Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request) (bot |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 45:
Well, Do you know whether any such service exists yet?<br/>--[[User:Seren-dipper|Seren-dipper]] ([[User talk:Seren-dipper#top|talk]]) 22:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
:Perhaps not as a single service, though [[Pubmed]], [[Web of Science]] and [[Google Scholar]] are all along those lines. It's always a tradeoff between answering all questions vs. best answering questions within a given ___domain. A specialized biomedical tool will be better at targetted replies to biomedical questions, but may miss some things on the periphery that the generalist tool would catch (e.g. biography or obit for biomed writers. The [[Copernicus]] approach to metasearch on the internet never really took off, though Bing seems to use some of their ideas. [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
== Archiving the found scans ==
When scans result from these requests, should we not try to send them to archives such as [[WebCite]] so they are accessible to reviewers, editors, and readers? [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
== Resolved rate ==
Line 57:
:My experience is that if the resource is available through online subscription at major university libraries than its very likely to get fulfilled and if its the type of thing that major university libraries have as a hard copy than its somewhat likely to be fulfilled. General interest publications that universities don't tend to have aren't particularly likely to be fulfilled. As far as US newspapers, I think that university libraries typically have online access to the archives of local papers, major national publications like the NY Times and databases like LexisNexis that cover roughly the last 20 years. If you were looking for an article in a small city newspaper from 50 years ago or a publication that's not likely to be in a university library than you're best bet might be to try to find a wikipedian in that city who could check to see if their local public library had access or make an interlibrary loan request at your local library. [[User:GabrielF|GabrielF]] ([[User talk:GabrielF|talk]]) 22:50, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
::I am not a stats man but I can tell everyone this much: GabrielF has been outstanding in resolving the numerous and various queries which I have raised here. I have been promoting the project via various talk pages as and when awkward situations have arisen. It seems to end up with me being the one to actually ask the question, but hopefully the concept is sticking in someone's brain, somewhere. I am still waiting for that first request for an article from the journal of the [[Newcomen Society]], regarding which I can probably supply the resource and would be happy to do so. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush|talk]]) 01:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
:::Indeed. I'm starting to think that Harvard place must have something to be said for it. ;-) [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
== make references easier to use ==
Line 86:
:Good thinking. [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 05:23, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
::See also one section above. --[[User:Thgoiter|тнояsтеn]] [[User talk:Thgoiter|⇔]] 06:58, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
:::We do need a better structure to address this work. I'd suggest that a transcluded subpage arrangement, as used on [[wp:SPI]] and [[wp:AFD]], would help. But there is historic value, even to failed requests: they show an effort was made to find a source. It justifies removing article content for having failed verification. [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
== Book sources ==
Line 109:
I think this resource is great but I couldn't find it and after quite an lot of searching gave up and asked at [[WP:HELPDESK]]. Perhaps you could consider making more redirects here such as [[Wikipedia:Check sources]], [[Wikipedia:Check references]], [[Wikipedia:Verify sources]] or setup a [[Wikipedia:Noticeboard]] or add to {{Tlx|Noticeboard links}}. Regards, [[User:Sun Creator|Sun Creator]]<sup>([[User talk:Sun Creator|talk]])</sup> 14:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
:Good Idea.--[[user:Shrike|Shrike]] ([[User talk:Shrike|talk]])/[[WP:RX]] 10:07, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
::Not so sure it is such a good idea to advertise that widely. This is meant to be a service to Wikipedia editors building the encyclopedia. If it becomes a service to every passing reader with a query it will overload the volunteers and may possibly start running into copyright problems. There is already a huge increase in activity on this page in the last year or two. '''[[User:Spinningspark|<
:::I usually don't fulfill request of random IP.People who ask for sources are usually established editors.--[[user:Shrike|Shrike]] ([[User talk:Shrike|talk]])/[[WP:RX]] 12:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
::::With this and the next discussion in light, I think that there needs to be a guideline or policy detailing how individuals giving paid source material to other editors should behave. [[User:Wer900|Wer900]] • <small>[[User talk:Wer900|talk]]</small> 20:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Line 121:
