Template talk:Page

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search

links to scanned pages[edit]

The "links to scanned pages" link isnt appearing. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

this is because I removed the (apparently useless) "zzz" span. sorry about the confusion. ThomasV 06:38, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Where is the "zzz" being used? This should be documented, as I also thought it was unnecessary. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I renamed it : [1] ThomasV 09:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
it would be great to get rid of the NewSection template (replace with LST), so that we can simplyfy the page template. ThomasV 09:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

This is broken again, probably because ThomasV's changes were reverted[2]. We need to know why this additional empty span is required. I have quickly looked through the code at MediaWiki:Common.js section "Display options" and I cant quickly see why the span is needed. John Vandenberg (chat) 23:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

thinsp[edit]

Looking at Waltzing Matilda in IE6, it appears that HTML entity thinsp isnt supported by that browser. I see this is being reported elsewhere as an IE6 problem.[3] John Vandenberg (chat) 21:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Here are the different ways of doing spaces:

" " - normal space
" " - thinsp entity
"" - U+2009 inside {{unicode}}
" " - U+2009 in a span with font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"
" " - thinsp entity in a span with font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"
" " - U+2009
" " - &# 8201;
" " - ensp
" " - emsp

What do from and to do?[edit]

The linked article doesn't say anything about them. Prosody 04:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

They are now deprecated now that Labeled Section Transcluding (LST) is supported. I've updated the documentation. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Some issues with template[edit]

It seems that this documentation might be a bit out of date. The documentation says that a "Link to scanned pages" will be added to the toolbox in the Monobook skin. I am not seeing it. Has this been removed? Also, I'm having formatting issues with the template, in that I am forced to use a table to keep the transcluded text from being smushed on top of the "[page]" link. I know this has been asked before, but does anyone know why this happens?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 00:50, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I have been away from Wikisource for some months, and looking back at my own work on The_Ballad_of_Reading_Gaol today, I still see both of the problems mentioned by Zhaladshar above. I am pretty confident that both of these problems have arisen since I last worked on the Ballad in July 2008. I hesitate to do anything to my document because this seems like something that an expert is about to fix in the template definition. I hope that such an expert will comment soon. Thanks. --Mike O'D (talk) 23:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Position[edit]

I have added an option Position: itwas created by Philippe on fr-ws.--Zyephyrus (talk) 10:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Experimental category[edit]

I went to remove the Experimental tag, and found that it is must be deeply linked into one of the components. It would be nice if that category could be removed for this active and widely-used template. Thanks. -- billinghurst (talk) 09:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Recategorized; the categories and interwiki links are on the documentation subpage. —Pathoschild 00:40:09, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Missing page numbers?[edit]

It seems that this template is no longer adding page numbers when transcluding pages from the Page namespace. Any reason why not? Without visible page numbers, it's much more difficult for readers to verify our text against the page scans, and navigation for editors is more difficult as well. What happened? --Spangineerwp (háblame) 19:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thomas wrapped it in a class that makes the page numbers disappear until you click the "links to scans" button in the sidebar. Hesperian 23:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. Still, I don't see how this is intuitive; how is the average reader supposed to know how to make the links appear? And without the links, we don't send as strong a message about our validation practices... we're essentially hiding one of our main features (i.e., easy comparison against the source text) that Gutenberg and others don't have. Was there discussion on this that I missed? --Spangineerwp (háblame) 04:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
I would suggest two things.
  1. that there is an additional option in Gadgets or similar to have the PAGE view toggled on and off, with the DEFAULT being ON
  2. bigger, more obvious text for LINKS TO SCANS. No point in hiding that useful option, shout and scream it from the rooftops! billinghurst (talk) 04:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
I would be happy to have it permanently turned on; it isn't like they are particularly prominent or distracting. Hesperian 05:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Ditto (shouting and screaming). It is frustrating when working on a document to force the links, if they work at all, and because this is an enhancement that offers something other sites usually do not. I notice that Gutenberg now hosts works with a similar access to original scans. It offers the original page numbering of the document, and easy access for correction or verification our works. There are now two links in the sidebar that may be invoked, dependent on what method one uses to transclude the the transcriptions: "links to scanned pages" and "links to scans" in the (often ignored) sidebar under "display options". As per Spangineer, et al., it should be the default; it is intuitive and useful, hardly a distraction. I hate to whinge to someone who has provided so much brilliant work on this function, but unannounced changes are a pain in the neck when I am adding texts. It is not the first time I've chased me tail due to this, my first thought is always that it is something I messed up. Cygnis insignis (talk) 14:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Me too! (pile on). I thought I was going mad when that disappeared. A useful tool which is best on by default. Moondyne (talk) 14:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


No opposition after several weeks—and I did let ThomasV know about this discussion. Therefore done.[4][5] Hesperian 05:02, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

customize css[edit]

I want to modify my monobook so that any page which calls this template will look more like a page in the div class "prose" (that is, it will be nicely centered than shoved off to the left side). Can anyone help me figure out what I need to add to do this. It looks like there is not a nice id or class attribute I can modify in my monobook. Thanks.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 21:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

On Pathoschild's user page, there is a request by me for users to have the ability to choose and swap their preferred class attribute. Maybe support that proposal. Supposedly it is a .js thing. billinghurst sDrewth 23:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
no, no js is required. a css gadget will do it ThomasV (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Links to page numbers are shown only for the beginning of the page[edit]

Links to page numbers are shown only if the section begins at the the beginning of the page. I believe that in the past the page numbers were shown even if the section began at the middle of the page.

See, for example here: Link to page 71 appears in the middle of the second paragraph, but i would also like to see a link to 70 at the beginning of the first. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 05:41, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Have you tried using <pages> terminology? I believe that the general statement is that {{Page}} is now deprecated. I know that using Pages the page numbers do display. Looking at the means to transclude using varied templates looks pretty ugly, and rather than the means that you have used, could I encourage you to look to how I set up {{DNB00}} in conjunction with {{DNBset}} to do similar in the input but standard in its output.— billinghurst sDrewth 07:26, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm not clear on what is meant by 'the general statement', one person stated {{Page}} 'should be deprecated', I'm not aware of other discussion at en. There are, however, there are some pages where <pages didn't, or doesn't work. I don't see a cause to convert them yet, only a risk and need for the creator to check something still works. This template is obviously more trouble, being unable to adopt the pagination given in the index being a great annoyance, but once it is done it is uneconomical to change them. I'm not converting some pages until the ref function is implemented. cygnis insignis 07:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
billinghurst: Thanks for the idea. It indeed looks more elegant. I wish i knew it back when i created all the chapter pages.
I tried creating a chapter page like this: Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar/20. The Strengthening (Sharpening) of Consonants/pages. The first page number still doesn't show. Am i doing anything wrong?
In general, where can i find documentation about the "pages" tag? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 08:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Fixed, in theory. See summary
Help:Proofread, and further should be linked from there. cygnis insignis 09:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Template_talk:Page
en.wikisource.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-50
39833
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:WJ2NVAWGRGP3N2WW2GSTL42KS3JKJIJ7
<urn:uuid:e4729519-58a9-445b-abeb-92d7e3bf8c4e>
2016-12-03T17:49:14Z
208.80.154.224
sha1:D5RYGJ6OXSGYLSKL2G4MJTWVYJ4R4IOJ
<urn:uuid:517a2f10-3833-4b84-853f-d4d4d3be1e45>
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Template_talk:Page
response
<urn:uuid:da232258-6a11-4c02-bee5-bd55604412fb>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-31-129-80.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-50
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for November 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf