[Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
97 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Pine W
On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being included in
the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or "Wiki Content
Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do and/or shouldn't do. I
have a number of activities in mind for this kind of organization.
Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this organization
should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and WMF has such
strong fundraising capabilities that I think that competing with WMF for
funding from readers and grant-making organizations would be very
difficult. If WMF would like to have conversations about how the community
could raise funds directly from readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one
would be very interested in having that conversation.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

James Salsman-2
Pine, why not ask your namesake?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7jj0oa/im_donating_5057_btc_to_charitable_causes/

On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being included in
> the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or "Wiki Content
> Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do and/or shouldn't do. I
> have a number of activities in mind for this kind of organization.
> Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this organization
> should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and WMF has such
> strong fundraising capabilities that I think that competing with WMF for
> funding from readers and grant-making organizations would be very
> difficult. If WMF would like to have conversations about how the community
> could raise funds directly from readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one
> would be very interested in having that conversation.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Pine W
If he/she sends a few million dollars to the community in a way that is
independent of WMF, and we organize ourselves to accept and use the funds
wisely, I will be very grateful. :)


Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 6:46 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Pine, why not ask your namesake?
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7jj0oa/im_donating_5057_btc_to_
> charitable_causes/
>
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being included
> in
> > the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or "Wiki Content
> > Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do and/or shouldn't do. I
> > have a number of activities in mind for this kind of organization.
> > Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this
> organization
> > should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and WMF has such
> > strong fundraising capabilities that I think that competing with WMF for
> > funding from readers and grant-making organizations would be very
> > difficult. If WMF would like to have conversations about how the
> community
> > could raise funds directly from readers and non-WMF foundations, I for
> one
> > would be very interested in having that conversation.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

WereSpielChequers-2
In reply to this post by John Erling Blad
Pine, there is one possible way to fund such translation in the future; The
Foundation is building up an endowment. When that endowment has grown to
the point where the annual return is sufficient to fund the Foundation,
then you could re-purpose the annual fundraiser from collecting money to
host Wikipedia, to collecting money to make Wikipedia available in other
languages.

If I'm correct in thinking that part of the problem for many of our widely
spoken languages with weak wikipedias is that the more educated people who
speak those languages are more likely to contribute edits in what is to
them a  higher status or more language or one more useful to their career,
then maybe we should test using fundraiser  type advertising to ask our
English readers in places like India to translate articles from English to
Indic languages.

In some parts of the world where incomes are generally very low and
financial donations reflect that perhaps we have little to lose by shifting
now from asking for funds to asking for content donations, especially in
the language of that area.

WereSpielChequers

>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:13:38 -0800
> From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> Message-ID:
>         <CAF=dyJhxBXyhmMPvDYWA4oPGuj3mOTjQ1bP5QQKhGE3U2tDFcA@mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being included in
> the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or "Wiki Content
> Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do and/or shouldn't do. I
> have a number of activities in mind for this kind of organization.
> Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this organization
> should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and WMF has such
> strong fundraising capabilities that I think that competing with WMF for
> funding from readers and grant-making organizations would be very
> difficult. If WMF would like to have conversations about how the community
> could raise funds directly from readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one
> would be very interested in having that conversation.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

John Erling Blad
In reply to this post by Pine W
You guys are making the whole idea way to complex. There should be no
editorial board. That goes against the whole wiki-way of doing things.
There should be no additional foundation, that makes the whole idea
unmanageable. It will also cost way more than the gain.

Make thing DarnSimple™! A single list covering all universally valid topics
that a true encyclopedia should cover. Leave it to the translator to chose
which source article to use, as this creates the best opportunity to find
translators. Allow other editors to join in after publication, but do
respect the primary translators effort. Split the payment in one for the
initial translation, and one for the followup edits. Cap them to avoid
bloated articles.

Make a DarnSimple™ interface to manage the translations, where the only
action is for some identified user to tick of translated articles when they
reach a certain threshold. In another interface the translator must
identify himself with sufficient details to make the payment possible. This
should be an optional part of the usual configuration of an account. All
persons involved in the editing should have a split, but no payment will be
done before the account for each editor reaches some threshold.

Make the core list big enough to create a real encyclopedia, but small
enough that there are room for local additions. There should probably be
some way to specify local articles, like municipalities, important authors,
and politicians. A good test is whether such additional articles makes
sense in neighboring countries or languages. If it isn't possible to
describe such things in a generic way they should probably be left out. I'm
not sure if it should be possible to exclude articles, but I guess it will
be an issue for some languages. Think Armenian genocide, which is
problematic for some countries.

A small single-book encyclopedia is about 60-70k articles, so lets say such
a list would cover 25% of this. That would be a list of 15k articles. There
are perhaps 50 Wikipedias that are large enough to be sustainable, and
still small enough to miss articles on such a list. That would imply 750k
articles,  thus plenty of articles for those that would like to translate
one! Lets say this project is spread over 10 years with a cap on each
article at 2x USD 10, then it would cost about USD 1500k each year. I
believe that would be manageable. (Quite frankly I doubt it would be
possible to find many enough translators, so this will never reach the
proposed levels!)
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

John Erling Blad
It should also be possible for an editor to let the payment go back to
foundation. This would probably be the case for many users in industrial
countries.

Perhaps it wasn't clear enough but the interface to manage translations
would be for someone other than the involved translators, aka a third
person within the local community, to accept the translation as valid and
good enough. After it is ticked off as "done" further payment of that
specific article will stop.

