Template talk:Railtransportyear-Austria

@Apalsola: I don't think you're right, per COM:CAT a short description text that explains what should be in the category, if the title is not clear or unambiguous enough on its own is (among others) what category pages should (or rather could) contain.    FDMS  4    21:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

And I don't think you are right. The title may be clear enough in English, but not in other language. Per COM:LP: Descriptions at galleries, categories and file description pages can be in any language and should be added in multiple languages. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 07:59, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

In addition, COM:CAT does not prohibit to add descriptions when the title is clear and unambigous. It states that a description is mandatory, when the title is not clear or unambiguous. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 08:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but a description is something like [companyname] is a [country] [industry] company founded in [DOF] best known for [something special], not a translation of the tile. And again, there are Train and Austria symbols as well as a timeline, which hardly leave any wiggle room to readers who do not understand any English at all.    FDMS  4    08:42, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I know what a description is. In this particular case the mere translation of the title is descriptive enough. Of course we could change the description something like 2014 in rail transport in Austria means trasportation on rails in the Republic of Austria since 1 January 2014 until 31 December 2014, but that would be silly.

In which policy is it stated that description may be replaced by some eye-candy symbols? Especially flag symbols are not that familiar for many people; for example I guess that quite a many non-European person wouldn't recognize Austrian (nor Finnish for that matter) flag. And, in many countries, symbols like this are still used for trains, so the train symbol chosen for this page is not that easily recognizable for all people, either. Textual descriptions can also be searched with search engines. And finally, Commons is an international and thus multilingual project.

There are similar descriptions in probably thousands of category. If you really think that they are that harmful, I recommend you to start a discussion on some wider forum to revise the policies. Best regards, Apalsola ^{t • c} 13:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

@Apalsola: Why would anyone want to view this obvious "description" in multiple languages? Why isn't displaying a translation into the user's interface language sufficient in your opinion?    FDMS  4    19:41, 26 October 2014 (UTC) Added quotation marks on 00:14, 27 October 2014 (UTC).

Two examples:

• Descriptions in different language are not always consistent regarding to the content: for one lanugage it may contain only translation of the term while for some other language description may be very detailed.
• Editors may want to see the current descriptions, so they are able to add new ones or improve existing ones. If {{Other languages}} is used, they always need to click Edit to even see the descriptions.

Please also notice that – according to the template documentation – {{Other languages}} is intended for Potd pages only. On the other hand {{Multilingual description}} (according to its documentation) is recommended for categories and galleries.

I also renew my recommendation in my previous comment. If you really think that these policies, guidelines and recommendations are harmful I advice you to start a discussion on some wider forum. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 23:29, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but again, this is a translation, therefore Descriptions in different language are not always consistent regarding to the content does not apply. The {{Mld}} template adds a rather large JavaScript (→ reduced accessibility) dropdown menu to pages for those who have a gadget activated, which is neither comfortable to use nor necessary as the other translations can easily be found in the page source anyway. The template I used is not called {{Other languages}}, which is indeed a POTD template, but {{Other language}}, which is a LangSwitch variant of {{Translation table}}. There is no policy (or guideline for that matter) saying that {{Mld}} is a template that should generally be used for category title translations, so I'm not going to start a discussion on "changing" policy.    FDMS  4    00:14, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@FDMS4: , JavaScript is quite heavily used on Commons anyway, so I don't consider it as a major issue.

From Commons:Categories#Creating a new category: "A category page should contain the following information (in order of importance): – – A short description text that explains what should be in the category, if the title is not clear or unambiguous enough on its own. Descriptions in particular languages can be tagged e.g. with the template {{ab|...}} for description in Abkhazian, {{en|...}} for description in English, etc, as listed in Commons:Templates for galleries); or using the {{Mld}} template to show only the description in the user’s preferred language if there is one." So, yes, there is a policy about using either language templates or {{Mld}}. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 18:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

if the title is not clear or unambiguous enough on its own – I think the railtransportyear-Austria category titles are clear and unambiguous enough, as they consist of exactly the same text as their description (except for a link to the Austria gallery).    FDMS  4    21:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I get the feeling that this discussion is stealing both your and my time without really improving our media repository. Therefore, I am going to step back from this discussion. Please choose whatever translation template you feel suits the purpose of this template best. Good night,    FDMS  4    21:37, 28 October 2014 (UTC)