A few notes:

1. I did not create example pages for every language hub thus far. I only created enough to show off examples of how this will be approached.
2. The SCP-RU Credits page is not complete. I admittedly could not figure out where, say, SCP-206 was on the Russian site because its original number was changed and replaced by a new SCP on there. Same for all the other ones except for SCP-2470/SCP-1001-RU. The rest of the examples on that page are filler to test out formatting.
3. The footnotes on the workbench page are there so I can replace the links to sandbox with actual mainsite links immediately instead of forgetting about them.
4. The templates used here are based off of the Korean site's hub, the French site's hub (who used my WIP as a template and got theirs out before I ever got done!) and the Russian site's licensing page.
5. This will be posted on both 05command and SCP International to get the widest range of responses as I can so Roget, anqxyr, and I can work on stuff.

Hopefully you guys like this! Feedback is appreciated. Thank you ❤

Link to SCP International post.

Alternatively, would it be possible to move the duty of updating the translation hubs with new translations to the people doing the translating? i.e. Say that one of the requirements for translating an article is adding it to its relevant translation hub, similar to how authors are required to add their skips to the relevant series page themselves.

Just my 0.02 USD on the subject.

Like say SCP-173-KO is put into slot SCP-3003 on our mainlist, and then linked to a Translations page that lists it as a translated article & links back to the original SCP-173-KO on their wiki.

ETA: I'm cool with the above proposal, btw.

That said, we don't necessarily have to endorse them either. Which posting translations on our wiki would be, in my eyes. Whatever gets to stay on our wiki should abide by our quality standards and our community's vote. And most of the foreign works will probably do just fine. But we shouldn't exempt all of them from the voting process just because they earned their place on their respective wikis. Earning a place there should not be a free-pass for a place here.

To put it another way, should we have posted articles from the CI wiki on the main site, deletion-exempted, just because they've survived there, and CI wiki is an offshot site? Is the situation with the translation wikis substantially different from this hypothetical?

Which is not to say that the works of the translation wikis are automatically bad in some way. They're just a product of different cultures, and different cultures sometimes have different tastes. But we still shouldn't adopt them unfiltered.

My opinion is based mostly on the russian branch, as the one I'm most familiar with, but should apply to others as well.

I mean we could use a tag or something either, I dunno.

Or am the only one who thinks this is weird?

When we put up a hub for -FR, -PL or -RU (or any of the other recognized foreign language wikis), we are essentially saying: this is your list. Translations that go on there are different from translations that are trying to integrate into the mainlist. Of course a translation can be done poorly, with bad spelling, grammatical errors or punctuation errors, but if an article is on its own foreign language hub, the translation is just that: a translation. It's an English version of an article that's already been judged on its parent wiki and does not need to be judged again. SPAG errors can be fixed, especially with our help (us being the community).

If we go down the hub route, I strongly advise articles added to those hubs are exempt from the normal deletions process. I wouldn't even put rating modules on them to be honest.

Edit: to explain this, our articles, translated into any of the foreign language wikis' mother tongue, are exempt from the deletion process too (I think?), so I'm assuming we'd do them the same courtesy.

One thing I do want to stress, however: I would like the translated articles treated with the same level of care and respect as mainlist articles. I'm seeing a bit of a superiority complex in the tone of some of these posts, and that bothers me.

I don't feel like I'm being addressed here, but to answer your concerns:

• Yes, these translated articles are as important and worthwhile as articles native to this wiki.
• Their off-site origins are addressed by the "translation" and "ru", "ko" etc. tags already in use. These articles are both immediately listable in a ListPages module and instantly recognizable when viewing the article.
• Cultural significance of certain details should be addressed on the discussion thread, where a context can be given for translated articles that incorporate certain culture-specific elements and might not make sense otherwise.

The only difference in writing quality between the english wiki and the foreign wikis is that we got here first.

