[Foundation-l] Push translation

[Ray Saintonge]

stevertigo wrote:
> Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> I would like to add to this that I think the worst part of this idea
>> is the assumption that other languages should take articles from
>> en.wp.
>>     
> The idea is that most of en.wp's articles are well-enough written, and
> written in accord with NPOV to a sufficient degree to overcome any
> such criticism of 'imperial encyclopedism.'
>   
Suppose for a minute that your proposal were implemented, and all the 
machine translation problems were overcome. Would English NPOV be so 
good that community members in the target language would be incapable of 
making substantive improvements? And if they did make substantive 
change, how would you reconcile the divergence when both versions were 
subsequently edited?

> Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote
>> Key to the growth of Wikipedias in minority languages is respect for the
>> cultures that they encompass, not flooding them with the First-World
>> Point of View.  What might be a Neutral Point of View on the English
>> Wikipedia is limited by the contributions of English writers.  Those who
>> do not understand English may arrive at a different neutrality.  We have
>> not yet arrived at a Metapedia that would synthesize a single neutrality
>> from all projects.
>>     
> I strongly disagree. Neutral point of view has worked on en.wp because
> its a universalist concept. The cases where other language wikis
> reject English content appear to come due to POV, and thus a violation
> of NPOV, not because - as you seem to suggest - the POV in such
> countries must be considered "NPOV.

I'm disinclined to accept your universalist conjecture.  It sounds too 
much like intelligent design for linguistics. When I visit the 
bookstores in another country I am struck by the difference in emphasis 
that they put on different topics.  This alone is bound to lead to 
different neutralities.

Ray