Yes I agree that primary sources should ONLY be cited-quoted, in their original language. A translation can be *published* but that publication cannot be in Wikipedia solely. It must live somewhere else as well, published by a reliable source.
In this case of an audio file, we should have a transcription, than a translation. However having Wikipedians translate primary sources and then citing and quoting those *translations* in-project is a recipe for disaster and fraught with the potential for abuse, as well as being original research. In this case the original research is *your unpublished translation used as the actual source*. That's no good. -----Original Message----- From: Ray Saintonge <sainto...@telus.net> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Wed, Jul 27, 2011 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge On 07/27/11 12:42 PM, Wjhonson wrote: David how is an exact quote a summary or interpretation? An exact quote, backed up by the actual audio track is... exact. You are not summarizing it, and you are not interpreting it either. You are presenting it. If that is to be the case the exact quote MUST be in its original anguage. All translations require interpretation. Ray _______________________________________________ oundation-l mailing list oundatio...@lists.wikimedia.org nsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
