Perhaps some problems come from the double nature of wikisource - that is both a typography and a library. I see soma advantage from having language-specific typographies, but I can't see any advantage from having language-specific libraries; my dream would be, a Commons like architecture, to share source texts just as any project can share media. 

A bold solution could be, to share texts using Commons; I'm just playing with the idea of uploading wiki text, or html, of nsPage into djvu page metadata. 

Alex

2015-11-29 2:19 GMT+01:00 billinghurst <billinghurstwiki@gmail.com>:

There is no need for global gadgets, javascripts are able to be pulled
x-wiki now and are essentially global, and if any community wishes to
use another's gadgets they can now. If they are not usable then
request to make them usable. If they want assistance, then ask for it.

I would think that we are looking to argue that we would be looking
for the x-Wikisource application of Module: ns to allow a one to many
pull of Module: from that space. Traditionally that has been
oldwikisource, though one would say that other wikisources have been
where more development has taken place more recently, so there is
possibly argument about where, otherwise HOW if they are to be at
(mul|old)wikisource

I still believe that if this is a rational complaint then someone will
sit down and write down out the issues on a wiki and we can step
through them. Plaintive cries to a mailing list just creates noise,
and little action.  Wistful commentary about how olden times were
better has never had a success in my simple look at history.

Regards, Billinghurst

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bodhisattwa Mandal
<bodhisattwa.rgkmc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> During the recent Wikisource Conference in Vienna, need for global gadgets,
> templates and module was discussed and already it has been reported in
> Phabricator ( https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T1238 ). So someday, the
> problem will be solved.
>
> To me, it is not at all a good idea to return back to multilingual WS for
> this reason. The diversity of the language projects make Wikimedia movement
> unique which includes Wikisource as well. Every language and scripts has its
> own unique problem, which can not be generalised at all. Besides, if some WS
> community choose to return back to multilingual, I think, that's possible,
> but not every WS community would want or like to do that.
>
> Regards,
> Bodhisattwa
>
> Maybe it is "fine" but I am afraid it is only "fine" for majority (that
> speaks English or at least one major European language). As an example,
> note, that there is very few discussion in Chinese in Village pump despite
> there is a lot Chinese users there and many of them do not speak English.
>
> It is very difficult to operate on Commons for users that speak only Thai,
> Urdu, Bashkir, Hindi or another not highly populated language.
>
> Also there are attempts to discriminate users who do not speak / do not
> understand English.
>
> IMO, there is high risk that merging all wikisources would marginalize
> minorities or people who are not multilingual.
>
> The other issue is (I noticed it in plwikisoure) that few users come to
> wikisource because they feel bad in large wiki communities (plwiki in our
> case). (I don't know if there are similar cases in otner wikisources, but
> likely.) In case, we decide to merge projects they will leave.
> So disadvantage here is the risk of losing users that we do not have too
> many.
>
> However, there are also advantages of unification and closer cooperation.
> Question is: will they predominate?
>
> Ankry
>
>> As to the communication problems well WD and Commons are doing just
>> fine, it's no problem really. I am actually not an active contributor to
>> WS but I always had a feeling that I'd perhaps be one if it was not
>> split. It's easier to work in big project with all infrastructure ready
>> and big community to help you, in small on the other hand you have to
>> face the same 1 or 2 people or the time and personal issues may come in
>> the way of participation.
>>
>> I am not a person to have enough energy to run a major RfC in order to
>> have the WSs joined (as you can see I even failed to show my points in a
>> structured way) but if such a person shows up I'd gladly support such an
>> initiative.
>>
>> --Base
>>
>> On 27.11.2015 17:03, Alex Brollo wrote:
>>> I'm deeply convinced that splitting wikisource projects into variuos
>>> languages has been a mistake.
>>>
>>> Is anyone so bold to imagine that it is possible to revert that mistake?
>>>
>>> Or, are we forced to travel along the/ diabolicum/ trail?
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikisource-l mailing list
>>> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikisource-l mailing list
>> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikisource-l mailing list
> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikisource-l mailing list
> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>

_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l