I don't follow. How is this wiki being older an influence on the writing quality? Or do you mean that we've had more time to practice writing for this specific community, while the foreign-language wikis might have a different set of standards due to their more recent founding?

Anyway, I would presume translated articles would be treated exactly like non-translated articles.

Edit: forgot to say something. If we start up hubs for translated articles, they won't be as visible as on the mainlist.

One thing I do want to stress, however: I would like the translated articles treated with the same level of care and respect as mainlist articles. I'm seeing a bit of a superiority complex in the tone of some of these posts, and that bothers me. The only difference in writing quality between the english wiki and the foreign wikis is that we got here first. I want to make sure that they aren't either shunted off where no one will see them, and that their origins off-site are not erased, and that the cultural significance of certain details are not erased either.

As long as those concerns are addressed and kept foremost, I think the rest comes down to details and authorial preference.

If the author's gone or fine with it, then go for it.

I mean, I'm obviously talking of something I have little to no idea of, but this sounds sort of coherent, I hope?

What if the author really does not want to put SCP-222-KO under SCP-2127? Asking the authors is still fine, but if an author really doesn't want their thing in the mainlist slot, then can we force them?

Well, one option is that the piece of work simply doesn't go on this wiki.

Suggestion: Classify it under another number on the mainlist, but then:

A) title the article SCP-222-KO, and add an in-character note under "Item #" reading "This SCP is classified as SCP-2127 under the Foundation's English-language classification system."
B) title the article SCP-2127, and add an in-character note under "Item #" reading "This SCP is classified as SCP-222-KO under the Foundation's Korean-language classification system."

Alternative: American/Korean; cross-country/localized; etc

I'd honestly recommend this not be done unless the classification number is important to the SCP's content, especially for cultural reasons.

For instance, I honestly don't see SCP-179 (one of my favorite SCPs) as having the same impact with a note like this tacked onto it. I'd have been disappointed when it turned out the number did NOT have an actual impact on the article itself, because so much attention was called to it.

So okay, no putting stuff in the mainlist under original numbering + suffixes. But there's still the issue of having translated articles being put under a fresh mainlist number slot at all. What if the author really does not want to put SCP-222-KO under SCP-2127? Asking the authors is still fine, but if an author really doesn't want their thing in the mainlist slot, then can we force them?

People seem to be generally okay with the hub. Regardless of how we sort this out, making a hub for these translated articles would indeed work, right?

Also, a technical note and question as an author; would the articles that have been significantly rewritten when translated from their original wiki since posted receive a subdesignation at all, or is the concept linking them relevant enough as to make them worth of a subdesignation (and the translation tags, etc)? I ask because, well, for instance, SCP-179 is basically SCP-ES-026, but they do not have the same text in their articles. I'm not sure whether this would merit 179 a subdesignation, since it is quite different from the original. I had to rewrite it in order to improve it and up its quality to site standards. :S

I'd say they still count. 179, if posted under this method on the site in the form its in today, would count as SCP-ES-026. That's my take on it.

a good enough reason

YMMV. I understand your point, but I simply don't see it as a major issue of the proposal (frankly, I find that the symmetry of the mainlist is already broken at points, visually at least by adding bolded text for the title of an item, for instance; the bolding is applied for story-enhancing reasons, as a way to reinforce certain aspects of the item within the mainlist. It is not necessary, and it eliminates the clean-and-cut looks of the mainlist… but it adds to the article, and drags attention to it when a user is browsing the mainlist. Why not do this methodically for articles that have been translated?¹), while I see the boons that would arise from its application as rewarding enough to attempt it. _{Then again, it's not something worth arguing about, it's merely an idea worth entertaining.}

_{Also, a technical note and question as an author; would the articles that have been significantly rewritten when translated from their original wiki since posted receive a subdesignation at all, or is the concept linking them relevant enough as to make them worth of a subdesignation (and the translation tags, etc)? I ask because, well, for instance, SCP-179 is basically SCP-ES-026, but they do not have the same text in their articles. I'm not sure whether this would merit 179 a subdesignation, since it is quite different from the original. I had to rewrite it in order to improve it and up its quality to site standards. :S}

_{Opinions anyone?}

It may sound frivolous. But I still support Deci's idea in face of Reject's comment for the aforementioned reasons.

