This is such a delightful experience. Whoever is working on translation interfaces and translation research this way: very nicely done indeed.
Sadly, automatic translation hinting doesn't seem to be available yet. Or at least it's Non disponible pour français
SJ
2015-06-25 15:59 GMT-07:00 Wikimedia Research < recommender-feedback@wikimedia.org>:
Bonjour, L’équipe Recherche de la Fondation Wikimédia (Wikimedia Research) travaille actuellement sur l’identification d’articles populaires et importants1 <#14e2cf2eca33408f_fn1> dans certaines langues du projet Wikipédia qui n’existent pas encore sur le Wikipédia francophone. Les cinq articles suivants existent dans la version anglophone de Wikipédia et sont considérés comme étant importants pour les autres langues du projet. Au vu de votre historique de contribution à Wikipédia, nous pensons que vous êtes un(e) excellent candidat(e) pour contribuer à ces articles. Démarrer la création de l'un de ces articles serait un premier pas considérable en vue d'élargir les connaissances disponibles en français.2 <#14e2cf2eca33408f_fn2>
Dollfus' stargazer https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ContentTranslation?campaign=frwiki-recommender&to=fr&from=en&page=Dollfus'_stargazer
Request Tracker https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ContentTranslation?campaign=frwiki-recommender&to=fr&from=en&page=Request_Tracker
American Poultry Association https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ContentTranslation?campaign=frwiki-recommender&to=fr&from=en&page=American_Poultry_Association
Attribute–value pair https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ContentTranslation?campaign=frwiki-recommender&to=fr&from=en&page=Attribute–value_pair
Kal Aaj Aur Kal https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ContentTranslation?campaign=frwiki-recommender&to=fr&from=en&page=Kal_Aaj_Aur_Kal
Nous vous remercions d'avance pour votre aide. 3 <#14e2cf2eca33408f_fn3> 4 <#14e2cf2eca33408f_fn4>
Equipe de Recherche Fondation Wikimédia 149 New Montgomery Street, 6th Floor San Francisco, CA, 94105 415.839.6885 (Office)
- Nous identifions les articles importants et populaires grâce à un
algorithme. Cette sélection d'articles peut être un résultat personnalisé ou aléatoire. Vous pouvez en apprendre davantage sur la personnalisation et les méthodes utilisées pour trouver les articles importants à cette adresse https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Increasing_article_coverage#Methodology . 2. Les liens pointent vers l’outil de traduction de Wikipédia (ContentTranslation Tool). Cet outil est en cours de développement par l’équipe Language Engineering de la fondation (pour l’instant en version beta dans certaines langues). En savoir plus: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Content_translation. 3. Si vous désirez plus d’informations sur ce projet de recherche, vous pouvez lire cette page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Increasing_article_coverage (en anglais), et nous en parler sur sa page de discussion https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Increasing_article_coverage (en anglais de préférence, même si nous trouverons certainement un traducteur si vous nous écrivez en français :). 4. Votre avis est important pour nous. Faites nous part de vos impressions par courriel à l’adresse recommender-feedback@wikimedia.org.
Si vous ne souhaitez plus recevoir de courriel de Wikimedia Research, merci d’envoyer un courriel ayant pour sujet "unsubscribe" à l’adresse recommender-feedback@wikimedia.org>.
On 26.06.2015 01:50, Samuel Klein wrote:
This is such a delightful experience.
I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou...).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Emmanuel
Interesting viewpoint, Emmanuel! I am always fascinated to know what others think I might be interested in, even if the "other" is just a bot. Like Sam I was delighted, and I might even be prompted to do a translation (though not one of the ones they suggested, but an article which I made myself and is in the same general area). I disagree by the way, that each Wikipedia has to decide on their own what is "encyclopedia worthy" in that language. I think the projects need to start trusting each other more and be open to *aggressive* translation efforts as a way to educate new (multi-lingual) editors, and also to promote a neutral point of view. Let's wikibomb everybody aggressively with translation suggestions!
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote:
On 26.06.2015 01:50, Samuel Klein wrote:
This is such a delightful experience.
I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou... ).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Emmanuel
Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline & more
- Web: http://www.kiwix.org
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline
- more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
I still wonder what made a bot think I speak French? Surely, a few minor edits on fr.wp can't be the trigger? (well, I had two years at school, but I barely remember enough to identify the language...)
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:42 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting viewpoint, Emmanuel! I am always fascinated to know what others think I might be interested in, even if the "other" is just a bot. Like Sam I was delighted, and I might even be prompted to do a translation (though not one of the ones they suggested, but an article which I made myself and is in the same general area). I disagree by the way, that each Wikipedia has to decide on their own what is "encyclopedia worthy" in that language. I think the projects need to start trusting each other more and be open to *aggressive* translation efforts as a way to educate new (multi-lingual) editors, and also to promote a neutral point of view. Let's wikibomb everybody aggressively with translation suggestions!
