Please note actions by [[User:Liuxinyu970226]]

The terminology can be (mostly) stabilized, especially the "whom to take, tw or hk" split seen in zh-hant translations. (I am quite happy that no zh-SG speakers have argued with zh-CN speakers to date, by the way.)

As a side note, keeping translations from both sides in that fictional "whom to take from" table would be helpful for custom install-time language splitting by tools like OpenCC (it does hk-tw conversion too), thus providing a solution for current "merged hant" problem.

Arthur2e504:35, 16 October 2016

"The terminology can be (mostly) stabilized" haven't you seen the MassMessage example? Per history, the MassMessage was having these translations:

  • 大量信息发送者/大量消息发送者 (mainly provided by me)
  • 群发消息者/群發消息者 (provided by @飞舞回堂前:, a Wuu Chinese user)
  • 大量訊息寄件者 (provided by @Cwlin0416:)
  • 大量訊息發送者 (provided by @Bowleerin:)

Is this still stabilized? If still yes, then let you see the history of MediaWiki:Last/zh-hans where 11 diffs about "prev" happened.

Liuxinyu970226 (talk)07:48, 16 October 2016

"Can be" means possible with some work. For stabilizing things across communities, that "work" means communication...

(By the way is this yet another terminology problem?)

Arthur2e502:55, 17 October 2016