User talk:Xover/Archive 21

LDS Standard Works on Wikisource
Thanks for the offer to help on the Wikisource side of things with my proposal to revamp the LDS template. The issue I wanted to raise on Wikisource relates to the way the Pearl of Great Price handles HTML bookmarks to allow for jumping to specific chapters/verses. While that text uses a slightly different pattern than the Bible and Book of Mormon, in general that's not much of a problem to handle on the Wikipedia template side, it just requires a bit of extra logic.

However, on the page for the Book of Moses, the bookmark for each chapter is of the form,  , etc., which causes a problem because those bookmarks are already in use by the links to the scans of the book that are provided for proofreading (sorry I don't know any of the correct lingo for this stuff, so hopefully that makes sense—in short, there's already a   bookmark that is the name of the link that takes you to the scan of the first page of the book).

As a concrete example, if the Wikipedia template jumps to the  bookmark because someone cited the 3rd chapter of Moses, the link will actually take the user to the bookmark for page 3 of the physical book, which happens to be in the middle of verse 8 of chapter 1.

The ideal solution would be to change the HTML bookmark names for chapters so that they are of the form, which is how the Bible and Book of Mormon projects work. My issues are that (1) I don't know how to affect the HTML code that gets generated (though admittedly I have also done zero research on this yet), and (2) even if I did, I want to raise this issue on Wikisource to make sure there aren't any other reasons for the way things are, or other projects that rely on the existing bookmarks, that would get in the way of making this change. You may not have had any experience with the nitty-gritty of how Wikisource generates its HTML bookmarks, of course, but I'm hoping you might perhaps be able to point me in the right direction of where to raise this issue or who to make sure to include in the discussion (if it involves anything more complicated than just posting on the PoGP talk page or whatever).

