Talk:Interpreter (communication)

Isnt this more of a dictionary entry really - unsuitable for wikipedia? Ludraman, 2220, 26/02/04

I suggest the article renamed to Interpreter (natural language) or Interpreter (human language), because there are interpreters for sign languages as well and I don't see a reason to write separate articles for them. Maybe (human language) is better, because interpreting could also be done between constructed languages. --Farside 11:52, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Ok, no objections for a month so now moved to Interpreter (communication) - it excludes computer languages but includes all languages and methods used for communication. --Farside 17:32, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There seems to be no need for this entry - shouldn't we move it to the interpreting article, which is in any way dry and rather sparse? Perhaps the focus should be on adding to that.Tomes 14:35, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Merge this article with interpreting. Provide a redirect so that it can be found by people who look up "interpreter" or "interpreters".  This article by itself seems to provide no additional useful information. The Bearded One 17:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge this article with interpreting. &mdash; Grstain 01:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

While people are certainly free to merge this, I would also suggest maybe just marking this as a stub. Why? Because I can think of a number of things that could be added, such as the methods and requirements to become an intrepreter in various nations or organizations (for instance, the prerequisites for becoming an interpreter for the White House vs. for the United Nations), the average pay scales in different nations and organizations, famous interpreters (I'm sure there's a few), cases in history in which proper or improper interpretation may have dramatically changed the course of events, as well as information about unions and organizations for interpreters across the globe. However, I haven't checked out the interpreting article yet, and since the terms are so closely linked, maybe it IS best to redirect there, and include all of that kind of information in the interpreting article. 63.21.32.46 07:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)