ArchWiki talk:Translation Team

From ArchWiki

Comments on “Create a new page and its translation” section

For step 7, you should not save changes that add interlanguage links, but you should preview those changes. Because the translated article does not exist at this time, if people who want to browse (rather than create) that language version Click the interlanguage link, they will get the information of "there was no content here", this is no doubt bad, and translation takes time, and this state will last for a period of time. -- Blackteahamburger (talk) 15:58, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Or, tag the text to be translated with a language tag, and then search and create it. -- Blackteahamburger (talk) 23:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
If we ask to preview and not save, we then have to remind to go back and save the interlanguage link once the translation has been initialised, I think 16 steps are already quite many, and if somebody is following them they're going to save the page say in the next hour hopefully, so the period while the new interlanguage link is broken is very short. -- Kynikos (talk) 16:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
The problem is that it takes a long time to translate a long page, such as Arch is the best, which exceeds one hour, resulting in a long chain break time. -- Blackteahamburger (talk) 08:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
+1. I personally used preview myself when translating Ukrainian pages and saved only when finished, so I already followed your procedure before it has been proposed here :) -- Svito (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
If you guys feel like adding a preview step to the procedure, go ahead :) -- Kynikos (talk) 16:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
I have changed the steps. -- Blackteahamburger (talk) 16:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Reopen. If a user wants to translate a page that the user does not have permission to edit, these steps are invalid. -- Blackteahamburger (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
And, if a language does not have interlanguage link, then these steps are also invalid. -- Blackteahamburger (talk) 10:12, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Add mention to translating Table of Contents

There is no mention of intructions for translating Table of contents pages. Personally, it took me a while to know it was available for translation after reading ArchWiki:Bots#Table of contents. How about adding instructions in here? -- Josephgbr (talk) 10:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree. -- Blackteahamburger (talk) 11:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
In case further development of the bot involves upgrading the entry point, keeping all its ArchWiki documentation in the same page may ease keeping it in sync, I suggest just linking to ArchWiki:Bots#Table of contents as by the way we also wanted to do in Help talk:I18n#Checklist to add a new language. -- Kynikos (talk) 14:10, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Translating Wiki Pages

Hello, I want to translate Archwiki pages into Bangla. But, wiki tells to inform translation team. Bangla language has no translation team. Now, whom should I inform? There is no interlanguage link, too. And also, how do I translate pages like Installation Guide, Arch Linux etc.? Would anybody please help me with these matters? I am new in ArchWiki translating.

—This unsigned comment is by FOSS ভক্ত (talk) 16:17, 2 September 2020‎. Please sign your posts with ~~~~!

The correct place for discussion about how to add a new language is Help talk:I18n#Add Bangla Language. – Lahwaacz (talk) 17:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Swedish translations

Hi, I was told I should come here and talk about the state of Swedish ArchWiki translations.

As of right now there's only 2 translated pages, one of which is Main page (Svenska), which literally just excuses itself for being empty and nothing more. The second page is Installation guide (Svenska), which I took to fully re-doing as it was severely outdated, missing pieces and was seemingly written by someone who wasn't a native speaker.

After doing this page I'm quite exhausted and probably won't do much translating in the near future, at least not such a big project.

Either way I thought it'd be good to share my view on this and possibly get attention from others wanting to do Swedish translations! DerpishCat (talk) 19:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Lack of best practices documentations

There are a lot of practices for translation that a lot of newbies are not aware of, such as the use of Template:Translateme. In fact, a lot of points are unclear. Information is also scattered everywhere, including ArchWiki:Translation Team, Help:i18n, Help_talk:i18n, ArchWiki:Contributing, Help:Editing, and Help:Style. As we know General recommendations exists, we really really need a Translation recommendations.

  • Things like Help:I18n#Localized_redirects is utterly useless since the reader is required to read excessive articles to know how to create a redirection page. We can point them to a "centre" (like "Read here for more info").
  • The fact is, Help:i18n is incomplete in my opinion. Contributors still need to read Help_talk:i18n to get more info.
  • It is unclear whenever (partially) machine-translations are accepted.