I see that you're involved in real-world COVID-19 projects, which obviously takes major precedence over this, but let me know when you get a chance whether you have any tips for where to start/how to go about this. Thank you! ― biggins (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Having whatever anchors you want can definitely be done: each chapter can have multiple anchors, so it's just a matter of what do they already have and how to add whatever is missing.Wikisource relies on the ProofreadPage extension and a ton of custom formatting and navigation templates to function. The core setup is that for every file in the File: namespace you can create a page with the same name in the Index: namespace and ProofreadPage knows the latter refers to the former based on the filename. That Index: page is the "central hub" for works on Wikisource so far as the software is concerned. Based on this Index: page ProofreadPage creates "virtual" wikipages in the Page: namespace for every physical page in the scanned book. So the outside front cover (usually the first physical page in a scan) will be found in the wikipage . Since the logical page numbers (the number usually printed on each page in the book) usually do not correspond with the physical pages in the scan (e.g. the logical page number 1 is at physical page 13), ProofreadPage provides a special   tag you can use on the Index: page to create a mapping from physical to logical page numbers. For example, to tell the software that the book's page numbering starts on physical page 13, one might use  .Once that is set up we transcribe and format the text of each page of the book on the virtual wikipages in the Page: namespace. ProofreadPage provides a custom editing interface in that namespace that, among other things, shows the scanned page image side by side with the wikitext editing text box (it also does other stuff like preload the editing box with OCR text if the file has a text layer). When all pages of the book have been transcribed on separate wikipages in the Page: namespace, we use a tag like   to transclude the individual pages together into a complete text on a wikipage in mainspace. It uses custom functionality of the ProofreadPage extension, but you can just think of it as template transclusion if each page were a separate template. The small page number links you see in the left margin are the logical page numbers provided in the mapping on the Index: page.Or put succinctly: what you see on Pearl of Great Price is the result of transcluding in the contents of the "templates" for each page in the Page: namespace. For the most part these can be edited just like any other wikipage.We also have some (mainly very old) texts that do not use the ProofreadPage extension. These have been transcribed manually on normal wikipages (just like an article here on enwp), and these often use the standard MediaWiki syntax  for chapter headings. Crucially, for our purposes here, the current practice on Wikisource is to not use that syntax and instead use formatting templates to make the heading text bigger and bold (etc.). This means that link targets for these older texts (MediaWiki-generated anchors / "bookmarks") will be different from newer texts (no or manually generated anchors).We can add as many anchors as we want, using pretty much any scheme we want, so it's just a matter of figuring out what's needed and how to add them with the minimum amount of effort. Manually adding all new anchors for every chapter of every LDS-related text is going to be quite a bit of manual labour (but perhaps doable). But a lot of these are going to be using a template like s:Template:chapter to add the anchor.And when I looked into it based on your message here I discovered that that template was emitting broken anchors: the old version used anchors that were identical with those that ProofreadPage uses for its page numbers (the ones you see in the left margin) and so they just didn't work. I've now modified that template so it uses anchors of the form  . And since Pearl of Great Price happens to use that template to generate chapter anchors, you should now have functional targets in all of that text.The other relevant texts may or may not be the same. So I think the path forward is that you just try linking to the texts that are relevant, and if you find any that don't work you can let me know and I'll see what we can do about it.PS. Once this effort hits "production" it may be a good idea to post about it on the Scriptorium (essentially our Village Pump) since sister links from Wikipedia do not show up in "What links here" on Wikisource. If people there are not aware the anchors are being used here they will not know to account for it when making changes. --Xover (talk) 06:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Got it, that is all super helpful. I've prowled around a bit on Wikisource now and I was piecing together the whole Index:/Page: namespace thing, but your explanation is much faster :) It's especially good to know that anchors can have multiple names so I don't have to worry about changing anything that's already there. That all gives, I think, a workable path forward—fortunately the other LDS-specific texts (Book_of_Mormon_(1981) and The Doctrine and Covenants) have workable anchors so the only changes that (might) need to be made should be limited to the PoGP, which is very short. And I will make sure to put a notice on the Scriptorium page if/when this Wikipedia template is rolled out to production. Thanks for sharing your expertise! ― biggins (talk) 17:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hope things are still tolerable
I thought Norsk skadeglädje fyller min mejlkorg – men andra halvlek kan bli värre could interest you a little. If you haven't read his Brobyggarna I highly recommend it, great fun. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I can't meaningfully comment on that without violating both WP:CIVIL and WP:BLP. But let's just sum up that every factual assertion he makes there is incorrect, and adopting the same rhetorical strategy as antivaxxers does not particularly indicate journalistic integrity. "Kanske, vad vet jag?" Then again, has Guillou really had any credible claim to being a journalist the last three decades?But I'm going to make a prediction: Norway will have a second wave in September, maybe as late as October, as a result of easing restrictions and permitting travel without quarantine, including to and from Sweden (which is on course to exit the "red" category in the coming week, or at the next scheduled bi-weekly assessment at the latest; despite 75% of Norwegians polled being against opening the borders with Sweden). When that happens—unless we manage to contain all the import cases and prevent community spread—we will see actual schadenfreude in Expressen and Aftonbladet's opinion columns, from the same people who are complaining about imaginary gloating in Norway now.I hope I'm wrong on both counts, but all available information suggests this is where we're headed. --Xover (talk) 08:52, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, on the off chance you haven't seen it (I think Expressen ran them too?), and without any additional comment or interpretation, Emanuel Karlsten's posts here, here, and here are interesting. --Xover (talk) 08:31, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

If you have the time
Hello X. I hope you are well. If you have a moment would you please take a look at this and see if it is reasonable? I also have replied to the editors post here Talk:Macbeth. If you have other things going on please don't worry about it. Best regards. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 01:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I check the watchlist here so sporadically these days that I'll miss most of what happens, so I really appreciate a ping when something interesting pops up! --Xover (talk) 08:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm glad I can be of assistance and thanks for adding your input :-) MarnetteD&#124;Talk 14:26, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

And if a draft about a Norwegian resistance member during WW2 interests you, you can take a peek at Teahouse. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 17
 News and updates associated with user scripts from the past two months (July and August 2020).