On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:27 AM, John Erling Blad <[hidden email]> wrote:

> You guys are making the whole idea way to complex. There should be no
> editorial board. That goes against the whole wiki-way of doing things.
> There should be no additional foundation, that makes the whole idea
> unmanageable. It will also cost way more than the gain.
>
> Make thing DarnSimple™! A single list covering all universally valid
> topics that a true encyclopedia should cover. Leave it to the translator to
> chose which source article to use, as this creates the best opportunity to
> find translators. Allow other editors to join in after publication, but do
> respect the primary translators effort. Split the payment in one for the
> initial translation, and one for the followup edits. Cap them to avoid
> bloated articles.
>
> Make a DarnSimple™ interface to manage the translations, where the only
> action is for some identified user to tick of translated articles when they
> reach a certain threshold. In another interface the translator must
> identify himself with sufficient details to make the payment possible. This
> should be an optional part of the usual configuration of an account. All
> persons involved in the editing should have a split, but no payment will be
> done before the account for each editor reaches some threshold.
>
> Make the core list big enough to create a real encyclopedia, but small
> enough that there are room for local additions. There should probably be
> some way to specify local articles, like municipalities, important authors,
> and politicians. A good test is whether such additional articles makes
> sense in neighboring countries or languages. If it isn't possible to
> describe such things in a generic way they should probably be left out. I'm
> not sure if it should be possible to exclude articles, but I guess it will
> be an issue for some languages. Think Armenian genocide, which is
> problematic for some countries.
>
> A small single-book encyclopedia is about 60-70k articles, so lets say
> such a list would cover 25% of this. That would be a list of 15k articles.
> There are perhaps 50 Wikipedias that are large enough to be sustainable,
> and still small enough to miss articles on such a list. That would imply
> 750k articles,  thus plenty of articles for those that would like to
> translate one! Lets say this project is spread over 10 years with a cap on
> each article at 2x USD 10, then it would cost about USD 1500k each year. I
> believe that would be manageable. (Quite frankly I doubt it would be
> possible to find many enough translators, so this will never reach the
> proposed levels!)
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by WereSpielChequers-2
Part of the problem may be that the vocabulary is lacking. It is very difficult to explain a concept in one language when you know the words only in another language, and it would be considered original research by some Wikipedias to make up words for the job. I have struggled with translations into Afrikaans, which has a reasonably extensive technical vocabulary, and good electronic dictionary systems,, but many concepts familiar to me in my fields of interest just do not have Afrikaans words (yet).
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of WereSpielChequers
Sent: 04 March 2018 11:54
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Pine, there is one possible way to fund such translation in the future; The Foundation is building up an endowment. When that endowment has grown to the point where the annual return is sufficient to fund the Foundation, then you could re-purpose the annual fundraiser from collecting money to host Wikipedia, to collecting money to make Wikipedia available in other languages.

If I'm correct in thinking that part of the problem for many of our widely spoken languages with weak wikipedias is that the more educated people who speak those languages are more likely to contribute edits in what is to them a  higher status or more language or one more useful to their career, then maybe we should test using fundraiser  type advertising to ask our English readers in places like India to translate articles from English to Indic languages.

In some parts of the world where incomes are generally very low and financial donations reflect that perhaps we have little to lose by shifting now from asking for funds to asking for content donations, especially in the language of that area.

WereSpielChequers

>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:13:38 -0800
> From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> Message-ID:
>         <CAF=dyJhxBXyhmMPvDYWA4oPGuj3mOTjQ1bP5QQKhGE3U2tDFcA@mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being
> included in the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or
> "Wiki Content Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do
> and/or shouldn't do. I have a number of activities in mind for this kind of organization.
> Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this
> organization should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and
> WMF has such strong fundraising capabilities that I think that
> competing with WMF for funding from readers and grant-making
> organizations would be very difficult. If WMF would like to have
> conversations about how the community could raise funds directly from
> readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one would be very interested in having that conversation.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Amir E. Aharoni
Yes, I mentioned something like this in one of my emails in this thread.

Every language goes through a period of creating terminology. Some
languages successfully create native words (Icelandic is a famous example),
some languages are fine with taking foreign words (um, English took a lot
from Latin, Greek and other languages), some are a mix (Russian). You can
never say "it's *impossible* to write about science in this language"; you
can, at most, say "it's *difficult* to write about science in this language
*today".

People who speak a language that had already overcome this problem must
remember that their language didn't always have this terminology. That's
one of the reasons why the resolution "just learn our language instead of
investing in your own" may be practical, but isn't very fair.

People who speak a language that hadn't yet overcome this must remember
that it's a challenge, but not a blocker. A translator who cares about
their language can overcome this with some ingenuity and resourcefulness.
(Teaser: I'm about to publish a blog post soon that talks about one
language that is doing it now with considerable success.)


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

2018-03-04 15:22 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood <[hidden email]>:

> Part of the problem may be that the vocabulary is lacking. It is very
> difficult to explain a concept in one language when you know the words only
> in another language, and it would be considered original research by some
> Wikipedias to make up words for the job. I have struggled with translations
> into Afrikaans, which has a reasonably extensive technical vocabulary, and
> good electronic dictionary systems,, but many concepts familiar to me in my
> fields of interest just do not have Afrikaans words (yet).
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of WereSpielChequers
> Sent: 04 March 2018 11:54
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
>
> Pine, there is one possible way to fund such translation in the future;
> The Foundation is building up an endowment. When that endowment has grown
> to the point where the annual return is sufficient to fund the Foundation,
> then you could re-purpose the annual fundraiser from collecting money to
> host Wikipedia, to collecting money to make Wikipedia available in other
> languages.
>
> If I'm correct in thinking that part of the problem for many of our widely
> spoken languages with weak wikipedias is that the more educated people who
> speak those languages are more likely to contribute edits in what is to
> them a  higher status or more language or one more useful to their career,
> then maybe we should test using fundraiser  type advertising to ask our
> English readers in places like India to translate articles from English to
> Indic languages.
>
> In some parts of the world where incomes are generally very low and
> financial donations reflect that perhaps we have little to lose by shifting
> now from asking for funds to asking for content donations, especially in
> the language of that area.
>
> WereSpielChequers
>
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:13:38 -0800
> > From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> > Message-ID:
> >         <CAF=dyJhxBXyhmMPvDYWA4oPGuj3mOTjQ1bP5QQKhGE3U2tDFcA@mail.
> > gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being
> > included in the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or
> > "Wiki Content Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do
> > and/or shouldn't do. I have a number of activities in mind for this kind
> of organization.
> > Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this
> > organization should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and
> > WMF has such strong fundraising capabilities that I think that
> > competing with WMF for funding from readers and grant-making
> > organizations would be very difficult. If WMF would like to have
> > conversations about how the community could raise funds directly from
> > readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one would be very interested in
> having that conversation.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