So, I think merging those points into a (new) page might be good. — windowsboy111 (talk) 01:59, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

ArchWiki:Contributing, Help:Editing, and Help:Style have a broader scope than only translation. Not only translators edit and contribute to ArchWiki.
I agree, that Help:i18n does not look complete enough. It must be a complete guide for translators, the only place where they seek advice. We can merge critical topics from Help talk:i18n into Help:i18n, as well as the majority of ArchWiki:Translation Team sections, as #Create a new page and its translation and the sections about template usage.
After all, I see ArchWiki:Translation Team as a reference page which contains 1) links to important for translators pages (Help:i18n etc.); 2) technical issues like #Page list.
This allows to avoid both unnesessary splitting and duplicating content. -- Duodai (talk) 09:10, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Dealing with ancient translations

There is no procedure on how to deal with horribly outdated translations. I know there is Template:Translateme when something should be updated and Template:Bad translation when it is getting bad but how about things that are so ancient that they require a rewrite since everything has changed since then? The specific page is KDE (Čeština), I would actually argue that pages like this should just be blanked, but there may be a better way to handle them.

Unfortunately there is no doubt that more of these ancient remnants are hidden in the dark corners of the wiki.

-- NetSysFire (talk) 00:40, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

The problem was once discussed here. Marking an article with templates actually does nothing — if the article have not been updated for 5, 8 or 10 years, then there is no one who care of it...
-- Duodai (talk) 06:16, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Redirecting is a good idea, thanks. It is clear that the article in question should just be a redirect, but what about others? At which point of outdated/bad translations do we transform the page into a redirect? 3 years? 5 years?
-- NetSysFire (talk) 17:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
There are two answers to this question — the direct one and more general view.
The direct answer is "just pick up the date and delete all that is older". :-) Periodically I clean up the Russian ArchWiki and I have empirical observation that the articles older than 2015 are usually useless crap, even dangerous for readers because of providing wrong commands. The articles that was updated, for example, in 2016 or 2017, need closer inspection of their content before deletion.
But generally speaking, I think that old translated pages are the problem of translation teams, not yours. Maintainers and administrators of ArchWiki should take care of the biggest and most important one — the English ArchWiki. It is essential because the English ArchWiki is the synchronization point for the other ones. Yes, translation communities are not at their best right now (and possibly will never be), but you are trying to start an endless fight — I have been cleaning the (only) Russian wiki about a year and it looks like there is no hope to win one day. %)
-- Duodai (talk) 06:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
This is right, but I occasionally stumble upon old translated pages when hitting Special:Random and since there is no guideline or similar I wanted to know how the translation team would handle that. There is nothing wrong with helping each other out, I assume :)
And yes, I observed the same thing. Ancient translations usually end up being hazardous.
-- NetSysFire (talk) 15:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
I would say if you see articles that has not yet finished translating, and they mention stuff about i686 and they totally don't match the current English one, just scrap it and start over. There are no points in keeping them.
Translated pages however, may be kept unless things are very out-of-date to the point where most of the things do not matches. In that sense, erasing isn't a bad idea.
windowsboy111 (talk) 08:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
In such cases, if the page is new, it is often better to move an unfinished translation (or just a questionable page) into translator's personal subpage without leaving a redirect, examples: Special:Diff/485210/prev, Special:Diff/652906/prev.
-- Duodai (talk) 08:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
I have been redirecting outdated translations to the respective english article since months (and I am proud to be the cause of the declining number of content pages as seen in ArchWiki:Statistics#Global statistics) and nobody complained. If no one complains in here either, I will just add the procedure to the page.
-- NetSysFire (talk) 06:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
We're close to six months with the new rule, I guess we could close this discussion? --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 16:23, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm surprised there are still any translations left :O — Lahwaacz (talk) 16:09, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Interlanguage links are not visible anymore in the preview

"5. Preview the page with the new interlanguage link. / 6. Visit the interlanguage link you have just created" — After recent MediaWiki upgrades, this is no longer possible. I guess there is a bug somewhere in the vector-2022 skin (the vector skin works fine). (If anyone cares, it does not work in the monobook skin either.) -- andreymal (talk) 10:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

To me they still appear during the preview with vector-2022… but on the left, at the bottom of the main menu, where they were before the update of MediaWiki. --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
It works with vector, but with vector-2022 it is just empty. (Btw, why are there two almost identical skins?) -- andreymal (talk) 11:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Here's what it looks like on my side (new Vector on the left, old one on the right: but maybe it's something to do with me using a custom CSS? The vector-2022 version is linked to MediaWiki's mw:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements from what I understand. --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 12:13, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Some translate team add their own pages.

Some language's user add their own new page to list the maintenance list,I think we need to add a new english page to storage them.霧雨 魔理沙 です (talk) 13:19, 20 August 2022 (UTC)