[Foundation-l] The status of smaller languages on the Wikimedia Commons

[Gerard Meijssen]

Brianna Laugher wrote:
> GerardM said:
>
>   
>> It is abundantly true that we need better support for the localisation
>> of our project and of our software. There is a subcommittee that deals
>> with communication and translation. I am sure that they were consulted
>> before these punitive measures were enacted.
>>     
>
> Sorry, what subcommittee? The meta subcommittee that is completely
> divorced from commons? (I'm not saying that's their fault or the
> Commons' fault, but it's a fact)
>
> folengo said:
>   
>> The issue has
>> been discussed on the English speaking village pump of Commons.
>> But should we consider the English speaking village pump of
>> Commons as an authoritative voice in a multilingual project, which
>> includes tiny minority languages, and also somewhat less tiny
>> minority languages yet less active and dynamic than the English
>> speaking community (and represented there mostly by bilingual
>> people, non bilingual people being almost absent and
>> underrepresented if not unrepresented) ?
>>     
>
> What is the alternative???? How do you honestly propose that we
> communicate with all these monolingual people?
>
> As you know Teofilio I have supported some of your measures (like the
> &uselang links one) and disagreed with others (parallel category
> structures), and as it happens I disagree with the "hiding" links
> approach of Arnomane. Although the Arabic front page is quite
> appalling: literally one paragraph. It is the *only* page in
> [[Category:Commons-ar]]. I did suggest to an admin candidate who spoke
> Arabic that they might like to update it substantially. But if native
> speakers are not interested in maintaining their translations what
> exactly are us non-speakers supposed to do about it? We cannot force
> them. They have to take the initiative. But they are more interested
> in their Wikipedia or other projects - of course! The vast majority of
> English and German speakers are too, actually. These projects are just
> lucky enough to have a "surplus of interest" to allow something
> resembling a Commons community to exist.
>
> Realistic, workable, technically-feasible ideas to promote
> multilinguality, I will always support. But it is unrealistic to
> expect the people who are interested in the Commons to consult over
> 100 different language groups on ANYTHING let alone EVERYTHING.
>
> Look at the Village Pumps - look at how active they are.
> (als) Commons:Brünnele No topics.
> (ar?) Commons:قهوه‌خانه One line, not even set up. Should probably be deleted.
> (bg) Commons:Разговори One topic in October 2005.
> (ca?) Commons:La taverna 6 topics, last active November 2005.
> (de) Commons:Forum Active.
> (en) Commons:Village pump Active.
> (es) Commons:Café Active.
> (fi) Commons:Kahvihuone No topics.
> (fr) Commons:Bistro Maintained, but not very active (6 topics).
> (gl) Commons:A Taberna Maintained, not very active (9 topics).
> (he) Commons:המזנון 1 topic, unanswered.
> (hu) Commons:Kocsmafal One line, no topics.
> (it) Commons:Bar italiano Moderately active, seems to be maintained by
> our one native Italian speaking admin.
> (ja) Commons:井戸端 Moderately active. I see the most recent discussion
> concerns Captchas - another technical limitation we never asked for
> but had to work around (and I recall being accused of "English
> villainy" on this occasion too)
> (lb) Commons:Stamminet No topics.
> (nl) Commons:De Kroeg 4 topics, remarkably unused considering the
> NL.wp controversy. (We can never solve problems on Commons if they are
> not discussed there...)
> (no) Commons:Tinget Maintained, not very active (7 topics).
> (pl) Commons:Bar Surprisingly inactive, 4 topics.
> (pt) Commons:Esplanada Maintained, moderately active (24 topics).
> (ru) Commons:Форум 2 topics, seems to be unmaintained and inactive.
> (sl) Commons:Pod lipo No topics.
> (sv) Commons:Bybrunnen Moderately active/active, maintained.
> (zh-hans) Commons:互助客栈 4 topics, but basically unused.
> (zh-hant) Commons:互助客棧 No topics.
>
> So of the 20-odd groups, there are not even ten that have any decent
> amount of activity. Realistically, what do you propose we do? How
> should we conduct discussions?
>
> To me the bottom line is that the whole thing is volunteer, just like
> everything else. That means people only translate if they are
> interested. We can't force them.
>
> As you criticise us, please consider coming and helping us improve. It
> is hard for us to be everything to everyone when very few people want
> to devote much time to maintaining or improving the place.
>
> Help us harass the developers for automatic translation of templates,
> automatic language selection based on browser settings and/or
> drop-down menu for language choice on the main page, for adoption of
> Duesentrieb's proposed category translation scheme via interwikis.
> These are just a few of the proposals that we dream of being
> implemented but have no idea if it will ever happen.
>
> Join the Commons mailing list and start throwing out proposals:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
> Brianna
> [[user:pfctdayelise]]
Hoi,
I hoped for a reaction and I am pleased with what I got. The problem is 
one of communication. A decision is made in Commons for all the best 
intended reasons and it is implemented. Great. Well, actually yes and 
no. Yes because something happens and, no because the communication is 
sadly lacking. Why you are talking about a meta-subcommittee I wonder, I 
was thinking more in terms of the communication committee and its 
translation subcommittee. With the new structures that are put in place, 
there are new opportunities to find ways of getting your message out.

As to your request to harass developers for automatic translation .. a 
large part of what needs doing is called http://wiktionaryz.org and we 
are getting towards the point where we can do some good. Another part of 
making Commons more relevant is called InstantCommons and we are waiting 
for the special projects committee to finally inform us that we can 
start coding. You may also know that we are coding Multilingual 
MediaWiki, this will help Commons in its quest for multi linguality.

So yes, we do try to get things done. We will get you the functionality 
that will allow a 7 year old to find her picture of a "chien" or a 
"cheval". But please do communicate big things, do use the Foundation or 
the Wikipedia list for things that are profound. It is the lack of 
communication that creates resentment it is not the fact that things are 
done.

Thanks,
   GerardM