Hi Sam,

Good idea !

For me, the Wikidata linking part seems (maybe the most) important. That's
a great tools to visualise that most books are badly put in Wikidata (so
much P1957 missing!).

The importing from PG part seems important too (but for fr.ws - IIRC - we
already have most of PG works).

Cdlt, ~nicolas

2016-10-14 12:55 GMT+02:00 Anika Born <wikian...@wikipedia.de>:

> Hy Alex,
>
> My comment was not about spending some time on a PG-Projekt or not
> spending any time at all.
>
> The point/question (when it comes to de-WS) is a different one:
>
> (A) to spend some of our valuable contributions into a project that
> already is freely available (in another format) or spend this time in a
> (related) project that is NOT already freely available? (and we do have a
> lot of them)
>
> // note, it is not about not spending any time in proofreading or the
> Wikisourceproject... it is about finding valuable projects/texts to invest
> our time...
>
>
I see the thing differently: when a text is on Gutenberg, why should we
redo it again from scratch on Wikisource when we can just copy it?


> + (B) to spend this time in a project, that may cost us the findability of
> the whole wikisource-project (and all other texts on wikisource) because
> Google/Bing/others do tag us as fork/reuser/copy of ... (as happened in the
> past, at least with de, when we had some texts of the commercial
> http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/ that is also supported by ABBY with a free
> softwarelizense)
>

I've never heard of this before. Did it happen only on de.ws ? is it really
because of copying Gutenberg? (and was it before the proofreading which
changed pretty much everything ?)

Cdlt, ~nicolas
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

Reply via email to