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote:
On 26.06.2015 01:50, Samuel Klein wrote:
This is such a delightful experience.
I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou... ).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Emmanuel
Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline & more
- Web: http://www.kiwix.org
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline
- more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Oh cool, you offer free French courses? Did I understand the e-Mail correctly?
-- Rillke
Interesting, I figured I received the mail because of joining translation projects. It seems that it's enough to have made a single edit in both language wikipedias in the last year.
I hope you will do this in both directions for each language pair (both suggestions from FR --> EN and from EN --> FR.)
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote:
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
The article eval programs like this one are really good. I agree that's a good source of prioritization of topics (whether or not a bot is involved; bots are people too). But this system isn't so good at identifying topics that haven't yet been written.
S
I strongly disagree that this is spamming. Like others have mentioned, I was not offended by the email (though I wasn't "delighted") by it either, I think it is a reasonable attempt to encourage editors to put some efforts into languages other than English.
Plus it is easy to unsubscribe from the research mailing list.
Jim
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote:
On 26.06.2015 01:50, Samuel Klein wrote:
This is such a delightful experience.
I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou... ).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Emmanuel
Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline & more
- Web: http://www.kiwix.org
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline
- more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Spamming - a question what the e-mail function of WP is ment for. I was very surprised to get the request though my French is limited, I hardly ever edited on fr.WP, and the suggested topics have totally nothing to do with what I do on Wikipedia. So I do think that the mail was not quite appropriate, and it gives me a not so favorable impression about the people or initiative behind. Kind regards Ziko
Am Freitag, 26. Juni 2015 schrieb Jim :
I strongly disagree that this is spamming. Like others have mentioned, I was not offended by the email (though I wasn't "delighted") by it either, I think it is a reasonable attempt to encourage editors to put some efforts into languages other than English.
Plus it is easy to unsubscribe from the research mailing list.
Jim
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart <kelson@kiwix.org javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kelson@kiwix.org');> wrote:
On 26.06.2015 01:50, Samuel Klein wrote:
This is such a delightful experience.
I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou... ).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Emmanuel
Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline & more
- Web: http://www.kiwix.org
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline
- more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org'); https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
-- Jim (trodel@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','trodel@gmail.com');) "Our love may not always be reciprocated, or even appreciated, but love is never wasted"
- Neal A Maxwell-
Hi everyone,
Thank you for your feedback. It's really appreciated. My responses below, all in one-batch to avoid many emails to the list. Sorry if it's too long in advance.
2015-06-25 16:50 GMT-07:00 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com:
This is such a delightful experience. Whoever is working on translation interfaces and translation research this way: very nicely done indeed.
Thank you! It's great to hear that you liked it. There are many things we would like to improve about the algorithm and hearing that you like it makes us more motivated. If you have more specific comments, feel free to leave us a comment on the talk page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Increasing_article_coverage .
The translation tool is owned by Language Engineering team. You can read more about it here https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Content_translation, though I'm guessing you've already seen that. Sorry if it's repetitive.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote:
[...] I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou... ).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
I'm sorry that you received an email when you don't like to receive one. This is not nice and I apologize for that. The opt-out option is available through the email you have received. We will make sure you do not receive any future research related emails if you unsubscribe. The test on French Wikipedia is over now.
The opt-out/opt-in discussion deserves a dedicated effort considering the needs of everyone involved. I'm committed for improving the communications with users regarding research projects and will do what I can on that front.
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on
Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Thank you for this pointer.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting viewpoint, Emmanuel! I am always fascinated to know what others think I might be interested in, even if the "other" is just a bot. Like Sam I was delighted, and I might even be prompted to do a translation (though not one of the ones they suggested, but an article which I made myself and is in the same general area). I disagree by the way, that each Wikipedia has to decide on their own what is "encyclopedia worthy" in that language. I think the projects need to start trusting each other more and be open to *aggressive* translation efforts as a way to educate new (multi-lingual) editors, and also to promote a neutral point of view. Let's wikibomb everybody aggressively with translation suggestions!
Jane, thank you for your comment. We're happy that you welcomed receiving such recommendations. For the purposes of this research, we are taking the following approach: we take a more global approach to identify missing content, rank them by their importance, and recommend them to editors. The editor should make the final call whether the recommendation they receive should go to the destination language. Ideally, we want to loop back editors' expertise and feedback to the algorithm, i.e., if you as an editor think a recommendation is not useful in a language, we should be able to collect that information from you, feed it to the algorithm, and let the algorithm learn. This needs to happen down the road (hopefully not too far down) for the algorithm to be able to serve the needs of each language and community.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
I still wonder what made a bot think I speak French? Surely, a few minor edits on fr.wp can't be the trigger? (well, I had two years at school, but I barely remember enough to identify the language...)