John Erling Blad
Using a term from another language while creating an article and then later
localizing that term isn't that difficult, and should not be described as
impossible. What it does although identifies a problem with our current
production system; it is easy to move an article, but it is not easy to
make terms referring to that article or concept consistent.

On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Amir E. Aharoni <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yes, I mentioned something like this in one of my emails in this thread.
>
> Every language goes through a period of creating terminology. Some
> languages successfully create native words (Icelandic is a famous example),
> some languages are fine with taking foreign words (um, English took a lot
> from Latin, Greek and other languages), some are a mix (Russian). You can
> never say "it's *impossible* to write about science in this language"; you
> can, at most, say "it's *difficult* to write about science in this language
> *today".
>
> People who speak a language that had already overcome this problem must
> remember that their language didn't always have this terminology. That's
> one of the reasons why the resolution "just learn our language instead of
> investing in your own" may be practical, but isn't very fair.
>
> People who speak a language that hadn't yet overcome this must remember
> that it's a challenge, but not a blocker. A translator who cares about
> their language can overcome this with some ingenuity and resourcefulness.
> (Teaser: I'm about to publish a blog post soon that talks about one
> language that is doing it now with considerable success.)
>
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
>
> 2018-03-04 15:22 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Part of the problem may be that the vocabulary is lacking. It is very
> > difficult to explain a concept in one language when you know the words
> only
> > in another language, and it would be considered original research by some
> > Wikipedias to make up words for the job. I have struggled with
> translations
> > into Afrikaans, which has a reasonably extensive technical vocabulary,
> and
> > good electronic dictionary systems,, but many concepts familiar to me in
> my
> > fields of interest just do not have Afrikaans words (yet).
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> > Behalf Of WereSpielChequers
> > Sent: 04 March 2018 11:54
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> >
> > Pine, there is one possible way to fund such translation in the future;
> > The Foundation is building up an endowment. When that endowment has grown
> > to the point where the annual return is sufficient to fund the
> Foundation,
> > then you could re-purpose the annual fundraiser from collecting money to
> > host Wikipedia, to collecting money to make Wikipedia available in other
> > languages.
> >
> > If I'm correct in thinking that part of the problem for many of our
> widely
> > spoken languages with weak wikipedias is that the more educated people
> who
> > speak those languages are more likely to contribute edits in what is to
> > them a  higher status or more language or one more useful to their
> career,
> > then maybe we should test using fundraiser  type advertising to ask our
> > English readers in places like India to translate articles from English
> to
> > Indic languages.
> >
> > In some parts of the world where incomes are generally very low and
> > financial donations reflect that perhaps we have little to lose by
> shifting
> > now from asking for funds to asking for content donations, especially in
> > the language of that area.
> >
> > WereSpielChequers
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 2
> > > Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:13:38 -0800
> > > From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> > > Message-ID:
> > >         <CAF=dyJhxBXyhmMPvDYWA4oPGuj3mOTjQ1bP5QQKhGE3U2tDFcA@mail.
> > > gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being
> > > included in the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or
> > > "Wiki Content Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do
> > > and/or shouldn't do. I have a number of activities in mind for this
> kind
> > of organization.
> > > Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this
> > > organization should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and
> > > WMF has such strong fundraising capabilities that I think that
> > > competing with WMF for funding from readers and grant-making
> > > organizations would be very difficult. If WMF would like to have
> > > conversations about how the community could raise funds directly from
> > > readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one would be very interested in
> > having that conversation.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > http://www.avg.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Amir E. Aharoni
Difficult, yes. Impossible, no.
Part of the problem can be that some Wikipedias are somewhat fussy about the language you use. There are users who object to anyone using a word not approved by some authority, but cannot suggest what to do when there is no such word.
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Amir E. Aharoni
Sent: 04 March 2018 15:59
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Yes, I mentioned something like this in one of my emails in this thread.

Every language goes through a period of creating terminology. Some languages successfully create native words (Icelandic is a famous example), some languages are fine with taking foreign words (um, English took a lot from Latin, Greek and other languages), some are a mix (Russian). You can never say "it's *impossible* to write about science in this language"; you can, at most, say "it's *difficult* to write about science in this language *today".

People who speak a language that had already overcome this problem must remember that their language didn't always have this terminology. That's one of the reasons why the resolution "just learn our language instead of investing in your own" may be practical, but isn't very fair.

People who speak a language that hadn't yet overcome this must remember that it's a challenge, but not a blocker. A translator who cares about their language can overcome this with some ingenuity and resourcefulness.
(Teaser: I'm about to publish a blog post soon that talks about one language that is doing it now with considerable success.)


