I support this effort to create a common glossary/vocabulary.

And I add, since I tried to translate some of these words/expressions into
French some time ago, and since it’s quite hard to obtain great and
intuitive translations for many of these expressions, it would be great if
new expressions could be thought with an internationalisation spirit as
far as possible.

As an example, in the Wikimedia Highlights of September, it’s hard to
translate "Curation Toolbar" since "curation" don’t have a direct
equivalent in French for this exact meaning (of "tacking care" of
articles, "curation" is usually translated by "conservation" but quite
different of this meaning). This is just an example but it illustrates a
common difficulty for translators, probably for many languages.


Le Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:55:04 +0100, Guillaume Paumier
<gpaum...@wikimedia.org> a écrit:

The use of jargon, acronyms and other abbreviations throughout the
Wikimedia movement is a major source of communication issues, and
barriers to comprehension and involvement.

The recent thread on this list about "What is Product?" is an example
of this, as are initialisms that have long been known to be a barrier
for Wikipedia newcomers.

A way to bridge people and communities with different vocabularies is
to write and maintain a glossary that explains jargon in plain English
terms. We've been lacking a good and up-to-date glossary for Wikimedia
"stuff" (Foundation, chapter, movement, technology, etc.).

Therefore, I've started to clean up and expand the outdated Glossary
on meta, but it's a lot of work, and I don't have all the answers
myself either. I'll continue to work on it, but I'd love to get some
help on this and to make it a collaborative effort.

If you have a few minutes to spare, please consider helping your
(current and future) fellow Wikimedians by writing a few definitions
if there are terms that you can explain in plain English. Additions of
new terms are much welcome as well:


Some caveats:
* As part of my work, I'm mostly interested in a glossary from a
technical perspective, so the list currently has a technical bias. I'm
hoping that by sending this message to a wider audience, people from
the whole movement will contribute to the glossary and balance it out.
* Also, I've started to clean up the glossary, but it still contains
dated terms and definitions from a few years ago (like the FundCom),
so boldly edit/remove obsolete content.

Thank you,

Wikimedia-l mailing list
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Reply via email to