I'am copying from here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Increasing_article_coverage#Evaluation :
We determine which editors are suitable for receiving recommendations for translating from the source to the target language via two methods. The first is scraping the target users' User pages for a Babel template that indicates that they speak the source language. The second is selecting target users who have an account with the same username in the source language, have made at least one edit in both the source and target Wikipedias, have made at least one edit in either language within the last year and have matching email addresses for the two accounts.
Based on the feedback from the test, it is clear that we need to raise the bar on the contributions to source/destination languages for the future steps. We initially had a 100 byte limit in each of the source and destination language in the past year as a bar, but that one somehow didn't get to the code (code issue) and we didn't realize this until we received the feedback. Based on the feedback, we may want to consider even higher bars for choosing editors, one thing we do not want to do is to ignore those with few edits completely. Those may be people who have contributed few times and recommendations can encourage them to contribute more and come back. Any feedback on how we can improve this aspect further is appreciated.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting, I figured I received the mail because of joining translation projects. It seems that it's enough to have made a single edit in both language wikipedias in the last year.
we changed the wording of the page to make it clearer. I think there was a confusion caused by our wording. please read here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Increasing_article_coverage#Evaluation .
I hope you will do this in both directions for each language pair (both suggestions from FR --> EN and from EN --> FR.)
the way the algorithm makes the final recommendations is language agnostic so we can easily expand them to other language pairs. the goal is to have them for the top 30 languages (to and from), the top 50 if we have enough data to make good enough recommendations. We do hope that the engineering aspect of receiving these recommendations can also move as fast so we can offer the editors the recommendations in a way that works smoothly with their workflow.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Jim trodel@gmail.com wrote:
I strongly disagree that this is spamming. Like others have mentioned, I was not offended by the email (though I wasn't "delighted") by it either, I think it is a reasonable attempt to encourage editors to put some efforts into languages other than English.
Plus it is easy to unsubscribe from the research mailing list.
Thanks for sharing your point of view and happy to hear we did not bother you by it. As mentioned earlier, I hope that we (all parties involved, not just research) can resolve the email conversation in a way that more people are happier with the outcome.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com wrote:
Spamming - a question what the e-mail function of WP is ment for. I was very surprised to get the request though my French is limited, I hardly ever edited on fr.WP,
The feedback about limited French language knowledge is a great feedback that we have heard clearly. Thank you for sharing that and sorry that you were chosen. This is something we have already changed in our code to increase the threshold on the way we choose future participants.
and the suggested topics have totally nothing to do with what I do on Wikipedia. So I do think that the mail was not quite appropriate, and it gives me a not so favorable impression about the people or initiative behind.
I'm sorry if the recommendation has disappointed you. As mentioned in the recommendation email, you will be in one of the two groups: those who receive random but still important (with the algorithm's definition of importance) recommendations or those who receive personalized and important recommendations. Since we have not finalized the analysis of the test I cannot look to see which group you were in since that may have impact on the results. I hope this helps us build more trust, and hopefully we can learn much more when the results are out. Thank you for your time.
Thanks again everyone. I will continue monitoring this list. We are also busy with the talk page so you may experience some delay. Apologize in advance if that happens. Just be sure that we will get back to you. :-)
Best, Leila
One concern I would raise with a straight opt-out system is simply that, as someone who received the email (and was incredibly confused. I don't speak French and had never heard of the underlying project) I /am/ interested in research projects. I'm just not interested in research projects in, well, French. It would be great to have something more granular than "all emails or no emails"
On 26 June 2015 at 14:40, Leila Zia leila@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
Thank you for your feedback. It's really appreciated. My responses below, all in one-batch to avoid many emails to the list. Sorry if it's too long in advance.
2015-06-25 16:50 GMT-07:00 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com:
This is such a delightful experience. Whoever is working on translation interfaces and translation research this way: very nicely done indeed.
Thank you! It's great to hear that you liked it. There are many things we would like to improve about the algorithm and hearing that you like it makes us more motivated. If you have more specific comments, feel free to leave us a comment on the talk page.
The translation tool is owned by Language Engineering team. You can read more about it here, though I'm guessing you've already seen that. Sorry if it's repetitive.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote:
[...] I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou...).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
I'm sorry that you received an email when you don't like to receive one. This is not nice and I apologize for that. The opt-out option is available through the email you have received. We will make sure you do not receive any future research related emails if you unsubscribe. The test on French Wikipedia is over now.
