Talk:Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/2006/Translations

I suggest we use the new template Template:ElectionBox in every election page : it provides proper links with texts in the choosen language as much as possible to only existing pages : no more red links ! Arno Lagrange ✉ 07:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions on how to change the wordings in that box on a specific language would be greatly appreciated. // habj 10:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As said in Template:ElectionBox#Uses you have to look at Multilingual messages where all the messages can be found. AL ✉ 10:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not totally supportive for "no red link" policy, its apparence is cool admittedly though. Red links indicate editors that they need to work more. After removing those links, how we let them know we need still their help? "Compare the original/English version and your language version" seems horrible to me and I can't say such to translators. I'd like to know what idea you have for the way we are going to call for editors at the next necessity. --Aphaia 11:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I modified the template Template:Election/Item : missing pages now appear with italized link to english page with mention " (en)" and I added link to missing page with the language code. It looks so :

Aankondiging when exists
Vertalingen (en) nl when misses

is that OK now ? I personnaly find that a page with a lot of red links look horrible as an unfinished work. If you want to emphasize that there is lot of work which remains to be done, I think there are better ways than letting all these red links. That's why we have working areas like the election translation pages. But for a basic reader which not necesseraly wants to become an editor or a translator red links simply look like a bad edited page. Arno Lagrange ✉ 05:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO there should hardly be any "basic readers" who do not understand what a red link is and is not on Meta. I see to reason to complicate things further. We already have a complex template system that is so vulnerable, that if you miss out a "]" the whole page does not work: [1] // habj 20:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]