On 2016-03-11 18:00, Sydney Poore wrote:
Hello Yaroslav

Thanks for your reply.

My point is that there is no clear strategy or process for prioritizing
which pages get translated. So, perhaps it is easy for some people to be
mixed up.

But I'm pretty confident that I understand the issues, and I'm not getting
anything mixed up. :-)


This dynamic in the wikimedia movement needs to change. It is exclusionary
and unwelcoming.

We can not reach the people that the wikimedia movement needs to reach if
the burden of translation of these important official WMF processes a
completely volunteer process.

Going forward, I would like to see the percentage of pages translated as a
metric that is tracked, reported, and discussed regularly.

Warm regards,

Thank you, it more clear now.

However, my point is we can not translate everything to all languages. we do not have and we will never have resources for that. We need to prioritize. I would say in the case of the upcoming elections, it would be great to know what languages we need to translate the documents into - the languages spoken by the members of boards of the organizations who actually intend to vote, and only in the case they do not speak English. I asked this already a week ago in this very same topic of the mailing list, and got a reply from someone (was it Amir? - sorry, I can not easily check it now) that there is a generic list of languages important messages get translated into. In this situation, I would say, we need first to make a custom list for these elections - hopefully it is more narrow than the generic list, and then see what is the best way to proceed. I am not sure there is a general solutions - probably different documents just need to be translated into different sets of languages.


Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to