The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was Approved.
Function overview: Add |alt=Stub icon (or a more descriptive alternate text - to be determined) to images on stub templates for greater web accessibility. May be done by converting stub templates to use {{asbox}}.
Edit period(s): One time run (initially), periodically (if necessary)
Function details: When an image is the only content in a link, a screen reader will output the filename of the image [1]. For example, on encountering {{album-stub}}, the screen reader will output "Gnome-dev-cdrom-audio.svg This album-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it". This is suboptimal, as the filename of the image is irrelevant. It has been proposed (permlink) to provide alternate text (eg. "Stub icon") for these stub templates.
As suggested at the VPM thread, it may be worthwhile to expand this task to other images of this nature, such as those used on portals, wikiproject templates, and the like. However, in those cases it will likely be difficult to find a suitable generic alternative text. –xenotalk18:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a plan. I do note however that this is an endless job, because stubs are simply not standardized. As such it is likely in the future the same problem will spread again. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was hoping we could encourage the stub project to ensure newly created stubs have alt text, but I could run the bot again periodically if that endeavour proves unsuccessful. –xenotalk18:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Err... Does anyone know if there is there a reason stubs don't use a meta template? We ought hard-code the default alt-text... –xenotalk01:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the BRFA [2] to note that this task may be completed via conversion to {{asbox}}, which can provide "Stub icon" as default alternate text. –xenotalk15:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I found a line at Wikipedia:Alternative text for images#When to specify: "Icons and other images without links need not have alt text if the images are decorative and have no function. [3] Use "|link=" to disable the link that would normally be generated for an image. For example, [[Image:P Eiffel.png|24px|link=]] generates an image with empty alt text." Going to ping around and see if this is preferable. –xenotalk03:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a screen reader user, I'd rather have the alt text be "stub icon" than have nothing at all. I can confirm that the problem described above is real, and I support this request. Graham8706:25, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Yes, my reading of it too. A further trial will probably be necessary, but given the fluctuation of consensus, the extended process is probably going to be of benefit. - Jarry1250[ humorous – discuss ]11:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please address this diff: [5]. I'd also like to see the trial run against a more diverse sample. Otherwise, this task has been executed excellently thus far. — madmanbum and angel21:26, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes. Thanks for catching that. That was when I was using a fairly clumsy find and replace logic, the latter edits are using a more comprehensive regex. If I am approved for a further trial (say another 100?) you will see a more diverse sample. –xenotalk18:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Approved for extended trial (80 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete., with a diverse sample if you could. Cheers, - Jarry1250[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]18:37, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
{{BotTrialComplete}}[6] The errors in the first handful (subject/qualifier mismatch) were layer 8. FWIW, the first several hundred edits of this task (if approved) will be manual, to ensure no errors in the logic pop up. There's so much diversity among these templates, it's slow work making a regex for each variety and making sure they don't conflict (and I'm no regex expert!). –xenotalk15:15, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit concerned about the recurrence of errors, at the same time, I'm pleased to see you're monitoring your bot's performance well. Are you comfortable that the fixes you have made should cover further automated edits? — madmanbum and angel03:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm becoming more and more experienced with regex as I go along. I think logic I'm using now is pretty tight. Like I said, I will manually review the first several hundred edits before setting the bot to autosave, and even then, spot check it as it goes. –xenotalk15:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Approved. It's clear there is a consensus here, and I trust that xeno will be able to turn that into a functional change. Of course, this will mean checking edits, and then checking them again, but there is no reason to nag about it constantly. Thusly, I am approving with madman's (slight) concerns noted. - Jarry1250[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]14:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.