Re: [Foundation-l] elections

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Foundation-l] elections

Guillaume Paumier
Hello,

On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber <[hidden email]> wrote:

The voting period was long, but there was very little time between the
finalization of candidates and the beginning of voting. One consequence
of this was that translators had not completed translation of candidate
statements at the time the voting began.

There should be more time ahead to prepare.

Indeed. Though translators really do their best, it is very difficult to achieve translation of all candidate's statements. Last time the statements were *suggested* not to exceed 1,000 characters [1]. Some rules must be changed.

I suggest the following extra rules :
* For the pre-(s)election candidates, only a *short presentation* (~50 words) ; easy and fast to translate, even for many candidates. These statements may be translated only in « big » languages, i.e. those of the most developed projects.
* For the final candidates, *no more than 150 words*. These statements should be translated in as many languages as possible.
* All statements *must* be written in simple words, simple sentences without any idioms.
* All candidates *must* write their statement in all languages they speak. They know what they want to say better than anyone, so it's better to have a rough translation by themselves that will be refined later than a well-written <span onclick="dr4sdgryt(event)">serious mistranslation.

To the future candidates: respect the work of translators. Last time, some candidates largely exceeded the characters limit. Their statements were however translated because the translators felt a moral obligation to translate them. Though, such an attitude from candidates shows a disrespect to our volunteer translators. So, if you long to be a community representative, first respect the community by following these simple rules. Thanks.

[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Election_candidates_2006/En

--
Guillaume Paumier
[[m:User:guillom]]
http://www.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Foundation-l] elections

Michelle Gallaway
With respect, a lot of candidates are going to struggle to get their statements in in under 150 words.  I know that I would.  If we attempt to put a rule down like this, we're either going to be ignored by many candidates or at least stir up resentment.

Maybe a better idea is to just refuse to translate statements over a certain size?  That way our more lexically inclined candidates can spout off their essay and be restricted to English voters only, or people can write concise, brief statements, and be translated?

- Michelle G.



On 4/7/07, Guillaume Paumier <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello,

On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber <[hidden email]> wrote:

The voting period was long, but there was very little time between the
finalization of candidates and the beginning of voting. One consequence
of this was that translators had not completed translation of candidate
statements at the time the voting began.

There should be more time ahead to prepare.

Indeed. Though translators really do their best, it is very difficult to achieve translation of all candidate's statements. Last time the statements were *suggested* not to exceed 1,000 characters [1]. Some rules must be changed.

I suggest the following extra rules :
* For the pre-(s)election candidates, only a *short presentation* (~50 words) ; easy and fast to translate, even for many candidates. These statements may be translated only in « big » languages, i.e. those of the most developed projects.
* For the final candidates, *no more than 150 words*. These statements should be translated in as many languages as possible.
* All statements *must* be written in simple words, simple sentences without any idioms.
* All candidates *must* write their statement in all languages they speak. They know what they want to say better than anyone, so it's better to have a rough translation by themselves that will be refined later than a well-written serious mistranslation.

To the future candidates: respect the work of translators. Last time, some candidates largely exceeded the characters limit. Their statements were however translated because the translators felt a moral obligation to translate them. Though, such an attitude from candidates shows a disrespect to our volunteer translators. So, if you long to be a community representative, first respect the community by following these simple rules. Thanks.

[1] <a href="http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Election_candidates_2006/En" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Election_candidates_2006/En

--
Guillaume Paumier
[[m:User:guillom]]
<a href="http://www.wikimedia.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> http://www.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
[hidden email]
<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l" target="_blank">http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l



_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Foundation-l] elections

Fruggo
Also, a shorter statement isn't necessarily easier to translate. The statements often consist of difficult topics, which means that you need some context in order to translate it correctly (I know I do). It is very difficult to translate some loose sentences.
I do agree that statements should be written in simple words; of course a candidate can write a difficult statement (which of course can also be translated), but it would be nice if all official statements would be in simple words (a more difficult version could be placed on the candidate's user page, no need to forbid that).

-Fruggo

On 4/9/07, Michelle Gallaway <[hidden email]> wrote:
With respect, a lot of candidates are going to struggle to get their statements in in under 150 words.  I know that I would.  If we attempt to put a rule down like this, we're either going to be ignored by many candidates or at least stir up resentment.

Maybe a better idea is to just refuse to translate statements over a certain size?  That way our more lexically inclined candidates can spout off their essay and be restricted to English voters only, or people can write concise, brief statements, and be translated?

- Michelle G.



On 4/7/07, Guillaume Paumier <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello,

On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber <[hidden email]> wrote:

The voting period was long, but there was very little time between the
finalization of candidates and the beginning of voting. One consequence
of this was that translators had not completed translation of candidate
statements at the time the voting began.

There should be more time ahead to prepare.

Indeed. Though translators really do their best, it is very difficult to achieve translation of all candidate's statements. Last time the statements were *suggested* not to exceed 1,000 characters [1]. Some rules must be changed.

