Vicilibri:Porta communis

Salve!

Please use this page to discuss Vicilibri Latina, as well as just to have general discussion.

See also: Vicilibri:Porta communis/Vetera

Technical Wishes: FileExporter and FileImporter become default features on all WikisRecensere

Max Klemm (WMDE) 09:13, 6 Augusti 2020 (UTC)

Important: maintenance operation on September 1stRecensere

Trizek (WMF) (talk) 13:48, 26 Augusti 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in the conversationRecensere

Wiki of functions naming contestRecensere

21:26, 29 Septembris 2020 (UTC)

Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubricRecensere

Hello. Apologies if you are not reading this message in your native language. Please help translate to your language.

Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees starts two calls for feedback. One is about changes to the Bylaws mainly to increase the Board size from 10 to 16 members. The other one is about a trustee candidate rubric to introduce new, more effective ways to evaluate new Board candidates. The Board welcomes your comments through 26 October. For more details, check the full announcement.

Thank you! Qgil-WMF (talk) 17:09, 7 Octobris 2020 (UTC)

Important: maintenance operation on October 27Recensere

-- Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:10, 21 Octobris 2020 (UTC)

Add Wikisource featuresRecensere

Hi all, @Alex1011: @UV: @The Doc: @Dbmag9: @OrbiliusMagister: @Frozen Wind:

I know this project is very low activity right now. I have an idea for some useful content, specifically adaptations for learners. These could be:

  • Parallel text editions, made from Wikisource trascriptions and translations
  • Music lyric editions, with or without translations, for common classical pieces
  • Accented texts, from Wikisource transcriptions
  • Ørberg-style texts, using word notation and graphics

For these to be truly useful, I think it would be helpful to use Wiksource templates to ebooks to compose and export like ebooks. Would anyone like to help migrate the templates, or otherwise help, eg with anything that needs higher permissions than I currently have?

See also, this discussion on en:Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals

Thanks! JimKillock (disputatio) 09:24, 2 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

Update @UV: and others. I am going to start the work of importing the templates from Wikisource that should work with little or no problem. I will produce some demonstration content to show these in user space. There are three elements that need to be done, as I see it:
  • Layout templates for headers, navigation and so on that help present content in a book-like format; should be easy and is a first step
  • Alternate page layouts that look like book layouts, eg narrow columns, serif fonts; this needs creation of a Wikimedia gadget, using WS Javascript and CSS; this is the hardest bit
  • Adding ebook export features: this should be fairly easy but requires WSExport tools to accept creation requests from this project

I will get started this weekend, meanwhile I am hoping someone from Wikibooks or elsewhere with more JS expertise than me (none) might help with the gadget creation. JimKillock (disputatio) 14:48, 14 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

@JimKillock, perhaps you do not need to create a gadget at all. I am not entirely sure what you mean by "Alternate page layouts": If you would like to offer readers the possibility to change the page layout according to personal preferences (e. g. one reader might prefer a serif font whereas a different reader might prefer a sans-serif font), then you will probably need to look into gadgets indeed. But if you just would like to offer editors the possibility to change the layout of a specific Wikibook, then there is in my view no need to use a gadget - you can probably use TemplateStyles instead, see mw:Help:TemplateStyles. Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 18:14, 14 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, yes I think this can be aimed at editors only, which should make implementation much easier. JimKillock (disputatio) 11:35, 15 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
@UV: just to let you know, I have got this working at Usor:JimKillock/Formulae and have raised a ticket to see if WSExport can be enabled for ebook export from this wiki. JimKillock (disputatio) 21:35, 26 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

Administrator requestRecensere

Hi all, I know this is likely to go unnoticed, but in case anyone editing can respond, I would like to request Administrator status for this site so I can help get Wikisource-style book layout pages implemented. This would allow users of Wikibooks to develop books that behave more like ebooks, including easier creation of navigable book contents, layouts with Serif fonts and Wikipages that feature narrow columns so that the pages preview as an ebooks.

I have some content ideas for English-Latin books that could be implemented this way. I am hoping this would attract some new users to this project. Please let me know if you approve of this request. JimKillock (disputatio) 08:44, 4 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

