give me a chance to try something new! The key is how to format the errata pages...hmm...JamAKiska (talk) 03:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I spent some time this morning editing page 1 of the Errata volume using a collapsible table format that is quite user friendly (pleasant surprise). I need to get the existing DNB templates compatible with DNB01 articles, before I research the side notes for the Errata information. And the templates will take a back seat to finish proofing the Volume I of the 1901 Supplement. JamAKiska (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

• This may help to include errata {{Definition}}. The article, Crealock, Henry Hope, contains an example for including Errata adjustments. JamAKiska (talk) 13:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Errata Breakthrough…The table format and transclusion were a bit challenging. ThomasV helped reformat the table into a Transclusion friendly format. Anchors allow links from article to Errata pages, while transcluded notes provide reader with snapshot on extra-notes. The three pages that apply to 1901 Supp are all prepped to transclude as the articles are written. The multi-line notes require "includeonly" statements binding one block for Transclusion. JamAKiska (talk) 20:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Need your input

.... over in Wikisource:Scriptorium#Broken_file_-_needs_deleting about an index proposed for deletion (wrong forum, I know) that you created some time ago. Just not sure what the deal with the "TIFF demo" was and if its still needed or not. TIA. George Orwell III (talk) 21:42, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

You have new messages

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Billinghurst's talk page.
Message added 00:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

bugzilla fix not implemented — billinghurst sDrewth 00:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC) ping. 03:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Did you find a cage to shake? — billinghurst sDrewth 08:39, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

News from one of your "source pupils"

Dear John, I've been pulled by it.source friends to try to gain an account into toolserver. Now I have it, and I successfully logged in and I posted my html file "hello world" into public html space. Believe me, I consider such "hello world" a great result. :-)

I'm confused and worried about such a hard adventure; I hope that it will not turn out to be far above my skills. Can be I'll ask you for some help (just some suggestion and/or link). I know from experience that you are a great teacher! --Alex brollo (talk) 09:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, of course you can ask for help with the toolserver. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 09:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll ask you as soon as I'll find myself into a mess! --Alex brollo (talk) 10:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Tooloserver question 1

There are lots of banal questions I'd like to send to you about toolserver... I will not post any of them. :-)

I ask you only this "strategic" question.

As perhaps you know, I'm driving a bot that screens recentChanges, selects edits into relevant napemspaces, and "does things" on them. There are two possible strategies:

1. to read RecentChanges at intervals, parsing new edits;
2. to use an #irc channel to read edit list.

There are advantages using approach 1, since "fast edits" (t.i. an immediate fix of and edit by the contributor) can be avoided (the bot only considers last edit of a page). When running, Alebot reads RecentChanges at 20 or 40 minute intervals.

Is this interval a good one for a cron job running in toolserver with approach 1, or have I to study irc bot scripts as soon as possible? Can you link a good, ready irc script for my bot? Thanks! --Alex brollo (talk) 15:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Templates at Proposed deletions

{{Header-layout}} and {{Header-layout-override}} were proposed for deletion. Are these currently still in use? --Eliyak T·C 15:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

multi-language texts

I'm working with several translations to English, most of which are solely in English but it got me thinking about what to do with multi-language texts, particularly translations which maintain the original. I noted the following examples:

• Laozi_(Wikisource_translation)
• Three_Kingdoms
• la:Liber:The poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus - Francis Warre Cornish.djvu

All three of these have an apparent target audience of English speakers. Is there a reason that the third one is at la and should we consider a transwiki to here? It would likely get more attention here.

I can see the possibility of creating a link here to the la text, possibly by creating a page with notes organized somewhat like a dab. However, it seems that in cases where the target audience is clear (the title and introductory material are in only one language or, for the title anyway, one language is primary), that we ought to have a general rule to avoid the likelihood of the same work being separately transcribed on multiple wikisources. Obviously there are those occasional texts that are written in two languages or more in the original (many treaties for example) and there are occasional works that are translated into multiple languages within a single book, but these are far more rare than two-language parallel text translations such as those above.

--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 00:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Doug, a good example of a multi-language text is Index:Zwei-Plus-Vier-Vertrag.djvu. That text contains four languages, and all four Wikisource projects have an index page, with interwikis linking them together. This allows each project to build content pages (Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany and de:Zwei-plus-Vier-Vertrag) from the pagescans.

wrt la:Liber:The poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus - Francis Warre Cornish.djvu, we do need to create Index:The poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus - Francis Warre Cornish.djvu, and import any validated content from there (copy and paste would be quicker).