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com ‪“We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

2018-03-04 15:22 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood <[hidden email]>:

> Part of the problem may be that the vocabulary is lacking. It is very
> difficult to explain a concept in one language when you know the words
> only in another language, and it would be considered original research
> by some Wikipedias to make up words for the job. I have struggled with
> translations into Afrikaans, which has a reasonably extensive
> technical vocabulary, and good electronic dictionary systems,, but
> many concepts familiar to me in my fields of interest just do not have Afrikaans words (yet).
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of WereSpielChequers
> Sent: 04 March 2018 11:54
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
>
> Pine, there is one possible way to fund such translation in the
> future; The Foundation is building up an endowment. When that
> endowment has grown to the point where the annual return is sufficient
> to fund the Foundation, then you could re-purpose the annual
> fundraiser from collecting money to host Wikipedia, to collecting
> money to make Wikipedia available in other languages.
>
> If I'm correct in thinking that part of the problem for many of our
> widely spoken languages with weak wikipedias is that the more educated
> people who speak those languages are more likely to contribute edits
> in what is to them a  higher status or more language or one more
> useful to their career, then maybe we should test using fundraiser  
> type advertising to ask our English readers in places like India to
> translate articles from English to Indic languages.
>
> In some parts of the world where incomes are generally very low and
> financial donations reflect that perhaps we have little to lose by
> shifting now from asking for funds to asking for content donations,
> especially in the language of that area.
>
> WereSpielChequers
>
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:13:38 -0800
> > From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> > Message-ID:
> >         <CAF=dyJhxBXyhmMPvDYWA4oPGuj3mOTjQ1bP5QQKhGE3U2tDFcA@mail.
> > gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being
> > included in the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or
> > "Wiki Content Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do
> > and/or shouldn't do. I have a number of activities in mind for this
> > kind
> of organization.
> > Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this
> > organization should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources,
> > and WMF has such strong fundraising capabilities that I think that
> > competing with WMF for funding from readers and grant-making
> > organizations would be very difficult. If WMF would like to have
> > conversations about how the community could raise funds directly
> > from readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one would be very
> > interested in
> having that conversation.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

James Salsman-2
In reply to this post by WereSpielChequers-2
If the Foundation Endowment paid for translations of articles across
Wikipedias, it would still be like a Foundation Grant in terms of the
legal effect on the DMCA safe harbor provisions and the practical
effect on whether mistakes could bring the Foundation into disrepute.

Maybe the Foundation could pay for translations, as long as a much
smaller independent third party was reviewing them for fidelity and
freedom from bias under conditions where a group of people are trying
to confound the paid reviewers by including a constant but small
proportion of intentionally inaccurate and biased proposed
translations to make sure that the reviewer quality is sufficient.

If that doesn't work, then the independent third party anti-bias QA
organization could grow to do the translation, perhaps as a thematic
organization supported by both outside and less than half internal
Foundation grants.

Best regards,
Jim

On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 2:53 AM, WereSpielChequers
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Pine, there is one possible way to fund such translation in the future; The
> Foundation is building up an endowment. When that endowment has grown to
> the point where the annual return is sufficient to fund the Foundation,
> then you could re-purpose the annual fundraiser from collecting money to
> host Wikipedia, to collecting money to make Wikipedia available in other
> languages.
>
> If I'm correct in thinking that part of the problem for many of our widely
> spoken languages with weak wikipedias is that the more educated people who
> speak those languages are more likely to contribute edits in what is to
> them a  higher status or more language or one more useful to their career,
> then maybe we should test using fundraiser  type advertising to ask our
> English readers in places like India to translate articles from English to
> Indic languages.
>
> In some parts of the world where incomes are generally very low and
> financial donations reflect that perhaps we have little to lose by shifting
> now from asking for funds to asking for content donations, especially in
> the language of that area.
>
> WereSpielChequers
>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:13:38 -0800
>> From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CAF=dyJhxBXyhmMPvDYWA4oPGuj3mOTjQ1bP5QQKhGE3U2tDFcA@mail.
>> gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being included in
>> the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or "Wiki Content
>> Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do and/or shouldn't do. I
>> have a number of activities in mind for this kind of organization.
>> Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this organization
>> should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and WMF has such
>> strong fundraising capabilities that I think that competing with WMF for
>> funding from readers and grant-making organizations would be very
>> difficult. If WMF would like to have conversations about how the community
>> could raise funds directly from readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one
>> would be very interested in having that conversation.
>>
>> Pine
>> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

WereSpielChequers-2
In reply to this post by John Erling Blad
James, I don't think anyone has suggested using the endowment money to fund translations. That money is being collected for the purpose of guaranteeing the projects future, even if we enter an era where the fundraiser doesn't work. Repurposing that pot of money in such a way would have ethical and hopefully legal implications.

But once that endowment is big enough to take over the task of funding the foundation, the annual fundraiser will no longer be needed to fund core foundation activity. It could then be repurposed with translation as one of the things that we ask people to donate to, and in such a scenario there is very little exposure to the Foundation, especially if the banner is asking people to donate to the chapter or other organisation that is organising the project. In the past several chapters have been "payment processors" - funds collected in their country were collected by them. Moving back from our currently over centralised organisation to a more decentralised one would mean that money collected in say India stayed in India at least if it was being collected to fund translation into Indic languages.

The Foundation doesn't have to handle the money if our fundraising banners were to ask our readers to fund the activities of the Wikimedia chapter in the country where they live, or even if people in wealthy areas of the world were being asked to help people in countries without the libraries that they are used to, and without the plethora of material available to people who are literate in one of the main languages of the Internet.

