Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
2011/1/28 MZMcBride : > Strainu wrote: >> These messages can be improved by introducing internal links and references >> to >> wiki* policies. > > Why do you hate Wiktionary? ;-) > > MZMcBride > Nice one :) Actually I could go on for ages on "why wiktionary is bad" , but that would be disrespectful to the people working on it and simply not the reason I said "wiki*". If you want, we can take this off-list. Strainu ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
On 28 January 2011 15:49, David Gerard wrote: > On 28 January 2011 15:08, Teofilo wrote: >> Let's imagine a group with non-democratic values provides translators >> to Translatewiki. > You really don't understand that "for any purpose" bit, do you? > If you don't want to contribute to a project (Wikimedia,) whose works ... are for use for any purpose, that's up to you. But claiming that "for any purpose" is somehow at odds with the values of the Wikimedia projects is simply incorrect. It is you that has a complete misunderstanding as to what all this is for. I strongly suggest you read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software http://freedomdefined.org/ - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
On 28 January 2011 15:08, Teofilo wrote: > Let's imagine a group with non-democratic values provides translators > to Translatewiki. You really don't understand that "for any purpose" bit, do you? If you don't want to contribute to a project (Wikimedia,) whose works ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
An'n 28.01.2011 16:11, hett Arlen Beiler schreven: > Or boycott their translations and start a WMF transwiki. That seems sensible! *eyeroll* If you look in the archives of this mailing list, you'll notice that the Translatewiki guys asked Wikimedia to host the wiki more than once. They would have been happy to join and be part of the "official" Wikimedia universe. But Wikimedia didn't get its ass off the ground and nothing happened. If you people really worry about undemocratic regimes overtaking Translatewiki and other evil stuff then direct your efforts against Wikimedia (which never bothered to provide a sensible way for localisation) and not against the guys who actually fixed the shortcomings. I guess, they would still be willing to settle under the Wikimedia roof, or am I wrong? (@Gerard Meijssen and the other Translatewiki guys) Marcus Buck User:Slomox (both on Wikimedia and on Translatewiki) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
Hoi, Sorry but there are a few people who have the power and who do the work. When an organisation does contribute at translatewiki.net, that is exactly what they do. When you want to contribute you are welcome, not because you are a Wikipedian but because you contribute to the localisation of software in your language. The people who localise are volunteers. When someone pays people to do a translation, that is none of our concern or business. When a translation is done badly, we welcome people to proof read and improve. When there is a systemic difference ie formal versus informal language use or a specific orthography like UK vs US English, people can ask to localise in a specific way and when it makes sense it is granted. Please do understand that the WMF does accept the translatewiki.netlocalisation because our community has earned it because of the quality of its work. Our developers are MediaWiki developers because of the merit of their work. We are always looking for people willing to do good. There are over 300 languages and orthographies we support. The quality is the quality of the people who make a difference. The people who make a difference are the ones who do the work not the ones who are known for talk. Thanks, GerardM On 28 January 2011 16:08, Teofilo wrote: > 2011/1/28 Gerard Meijssen : > > When the CIA uses MediaWiki and it does, we are > > happy because as a result we do and did get feedback on the use of our > > project. When the CIA wants to use LocalisationUpdate and its people help > > localise at translatewiki.net we could not be more happy. > > As I said, I have nothing about anybody reusing the contents. However > I am against entering into a community with anybody. I want to enter > only communities with which I share some values. > > Let's forget about the CIA. I have nothing against the CIA. > > Let's imagine a group with non-democratic values provides translators > to Translatewiki. Then that group has a legitimacy to have a say in > the way Translatewiki is managed. Then that group can impose its power > structure in the management of Translatewiki. Then for some > unexplained reason, they hire bad translators, who really do bad work. > Can I say "hello, I am from Wikipedia, and I think your translation is > wrong, please change it". No I can't. It is too late. They have > imposed their non-democratic power structure, and there is no way to > change what people superior to me in their non-democratic hierarchical > power structure are imposing. In a non-democratic power structure the > only thing you can do is shut up. > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
