My 2c :
- I dont know where everyone came up with the notion that the tool
produces good results. Most of the articles on both Google's projects on the
Arabic wikipedia are barely intelligible, with broken sentences, weird
terminology and generally can be spotted right away (see my reply to the
- Even if GTTK is improving, The idea of push contradicts with GTTK. Push
means that someone with no knowledge of Arabic will 'push' the en.wp (or any
other one) article to ar.wp. GTTK supposedly requires a translator that will
revise and rephrase what the machine translation couldn't do.
- NPOV falls victim to systemic bias, on en.wp or any other wiki. If not
in the representation of difference in opinion, but in the arrangement of
the article and the highlighting and order of different events. The wording
of paragraphs also usually gravitates towards western way of neutral
expression, which may be considered biased when read by someone where
English is not his first language.
- Let's suppose all the above didnt matter, and that GTTK works perfectly
fine, let's suppose this idea is taken to the extreme, it would be: take
largest x wikipedias, clone all articles to language x, wash, rinse, repeat.
Where is the community? where is the involvement and exchange of ideas and
continuous evolvement of articles? where's the wiki in wikipedia?
- I see it as POV to assume that wiki x has the 'perfect' article on a
certain subject such that everyone in the world needs to read that version