Poll: Have you ever contributed with a text to Wikipedia?
Thread poster: ProZ.com Staff

ProZ.com Staff
Local time: 19:24
SITE STAFF
Feb 28, 2011

This forum topic is for the discussion of the poll question "Have you ever contributed with a text to Wikipedia?".

View the poll results »



Direct link Reply with quote
 

Adnan Özdemir  Identity Verified
Turkey
Local time: 06:24
Member (2007)
German to Turkish
+ ...
Yes. I love Wikipedia very very much Feb 28, 2011

For me, Wikipedia is the most important website on planet. I love it very very much. Naturally, during past 8-9 years, I have been written some articles (more than 1400 articles)...


Saludos desde Anatolia
Anadolu'dan selamlar

[Edited at 2011-02-28 08:58 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 

xxxInterlangue
Angola
Local time: 04:24
English to French
+ ...
Other Feb 28, 2011

Not a text, just a line.

Direct link Reply with quote
 

Sonja Kroll  Identity Verified
Germany
Local time: 04:24
Member (2008)
English to German
+ ...
No articles written, Feb 28, 2011

but glaring (formal) errors I kick out.

Direct link Reply with quote
 

avsie  Identity Verified
Local time: 04:24
English to French
+ ...
Same here Feb 28, 2011

Sonja Kroll wrote:

but glaring (formal) errors I kick out.


I never wrote an article, but I corrected numerous spelling/grammar mistakes!


Direct link Reply with quote
 

neilmac  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 04:24
Spanish to English
+ ...
Other Feb 28, 2011

Not entirely, but have corrected or tweaked a couple of pages...

Direct link Reply with quote
 

Michaël Temmerman  Identity Verified
Costa Rica
Local time: 21:24
English to Dutch
+ ...
No Feb 28, 2011

Even though Wikipedia is very useful and can help us translators a lot to find background information and terminology (which needs to be checked!), it's not what call a reliable source. I don't consider myself an expert that is able to write articles for an encyclopedia. I'd rather leave that to real scholars.

Direct link Reply with quote
 

MedTrans&More  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
English to Portuguese
+ ...
Missing Translations Feb 28, 2011

Yeah I've corrected a few pages, not actually written whole ones.

What annoys me is that there are vast differences between the content on a given subject in one language, say, English, and another language, such as Portuguese. I've often badgered my partner (Brazilian) into writing sections that are missing in the Portuguese version of pages.

Keep up the good work guys!!


Direct link Reply with quote
 

DZiW
Ukraine
English to Russian
+ ...
not really Feb 28, 2011

But I'd like to... The main problem is that usually some 'hot' varied topics are not so 'neutral' and seem to be far more than biased or single-sided, let alone completeness (e.g. missing pages, dead links, expired metalinks etc) and correctness. Also it really depends on the specific language, say a topic about something in English may be almost 10 times greater than the same topic in some other language. I wish they were more unified or something, but it might be beside the point

Direct link Reply with quote
 

Steven Capsuto  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 22:24
Spanish to English
+ ...
A word or sentence here and there Feb 28, 2011

I haven't written articles for them, but I've fixed factual errors and filled in important missing info on occasion.

Direct link Reply with quote
 

Ambrose Li  Identity Verified
Canada
Local time: 22:24
Chinese to English
+ ...
politics Mar 1, 2011

Michaël Temmerman wrote:

Even though Wikipedia is very useful and can help us translators a lot to find background information and terminology (which needs to be checked!), it's not what call a reliable source. I don't consider myself an expert that is able to write articles for an encyclopedia. I'd rather leave that to real scholars.


I don’t think that’s the problem with Wikipedia, especially when people (researchers IIRC) have pointed out that it only contains about the same amount of errors as traditional encyclopedias.

That said, I firmly believe that the current focus on “scholarly research” is antithetical to the whole idea of Wikipedia. They used to lead us to believe that you write what you know, so together we would create the best encyclopedia in the world. With the current emphasis on references, it means that local knowledge, oral traditions, and outmoded information will have a difficult time getting through the editors. IMHO the current politics strongly favours current Western knowledge and strongly discriminates against non-Western knowledge and even Western knowledge that has either become outmoded or never been widely discussed. So I do share the opinion that it may not be a reliable source, but not for the reason you cited.

I once spent almost a month correcting some factual errors in an article because it was almost impossible to find online articles or books that are still in print to back up my corrections. And that was for something that pertained to the West. I can’t imagine how anything pertaining to lesser-known cultures in Africa, Asia, etc. could stand a chance getting in under the current policies.

[Edited at 2011-03-01 04:30 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Rebecca Garber  Identity Verified
Local time: 22:24
Member (2005)
German to English
+ ...
Nope, not interested Mar 1, 2011

When it first started, some friends of mine, experts in medieval studies, wrote an article on feudalism incorporating the latest research.
It was corrected back 30 years.
So, they fixed it, bringing it back to the latest research.
It was corrected again, and they were belittled and insulted for believing that their expertise was of any value to the wikipedia community.

The professional historians pretty much washed their hands of the mess at that point.
Because some of our knowledge IS more equal than others.


Direct link Reply with quote
 


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:

Moderator(s) of this forum
Jared Tabor[Call to this topic]

You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Poll: Have you ever contributed with a text to Wikipedia?

Advanced search






memoQ translator pro
Kilgray's memoQ is the world's fastest developing integrated localization & translation environment rendering you more productive and efficient.

With our advanced file filters, unlimited language and advanced file support, memoQ translator pro has been designed for translators and reviewers who work on their own, with other translators or in team-based translation projects.

More info »
Anycount & Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000

Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.

More info »



Forums
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search