[Foundation-l] Translatewiki illustrates how low internationalisation is in the priorities of the Wikimedia Foundation

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
When messages get changed in the code repository system by people who
contribute to the development of MediaWiki, it is done in a Wikimedia
Foundation project. When messages change, it is detected at
translatewiki.net and consequently action is taken to signal the need for
action. This is done to ensure the best possible localisation for MediaWiki.

The core developers of translatewiki.net are core developers of MediaWiki..
Sorry, but your conspiracy theories are just that.. If you want to, you can
run the software used by translatewiki.net ... it is available at the WMF
code repository.. I doubt though that you get sufficient access to the WMF
project you contribute to run the necessary processes.

Again, PLEASE study open source and its licenses and PLEASE consider
assuming good faith.
Thanks,
       GerardM



On 28 January 2011 15:58, Teofilo <teofilowiki at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2011/1/27 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
> > One very powerful reason why you should not localise locally is because
> > there is no way that you will know locally when a message gets changed.
> The
> > consequence is that the quality of locally localised messages do not get
> the
> > same quality assurance as it gets in translatewiki.
> >
> > So in essence, localising at translatewiki.net does enhance the quality
> of
> > the localisation. Only messages with changes that give specific
> information
> > for a local wiki should be localised locally.
> > Thanks,
> >      GerardM
>
>
> When I hear "there is no way that you will know locally when a message
> gets changed", many warning lights are flashing in my cockpit. A
> non-Wikimedia community has the power of changing things within a
> Wikimedia website without the Wikimedia people being warned
> beforehand.
>
> According the New Statesman (1), Jimbo Wales used the word
> "self-reliance" in a comment about the Wikipedia spirit. In my view,
> relying on a non-Wikimedia website and community is not self-reliance.
>
> Today only the translations are expelled to a non-Wikimedia website
> and community.
>
> Tomorrow, will the same happen to bugzilla ?
>
> One of the strenghts of the Wikimedia projects is the reactivity of
> the community. When there is something wrong, people file a bug.
>
> If the bug-filing place is moved to a far away place, the reactivity
> might be lower (your comment that "there are very few issues between
> the translators" might mean that the reactivity is low). If it remains
> high, it means Wikimedia is providing volunteers to a non-Wikimedia
> community. It means Wikimedia sends its volunteers to work on
> non-Wikimedia projects. Is Wikimedia a volunteer hiring agency for a
> variety of wikis not sharing the same purposes ?
>
> (1)
> http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/01/jimmy-wales-wikipedia-vote
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>