Talk:Straight Songs of Sorrow

Removal of alt text descriptions.

Hi again Binksternet,

<sarcasm mode=on reason=to help make a point> Do you have an issue with Wikipedia readers who have visual disabilities? Those who may require screen-reading systems? Have you been removing other alternative text captioning from infoboxes and perhaps main article sections?<sarcasm mode=off>

May I suggest the Accessibility MoS on the alt field as a start?

Alternative text is text associated with an image that serves the same purpose and conveys the same essential information as the image. In situations where the image is not available to the reader, perhaps because they have turned off images in their web browser or are using a screen reader due to a visual impairment, the alternative text ensures that no information or functionality is lost. Absent or unhelpful alternative text can be a source of frustration for visually impaired users. On Wikipedia, alternative text is typically supplied through a combination of the image caption and the text supplied for the image alt parameter in the MediaWiki markup.

In this case, your undo was done to a {{infobox album}} template. This template comes from the {{infobox person}} template and uses its Module:InfoboxImage.

{{infobox person}} clearly states how and why alt exists and its use:

| alt = <!-- descriptive text for use by speech synthesis (text-to-speech) software -->

The alt feature is not there for readers (and I'm assuming here) such as yourself who have full visual acuity. It is there for those who do not, and it is appreciated when there. If there is some new MoS that deprecates the use of the simple alt captioning to assist those with visual disabilities, please do point this out. Thank you in advance. Regards. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 04:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░

References

I said the supplied alt text was useless and I meant it. No person who needs alt text will ever be enlightened by the horrible example that was there. Binksternet (talk) 05:02, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

You may certainly have an opinion on this. Which screen reading software do you use that has created this opinion? 🧐

May I also ask a non rhetorical question? In your mass of article editing and creation over the years (which I highly congratulate & thank you for), how many alt parameters have you filled in with captioning text? I did a minute sub-sample and could not find a one. I will also ask, how would you fill in the parameter? As you may have yet to read it, please be aware, the Accessibility MoS is quite clear on How to write alternative text: Alternative text should be short, such as "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush"... are these "horrible examples"? How do they differ from, in this case, "Image of album front cover".

If may not be your editing style to fill in alt parameters when you seen them while editing other parts of an article, but that is personal style, not MoS, not policy. It's a good habit to get into btw. If you cannot see this, perhaps we can bring this up with some of the people behind the WikiProject Usability for their thoughts? Regards. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 05:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░

It's hard to describe a photograph accurately for the unsighted. I have done it a few times but I'm not surprised you didn't see any. The great majority of them are from years ago, for instance Santa María de Óvila and Henry Edwards (entomologist).

This album cover I would describe as monochrome or even sepia toned monochrome photograph showing Mark Lanegan's left hand in the foreground, resting on a furniture knob. The hand carries star tattoos, two on each finger. In the background Lanegan's arm, torso and face are partially obscured. Binksternet (talk) 06:07, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

What I see here is you trying to personally determine what is needed by visually impaired readers. Do you have any sourced knowledge to back up your belief? Something other that what is defined in the Manual?

As to your example description, if you did add that to the Alternative text field, I, or someone else, perhaps Binksternet, 😉 would have to undo it. Stating the clear Accessibility MoS statement on this subject – How to write alternative text: Alternative text should be short. As is often said, "those who live by the sword..." 😉 It would be hypocritical to use the MoS 100s (1000s?) of times to correct other editor's edits, yet violate it yourself.

You are obviously one of the best "content janitors" of Wikipedia and your efforts do so much to keep this place free of spam & endless foolishness. You're one of those who keep this place viable. So, I feel guilty even taking time away from that. But, you are wrong in this case. You, and many here, should be happy that some editors take the time to fill in Alternative text captions – and do it per MoS. More should, if one starts, it becomes a habit. I feel strongly about this, if you still disagree, I understand. I will then revert your undo and take it to Dispute resolution. It would be a good test to see if a lowly IP editor such as I will have a chance against someone with an impressive editing resume such as yourself. It would show if the consistent application of MoS really does trump all in the end.

ps. I do feel honored that you seem to be tracking my recent edits. It's like having a learned mentor! I do appreciate having actual mistakes pointed out or corrected. Regards. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 21:21, 7 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░

Forgot about this. As there has been no reply, nor have you been undoing any further alt field edits I've done, I'm concluding you either agree, or don't care that much. As such, as per the MoS's How to write alternative text, I will redo the field. But, in the spirit of compromise, I'll try add a couple more words while still trying to not violate the MoS's Alternative text should be short requirement. Regards. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 05:07, 11 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░