User talk:ToxicPea
Welcome to Wikidata, ToxicPea!
Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!
Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:
- Introduction – An introduction to the project.
- Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
- Community portal – The portal for community members.
- User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
- Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
- Project chat – Discussions about the project.
- Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.
Best regards!
—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Project Gutenberg ebook ID
[edit]Project Gutenberg ebook ID was not needed for Q124162070, which was a Wikidata item for an edition. If it were to be added to an item, it would need to be added on the work level. But in fact, even this is disallowed (which I'm not the biggest fan of). So, what several of us have been doing is creating our own "edition items" of Project Gutenberg publications, such as at Q124617561. I've been doing it because the rules require it, but it seems to me like it's needless—must we recreate Gutenberg's internal database? They have their own site for a reason. Well, anyway, the situation with Gutenberg here is complex. SnowyCinema (talk) 05:55, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
scan is an edition
[edit]I just noticed that you added the scan which is the subject of Q124287705 to its literary work Q124287689.
At en.wikisource, the Main space, the transclusion, gets the original publishing date. In some books which were illustrated, then it is the original publishing date of the book containing the illustrations. The scan used might perhaps be a later edition -- so I keep the scan separate from the work. And, it is how it should be done as I was at first made to do this and now am glad to do this.
My first encounter with the dates difference was in s:Undine (1909). The scan is from 1919. The Mainspace name got changed and it truly befuddled me at the time. But the original illustrated version was in 1909 and so, that 1919 scan has the 1909 in the Main.
I am going to take it off, and I ask you to consider a works editions before adding the scan to any of the (literary) works.
Also, I don't know how familiar you are with commons. But check out how that edition information fills out the book template there. It is really nice for the information that is required and appreciated there.
This was confusing stuff to me, and I am unsure of my ability to pass along what I have learned, so if you have questions about this in particular, or any other data/source things, ask and I will look it up if I don't know. RaboKarbakian (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)