It has come to my knowledge that the hashtag <nowiki>#icanhaspdf</nowiki> on Twitter is a way for people who tweet to get journal articles that they have no access to. I am thinking about including this fact onto the Resource Request page as an alternative, or for people who do not use Wikipedia. I hereby ask for your opinion. <span style="border: 1px solid #C90016;background:white">[[User:Kinkreet|<b><font style="colour:#002147;">Kinkreet</font></b>]][[User talk:Kinkreet|<sup><font style="colour:#993333;">~♥moshi moshi♥~</font></sup>]]</span> 23:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
:I don't think that this is a good idea. By keeping resource requests on site, we can fall back on the claim that it's all for the good of the encyclopedia and probably under fair use (in the United States). Once we start going off site, we lose that protection, I think. [[User:Sven Manguard|<
== [[Wikipedia:Free English newspaper sources]] ==
Line 156:
== Page maintenance ==
I'm relatively new to regular participation here, so I have some questions about how things are run. Is there a bot automatically archiving filled requests? If not, perhaps we should set one up. Also, any thoughts on what to do with very old unfilled requests? Surely most of these have been abandoned by the requester. Perhaps we can archive anything older than, say, a year, and re-categorize the rest into groups - books, articles, etc. - to give them a better chance of being filled. I suspect most people just scroll to the bottom of the page to look at the new requests. [[User:Gamaliel|<
:For the former see [[#Archive]]. --[[User:Thgoiter|тнояsтеn]] [[User talk:Thgoiter|⇔]] 15:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Line 163:
:::Six months seems rather a long time, assuming there have been no responses whatsoever during that time. I would suggest three months, and I'm not at all sure that one or two months would be too short. [[User:John M Baker|John M Baker]] ([[User talk:John M Baker|talk]]) 16:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
::::Three months sounds good. Will add that to the page introduction. [[User:Shyamal|Shyamal]] ([[User talk:Shyamal|talk]]) 10:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
:Related: before or after archiving, requests with no successful finds should be reported back to the original requester and the talkpage of the related article. While absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, such cases will often correspond to a citation which should at least be marked with {{tl|fv}}. Is there a suitable tool for such notifications? If not, can we create one? [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
::{{ping|LeadSongDog}} <nowiki>{{ping|USERNAME}}</nowiki> raises a notification that should notify the requester. I added an instruction line about it. [[User:Shyamal|Shyamal]] ([[User talk:Shyamal|talk]]) 15:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Yes, that's great for notifying the user if they're still active on en-wp, but we still should have a notice to the relevant article's talkpage. [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
== talk on the RX, need your stories ==
Line 203:
== World eBook Fair ==
Has anyone tried using worldebookfair.org yet? Reading [http://worldebookfair.org/View/about-us.aspx their about page], it seems a bit too good to be legit. Am I missing a catch? [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
== Suggestion for reorganization of pages ==
Line 214:
==Download tools==
I'm not the most techy of editors, so apologies if I'm posting something that everyone but me has been using for the last ten years. I've found it useful to temporarily download pages from Google books using the Google Book Downloader 2.3 script and similarly with the self-explanatory Amazon Reader (Look Inside) Downloader, which just enables right-click saving <
== Any way to avoid revealing personal information? ==
Line 232:
:::Thanks for the tips! I've incorporated the suggestions about a more specific page description and tried to tighten the white space a bit. I'm trying it out live to see what others think. Happy to keep working on design, layout, text, etc. Cheers, [[User:Ocaasi|Ocaasi]]<sup> [[User talk:Ocaasi|t ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Ocaasi| c]]</sup> 16:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
::::A couple of suggestions. The text size after the banner should ideally remain in the normal style. A table of contents after the banner would be good to retain. [[User:Shyamal|Shyamal]] ([[User talk:Shyamal|talk]]) 10:39, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
::::: Is there a way to fully utilize the width of the page? This page is rather long (length-wise) already. [[User:OhanaUnited|<b
::::::But do we really need to? Wikipedia's width-heavy format can make things less legible, eg [http://alistapart.com/article/whitespace figures four vs five]. [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 22:27, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
