Example of translation flagged as "100%" not translated:

Према Морелијевим речима, овај поступак је поново примењен у рату у Ираку, иако је светска јавност била далеко подељенија него у сукобу на Косову. Бити против рата значило је залагање за Садама Хусеина. Исти дизајн је коришћен у потпуно другачијем контексту, односно током гласања о европском уставу. Бити против Устава сматрало се да значи бити против Европе.

In T392745#10771086, @Djido wrote:

Message clearly says "100% of text is not translated". At least, there is a bug to imply that there is no translation at all. It does not say "100% of paragraphs are not translated".

All paragraphs are marked as _not translated_, even if they have no English words. Actually, all yellow-marked paragraphs are _all_ translated. There is no chance that tool can judge _quality_ of translation. Why they are all marked as "untranslated" when they do not contain a single English word?

What I meant is that I judged the translation because I speak Serbian. Some paragraphs are incorrect.

For the rest: I think you're right, I also noticed that even when some parts are correctly translated (while using the tool), ContentTranslation doesn't want to allow them. I won't close this task, I'll track how is it going.

Yeah, I am native speaker of Serbian as well :) Most of the text is just as-is from the translator tool. My workflow is to dump machine translation, correcting just most noticable errors, then go through Serbian article and fix it up, as output of the tool contains some quirks which I find more comfortable editing in the source editor (since translator tool just gives me this visual editor which is rather clumsy.

@Djido Please don't touch the priority field. We try to set it to reflect reality, changing it doesn't change reality.

Reason for this was that you were already told what is the issue: you haven't edited the machine translation enough. That limitation is there intentionally.

I don't speak Serbian well enough to judge if the translation of original text is incorrect or unclear. Here is what it says in English:

I left this task open for someone to check the translation. If it is a problem of translation, it is not handled in Phabricator but translatewiki.net.

As far as I can see things are working as intended and the confusion is about untranslated vs. unmodified translation.

@Nikerabbit, you do not speak Serbian, but I assure you 100% of text is translated. Maybe not ideally, but tool cannot judge _quality_ of transation. It just claims that none of paragraphs are translated, and that 100% of text is not translated. Even without knowledge of Serbian you can see that it plain bug.

It is not user error.

Note that there is no untouched paragraphs, and there is barrely few English words (in original names). Yet, paragraphs which are 100% Serbian text, without any single Latin character, are marked as untranslated.

Something is very wrong with the tool.

Reason for this was that you were already told what is the issue: you haven't edited the machine translation enough.

That was initial Kizule's _assumption_ which I refuted in the first message.

@Djido the system is reporting that the machine translation generated as a starting point is not sufficiently modified by the editor to be published.

@SBisson, this is a new thing? I had no such problems before, and what if machine translation is good enough? It actually gotten much better, so not many manual intervention is needed.

Basically, you must superficially change machine translation, even if it good enough?

In T392745#10804799, @Djido wrote:

Reason for this was that you were already told what is the issue: you haven't edited the machine translation enough.

That was initial Kizule's _assumption_ which I refuted in the first message.

I did not see you claim that you have edited it, in fact you said the opposite:

Most of the text is just as-is from the translator tool. My workflow is to dump machine translation, correcting just most noticable errors, then go through Serbian article and fix it up, as output of the tool contains some quirks which I find more comfortable editing in the source editor (since translator tool just gives me this visual editor which is rather clumsy.

I hear you that you cannot do things the way you want, but we listen to the communities and they don't want poor quality translations, so we have added restrictions like this. The tool itself doesn't know how good the machine translation is, so there is way to adjust the limits to some extent.

@Djido different wikis have different tolerance level but they mostly agree that 100% machine translation does not constitute the editor's "own work" so it needs to be re-phrased to some degree to be compatible with the content policy.

I don't know the specifics of your wiki or if the rules have changed or if there was a bug allowing this in the past but this is the general idea.

I also acknowledge that as machine translation becomes better that restriction seems counterintuitive but this is a broader question that has content policy implications.

Yeah, it is getting to the point that I would be served better by copy-pasting it into Google Translator, or even just manually translate. Tool with those restrictions seems rather non-useful to me.

Also, message (bold part) should be better at conveying what is wrong -- it says "Your translation contains 100% of unchanged text". My first instinct is to interpret that as if tool detected that I have _untranslated_ text (who bothers to read, gray, small text underneath? :) ).

It could be better if it was "Your translation contains 100% unmodified machine translation". That would be better at showing what is wrong.

Can we at least get option to publish to Draft namespace without restrictions? Essentially, this current workflow:

a) Forces me to work in awkward translator editor, instead of much better Wiki editor in my target Wikipedia.
b) Requires me to make superficial changes to already well translated text.