Talk:Using OmegaWiki for Commons

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why don't you refer to Wiktionary at all here. I find it to be a great source of translations. :)--Thecurran 02:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Key to OmegaWiki is that the same information is shared for all languages. This is something Wiktionary is not capable off. So in essence it is using the right tool for the job. nb there is no such thing as Wiktionary there are more then a hundred of them GerardM 05:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

What I mean is to ask which translation you will use. Wiktionary is great at finding appropriate translations for the titles you speak of and clearing up misspellings. English Wiktionary specifically tries hard to catalog every word in every language, creating a page for en -> xx, a page for xx -> en and an external link to the xx Wiktionary entry. I'm not saying that you use Wiktionary instead of Omegawiki, but I am prompting you to choose a standard protocol for translating each word. I also wish to prompt you to choose a basic set of languages to translate into that incorporates most of the world. The set I play with is: 1Arabic, 2Chinese, 3English, 4French, 5Russian, 6Spanish, 7German, 8Polish, 9Japanese, 10Italian, 11Dutch, 12Portuguese, 13Finnish, 14Turkish, 15Indonesian, 16Korean, 17Vietnamese, 18Telugu, 19Thai, 20Basque, 21Georgian, 22Quechua, 23Swahili, 24Noongar, 25Nahuatl, 26Abkhaz, 27Hebrew, & 28Simple English. :)--Thecurran 07:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

It is not a matter of using a translation, it is certainly not a matter of giving precedence of one translation over another; we support over 300 languages in Betawiki, so these are the ones that are most appropriate to start with. In the end the quality for a language is dependent on the ability and willingness of volunteers to add translations. Thanks, GerardM 04:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)