اسمي أسامة خالد وأنا مساهم في الموسوعة الحرة وأملك الوصول إلى الأدوات
الإدارية وآمل أن أتمكن من المساعدة في المشروع. لا تتردد في السؤال إن
واجهتك بعض المشاكل في تحرير الموسوعة.
لدي سؤال بخصوص هذا المشروع. هل المستخدمون ملزومون باستخدام أدوات غوغل
للترجمة ليتبرعوا للمستشفيات؟
I'm speaking of my self whey I say that's annoying. Is it possible to
change that policy to allow people to use their own text editors on
their own computers and still be able to join the event?
[I'm speaking of myself. I represent only my point of view.]
When this project was presented in Wikimania 2010, I honestly liked
it. It was presented as Google's non-profit effort to educate people
to make their lives better through Wikipedia. Now, I just cannot see
the non-profit, human-helping part anymore.
It seems to me that what is really going on here is using the amazing
power of volunteers to improve the proprietary Google Translate
Toolkit for basically nothing. This Toolkit isn't only secret and not
accessible, modifiable or tickerable by users, but also requires them
to push their data into a huge repository that they cannot control and
they cannot understand and that is subject to free modification by
It is not, in my point of view, Wikipedia spirit to support or engage
in a project that's its only goal is to promote and improve a non-free
corporate tool. It works against software freedom, culture freedom,
society empowerment and independence, the ideals we have been working
to promote for many years.
The only solution that can work which is at the same time easy to
adopt is to explicitly allow maximum freedom for any person to choose
the tool they want to use to participate in this event.
I appreciate the effort that was done in the first project. I was
happy to chat with Michael in Wikimania on how it can be done better,
but I cannot see how the community can support this one.
On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 02:16:50AM -0700, Joanne Stevens wrote:
> to correctly calculate the donation to 57357.
> to provide the gadgets on the site that we all use to monitor
> progress as a volunteer community.
I understand. It's just that I believe we/you can solve this issue by
simply implementing a static HTML page in the frontend with a small
Python script in the backend to report to Google the progress.
So here is the idea: there will be a list of 250 English articles with
a text field to fill with the name of the article in the Arabic
Wikipedia. We will put all articles in a temporary place (outside the
'main', article namespace) so we can review and keep track of them.
Once the text field is filled, the script will automatically check the
article existence in the Arabic Wikipedia and if it exists, if will
list its author in the HTML page, count the words in the original
article and mark it as 'needs review'. Someone from the Arabic
Wikipedia will review the article: If we feel that it is not eligible
for inclusion in Wikipedia (e.g. too bad translation or too much
machine translation), we will delete them, and the script will
automatically notice and remove the 'needs review' tag. If we liked
them and saw them as complete translations, we will add a certain tag
and the script will notice and mark the article as 'ready'.. And
that's how Google will know that this article is eligible.
I'm ready to contribute to this event by implementing this solution
shortly and running it on my little server (or on the Wikimedia's
Toolserver). Of course, I'll publish the source code so anyone can
study it, improve it and give me feedbacks.
Speaking of verity of tools, don't students contribute using very
different tools, to very different projects, in very different
programming languages every year during the Google's Summer of Code? I
mean.. I think that is common and no problem at all.
This very part is nice, but the rest is disturbing. The whole
unfragmented picture should be seen and judged. I guess I explained
enough in my previous email.
Shall we extend this one more 'win' for Wikipedia commitment to free
software and another one for people who're (for any reason) not very
comfortable with using Google Translate Toolkit?
Again, all what I am asking for is to extend the possibility and I
cannot understand why anyone would not like this. :)
I agree with what Anas, Ahmed and Khaled said.
As a medical student, I did benefit alot from this project whether it’s the medical content, technical application or teamwork!
I just want to comment on the freedom part.
Your ideas are very good and would make things easier for some people. However, a lot of people are finding the toolkit an easy way and are getting used to it.
I am proud of being part of such a project and hope you find it as interesting and fun as we do!
Happy Feast Everyone