LOL. If that's the case it would be a good reason for changing the OR
policy. It would also make sense to quote non-English sources in their
original language unless the translation itself is verifiable.
Ray
On 07/27/11 4:36 PM, M. Williamson wrote:
Well then, Ray, en.wp would not be able to
Hi Folks,
I'm really pleased to send out this email welcoming the first 2 new members of
the India Programs team. Just before I introduce them, I thought I'd share
with you the background of their selection.
Context
As you might be aware, the Foundation had decided to undertake a catalyst
On 07/27/11 4:40 PM, Wjhonson wrote:
Yes I agree that primary sources should ONLY be cited-quoted, in their
original language.
A translation can be *published* but that publication cannot be in Wikipedia
solely. It must live somewhere else as well, published by a reliable source.
In this
The great thing about an oral history citations project is that it is
a first and active method to remedy one of the big problems with
English Wikipedia: the epistemology - how we decide we know what we
know - really is completely and utterly broken at the edges.
(I realise this is foundation-l,
From the perspective of Wikimedia Canada, this sounds exciting. Many
of us believe that work with the First Nations is an important element
in Wikimedia Canada's tasks. I look forward to meeting you in Haifa.
Thanks for providing the RRN link; since I am in the Greater Vancouver
District
This is spot on.
At times I wonder if some Wikipedians have ever heard of epistemology.
I also have taken note that there is a tendency among some editors to
truncate probability calculations to the nearest whole number.
Ray
On 07/29/11 2:50 AM, David Gerard wrote:
The great thing about an
On 29 July 2011 11:25, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
At times I wonder if some Wikipedians have ever heard of epistemology.
Larry Sanger was no great shakes as a philosopher, but at least he'd
heard of the stuff.
Here's essays from Tom Morris (another philosopher):
On 29 July 2011 10:50, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Thus we end up with blithering insanity like the phrase reliable
sources being used unironically, as if being listed on WP:RS
*actually makes a source humanly reliable*. This is particularly
hilarious when applied to newspapers -
Here's essays from Tom Morris (another philosopher):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tom_Morris/The_Reliability_Delusion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tom_Morris/The_Definition_Delusion
While some editors do tend to argue binary options over sources, in general
this is not the case
Thanks Ray! I actually met with developers from RRN and a few First Nations
advocacy groups (regarding cultural preservation) - RRN is really amazing, and
I look forward to exploring how opportunities can open from it. We will talk
more in Haifa!
(I lived in Van for a year, give my best to
On 29 July 2011 11:58, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote:
While some editors do tend to argue binary options over sources, in general
this is not the case (and if you are observing it as so, it's probably one
of the battlefield areas where such things do occur).
They do tend
Welcome Shiju and Nitika. We are thrilled to have the both of you around!!!
:)
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Hisham Mundol hmun...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm really pleased to send out this email welcoming the first 2 new members
of the India Programs team. Just before I
The logical flaw here comes between use and translate.
Although Wikipedians may and probably sometimes do, translate Wikipedia pages,
from English to French etc, translating a source citation is something quite
different.
I would agree with Ray that we should quote Latin texts in Latin,
On 29 July 2011 11:25, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
This is spot on.
At times I wonder if some Wikipedians have ever heard of epistemology.
Some have some haven't.
However the field of epistemology tends to have so little relation to
what people actually do that it's not
On 29 July 2011 17:39, Wjhonson wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
I would agree with Ray that we should quote Latin texts in Latin, Spanish
texts in Spanish no matter what language-page we are using. IF the text is
that important to English speakers then there should be or probably will soon
be, a
And what if readers don't understand Spanish? As a translator, I have to say
I am strongly against the idea that a translation counts as original
research. Translating quotes has been practiced in academia for a very long
time, and just in the last month I must've read several papers with quotes
Yes of course translating documents has been practiced in academia for a very
long time.
We however are not a first publisher of translations. We are an aggregator of
sources.
That is the point of RS.
We don't publish first.
-Original Message-
From: M. Williamson
Why can't you do both?
Provide the original text in the original language in the citation, followed by
a translation. Any bickering over the quality of the translation can be dealt
with through consensus on the talk page, while the original is still there for
those who want the original to do
On 29 July 2011 19:19, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote:
Why can't you do both?
Provide the original text in the original language in the citation, followed
by a translation. Any bickering over the quality of the translation can be
dealt with through consensus on the talk page,
On 7/29/2011 11:06 AM, Wjhonson wrote:
Yes of course translating documents has been practiced in academia for a
very long time.
We however are not a first publisher of translations. We are an aggregator
of sources.
That is the point of RS.
We don't publish first.
Translating a quotation
Nope, never said that.
I disagree with the idea that this is usually done however I have no
objections to it's being done.
Never did.
My point is, and was that the source should be quoted in its original language.
-Original Message-
From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com
To:
Dear friends,
A quick update on the oral citations project.
1) We have now posted sample articles in all 3 project languages,
Malayalam, Sepedi and Hindi:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Oral_Citations#Articles.2F_Discussions_.28in_development.29
2) A full English subtitle track for
For what it is worth
I think this approach exists on en.wiki on the premise that by using foreign
sources with no independent translation available:
a) It makes it easier to push a POV or miss-interpretation via that source
(because other editors are generally not able to understand it)
b)
23 matches
Mail list logo