::Now, commenting on the design itself, which was just [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request&diff=607119053&oldid=607086162 removed] ... I'm sorry to say that it's pretty bad, Ocaasi. The text didn't flow around the logo, the postage stamp on the right (oh, that was a picture) was awkwardly placed in line with "Resource Exchange", and the entire top was just cluttered and bloated with information. [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 06:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Line 271:
<span style="font-family:Euclid Fraktur; background:white;">→[[User:Σ|<font color="#BA0000">Σ</font>]][[User talk:Σ|<font color="#036">σ</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Σ|<font color="#036">ς</font>]]. <small>([[User:Σ|Sigma]])</small></span> 03:54, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
:There's an existing [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#Copyright_piracy.3F|discussion on the talk page]]; I suggest you move this section there. Regards, [[User:Orange Suede Sofa|<span style="font-variant:small-caps
== Wikipedia Library looking for Partner Account Coordinators! ==
Line 290:
:::::::So if I leave a copy of a Wiley article I printed in a public place while I go for a cup of coffee, I violate the rules? Clearly somebody can snap pictures of all pages with a cellphone camera in that time. How is temporarily hosting on a website any different? The main concern is "systematic distribution" and temporary hosting for tens of minutes does not meet that criteria. [[User:Churn and change|Churn and change]] ([[User talk:Churn and change|talk]]) 18:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::::Nobody should use links to the journal articles gotten from [[WP:RX]] and then copy-paste those links into the references section of the Wikipedia article that the journal reference is used for. One should always link to the official page, with a paywall if it exists, for the references section. And remember, links are generally removed within hours and articles are often sent by email. Journals are not losing any ability to profit from [[WP:RX]] that they don't expressly disclaim in their terms and conditions. [[User:Wer900|Wer900]] • <small>[[User talk:Wer900|talk]]</small> 19:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
::::::::.Quite the reverse, really. Citation in a wp article generates demand for paid downloads from the journal. It is a clear win-win scenario. [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
:::::::::I know of at least one scientist who finds that a well sourced WP article can be a convenient place for finding bibliographic links, particularly for the less current or harder to find sources. And it may give more visibility to one's own articles, even if no one pays extra to download them. ~ [[User:J. Johnson|J. Johnson (JJ)]] ([[User_talk:J. Johnson#top|talk]]) 22:20, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Line 338:
For Wikipedia, are the benefits worth the difficulties? Please share. I want to know..
<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:172.242.17.191|172.242.17.191]] ([[User talk:172.242.17.191|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/172.242.17.191|contribs]]) 10:51, 13 May 2015</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:This isn't really the place to ask. You might try [[wp:VPT]]. My guess is that Google's lawyers warned them off the legal risks of publishing erroneous nautical charts. [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
== How can I get a passage from the book "International handbook of universities"? ==
Line 346:
I cheeked in all my country's libraries and I didn't find even 1 duplicate of this book (from years 2014-2015) in spite of we have the greatest libraries. I just need to see a passage on the university "UAFM" (Kiev medical Institute) . I'm looking for any service for free or for money, that will enable me to reach this passage. Thanks
--[[Special:Contributions/149.78.38.232|149.78.38.232]] ([[User talk:149.78.38.232|talk]]) 08:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
:It might be because it is very expensive, so that few libraries buy it. {{OCLC|897478417}} shows the 2015 26th edition as US$890. There's a 1993 13th edition showing in Krakow at the Medical Library of the [[Jagiellonian University]], and there's a 2003 17th edition in Budapest at the [[Central European University]] library. Your best bet, though is a 2013 25th edition at the [[Open University]] ({{ISBN|9781137293725}}). Is there someone who could play fetch? [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<
: If anyone's looking, it is listed as ''Kyiv Medical Institute UAFM (Ukrainian Association of Folk Medicine)'' in the handbook. It is available through the ''World Higher Education Database Online (WHED Online)'' database. Till last year, it was accessible through Palgrave Macmillan, but now it is hosted by ''The International Association of Universities'' (IAU) at whed.net. An entry for the institution which was last updated in November 2008 is available in the non-subscriber area of the website. You can also get in touch with a document retrieval service to source it for you. I highly recommend Dmitri and his team over at [http://www.artrieve.com/ Artrieve]. - [[User:NQ|'''NQ''']] [[User talk:NQ|<small>(talk)</small>]] 11:00, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Line 428:
