Hello,
On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org 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
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 guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org 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 Translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
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 mgallaway@gmail.com 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 guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber <brion@wikimedia.org > 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 Translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
Translators-l mailing list Translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
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 fruggo@gmail.com 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 mgallaway@gmail.com 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
guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
On 4/6/07, Brion Vibber <brion@wikimedia.org >
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 Translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
Translators-l mailing list Translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
Translators-l mailing list Translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org
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@lists.wikimedia.org