 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Book scans edit
Please see this link. It is actually improved over the this link where you have do 2 or 3 clicks to navigate through to the other volumes. Also, biodiversitylibrary.org are using the same open-source Book Viewer software developed by Internet Archive. The books at biodiversitylibrary.org were originally scanned by Internet Archive [Scanner: scribe1.capitolhill.archive.org]. Guess I'm not understanding what the problem is with Internet Archive or why we link to a sub-set of copies at biodiversitylibrary.org -- GreenC 21:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- Most entomologist colleagues want to find a secies description by volume and page and the BHL pages lets you navigate that fairly easily. BHL also has annotations to the genera mentioned on a page which helps apart from letting you see the page structure, table of contents etc. Yes, we all know that the underlying files are delivered via archive.org and that there are ways to search there too. Other issues aee around scientific names failing ocr and issues with synonymy. BHLs name indexes handle both to an extent. Note also that there are scans of poor quality too on archive.org and BHL versions tend to be of higher quality than those from Google, Million Books and so on. Shyamal (talk) 21:50, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- Take a look at the Helopeltis paper and you can see that it lacks publication metadata and the Coccidae volumes are unsorted. Binomials end with the taxon author and the year and those are places from which one expects most biographical lookups and in any case make up the largest numbers of inbound links. Shyamal (talk) 22:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
OK two links are best then as IA at least make the other works available and presumably more will be added in years to come. -- GreenC 02:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC)