Wikipedia talk:The Wikipedia Library

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Libraries (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Newspapers.com[edit]

I got a renewal notice, and for a while it worked, by logging in with my email-named account. But today I tried to search for some stuff and I get "You need a Publisher Extra Subscription to view this page" when I try to access a newspaper article, and my account settings are saying "You need a Publisher Extra Subscription to view this page." ... help? Ealdgyth (talk) 21:40, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to ask about my Newspapers.com access as well. My access with them has been pending since...wait for it...2018. It's really helpful to get access to the information that sometimes is *only* available behind Newspapers.com's paywalls. Can anyone help? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Samwalton9 (WMF) Can you help me with this? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:21, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Same here. Can't access behind the paywall and I don't have the $76 to spend at the moment. -- Srwalden (talk) 20:10, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shearonink: Newspapers.com access is given in 1-year increments, so you've has been expired for some time. To request a renewal just head over to https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/users/my_library/, find Newspapers.com in 'My collections' and click 'Renew' or 'Extend'. Once that's processed, you'll get another year of access and need to renew again once that's up. -- Netoholic @ 07:52, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Netoholic... I actually gave up on getting Newspapers.com through the Library and am paying for access but it would be really nice not to have to. Shearonink (talk) 13:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, whenever you're ready, follow the steps above. -- Netoholic @ 19:47, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Renewal to newspapers.com...[edit]

I got an email on 9 Feb saying that my subscription had been renewed and that "You can expect to receive access details within a week or two once it has been processed." ... I've yet to receive such details and my account still shows "registered guest" status at newspapers.com. Am I missing something that I need to do? I've double-checked my spam folder and nothing there. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've renewed my subscription a few weeks ago. Last year, it also took weeks after I applied to have access. It would be nice to get a faster response, but I know that it takes some time. – jona 13:31, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ealdgyth: - are you sure you are logging in to Newspapers.com using the same account email address you provided with your application? I got a confirmation on Feb 17 that your account was renewed. I'll add a comment to your application, please reply there. -- Netoholic @ 07:47, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for resolving this, it's working now. I'll try to remember this when I renew... heh. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:52, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just renewed and it went smoothly. Thanks to all concerned! Coretheapple (talk) 23:19, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General search fails to find article that is present at one of the partner sites[edit]

I'm seeing an issue where my article title-search at the main TWL search page fails to find the article I'm interested in, but redoing the same title-search succeeds when performed instead from the partner's 'Access collection' search page.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. The article in question is "The mythical 'Gerasimov Doctrine' and the language of threat" (doi=10.1080/21624887.2018.1441623).
  2. Start by logging in at https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/users/my_library/ .
  3. Search for The mythical 'Gerasimov Doctrine' and the language of threat (unquoted; include the single quotes which are are part of the title)
  4. In this result page I see no relevant results among any of the 23 snippets on page 1—the only page of results.
  5. Note: Based on a search at my public library digital offerings, I found a summary page (metadata, abstract) of the desired article, which named the publisher as "Taylor & Francis".
  6. I went back to TWL my_library, and scrolled down to the Taylor and Francis badge, and clicked the blue Access collection button.
  7. This brought me to an oclc.org domain search page for searching T&F only.
  8. I entered the article title in the search bar, and clicked search.
  9. This brought up this search results page, and the very first result was a snippet for my desired article.
  10. Clicking the article snippet brought me to this url, which includes the doi in the url path.
    • Not only did this web page provide the metadata and abstract, but it contains the full text of the article on that page (in html format).
    • There is also a PDF button which allowed me to download the article in PDF format, and
    • an EPUB button which brings up a print-format version of the article in my browser.

So, I have a question and a comment:

  • Why does the initial search fail? That seems like a bug to me, or is there something I'm missing? Should I file a phab ticket?
  • Whether a bug or a feature, it seems to me there should be a doc page about searching TWL somewhere (is there one?) and it should include the fact that a failed search on the main page may not mean that TWL partners do not have the article being searched for, and that a more targeted search restricted to the collection of the individual partner may succeed where the more general search failed. It also implies that if the publisher/partner is known, it may be better to begin the search there.

Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding users @Sdkb, Wikmoz, SandyGeorgia, and Shibbolethink: who I believe may be interested in following this. Mathglot (talk) 22:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I think some of the hyperlinks above have session data included, and if you click them directly you may not get to the same page I saw; you may have to go through all the steps in sequence, in order to see the same results. Mathglot (talk) 22:12, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New issues with Newspapers.com[edit]

@Netoholic: I have left you a message on the Library Platform my Application History. Newspaper.com was only a 3-month renewal. Strange. I see by the multiple threads above, that we are having subscription/renewal issues with Newspapers.com. Please advise. — Maile (talk) 19:37, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestory.com access[edit]

Hello and good day Wikipedians. I recently gained access to Newspapers.com via Wikipedia Library. I have submitted a request for Ancestory.com but I am aware that there is a wait list. How hard is it to get Ancestory.com access. If it is easy to gain access is it just a matter of accepting to many people at the same time? In short, can I expect any action on my request or should I just write it off as a long shot? Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 23:55, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I actually emailed @Samwalton9 (WMF) about this yesterday. I'm sure he'll reply too, but he essentially said there's no news. I had Ancestry access until recently. There was a previous discussion about this here: Wikipedia talk:The Wikipedia Library/Archive 6#Ancestry.com issue. It wasn't difficult to get access before, but it seems to be an issue at the moment. I guess "wait and see" is the answer. In the meantime, your local public library might have Ancestry access. TrottieTrue (talk) 13:24, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the update, TrottieTrue, even if it's a non-update update. It was such a useful subscription to have! I miss it daily, especially the time it saved in establishing basic details. Penny Richards (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Penny - yes, I agree, it was really useful. Let’s hope it comes back before too long. TrottieTrue (talk) 23:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Earlier today, I received an email with the log-in details for Ancestry via The Wikipedia Library. Thanks to those who have made this possible - it's a great resource, for which I am very thankful. Shame it's a new account, as it meant I had to copy all the stuff I'd saved to my Shoebox over to the new account. Hopefully next time I can just renew the Ancestry membership for this account. Penny Richards and Gandalf the Groovy, maybe you'll hear something soon. TrottieTrue (talk) 14:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I heard today! Very glad to have this tool again. Penny Richards (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gale[edit]

Not sure who can help with this issue so am pinging Samwalton9 (WMF), but happy for any help. Searching for the name of an academic in the search bar at the top of the my library page brings up numerous articles in Gale (multiple people I get the same situation). When you attempt to access the link, the results always end up giving a brief abstract and then say "Access from your library. This is a preview. Get the full text through your school or public library." If you go to the actual Gale page and press on the Academic One File tab, you can actually retrieve the complete article. BUT, if you then add the link (for example, {{Gale|A396768686}}) to your citation, it reverts to the abstract and not the full article. This is highly frustrating because the search links only stay active for like 15 minutes, so you have to find them, format them, save them in your article, within that short time frame or you are looking at an unrefreshable locked page. Then to access the full article you have to go back to the Gale page at the library to access. This seems like quite a roundabout way to work, especially if say two articles are comparing an academics work and you cannot see them simultaneously, unless of course you kill a bunch of trees and print them out. Is there a reason this has to be so difficult? Is there an easier way to get the citation template to revert to the full article rather than the abstract? SusunW (talk) 20:56, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey SusunW, I can't replicate that "Access from your library" behaviour searching via the library search bar - could you elaborate on your process there? For the citation, unfortunately full text is through the library proxy and citations generally shouldn't be proxied. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:42, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria I'm not sure I can explain it any better. If I go to the main search bar the results are an abstract. Typing in a link that results for say Gale A396768686 I get the message as I said "Access from your library. This is a preview. Get the full text through your school or public library." I then have to back out of that, go to the library, sign in because it will have logged me out (annoying because it happens all the time, why won't it leave me signed in?), find the Gale icon, and search for the article name to get the full article. Then it doesn't stay live long enough for me to read the whole thing (unless its really short like this example), or even input the full source in a citation. Within a short period of time, it automatically goes to a page that says "Thanks for visiting! You have logged out successfully. Where can we take you? Library home page. Start a new session. Access Gale Academic OneFile." If I push on the Library home page link, I get an error message: "Welcome to Gale North America. You appear to be visiting us from Mexico." (No duh, I am in Mexico, which is in North America, hello.) If I press on start a new session, sometimes it works that I can paste the name of the file again and access it from the search result, but sometimes it doesn't. If I push on the access Gale, it takes me back to the abstract. Bottom line, I spend hours just trying to read, format and access a single source because of the roundabout way to access it and the short period of time it stays "live". SusunW (talk) 05:26, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]