Translating talk:Flagged Revs extension

Flagged Revs contains many key words. "quality", "stable" and "sighted" are mentioned on the page. Every translator of Flagged Revs should create a list of standard translations of these keywords before starting to translate. These standard translations avoid translating the keywords with different synonyms on different occasions which is bad for consistency. Has anybody already created a list like that? (Would save me from looking through all the messages and compiling one myself.) --::Slomox:: >< 18:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Not {{Identical}}? --fryed-peach 08:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Identical is for identical messages only, isn't it? I meant cases like "this is a stable article" where "stable" should be translated with the same word as in all the other Flagged Revs messages. --::Slomox:: >< 13:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I tried to collect all relevant keywords. See below. Please somebody have a look whether it's accurate. I'm really unsure about the parts marked with question marks. --::Slomox:: >< 01:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

keyword	example	where it occurs, what it means
quality quality page quality revision quality version quality assurance	Reviewedpages-lev-1 (“{{int:revreview-lev-quality}}”) Revreview-quality-title (“This is a quality version of this page”) Revreview-hist-quality [hist-quality] (“quality revision”) Revreview-filter-level-1 (“Quality”) Specialpages-group-quality (“Edit review”)	a page or revision that is 'reviewed'
stable stable page stable version	Stabilization-def-short-1 (“Stable”) Stablepages (“Pages using edit approval”) Stablepages-stable (“published version”)	a page that is either 'reviewed' or 'sighted' thus not a 'draft'
stabilize stabilized stability stabilization	Flaggedrevs-desc (“Gives Editors the ability to review revisions and stabilize pages”) Stable-logpagetext (“This is a log of changes to the [[{{MediaWiki:Validationpage}}|stable version]] configuration of content pages.”) Stable-logpage (“Stability log”) Stabilization (“Page stabilization”)	the act of making 'stable' ('stable' and 'stabilized' are the same, but 'stable' focuses on the status and 'stabilized' focuses on the finished act)
sighted sighted page sighted revision sighted version	Reviewedpages-lev-0 (“{{int:revreview-lev-basic}}”) Revreview-basic-title (“This is a checked version of this page”) Revreview-hist-basic [rev-review-hist-basic] (“checked revision”) Revreview-filter-level-0 (“Sighted”)	'to sight' is the act of approving, that an edit was not invalid
current current revision	Stabilization-def1 (“The stable version; if not present, then the latest revision”) Stabilization-def2 (“The latest revision”)	most up-to-date version of the page, whether sighted or not
editor	Editor (“Editor”)	anybody, who is able to 'sight'
review reviewed reviewer	Revreview-reviewlink (“pending edits”) Validationstatistics-stable (“Reviewed”) Group-reviewer-member (“{{GENDER:$1|reviewer}}”)	a reviewed page is the second level after a 'sighted' page, it means, that the page is not only "not containing invalid material" (that's what 'sighted' means), but the content is 'valid' in a positive sense and is regarded to be accurate
draft draft page draft revision draft version	Revreview-current (“Pending changes”) Revreview-draft-title (“Pending changes are displayed on this page”) Revreview-hist-draft (“unchecked revision”) Unstablepages-text (“Below is a list of pages manually configured to show the draft version as the default page content for viewers.”)	a revision not yet sighted or a page containing a revision like that
validate validated validation	Flaggedrevs-desc (“Gives Editors the ability to review revisions and stabilize pages”) Right-validate (“Mark revisions as being "quality"”) Validationstatistics (“Page review statistics”)	synonymous to 'reviewed'? Or a catchall for 'reviewed' and 'sighted'?
approval approve approved	Qualityoversight-list (“This page lists the most recent approvals and deprecations of revisions.”) Revreview-basic (“This is the [[{{MediaWiki:Validationpage}}|stable version]], [{{fullurl:{{#Special:Log}}|type=review&page={{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}} checked] on <i>$2</i>. [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}|oldid=$1&diff=cur}} $3 pending {{PLURAL:$3|change|changes}}] {{PLURAL:$3|awaits|await}} review.”) Revreview-filter-approved (“Approved”)	catchall for 'reviewed' and 'sighted'?
unapproved	Revreview-depth-0 (“Inadequate”)	first level of 'depth'
basic	Revreview-depth-1 (“Basic”)	second level of 'depth'
moderate	Revreview-depth-2 (“Moderate”)	third level of 'depth'
high	Revreview-depth-3 (“High”)	fourth level of 'depth'
featured	Revreview-depth-4 (“Featured”)	fifth level of 'depth'
unapproved	Revreview-style-0 (“Inadequate”)	first level of 'style'
good	Revreview-style-1 (“Acceptable”)	second level of 'style'
acceptable	Revreview-style-2 (“Good”)	third level of 'style'
concise	Revreview-style-3 (“Concise”)	fourth level of 'style'
featured	Revreview-style-4 (“Featured”)	fifth level of 'style'
unapproved	Revreview-accuracy-0 (“Inadequate”)	first level of 'accuracy'
sighted	Revreview-accuracy-1 (“Spot checked”)	second level of 'accuracy'
accurate	Revreview-accuracy-2 (“Accurate”)	third level of 'accuracy'
well sourced	Revreview-accuracy-3 (“Well sourced”)	fourth level of 'accuracy'
featured	Revreview-accuracy-4 (“Featured”)	fifth level of 'accuracy'
autopromoted	Rights-editor-autosum (“autopromoted”)	a user who attains the 'editor' right without applying for it (by number of edits, time since account creation, or other criterions like that)
rate rating	Revreview-legend (“Rate revision content”) Ratinghistory-tab (“rating”)	readers can give their opinion on pages and judge about 'neutrality', 'completeness', 'reliability', and 'presentation'
reliability	Readerfeedback-reliability (“Reliability”)	one of the four fields readers can 'rate' the page by, is the page reliable or does the reader not trust the content?
completeness	Readerfeedback-completeness (“Completeness”)	one of the four fields readers can 'rate' the page by, is the page complete or is information lacking?
neutrality	Readerfeedback-npov (“Neutrality”)	one of the four fields readers can 'rate' the page by, is the page neutral or biased?
presentation	Readerfeedback-presentation (“Presentation”)	one of the four fields readers can 'rate' the page by, is the content presented in a way easy to read and to understand?
poor	Readerfeedback-level-0 (“Poor”)	first level of the four fields of 'reader feedback'
low	Readerfeedback-level-1 (“Low”)	second level of the four fields of 'reader feedback'
fair	Readerfeedback-level-2 (“Fair”)	third level of the four fields of 'reader feedback'
high	Readerfeedback-level-3 (“High”)	fourth level of the four fields of 'reader feedback'
excellent	Readerfeedback-level-4 (“Excellent”)	fifth level of the four fields of 'reader feedback'

Patrol log vs Review log

These translations in Korean are *same*. I wonder what is difference between "patrol" and "review". How can I avoid this conflict?--Kwj2772 04:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

What messages exactly are you referring to? --::Slomox:: >< 21:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

The link to the svn (currenty) at the bottom of the page is working but not going anywhere useful. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 08:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I find some Polish translations (in particular, MediaWiki:Revreview-accuracy/pl) inadequate or inconsistent (MediaWiki:Revreview-depth-0/pl versus MediaWiki:Revreview-style-0/pl). Can I just fix them here or should I do anything special first? Editing them in a test wiki first does not seem to be an option; you need to have administrator rights to edit interface messages there.

Just fix them here, especially if you're sure that the editors at your wiki will think that your corrections are OK.