Regards

WereSpielChequers

---------------------------------------

>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:30:13 -0700
> From: James Salsman <[hidden email]>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> Message-ID:
>    <CAD4=[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> If the Foundation Endowment paid for translations of articles across
> Wikipedias, it would still be like a Foundation Grant in terms of the
> legal effect on the DMCA safe harbor provisions and the practical
> effect on whether mistakes could bring the Foundation into disrepute.
>
> Maybe the Foundation could pay for translations, as long as a much
> smaller independent third party was reviewing them for fidelity and
> freedom from bias under conditions where a group of people are trying
> to confound the paid reviewers by including a constant but small
> proportion of intentionally inaccurate and biased proposed
> translations to make sure that the reviewer quality is sufficient.
>
> If that doesn't work, then the independent third party anti-bias QA
> organization could grow to do the translation, perhaps as a thematic
> organization supported by both outside and less than half internal
> Foundation grants.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 2:53 AM, WereSpielChequers
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Pine, there is one possible way to fund such translation in the future; The
>> Foundation is building up an endowment. When that endowment has grown to
>> the point where the annual return is sufficient to fund the Foundation,
>> then you could re-purpose the annual fundraiser from collecting money to
>> host Wikipedia, to collecting money to make Wikipedia available in other
>> languages.
>>
>> If I'm correct in thinking that part of the problem for many of our widely
>> spoken languages with weak wikipedias is that the more educated people who
>> speak those languages are more likely to contribute edits in what is to
>> them a  higher status or more language or one more useful to their career,
>> then maybe we should test using fundraiser  type advertising to ask our
>> English readers in places like India to translate articles from English to
>> Indic languages.
>>
>> In some parts of the world where incomes are generally very low and
>> financial donations reflect that perhaps we have little to lose by shifting
>> now from asking for funds to asking for content donations, especially in
>> the language of that area.
>>
>> WereSpielChequers
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:13:38 -0800
>>> From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
>>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
>>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
>>> Message-ID:
>>>        <CAF=dyJhxBXyhmMPvDYWA4oPGuj3mOTjQ1bP5QQKhGE3U2tDFcA@mail.
>>> gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>>
>>> On the subject of paid translation, I could imagine this being included in
>>> the scope of work for a "Wiki Community Foundation" or "Wiki Content
>>> Foundation" that would do work that WMF doesn't do and/or shouldn't do. I
>>> have a number of activities in mind for this kind of organization.
>>> Unfortunately, I do not know how to fund it. I think that this organization
>>> should get most of its funding from non-WMF sources, and WMF has such
>>> strong fundraising capabilities that I think that competing with WMF for
>>> funding from readers and grant-making organizations would be very
>>> difficult. If WMF would like to have conversations about how the community
>>> could raise funds directly from readers and non-WMF foundations, I for one
>>> would be very interested in having that conversation.
>>>
>>> Pine
>>> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Amir E. Aharoni
In reply to this post by Renée Bagslint
Yes, it makes sense.

This is yet another thing that is a challenge, not a blocker.

English speakers have a useful result from Wikipedia coming up in almost
every Google search. *Suspected* copyvio issues are an acceptable price to
pay for this privilege. (Particularly bad copyvio issues are handled
through OTRS.)

People who speak many other languages don't have the privilege of such high
availability of useful knowledge. So first, let's not imagine problems that
will prevent them from getting this. People who currently don't have this
wealth of information in their language wish that they had such a problem
(even if not consciously).

Besides, when people start getting useful search results in their language,
they will read the articles, and some of them will become editors and the
community will grow. It happened in English in 2002, and it can happen in
other languages.


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

2018-02-27 19:49 GMT+02:00 Renée Bagslint <[hidden email]>:

> Does it make sense to have more articles in a language than can be curated
> by the volunteers who speak that language?  This has already happened on
> the Englisg-language Wikipedia where the five million articles have simply
> overwhelmed the capability of the few thousand active contributors to
> self-organise and curate -- for example, there are about one million
> articles without adequate sources, and thousands of unsourced BLP; there
> are copyvio cleanups that will not complete, if ever, before 2030.  An army
> of hand-coded bots is just about keeping on top of vandalism.  How does
> that scale to projects where the number of native speaker contributors is
> in the dozens rather than the thousands?
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Vi to <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > (This thread is getting terribly interesting)
> >
> > I generally think Wikipedia should be a strictly non interfering observer
> > for various aspects, language included. I fear if a wiki tries to set a
> > model for a language it may be a model which doesn't represent the
> reality
> > of that language: small wikis are often monopolized by a few users.
> That's
> > not a fault per se but it may introduce a significant bias in linguistic
> > models used.
> >
> > About one of Amir's emails I think a "small" Wikipedia edition is sign
> of a
> > series of situations, one of the most common of is an endangered
> language.
> > While planning should differentiate between endangered and non endangered
> > language I think most of problems we have to face are related to
> languages
> > endangered at various levels.
> >
> > On a more practical and less ideological note, I should note that even
> > though I didn't run the numbers, I strongly suspect that translating
> 10,000
> > articles to 100 languages is considerably cheaper than teaching 7 billion
> > people English.
> >
> > I don't why but I tend to second your suspects :p
> >
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > 2018-02-27 16:53 GMT+01:00 Peter Southwood <[hidden email]
> >:
> >
> > > If the people creating the basic encyclopaedic terminology and style in
> > > the language are native speakers, then it would not be a thing imposed
> > from
> > > outside. It would be a development within the language, just like it
> was
> > > with the languages that already have encyclopaedias. The basic
> > > encyclopaedic terminology and style in languages that have then also
> had
> > to
> > > be created before it existed, it just happened earlier. Living
> languages
> > > evolve to deal with the realities of the present. Those which don’t,
> tend
> > > to die out as they become less useful. Cheers, Peter
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> > > Behalf Of Vi to
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 1:43 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> > >
> > > I see Amir's points, which are pretty reasonable, but I fear this would
> > > suit languages with a significant presence on the web.
> > >
> > > Among them I agree with points 1, 3 and 4 while I'm not sure about #2
> > > "creating basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that language",
> if
> > we
> > > want to preserve a language we shouldn't create a thing.
> > >
> > > By the way I was wondering my concerns about cultural colonization may
> be
> > > addressed -for wikis which has some contents (let's say at least 1000
> > > articles)- by starting expanding existing articles instead of
> translating
> > > new ones. This would solve the problem of choosing what to translate
> > though
> > > would leave problems about the perspective contents are created.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > 2018-02-27 12:31 GMT+01:00 Amir E. Aharoni <
> [hidden email]
> > >:
> > >
> > > > 2018-02-27 13:00 GMT+02:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
> > > > [hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le 24/02/2018 à 18:08, Vi to a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > >> *finally I think paid translators would hardly turn into stable
> > > > >> Wikipedians.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think this misses an important point that is, we don't need the
> > > > initial
> > > > > translator to turn into a sustaining editor, we need the article to
> > > > evolve
> > > > > with call to action incentives. And articles which don't exist at
> > > > > all – even as a stub – or don't meet an audience of potential
> > > > > contributors will never catch such an evolving cycle.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is one of the issues with what I alluded to in my earlier email
> > > > in this thread: the privilege that the "big" languages have. It's the
> > > > privilege of already having other encyclopedias, textbooks, public
> > > > education, etc., in this language. A lot of languages don't have
> these
> > > > things. When you speak a language that has had these things before
> > > > Wikipedia came along, it's hard to perceive the world like a person
> > > > who speaks a language that doesn't perceives it.
> > > >
> > > > If you define the purpose of paying somebody to translate as "turning
> > > > the paid translator" into a sustaining editor, then this is indeed
> > > > likely to fail.
> > > >
> > > > But if you define the purpose differently, it may succeed. For
> > > > example, you may define the purpose as one or more of the following:
> > > > * Demonstrating that it's possible to write an encyclopedia in that
> > > > language
> > > > * Creating basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that language
> > > > * Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in
> > > > interlanguage links in Wikipedias from bigger languages (English,
> > > > French, etc.)
> > > > * Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in search
> > > > results from internet search engines
> > > >
> > > > The existence of these things may bring in people who will become
> > > > volunteer sustaining editors.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> > > > http://aharoni.wordpress.com ‪“We're living in pieces, I want to
> live
> > > > in peace.” – T. Moore‬ ______________________________
> _________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

