[Foundation-l] WMF 2015 strategic plan and multilingualism

[Jay Walsh]

On Mar 5, 2011, at 4:19 AM, Teofilo wrote:

> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Template:BLPLang is not currently
> used at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Movement_Strategic_Plan_Summary
> 
> This can be construed as the WMF wanting to reach the people of the
> world to provide educational contents AND English-dominate them.
> 
> The fact that http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_subcommittees/Trans#Core_set_of_languages
> is now marked as "obsolete" disappoints me. It seems to mean that
> multilingualism has been rejected.
> 
> Can the notion that a key document like a strategic plan is ready for
> release when it exists in only one language be discussed ? Or is it
> already too late ? Has multilingualism definitely lost the game ? For
> example because most of the supporters of multilingualism have left
> the management sphere of WMF.

Although we haven't discussed this much here, I'd like to add that one of the document/design production factors I've been thinking about a great deal is how to prepare information for broad localization in other areas.  At a minimum we wanted to be sure the summary report could be localized on the wiki, which is why we simultaneously released it in PDF and back on the strategy wiki. I don't believe any localization has happened, but I know an open field when I see it :)

Beyond just localization, I'd also like to add that we spent quite a bit of time simplifying the text in the summary carefully to remove un-necessary words/ideas or complex elements so it could be translated with more ease than a more complicated document.

In a similar vein, I'd like to point out that the design concept proposed for Wikipedia 10 was very much developed to widely include all the languages of the world:
http://ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design

And over 100 logos were developed in scripts and languages from all over the world.  Multilingualism is at the core of our design thinking, as is the concept that everyone be able to take simple graphic forms and turn them into their own works.

> 
> Should http://blog.wikimedia.org/ remain 100% English ? Why not have 1
> or 2% of non-English with English translation ? 5 or 10% of
> English-with-some-translation ? Which degree of openness to
> non-English language should be shown on http://blog.wikimedia.org/ ?
> What is the purpose of linking to the blog from non-English main pages
> such as http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Portada anyway ?

I'm very much open to a multilingual blogging space in time.  Right now we're working on a system to expand the wikimedia blogs into a few channels, and to open the door for a space with potentially many different channels using different languages - including perhaps reports and info from chapters in their own language and hopefully also in english.

> 
> Would it not be fairer to tell people "we have nothing pertinent in
> your language on this website. Please learn English first and come
> back. See you again" ?


There's no simple answer for how to accommodate many languages. Do we start with 3? Which ones? All? I don't know - but at a minimum I'm glad to say that we factor into our production and writing the ideas of simple, easy to comprehend text that can be understood by those for whom English isn't a first language, and text that lends itself to easier translation. It doesn't overcome the challenge, but it's an important step.

-- 
Jay Walsh
Head of Communications
WikimediaFoundation.org
blog.wikimedia.org
+1 (415) 839 6885 x 6609, @jansonw