Help:Translation/Machine translation errors

This page is a worksheet for gathering data on serious errors produced by automatic translation programs translating into English that would negatively impact the verifiability of an article if the translation were added to English Wikipedia. This page is not for recording awkward wording, poor style, incorrect grammar, or translated content that would benefit from copyediting, but strictly examples of automatic translations that turn a verifiable statement in the source language^[a] into a false or unverifiable one in English.

Please add your examples to the § List; you may use the § Model incident report below if you wish.

Model incident report

A suggested incident report format follows, but feel free to report translation errors however is best to clearly show what happened and to detail the error:

More information Suggested copy-paste reporting model, with instructions ...

Suggested copy-paste reporting model, with instructions

Copy-paste model:

=== MT-Program from LanguageName – additional info ===
* '''source:''' [[:xx:Foreign article]]; rev. [[:xx:Special:Permalink/12345678#Optional_section_name|12345678]] of <timestamp>
* '''date:''' YYYY-MM-DD
* '''orig:''' {{lang|xx|Text passage in the original language, with '''difficulty''' bolded}}
* '''MT:''' faulty English text from MT program,  with '''erroneous translation''' bolded
* '''better:''' Your improved (human-translated) text, with '''fixed translation''' bolded.
Your additional comments here. ~~~~

Description:

section heading: for example, "Google translate from French – revenir" or " DeepL < Spanish "
source – the foreign article, with a link to the original source text or external page, or a description where one can find it
date – of the translation produced by MT
orig – original foreign language passage; you can add bolding to highlight the portion that was mistranslated, if helpful."
MT – machine translated text in English; highlighting the erroneous part encouraged if helpful
better – a better translation provided by you or a knowledgeable human translator. No need to fix up stylistic problems or grammar here or rewrite the whole sentence; this is not the *best* translation, just a model of how to fix the erroneously translated part to show what was wrong with the MT text; highlight the fix if helpful

Comments – Any additional remarks that will help. Although not a Talk page, your sig helps identify when it was seen/reported and by whom.

This model is only a suggestion; feel free to report the translation error you found in whatever way best describes the problem.

If you get different results than you see below for the same input text and search engine, you can add your data in a follow-up post in the original section. Please label your machine translation output as MT2: (then MT3: for a third, different output, etc.) and sign it for timing/ident purposes. This is a data worksheet, not a discussion page: if you have general comments or discussion not involving new or different data; please use the relevant Talk page, most likely Help talk:Translation, or Help talk:Translation/Machine translation errors.

List

Google translate from French – flipped the sense: reject/reaffirm

source: fr:La Manif pour tous#Opposition à la « théorie du genre », rev. 224223413 of 2025 mars 25 à 10:59
date 2025-04-21
orig: La Manif Pour Tous justifie l'utilisation du terme par l'usage qu'en a fait Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, alors conseillère générale du Rhône, en août 2011 et cela en dépit du fait que cette dernière soit revenu, en juin 2013, sur ses déclarations pour affirmer que « la théorie du genre n'existe pas »
MT: The Manif Pour Tous justifies the use of the term by the use made of it by Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, then general councillor of the Rhône, in August 2011, despite the fact that the latter returned, in June 2013, to her declarations to affirm that "gender theory does not exist".
better: The Manif Pour Tous justifies the use of the term by the use made of it by Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, then general councillor of the Rhône, in August 2011, despite the fact that the latter recanted, in June 2013, her earlier declarations affirming that "gender theory does not exist".

Google completely reversed the sense what happened here; Manif justified a term based on someone who *recanted* (rejected, withdrew, disavowed, repudiated, renounced) their earlier position, not *reaffirmed* it, as Google would have it. Mathglot (talk) 18:54, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

On 22 April, TSventon noted (diff) the following output from a full-page translation by Google of the linked source page:

MT2: La Manif Pour Tous justifies the use of the term by the use made of it by Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, then general councillor of the Rhône, in August 2011 and this despite the fact that the latter returned, in June 2013, on his statements to affirm that "gender theory does not exist". [edited for misplaced spaces].

reported here by Mathglot (talk) at 02:21, 23 April 2025 (UTC) on behalf of TSventon.

On 12-Jan-2026, Gemini got it right, with the following text:

MT3: "La Manif Pour Tous justifies using the term by pointing to its use in August 2011 by Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, then a general councillor for the Rhône, despite the fact that the latter went back on her statements in June 2013 to assert that 'gender theory does not exist.'"

and followed up the translation by adding a translation note which nails the issue:

"Soit revenu... sur ses déclarations": While the literal translation is "returned to her statements," the idiomatic meaning in this context is "went back on," "recanted," or "walked back."

Exactly so. The engine is: Core Model: Gemini 3 Flash; Platform: Gemini for Web; Tier: Free; Latest major release: Gemini 3 Flash, the new default model for the Gemini app of mid-December 2025. Mathglot (talk) 04:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

on second thought, Gemini could have included this page in their training (or looked it up live as an exact match), so not sure we can rely on their result as being independent in this case. Mathglot (talk) 19:35, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Google translate from Armenian - Leningrad College

source: hy:Օքսֆորդի_համալսարան (University of Oxford), rev. 10290828 of 00:04, 23 April 2025
date: 2025-04-23
orig:

Քելլոգ
Լեդի Մարգարետ Հալլ
Լենիքըլ
Լինքոլն

MT: link

Kellogg
Lady Margaret Hull
Leningrad
Lincoln

better:

Kellogg
Lady Margaret Hall
Linacre
Lincoln

This is part of a list of Oxford colleges. The error may have be in the original Armenian or in the translation. TSventon (talk) 14:25, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

You cannot expect correct "translation" of proper nouns between languages with different alphabets and phonology. These should always be checked. (That said, "Լենիքըլ" in the Armenian Wikipedia for "Linacre" is strange.) ‑‑Lambiam 10:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

[Unknown MT] from Finnish – 'hallucinated' and literal translations

source: fi:Mänkeri; rev. fi:Special:Permalink/19181986 of 22. syyskuuta 2020 kello 10.37 (22 September 2020 10:37)
date: 1 January 2026
orig: Mänkereitä on männyn lisäksi valmistettu muun muassa eläinten sääriluista sekä koiranputkesta.
MT: In addition to pine, gongs have been made from animal tibias and Dog pipe.
better: In addition to pine, these instruments [or mänkeris] have been made from animal tibias and cow parsley.

Firstly, the MT clearly didn't recognise the word 'mänkeri' (not surprisingly, it is a very obscure one; I'm Finnish and I for one have never heard of it), so it just hallucinated 'gong' (a percussion instrument, rather than a woodwind one) as translation. Secondly, it didn't recognise the Finnish word for cow parsley, 'koiranputki', and translated it literally as "dog pipe"; this is a more surprising one, because the word is quite common. I'm pretty sure a human translator would not have made either mistake, and even a semi-competent reviewer would have immediately spotted them; however, a non-Finnish-speaker reading the translation would probably be stumped trying to figure out what the heck is 'dog pipe'? (The MT version Draft:Mänkeri also has confusing errors in wikilinking, eg. the word 'liru' on fi.wiki correctly links to fi:Liru, an article on a similar instrument, whereas in the translation Liru points to an en.wiki article – which, by sheer coincidence, exists at the same title – on a village in Iran.) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:34, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Notes

[a]
In this context, a verifiable statement in the source language means verifiable according to English Wikipedia's WP:Verifiability policy, regardless what is or isn't acceptable in the source languge, and specifically excluding what their version of verifiability policy says, if they have one.