Category talk:German Wikisource books

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Could all of these be moved to Category:Scanned German texts? The current name suggests that the pages may only be used by people associated with Wikisource, but in actuality, they may be used by many others. Thanks. --Spangineeren ws (háblame) 20:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It is the older of the both categories, and contains only historical texts and it is maintained.

De Wikisource book 15:04, 2. Jun. 2006 Joergens.mi (Diskussion | Beiträge)
Scanned German texts 20:40, 8. Aug. 2006 Spangineer (Diskussion | Beiträge) K (German)

It is the bigger of the two catgories.

De Wikisource book ca 1100 members.
Scanned German texts ca 55 members, all of them are members in both catgories

The following 45 texts are in both categories so there are only 10 left which are only member of (Scanned German texts)

--Joergens.mi 16:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

This can be done using a bot, keeping a {{category redirect}} warning on this category :). So... what is the exactly point to keep this naming convention? I'm in doubt not only because to move all xx Wikisource, but also to create a Category:Pt Wikisource or Category:Scanned Portuguese texts. Lugusto 01:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The curiosity is all people who ar working and maintaining these texts are happy with this naming, only people who have nothing in common with these scans, that are used in the german language wikisource, are complaining about changes. Why change things that ar well known an running? If you want to feel happy, simply ad this nearly empty category to all textes which belong to this usefull category. As you stated which can be easily be done by a bot. --Joergens.mi 14:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

We are interested in standardization so that these texts are useful to more people than just the German wikisource. Clearly, right now everyone involved in working on these texts approves of the current naming because they all are involved in Wikisource, but if someone else comes along who wants to use the scans in another fashion, the category name won't make any sense to him. To encourage such efforts, we should preemptively change the category name to something more easily understood to people outside of Wikisource. --Spangineeren ws (háblame) 04:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Either I don't get why exactly a move is proposed or some people in favour for the move haven't understood the categorization system yet. A scanned German text does not have to be on de.wikisource and a de wikisource book does not have to be scanned nor German (in terms of todays German, some of these texts are 500 years or older and hardly readable by Average Joe).
We are interested in standardization so that these texts are useful to more people than just the German wikisource. – This is the point I don't get. The users from de.wikisource have already uploaded these images to commons to make them available to more people than just the German wikisource. How is this category (which seems to be very helpful for de.wikisource) harmful for others? [If] someone else comes along who wants to use the scans in another fashion then he's still free to do so.
One could argue that a category for a project is the wrong way and there don't exist any wikipedia categories, but in fact this book pages are managed/cared by exaclty the people of one project and in most cases the vast majority isn't useful for any non German Wikimedia project. Even the German Wikipedia won't make a large scale use of these book pages since most of them are out of de.WP's project scope.
This whole discussion shows again why some people are frustrated after a while of supporting commons. --32X 16:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Commons is meant to be a repository for media, so that it can be easily distributed. Thus, it makes sense that navigation be based on Commons standards. You say "the vast majority isn't useful for any non German Wikimedia project". That's all well and good, but what about other people? Making the category names intuitive and understandable to any user, not just Wikimedia users, is the point of Commons. You ask how the current category is "harmful"; I wouldn't go so far as to say it's harmful, but it's not the best solution for people who aren't familiar with Wikisource but who are users of Commons. It's trivial to move all the pages to another category, and it's trivial to move discussions over there, and it's trivial to fix links so that people know where to go. The benefit is ease of use for people using Commons. --Spangineeren ws (háblame) 04:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The technikal problem is that all references to these Cats schould be resolved not only on commons but everywere de.wikipedia de.wikisource,....

This means a correct recatigorisation of 1460 categories and roud about 90.000 pages on commons.

I don't think this whole operation is usefull. Changing things wihtout any good special reason.
These textes are available to all people, and everybody can see who ist maintaining it. I don't think that your other scanned textes categories will maintained and are of the same size.
I've yust counted it: in total 70 catgories for all other scanned text categories, and in the main category ist still a subcategory category:M.O. Byez-Kornilovich - Historical Data about Notable Places in Byelorussia which is a text an not related to a land.
Please make a tidy up there before messing up a running system.