Or boycott their translations and start a WMF transwiki. On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Teofilo wrote: > 2011/1/28 Gerard Meijssen : > > When the CIA uses MediaWiki and it does, we are > > happy because as a result we do and did get feedback on the use of our > > project. When the CIA wants to use LocalisationUpdate and its people help > > localise at translatewiki.net we could not be more happy. > > As I said, I have nothing about anybody reusing the contents. However > I am against entering into a community with anybody. I want to enter > only communities with which I share some values. > > Let's forget about the CIA. I have nothing against the CIA. > > Let's imagine a group with non-democratic values provides translators > to Translatewiki. Then that group has a legitimacy to have a say in > the way Translatewiki is managed. Then that group can impose its power > structure in the management of Translatewiki. Then for some > unexplained reason, they hire bad translators, who really do bad work. > Can I say "hello, I am from Wikipedia, and I think your translation is > wrong, please change it". No I can't. It is too late. They have > imposed their non-democratic power structure, and there is no way to > change what people superior to me in their non-democratic hierarchical > power structure are imposing. In a non-democratic power structure the > only thing you can do is shut up. > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
Hoi, When messages get changed in the code repository system by people who contribute to the development of MediaWiki, it is done in a Wikimedia Foundation project. When messages change, it is detected at translatewiki.net and consequently action is taken to signal the need for action. This is done to ensure the best possible localisation for MediaWiki. The core developers of translatewiki.net are core developers of MediaWiki.. Sorry, but your conspiracy theories are just that.. If you want to, you can run the software used by translatewiki.net ... it is available at the WMF code repository.. I doubt though that you get sufficient access to the WMF project you contribute to run the necessary processes. Again, PLEASE study open source and its licenses and PLEASE consider assuming good faith. Thanks, GerardM On 28 January 2011 15:58, Teofilo wrote: > 2011/1/27 Gerard Meijssen : > > One very powerful reason why you should not localise locally is because > > there is no way that you will know locally when a message gets changed. > The > > consequence is that the quality of locally localised messages do not get > the > > same quality assurance as it gets in translatewiki. > > > > So in essence, localising at translatewiki.net does enhance the quality > of > > the localisation. Only messages with changes that give specific > information > > for a local wiki should be localised locally. > > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > When I hear "there is no way that you will know locally when a message > gets changed", many warning lights are flashing in my cockpit. A > non-Wikimedia community has the power of changing things within a > Wikimedia website without the Wikimedia people being warned > beforehand. > > According the New Statesman (1), Jimbo Wales used the word > "self-reliance" in a comment about the Wikipedia spirit. In my view, > relying on a non-Wikimedia website and community is not self-reliance. > > Today only the translations are expelled to a non-Wikimedia website > and community. > > Tomorrow, will the same happen to bugzilla ? > > One of the strenghts of the Wikimedia projects is the reactivity of > the community. When there is something wrong, people file a bug. > > If the bug-filing place is moved to a far away place, the reactivity > might be lower (your comment that "there are very few issues between > the translators" might mean that the reactivity is low). If it remains > high, it means Wikimedia is providing volunteers to a non-Wikimedia > community. It means Wikimedia sends its volunteers to work on > non-Wikimedia projects. Is Wikimedia a volunteer hiring agency for a > variety of wikis not sharing the same purposes ? > > (1) > http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/01/jimmy-wales-wikipedia-vote > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
