Grants talk:PEG/Patricio Molina - Wikimedians in Bolivia/Bylaws translation

Is it really necessary to have professional translation? I guess chapters committe can accept non-profesional translation made by Wikimedia contributors just to avoid this IMHO unnecesary costs.... Moreover the cost of this translation seems to me really high. How it was calculated? Polimerek (talk) 00:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

• I second Polimerek concern. Béria Lima ^msg 17:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

We're not particularly interested in a professional translation (and we don't want to waste other people's money in vain). As a matter of fact, we tried to find volunteers interested in the translation of our bylaws, but we couldn't find anyone with enough time and knowledge for this task. I can assure you that we have discussed a lot about this issue in our meetings, and we couldn't find any better solution rather than a grant request.

About the cost: I've asked four different people and this was the cheapest estimate we have received.

Mahadeva (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the submission. Usually we receive such requests after the recognition and foundation of the chapter, but it doesn't seem to be always necessary when an NGO really exists. So, did you already found an NGO in Bolivia to formally receive the money on its account or it is something that you will do after the recognition from the ChapCom? I also think that this cost is a bit high, but please excuse me if it includes more than only translation. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I can pay for it and wait for a reimbursement, does that work for you?. I can also ask Wikimedia Argentina to intercede in this, to make things more transparent (I'm the Deputy Treasurer in that chapter). We're planning to found and NGO in Bolivia immediately after the recognition as an official chapter.

Mahadeva (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

It's fine and that's the usual way how it used to be done.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:13, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Fit to strategy

Could you please expand this section? Abbasjnr (talk) 14:17, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll expand that section ASAP. Mahadeva (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Done. Mahadeva (talk) 19:36, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Other comments

Just to put in a bit of historical perspective after the grant has already been approved quite efficiently. In 2005, the Board decided that new chapters could be given certain funding by the Chapters Coordinator upon request to get them started including the translation of bylaws (this latter is important because the Chapters Committee usually reviews an English version of the bylaws before "allowing" any local NGO to be founded - therefore requests are coming in from entities-to-be); while there is no more Chapters Coordinator, these rights and duties were transferred to the Chapters Committee. In the years since, to my knowledge, Chapcom has not used this facility and in the mean time the grant system was set up as a standard and transparent way to provide support for those who need it.

Without wanting to turn back time or to build up parallel capacities, I would appreciate if the Chapters Committee could continue to rely on the efficiency of the grants programme (as has been demonstrated in the present case), and if the GAC would be aware that requests like these (and to the like mentioned in the 2005 document) are likely to come in and should continue to be handled routinely and quickly. (The Committee will continue to encourage volunteer translations, but speaking out of experience, we fully appreciate that translating legal texts is difficult and when appropriate will recommend the grant system.)

If in doubt, or for any questions, please contact us, --Bence (talk) (member of Chapcom, but expressing entirely personal opinion even if being liberal with "we") 00:16, 12 June 2012 (UTC)