User talk:SignpostMarv Martin/Sandbox/Project:Internationalisation/List of communities

multi-lingual articles

As Second Life, and thus the SL Wiki is a multi-lingual community, some structure to translates articles should be implemented.

This is my proposal.

1. Create the English-language article in [[foo]]
2. Create translated versions of the article in [[foo/lang-code]], where "lang-code" is the ISO 639-3 language code for that language, e.g. foo/spa

Examples

• GUIA SL FAQs moves to Help:Second Life FAQ/spa (and the german version to Help:Second Life FAQ/deu and so on)
• GUIA - Gestos moves to Help:Gestures/spa and so on.
• Geld gets translated into english, with the translated version being put in Help:Linden Dollar, and Geld being moved to Help:Linden Dollar/deu

---

If enough people agree with this proposal, I would suggest we keep to the Help articles to begin with- this will give a highly focused sandbox for developing the processes for translating, moving and requesting articles to be translated. I'll also go into more detail with the ideas I have for Project:Internationalisation.

I think it's a given why the English language version of an article should be the "root" article, although if anyone disagrees or would like my opinion on the matter, feel free to say so! :-)

SignpostMarv Martin 22:33, 10 February 2007 (PST)

After looking into the matter, I've concluded that using IS0 639-3 codes will be better in the long run, although if anyone disagrees, please do so before the end of the month, as efforts will likely be too far entrenched in ISO 639-3 to reverse.

SignpostMarv Martin 18:54, 15 February 2007 (PST)

<shrugs> I'm okay with any of the codes per se, as long as they don't change for at least a year or two once fixed down. Also: referencing to these codes has to be provided so that less technically-oriented volunteers can get an idea of how to work with them.

As an aside, I'd like initial translations of the SL FAQ and KB into other languages by volunteers and Lindens to start by agreeing on common, pleasant-sounding (as much as possible) terms in each language. I've been rolling L$ into Chinese in several guises, and "Lime Money/Dollar" doesn't have the same sort of oomph... other languages may face the same issue... --Patchouli Woollahra 00:18, 20 February 2007 (PST)

ISO codes shouldn't change. The reason I'm advocating 639-3 is that it supports more languages than 639-2, which was what Template:languages-spoken currently uses. I'll be upgrading it soonish to use 639-3 and Template:ISO 639-3/native.

With regards to the "lime money/dollar" issue, use the symbol "L$", and when explaining it unabbreviated, consider it a non-translatable trademark (e.g. the reason why you can easily order a "Coca Cola" anywhere in the world).

SignpostMarv Martin 07:11, 20 February 2007 (PST)

Template:languages-spoken is now deprecated in favour of Template:ISO_639-3/cat-speaking

SignpostMarv Martin 17:58, 12 October 2007 (PDT)

---

I don't know what are the usual guidelines for big Wikis (Wikipedia.org guidelines are the first obvious example): I would follow those structures. But your idea definitevely makes sense, and I also agree with english articles namespace being "root" to translations. (oh, and is me editing this page the correct way to approach your proposal? thanks :) --Signore Iredell 12:01, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Yes this would be the correct way :-)

SignpostMarv Martin 15:07, 15 February 2007 (PST)

I agree with your proposal about what standard we should use. Also, with your proposal, it seems that it will be easier to follow through the translation process. However, title still have to be translate. So, I guess we could still use to name links within a translated document. For instance, "en este documento Guía:Gestos encontras"--Vindice VanDornan 13:05, 22 February 2007 (PST)

Although most of the sites are using the two-letter standard, and I use myself "es" for Spanish, I would go ahead with a three-letter standard. It may be a bit confusing or disturbing, at the beginning, for some people; but you get use to it and it will be transparent for end user. If you think that we have two to three main languages within Spain that they would expect SL to be translate to, it makes sense to go for this standard now.

--Vindice VanDornan 12:21, 28 February 2007 (PST)