2011/1/28 Gerard Meijssen : > When the CIA uses MediaWiki and it does, we are > happy because as a result we do and did get feedback on the use of our > project. When the CIA wants to use LocalisationUpdate and its people help > localise at translatewiki.net we could not be more happy. As I said, I have nothing about anybody reusing the contents. However I am against entering into a community with anybody. I want to enter only communities with which I share some values. Let's forget about the CIA. I have nothing against the CIA. Let's imagine a group with non-democratic values provides translators to Translatewiki. Then that group has a legitimacy to have a say in the way Translatewiki is managed. Then that group can impose its power structure in the management of Translatewiki. Then for some unexplained reason, they hire bad translators, who really do bad work. Can I say "hello, I am from Wikipedia, and I think your translation is wrong, please change it". No I can't. It is too late. They have imposed their non-democratic power structure, and there is no way to change what people superior to me in their non-democratic hierarchical power structure are imposing. In a non-democratic power structure the only thing you can do is shut up. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
2011/1/27 Gerard Meijssen : > One very powerful reason why you should not localise locally is because > there is no way that you will know locally when a message gets changed. The > consequence is that the quality of locally localised messages do not get the > same quality assurance as it gets in translatewiki. > > So in essence, localising at translatewiki.net does enhance the quality of > the localisation. Only messages with changes that give specific information > for a local wiki should be localised locally. > Thanks, > GerardM When I hear "there is no way that you will know locally when a message gets changed", many warning lights are flashing in my cockpit. A non-Wikimedia community has the power of changing things within a Wikimedia website without the Wikimedia people being warned beforehand. According the New Statesman (1), Jimbo Wales used the word "self-reliance" in a comment about the Wikipedia spirit. In my view, relying on a non-Wikimedia website and community is not self-reliance. Today only the translations are expelled to a non-Wikimedia website and community. Tomorrow, will the same happen to bugzilla ? One of the strenghts of the Wikimedia projects is the reactivity of the community. When there is something wrong, people file a bug. If the bug-filing place is moved to a far away place, the reactivity might be lower (your comment that "there are very few issues between the translators" might mean that the reactivity is low). If it remains high, it means Wikimedia is providing volunteers to a non-Wikimedia community. It means Wikimedia sends its volunteers to work on non-Wikimedia projects. Is Wikimedia a volunteer hiring agency for a variety of wikis not sharing the same purposes ? (1) http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/01/jimmy-wales-wikipedia-vote ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
Hoi, When you contribute at translatewiki.net, you contribute to the localisation of Open Source / Free software. When YOU only want to contribute to Wikipedia, please do not localise MediaWiki because it does not give us all the best solution. Your notion of Wikimedia and its contributions are at odds with what the notions of the WMF. We want to provide knowledge and the tools to acquire knowledge to all comers. When the CIA uses MediaWiki and it does, we are happy because as a result we do and did get feedback on the use of our project. When the CIA wants to use LocalisationUpdate and its people help localise at translatewiki.net we could not be more happy. Please study what Open Source / Free Software means and what its licenses actually say. Thanks, GerardM On 28 January 2011 15:12, Teofilo wrote: > 2011/1/27 Jesse (Pathoschild) : > > These messages are available to all wikis > > (including non-Wikimedia wikis), instead of just one wiki. > > That means contributing as a volunteer to a variety of websites with > different principles. Wikimedia is a non profit and it is dedicated to > the distribution of culture and knowledge, and this is what I am > interested in. I am not interested in contributing voluntarily for, > say, Intellipedia, the CIA's wiki (they probably use a non-mediawiki > software, but they could). > > There is a difference between letting non-Wikimedia wikis copy > everything they want (fork anything they want) from Wikimedia contents > and software, and working together with them, finding compromises half > way between their needs and ours. > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
On 28 January 2011 14:12, Teofilo wrote: > 2011/1/27 Jesse (Pathoschild) : >> These messages are available to all wikis >> (including non-Wikimedia wikis), instead of just one wiki. > That means contributing as a volunteer to a variety of websites with > different principles. Wikimedia is a non profit and it is dedicated to > the distribution of culture and knowledge, and this is what I am > interested in. I am not interested in contributing voluntarily for, > say, Intellipedia, the CIA's wiki (they probably use a non-mediawiki > software, but they could). Then don't contribute. You don't appear to understand the "for any purpose" bit of what makes free software or free content free. If you read this bug: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26791 - do you understand why it was considered a valid bug report? - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