Given the legality issues surrounding [[Library Genesis]] and [[Sci-Hub]], and our ongoing access donation partnerships with parties involved, I've removed the suggestion to use these from the page. Someone added a note asking for a talk page discussion if anyone did so, so here it is. [[User:Samwalton9|'''S'''am '''W'''alton]] ([[User talk:Samwalton9|talk]]) 16:10, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
:"Someone" was {{U|Piotrus}}, who also asked to be pinged. --[[User:Worldbruce|Worldbruce]] ([[User talk:Worldbruce|talk]]) 16:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
:Thank you, [[User:Worldbruce]], for pinging me. Given it is undeniably the most useful resource, and has been discussed by mainstream publication like Science ([http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/whos-downloading-pirated-papers-everyone]), I do not think censoring its existence and hiding our head in the sand is doing anything but hurting our editors. I am open, however, to adding a note saying something like ("editors are advised that there are legal disputes surrounding this website and its use is not endorsed by the community; the listing here is merely informative"). Again, let's keep in mind that our goal is to build an encyclopedia, our partnerships still don't provide all the resources we need, and LG/SH do. We don't have to endorse it, but we should inform editors this option exist so they can exercise their own judgement.--<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<
::Since there are no objections to my proposal, I have restored the entry with a warning notice. I will note that if we allow comments like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request&diff=726109660&oldid=726057036], which in essence are asking for copyrighted materials, and answers that promise to share such materials despite this being a copyvio practice, we are already on the "technically illegal" side of the fence here. Further, such activities as suggested in said discussion are much more problematic (clear intent to violate copyright) then a merely informative listing about a service. Feel free to reword my warning, if you can think of a better formulation to legally cover our a$$. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<
:::I have some discomfort with our recommending sources such as Sci-Hub, particularly in light of the opposition from parties with whom Wikipedia has ongoing access donation partnerships. I don't think the warning legend gets us there, since context shows that we are recommending that users consult these resources. I don't think copyright owners have the same problem with limited provision of sources to editors working on Wikipedia articles. [[User:Samwalton9|'''S'''am '''W'''alton]] and [[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]], do you have any further thoughts? Anyone else? [[User:John M Baker|John M Baker]] ([[User talk:John M Baker|talk]]) 21:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
::::I too am uncomfortable with this. Might I offer another suggestion in lieu of the current wording:
Line 435:
::::This approach flips the intent. It warns primarily, as it informs--rather than suggesting use explicitly, with a warning as an addendum. [[User:Ocaasi (WMF)|Ocaasi (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Ocaasi (WMF)|talk]]) 18:00, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
:::::That seems better to me. [[User:John M Baker|John M Baker]] ([[User talk:John M Baker|talk]]) 18:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
:::::I am fine with the revised warning proposed above. I do think that the "the listing here is merely informative" sentence from my original warning can be retained as well, as it further stresses we are not endorsing the use of those sources. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<
::::::Cool, {{U|Piotrus}}. Would you go ahead and make that change if no one else objects? Cheers, [[User:Ocaasi (WMF)|Ocaasi (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Ocaasi (WMF)|talk]]) 18:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
::::::Actually, I think it's better without adding "the listing here is merely informative." Ocaasi's language fully communicates that Sci-hub and LibGen exist, there are legal questions around their use, and we do not endorse them. [[User:John M Baker|John M Baker]] ([[User talk:John M Baker|talk]]) 18:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Line 493:
Jake Orlowitz [[User:Ocaasi (WMF)|Ocaasi (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Ocaasi (WMF)|talk]]) 18:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
: {{re|Ocaasi (WMF)}} Great idea. I have added my 2 cents. [[User:OhanaUnited|<b
== Most requested sources ==
Line 636:
:Thanks for this; very interesting. I wonder if it would be worth updating the notice that comes up when you click "Create New Request" to include a link to TWL so people can check? More aggressively, could a bot patrol this page and if it sees a request for a link to a database, post a link to TWL? It should probably only do that for the first poster to a section, and have an opt-out option. [[User:Mike Christie|Mike Christie]] ([[User_talk:Mike Christie|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Mike_Christie|contribs]] - [[User:Mike Christie/Reference library|library]]) 13:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
