Hello,
This seems to me like a social problem, rather than a technical one.
Shutting down the tool would be a disadvantage for those people who benefit
from the tool and do good things with it.
What is the general opinion among the Norwegians about this issue? Is there
consent about how to deal with this kind of "articles"? If most people
agree they should be speedy-deleted, this would be a useful deterrence for
those who are not careful enough when using the tool?
Kind regards
Ziko
2017-05-03 13:22 GMT+02:00 John Erling Blad <jeblad(a)gmail.com>om>:
Agree! I also wonder if translators adapt to specific
errors if they are
repeated to often. I wonder if it works like priming the brain to a
specific pattern.
On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org>
wrote:
Reading this, I get a strong impression the
problem may very well be in
setting expectations for the users of this translation tool. If they
expect
the automated translation to be rather good, they
may get fed up more
easily than when they consider it primarily a glorified dictionary.
Lodewijk
On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:06 PM, David Cuenca Tudela <dacuetu(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Perhaps it would be a good idea to compare the
translated text to the
text
> that the user wants to save.
>
> If they are more than 95% the same, that means that the user didn't
take
the
effort to correct the text.
Cheers,
Micru
On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Wojciech Pędzich <wpedzich(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
It does depend a lot on the engagement level of
the human behind the
keyboard. When I deal with machine-translated text, I simply wonder
whether
> the someone behind the keyboard took efforts to actually read the
piece.
> >
> > Now whether this would work if limited to namespaces outside "main"
- I
do
> not want to demonise the issue, but if the person submitting the text
for
> > machine translation does not read it, what will stop them from a
quick
> > ctrl+c / ctrl+v? Just asking.
> >
> > Wojciech
> >
> > W dniu 2017-05-03 o 09:33, Yaroslav Blanter pisze:
> >
> > Creating machine translations only in the draft space (or in the user
> space
> >> in the projects which do not have draft) could help.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Yaroslav
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Pharos <
pharosofalexandria(a)gmail.com
>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think it all depends on the level of engagement of the human
> translator.
> >>>
> >>> When the tool is used in the right way, it is a fantastic tool.
> >>>
> >>> Maybe we can find better methods to nudge people toward taking
their
time
>>> and really doing work on their translations.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pharos
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
>>> bodhisattwa.rgkmc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Content translation with Yandex is also a problem in Bengali
Wikipedia.
>>>> Some users have grown a tendency
to create machine translated
>>>> meaningless
>>>> articles with this extension to increase edit count and article
count.
> >>>>
> >>> This
> >>>
> >>>> has increased the workloads of admins to find and delete those
> articles.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yandex is not ready for many languages and it is better to shut
it.
We
>>>> don't need it in Bengali.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> On May 3, 2017 12:17 AM, "John Erling Blad"
<jeblad(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually this _is_ about turning ContentTranslation off, that is
what
>>>>> several users in the
community want. They block people using the
>>>>>
>>>> extension
>>>>
>>>>> and delete the translated articles. Use of ContentTranslation has
>>>>>
>>>> become
>>>
>>>> a
>>>>
>>>>> rather contentious case.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yandex as a general translation engine to be able to read some
alien
> >>>>> language is quite good, but as an engine to produce written
text
it
is
>>>>>
>>>> not
>>>>
>>>>> very good at all. In fact it often creates quite horrible
Norwegian,
>>>>>
>>>> even
>>>
>>>> for closely related languages. One quite common problem is
reordering
>>>>>
>>>> of
>>>
>>>> words into meaningless constructs, an other problem is reordering
>>>>>
>>>> lexical
>>>
>>>> gender in weird ways. The English preposition "a" is often
translated
> >>>>>
> >>>> as
> >>>
> >>>> "en" in a propositional phrase, and then the gender is
added to
the
> >>>>> following phrase. That
gives a translation of "Oppland is a
county
> >>>>>
> >>>> in…"
> >>>
> >>>> into something like "Oppland er en fylket i…" This
should be
> "Oppland
> >>>>>
> >>>> er
> >>>
> >>>> et fylke i…".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (I just checked and it seems like Yandex messes up a lot less
now
> than
> >>>>> previously, but it is still pretty bad.)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Apertium works because the language is closely related, Yandex
does
not
>>>>> work because it is used between very different languages. People
try
to
>>>>>
>>>> use
>>>>
>>>>> Yandex and gets disappointed, and falsely conclude that all
language
>>>>> translations are equally
weird. They are not, but Yandex
translations
> >>>>>
> >>>> are
> >>>
> >>>> weird.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The numerical threshold does not work. The reason is simple,
the
> number
> >>>>>
> >>>> of
> >>>>
> >>>>> fixes depends on language constructs that fails, and that is
simply
> >>>>>
> >>>> not a
> >>>
> >>>> constant for small text fragments. Perhaps if we could flag
specific
> >>>>> language constructs
that is known to give a high percentage of
> >>>>>
> >>>> failures,
> >>>
> >>>> and if the translator must check those sentences. One such
language
> >>>>> construct is
disappearances between the preposition and the
gender
of
>>>>
>>> the
>>
>>> following term in a prepositional phrase. If they are not similar,
then
>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> sentence must be checked. It is not always wrong to write "en
jenta"
> in
> >>>>> Norwegian, but it is likely to be wrong.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A language model could be a statistical model for the language
> itself,
> >>>>>
> >>>> not
> >>>>
> >>>>> for the translation into that language. We don't want a
perfect
> >>>>>
> >>>> language
> >>>
> >>>> model, but a sufficient language model to mark weird constructs. A
> very
> >>>>> simple solution could simply be to mark tri-grams that does
not
> >>>>>
> >>>> already
> >>>
> >>>> exist in the text base for the destination as possible errors. It
is
>>>>>
>>>> not
>>>
>>>> necessary to do a live check, but at least do it before the page
can
> >>>>>
> >>>> be
> >>>
> >>>> saved.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Note the difference in what Yandex do and what we want to
achieve;
> >>>>>
> >>>> Yandex
> >>>
> >>>> translates a text between two different languages, without any
clear
> >>>>>
> >>>> reason
> >>>>
> >>>>> why. It is not to important if there are weird constructs in
the
> text,
> >>>>>
> >>>> as
> >>>
> >>>> long as it is usable in "some" context. We translate a
text for
the
>>>>>
>>>> purpose
>>>>
>>>>> of republishing it. The text should be usable and easily readable
in
> >>>>>
> >>>> that
> >>>
> >>>> language.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Amir E. Aharoni <
> >>>>> amir.aharoni(a)mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2017-05-02 18:20 GMT+03:00 John Erling Blad
<jeblad(a)gmail.com>om>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Brute force solution; turn the ContentTranslation off.
