[Foundation-l] 300 Euro for excellent Articles: an experiment

Thu Aug 18 12:26:45 UTC 2005

>Sure it is a contribution, but what would that do to our credibility.  
>
Nothing. Books and Encyclopedias have always been translated and did not 
loose anything about their credibility for that.

>Having 
>companies pay for articles, especially feature articles, raises the  question 
>of whether they are simply advertising pieces in the guise of  articles, or 
>genuine NPOV coverage. 
>
It is a wikipedia article that is going to be translated (therefore 
npov) - and it is a wikipedia article afterwards and therefore npov and 
editable for anyone.

>If a company pays us to write or  feature an article, 
>does that mean that we are beholden to them to provide their  POV as well? 
>
no - since whoever wants such a translation knows that the article is 
already npov - so he wants this content translated and not re-written to 
his/her favour

>What 
>about if a political or religious group tries to do the same  thing? 
>
see above: any article for wikipedia is there to be improved - also the 
translated ones ...

>To what 
>degree will corporate or other moneys be used as leverage  against NPOV.  
> 
>I am confident that the community will reject this idea.
>  
>
well ... see: if there is a translated article and you don't even know 
about this and then it is uploaded it is treated like any contribution - 
people will have a look at it and say it is fine or modify it

if you know that an article is translated and then it is uploaded I 
suppose you will have a closer look to make sure it is correct and npov, 
right? so anyway it is better to know this

what if anyone takes any article without telling you, translates it and 
then puts a bit of pov there? this is not wanted ...  the procedure is 
the same, only it is less checked than the one we know to be translated 
I suppose

so think about a translator doing such a job: it is his credibility and 
professionality that depends on a correct translation of an article - so 
if he does not work well this will be known and it is useless to say 
what this means to the carreer since this should be obvious to anyone - 
what does a correct article instead mean? it would be a piece of text to 
show in his/per portfolio of translations ... so it makes only sense for 
a translator to do a good job

what you are saying of religious or political groups can happen anyway - 
it is even more probable that if it happens, this happens in background 
without anyone knowing it

then: anyone is free to translate whatever is published under gfdl - if 
you want this or not

any wikipedia can decide if leave an article or not

I also can take an article, have it translated under gfdl and only use 
it for my purposes on my website indicating its source and stating gfdl 
+ providing the text of the license on my website and anyone can do this 
also adding pov - so isn't it better to have things in an npov 
enviroment being checked by many people?

so the community might approve or reject this idea: it can and sooner or 
later will happen anyway (somewhere) - so it is better to prepare this 
and do it in a professional way instead of leaving things happen on 
their own and it is better to be able to choose the translators that can 
be part of that project (providing a cv and some credentials) than just 
leaving it to whoever - or am I wrong in that?

ciao, sabine

___________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB 
http://mail.yahoo.it