[Foundation-l] Language proposal policy

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
My question is a different one; consider how well the Turkish projects would
do if their localisation was outstanding.
Thanks,
       GerardM

On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:

> How, then, is the Turkish Wikipedia one of our leading Wikipedias if a
> Wiki needs localization to function and it isn't well localized?
>
> MArk
>
> 2008/9/15 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
> > Hoi,
> > What we do is done to make information available. Our main objective is
> not
> > the creation of content, but the publication of content to readers. It is
> a
> > well established fact that localisation is one of the best methods of
> making
> > our content more accessible to our readers.
> >
> > Andre, you and I are fortunate that both the English, the German, the
> Dutch
> > and the French Wikipedias have a continued great localisation. These are
> the
> > languages that a typical Dutch person will read. Consequently ou do not
> know
> > the problem of limited localisation because you do not experience it.
> >
> > When you say that it is a bother for editors that they have to localise,
> I
> > will agree. However, all this work is necessary to make the content they
> > create more accessible to the readers. It is the readers and getting more
> > readers that everything centres around.
> > Thanks,
> >        GerardM
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:19 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> >> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > What we need more then new projects is supporting our existing
> languages.
> >> > Even for languages like Turkish, one of our bigger projects, we have
> only
> >> > 74% of the MediaWiki messages and 25% of the WMF used extensions
> >> localised.
> >>
> >> I would say: so what? As you say, it is one of our bigger projects,
> >> and it seems to be doing well. If then still MediaWiki is not
> >> localized as you would like it, maybe that means that localization of
> >> MediaWiki is not thought by everybody to be as important as you think
> >> is? Wikimedia is there in the first place for making encyclopedias,
> >> textbooks and dictionaries. Projects should be supported with what
> >> they need to do that better. And I don't think that translating
> >> MediaWiki, at least beyond what the average editor comes across on a
> >> regular basis, would be high on that list. Apparently the Turkish
> >> agree with me. Translating the interface in many languages is a nice
> >> thing to have, and I am happy you are working on that. But I do feel
> >> you are putting way too much emphasis on it, to an extent that is
> >> bothering languages more than supporting them. Creating a betawiki,
> >> and inviting people to come over there is supporting languages.
> >> Forcing them to go a certain distance with it before they can get
> >> their project is bothering them. Then you are using the Wikipedias
> >> (and Wiktionaries and other projects) to build the software, rather
> >> than the other way around.
> >>
> >> --
> >> André Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>