That's a really good point Anika, I'd not considered that having PG books could be detrimental to Wikisource! :-(

I guess the reverse could also be true? That Google might think that PG is a mirror of WS, and decrease PG's page-rank. Either way, not great.

How can I investigate whether this is occuring? How did you figure it out for

As for replicating the effort: I figure that if there are people interested in doing it, then why not! :-) Personally, I want to make Wikisource the best digital library it can be, and when I show it to people and they say "oh but you haven't got all of Dickens" or something, then I want to fix that. And it seems that importing other existing (free and open) digital libraries can help with this in a quicker fashion than straight-up proofreading. But I totally can see why people wouldn't want to spend time doing it! And that's cool.



On 14/10/16 03:55, Anika Born wrote:
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...

+ (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 that is also supported by ABBY with a free softwarelizense)


2016-10-14 10:13 GMT+02:00 Alex Brollo < <>>:

    I'm too very interested both into the idea and into its technical
    implementation, but I need some more doc for dummies to understand
    it fully :-(

    About importing into wikisource texts alreary proofread: a text
    into wikisource is different from a similar text into another web
    site, since it is "a node into wiki network", and this goal
    deserves IMHO some pain to proofread (and re-format)  it again,
    adding lots of wiki cross links.


    2016-10-14 8:27 GMT+02:00 Andrea Zanni <

        I think the idea is good,
        but I would like to try that in my wikisource:
        could you manage to take also the few italian books that PG has?

        On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Anika Born
        < <>> wrote:

            corr1: [...] does not ha*ve*/show the scans, [...]


            2016-10-14 8:18 GMT+02:00 Anika Born
            < <>>:

                Hy Sam,

                would be good, cause PG does not hat/show the scans,


                as I remember there was/is a policy at
                <> to not use texts from other projects
                (say: if there is text A in PG, there won't be a
                similar text A in de.WS),

                cause at the time de.WS did use PG-texts... Google
                said WS is a mirror of PG and all other (not PG)-texts
were left out in Google-Search-Results as well.... The (small) visibility of WS got lost completely...
                That is the reason, why there are no new projects on
                de-WS about texts that are available in a (nearly)
                similar project

                (besides the effort: why spending so much time on a
                text that already is avilable? - you'd have to
                proofread ist at least two times)

                But that is this special German-thing.....

                What do the others think about it?

                2016-10-14 3:20 GMT+02:00 Sam Wilson
                < <>>:

                    Hi all,

                    I've been tinkering with an idea I've had for
                    importing Project Gutenberg books into Wikisource:

                    The idea is that, if Wikidata makes a link between
                    a PG ID number and a Wikisource Index page, then
                    we can go through that Index page one page at a
                    time, and copy the page's text from the PG book to
                    the WS page.

                    The interface so far isn't very brilliant, but I'm
                    just trying to figure out if this is worthwhile or
                    not. Basically, it's a matter of selecting the
                    right chunk of text in the right-most text box
                    (the full PG text) and hitting the button to move
                    it left into the centre box. Then cleaning it up
                    (manually and with the magic cleaning button) to
                    make it match the image, and then uploading it to

                    It's a bad tool though, because it doesn't handle
                    the running header, and the copy-across button
                    doesn't do nice things with {{hws}} etc. — not to
                    mention all the other things it doesn't do.

                    Anyway, just thought I'd mention it. :-) Anyone
                    think this is an avenue worth exploring? Certainly
                    I'd love to be able to say we've got everything PG
                    has /and more/!


                    PS changes made by this tool are all tagged as
                    "OAuth CID: 638" —


                    Wikisource-l mailing list

            Wikisource-l mailing list

        Wikisource-l mailing list

    Wikisource-l mailing list

Wikisource-l mailing list

Wikisource-l mailing list

Reply via email to