Wikipedia's founder said he used ChatGPT in the review process for an article and thought it could be helpful. Editors replied to point out it was full of mistakes.
As long as you can verify it is an accurate translation
Unless the process has changed in the last decade, article translations are a multi-step process, which includes translators and proof-readers. It’s easier to get volunteer proof-readers than volunteer translators. Adding AI for the translation step, but keeping the proof-reading step should be a great help.
But you could probably also have used Google translate and then just fine tune the output yourself. Anyone could have done that at any point in the last 10 years.
Have you ever used Google translate? Putting an entire Wikipedia article through it and then “fine tuning” it would be more work than translating it from scratch. Absolutely no comparison between Google translate and AI translations.
Unless the process has changed in the last decade, article translations are a multi-step process, which includes translators and proof-readers. It’s easier to get volunteer proof-readers than volunteer translators. Adding AI for the translation step, but keeping the proof-reading step should be a great help.
Have you ever used Google translate? Putting an entire Wikipedia article through it and then “fine tuning” it would be more work than translating it from scratch. Absolutely no comparison between Google translate and AI translations.
That depends on if you are capable of translating the language if you don’t know the language then the translator will give you a good start.