2011/1/27 Jesse (Pathoschild) : > These messages are available to all wikis > (including non-Wikimedia wikis), instead of just one wiki. That means contributing as a volunteer to a variety of websites with different principles. Wikimedia is a non profit and it is dedicated to the distribution of culture and knowledge, and this is what I am interested in. I am not interested in contributing voluntarily for, say, Intellipedia, the CIA's wiki (they probably use a non-mediawiki software, but they could). There is a difference between letting non-Wikimedia wikis copy everything they want (fork anything they want) from Wikimedia contents and software, and working together with them, finding compromises half way between their needs and ours. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
Strainu wrote: > These messages can be improved by introducing internal links and references to > wiki* policies. Why do you hate Wiktionary? ;-) MZMcBride ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
On 28/01/2011, at 7:22, Strainu wrote: > That's one of the reasons I proposed the implementation of an open-id > provider using the Wikimedia login (i.e. being able to login to > translatewiki and other websites using your wikipedia password) +1. yes please! Wittylama.com/blog Peace, love & metadata ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
2011/1/27 Amir E. Aharoni : > 2011/1/27 Teofilo : >> Before Translatewiki existed it was possible for Wikimedia/Wikipedia >> users to improve the translation of the Mediawiki software's message >> used on their project into their own language. >> >> It is no longer possible now, > > As Chad said, it's still possible and it's often done in many wikis. It's even recommendable to do it. The messages on TranslateWiki should be generic and without internal links, because they might be used on different websites. These messages can be improved by introducing internal links and references to wiki* policies. >> * Or open an account on a non-Wikimedia project, which means providing >> non-Wikimedia managers access to your personal data. That means you >> are loosing the guarantees of >> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy (the guarantee that >> your data are accessed only exceptionally and in such exceptional >> cases, always handled by people trusted by the Wikimedia Foundation) > > Translatewiki.net has a privacy policy, too. That's one of the reasons I proposed the implementation of an open-id provider using the Wikimedia login (i.e. being able to login to translatewiki and other websites using your wikipedia password) > >> I ask the Wikimedia Foundation to support people involved in >> translation work, rather than expell them to non-Wikimedia projects. > > I do hope that the collaboration between Translatewiki.net and the WMF > will become tighter, but there's nothing terribly broken in the way > things work now. Still, it would make sense to allow some trusted user svn access to the translations. Bug 24951 is open for 6 months now because some of the translations aren't automatically updated and the review backlog hasn't reached the relevant revision. Strainu ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
Hoi, Yes you can localise at your own Wiki. It is even recommended for several messages, particularly those messages that are specific to messages about policies and what not particular to your wiki. Such specific texts are explicitly what we do not want at translatewiki.net because at translatewiki we localise MediaWiki. This is to ensure that all the MediaWiki installations can use the localised messages per default. As to translatewiki.net not being a Wikimedia Foundation project, you know, it could be. It certainly has many of the necessary qualifications. Even when you look at the people involved, they are quite substantial in the Wikimedia world; Siebrand has a part time contract to ensure high quality from the Wikimedia Foundation, Nikerabbit is on the board of the Finnish chapter, I am on the language committee... Most of the people who contribute localisations are heavily involved in their language projects many of them as admins or bureaucrats. Each language has a project page for a language and we are really happy when many people contribute for a language; it raises the standards. Typically there are very few issues between the translators for a language and when they exist, the people who run translatewiki do not get involved. We do not necessarily know any particular language as you can imagine. One very powerful reason why you should not localise locally is because there is no way that you will know locally when a message gets changed. The consequence is that the quality of locally localised messages do not get the same quality assurance as it gets in translatewiki. So in essence, localising at translatewiki.net does enhance the quality of the localisation. Only messages with changes that give specific information for a local wiki should be localised locally. Thanks, GerardM