The opt-out/opt-in discussion deserves a dedicated effort considering the needs of everyone involved. I'm committed for improving the communications with users regarding research projects and will do what I can on that front.
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Thank you for this pointer.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting viewpoint, Emmanuel! I am always fascinated to know what others think I might be interested in, even if the "other" is just a bot. Like Sam I was delighted, and I might even be prompted to do a translation (though not one of the ones they suggested, but an article which I made myself and is in the same general area). I disagree by the way, that each Wikipedia has to decide on their own what is "encyclopedia worthy" in that language. I think the projects need to start trusting each other more and be open to *aggressive* translation efforts as a way to educate new (multi-lingual) editors, and also to promote a neutral point of view. Let's wikibomb everybody aggressively with translation suggestions!
Jane, thank you for your comment. We're happy that you welcomed receiving such recommendations. For the purposes of this research, we are taking the following approach: we take a more global approach to identify missing content, rank them by their importance, and recommend them to editors. The editor should make the final call whether the recommendation they receive should go to the destination language. Ideally, we want to loop back editors' expertise and feedback to the algorithm, i.e., if you as an editor think a recommendation is not useful in a language, we should be able to collect that information from you, feed it to the algorithm, and let the algorithm learn. This needs to happen down the road (hopefully not too far down) for the algorithm to be able to serve the needs of each language and community.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
I still wonder what made a bot think I speak French? Surely, a few minor edits on fr.wp can't be the trigger? (well, I had two years at school, but I barely remember enough to identify the language...)
I'am copying from here:
We determine which editors are suitable for receiving recommendations for translating from the source to the target language via two methods. The first is scraping the target users' User pages for a Babel template that indicates that they speak the source language. The second is selecting target users who have an account with the same username in the source language, have made at least one edit in both the source and target Wikipedias, have made at least one edit in either language within the last year and have matching email addresses for the two accounts.
Based on the feedback from the test, it is clear that we need to raise the bar on the contributions to source/destination languages for the future steps. We initially had a 100 byte limit in each of the source and destination language in the past year as a bar, but that one somehow didn't get to the code (code issue) and we didn't realize this until we received the feedback. Based on the feedback, we may want to consider even higher bars for choosing editors, one thing we do not want to do is to ignore those with few edits completely. Those may be people who have contributed few times and recommendations can encourage them to contribute more and come back. Any feedback on how we can improve this aspect further is appreciated.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting, I figured I received the mail because of joining translation projects. It seems that it's enough to have made a single edit in both language wikipedias in the last year.
we changed the wording of the page to make it clearer. I think there was a confusion caused by our wording. please read here.
I hope you will do this in both directions for each language pair (both suggestions from FR --> EN and from EN --> FR.)
the way the algorithm makes the final recommendations is language agnostic so we can easily expand them to other language pairs. the goal is to have them for the top 30 languages (to and from), the top 50 if we have enough data to make good enough recommendations. We do hope that the engineering aspect of receiving these recommendations can also move as fast so we can offer the editors the recommendations in a way that works smoothly with their workflow.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Jim trodel@gmail.com wrote:
I strongly disagree that this is spamming. Like others have mentioned, I was not offended by the email (though I wasn't "delighted") by it either, I think it is a reasonable attempt to encourage editors to put some efforts into languages other than English.
Plus it is easy to unsubscribe from the research mailing list.
Thanks for sharing your point of view and happy to hear we did not bother you by it. As mentioned earlier, I hope that we (all parties involved, not just research) can resolve the email conversation in a way that more people are happier with the outcome.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com wrote:
Spamming - a question what the e-mail function of WP is ment for. I was very surprised to get the request though my French is limited, I hardly ever edited on fr.WP,
The feedback about limited French language knowledge is a great feedback that we have heard clearly. Thank you for sharing that and sorry that you were chosen. This is something we have already changed in our code to increase the threshold on the way we choose future participants.
and the suggested topics have totally nothing to do with what I do on Wikipedia. So I do think that the mail was not quite appropriate, and it gives me a not so favorable impression about the people or initiative behind.
I'm sorry if the recommendation has disappointed you. As mentioned in the recommendation email, you will be in one of the two groups: those who receive random but still important (with the algorithm's definition of importance) recommendations or those who receive personalized and important recommendations. Since we have not finalized the analysis of the test I cannot look to see which group you were in since that may have impact on the results. I hope this helps us build more trust, and hopefully we can learn much more when the results are out. Thank you for your time.