Hello everyone and welcome to the 17th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:

Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
 * Cscr-featured.svg Yet another Articles for creation helper script ("AFCH"), a gadget used by Articles for creation reviewers, is this month's featured script


 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Opencooper's collapseBots declutters talk pages by collapsing comments made by bots
 * SD0001's GAR-helper is a script to easily create a GAR nomination and carry out the necessary related steps
 * SD0001's shortdescs-in-category can be used to view short descriptions of pages in a category
 * WikiMacaroons's Talk to Wiki allows for voice-activated functionality and navigation of Wikipedia
 * WikiMacaroons's AutoShortDesc simplifies the addition of short descriptions to pages
 * IagoQnsi's ipareader adds a button next to IPA pronunciations to have them read out by a text-to-speech program
 * Awesome Aasim's xfdvote makes it easier to participate in XFD discussions
 * BrandonXLF's CitationStyleMarker adds "CS1" or "CS2" beside citations to show their style with an optional toggle
 * GeneralNotability's spihelper a script to help CheckUsers, SPI clerks, and patrolling admins with sockpuppet investigation case pages
 * Evad37's TimestampDiffs adds a link at the end of every comment to the diff in which it was added


 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Twinkle has a number of improvements including additional redirect category templates
 * Updates to Enterprisey's reply-link include compatibility fixes with Mdaniels5757's markAdmins script and Kephir's unclutter script
 * Evad37's rater is now at version 2.6.0, which updates including OOUI tweaks and the inclusion of banners for inactive projects

Miscellaneous
 * If anyone would like to help contribute to this newsletter, please leave a note at Wikipedia talk:Scripts++

Pending requests
 * A script to simplify addition of "connected contributor" templates to talk pages
 * A script to simplify removal of the "persondata" template on mlwiki
 * ...and many more, all available at User scripts/Requests



Stay safe --DannyS712 (talk) 19:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

About the newsletter

Subscription options

Discuss this issue

Books & Bytes – Issue 40
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 40, July – August 2020 
 * New partnerships
 * Al Manhal
 * Ancestry
 * RILM
 * #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
 * AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 40
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 40, July – August 2020 
 * New partnerships
 * Al Manhal
 * Ancestry
 * RILM
 * #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
 * AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you Gerda! --Xover (talk) 07:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I have no idea if that's right
Maybe you do. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:18, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd need to check. It'll be specified as either the clock having struck, or is striking, midnight; or as "the witching hour" or somesuch. I believe it's fairly plainly given in the text (it's emphasised for dramatic reasons), but I don't recall ottomh. --Xover (talk) 10:29, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I (finally, sorry) checked. In both I.i and I.iv the characters make a point of fixing the time to shortly after midnight. The passage of time is a little vague since after about two minutes worth of dialogue after its appearance in I.i it is apparently daybreak with a cock crowing and all. --Xover (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, the urgency was minimal. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:15, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Happy Christmas
Hi Xover, just wanted to stop by and wish you a happy Christmas. Hope 2020 isn't going too bad for you (I would have said "I hope 2020 is going well for you", but that's just crazy talk!!) Bertaut (talk) 03:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and a very belated ditto. 2020 has indeed turned itself into a cliché, but I don't want to tempt fate by intimating 2021 can only be better. Let's just appreciate the fact that it hasn't so far gone worse, and leave it at that. But I do hope everything is going as well as it can be under the circumstances for you. If I've not been too neglectful in keeping up on news I think you had some pretty rough stretches over your way, but that things have been looking a little better lately? Around here we've mostly been spared, but after a slow build since last autumn we now appear to be heading into the biggest wave so far, with the first time reporting worse per-capita numbers than the US(!) earlier this week. Still optimistic we can bring it around in time, but pretty frustrated with the lack of decisive action from Great Leader over the latter couple of months (and just this week getting caught breaking the social distancing rules didn't exactly inspire renewed confidence, sigh). In any case, great to hear from you and here's crossing fingers and toes 2021 will outperform 2020 in all the right ways! --Xover (talk) 14:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Someone said "The unforgetable year we'd like to forget." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:44, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Amen! --Xover (talk) 15:49, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Here too


— Preceding unsigned comment added by Serial Number 54129 (talk • contribs) 16:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

God Jul och Gott Nytt År!
 Gråbergs Gråa Sång is wishing you the season's greetings. Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus, or the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk • contribs) 14:53, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

success and warning classes
One or more or your scripts uses the  or   classes. Be aware that the styling for these classes may be removed in the near future. See WP:VPT for a list of scripts. Izno (talk) 18:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Funny story
So, I was writing a new article. I got it to this stage, then I wondered "Who got it the "first first" time?" Huh. Well, at least I found some independent sources. Hmm, perhaps you'd want to write a Norwegian version or two? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Africa Food Prize. Xover (talk) 19:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Zounds, that was quick. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Any idea why no-WP doesn't show under "languages" on en-WP? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Probably just a delay in updating cached Wikidata data. It's there now. Xover (talk) 07:44, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Bookmeal, check. Plenty of fiber, I'm sure. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

:3
thanks for clearing up the copyright issue on my discussion page ! Not sure how to delete the file but thank you for the help/can confirm it was an error, admin pls delete :3 here's wikilove in cat form - yaq

Xiaopihar (talk) 22:27, 26 May 2021 (UTC) 

Help me out?
About Christopher Marlowe. I quote p22:

"We do not know on which precise day he was born, but his baptism at St George’s church, Canterbury, is recorded as 26 February 1563, which in accordance with the custom of the timewould have beenwithin a fewdays of his birth. The Julian calendar was then in use,so that the new year began on 25 March, for the Gregorian calendar, introduced in Catholic countriesin 1582,was not adopted in England until 1752"

The primary source, which is the WP-article's ref for 26 Feb 1564, agrees with the above. Also, this source p32 says  "Some meddling biographer emended his birth date to 1564 without saying so, and has been copied by all other biographers, creating false evidence."

So, should we change related WP articles to say born 1563/baptised 26 February 1563? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Both are correct, in that neither is sufficiently specified to create a conflict. The church registry lists the date (26 February 1563) in the calendar that was in use at the time. In England this is the Julian calendar with Old Style year, in which the year starts on Lady Day (25 March). In the proleptic Gregorian calendar with New Style year, the date for this point in time is 7 March 1564 (the difference is +10 days, but 1564 is a leap year). Both these dates are correct provided you specify which system you're using.But you might find a peek at William Shakespeare instructive in that regard. :) Xover (talk) 12:16, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Ok, so "with the start of the year adjusted to 1 January" he was (most likely, unless hidden for several months, as a part of a "born within wedlock" plot, which probably doesn't make sense here) born 1564, and that is not an unreasonable way to write? It only makes a mess of things when people reason "So he was born 1564, and the Marlowe portrait is dated 1585, this means that..." That article has expanded, btw. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:49, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Just specify the calendar and Old/New Style usage, and be consistent throughout the article, and it's fine. As mentioned in the note on Will, using Julian dates with year adjusted to New Style is entirely reasonable. But every serious biographer, and most historians, will specify their treatment of dates when dealing with England between 1582 and 1752. Xover (talk) 13:06, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Helpful as always, thank you very much. Are you enjoying pleasant summer-weather as well? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Unseasonably so, for this latitude and microclimate, yes. Very pleasant, though I spend most of my time inside videoconferencing. :( Xover (talk) 13:58, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's starting to remind me of 2018... no, let's not go there. Also, we had plenty of rain in May. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:59, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Ugh, no, let's hope that won't happen again any time soon. I kinda feel like we're all of us due a decade or two of good years right about now… Xover (talk) 18:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll drink to that (hämtar en öl)! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:47, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Another question. It struck me recently while editing Shakespeare authorship question that I should try to follow the established form of reference, FA-goldstar and everything. I've never bothered to try to grok this form of reference, so I asked 2 experienced editors "what's the easy way to do this" and they both answered ????, so I'm asking you now.

