Page MenuHomePhabricator

Per-wiki classification of Content Translation as automated or non-automated edits
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

Content Translation is a really useful tool for those of us who are interested in translating, but it is implemented differently on different wikis, in that on enwiki, unlike many (all at the moment, I think?) others, the automated translation functionality is completely disabled. All the translation happens manually.

As a result, it'd be good to be able to classify CXT edits on enwiki as being non-automated edits, but I recognise that other projects will probably want to keep the automated edit classification, due to the nature of the automated translation enabled there. Could this be a per-wiki option, like the opted_in variable?

Event Timeline

MusikAnimal subscribed.

The contribs flag is set for this tool, such that usage of it still gets counted but edits made using it still appear in the non-automated contributions list. This seems desirable for all wikis, even English (since you can still modify content before saving, I think). Does that not satisfy your concern?

Sorry, I'm not quite sure I follow - I'm not hugely familiar with the internals of XTools, so please forgive my ignorance! Are those contributions then counted twice? If I understand correctly, they aren't - they're shown in the non-automated list, but count towards the (semi)automated counter, not the non-automated counter. That seems like strange behaviour - but it's more than possible that I'm completely misunderstanding!

The primary purpose of the non-automated list is to identify article prose -- that is, edits containing manually entered content. This is the why the mainspace is the default namespace, as opposed to all namespaces. There is a way to tell XTools to count edits as being semi-automated, but still show them in the contributions list, and that's what we've done with CTX.

The (semi-)automated counts towards the top are there mostly just as fun statistics, showing how many times you used various tools. You're right though, the naming here can be confusing. Say *all* of your edits are with CTX. At the top it would say "0 non-automated edits", but then you still see edits in a section called "Non-automated edits". That indeed sounds like a bug or something!

I'm not quite sure what to do. Maybe this "contribs flag" thing isn't that great of an idea after all. Or we can try to change the wording to make it more clear what we're showing. So the "(Semi-)automated edits" section (where it shows counts) could be renamed to "Tool counts". The "Summary" at the top, however, would respect the "contribs" setting, such that CTX edits wouldn't count towards semi-automated. That way the percentages aren't thrown off. How does that sound?

At the top it would say "0 non-automated edits", but then you still see edits in a section called "Non-automated edits".

Wait, doesn't it *count* them as non-automated but put them into the tool counts? That would make more sense to me.

Anyway, I think showing an info icon with an explanation next to the tools with "contribs=true" might prevent confusion.