Thanks again everyone. I will continue monitoring this list. We are also busy with the talk page so you may experience some delay. Apologize in advance if that happens. Just be sure that we will get back to you. :-)
Best, Leila
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
2015-06-26 20:40 GMT+02:00 Leila Zia leila@wikimedia.org:
Hi everyone, the way the algorithm makes the final recommendations is language agnostic
Obviously. :-)
I'm sorry if the recommendation has disappointed you. As mentioned in the recommendation email, you will be in one of the two groups: those who receive random but still important (with the algorithm's definition of importance) recommendations
If my French was better, I had certainly read also the small letters in the footnote. :-)
No offense taken, but I had liked to see the choice made with more care. In general, I don't have much trust in automatics making evaluations about people and their edit behavior. They should always be supervised by a human being (who would have seen, with two clicks, that I'm not suitable to translate to French). I am a little bit stunned by the fact that you seriously considered everyone with "fr" in a Babel template as francophone. Everywhere I have indicated "fr-1" - except on my French user page where I describe my handicap in poor French. :-)
Already in 2009/2010 I have discussed such issues in my https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Ziko/Handbuch-Allgemeines There is a phenomenon which I call "foreign helpers". They are Wikipedians who edit significantly in language versions of which they don't or hardly understand the language. They remove obvious spam or embed pictures, or they post (English language) announcements at the "village pump" (forum). This explains why they have edits in many language versions, and why some small language versions seem to have quite a lot of editors.
My recommendations: * Consider only people who indicate at least -3 in BOTH relevant languages. Actually, the version people translate to should be the native language. * They should have at least have 1000 edits in both language versions, to make sure they feel comfortable and experienced enough in both. Preferably rather recent edits. * How do you filter the topics people might be interested in?
Kind regards Ziko
Dear Leila,
thank you for elaborating how this mailing came about.
I would like to address the ethical aspect of your project.
In saying
"For the purposes of this research, we are taking the following approach: we take a more global approach to identify missing content, rank them by their importance, and recommend them to editors. The editor should make the final call whether the recommendation they receive should go to the destination language."
you certainly leave it to the editor whether or not to take action and actually translate an article you have suggested.
However, I think a threshold is crossed here with the Wikimedia Foundation interfering into the editors' business. It has generally been accepted that the Foundation will not care about content creation, except for handling DMCA takedown requests as office actions.
It still has to be addressed whether the Foundation may solicit the creation of content, and if so, in which manner? I gather from the discussion on German Wikipedia that most experienced editors think no. This is a volunteering project, and everyone taking part in it decides for himself what he would like to do. We have never had suggestions like this. Indeed, I think this is a delicate matter concerning the relation between the Community and the Foundation that should be dealt with in the first place. Which roles do we play? Or, which roles do you change, or rather play with? when sending out such a suggestion?
And, of course, an opt-in for such experiments would be fine. I think a lot of people would even be inclined to subscribe to such a list because after all we are interested in what you are doing, aren't we? ;)
Best regards, Jürgen.
Am 26.06.2015 um 20:40 schrieb Leila Zia leila@wikimedia.org:
Hi everyone,
Thank you for your feedback. It's really appreciated. My responses below, all in one-batch to avoid many emails to the list. Sorry if it's too long in advance.
2015-06-25 16:50 GMT-07:00 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com: This is such a delightful experience. Whoever is working on translation interfaces and translation research this way: very nicely done indeed.
Thank you! It's great to hear that you liked it. There are many things we would like to improve about the algorithm and hearing that you like it makes us more motivated. If you have more specific comments, feel free to leave us a comment on the talk page.
The translation tool is owned by Language Engineering team. You can read more about it here, though I'm guessing you've already seen that. Sorry if it's repetitive.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote: [...] I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou...).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
I'm sorry that you received an email when you don't like to receive one. This is not nice and I apologize for that. The opt-out option is available through the email you have received. We will make sure you do not receive any future research related emails if you unsubscribe. The test on French Wikipedia is over now.
The opt-out/opt-in discussion deserves a dedicated effort considering the needs of everyone involved. I'm committed for improving the communications with users regarding research projects and will do what I can on that front.
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Thank you for this pointer.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: Interesting viewpoint, Emmanuel! I am always fascinated to know what others think I might be interested in, even if the "other" is just a bot. Like Sam I was delighted, and I might even be prompted to do a translation (though not one of the ones they suggested, but an article which I made myself and is in the same general area). I disagree by the way, that each Wikipedia has to decide on their own what is "encyclopedia worthy" in that language. I think the projects need to start trusting each other more and be open to *aggressive* translation efforts as a way to educate new (multi-lingual) editors, and also to promote a neutral point of view. Let's wikibomb everybody aggressively with translation suggestions!
