Problem: When translating an entry from another language edition of wikipedia, publication is often not permitted. I agree not to publish in the ns0 but if you want to publish in a user sandbox it should not be forbidden as it works better in a sandbox than the translator screen.
Content Translation has a a system for quality control that prevents from publishing translations when too much unmodified content is detected. There are different elements in this system and we identified different possible improvements (phab:T251887). Avoiding limits to be applied when publishing in the user namespace is one of them, but it wold be useful to know more details about the issues experienced to identify the underlying problem (preventing the publication of good translations) rather than providing just a workaround. --Pginer-WMF (talk) 15:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For example, some templates or tables are just simply difficult to translate in the Content Translation interface, so as things like source code editing or editing reference lists. In addition, sometimes some machine translation result of some paragraph are so bad due to failure of machine translation engines, that it is more preferable to take the original text and translating them by hand subsequently in draft space. Sometimes translation would also need to adjust paragraph and section layout and that's easier to be done in user namespace than inside Content Translation interface. Sometimes the Content Translation simply bugged out and cannot properly store an article so it would be better to first export what have been done to user namespace or draft namespace first instead of having to dump the entire thing into trash bin and redo the entire thing. C933103 (talk) 22:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, when we can't translate as efficiently most people want to publish the draft in a user draft page, or in Draft: namespace. Howewer, CT has a lot of problem, when we can't edit in source code and a lot of template must be used in source code. Thingofme (talk) 02:36, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Burgundo, thank you for this proposal. Could you write more about when exactly you experience this? I mean in what situation you find it's forbidden? It may be helpful for you to read the comments above. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 22:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My experiences are of a different kind. The system does not accept HTML errors that are not easy to find in the tables, or the translation of a paragraph is good and therefore it was not necessary to change the translation. In these cases I am forced to make unnecessary corrections that the program deems sufficient to unlock the translation. This means that it is then necessary to sandbox what has been modified to get published. I still maintain that it would be very useful to be able to publish the raw translation in a user sandbox anyway where you still have to work to fix the notes, wikify and insert the templates that have not been translated. In any case I will continue to make do as I have so far as I have done more than 2000 translations and I am a responsible person as I have also been an administrator on it: wiki for 15 years.--Burgundo (talk) 07:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I also have this issue - I like using the translation tool for templates, categories, etc., but want to do the actual translation work in my sandbox due to preferring the native tools on Wikipedia. Exilexi (talk) 18:01, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Izno (talk) 00:01, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Strong support Alhassan Mohammed Awal (talk) 03:33, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
