[Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation's 2010-11 Annual Report

Sat Dec 31 23:37:39 UTC 2011

Thank you for the answers.

Jay Walsh, 17/12/2011 19:29:
> The languages chosen were a balance between our geographic priorities
> (Brazil, Middle East, India) and our widest base of donors and contributors
> from other countries.  It's imperfect, as always - we want to do more in
> the future, but we needed to get started.

I'm not saying you should have translated to more languages, I 
understand the constraints; I was just wondering how the priority was 
defined.
I had thought of the geographic priorities, not of the donors and 
contributors base. However, I'm still quite confused: for instance 
Russian projects have way more active users than the Japanese and almost 
the same as the French (with twice as many speakers); Italian projects 
have a bit less but Italy, Zack said, is the second biggest source of 
donations to WMF this year.

> These choices are by no means
> part of a permanent pattern for WMF in terms of translation.

It can be a coincidence, anyway in the future sharing your "algorithm" 
(which is something difficult to make and I suppose cost you some 
thinking) would help everybody define variations suitable for their 
purposes and make other choices like this. :-)

Nemo