How to stop a "translation war"?

[Schimon Jehudah]

Good afternoon.

I want to add a note in addition to the message of Mr. Zayed Al-Saidi.

I want to add that there are infiltrators (i.e. "moles", so called)
from organizations that do not want Open Source and Free Software to
prevail, so they pay people to corrupt translations.

In Hebrew, for instance:

There are rules for Hebrew translations which are based on the rules of
MacroSoft and Abode (I have deliberately wrote the brands wrongly).

https://web.archive.org/web/20061014012007if_/http://il.kde.org/hebrew/guidelines/

However, moles, in the name of gender equality "agenda", corrupt the
verbs into nouns (e.g. Select All is translated to Selection Of The
All, and sometimes to Selectation All which is not a valid word), so
the context is distorted.

This string:

"Are you sure that you want to exit this porgram?"

Might be translated to:

"Are you sure to exit program?" (not good)

"To exit program are you sure?" (very bad)

In order to skip gender references, which is not in-line with any rule
of software in the Hebrew market.

This means, that a lecturer in a university would laugh when he would
see a Hebrew desktop of a Linux software and subsequently would
consider MS or MAC, because the Hebrew translation for Linux is mostly
corrupted.

This gender argument is inherently a false argument, because "computer"
in Hebrew is always a male, so verb commands should always be
translated to male, and there is no "discrimination" by doing it, yet
the moles try to shift the argument to human, male and female.

It is easy to recognize some of those moles, because according to
thenumber of translated software, some apparently utilize more than 5
desktop environments and over 1500 software, which is impossible for a
one man, and it is impossible that a man is translating so many
software unless he is on a very high welfare from who knows who.

Some moles even harassing new volunteers in porjects that were not even
known to them prior to the involvement of new volunteers, because they
(or the subverting organization behind them) scan or follow activities
or other software, and then they are notified of a new project to
corrupt.

I am VERY disappointed of software developers for not investigating or
understandind this issue.

This is why I, and many other volunteers, have eventually stopped to
translate for GNOME, Xfce, and Qt.

Since Falkon is under KDE, I now fear to restore the Falkon
translation, which I have participated during the days of Qupzilla,
because I am not intending to waste my time arguing with harassers.

There should be a recommended regulation to handle translators.

Otherwise, anyone who is bullying at people behind a keyboard, would
discourage new and potential volunteers.

P.S. I did speak about it in the past with Mr. Juraj and I am glad that
     Juraj is aware of this concern.

Kindly,
Schimon

On Sun, 6 Jul 2025 10:02:01 +0400
Zayed Al-Saidi <zayed.alsaidi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Juraj,
> 
> Thank you to bring this to my attention. It seems the scripty kiddy
> doing the fight with my Lokalize and summit without human involvement
> 😅.
> 
> 
> في السبت، ٥ يوليو ٢٠٢٥، ١٢:٤٤ م Juraj Oravec <jurajoravec at mailo.com>
> كتب:
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > For a while I maintain a Falkon project.
> > Since the translations are included and synced every day within the
> > git repository, I see very often something I call a "translation
> > war".
> >
> > This "war" consist of changing the SAME translation back and forth
> > over and over and over again. Which translator is right? I have no
> > idea, all I know is, that it is a mess and it makes a load of
> > useless commits.
> >
> > The issue is with an Arabic (ar) translation[2] and what seems to be
> > numbers. Have a discussion here and now, determine which one is
> > correct, correct the translation (if needed) and freeze it.
> >
> >  
> > > "Plural-Forms: nplurals=6; plural=n==0 ? 0 : n==1 ? 1 : n==2 ? 2 :
> > n%100>=3 "
> > > "&& n%100<=10 ? 3 : n%100>=11 && n%100<=99 ? 4 : 5;\n"  
> >
> > vs
> >  
> > > "Plural-Forms: nplurals=6; plural=n==0 ? 0 : n==1 ? 1 : n==2 ? 2 :
> > n%100>=3 "
> > > "&& n%100<=10 ? 3 : n%100>=11 ? 4 : 5;\n"  
> >  
> 
> In Arabic we using this. See
> https://wiki.arabeyes.org/Plural_Forms
> 
> 
> >
> > PS: at the end are links to the commit history[1] for this file and
> > to an example commit[2] with this change.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your help,
> > Best regards,
> > Juraj
> >
> >
> > [1]:
> > https://invent.kde.org/network/falkon/-/commits/master/poqm/ar/falkon_sitesettingsview_qt.po
> > [2]:
> > https://invent.kde.org/network/falkon/-/commit/c8dfd002b807c87610fff4a8332107f4ddccfcc4
> >  
> 
> 
> As far I understand, the result both forms will give same result.
> Fifth form: for numbers that end with a number between 11 and 99
> (like: 1099, 278)
> 
> n%100>=11 && n%100<=99 ? 4
> n%100>=11 ? 4  
> 
> Is that correct? As I mentioned before, we have sticked to the last
> one for decade without issue.
> 
> I don't know who introduced the first one to scripty kiddy.
> 
> Regards,
> Zayed