On 27 January 2011 18:15, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: > 2011/1/27 Teofilo : > > Before Translatewiki existed it was possible for Wikimedia/Wikipedia > > users to improve the translation of the Mediawiki software's message > > used on their project into their own language. > > > > It is no longer possible now, > > As Chad said, it's still possible and it's often done in many wikis. > > > because Translatewiki exists, and there > > is a powerful Translatewiki lobby within the local Wikipedia/Wikimedia > > communities which actively fights against the translation of messages > > on-wiki, and compells users to open a user account on Translatewiki > > (1). > > It's "powerful" simply because it makes sense not to duplicate the > effort by translating messages on-wiki. If a certain message makes > sense for MediaWiki in general, but not for Wikipedia, then it can and > should be changed on-wiki after community discussion. The existence of > a whole page devoted to such discussions in the French Wikipedia is a > proof that this system works. > > > * Let awkward translations go on being displayed on their language > > version of Wikipedia > > ... Or discuss changing them and ask the admins to implement the decision. > > If you think that changing that particular message in fr.wikipedia > should be done locally and not in Translatewiki.net, express your > opinion there. > > > * Or open an account on a non-Wikimedia project, which means providing > > non-Wikimedia managers access to your personal data. That means you > > are loosing the guarantees of > > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy (the guarantee that > > your data are accessed only exceptionally and in such exceptional > > cases, always handled by people trusted by the Wikimedia Foundation) > > Translatewiki.net has a privacy policy, too. > > > I ask the Wikimedia Foundation to protect its users from the > > aggressions of non-Wikimedia projects. And to implement a set of > > policies to prevent this sort of non-Wikimedia project lobbying. > > This is not aggression. Even though it's not officially connected to > the WMF, the people operating Translatewiki.net are important > contributors to Wikimedia projects and to MediaWiki. Thanks to > Translatewiki.net localization became simpler and faster. It's true > that the WMF could have made it, but the WMF didn't do it, and > Translatewiki.net did and it fit pretty well into the way MediaWiki is > developed. > > > I ask the Wikimedia Foundation to support people involved in > > translation work, rather than expell them to non-Wikimedia projects. > > I do hope that the collaboration between Translatewiki.net and the WMF > will become tighter, but there's nothing terribly broken in the way > things work now. > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
The free encyclopedia that anyone can translate? I find Translatewiki.net very "user-unfriendly". WMF could use more than one site for the translations. For example, I would prefer to use Transifex : http://www.transifex.net/ -- Fajro ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
2011/1/27 Teofilo : > Before Translatewiki existed it was possible for Wikimedia/Wikipedia > users to improve the translation of the Mediawiki software's message > used on their project into their own language. > > It is no longer possible now, As Chad said, it's still possible and it's often done in many wikis. > because Translatewiki exists, and there > is a powerful Translatewiki lobby within the local Wikipedia/Wikimedia > communities which actively fights against the translation of messages > on-wiki, and compells users to open a user account on Translatewiki > (1). It's "powerful" simply because it makes sense not to duplicate the effort by translating messages on-wiki. If a certain message makes sense for MediaWiki in general, but not for Wikipedia, then it can and should be changed on-wiki after community discussion. The existence of a whole page devoted to such discussions in the French Wikipedia is a proof that this system works. > * Let awkward translations go on being displayed on their language > version of Wikipedia ... Or discuss changing them and ask the admins to implement the decision. If you think that changing that particular message in fr.wikipedia should be done locally and not in Translatewiki.net, express your opinion there. > * Or open an account on a non-Wikimedia project, which means providing > non-Wikimedia managers access to your personal data. That means you > are loosing the guarantees of > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy (the guarantee that > your data are accessed only exceptionally and in such exceptional > cases, always handled by people trusted by the Wikimedia Foundation) Translatewiki.net has a privacy policy, too. > I ask the Wikimedia Foundation to protect its users from the > aggressions of non-Wikimedia projects. And to implement a set of > policies to prevent this sort of non-Wikimedia project lobbying. This is not aggression. Even though it's not officially connected to the WMF, the people operating Translatewiki.net are important contributors to Wikimedia projects and to MediaWiki. Thanks to Translatewiki.net localization became simpler and faster. It's true that the WMF could have made it, but the WMF didn't do it, and Translatewiki.net did and it fit pretty well into the way MediaWiki is developed. > I ask the Wikimedia Foundation to support people involved in > translation work, rather than expell them to non-Wikimedia projects. I do hope that the collaboration between Translatewiki.net and the WMF will become tighter, but there's nothing terribly broken in the way things work now. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Teofilo wrote: > Before Translatewiki existed it was possible for Wikimedia/Wikipedia > users to improve the translation of the Mediawiki software's message > used on their project into their own language. > > It is no longer possible now, because Translatewiki exists, and there > is a powerful Translatewiki lobby within the local Wikipedia/Wikimedia > communities which actively fights against the translation of messages > on-wiki, and compells users to open a user account on Translatewiki Translatewiki provides an interface for editing the MediaWiki localization messages. These messages are available to all wikis (including non-Wikimedia wikis), instead of just one wiki. For example, see Meta with a Chinese interface: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_such_page?uselang=zh . You can still translate the wiki directly by editing the MediaWiki namespace, the same way it has always been done. This change will not be available to other wikis, and the message will no longer be updated from Translatewiki. -- Yours cordially, Jesse (Pathoschild) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Teofilo wrote: > (...) > So users are requested to either > > * Let awkward translations go on being displayed on their language > version of Wikipedia > * Or open an account on a non-Wikimedia project, which means providing > non-Wikimedia managers access to your personal data. That means you > are loosing the guarantees of > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy (the guarantee that > your data are accessed only exceptionally and in such exceptional > cases, always handled by people trusted by the Wikimedia Foundation) > You don't have to use the same username as on the wiki. You don't EVEN need to have a wikipedia username. Nobody can correlate your account on Translatewiki to your Wikipedia account, unless you do it. Don't use same password. Don't use same username. That's all. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Teofilo wrote: > Before Translatewiki existed it was possible for Wikimedia/Wikipedia > users to improve the translation of the Mediawiki software's message > used on their project into their own language. > You still are. It's called the MediaWiki namespace. That has never changed. -Chad ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation
Before Translatewiki existed it was possible for Wikimedia/Wikipedia users to improve the translation of the Mediawiki software's message used on their project into their own language. It is no longer possible now, because Translatewiki exists, and there is a powerful Translatewiki lobby within the local Wikipedia/Wikimedia communities which actively fights against the translation of messages on-wiki, and compells users to open a user account on Translatewiki (1). "Translatewiki.net is not part of the Wikimedia Foundation projects" (2). So users are requested to either * Let awkward translations go on being displayed on their language version of Wikipedia * Or open an account on a non-Wikimedia project, which means providing non-Wikimedia managers access to your personal data. That means you are loosing the guarantees of http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy (the guarantee that your data are accessed only exceptionally and in such exceptional cases, always handled by people trusted by the Wikimedia Foundation) A user who wants to remain just that : a Wikimedia user, not a non-Wikimedia user can no longer work successfully on a Wikimedia/Wikipedia wiki. I ask the Wikimedia Foundation to protect its users from the aggressions of non-Wikimedia projects. And to implement a set of policies to prevent this sort of non-Wikimedia project lobbying. I ask the Wikimedia Foundation to support people involved in translation work, rather than expell them to non-Wikimedia projects. Symbolically, that means that the Wikimedia Foundation is expelling internationalisation. "Internationalisation ? What ? I don't want that to happen in my house", the Wikimedia Foundation is saying. (1) http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikip%C3%A9dia%3ADemande_d%27intervention_sur_un_message_syst%C3%A8me&action=historysubmit&diff=61680671&oldid=61680545 (2) http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Project:About ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