I managed to do it in 2 steps. First I edited the References section, using reftoolbar but tweaking the result, removing reftags, vertical shape etc. Then I added articletext and harvnb tags, which I figured out in a monkey-see monkey-do fashion. This works, and I can probably get used to it, but is there an easier way? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:57, 6 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång. It depends entirely on what you find "easy". The short reference style really shines when you cite each source more than once, because then you add the full reference only once down in the References section and subsequently you just throw in (no ref tags needed; you only need  when you need to merge multiple cites or for other reasons need to manually control the ref tags) wherever you need it. It also makes the wikitext a lot neater and easier to edit, and makes it a lot easier to maintain a consistent reference style (cf. FAC). But if you mostly cite sources just once, and you only edit using some kind of visual mode (i.e. you never see wikitext), this style is almost inevitably going to feel more tedious and with little apparent benefit. I still recommend it, because I think it has significant benefits for others even if not for yourself, but the cost—benefit is going to be subjective and I certainly couldn't claim not adopting it would be wrong in any objective sense.In practice, the easiest way, for me, is pretty much what you've done in your example: first edit the References section to add the full ref, then go up and edit the section you want to add the  or . For shorter articles I may edit the whole article instead of a section so I can do both in one operation, but the principle is the same.One possibility, which I haven't tried because I use the old wikitext editor in mainspace (for performance, mainly), is to use the Visual Editor to add the full reference as a template instead of as a ref (refToolbar and friends always wrap the result in ref tags I think). That may possibly make it sufficiently less tedious, even if you lose the auto-fill/lookup features the real ref tools give you. I also have a browser-side favlet to extract a pre-filled citation template from an article's page on JSTOR, which I tend to cite a lot, but I think it broke in their last redesign (let me know if you want it and I'll try to fix it up).If you need to convert a whole article to this style (cave WP:CITEVAR) I can often be persuaded to do the job if the topic is at least tangentially connected to Shakespeare. Some of my TWL accesses have probably expired by now, but if the extant bibliographic data is half way decent i should be able to muddle through anyway. Xover (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. Like you say, there is a subjective element involved. I find that reftoolbar can deal with repetetive refs well if you name them and use "Named references" (rarely perfect because editors will often go by the "good idea at the time" naming method), and think that in-text page-number templates is preferable to having "Shapiro, 2010" being 62/276 citations at SAQ. This is very subjective, I know there are editors who consider in-text pagenumbers ugly, and I think I've seen GA and FA people asking for them to be removed. I noted though that citenames like "Shapiro, 2010" and "Polo 2020" seems to add an aspect of, I don't know, equality (you have to check the SAQ article to understand my meaning, Polo 2020 is a perfectly fine ref in context)?


 * I now feel capable of dealing with these refs when necessary. And the important message of WP:CITEVAR is obviously "If I create the article, I get to pick, bitches." Pinging because you will find this discussion fascinating. Possibly. Maybe. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Xover and Gråbergs Gråa Sång I am sure this is a wonderfully clear explanation, but I remain as clueless as ever. Why are the citation templates different if this is the best approach? WP annoys me with this!!  I am frowning now!  :-( Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that like with WP:ENGVAR, WP says that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and while one way is not necessarily better than the other, articles should pick a way and stick with it. If you want to do it like Shakespeare authorship question or Marlowe portrait either is fine, and editors should adapt to the established form. I think the SAQ way may generally be more pleasing to academics, the which I am not, I just plunder their works for my own purposes. I also think that way may be generally more difficult for new editors and not very new editors. That said, the alphabetical References section at SAQ looks very nice, the one at Marlowe portrait is more jumbled (not necessarily a problem). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

The horror
Bet you didn't realize that about me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Oh, I've always had my suspicions! :) Xover (talk) 05:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


 * There’s no more faith in thee than in a stewed prune. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Why, thou whoreson, impudent, embossed rascal! If there were anything in thy pocket but tavern reckonings, memorandums of bawdy houses, and one poor pennyworth of sugar candy to make thee long-winded… If thy pocket were enriched with any other injuries but these, I am a villain! There’s no room for faith, truth, nor honesty in this bosom of thine. It is all filled up with guts and midriff. Art thou not ashamed? Xover (talk) 10:54, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Villain, I have... no, let's not go there. You are the victor of this round of Shakespeare insults. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:02, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ...is it Marlowe he's talking about? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:07, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: No, that's in AYL 3.5: (the Dead Shepherd is Marlowe, and the quoted bit is from Hero and Leander). Xover (talk) 12:23, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Got it, it was the "tavern reckonings" that made me wonder. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:25, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you
... for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Hamlet Reverts
Hi Xover. Regarding your reversions in the Hamlet page. Terri Bourus' analysis is regarded as robust even by those who does not agree with all her conclusions. Please I have seen respecful references in:


 * Taylor, Gary, and Rory Loughnane. “The Canon and Chronology of Shakespeare’s Works.” In The New Oxford Shakespeare: Authorship Companion, edited by Gary Taylor and Gabriel Egan, 415–602, 2017.


 * Jackson, MacDonald P. “Vocabulary, Chronology, and the First Quarto (1603) of Hamlet.” Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England 31 (2018): 17–42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26800525.


 * Dutton, Richard. Shakespeare, Court Dramatist. Kindle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

The views your reverting to is no longer current. If revert because you agree with the old dating, you should read up on the subject, as a lot has happened the last 15 or so years.

Edit: Did not notice I was not logged in.