I think it is useful to have a copy of the transcription on Latin Wikisource, so that the Latin text can be used to create Latin content pages. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

John, thanks for the reply and I agree with you. With respect to treaties, I see the issue as substantially different, they are actually written in multiple languages for different audiences, whereas this was clearly written for an English speaking audience as I mentioned above. However, I had not considered the possibility that for this book the English text should be here and the Latin content there. After reading your response, I do agree that the Latin text is in itself valid for the Latin WS and I would also agree that the English translation could stand here in its own right. However, I still question whether one site ought to host the entire work, even if that resulted in duplication of some of the text ; it seems strange to manufacture a split in a book that was written entirely for speakers of English just because some is Latin; especially where the Latin was integral to the original text. Though this also makes me wonder if a book written in two languages for a single audience doesn't really fall in to the ether betwixt WS and WB and it also makes me think that maybe we should consider allowing cross project transclusion within the WS family for this reason.

I agree that importing is unnecessary, since within WS the work we do transcribing isn't copyrightable.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Another thought: do we need to clarify Wikisource:What is Wikisource?#Languages and translations wherein it says that "Parallel source with translations into English" belong at enWS.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

As this is an English work, the entire work should be transcribed and presented here.

Only the Latin text on the pages are useful over Latin Wikisource; they need pagescans too, and the originals are much harder to find. The duplication of the Latin text over there isn't ideal, but it isn't likely to cause major problems (Google will send most people to the English version).

cross project translation may be useful for cases like this, however this capability is unlikely to be deployed on Wikisource anytime soon. Here are the relevant bugs about that technology, and mw:User:Peter17/Reasonably efficient interwiki transclusion is the latest attempt to fill the gap. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, then we're really in agreement on this. I wasn't sure that the work belonged on both projects as that didn't seem to be wiki-cool, but I really don't care about the duplication if nobody else does. Clear links on the texts to the other language version (in addition to the sidebar) will ensure that all is clear. Thank you for the references, I'll take a look at those shortly. I'll start work on this shortly, unless you or someone else does first. :-) Thanks again for helping me understand this, I'm still trying to absorb how all the WS projects relate. Life is so much different (and nicer!) here than at enwiki.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 17:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Wow, we're really covering this guy's work heavily: b:The Poetry of Gaius Valerius Catullus :-) - though talk there does say their copy is reserved for one with comprehensive annotations.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

• I created Index:The poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus - Francis Warre Cornish.djvu and made changes at la:Liber:The poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus - Francis Warre Cornish.djvu to reflect the author of the Latin work rather than the source edition, please check it and if your Latin is decent, the info on the Latin Liber space page could be translated if you get time. I'll start copying work over. I also noticed we already have some of the English text here, See e.g. Carmina.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 21:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy new year!

Happy new year John!

I guess, I will not waste your time again with my "ideas", since I found other patient victims: Ineuw, Inductiveload, and other... :-) ... I can't forget your help when I was an absolurte beginner, and my confusion when looking at the terrible code used to obtain dotted lines into summary of The Modern Art of Taming Wild Horses. Well, I discovered a trick to simplify a lot that code. :-) --Alex brollo (talk) 09:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Happy new year Alex. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Imported templates

Gday. When you imported templates the other day, some have overwritten existing templates, non-seriously though there are consequences. Also the imported templates have categories that pointed to WP, which I started to change, however, I just don't have the patience today to wade through the spaghetti mix of layered templates. I have edited a couple to point to these, though that is far as I got before, I lost patience with template digging, as there are still more links within them.

• Category:Wikisource semi-protected templates
• Category:Wikisource move-protected templates
• Category:Wikisource protected templates
• Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates

— billinghurst sDrewth 00:08, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. I only imported one revision, and it looked like these imports were a no-op (e.g. [1]). I now see that the relevant diff is the one prior to that (e.g. [2]) and I have a lot of cleanup to do. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:40, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yep, there is still some issues, through Special:PrefixIndex/Template:Documentation, the end box now only displays half size, and there is still some references to Wikipedia through them. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:58, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Template:Authority/base

I have strung it together, and it probably can be done with something other than nested #if tests by someone with half a clue. Then I have successfully applied it through Template:Men-at-the-Bar lkpl<p.My reasoning for the extra parameters is to allow for different thinkers on anchors, some will have page refs, some will want to do to text anchors, so I included both, just because! Three levels of piped output cascading down, and I probably could have it that if there is NO anchors, then don't pipe anything. If they are using this template, they principally have a reason to hide something, hence there will be a reason to pipe something. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:42, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Author:Lee Milton Hollander

I am not understanding something. At the author's page you have a copyright renewal, yet we have copies of the work. Would you mind clarifying. FWIW the author's dates of life are 1880-1972. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can see, our 1923 edition is PD, as I couldn't find a renewal within 28 years.