I'm down to also have a hub that has whatever number + suffix and links to the original and translated versions of whatever articles as long as on our website they are treated and titled as normal SCPs. They can be linked from that hub under their original number easily without screwing anything else up.

Thanks, Decibelle. _{Why you so cool tho} :3

What about articles written by an author as mainlisters, then translated by the same author to their Wiki? Should the article designation remain, or could it be classified as an ES?

They already do SCP-XXX-JP, or SCP-XXX-KO, SCP-XXX-FR, etc. Every Wiki follows this standard for articles from other sites but us, at the moment.

Added the translation tag for that, and put her name in the Override list.

Danke schön. 🐶

Also, please note that I am pretty certain this is a pestering question. What about articles written by an author as mainlisters, then translated by the same author to their Wiki? Should the article designation remain, or could it be classified as an ES?

It's minor, obviously.

An observation: I don't mind, but articles in the SCP-ES receive a SCP-ES-XXX designation always, and it might be practical to consider the language designation as prioritary over the numerical one. Not due to vital distinctions between the articles, but for the sake of clarity.

I assumed the SCP-ES ordination intended to avoid messing up and confusing sub-designations for the readers (as in "SCP-letter-number-number/letter., where numbers are kept at the end so ES doesn't get mistaken for a letter sub-designation). In this case, of course, SCP-ES would be a bit jarring to see in the mainlist, if that is something I wouldn't really mind to see. Both designations, SCP-ES and SCP-XXXX-ES are fine.

If people even think this is a good idea in the first place, I don't mind having the SCP-ES/RU/KO-XXX vs. SCP-XXX-ES/RU/KO discussion.

One is 179, the other is 2104, written by now defunct user Vlank

Alright, thank you for telling me! Added the translation tag for that, and put her name in the Override list.

one from the Spanish wiki

_{Minor note. There are two. One is 179, the other is 2104, written by now defunct user Vlank (may she be forever remembered as the woman who started SCP-ES *Praise her*).}

SCP-101-RU

An observation: I don't mind, but articles in the SCP-ES receive a SCP-ES-XXX designation always, and it might be practical to consider the language designation as prioritary over the numerical one. Not due to vital distinctions between the articles, but for the sake of clarity.

I assumed the SCP-ES ordination intended to avoid messing up and confusing sub-designations for the readers (as in "SCP-letter-number-number/letter., where numbers are kept at the end so ES doesn't get mistaken for a letter sub-designation). In this case, of course, SCP-ES would be a bit jarring to see in the mainlist, if that is something I wouldn't really mind to see. Both designations, SCP-ES and SCP-XXXX-ES are fine.

I do wanna open this discussion up to non-staff as well.

This, I can agree on, though.

So provided Fissh got their SCP-500-KO article translated and wanted to keep the importance of the numbering, could they title the skip on the Series page SCP-500-KO? I know there are some articles that do this kind of thing but have some random number on the mainlist, hence the asking.

I had thought, when Roget posted How do you guys want to be represented on the mainsite?, that most people were in agreement about how we represent translated works, and the above is how we weren't supposed to do it. However, when Yoric brought this up to me, as did Salamander724, I realized that the Korean wiki feels differently now. They want their SCP articles represented and posted as SCP-XXX-KO, versus having a slot on the mainlist. There's even a thread on their forums where everyone so far is in agreement on how they want skips recognized. Having talked with Clef, and further discussions with Salamander and SunnyParallax on what the Chinese wiki wants (I sent PMs to Gene R and a tell to Reach on IRC), here's what I think might work. I will stress that this is just a preliminary idea.

Translators talk with the authors on a case-by-case basis. If they want their work in a regular mainlist slot, the work gets posted in a mainlist slot.

