I tried to go to the "Penelope" link on your user page, but only received a message that I did not have permission to enter. That's not a very helpful link. :-) Eclecticology 06:47, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I tried it again and just got:
- Forbidden
- You don't have permission to access /index.shtml on this server.
It may have something to do with cookie settings.Until you brought the subject up, Thomas Browne was just a name that I guessed to have been from that time period. Let's just say that you made me curious. Eclecticology 09:22, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. As a practical matter could you please make future comments to my talk page instead of my user page. That way I am notified that I have a message.
My first impression of Browne does seem his humour, which still manages to survive through more than 3 centuries of change in the language. This is great in the light of the tendency of modern scientists to take themselves seriously. Some of the subjects that Browne tackles tend to be dismissed these days as "pseudoscience".
I've looked up Brown at the Online Books Page http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?author=Thomas+Browne&amode=words&title=&tmode=words Several previously available items seem to now be in restricted sites. That may explain the difficulty that I have had with access to "Penelope". This suggests that of his works, these now become the prime candidates for inclusion in Wikisource. Some of our friends find it difficult to understand why there is no urgency to duplicate something from the Gutenberg Project, or yet another version of Shakespeare's plays. Eclecticology 19:51, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments. I didn't contribute the Futurist Manifesto; Angela dumped it here when she didn't know what to do with it at Wikipedia. It does fit here, but all I did was adapt it to the Wikisource environment.
U. of Chicago seems to have adopted the policy that one has to be subscribed to have access to their data base, or at least some of the material on it. Individuals cannot directly subscribe, but schools (including high schools) can. There is a fee involved. It does not appear to be an excessive fee, and it opens up the site to anybody at the school, but that does not help those of us who are not associated with a school. It would not seem unethical if someone with access to this public domain material copied the matierial from there to Wikisource. The Pseudodoxia looks as though it might be especially interesting. Eclecticology 01:20, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I'm in Canada, but they seem to shut us out as well. There's nothing "too much" about your TB contributions; I found it disappointing that you would stop. However, those with more dubious contributions have a tendency to be less discrete. Eclecticology 19:51, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I've just left a nasty note at aphorisms, which I then recognized was your article. I gather from the Authors page that this is by Hippocrates. No translator was shown; If Thomas Browne translated this there should be no problem but that fact should be shown to avoid possible problems. Sorry to be such a pest about this kind of detail. Eclecticology 21:42, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for beginning the split of Wikisource:Authors by letter. It was anly a matter of time before this became necessary. I would have eventually done this myself, but was waiting until the 30kb size warning began to appear on the edit page. Please try to not leave the material too long on the head "Authors" page too long after you have moved the material. We want to make sure that any new authors are put on the letter page rather than the head page. Let's not give people the opportunity to do the wrong thing; that's one of the few opportunities that they gladly take.
The On Arthur Dee pages raise an interesting challenge. How can we consistently deal with an author's correspondence? We can't expect that these letters will always be very clearly about one topic, as has been the case with Browne's letters to Ashmole about Dee. Neither is it the practice for authors to give titles to each epistle. I thought of something like [Thomas Browne TO Elias Ashmole, January, 1658] with the italicized portions being optional if there is no ambiguity. It still seems too long. The "TO" in capitals like that would be the indicator that it is correspondence. Let me know your thoughts on this. Eclecticology 05:19, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments. The problem goes well beyond just Browne's letters. Perhaps I'm just trying to deal with an issue. In this case, since you are clear about why these letters are important, it might work to have them both on one page; that would permit us to get rid of that ugly "(2)". Eclecticology 02:22, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Regarding Paracelsus the bright red link indicates that it is to a Wikisource page that doesn't exist. Not finding the vertical bar (a.k.a. pipe symbol) suggests that you may not be playing with a full keyboard.;-) In North American keyboards it uses shift + the key for the back diagonal. What does that give in England? If you're really stuck you can use Alt + 0124 using the numbers from the number pad rather than the top row of keys, and always with the leading 0. I hope that helps. Eclecticology 01:50, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I see that you have combined the two letters on Arthur Dee. Do I have your permission to delete On Arthur Dee (2)? Eclecticology 01:53, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I should avoid dealing with two different subjects at quick interval; the first answer gets missed. :-) Or am I not understanding something? Eclecticology 02:18, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
As I write the local time is 21:38. Dare I ask what A & E stands for? Eclecticology 05:35, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- It's me being a pest again! In the course of tracking down orphaned articles, I've just run into your Selected Writings two of whose three paragraphs appear to be duplicated on Medical writings of Paracelsus. Could you please review this? Once the single small paragraph has been moved it can probably be deleted. Eclecticology 09:11, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
We do use "Emergency" Departments here, but without "Accident". In recent years in Canada "A & E" has come to refer to the "Arts and Entertainment" cable television network. There are people who find emergencies to be entertaining. :-)
There is a problem with the title "Selected writings". It's too generic. Any author can have selected writings. "Medical writings" is quite generic too, but the number of writers who have medical writings are far fewer. I'll let you consider possible alternatives for this situation. Eclecticology 09:47, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I see that you have removed the links to On Guardian Angels and On Aristotle. I presume, then, that these are no longer valid. Please advise so that I can proceed accordingly. My intention when I re-linked them was based on cleaning up the orphaned status of these two items. Eclecticology 17:42, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
In case you're interested there is a 1658 copy of the Pseudodoxia coming for sale on eBay. It has a starting price of US$500.00. If interested see http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3597682037&category=29223 Eclecticology 09:06, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- May I congratulate your bankers for your win? Because YOU made me curious, I looked up Thomas Browne on eBay. I did win a 1904 3-volume set of his works for US$58.00. Consider your win as friendly revenge. :-) Eclecticology 18:03, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I hadn't heard of it called Van Kong, but I have heard it referred to as Hong-couver. There was a great deal of immigration from Hong Kong during the period immediately preceding the turn over to the Chinese. That process has since calmed. The edition of Browne which I bought is The Works of Sir Thomas Browne Edited by Charles Sayle, London, Grant Richards, 1904. The editor takes pride in having restored the annotations to Religio Medici. He makes no claim of it being the "complete" works. I'm glad you're happy with your own purchase. While I have you here, I should let you know that I would like to move the list of Browne's works from Wikisource:Authors-B to Author:Thomas Browne as a part of a more general plan to have the former serve as primarily a master list of authors.
I met a Norwikian in 1976 in Toronto. I've forgotten his name. He was interested in the works of Arthur Waley, and Waley's translations of classics from the Chinese. Shortly afterwards he planned to move back to Norwich, and I moved west. My own procrastination is most responsible for breaking the contact. It's typical of the mystical impression that I have of Norwich. Glastonbury is perhaps the only other English community that leaves such an impression. Eclecticology 20:54, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
Welcome back! I confess that I have no more expertise in music than in many other subjects that draw my attention. I am not familiar with the books that you mentioned, though I still appreciate the unique alchemy that music produces. Bach's inventions can very effectively transport a person. My happening upon music for Wikisource was strictly by hazard. I was investigating the idea of having our own version of the 1911 Encyclopedia. The one that is already on line shows a shameful disregard to proofreading of its OCR materials. Music was taken from a randomly chosen volume of my newly acquired set of that work, and based on the science of allowing a book to be opened at the page that it chooses. Once the selection was made, I needed only to reassure myself that I would not need to struggle with the internet typography of putting notes on staves. Eclecticology 01:31, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Your account will be renamed
editHello,
The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.
Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Norwikian. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Norwikian~sourceswiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.
Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation
08:22, 20 March 2015 (UTC)