Hi Srikanth,<br><br>I have found the tools by both Google and Microsoft to be just OK. But, I haven&#39;t seen one regular Wikipedian using them for contributing. I have found that directly working in Wikipedia is much user friendly than using their tools. <br>
<br>But the problem in Google project&#39;s case is not about the tool. Google funded lots of paid translators to manually translate articles using their tools. This created lot of operational problems in the respective Wikipedia communities. <br>
<br>More details can be found at this presentation at <a href="http://bit.ly/adRtak">http://bit.ly/adRtak</a><br><br>Whereas, Microsoft just stopped with the creation of tools and did not seed any article directly in mass scale. <br>
<br>Ravi<br><br>On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:rsrikanth05@gmail.com">rsrikanth05@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Ravi, <br>What Google did can pretty much be summarized as a &#39;Half hearted attempt&#39;. <br>However, I had posted last week, a link to Microsoft&#39;s API and transliteration tools. Personally, I find it better than Google.<br>

The only catch is that Microsoft requires you to link back to them.<br>--<br>Regards, <br>Srikanth<br><br></blockquote><br></div><br>