Talk:Televisión Nacional de Chile acknowledges 'error' for using 'hooded delinquent' videos in news programme

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I believe that we should adopt the policy of wikipedia that all translations be verified by two editors fluent in the language. (And that machine translations not be condoned without verification by other than the editor of the article. Respectfully, Mattisse (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I may provide translations on request; no other Spanish editors around may be willing to provide translations, so the "second editor" suggested by you should be Google Translate. アンパロ Io ti odio! 21:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
That is just you verifying yourself. Not a neutral method. There are plenty of users on Wikipedia who will validate your source, and also make sure you are not plagiarizing. Also, I have found good luck with willing editors on the Spanish sites, both wikipedia and wikinews. If no one reads Spanish well enough on this sites, I think you should seek else where.
Also, your article needs a copy edit, as some of the language use is very strange. e.g. "that TVN had used at least thrice videos of a 'hooded delinquent' to present reports on the student protests" - sounds like a machine translated phrase. Respectfully, Mattisse (talk) 21:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Actually, no, Mattisse. For a reason I pointed out the use of Google Translator, since I will be translating the sources, and Google Translator will prove that my translations are truthful; I'll be just helping the eventual reviewer. Since you are not a reviewer, I don't see the point of you drama-whoring. Respectfully, アンパロ Io ti odio! 23:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
I've studied Spanish for four years in high school, and I'm reading the Spanish translation of Harry Potter right now. However, I'm not taking any Spanish classes in college. Am I qualified to review translations? Ragettho (talk) 21:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Well, on wikipedia you wouldn't but perhaps here you would. Wikipedia requires fluent speakers, else the nuances and idiomatic phrasing are not easily understood. I have about the same level of experience of Spanish that you have. But I have looked at the google's machine translations of this article and I have real questions. Especially about the phrases in quotes, since there are alternative ways they could be translated, so why should they be in quotes?. Perhaps you could fix the weird wording/punctuation that seem to come from a machine translation in the article. (An example is given above.) Respectfully, Mattisse (talk) 21:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
And no, I don't use machine translation (i.e. Google Translator). The only thing I use when translating is my loyal Collins 1982 dictionary. Perhaps my translations are too literal from Spanish... アンパロ Io ti odio! 23:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I see some difficulties with this concept; working out how to improve this aspect of our practices is quite tricky, methinks, and needs to start with understanding our current best practices; consultation with extensively experienced folk would be called for.

  • 'Two fluent editors' seems native Wikipedia, and incompatible with Wikinews infrastructure.
    • Wikipedia relies on extensive redundancy: many eyes, over however long it takes. We can't, having neither the time nor the personnel.
    • Wikinews relies on profoundly trusted individuals; our whole internal dynamics focuses on assessing individuals' trustworthiness. Reviewers routinely take irreversible actions; Wikipedia has nothing like it, which figures since nothing routine in Wikipedia is irreversible.
    • The redundancy technique seems to focus on polishing over time; that's a Wikipedia thing, not a Wikinews thing.
  • Current best practices aren't perfect, but consultation with an expert is needed, I think, even to identify just what the weaknesses are. My understanding (I don't often visit this pocket of our practices):
    • When a reviewer checks a source, in the ordinary scheme of things, the reviewer must be fluent in the source language. This is the same standard for non-English sources as for English sources.
    • If the reviewer isn't fluent in the source language, it's the reviewer's responsibility to get help; automatic translation is definitely not good enough for source-checking. I believe I recall Blood Red Sandman fetching someone trustworthy from Wikipedia to do some checking of... Swedish?... sources of an article. BRS, of course, is an admin on Wikipedia and knows who there to trust and how to explain what's needed, and is trusted here to do that well.
    • Accuracy of quote translations is part of verification, which is in the purview of the peer reviewer.

--Pi zero (talk) 05:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

  • There is a problem with the use of quotations. Quotations are a literal rendering of what was written. Presumable the material in quotation marks was in Spanish, since all of the sources are. What are the sources for the English quotations used in this article? Mattisse (talk) 18:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
    • It is common practice to do translations of quotes. There is minor to no coverage on the students protests in English-language news sources, so I have to do it by myself, obviously. アンパロ Io ti odio! 18:07, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
      • There is no reason why you have to use quotes at all in this article. It's not like you're quoting "I quit!" or something that would benefit the article by quoting. And especially since your translating of Spanish isn't too good, I don't think you should be using quotes unless they can be verified.
Also, what about the strange wording like "Online newspaper Otra Prensa! reported on July 13 that TVN had used at least thrice videos of a 'hooded delinquent' to present reports on the student protests" - that is not correct English. Mattisse (talk) 18:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Instead of complaining, {{sofixit}}. Wikinews is a wiki, and can be edited and fixed by anyone, including you. アンパロ Io ti odio! 18:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean by it, so I can't fix it. Also what do you mean by "The journalists presenting the reports were, chronologically, Amaro Gómez-Pablos, Gonzalo Ramírez, and Consuelo Saavedra."? Do you mean something about age or something about order, e.g. the oldest (or youngest) was Amaro Gómez-Pablos? Or he was the first? (I will not copy edit something that I don't know is accurate to begin with. The purpose of the sources is to give the copy editor a source to go on. It is too much effort for me to translate all those sources myself.) Mattisse (talk) 18:39, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
The first journalist to present a report on the student protests with the hooded delinquent in the background was Mr. Amaro Gómez-Pablos, Gonzalo Ramírez followed, and Consuelo Saavedra was the last one to do so. アンパロ Io ti odio! 18:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
So write it in correct English.
Pi zero is saying above that the "the reviewer must be fluent in the source language", and although I can read Spanish somewhat, I am not what you call "fluent". So I am ineligible to "fix" the article. Mattisse (talk) 18:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the issue of quotes, that's what {{Translated quote}} is for. It provides access, to the reader and reviewer, to the original quote. Just thought someone might be interested. DENDODGE 19:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Um, will give it a try; I remember using it on my report of the tsunami in Pichilemu last March, per your own suggestion too. アンパロ Io ti odio! 20:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1264998 [Passed][edit]