Implicating machine_translation → translation_request
Link to implication

Reason:

There are currently 8960 translation_request posts. Sometimes stuff such as Latin or Danish can easily be typed and translated into google, but other languages such as Japanese or Chinese isn't so easy unless one knows how to type it.
My suggestion is to add machine_translation as a temporary place holder for untranslated text.

When a note is added, the user who does the translation should prefix the note with "\(Machine Translation)\\n\n"(where \n is a new line) as to not get tagged with bad_grammar or similar tags, as well have users not try and remove translation_request and to help translators know what was machine translated and what was not.

I believe this will be useful for those who want to know what is displayed on screen, especially japanese/chinese/russian/etc, but also to those who do not wish to type it out and translate it through google.

This is also a discussion on the usage of machine translation for notes.
Should it be allowed, if so do you agree with my idea of labeling machine translation by prefixing it or do you believe there should be another method?

Machine translation is not a replacement for manual translation. It is just a place holder until a translator can fully translate it. Machine translation is never completely accurate and as such, translators will still need to go and translate the text. It is just so users can read what is shown rather than guessing.

EDIT: The tag implication machine_translation -> translation_request (forum #203586) has been rejected by @furrypickle.

I feel like it would be much nicer to simply have the text that is on the image set as notes. Because like you said, machine translation is not the most accurate, but accuracy will change over time. If you typed something to google translate three years ago, you might get much differend translation compared to what you get now, because algorithms keep getting better as more data is being poured in.

Now if the text is available in copy-pasteable form right away, user is then free to translate the stuff themselves. Also then no need for extra tags or work to solve if something is machine translated or not.

Because google translators camera feature does work, but if the text is even slighly weirdly stylized, especially japanese, it fails to OCR it.

Translation_check is occasionally used when the translator (or someone reading the translation) is unsure about it. Maybe that could also be applied to machine translations?

The tag is currently empty, but that's just because everything's been checked.

Genjar said:
Translation_check is occasionally used when the translator (or someone reading the translation) is unsure about it. Maybe that could also be applied to machine translations?

The tag is currently empty, but that's just because everything's been checked.

I never knew that existed! I'll need to start using it now.

The tag implication machine_translation -> translation_request (forum #203586) has been rejected by @furrypickle.