Re: Langmaker and FrathWiki (was Re: Wikipedia:Verifiability - Mailing lists as sources)

On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Eugene Oh <un.doing@...> wrote:
> I've been kind of wondering
>  for a rather long time how Pedia did its alternative languages thing
>  in the sidebar, and whether we couldn't do the same with Frath's,
>  instead of just having "this page in Piscean/Satirocitan/etc.", for
>  example.
I'd suggest that a conpedia actually ought *not* copy wikipedia in this.

Essentially, Wikipedia strives to be language-agnostic - serving
moreorless (hypothetically!) the same content to everyone in their
native (or perhaps auxlingual) tongue.

We, on the other hand, are very much language-gnostic. And, let's be
honest - aside from a very small set of things that serve as standard
translation texts, nobody will be reading the entire wiki in a
particular language.

So, rather than having a WP-style
different-domains-for-different-languages format, I would suggest
in-article parallelism.

So, if an article about a language is available *in* that language, we
have a standardized two-column format. Sorta like you'd find in e.g. a
original-and-translation Bible at the most detailed (with footnotes on
translation quirks and all), or other parallel-translation text more
commonly.

If an article is one of the very few for which we have more than one
translation - e.g. Babel Text, Hamlet, or one of the more standard
form primers - then we set up something special. Maybe one translation
per page, parallel with the version of source used. Maybe even (this
would take a bit of wikiwizardry but is doable) something where
someone can select any given two translations to see 'em side by side.

(For reference, I have in mind something like e.g. halyihev and
tsiasuk-pron on ZBB frequently posting parallel translations in their
conlangs.)

In any case, the point - just as with the categorization etc - is to
not have such a translation languish unseen. And pragmatically, that
means it should be seen together with the English version, because
English is the real IAL of our era.

This would have the additional benefit of making all instances of this
an extension of the primer, for people who want to learn the language.

>  I'd like to help, but have no knowledge about programming, and am not
>  confident will come up with something everyone's satisfied with (dang,
>  people might even dislike what I can give), so if anyone has the time,
>  or doesn't find me a pain in the ass... (:
Experiment. ;-)

Create a new page to use as a sandbox, copy whatever you want to edit
into it, and then link to it from somewhere people will see once you
get something you like (or you get stuck). Try asking on wikicommons
or metawiki if you have questions about how to *do* something per se.
See if there's something on Wikipedia that looks like what you want
and copy it.

I'm hardly a wikiwizard, but I've managed to do things - usually by a)
trying naively, b) searching for an explanation or FAQ about it when
that doesn't work, and c) shamelessly copying something similar and
then just trying random things in a harmless place until it does work
like I want it to. FWIW, the most complicated things I've done on
Wikipedia are <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Constructed_languages>
and <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WP_conlangs>.

I had no idea how to do either when I started - as you can see if you
look at the (many) revisions on the history pages before I got
something that worked. ;-) Most of that is the same process - try,
copy, try again, edit, view, edit, view, add new thing, repeat.
Eventually you'll just osmose the stuff. :-P

- Sai

Reply