Board Thread:News and Announcements/@comment-14908162-20180130171542/@comment-26239285-20180131021811

Can we make statements like it's "not up to our standards"? How can YouTube allow translations unless they have some level of confidence that the translators are capable? I think we should investigate that issue before we make such a statement. If it turns out that YouTube has a way of assuring translation quality, then there's no reason why we would reject those translations, although I agree they should not be classified as "official".

Also, I don't think we need another notice like that. I think it's simpler and sufficient to label the translation column "Official English" as we do now (so long as it really is official). Warnings for reasons of health, offensiveness or copyright warrant notices like that as they are legitimate warnings and it helps them stand out. Who made the translation, however, does not warrant a notice that takes up space and is not even a guarantee of reliability (I've come across official translations that would not be up to our standards--very few, fortunately, but they exist).

My advice, for what it's worth, is that for the moment we add a warning to the guidelines that YouTube closed captions might not be official and for now are not accepted. Next, we should investigate how YouTube assesses the translators' capabilites and based on the results of the investigation decide further what to do.