Forum:Proposal: Removing translations: Difference between revisions

From the Audiovisual Identity Database, the motion graphics museum

Content deleted Content added
SuperMax124 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Forumheader|General Discussion}}
{{Forumheader|General Discussion}}

{{Forumcat|General Discussion}}
{{Forumpost
{{Forumpost
|text=Ever since we brought translations into the wiki last year, people have been marking them for such. I've noticed as of lately that we haven't gotten much of those and I felt like it would be a good decision to phase translations out entirely from our wiki. I've also noticed that it became an underutilized feature in the process too as of late and just clogs up the search bar suggestions.
|text=Ever since we brought translations into the wiki last year, I've noticed as of lately that we haven't gotten much of those and I felt like it would be a good decision to phase translations out entirely from our wiki. I've also noticed that it became an underutilized feature in the process too as of late and just clogs up the search bar suggestions.
|username=SuperMax124
|username=SuperMax124
|rank=Administrator
|rank=Administrator
|timestamp=12 October 2022
|timestamp=12 October 2022
}}
}}
{{Forumpost
{{Forumcat|General Discussion}}
|text=They do not work out very well for the following reasons:
# Navigation: For example, if you want to search up RTP or other articles in the search bar, you will be greeted with three versions of the title: one with a country name, one with just the name, and another containing the "/en" marker. The latter cannot be edited directly, making it more complicated to update the translation pages, which leads to...
# Updating: After each change you make on the original article, you have to remark the page for translation in order for that revision to appear on the translated page. As previously mentioned, keeping the translated page up to date is more complicated. Not to mention it erases the previous translated revisions, forcing users to translate the page all over again.
It sounded like a good concept at first, but it got messy thanks to the navigation and having to manually update the old article. If this gets phased out, I would fairly be in support of that decision. It's just that the functionality of the translations makes editing on those type of pages more labored than a regular one.
|username=Camenati
|rank=User
|timestamp=12 October 2022
}}
{{Forumpost
|text=Same reasoning with Camenati tbh, it sounds good as an idea but making it work is way too complicated. Also it makes visual editing impossible for some pages since translatable pages are not compatible with the visual editor. Besides translation services have improved so much in the past years like Google Translate etc.
|username=Logohub
|rank=Administrator
|timestamp=13 October 2022
}}
{{Forumpost
|text=It's unfortunate this feature wasn't used that much, knowing how much of my edits were basically translations to different pages in Finnish. If this gets removed I would kinda feel like I wasted a ton of time. On the other hand, I understand if the thing gets removed since even I feel like I am the only one who used it quite actively.
|username=VPJHuk
|rank=User
|timestamp=13 October 2022
}}

Latest revision as of 15:35, 13 October 2022


Reply or edit
Report post



Ever since we brought translations into the wiki last year, I've noticed as of lately that we haven't gotten much of those and I felt like it would be a good decision to phase translations out entirely from our wiki. I've also noticed that it became an underutilized feature in the process too as of late and just clogs up the search bar suggestions.


avatar
Camenati
User
12 October 2022

Reply or edit
Report post



They do not work out very well for the following reasons:

  1. Navigation: For example, if you want to search up RTP or other articles in the search bar, you will be greeted with three versions of the title: one with a country name, one with just the name, and another containing the "/en" marker. The latter cannot be edited directly, making it more complicated to update the translation pages, which leads to...
  2. Updating: After each change you make on the original article, you have to remark the page for translation in order for that revision to appear on the translated page. As previously mentioned, keeping the translated page up to date is more complicated. Not to mention it erases the previous translated revisions, forcing users to translate the page all over again.

It sounded like a good concept at first, but it got messy thanks to the navigation and having to manually update the old article. If this gets phased out, I would fairly be in support of that decision. It's just that the functionality of the translations makes editing on those type of pages more labored than a regular one.


avatar
Logohub
Administrator
13 October 2022

Reply or edit
Report post



Same reasoning with Camenati tbh, it sounds good as an idea but making it work is way too complicated. Also it makes visual editing impossible for some pages since translatable pages are not compatible with the visual editor. Besides translation services have improved so much in the past years like Google Translate etc.


avatar
VPJHuk
User
13 October 2022

Reply or edit
Report post



It's unfortunate this feature wasn't used that much, knowing how much of my edits were basically translations to different pages in Finnish. If this gets removed I would kinda feel like I wasted a ton of time. On the other hand, I understand if the thing gets removed since even I feel like I am the only one who used it quite actively.

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.