::{{re|Mike Christie}} It's an interesting idea, and one I'd considered briefly. The main reason I didn't pursue it yet is that RX is really designed for editors looking for individual documents rather than access to broad collections for longer periods of time. Under the current model we do have limited numbers of accounts for most publishers, and while we don't dissuade people from applying, I'd rather we prioritised editors who think they could make use of access for more than one or two documents. That said, [https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/02/22/wikipedia-builds-digital-library-system/ we're working on some changes] (expect to hear more in the next couple of months) that will see over half our collection available at the individual resource level, immediately, without requiring applications and year-long accounts. When that's in place, I think it could be a great idea to look into something like the bot idea you proposed, for content available through those publishers. [[User:Samwalton9 (WMF)|Samwalton9 (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Samwalton9 (WMF)|talk]]) 11:18, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
::: {{re|Samwalton9 (WMF)}} A few thoughts... Any chance you can connect with Magnolia Press? One of its journal, [[Zootaxa]], is the go-to source for new animals. That journal receives so many submissions that it publishes multiple papers on a [http://mapress.com/j/zt/issue/archive daily basis]. I think it will benefit many users. For Nature, I know that it already grants access to the full article for public who accessed it through a news article from its permitted list of news organization. It may be easier to persuade them when they already grant limited access under a similar program. As for the current sign-up model, I understand that some have caps because it reached the maximum number of users registered with the partnered organization. Wouldn't it be possible to convince the publishers to switch the current metric (number of maximum users) to "number of concurrent users" or "total number of access per month"? [[User:OhanaUnited|<b
::::{{re|OhanaUnited}} Thanks for your thoughts! Magnolia Press is one of the publishers that I'm making attempts to connect to, though I've yet to hear back from them. We're having a very promising conversation with SpringerNature at the moment, and I expect you'll be hearing good things before the end of the year. Yes, that's definitely one way we could do it, but the overhead for work involved by account coordinators goes up if we're monitoring per month, for example. We're working on a broader solution (see the blog post linked in my previous message), where for over half of our content you soon won't need to sign up for an account at all! [[User:Samwalton9 (WMF)|Samwalton9 (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Samwalton9 (WMF)|talk]]) 13:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
::::: {{re|Samwalton9 (WMF)}} Another big publisher that should be contacted is Wiley, which I find it surprising to be not available yet. [[User:OhanaUnited|<b
::::::{{re|OhanaUnited}} We've had a number of conversations with Wiley over the last few years but haven't been able to reach an agreement with them yet. They're absolutely one of our top priorities though! [[User:Samwalton9 (WMF)|Samwalton9 (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Samwalton9 (WMF)|talk]]) 10:56, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
:::::::The list is very interesting, and a reasonable way to prioritize bringing publishers on board. Another way to look at requested sources at the Resource Exchange is how long it takes volunteers to supply them. For Wiley, 79% of requested articles have been offered within 24 hours, rising to 87% within 48 hours, and 94% within a week of the request. Wiley seems to have become easier for the volunteer base to access, with 100% of requests in the past 18 months being offered to the requester within 48 hours, and 100% of requests in 2017 being offered within 24 hours. Wikipedians can obtain the full text of major publishers' digitized content fairly quickly and easily through the Resource Exchange.
Line 820:
== Internet Archive ==
Internet Archive has a [https://archive.org/ fundraising appeal] again. Please donate. [[User:Melly42|Melly42]] ([[User talk:Melly42|talk]]) 20:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
== "Please replace this subject line with a more meaningful description of the request." ==
Is there a way to make this more conspicuous (maybe via an edit notice)? I see lots of people (myself included) who do not "replace this subject line"; and well that makes navigation from the page history to their section that wee bit more time consuming... Cheers, [[User:RandomCanadian|RandomCanadian]] ([[User talk:RandomCanadian|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/RandomCanadian|contribs]]) 14:11, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:The [[Template:Resource Request submission/Edit intro|existing edit notice]] already says quite a lot, so putting in an extra line reminding people to populate the subject line will probably be missed. Perhaps a better place to put it is in the [[Template:Resource Request submission|resource request template]], something like
::{{tq|<nowiki><!-- Don't forget to replace the subject line with a more meaningful description of the request --></nowiki>}} just before {{tq|"Thanks, <nowiki>~~~~"</nowiki>}}.
