Babel extension: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:51, 8 August 2008

The tower of Babel.

An extension for the Babel system has been developed by MinuteElectron, and is in use on Betawiki. If we introduce this extension, we don't need hundreds of Babel templates. My question is, should Wikimedia use this extension? M.M.S. (talk)

Discussion

What are the pros/cons of this method versus the current system? Cirt 18:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pros

Cons of current system: duplication of efforts (copying and organizing templates), not warranty of template text and color scheme consistency across multiple projects.

As person who did part of described tasks, I'll definitely vote for usage of Babel extension instead of manual template maintenance.

EugeneZelenko 03:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay - and what are the pros and cons of the new Babel extension system? Cirt 17:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pros

No duplication of edits
Color scheme consistency
Simple
en.wikinews will finally have a good babel system
It works well

Cons

None

Anonymous101 16:29, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand it right, I support.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zginder (talk • contribs) 13:37, 5 May 2008.

I would tend to Support this as well, would just like a little more discussion. Cirt 04:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Simplifies things very much. I see Slovene (slovenščina) has not been included in the internationalisation file. Why's that? I suggest translations from the English Wikipedia are used for Slovene. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 08:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This extension can be translated on Betawiki. M.M.S. 13:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - it'll be useful. Carn 21:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Much more useful than templates. Soxred93 04:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very beneficial for the smaller projects; it allows people to concentrate on things that really matter .. things like content :) GerardM 21:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course! SPQRobin ^(inc!) 21:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can't the extension be adjusted to use less categories? It's rather annoying to have to create hundreds of categories (a few for each language). Will the extension developer allow for the categories to work the same way as Meta's system? Cbrown1023 talk 22:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it already can ... GerardM 10:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Helps the smaller projects, no visible downside. A good sensible improvement. Durova 10:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my above comment and so en.wikinews can finally have a babel system that is not making all the boxes grey by default and requireing the user to know enough of the language to say that they do not know it (which is useless if you want to say you do not speak the language). Anonymous101 16:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've been tinkering with babelboxes for years longin for a simplified system. That'd make my day (and would be perfect for la.wikisource). - εΔ ω 17:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Support --Accurimbono 13:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fabexplosive The archive man 18:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A good way to standardise an essential piece of the fabric of our multilingual interface. John Vandenberg 01:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 * {{support}} --[[User:Accurimbono|Accurimbono]] 13:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * {{support}} --[[User:Fabexplosive|Fabexplosive]] <small>[[User_talk:Fabexplosive|<span style="color: blue">The archive man</span>]]</small> 18:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
+* {{support}} -- A good way to standardise an essential piece of the fabric of our multilingual interface. [[User:Jayvdb|John Vandenberg]] 01:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)