Really
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> stupid
> >>>
> >>>> solution.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ... Then I guess you don't mind that I'm changing
the thread
name
:)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The next solution; turn the Yandex engine off. That would
solve
a
> >>>>>>> part of the
problem. Kind of lousy solution though.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What about adding a language model that warns when the
language
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> constructs
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> gets to weird? It is like a "test" for the
translation. The CT
is
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> used
> >>>>
> >>>>> for
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> creating a translation, but the language model is used
for
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> verifying
> >>>
> >>>> if
> >>>>
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> translation is good enough. If it does not validate
against the
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> language
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> model it should simply not be published to the main name
space.
It
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> will
> >>>>
> >>>>> still be possible to create a draft, but then the user is
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> completely
> >>>
> >>>> aware
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> that the translation isn't good enough.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Such a language model should be available as a test for
any
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> article,
> >>>
> >>>> as
> >>>>
> >>>>> it
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> can be used as a quality measure for the article. It is
really
a
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> quantity
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> measure for the well-spokenness of the article, but that
isn't
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> quite
> >>>
> >>>> so
> >>>>
> >>>>> intuitive.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So, I'll allow myself to guess that you are talking
about one
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> particular
> >>>>
> >>>>> language, probably Norwegian.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Several technical facts:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1. In the past there were several cases in which
translators to
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> different
> >>>>
> >>>>> languages who reported common translation mistakes to me. I
passed
>>>>>>
>>>>> them
>>>
>>>> on
>>>>>
>>>>>> to Yandex developers, with whom I communicate quite regularly.
They
>>>>>> acknowledged receiving
all of them. I am aware of at least one
such
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> common
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> mistake that was fixed; possibly there were more. If you
can
give
me
>>>>>>
>>>>> a
>>>
>>>> list
>>>>>
>>>>>> of such mistakes for Norwegian, I'll be very happy to pass
them
on.
I
>>>>>> absolutely cannot promise that they will be fixed upstream, but
it's
> >>>>>> possible.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2. In Norwegian, Apertium is used for translating between
the
two
>>>>>
>>>> varieties
>>>>
>>>>> of Norwegian itself (Bokmål and Nynorsk), and from other
Scandinavian
>>>>>> languages. That's probably why it works so well—they are
similar
in
>>>>> grammar, vocabulary, and narrative style (I'll pass it on to
Apertium
>>>>>> developers—I'm sure they'll be happy to hear it).
Unfortunately,
>>>>>>
>>>>> machine
>>>>
>>>>> translation from English is not available in Apertium. Apertium
works
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> best
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> with very similar languages, and English has two
characteristics,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> which
> >>>
> >>>> are
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> unfortunate when combined: it is both the most popular
source
for
> >>>>>> translation into
almost all other languages (including
Norwegian),
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> and
> >>>
> >>>> it
> >>>>
> >>>>> is not _very_ similar to any other languages (except maybe
Scots).
>>>>>>
>>>>> Machine
>>>>>
>>>>>> translation from English into Norwegian is only possible with
Yandex
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> at
> >>>
> >>>> the
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> moment. More engines may be added in the future, but at the
moment
>>>>>>
>>>>> that's
>>>>
>>>>> all we have. That's why disabling Yandex completely would indeed
be a
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> lousy
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> solution: A lot of people say that without machine
translation
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> integration
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Content Translation is useless. Not all users think like
that,
but
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> many
> >>>
> >>>> do.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 3. We can define a numerical threshold of acceptable
percentage
of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> machine
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> translation post-editing. Currently it's 75%. It's
a tad
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> embarrassing,
> >>>
> >>>> but
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> it's hard-coded at the moment, but it can be very
easily be made
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> into a
> >>>
> >>>> variable per language. If the translator tries to publish a page
in
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> which
> >>>>
> >>>>> less than that is modified, a warning will be shown.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 4. I'm not sure what do you mean by "language
model". If it's
any
>>>>>
>>>> kind
>>
>>> of a
>>>>
>>>>> linguistic engine, then it's definitely not within the resources
that
>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> Language team itself can currently dedicate. However, if somebody
who
>>>>>>
>>>>> knows
>>>>>
>>>>>> Norwegian and some programming will write a script that
analyzes
>>>>>>
>>>>> common
>>>
>>>> bad
>>>>>
>>>>>> constructs in a Wikipedia dump, this will be very useful. This
would
> >>>>>> basically be an upgraded version of suggestion #1 above.
(In my
> spare
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> time
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> as a volunteer I'm doing something comparable for
Hebrew,
although
>>>>>
>>>> not
>>
>>> for
>>>>
>>>>> translation, but for improving how MediaWiki link trails work.)
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>
>>>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?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: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?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: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
>>>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?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: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
_______________________________________________
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: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?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: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?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: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>