The renewal there is for a latter edition. That the renewal covers 'translation' isn't something I understand; perhaps the translation was improved upon. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

So there is no earlier registration and that is a renewal? Or they would have allowed a renewal though an earlier version is out of copyright? Interesting that done by daughter when father is still alive. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:32, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't find one then or now. I've looked under periodicals and contributions to periodicals in the Pennsylvania copyright records.

I've seen cases where the renewal appears to cover a work which can't be covered by copyright; I assume that has happened here. We should probably categorise these with a hidden cat, so they can be found later. "Works with a renewal that covers a later edition"? That doesn't say that the Copyright Office goofed up.

The problem with this case is we haven't cited the 1960 edition, so it is hard to know for sure. The above category name isn't too specific, so it should be fine for this case.

It is interesting that it was the daughter who renewed it. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:10, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

FWIW we need to migrate the work from the main namespace to the djvu, at the moment we have in duplicate. ThomasBot seems to have its match components stalled. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

reCAPTCHA for source

dear John, while going deeper and deeper into djvu files and djvuLibre routines into it.source, unexpectedly we got a "wysiwyg djvu layer text editor" (simply a python script which extracts layer text, converts mapped text into html, opens a html editor, then finds edits and convert them back into mepped text and reloads it into djvu file). This has no practical utility IMHO, but we found it useful for some tests. Then we went a little deeper into ddjvu.exe and we found that simply adding some rows to such a script, we could select words with unrecognized characters (usually pointed by a ^), extract their image, and use their coordinates as unique keys for the word. In brief, we got the core of a reCAPTCHA engine; all what is needed to show te image to a human, to get his transciption, and to use such transcription into the original OCR to refine it. Is has been really sorprising to see our script run, and find by itself the problematic word and to extract it and to save its image into a tiff file....

Is there some working project to get a "source reCAPCHA"? If it isn't, do you think that something of our it.source work could be inspiring? --Alex brollo (talk) 21:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

It sounds great. When it is stable, we could have a wikicapcha in every language, and package it up as an extension for mediawiki and integrate it into the widely used mw:Extension:ConfirmEdit. see mw:Captcha for a bit more info. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm just rewarded to know that I'm not mad. :-)

About implementation, I can't do more than posting here "the magic script" that finds doubtful words into djvu text layer, coupled with their "fingerprint" (that is coordinates into the page by now, but which should be name of djvu file + djvu page number + coordinates for full, unambiguous reference), with OCR doubtful interpretation and with tiff image of the word. How to build a database from these data; how to keep djvu file into something like an "incubator" (I think, toolserver) to allow fast and "history-free" edits of it from contributors edits; how to build a good interface to that database for contributors it absolutely far from my present and future kills. In the meantime, such an idea of a "djvu file incubator" would be useful too, for other kinds of djvu text layer refinements as those built by Hesperian, founded on search of "exotic" words that are not listed into a dictionary. --Alex brollo (talk) 08:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I sent you an email to join, if you like, to a shared DropBox folder where I'm doing all my "recaptcha tests". I gave you first keys to enter into the fuzzy logic of the whole thing. I apologyze for my horrible,personal python slang. --Alex brollo (talk) 22:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok Thanks! I see that you joined DropBox folder. Here same details:

1. dyvu.py was designed as the core of a wysiwyg djvu text layer script, but it needs KompoZer as a html editor to run (and, with KopoZer, really it runs, just to do some test!);
2. the logic is: to extract text layer, to convert into html where coordinates are saved as span attributes of words, then to reload words into the right place of text layer using coordinates;
3. the "reCAPTCHA trick" is nested where the conversion text->html comes out, into function produciHtml, after if "^" in word: condition.

At it.source we can't wait for advancements.... I will not write anything into wikisource-l, but we hope to see something about there as soon as you think that the idea could run somehow! --Alex brollo (talk) 06:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I doubt I can find time to help with this in the next month. support and additional tech resources may come from spreading the word. see this thread. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Also there is a wikitech-l thread about it now, and bugzilla:5309 has been mentioned.-- John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:27, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

The wikicaptcha idea has been illustrated into wikisource-l and quoted into wikitech-l. In the meantime, we are going on with our layman exploration; djvuLibre routines are running into my toolserver account and the idea is to go a little ahead, even if a running, usable wikicaptcha needs lots of skill, much more than I can share. --Alex brollo (talk) 14:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

contact

please - off wiki - could you indicate which preferred channel of regularl communication - as many things need to be followed up out of this space - cheers SatuSuro (talk) 23:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Style sheet

Would you please adding any "style sheet" onto/in respect of the Thai Wikisource for the tables therein are colourless and have no any line. Octahedron80 said it is so required. Thank you so much.

