5 ms·
This seems fine as long as the articles are clearly marked as machine-generated. Machine translation regularly garbles the meaning of text, while producing read
by _-___________-_ 7y ago
This seems fine as long as the articles are clearly marked as machine-generated. Machine translation regularly garbles the meaning of text, while producing readable text that has correct sentence structure etc. This is a major problem in an encyclopedia.
- yorwba 7y agoThe subtitle of the article makes it sound like the text in question is machine-translated, but it is created by filling a template with structured data. So long as the template is correct and the data source is accurate, the meaning won't be garbled.
- _-___________-_ 7y agoI can't really see how the number of translated articles could be as huge as it is using only that approach.
- rcthompson 7y agoI guess it depends on how much information is in Wikidata, assuming that's the data source.
- yorwba 7y agoWhy not? I tried a random article and got one about a park: https://ceb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atokad_Park https://ceb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atokad_Park Note that there's no English article about that park that could have served as the source for a machine translation. The article mostly lists a bunch of facts about the location that are easily available in public databases. I don't know how many entries GeoNames.org has, but this park has the number 5063315, so there should be material for quite a lot of articles.