John Erling Blad
In reply to this post by Renée Bagslint
We do need better tools to curate the existing articles, but that is not a
blocker for new ways to create and edit articles.

For example, what if we could simply select a sentence, create a query on
some search engine, and then have an ai-bot crawl the result to see if one
of the hits can be used as a source? Turned around, the ai-bot could check
the sentences in an article and flag those it can't verify, thus guiding
the editor to back those sentences with references. That would off-load the
bulk of the work on sourcing articles.

Just an idea.

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Renée Bagslint <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Does it make sense to have more articles in a language than can be curated
> by the volunteers who speak that language?  This has already happened on
> the Englisg-language Wikipedia where the five million articles have simply
> overwhelmed the capability of the few thousand active contributors to
> self-organise and curate -- for example, there are about one million
> articles without adequate sources, and thousands of unsourced BLP; there
> are copyvio cleanups that will not complete, if ever, before 2030.  An army
> of hand-coded bots is just about keeping on top of vandalism.  How does
> that scale to projects where the number of native speaker contributors is
> in the dozens rather than the thousands?
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Vi to <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > (This thread is getting terribly interesting)
> >
> > I generally think Wikipedia should be a strictly non interfering observer
> > for various aspects, language included. I fear if a wiki tries to set a
> > model for a language it may be a model which doesn't represent the
> reality
> > of that language: small wikis are often monopolized by a few users.
> That's
> > not a fault per se but it may introduce a significant bias in linguistic
> > models used.
> >
> > About one of Amir's emails I think a "small" Wikipedia edition is sign
> of a
> > series of situations, one of the most common of is an endangered
> language.
> > While planning should differentiate between endangered and non endangered
> > language I think most of problems we have to face are related to
> languages
> > endangered at various levels.
> >
> > On a more practical and less ideological note, I should note that even
> > though I didn't run the numbers, I strongly suspect that translating
> 10,000
> > articles to 100 languages is considerably cheaper than teaching 7 billion
> > people English.
> >
> > I don't why but I tend to second your suspects :p
> >
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > 2018-02-27 16:53 GMT+01:00 Peter Southwood <[hidden email]
> >:
> >
> > > If the people creating the basic encyclopaedic terminology and style in
> > > the language are native speakers, then it would not be a thing imposed
> > from
> > > outside. It would be a development within the language, just like it
> was
> > > with the languages that already have encyclopaedias. The basic
> > > encyclopaedic terminology and style in languages that have then also
> had
> > to
> > > be created before it existed, it just happened earlier. Living
> languages
> > > evolve to deal with the realities of the present. Those which don’t,
> tend
> > > to die out as they become less useful. Cheers, Peter
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> > > Behalf Of Vi to
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 1:43 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> > >
> > > I see Amir's points, which are pretty reasonable, but I fear this would
> > > suit languages with a significant presence on the web.
> > >
> > > Among them I agree with points 1, 3 and 4 while I'm not sure about #2
> > > "creating basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that language",
> if
> > we
> > > want to preserve a language we shouldn't create a thing.
> > >
> > > By the way I was wondering my concerns about cultural colonization may
> be
> > > addressed -for wikis which has some contents (let's say at least 1000
> > > articles)- by starting expanding existing articles instead of
> translating
> > > new ones. This would solve the problem of choosing what to translate
> > though
> > > would leave problems about the perspective contents are created.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > 2018-02-27 12:31 GMT+01:00 Amir E. Aharoni <
> [hidden email]
> > >:
> > >
> > > > 2018-02-27 13:00 GMT+02:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
> > > > [hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le 24/02/2018 à 18:08, Vi to a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > >> *finally I think paid translators would hardly turn into stable
> > > > >> Wikipedians.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think this misses an important point that is, we don't need the
> > > > initial
> > > > > translator to turn into a sustaining editor, we need the article to
> > > > evolve
> > > > > with call to action incentives. And articles which don't exist at
> > > > > all – even as a stub – or don't meet an audience of potential
> > > > > contributors will never catch such an evolving cycle.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is one of the issues with what I alluded to in my earlier email
> > > > in this thread: the privilege that the "big" languages have. It's the
> > > > privilege of already having other encyclopedias, textbooks, public
> > > > education, etc., in this language. A lot of languages don't have
> these
> > > > things. When you speak a language that has had these things before
> > > > Wikipedia came along, it's hard to perceive the world like a person
> > > > who speaks a language that doesn't perceives it.
> > > >
> > > > If you define the purpose of paying somebody to translate as "turning
> > > > the paid translator" into a sustaining editor, then this is indeed
> > > > likely to fail.
> > > >
> > > > But if you define the purpose differently, it may succeed. For
> > > > example, you may define the purpose as one or more of the following:
> > > > * Demonstrating that it's possible to write an encyclopedia in that
> > > > language
> > > > * Creating basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that language
> > > > * Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in
> > > > interlanguage links in Wikipedias from bigger languages (English,
> > > > French, etc.)
> > > > * Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in search
> > > > results from internet search engines
> > > >
> > > > The existence of these things may bring in people who will become
> > > > volunteer sustaining editors.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> > > > http://aharoni.wordpress.com ‪“We're living in pieces, I want to
> live
> > > > in peace.” – T. Moore‬ ______________________________
> _________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