:This may help, although it probably won't work for requesters who replace the entire pre-populated text with their text. I hope I'm making myself clear. —[[User:Bruce1ee|Bruce1ee]]<sup>[[User talk:Bruce1ee|''talk'']]</sup> 16:47, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::Good idea, Bruce1ee. --[[User:Gazal world|Gazal world]] ([[User talk:Gazal world|talk]]) 17:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Bruce1ee|Gazal world}} I've tried [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AResource_Request_submission%2FEdit_intro&type=revision&diff=1014359966&oldid=987985742 this]. If you think it's too much feel free to revert. Maybe a different lighter shade of red would be better? [[User:RandomCanadian|RandomCanadian]] ([[User talk:RandomCanadian|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/RandomCanadian|contribs]]) 17:09, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::::{{ping|RandomCanadian}} That would probably work highlighted in red. And I think the bright red you used is fine – it will be hard to miss. —[[User:Bruce1ee|Bruce1ee]]<sup>[[User talk:Bruce1ee|''talk'']]</sup> 17:13, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
== Can I just ask for the page number? ==
I need the page number for this ref[https://books.google.com/books?id=iWM3CwAAQBAJ&pg=PT99#v=onepage&q&f=false] because the preview doesn't show what the page number happens to be. So do I ask for the page number on the main page or can I just ask here on the talk page? [[User:ApproximateLand|ApproximateLand]] ([[User talk:ApproximateLand|talk]]) 08:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
:{{ping|ApproximateLand}} That looks like the preview of an ebook, which generally don't have page numbers. The [[WP:RX|Resource Request]] page is the correct place to ask for the page number – just click on the "create a new request" button. —[[User:Bruce1ee|Bruce1ee]]<sup>[[User talk:Bruce1ee|''talk'']]</sup> 08:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
::Thanks. [[User:ApproximateLand|ApproximateLand]] ([[User talk:ApproximateLand|talk]]) 08:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
== Wikipedia Library - most useful collections ==
Hello WP:RX regulars. Just wondering which Wikipedia library collections you find most useful for your work at WP:RX? I asked this question one time and somebody responded EBSCO, Gale, and ProQuest. I also recently discovered the library has Newspapers.com too. Any others come to mind? Any special ones I should apply for? I know they're working on a unified search / supersearch, but in the meantime, there is a mountain of collections and I want to get an idea of which ones are worth the time of searching. Thanks. –[[User:Novem Linguae|<span style="color:limegreen">'''Novem Linguae'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]])</small> 08:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
:The Oxford suite, Project MUSE, De Gruyter and NewspaperARCHIVE.com are also useful. You can see all the Library's collections [https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/partners/ here]. Those collections showing the book bundle icon are part of [https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/users/my_library/ the Wikipedia Library Bundle] and don't need to be applied for. Access to the Library Bundle is open to editors active for at least six months with over 500 edits and 10 edits in the last month. —[[User:Bruce1ee|Bruce1ee]]<sup>[[User talk:Bruce1ee|''talk'']]</sup> 08:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
::Everything depends on what you are writing about. Many people use Newspapers.com but for the topics I write about that would be completely useless. ([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 08:30, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
:::As Buidhe said, it depends on the subject you are working on. JSTOR, Project MUSE, De Gruyter & ProQuest are the most useful database for my work. I work on Indian literature related articles. --[[User:Gazal world|Gazal world]] ([[User talk:Gazal world|talk]]) 15:06, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
== Hathi access ==
Just a general question, some US universities has opened access to Hathi-scanned books to affiliated person during the pandemic. Is it possible to download these using, using Hathi Download Helper?--[[User:Antemister|Antemister]] ([[User talk:Antemister|talk]]) 14:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
:I can access Hathi books through my University. But they don't allow downloading. If you are looking for any particular pages, I would happy to help out. --[[User:Gazal world|Gazal world]] ([[User talk:Gazal world|talk]]) 15:03, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
:{{u|Antemister}}, If you mean [https://sourceforge.net/p/hathidownloadhelper/wiki/Hathitrust%20Emergency%20Temporary%20Access%20Service%20%28ETAS%29/ this utility] it explicitly says, "The HDH tool does not work with ETAS access. It is limited to public ___domain items only." ([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 15:23, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
::OK, thanks for the replies, did not look to that page. :{{u|Gazal world}}, have you tried https://sourceforge.net/projects/etasdownloadhelper/?--[[User:Antemister|Antemister]] ([[User talk:Antemister|talk]]) 15:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
:::{{u|Antemister}} Thanks. I will try this tool. --[[User:Gazal world|Gazal world]] ([[User talk:Gazal world|talk]]) 15:41, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
::::Can you try if you can take out [https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000417873]?--[[User:Antemister|Antemister]] ([[User talk:Antemister|talk]]) 19:08, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
:::::{{u|Antemister}} I would be able to provide only specific pages. please request pages you need at the 'Resource Request' page. --[[User:Gazal world|Gazal world]] ([[User talk:Gazal world|talk]]) 19:23, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
::::::Ah, "specific pages" can be provided by my local library, but I tried to find out if the complete book to which I currently don't have access can be downloaded. Anyway, thanks for trying out.--[[User:Antemister|Antemister]] ([[User talk:Antemister|talk]]) 21:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
| |||