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.
- Create the English-language article in [[foo]]
- 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)
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)