Jane, thank you for your comment. We're happy that you welcomed receiving such recommendations. For the purposes of this research, we are taking the following approach: we take a more global approach to identify missing content, rank them by their importance, and recommend them to editors. The editor should make the final call whether the recommendation they receive should go to the destination language. Ideally, we want to loop back editors' expertise and feedback to the algorithm, i.e., if you as an editor think a recommendation is not useful in a language, we should be able to collect that information from you, feed it to the algorithm, and let the algorithm learn. This needs to happen down the road (hopefully not too far down) for the algorithm to be able to serve the needs of each language and community.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote: I still wonder what made a bot think I speak French? Surely, a few minor edits on fr.wp can't be the trigger? (well, I had two years at school, but I barely remember enough to identify the language...)
I'am copying from here:
We determine which editors are suitable for receiving recommendations for translating from the source to the target language via two methods. The first is scraping the target users' User pages for a Babel template that indicates that they speak the source language. The second is selecting target users who have an account with the same username in the source language, have made at least one edit in both the source and target Wikipedias, have made at least one edit in either language within the last year and have matching email addresses for the two accounts.
Based on the feedback from the test, it is clear that we need to raise the bar on the contributions to source/destination languages for the future steps. We initially had a 100 byte limit in each of the source and destination language in the past year as a bar, but that one somehow didn't get to the code (code issue) and we didn't realize this until we received the feedback. Based on the feedback, we may want to consider even higher bars for choosing editors, one thing we do not want to do is to ignore those with few edits completely. Those may be people who have contributed few times and recommendations can encourage them to contribute more and come back. Any feedback on how we can improve this aspect further is appreciated.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting, I figured I received the mail because of joining translation projects. It seems that it's enough to have made a single edit in both language wikipedias in the last year.
we changed the wording of the page to make it clearer. I think there was a confusion caused by our wording. please read here.
I hope you will do this in both directions for each language pair (both suggestions from FR --> EN and from EN --> FR.)
the way the algorithm makes the final recommendations is language agnostic so we can easily expand them to other language pairs. the goal is to have them for the top 30 languages (to and from), the top 50 if we have enough data to make good enough recommendations. We do hope that the engineering aspect of receiving these recommendations can also move as fast so we can offer the editors the recommendations in a way that works smoothly with their workflow.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Jim trodel@gmail.com wrote: I strongly disagree that this is spamming. Like others have mentioned, I was not offended by the email (though I wasn't "delighted") by it either, I think it is a reasonable attempt to encourage editors to put some efforts into languages other than English.
Plus it is easy to unsubscribe from the research mailing list.
Thanks for sharing your point of view and happy to hear we did not bother you by it. As mentioned earlier, I hope that we (all parties involved, not just research) can resolve the email conversation in a way that more people are happier with the outcome.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com wrote: Spamming - a question what the e-mail function of WP is ment for. I was very surprised to get the request though my French is limited, I hardly ever edited on fr.WP,
The feedback about limited French language knowledge is a great feedback that we have heard clearly. Thank you for sharing that and sorry that you were chosen. This is something we have already changed in our code to increase the threshold on the way we choose future participants.
and the suggested topics have totally nothing to do with what I do on Wikipedia. So I do think that the mail was not quite appropriate, and it gives me a not so favorable impression about the people or initiative behind.
I'm sorry if the recommendation has disappointed you. As mentioned in the recommendation email, you will be in one of the two groups: those who receive random but still important (with the algorithm's definition of importance) recommendations or those who receive personalized and important recommendations. Since we have not finalized the analysis of the test I cannot look to see which group you were in since that may have impact on the results. I hope this helps us build more trust, and hopefully we can learn much more when the results are out. Thank you for your time.
Thanks again everyone. I will continue monitoring this list. We are also busy with the talk page so you may experience some delay. Apologize in advance if that happens. Just be sure that we will get back to you. :-)
Best, Leila _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Leila - great responses, thank you.
On Jun 26, 2015 1:28 PM, "Juergen Fenn" jfenn@gmx.net wrote:
you certainly leave it to the editor whether or not to take action and
actually translate an article you have suggested.
However, I think a threshold is crossed here with the Wikimedia
Foundation interfering into the editors' business. It has generally been accepted that the Foundation will not care about content creation, except for handling DMCA takedown requests as office actions.
The WMF has cared openly about content creation since at least 2009 when quality and content metrics, and the breadth and diversity of contributors (because of its impact on content) were made core strategic goals.
But I think this is a more interesting question here: not 'can (one actor) solicit creation', but 'how can one part of the community solicit creation at large scale'.
Yes, the WMF is involved with this effort So is Stanford. But it seems this is closer to people testing the first bots: it is about building a code and social framework in which anyone could run an outreach campaign by finding other contributors according to some metric, and asking them to do tasks according to some other metric.
