WikiProject Manual of Style  
WikiProject iconThis page falls within the scope of WikiProject Manual of Style, a drive to identify and address contradictions and redundancies, improve language, and coordinate the pages that form the MoS guidelines.
Note icon
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy which is a contentious topic. Please consult the awareness criteria and edit carefully.
Note icon
See WP:PROPOSAL for Wikipedia's procedural policy on the creation of new guidelines and policies. See how to contribute to Wikipedia guidance for recommendations regarding the creation and updating of policy and guideline pages.
WikiProject Accessibility  
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Accessibility, a group of editors promoting better access for disabled or otherwise disadvantaged users. For more information, such as what you can do to help, see the main project page.
WikiProject Wikipedia Help Project (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.
B This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This page has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film § Awards and accessibility under Vector 2022. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Animations Aren't Safe, Especially on E-InkEdit

Some wikipedia articles include non-stop autoplaying gifs and/or pngs. It's usually possible to configure desktop browsers to block these. But it's not always possible to configure tablet browsers to block these.

I often use eink due to neuro issues, and with text and static images it helps, but unless I set a harder-to-read "a2" display mode, with animation it starts rapidly flashing between white and black.

The current MOS guidance is inadequate because it permits animations if they're no longer than 5 seconds (which is far too long) or or if they have control functions to turn them off (which may not be visible and/or operable in the middle of the blinding pain if you are even mildly affected).

I suggest 1. no autoplaying animations, and 2. no infinite looping animations. That way users can choose whether to view each animation, and aren't stuck if we accidentally trigger the animation.

This particular animation both strobes and loops; if it does have control functions to stop the animation, I can't find them: It's a 7.7 second looping gif, so it violates the current MOS rules as well as my suggestions. (talk) 22:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The same user previously raised the issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Accessibility#Strobing Animations. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Accessibility issue with HTML lists on SignpostEdit

Please see my message at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-03-20/Interview and the relevant history. Graham87 06:42, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks like that has been cleared up. I started writing a warning for FormalDude but leaving it might work. Let me know if more problems arise. Johnuniq (talk) 06:59, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, I think leaving it is best for now. I did however start another thread about the attempted unpublication of the article at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost#Signpost author trying to unpublish their own article. Graham87 07:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Left-hand imagesEdit

Avoid placing images on the left hand side as a consistent left margin makes reading easier.

This guidance seems to go much further than the guidance at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images § Location. I would suggest rewriting it to be consistent with that. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 04:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Especially when there is guidance at MOS:PORTRAIT to have portraits of people look into the text, which would place some images on the left. I've seen some edits merely cite MOS:ACCIM in the edit summary of such images, and moving them from the left to the right. Either clarifications are needed at MOS:ACCIM, or consensus is needed on harmonizing conflicting MOS points. —Bagumba (talk) 04:26, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Appears one editor snuck in this text last July, without any discussion. Reverted as contrary to existing MOS and without discussion (guidelines like this ought to be page-protected to prevent this). It's constantly been part of a nitpicky campaign, and is just an extreme dislike for some users. There's no foundation in the idea that it has any accessibility problems, and it's been a norm and part of MOS likely since Wikipedia was founded. ɱ (talk) 05:15, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yes, remove or at least soften. The old (ancient) instruction used to be to alternate left and right hand images, but with the multiplication of types of devices and screen sizes this ceased to make much sense. But "Avoid placing images on the left hand side" is way too strong. Johnbod (talk) 14:39, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Accessibility issue: Use of Visible Anchors to help the partially sightedEdit

I propose adding a third bullet to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Links:

3. Using Template:Visible anchors where Destination highlighting helps the partially sighted to more easily locate the link target on the destination page.

See Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Accessibility issue: Use of Visible Anchors to help the partially sighted (talk) 16:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you show examples of results in normal text?Edit

On my first encounter with this page, I got completely confused with long strings of favoured and deprecated code, often code with which I'm unfamiliar ( {{templates|}}, etc. )

Sites like Help:Tables often show the "printed" results (i.e. what would normally appear on regular screens) of using either correct or incorrect code and Wiki-markup.

Unless it completely frustrates those using screen readers, would it be possible to illustrate the appearance produced by correct and incorrect markup and codes? —— Shakescene (talk) 18:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As a screen reader user, I wouldn't have a problem with this in general but I wouldn't know how to format it well enough. However, you'll need to be more specific about which passages need more examples. One problem with this page is that sometimes favoured and undeprecated markup *looks* the same to users without disabilities but is semantically different. Graham87 14:09, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suggest a removalEdit

Hello, I suggest removal or alteration of the below paragraph. Before anyone gets all up in arms about it, I'll clarify that it is misleading and not applicable anymore.

On 14 January 2006, the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation passed the following nondiscrimination resolution: "The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users and employees on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, or any other legally protected characteristics. The Wikimedia Foundation commits to the principle of equal opportunity, especially in all aspects of employee relations, including employment, salary administration, employee development, promotion, and transfer". The WMF asserts that its policies "may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by Wikimedia Foundation officers or staff nor local policies of any Wikimedia project".

The resolution text is accurate, but the resolution was to create a policy, linked here, which was edited by the WMF in 2017 to remove any responsibility over users. Thus, the policy has not applied to Manual of Style/Accessibility in 5 years. I would suggest we replace it with the text of Policy:Universal Code of Conduct, and perhaps someone should suggest that the WMF's nondiscrimination policy be updated to be cohesive with the UCOC. ɱ (talk) 14:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#Images in templatesEdit

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#Images in templates about how to handle templates that were created to insert images of typographic characters. These characters are now available via Unicode. Please comment there if interested, Rjjiii (talk) 01:54, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]