Thanks for preparing the survey. I wonder you reviewed Spanish translation, but I guess they forgot Wikipedia in Spanish doesn't use "usted", a formal way to address someone. We use "tú", which is more familiar. Where can I make some suggestions, changes, etc?
Alhen @alhen_ alhen at wikipedia, wikihow, wikispaces, and most places. Promotor de Wikimedia Bolivia 00-591-79592235 2012/10/29 Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> > Among the changes I made there was also the replacement of "editors" > incorrectly translated as "éditeurs" in French. Because an "éditeur" > is the person or organization that publishes the work made by authors. > When authors are collective and redacting on the same work ("œuvre") > that will be published by the same "éditeur", they are called > "rédacteurs" (this may include those that contribute images, not just > texts, and page layout, and the work performed by correctors). > > In the live interface of Wikimedia, the action "edit" is NEVER > translated in French as "éditer" (even if this is frequently used, due > to the other meaning of the term "editor" to designate the tool used > to make the redaction and correction work), but as "modifier". I > avoided anyway the term "modificateur" because it is too restrictive > and removes the act of creation. > > I think that in the spirit of the project, "rédacteur" (and the > associated verb "rédiger") is more respectuous of the work performed > on the project for which the survey is created. Som may think that the > act of discussing in talk page is different, it is still a > contribution, which is redacted (= working on a written piece of work, > not exactly like the term "redact" used in English that means more the > action of modifying the work made by someone else, including > corrections) as well. > > I tried to use a consistant terminology as well. I fixed also the > punctuation. And there shoul not longer be any > syntax/grammar/orthograph errors. > > Please review if you don't agree with some choices, but try to be > consistant. Thanks. > > 2012/10/29 Philippe Verdy <[email protected]>: > > Yes but most of the typos were imported by a bot... the source of this > > is not known. > > > > I've not seen these many typos last year. > > > > 2012/10/29 Federico Leva (Nemo) <[email protected]>: > >> Historyh works as usual: > >> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Research:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_August_2012/Questions/fr&action=history > >> > http://vs.aka-online.de/cgi-bin/wppagehiststat.pl?lang=meta.wikimedia&page=Research%3AWikipedia+Editor+Survey+August+2012%2FQuestions%2Ffr > >> (but original translations by the bot come from the previous edition, > if I > >> remember correctly). > >> Feedback to the authors of bad translations is surely useful; thanks for > >> fixes. > > _______________________________________________ > Translators-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l >
_______________________________________________ Translators-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
