BTW, it would be great if the awesome DeepL (DeepL) could also be used for machine translation. It was repeatedly called to be much better than Google Translate and stuff like that, so, I guess, it could be a great help for translators here.
Topic on Talk:Content translation
Thanks for sharing this, @Rugk.
Content translation was designed to be an extensible platform. We are always interested to hear about new services that can be useful for translators, and we'll look into this in more detail.
DeepL has a commercial API now, that sadly doesn't seem to have a javascript interface, but requires a GET or POST url submission that only a CGI-BIN would be able to do. The cost is 20 pounds a month plus usage costs of 20 pounds per 1,000,000 characters of translation. Wikipedia could interface with this quite easily with their Content Translation system, but I suggest a way for translators to upload their private DeepL API keys to their Wikipedia profiles.
Machine Translation has improved over the last 5 years, and with appropriate massaging of its first draft translation by a competent translator, could probably be useful in translating easy to medium difficult articles (from language pairs that offer good translations)