Wrimle (talk) 10:20, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

impaling Arden on Shakespeare
Shakespearean humor on purpose or just my filthy mind? Who can say. Anyway, Shakespeare coat of arms is in mainspace. And thanks for mentioning Schoenaum, that helped. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:48, 3 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Bleh. Apologies for being so lame about responding. I did skim it when you posted (over three weeks ago?!? Jeeze!) and it looked awesome, but I've been meaning to look at it properly and real life has just not been cooperative lately. I'm hoping I'll have some time around Christmas for wiki stuff, but no promises. Xover (talk) 10:04, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Take care! A scholar named Duncan-Jones had a couple of interesting interpretations of "shake [one's] spear", but they didn't quite fit the article. Also started Shakespeare's signet ring. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:49, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Joyous Season
 Happy Holidays text 2.png

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your fellow editors' talk pages.

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you Gerda. Much appreciated! Xover (talk) 13:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Wassail!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Xover: Enjoy the holiday season&#32;and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Inescapable
ca 22:50: "-Were you talking about hockey? No, we were talking Falstaff, we both played Falstaff!" Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Shakespeare Image
So I tried to ping you & others, but I'm not totally sure I did it properly. Anyway, this is in reference to changing the Shakespeare article image to Droeshout. I replied to various comments explaining why I think people are wrong to prefer Chandos, and it seems like nobody cares to defend their position. If so, fair enough, the rule is we go by consensus. But I just wanted to check whether you were ignoring the issue intentionally (maybe you have more important things to worry about), or accidentally (maybe I didn't ping you correctly).

To re-summarize: The primary objection to Droeshout seems to be based on the effect other editors seem to think it will have on (modern) readers in terms of making them more likely to read the article. I don't know what evidence the other editors have for this claim, if any. I'm inclined to say that even if there were evidence to support this claim, that wouldn't necessarily be dispositive (we might get very good VTR if we replaced Chandos with pornography, but that doesn't mean we should). But if there was actual evidence for it, I'd feel better about the whole thing. Dingsuntil (talk) 00:38, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Just want you to know
Shakespeare is alive and well in outer space: Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:49, 7 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I preferred jms' take. :) (Well, actually not, because that particular episode was crap, but the series as a whole: when it was good it was gooood!) Xover (talk) 07:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That's the one where Londo use one of his penises to cheat in (alien?) poker, right? I didn't even know there was a new Star Trek out there, but it's heartwarming that goes into such detail. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:05, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

In case you happen to know someone who took a picture
The article could use one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: No, but if I'd known in advance I could have probably arranged it (Oslo isn't that far out of my way on semi-regular travels; in fact, I attended a conference in late March that was held in Vika kino whose entrance is from the same little town square as the Oslo Concert Hall). Your best bet now is probably to ask at w:no:WP:TO. Xover (talk) 08:53, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I may try that. I also have the username of a COI editor since I started the article, it's not impossible they're still watching. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:02, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Asked in both places. We'll see what happens. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * FOP on steroids: Files_for_discussion/2023_January_24. And speaking of steroids, I made this article recently: Enhanced Games. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:44, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Palmerin of England
Your draft article in your sandbox looks like a very good basis for an article. I suggest you publish it so others can work to expand it. Goustien (talk) 21:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @Goustien: Thanks, but it's unlikely I'll bother until I get over my acquired antipathy for the project, and most especially for the new page patrollers. Do you have an interest in Palmerin of England or was it just a passing fancy? Xover (talk) 08:14, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've been reading Amadis of Gaul, and I see Palmerin was one of the other romances (along with Tirant lo Blanch) spared in the burning of Don Quixote's library. Goustien (talk) 03:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 58
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes

Issue 58, July – August 2023 
 * New partners - De Standaard and Duncker & Humblot
 * Tech tip: Filters
 * Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:45, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 59
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes

Issue 59, September – October 2023 
 * Spotlight: Introducing a repository of anti-disinformation projects
 * Tech tip: Library access methods

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#01902a; background-color:darkred; border-width:3px; text-align:center; padding:3px; width:800px;" class="plainlinks"> Merry Christmas! ''Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten! ¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua! God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus! Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce! Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством! শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스! สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส!'' ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành! Весела Коледа! ~ Meri Kirihimete! Hello, Xover! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:31, 23 December 2023 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}