Greetings --Joergens.mi 17:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

This can be accomplished easily with a bot. --Spangineeren ws (háblame) 04:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

FULLACK joergens. Most books are scanned in the frame of de.wikisource. The cat says that help or discussions can be found there. Changing the name would be harmful for Wikisource work --Historiograf 17:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I think a Category:Scanned German texts would not be the same. This denomination does not say anything about the copyright status, they might be texts which are unfree. Category:De-Wikisource, on the other hand, does convey the additional meaning that these are copyright free texts. So the name of the category as used is actually more useful for people who want to re-use the material than the proposed category name. Thanks, Longbow4u 21:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
This is not correct; all work on Wikimedia Commons must be copyright free. --Spangineeren ws (háblame) 04:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
whats the problem with this cat? boredom? the cat is primary used bei german wikisource, any changes here are results in unnecessarily work. thats not meaningfully, we have all other things to do. --Rabe Socke 13:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Standardization—make everything the same so that it's intuitive for the reader. The category name is inaccurate, because works here can be used by anyone, not just wikisource. --Spangineeren ws (háblame) 04:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • A decision has been made - by a commons admin - to remove the merging tag.

The question here is not who is allowd to use it - this is simple everybody is allowed to use it -, but who has done the work and who is the 124C41 for this pages. Otherwise you have remove all categories which are used as tags like this photography is done by.... Nobody will complain if you add to every position where an category de wikisoure... is an additional category scanned german textes, but be carefull, there are some english and latin textes within. Never mind a picture of the rosetta stone may also be tagged. When you have finished this job, you can send me a message and I will remove the category from then scanned textes category. Greetings --Joergens.mi 21:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


Alphabetleiste[edit]

Würde es nicht allmählich Sinn machen, eine Alphabetleiste einzubauen? Leider weiß ich nicht, wie das geht... --Liondancer 18:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC) done --Joergens.mi 22:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Das "macht" aber nur dann Sinn, wenn auch jeder seine hochgeladenen Dateien ordentlich einsortiert. Wikisource-logo.png Jonathan Groß Wikipedia-logo.png 12:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Erstaunlicherweise klappt das ganz gut, und die paar Fehler kann man ja korrigieren, das betrifft meistens nur eine Seite, meist den Artikel oder die Artikel-Kat --Joergens.mi 12:53, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Creator pages[edit]

Any chance someone would like to create {{creator}} pages and categories for all the authors of De Wikisource books? I believe most files use templates so adding those creator pages to the files would be easy. The author categories should go to Category:De Wikisource authors. --Jarekt (talk) 14:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed rename to "German Wikisource books"[edit]

User:ŠJů proposed that category name should be renamed "German Wikisource books" to comply with category name standards. User:Joergens.mi removed the {{move}} template inviting to a discussion here and applied full protection to the category to stop the discussion. I restored it to the previous state and started this discussion. --Jarekt (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

✓rename The new proposed name seem to comply better with Commons:Naming categories --Jarekt (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg don't rename putting in an macro without arguments will be simply removed. The Move Template was filled in at 2011-09-08T03:19:01 the first arguments came 14:22 after the removal and this wasn't done by the person who starts this joke

First discuss it here: http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Skriptorium

Your proposal - as you clearly state on the Commons:Naming categories - should go to a proven state bevore you try to press people to act on. This proposal didn't get full agreement within 4 years, therefore I think it fails - even if there are several good ideas within.

Your main Guideline is:

This page provides guidelines to choose a correct name for a Commons category page. You have to make such choice:

  1. when you create a new category page to categorize media related to a new subject in Commons;
  2. when there are several duplicate categories about the same subject, and you want to choose the correct category to gather media files and subpages in a single category page;
  3. when there is one or several duplicate category(ies) about a given subject, but no correct category name(s), and you want to create a new category page about an existing subject.

None of these points will fit here.

  1. We don't want to create a new category . De Wikisource book ist older than this proposal
  2. there are no duplicate categories, all books are sampled here De Wikisource book
  3. no, too

Greetings --Joergens.mi (talk) 15:13, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

There is no agreement for this