metasj
In reply to this post by John Erling Blad
+100 to this. Thank you, John.

I have slightly different ideas about what this should cost and how to
encourage translators and support a 100k-person  network of polylinguals +
babelfish + just.in.time conversion tools to melt language barriers.  But
simplicity, focus, persistence are what matter.!

SJ

On Mar 4, 2018 5:28 AM, "John Erling Blad" <[hidden email]> wrote:

You guys are making the whole idea way to complex. There should be no
editorial board. That goes against the whole wiki-way of doing things.
There should be no additional foundation, that makes the whole idea
unmanageable. It will also cost way more than the gain.

Make thing DarnSimple™! A single list covering all universally valid topics
that a true encyclopedia should cover. Leave it to the translator to chose
which source article to use, as this creates the best opportunity to find
translators. Allow other editors to join in after publication, but do
respect the primary translators effort. Split the payment in one for the
initial translation, and one for the followup edits. Cap them to avoid
bloated articles.

Make a DarnSimple™ interface to manage the translations, where the only
action is for some identified user to tick of translated articles when they
reach a certain threshold. In another interface the translator must
identify himself with sufficient details to make the payment possible. This
should be an optional part of the usual configuration of an account. All
persons involved in the editing should have a split, but no payment will be
done before the account for each editor reaches some threshold.

Make the core list big enough to create a real encyclopedia, but small
enough that there are room for local additions. There should probably be
some way to specify local articles, like municipalities, important authors,
and politicians. A good test is whether such additional articles makes
sense in neighboring countries or languages. If it isn't possible to
describe such things in a generic way they should probably be left out. I'm
not sure if it should be possible to exclude articles, but I guess it will
be an issue for some languages. Think Armenian genocide, which is
problematic for some countries.

A small single-book encyclopedia is about 60-70k articles, so lets say such
a list would cover 25% of this. That would be a list of 15k articles. There
are perhaps 50 Wikipedias that are large enough to be sustainable, and
still small enough to miss articles on such a list. That would imply 750k
articles,  thus plenty of articles for those that would like to translate
one! Lets say this project is spread over 10 years with a cap on each
article at 2x USD 10, then it would cost about USD 1500k each year. I
believe that would be manageable. (Quite frankly I doubt it would be
possible to find many enough translators, so this will never reach the
proposed levels!)
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by John Erling Blad
I like the idea, but have no clue as to how practicable it would be.
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of John Erling Blad
Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 12:36 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

We do need better tools to curate the existing articles, but that is not a blocker for new ways to create and edit articles.

For example, what if we could simply select a sentence, create a query on some search engine, and then have an ai-bot crawl the result to see if one of the hits can be used as a source? Turned around, the ai-bot could check the sentences in an article and flag those it can't verify, thus guiding the editor to back those sentences with references. That would off-load the bulk of the work on sourcing articles.

Just an idea.