--Aristitleism (talk) 09:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Best wishes

Jack Merridew 18:49, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

:'( John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Latest on PD-Manifesto?

Just wondering what is up with our consensus opinion in re freedom of American speech. I'd like to transcribe Michael Moore's speech in Wisconsin, which he has explicitly called for to be spread "far and wide" on his blog[3], as it seems rather monumental (despite his abject failure to utter the exact text of the Gnu Publc License during it, which certain zealots here now require). Do I just add it to the list of "dubious" manifestos that we already have? Or are we being good government muppets and suppressing it here? Let me know how I can wing it, please. -- Kendrick7 (talk) 04:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

In my left-thinking anti-establishmentian opinion, the appropriate test for 'manifesto' on Wikisource is not whether the author wants it to be distributed far and wide, but whether it was distributed far and wide, and has therefore become part of the commons. There is lots of self-published nonsense that authors and motivational speakers want redistributed, but it is not our mission to do that, or at least we shouldn't be the first to do it.

I don't have time at the moment to evaluate the importance of this speech; my guess is that it is far too recent to have become a culturally important speech. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I would assume that the old saying that "Wikipedia is not paper" extends to this project as well; you might not know w:Michael Moore but he's arguably the USA's leading leftist voice. Coincidentally, I'm just now watching the HBO recent documentary "Reagan" and notice that what they call Ronald Reagan's most important speech doesn't even have a usage tag, although clearly it would fall into the "manifesto" realm. If the fury of the now several year old attempts at purgations of public speeches has now passed, I am happy to resume adding notable and freely given speeches to the project, as is my wont. I turn to you as someone who I assume has their finger on our slow-moving and, at times, lackadaisical community's pulse. -- Kendrick7 (talk) 02:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

'WP:PAPER' has no meaning here; see WS:WWI instead. My finger is busted; the pulse may be found over at WS:S. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair use is a legal use of copyright material. Wikisource cannot host items based upon fair use. At this point in time we can see no legal basis for the Template:PD-manifesto as exemption from the copyright laws of the United States of America. Billinghurst (talk) 02:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Who the heck are you, again? Copyright applies to created, tangible works, speech is just temporary vibrations of the air. Free speech is a founding ideal of my country. -- Kendrick7 (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikisource:Possible copyright violations = we, and the discussion that took place, which is in the archives. Free speech is the right to say something. Copyright is the implementation and protection of intellectual property rights, as legislated in your country. Your legislators obviously do not see a conflict. John is right about where further conversation should take place. Billinghurst (talk) 00:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Look the reason you can't find a legal basis one way or the other in regards to the copyrightablity of freely given speech, is the same reason you can't find photographs of Martians, or blueprints for how to build an igloo in the tropics. It's not due to a conspiracy -- your thesis is completely daft. My god, by your reckoning w:stenographers are cold hard criminals. Anyone who confessed to a crime could merely assert their copyright and never hear of the matter again. Your position is simply completely irrational untenable. -- Kendrick7 (talk) 03:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Edited my previous remark, because, as such, your position could be rational, but simply is not given the world and the way it actually works. I appreciate, Billinghurst, that you are a dedicated contributor to this project, and I don't blame you for being protective, and, you know, I'm not here for an argument, but I still think if you took a step back you'd see the wisdom of what I'm trying to impart here. -- Kendrick7 (talk) 03:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

You have new messages

Hello, John Vandenberg. You have new messages at Graham87's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Graham87 (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

sdel

terima kasih ;) Jack Merridew 01:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Help

I am blocking in enwiki. Please help me. I am not a puppet of w:en:User:Ebrahimi-amir. I dont know why I blocking. Thanks. --Vugar 1981 (talk) 07:13, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Will you agree to not revert on w:Azerbaijani people ? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I agree. --Vugar 1981 (talk) 12:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Can I hoped for a favorable result? --Vugar 1981 (talk) 11:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I have notified the blocking admin and also left a note on your English Wikipedia talk page. A result may take a few days. Thank you for your patience. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I agree conditions of Khoikhoi. --Vugar 1981 (talk) 03:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)