If the authors want their works to have the regular numbering and suffix of where the work comes from, we edit the main series list in with the numbering. So, for example, if SCP-101-RU got ported over, it'd look like:

• SCP-100
• SCP-101
• SCP-101-RU
• SCP-102

etc. If the original article is from a deleted account, the translator would have the purview of how they want the work to be represented on our site.

Either way, what we should do is create a hub to link to these translated articles, based on where they're from. I'm not sure how I'd want it to look, because we don't have enough translated skips on the site yet (some from the Russian wiki, and one from the Spanish wiki). But this hub would link to the articles, and ideally a link to this hub would be put under the "SCP Database" portion of the sidebar. That way, it's much more visible and people can find the translated articles super easily. We would keep the "translation" and "ru", "es", etc. tags for any translated articles no matter what route we go. I would want a hub regardless.

Any feedback? Considering the Korean wiki really wants to have articles on our site, and we still get translation articles from the Russian wiki, and how I want to continue to push for more translations on our site, I'd really appreciate some comments in response to this. The Chinese wiki staff thinks this idea is kind of weird (for adding original numbering + suffixes on mainlist), and no word back from Gene yet. I'm posting this because I want discussion to start.

EDIT: I do wanna open this discussion up to non-staff as well. However, I do wanna at least get some discussion here first before opening up the floor to mainsite users.

EDIT: If anyone finds something that I missed, please tag it, or if you find or know of something, and don't want to tag it until you get confirmation if there is none, contact the poster of the article (or me if you want to make me do the grunt work :P).

So provided Fissh got their SCP-500-KO article translated and wanted to keep the importance of the numbering, could they title the skip on the Series page SCP-500-KO? I know there are some articles that do this kind of thing but have some random number on the mainlist, hence the asking.

also craaayne i sent you a tell about translation tags

EDIT: To review, we want another option to add a user as a translator, and only the original or rewrite author receives the upvotes?

Another question related to this; would it be fine to credit specific users on Wikidot for the original articles in Alexandra, or should that stay for the ones who translated it?

This is the question that has been bothering me the most. People should get credit for translating, but should they get the upvotes for it even though they didn't write the original? I don't know.

Right now I veer towards no, they do not get the upvotes in Alexandra. I support a "translated by" portion, similar to what we do with rewrites, as well as allowing translators to put it on their author page and get credit in the comments. I just don't feel comfortable with translators getting all the credit, though I really do want them to get some. Translating's not easy.

Another question related to this; would it be fine to credit specific users on Wikidot for the original articles in Alexandra, or should that stay for the ones who translated it? For example, Gene R has translated a vast majority of the translated Russian articles on our site, or at the very least, brought them over. Does he get credit in Alexandra, or do we credit the original authors? This is also a question that'd extend to whenever we translate articles from other sites too.¹

I'd also want the translator to do an attribution post as the first post on the discussion thread, giving full credit (of course) to the main author, linking to the original article (even if many members can't read the original, the added traffic and the link are a courtesy), and explaining why this article appealed to the translator.

I think that adding a tag to these articles to indicate they're a translation is a good idea, and that site members should be more willing to act and interact with the members of foreign sites (relative to them).¹ I'm assuming that pretty much anyone that can read an article on our wiki or one of the non-english wiki's is fully capable of communicating in that language, and would hope that a little courtesy "hey check out this translation of your work I've been working on!" would be among their checklist as they get at it. Whether the original author would be able to read the translation is a different story, but hopefully someone would be able to confirm that the article attempts to keep the same general feeling and tone across language barriers. I recognize that not asking the original author is a high probability from our wiki to one of the non-english ones, since we were the original, but I hope that that will begin to dissolve and we can turn article swapping and sharing into a way of bringing our sites, and the greater SCP community in general, closer together.

_{I'm a little miffed that I'm a bit late to the party here, but that's largely thanks to me trying to catch up on homework and recovering from Spring Break.}