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Renée Bagslint <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Does it make sense to have more articles in a language than can be
> curated by the volunteers who speak that language?  This has already
> happened on the Englisg-language Wikipedia where the five million
> articles have simply overwhelmed the capability of the few thousand
> active contributors to self-organise and curate -- for example, there
> are about one million articles without adequate sources, and thousands
> of unsourced BLP; there are copyvio cleanups that will not complete,
> if ever, before 2030.  An army of hand-coded bots is just about
> keeping on top of vandalism.  How does that scale to projects where
> the number of native speaker contributors is in the dozens rather than the thousands?
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Vi to <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > (This thread is getting terribly interesting)
> >
> > I generally think Wikipedia should be a strictly non interfering
> > observer for various aspects, language included. I fear if a wiki
> > tries to set a model for a language it may be a model which doesn't
> > represent the
> reality
> > of that language: small wikis are often monopolized by a few users.
> That's
> > not a fault per se but it may introduce a significant bias in
> > linguistic models used.
> >
> > About one of Amir's emails I think a "small" Wikipedia edition is
> > sign
> of a
> > series of situations, one of the most common of is an endangered
> language.
> > While planning should differentiate between endangered and non
> > endangered language I think most of problems we have to face are
> > related to
> languages
> > endangered at various levels.
> >
> > On a more practical and less ideological note, I should note that
> > even though I didn't run the numbers, I strongly suspect that
> > translating
> 10,000
> > articles to 100 languages is considerably cheaper than teaching 7
> > billion people English.
> >
> > I don't why but I tend to second your suspects :p
> >
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > 2018-02-27 16:53 GMT+01:00 Peter Southwood
> ><[hidden email]
> >:
> >
> > > If the people creating the basic encyclopaedic terminology and
> > > style in the language are native speakers, then it would not be a
> > > thing imposed
> > from
> > > outside. It would be a development within the language, just like
> > > it
> was
> > > with the languages that already have encyclopaedias. The basic
> > > encyclopaedic terminology and style in languages that have then
> > > also
> had
> > to
> > > be created before it existed, it just happened earlier. Living
> languages
> > > evolve to deal with the realities of the present. Those which
> > > don’t,
> tend
> > > to die out as they become less useful. Cheers, Peter
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > > On Behalf Of Vi to
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 1:43 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation
> > >
> > > I see Amir's points, which are pretty reasonable, but I fear this
> > > would suit languages with a significant presence on the web.
> > >
> > > Among them I agree with points 1, 3 and 4 while I'm not sure about
> > > #2 "creating basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that
> > > language",
> if
> > we
> > > want to preserve a language we shouldn't create a thing.
> > >
> > > By the way I was wondering my concerns about cultural colonization
> > > may
> be
> > > addressed -for wikis which has some contents (let's say at least
> > > 1000
> > > articles)- by starting expanding existing articles instead of
> translating
> > > new ones. This would solve the problem of choosing what to
> > > translate
> > though
> > > would leave problems about the perspective contents are created.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > 2018-02-27 12:31 GMT+01:00 Amir E. Aharoni <
> [hidden email]
> > >:
> > >
> > > > 2018-02-27 13:00 GMT+02:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
> > > > [hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le 24/02/2018 à 18:08, Vi to a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > >> *finally I think paid translators would hardly turn into
> > > > >> stable Wikipedians.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think this misses an important point that is, we don't need
> > > > >> the
> > > > initial
> > > > > translator to turn into a sustaining editor, we need the
> > > > > article to
> > > > evolve
> > > > > with call to action incentives. And articles which don't exist
> > > > > at all – even as a stub – or don't meet an audience of
> > > > > potential contributors will never catch such an evolving cycle.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is one of the issues with what I alluded to in my earlier
> > > > email in this thread: the privilege that the "big" languages
> > > > have. It's the privilege of already having other encyclopedias,
> > > > textbooks, public education, etc., in this language. A lot of
> > > > languages don't have
> these
> > > > things. When you speak a language that has had these things
> > > > before Wikipedia came along, it's hard to perceive the world
> > > > like a person who speaks a language that doesn't perceives it.
> > > >
> > > > If you define the purpose of paying somebody to translate as
> > > > "turning the paid translator" into a sustaining editor, then
> > > > this is indeed likely to fail.
> > > >
> > > > But if you define the purpose differently, it may succeed. For
> > > > example, you may define the purpose as one or more of the following:
> > > > * Demonstrating that it's possible to write an encyclopedia in
> > > > that language
> > > > * Creating basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that
> > > > language
> > > > * Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in
> > > > interlanguage links in Wikipedias from bigger languages
> > > > (English, French, etc.)
> > > > * Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in search
> > > > results from internet search engines
> > > >
> > > > The existence of these things may bring in people who will
> > > > become volunteer sustaining editors.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> > > > http://aharoni.wordpress.com ‪“We're living in pieces, I want to
> live
> > > > in peace.” – T. Moore‬ ______________________________
> _________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscr
> > > > ibe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscrib
> > > e>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscrib
> > > e>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
> wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

Pine W
In reply to this post by John Erling Blad
Hi John, perhaps I'm overlooking something. If you recommend that there be
no additional foundation, then who will pay the translators to translate
articles? Are you envisioning WMF paying translators directly, or WMF
paying a third party organization to pay the translators, or a third party
organization executing a self-funded or crowdsourced initiative to pay
translators?

SJ, I'd be interested in getting a fuller description of your thoughts.

Thanks,

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 2:27 AM, John Erling Blad <[hidden email]> wrote:

> You guys are making the whole idea way to complex. There should be no
> editorial board. That goes against the whole wiki-way of doing things.
> There should be no additional foundation, that makes the whole idea
> unmanageable. It will also cost way more than the gain.
>
> Make thing DarnSimple™! A single list covering all universally valid topics
> that a true encyclopedia should cover. Leave it to the translator to chose
> which source article to use, as this creates the best opportunity to find
> translators. Allow other editors to join in after publication, but do
> respect the primary translators effort. Split the payment in one for the
> initial translation, and one for the followup edits. Cap them to avoid
> bloated articles.
>
> Make a DarnSimple™ interface to manage the translations, where the only
> action is for some identified user to tick of translated articles when they
> reach a certain threshold. In another interface the translator must
> identify himself with sufficient details to make the payment possible. This
> should be an optional part of the usual configuration of an account. All
> persons involved in the editing should have a split, but no payment will be
> done before the account for each editor reaches some threshold.
>
> Make the core list big enough to create a real encyclopedia, but small
> enough that there are room for local additions. There should probably be
> some way to specify local articles, like municipalities, important authors,
> and politicians. A good test is whether such additional articles makes
> sense in neighboring countries or languages. If it isn't possible to
> describe such things in a generic way they should probably be left out. I'm
> not sure if it should be possible to exclude articles, but I guess it will
> be an issue for some languages. Think Armenian genocide, which is
> problematic for some countries.
>
> A small single-book encyclopedia is about 60-70k articles, so lets say such
> a list would cover 25% of this. That would be a list of 15k articles. There
> are perhaps 50 Wikipedias that are large enough to be sustainable, and
> still small enough to miss articles on such a list. That would imply 750k
> articles,  thus plenty of articles for those that would like to translate
> one! Lets say this project is spread over 10 years with a cap on each
> article at 2x USD 10, then it would cost about USD 1500k each year. I
> believe that would be manageable. (Quite frankly I doubt it would be
> possible to find many enough translators, so this will never reach the
> proposed levels!)
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
12345