As I'm uploading and proofreading texts, I'm surprised how slow Google is to pick up the new content. As far as I can see, there's nothing that blocks search engines from indexing Page: or Index: pages, so it should not be entirely necessary to transclude content into pages in the main namespace, right? For example, I'm googling the exact phrase "exportable effekter" (antiquated Swedish) which since April 3 (25 days) has been here, http://sv.wikisource.org/wiki/Sida:Post-_och_Inrikes_Tidningar_1835-12-31_3… In my experience, Google is very quick to pick up new content in Wikipedia. I assume it tracks the recent changes page. Is it a problem that the URL ends in ".jpg"? Would search engines avoid or delay to index it, assuming it was an image? Part of my problem is that I'm proofreading entire newspapers, and so far I have only transcluded a few articles. Maybe I should make a main namespace page for each day's full issue. Would that help me? When you proofread The New York Times (English) or Die Gartenlaube (German Wikisource), do you proofread entire pages and issues, and do you transclude everything that you proofread? From the Index: page, the <pagelist/> generates normal HTML links to each page, which is fine. But from the individual pages, the links to the previous (<), next (>) and index (^) pages are created only by Javascript. Is this a problem for search engines? Is it a problem for blind readers? Is there any good reason not to generate standard HTML links for these navigation tabs? -- Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se