I suggest the following extra rules :
* For the pre-(s)election candidates, only a *short presentation* (~50 words) ; easy and fast to translate, even for many candidates. These statements may be translated only in « big » languages, i.e. those of the most developed projects.
* For the final candidates, *no more than 150 words*. These statements should be translated in as many languages as possible.
* All statements *must* be written in simple words, simple sentences without any idioms.
* All candidates *must* write their statement in all languages they speak. They know what they want to say better than anyone, so it's better to have a rough translation by themselves that will be refined later than a well-written serious mistranslation.

To the future candidates: respect the work of translators. Last time, some candidates largely exceeded the characters limit. Their statements were however translated because the translators felt a moral obligation to translate them. Though, such an attitude from candidates shows a disrespect to our volunteer translators. So, if you long to be a community representative, first respect the community by following these simple rules. Thanks.

[1] <a href="http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Election_candidates_2006/En" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Election_candidates_2006/En

--
Guillaume Paumier
[[m:User:guillom]]
<a href="http://www.wikimedia.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> http://www.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
[hidden email]
<a href="http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l



_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
[hidden email]
<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l" target="_blank">http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l



_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Foundation-l] elections

Julien F.
Hi,
In previous elections i felt unnecessary to translate
statements from candidates that stood no chance
whatsoever to get elected. Of course it is my personal
judgment of who stands a chance to get elected.

Besides if a candidate with a fair chance of getting
elected were to write a long statement (and the Erik
was elected with some looooong statement ;)) i might
try to translate everything since it's pretty
important for the community to know where the
candidate stands on several key issues.

Fruggo also has a point here : short statements may be
confusing and lack of clarity on some topic. So
setting a limit might tend to see vague statements and
blurry outlines of the candidate's program. We should
nevertheless set an indication on the length
(non-binding indication).

I would encourage Britty writing on the election page
and on the behalf of the TransCom, something like
"Remember translators do it for fun and to help the
electoral process. They feel no obligation to
translate your statement, for instance if it's too
long, gibberish, or a load of crap. Write simply, it's
the easiest way to get your point across in the
translations. Please help us helping you."

Julien.

--- Fruggo <[hidden email]> schrieb:

> Also, a shorter statement isn't necessarily easier
> to translate. The
> statements often consist of difficult topics, which
> means that you need some
> context in order to translate it correctly (I know I
> do). It is very
> difficult to translate some loose sentences.
> I do agree that statements should be written in
> simple words; of course a
> candidate can write a difficult statement (which of
> course can also be
> translated), but it would be nice if all official
> statements would be in
> simple words (a more difficult version could be
> placed on the candidate's
> user page, no need to forbid that).
>
> -Fruggo
>
> On 4/9/07, Michelle Gallaway <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > With respect, a lot of candidates are going to
> > struggle to get their statements in in under 150
> words.  I know that I would.  If we attempt to put a
> rule down like
> > this, we're either going to be ignored by many
> candidates or at least stir
> > up resentment.
> >
> > Maybe a better idea is to just refuse to translate
> statements over a
> > certain size?  That way our more lexically
> inclined candidates can spout off
> > their essay and be restricted to English voters
> only, or people can write
> > concise, brief statements, and be translated?
> >
> > - Michelle G.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/7/07, Guillaume Paumier
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber <[hidden email] >
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The voting period was long, but there was very
> little time between the
> > > > finalization of candidates and the beginning
> of voting. One
> > > > consequence
> > > > of this was that translators had not completed
> translation of
> > > > candidate
> > > > statements at the time the voting began.
> > > >
> > > > There should be more time ahead to prepare.
> > >
> > >
> > > Indeed. Though translators really do their best,
> it is very difficult to
> > > achieve translation of all candidate's
> statements. Last time the statements
> > > were *suggested* not to exceed 1,000 characters
> [1]. Some rules must be
> > > changed.
> > >
> > > I suggest the following extra rules :
> > > * For the pre-(s)election candidates, only a
> *short presentation* (~50
> > > words) ; easy and fast to translate, even for
> many candidates. These
> > > statements may be translated only in « big »
> languages, i.e. those of
> > > the most developed projects.
> > > * For the final candidates, *no more than 150
> words*. These statements
> > > should be translated in as many languages as
> possible.
> > > * All statements *must* be written in simple
> words, simple sentences
> > > without any idioms.
> > > * All candidates *must* write their statement in
> all languages they
> > > speak. They know what they want to say better
> than anyone, so it's better to
> > > have a rough translation by themselves that will
> be refined later than a
> > > well-written serious mistranslation.
> > >
> > > To the future candidates: respect the work of
> translators. Last time,
> > > some candidates largely exceeded the characters
> limit. Their statements were
> > > however translated because the translators felt
> a moral obligation to
> > > translate them. Though, such an attitude from
> candidates shows a disrespect
> > > to our volunteer translators. So, if you long to
> be a community
> > > representative, first respect the community by
> following these simple rules.
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > [1]
>
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Election_candidates_2006/En

> > >
> > > --
> > > Guillaume Paumier
> > > [[m:User:guillom]]
> > > http://www.wikimedia.org
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Translators-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > >
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Translators-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> >
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> Translators-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
>





       
               
___________________________________________________________
Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de

_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l