That is what's primarily at stake here: whether this makes sense and how to do it well. Then secondarily, who should do it, how often, with what level of explicit buy-in.
Regards, Sam
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Juergen Fenn jfenn@gmx.net wrote:
Dear Leila,
thank you for elaborating how this mailing came about.
I would like to address the ethical aspect of your project.
In saying
"For the purposes of this research, we are taking the following approach: we take a more global approach to identify missing content, rank them by their importance, and recommend them to editors. The editor should make the final call whether the recommendation they receive should go to the destination language."
you certainly leave it to the editor whether or not to take action and actually translate an article you have suggested.
However, I think a threshold is crossed here with the Wikimedia Foundation interfering into the editors' business. It has generally been accepted that the Foundation will not care about content creation, except for handling DMCA takedown requests as office actions.
It still has to be addressed whether the Foundation may solicit the creation of content, and if so, in which manner? I gather from the discussion on German Wikipedia that most experienced editors think no. This is a volunteering project, and everyone taking part in it decides for himself what he would like to do. We have never had suggestions like this. Indeed, I think this is a delicate matter concerning the relation between the Community and the Foundation that should be dealt with in the first place. Which roles do we play? Or, which roles do you change, or rather play with? when sending out such a suggestion?
And, of course, an opt-in for such experiments would be fine. I think a lot of people would even be inclined to subscribe to such a list because after all we are interested in what you are doing, aren't we? ;)
Best regards, Jürgen.
I see no reason why anyone should be restricted from good faith solicitations to add content. I particularly do not see why the WMF wouldn't be permitted to do so; obviously the volume and quality of content available across all projects is a core concern of the WMF. Soliciting the creation of content - i.e. identifying gaps and asking volunteers to pitch in - is not the same thing as "managing" content on the projects themselves. Any such concerns are confusing the core mission of the WMF with the legal particulars of Section 230 safe harbor.
If I may make one suggestion, have a look at people's language preferences in the wikis concerned. My assumption is that if you know two languages well enough to translate between them you are unlikely to have opted for a different language for system messages. I have edits in lots of different languages, but I only understand English and in most of the wikis where I have any edits I have set my language preference to English.
I don't object to receiving the email, but it was completely wasted on me.
Regards
Jonathan
On 26 Jun 2015, at 19:40, Leila Zia leila@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
Thank you for your feedback. It's really appreciated. My responses below, all in one-batch to avoid many emails to the list. Sorry if it's too long in advance.
2015-06-25 16:50 GMT-07:00 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com:
This is such a delightful experience. Whoever is working on translation interfaces and translation research this way: very nicely done indeed.
Thank you! It's great to hear that you liked it. There are many things we would like to improve about the algorithm and hearing that you like it makes us more motivated. If you have more specific comments, feel free to leave us a comment on the talk page.
The translation tool is owned by Language Engineering team. You can read more about it here, though I'm guessing you've already seen that. Sorry if it's repetitive.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kelson@kiwix.org wrote: [...] I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Fou...).
AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?
I'm sorry that you received an email when you don't like to receive one. This is not nice and I apologize for that. The opt-out option is available through the email you have received. We will make sure you do not receive any future research related emails if you unsubscribe. The test on French Wikipedia is over now.
The opt-out/opt-in discussion deserves a dedicated effort considering the needs of everyone involved. I'm committed for improving the communications with users regarding research projects and will do what I can on that front.
FYI, the Wikipedia in French has an article evaluation program (like on Wikipedia in English) based on wikiprojects, so honestly I think they already know pretty well where are the weakness without the help of a robot: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:%C3%89valuation/Index
Thank you for this pointer.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: Interesting viewpoint, Emmanuel! I am always fascinated to know what others think I might be interested in, even if the "other" is just a bot. Like Sam I was delighted, and I might even be prompted to do a translation (though not one of the ones they suggested, but an article which I made myself and is in the same general area). I disagree by the way, that each Wikipedia has to decide on their own what is "encyclopedia worthy" in that language. I think the projects need to start trusting each other more and be open to *aggressive* translation efforts as a way to educate new (multi-lingual) editors, and also to promote a neutral point of view. Let's wikibomb everybody aggressively with translation suggestions!
Jane, thank you for your comment. We're happy that you welcomed receiving such recommendations. For the purposes of this research, we are taking the following approach: we take a more global approach to identify missing content, rank them by their importance, and recommend them to editors. The editor should make the final call whether the recommendation they receive should go to the destination language. Ideally, we want to loop back editors' expertise and feedback to the algorithm, i.e., if you as an editor think a recommendation is not useful in a language, we should be able to collect that information from you, feed it to the algorithm, and let the algorithm learn. This needs to happen down the road (hopefully not too far down) for the algorithm to be able to serve the needs of each language and community.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote: I still wonder what made a bot think I speak French? Surely, a few minor edits on fr.wp can't be the trigger? (well, I had two years at school, but I barely remember enough to identify the language...)
