[Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge

Fri Jul 29 18:06:43 UTC 2011

Yes of course translating documents "has been practiced in academia for a very long time."

We however are not a first publisher of translations.  We are an aggregator of sources.
That is the point of RS.
We don't publish first.

-----Original Message-----
From: M. Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Fri, Jul 29, 2011 10:59 am
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge

And what if readers don't understand Spanish? As a translator, I have to say
 am strongly against the idea that a translation counts as original
esearch. Translating quotes has been practiced in academia for a very long
ime, and just in the last month I must've read several papers with quotes
n languages I didn't understand well enough to read without the translation
y the author (German, Latin, etc). If I want to quote an academic paper in
panish for an article where there are few or no English-language sources
vailable, I should be able to quote directly from the paper but provide a
ranslation so that English speakers who do not speak Spanish can benefit
rom the quote. The great thing about the wiki process is that if someone
isagrees with my translation, it can be fixed (I have fixed a few
ranslations on en.wp myself).
011/7/29 Wjhonson <wjhonson at aol.com>
>
 No that's not what it would mean.
 It would mean that if a Spanish language source is used on an English
 language page, we should quote that source in Spanish, and not quote it
 using our OWN translation.  As editors we should not be creating
 publications, only quoting publications.

 -----Original Message-----
 From: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
 Sent: Fri, Jul 29, 2011 10:37 am
 Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge

 On 29 July 2011 17:39, Wjhonson <wjhonson at aol.com> wrote:
 > I would agree with Ray that we should quote Latin texts in Latin, Spanish
 exts in Spanish no matter what language-page we are using.  IF the text is
 that
 mportant to English speakers then there should be or probably will soon be,
 a
 erifiable English language translation *not* created in-project, but rather
 by
  reputable author publishing just such a translation.

 his would mean that only English-language references are acceptable
 n en:wp, which is of course false. Your statement takes a useful idea
 no original research), extrapolates it until it really obviously
 reaks, and then puts forward the broken version as a good thing.
 You appear to be mixing up policy, guidelines, practice and how you
 ersonally think things should be, without distinguishing which you
 re describing at any given time; this leads only to confusion.

  d.
 _______________________________________________
 oundation-l mailing list
 oundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
  nsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

 _______________________________________________
 foundation-l mailing list
 foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

______________________________________________
oundation-l mailing list
oundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
nsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l