I am not convinced that this is a good idea. Better first find a sufficient number of users who are sufficiently proficient in Latin and willing to contribute to this project more or less regularly. If these specific people find the technical facility you propose helpful, then go ahead. But adding a technical facility that will probably remain unused specifically here on this project, but that will probably need technical maintenance over the years to come is probably not too useful.
An even better idea might be not to implement the technical facility you propose here on the Latin wikibooks, but instead have it integrated into the MediaWiki software/into a MediaWiki extension that will automatically be enabled on all wikibooks projects/on all Wikimedia projects. That way, it will not need to be implemented (and maintained in the years to come!) by Administrators of individual projects, but will instead be implemented and maintained by the MediaWiki developers in one central place for all Wikimedia projects where this facility is useful.
Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 18:30, 5 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
I, too, doubt whether this will be useful. It appears that the project has had no active contributors for a long time. I have seen no evidence that the existing pages are used or that more pages are in demand.
I speak from experience because I tested the possibilities of a new Latin project myself, i.e. Latin Wikivoyage, using the incubator. We had three contributors (including UV) who were willing to put in some work and knew Latin. No one else joined us, there is no sign that the pages were used, and all three of us were spending time that we would otherwise have spent on Vicipaedia. The project was recently closed, correctly I think. We all three continued to work on Vicipaedia -- which really has readers, and really has an active contributor base.
I would not, of course, oppose administrator status for you. Far from it: I would be 100% in favour. My problem is with the project. Frankly, Wikimedia has far too many weak and unused projects, and I think this is one of them. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:54, 6 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
Thanks both. I understand the skepticism about the project here. The issue is this.
(1) The technical facility would be usful on en Wikibooks, and there is support for it, but nobody wants to implement it, because Wikibooks has been implemented rather differently.
(2) The content I want to contribute does not really fall in the remit of en Wikibooks, nor of Wikisource.
In terms of the extension idea @UV:, that sounds sensible but isn't something I can do. If you have advice about how to request or discuss the idea let me know and will try that – it would simplify doing that here if I go ahead with that.
In terms of the content, @Andrew Dalby: actually this is a lot easier than freshly writing Latin. The content I want to produce really comes in very simple forms. For instance
  • Latin-Engish parallel texts
  • Texts from sources with accent markers added
  • Latin texts, Ørberg style
  • Compilations of lyrics for classical pieces, either with or without transation
  • Other kinds of Latin readers, that do not fall into the purview of Wikisource
This content mostly just needs bringing together, or persuading people who have already done it to donate it. However, without the ebook features, I am blocked from moving forward. (At least, I am not keen on starting these projects without a clear path to my desired end results.)
For instance, I transcribed en:Jánua Linguárum Reseráta (the Vestibulum, that is!); (I lightly adapted the text (spellings and accents) and English translation to make it more useful, so is out of scope of Wikisource); but to produce a reasonable ebook, I had to create a print version, and then export that manually. Really, I want results much closer to wikisource:la:Colloquia familiaria, which I partly transcribed and partly implemented from prior transcriptions, to make an ebook. Currently, I cannot move forward with my ideas, as the content does not fall into Wikisource’s remit, and the facilities do not exist on EN Wikibooks.
In terms of community, if a few decent resources can be put together, then it may be easier to attract new users. If not, then at least i will have prodcued some useful resources that can move elsewhere if necessary in the future.
I think this could be a useful project for Latin teachers or tutors to share their work, for instance. There are many teachers who produce and share short Latin reading texts, whose work could be compiled here (or maybe en Wikibooks) with some encouragement.
I do hope tho, if I can show even with a few demonstration projects that this is a worthwile endeavour, that en Wikibooks finds a way to implement. However I have been waiting nine months without results from a proposal, so I have to conclude it is technically onerous for them at this point. And also, some of the projects above might not be suitable for an English language project. JimKillock (disputatio) 09:46, 8 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
Ut @UV: et @Andrew Dalby: dubito, ut multiplicis difficultatibus initium vicilibrorum novum haud facile sit. Praecipue tempus impedimentum maius imponeret (ut illis, qui professionum suarum officiis laborant, ut mihi). Obiter item Iacobi Killock propositum ita prorsus erroneum non existimem, atque ipse ego iam prius interdum textum pathologiae coepit, sane illius partes mutare delereque voluissem at non potuissem, simul neminem administratorem novi. --Andreas Raether (disputatio) 13:33, 8 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
I support you for administrator: it is evident that you want to do good and I'm certain you will do no harm!
I am surprised by your choice of an acute accent to mark vowel length. It is occasionally done that way (e.g. to distinguish feminine ablatives from nominatives: we sometimes do that on Vicipaedia) but schoolbooks and dictionaries known to me use a macron for this purpose, and those are really the only environments in which Latin long vowels are consistently marked. But I also feel it's not worth worrying over: a student could easily learn the system, that's what matters. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:02, 8 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
Thanks … on the vowel mark, there are a few of us who do this, but I agree it is not common and would not wish to force others to use it. It is as you know I am sure closer to how Latin originally marked long vowels, but mostly it is less ugly than macrons, as fonts have been designed forever with accents.
I am going to pursue the MediaWiki extension point as mentioned. JimKillock (disputatio) 21:57, 10 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
Hopefully to bring this to a conclusion: @UV: I will if granted adminship try to limit any technical contributions that need particular maintenance, and do things as simply as possible. It seems that we can avoid gadgets except for the WSExport facility. If I get admin rights I will also try to deal with @Andreas Raether:'s deletion issues. Lastly @Andrew Dalby: and all, I appreciate the points about needing to get a community here and the difficulty of that in practice; if I get adminship I will at the very least create some useful content here, along the lines I proposed, aimed at learners, and promote that. I am hopeful that people will see the products as easy to imitate and contribute to. Plus, many people for instance teachers have their own self-created Latin resources they could add here (that are not appropriate for Wikisource or Vicipaedia) – it may be a question of asking rather than creating. Finally, I will try to audit the project for anything that has been added that is especially useful or already complete and link that from the front page - Andrea's book for instance is not linked there but clearly the most well-developed item on this Wiki. JimKillock (disputatio) 11:43, 15 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

Wiki of functions naming contest - Round 2Recensere

22:10, 5 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2021Recensere

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

18:09, 20 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

Progress with ebooks toolsRecensere

Just to let everyone know, the ebook tools are now mostly in place, with the exception of the ebook export tool. I am discussing how this might be put to use on Phabricator. JimKillock (disputatio) 22:09, 27 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

@UV: Do you know by any chance why I can add "Modules" but they are not recognised (are not summoned by scripts when named)? For instance: Module:TOCstyle is not recognised, by Formula:TOCstyle? JimKillock (disputatio) 12:30, 28 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I do not know Lua modules well enough to help about this. Generally, as I explained above, I am not convinced of the usefulness of adding technical facilities here on la.wikibooks - no one is currently using them, and they may need maintenance in the future that no one may be able to provide here on la.wikibooks. Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 19:51, 28 Novembris 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata descriptions changes to be included more often in Recent Changes and WatchlistRecensere