I'am copying from here:
We determine which editors are suitable for receiving recommendations for translating from the source to the target language via two methods. The first is scraping the target users' User pages for a Babel template that indicates that they speak the source language. The second is selecting target users who have an account with the same username in the source language, have made at least one edit in both the source and target Wikipedias, have made at least one edit in either language within the last year and have matching email addresses for the two accounts.
Based on the feedback from the test, it is clear that we need to raise the bar on the contributions to source/destination languages for the future steps. We initially had a 100 byte limit in each of the source and destination language in the past year as a bar, but that one somehow didn't get to the code (code issue) and we didn't realize this until we received the feedback. Based on the feedback, we may want to consider even higher bars for choosing editors, one thing we do not want to do is to ignore those with few edits completely. Those may be people who have contributed few times and recommendations can encourage them to contribute more and come back. Any feedback on how we can improve this aspect further is appreciated.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting, I figured I received the mail because of joining translation projects. It seems that it's enough to have made a single edit in both language wikipedias in the last year.
we changed the wording of the page to make it clearer. I think there was a confusion caused by our wording. please read here.
I hope you will do this in both directions for each language pair (both suggestions from FR --> EN and from EN --> FR.)
the way the algorithm makes the final recommendations is language agnostic so we can easily expand them to other language pairs. the goal is to have them for the top 30 languages (to and from), the top 50 if we have enough data to make good enough recommendations. We do hope that the engineering aspect of receiving these recommendations can also move as fast so we can offer the editors the recommendations in a way that works smoothly with their workflow.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Jim trodel@gmail.com wrote: I strongly disagree that this is spamming. Like others have mentioned, I was not offended by the email (though I wasn't "delighted") by it either, I think it is a reasonable attempt to encourage editors to put some efforts into languages other than English.
Plus it is easy to unsubscribe from the research mailing list.
Thanks for sharing your point of view and happy to hear we did not bother you by it. As mentioned earlier, I hope that we (all parties involved, not just research) can resolve the email conversation in a way that more people are happier with the outcome.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com wrote: Spamming - a question what the e-mail function of WP is ment for. I was very surprised to get the request though my French is limited, I hardly ever edited on fr.WP,
The feedback about limited French language knowledge is a great feedback that we have heard clearly. Thank you for sharing that and sorry that you were chosen. This is something we have already changed in our code to increase the threshold on the way we choose future participants.
and the suggested topics have totally nothing to do with what I do on Wikipedia. So I do think that the mail was not quite appropriate, and it gives me a not so favorable impression about the people or initiative behind.
I'm sorry if the recommendation has disappointed you. As mentioned in the recommendation email, you will be in one of the two groups: those who receive random but still important (with the algorithm's definition of importance) recommendations or those who receive personalized and important recommendations. Since we have not finalized the analysis of the test I cannot look to see which group you were in since that may have impact on the results. I hope this helps us build more trust, and hopefully we can learn much more when the results are out. Thank you for your time.
Thanks again everyone. I will continue monitoring this list. We are also busy with the talk page so you may experience some delay. Apologize in advance if that happens. Just be sure that we will get back to you. :-)
Best, Leila _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Hi Leila
On 26.06.2015 20:40, Leila Zia wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart <kelson@kiwix.org mailto:kelson@kiwix.org> wrote:
[...] I have received this kind of email too. "No",*this is not delightful at all*. This kind of email bores me, like many other Wikipedians (see https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro_du_jour#Wikimedia_Foundation_se_lance_dans_le_spam). AFAIK I don't have asked to received that kind of email, and the definition of what you do is "spamming" (and please don't answer to this by talking about the "opt-out" option, "opt-in" is the respectful way of doing). Can you please stop this immediately?I'm sorry that you received an email when you don't like to receive one. This is not nice and I apologize for that. The opt-out option is available through the email you have received. We will make sure you do not receive any future research related emails if you unsubscribe. The test on French Wikipedia is over now.
The opt-out/opt-in discussion deserves a dedicated effort considering the needs of everyone involved. I'm committed for improving the communications with users regarding research projects and will do what I can on that front.
I know SF is really the "Far West" and maybe concepts like "Netiquette" or simply "good manners" may not have come so far... But if you judge your action unilaterally from the communication POV (which is obviously bad), then I'm sure you will understand what advertisement about "newly developed spamming machine at Wikimedia Foundation" means. As far as I can see we have enough bored people in the French speaking community to relay this kind of message.
Emmanuel
wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org