Template talk:Flag icon

Template-protected edit request on 2 June 2024

Since the names of several flag-related templates, including this one, have recently been changed, there are now a number of unnecessary redirects within this template. Pleae fix these as shown.

• flagicon/core --> flag icon/core
• flagdeco/core --> flag decoration/core
• flagdeco --> flag decoration

Colonies Chris (talk) 08:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Just quickly noting that this request is not strictly necessary as this is why redirects exist. Primefac (talk) 08:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

True, but this is a heavily used template so avoiding an unnecessary redirect has significant benefit. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

 Completed – per above and WP:BRINT. Only "flagicon/core" and "flagicon" were found in this template, no flagdeco. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 00:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Afghanistan

I propose to show an alternative flag of Afghanistan, the one of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (), which is the government accepted by the UN. Can this be made accessible as {{AFG-IRA}}, which is now only available under {{flag icon|Islamic Republic of Afghanistan}} and {{flag icon|AFG|2013}}. Saippuakauppias ⇄ 00:58, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

→ discussion continued here: Wikipedia_talk:Inline_templates_linking_country_articles#Afghanistan

Does this template really have accessibility problems?

Many of the articles tagged with {{accessibility dispute}} and which thereby land in Category:Articles with accessibility problems are tagged with the rationale that "screen readers can not read flag icons" or something similar. See 2017–18 Glasgow Warriors season and 2018 Charleston Battery season#Transfers for examples. But when I expand the flag template code in those pages, I see |alt=United States or similar in each of the flag icon images. It has always been my understanding that alt text is what screen readers use for interpreting images, so these flag icon uses look accessible to me. Am I missing something? Should these maintenance templates be removed? Pinging Isaidnoway, who appears to have added many of these tags. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Jonesey95 - When I expand the flag template code in 2018 Charleston Battery season, I see {{flagicon|USA}} - {{flagicon|COL}}. When I expand the flag template code in 2017–18 Glasgow Warriors season, I see {{flagicon|NZL}} and {{flagicon|WAL}}. I don't see any alt attributes in those pages, like what an alt attribute should look like, for example: |alt=United States |alt=New Zealand, or |alt=Scotland. Those flag icons render as a mouseover, which widely used and popular screen reader apps for Firefox and Google Chrome can not read. Like Graham87 recently told me in a different discussion about accessibility: if it's an issue, those people will have to get used to it. Screen readers mispronounce and misread things relatively often and proficient screen reader users get used to the idiosyncrasies of the system(s) they use. So, if you want to remove those maintenance templates (most editors do), I don't really give a shit, because it's painfully clear to me, accessibility is not a priority for the community. But if you want to, you can pass along the accessibility tip below on flag icons, and when I get time I'll upload an audio file of my screenreader reading one of those above pages so you can hear for yourself. You can also find a few screenreader audio files on my user page pertaining to the way tables are formatted. Isaidnoway (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

can't read these icons
	John Doe
	Jane Doe
	John Doe
	Jane Doe
	John Doe
	Jane Doe
Wiki markup	Displays
{{flagicon|JAM}}
{{flagicon|SCO}}
{{flagicon|MEX}}

can read these icons
Jamaica	John Doe
Scotland	Jane Doe
Mexico	John Doe
United States	Jane Doe
Uzbekistan	John Doe
China	Jane Doe
Wiki markup	Displays
{{JAM}}	Jamaica
{{SCO}}	Scotland
{{MEX}}	Mexico

Telling people with an issue to shove off is a rather shitty thing to do. I will admit there are some issues that just can't be easily fixed, but we should at least make an attempt. I'm pretty sure the "base" template for all of these is {{Country showdata}}, so we'll most likely need to make changes and discuss it there. Primefac (talk) 11:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

By "expanded", I mean the expanded wikitext or HTML that is rendered on the page. The template used in the table on the left, {{flagicon|NZL}}, expands to <span class="flagicon">[[File:Flag of New Zealand.svg|23x15px|border |alt=New Zealand|link=New Zealand]]</span> in wikitext, and the HTML includes <img alt="New Zealand".... There is alt text there that tells you the meaning of the icon. What am I missing? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Ahh, see what you mean now. From my experience, all I can tell you is that my screenreader (Firefox app) does not read those flag icons on the left. I checked with some other friends who use screen readers and they said the same thing. And in my view, per MOS:WORDPRECEDENCE - words as the primary means of communication should be given greater precedence over flags. That's why I think the icons on the right are preferable if a flag has to be used, and not just for those who are visually impaired, but I think it benefits our other readers as well. I don't use a mobile device to read WP articles, so I don't know how either style of flag icons render on a mobile device.

And on another note in 2017–18 Glasgow Warriors season, I wonder if the use of flags in some of the sections like Staff movements and Player movements are an appropriate use of flag icons per MOS:SPORTFLAG, seems like overzealous usage to me. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The Player stats section is even worse, the "Nation" column should absolutely (regardless of ACCESS things) have the country name; not everyone knows all the flags of the world. Primefac (talk) 23:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

And in that same Player stats section, under the "Position" column, those abbreviations are meaningless without a key defining them. From what I've seen in other sports articles, that seems to be the standard practice, a key usually precedes the table that defines abbreviations that are not widely known. I looked at their website, and couldn't find them being used, and our glossary article and rugby positions article don't use them either. Per MOS:1STABBR - when an abbreviation will be used in an article, first introduce it using the full expression. Those abbreviations appear to be invented. Isaidnoway (talk) 07:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

{{Rugbyposition}} exists but I am genuinely surprised it is not used (unlike {{Rugby league positions}} which has 10k uses). I'll get it cleaned up and try to start using it. Primefac (talk) 15:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

The above issues appear to be fruitful topics for discussion at various MOS talk pages. I don't think that it is helpful to tag individual pages with {{accessibility dispute}} or other accessibility tags until there is consensus at a MOS talk page that a specific type of formatting either is or is not acceptable under our guidelines. If a template is generating output that is not in compliance with MOS, that template can be fixed, and the individual articles will be fixed along with the template. Tagging one page does not advance the conversation or lead to a useful outcome, IMO. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Maintenance tags (accessibility or otherwise) are intended to alert editors that a page may need clean up, and are encouraged to fix the issue(s) identified by the maintenance tag. These are not inappropriate uses of the accessibility dispute tag IMO. For instance, as seen here, the nationality of the players is inaccessible, and could easily be fixed by using {{flag|USA}} instead of {{flagicon|USA}}. And as seen here, how is a visually impaired reader using a screen reader supposed to know which matches were a win, draw or loss, when colors are being used to convey that important information. A fix for that could be inserting header text in that table with a column that says "Score". Additionally, in that same table, there is content that is hidden underneath a collapsible template. If it's considered important content the reader should know about, it shouldn't be hidden. Screen readers can not read hidden content.

In my view, the consensus is clear that pages should be easy to navigate and read for people with disabilities, and if it all it takes is some minor changes to formatting to make content accessible, then we should be striving for that goal, even if it is just one page at a time.

Screen reader audio from 2017–18 Glasgow Warriors season player statistics, illustrating flag icons that are not accessible to all readers.

Screen reader audio from 2017–18 Glasgow Warriors season awards, illustrating flag icons that are not accessible to all readers.

Isaidnoway (talk) 17:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

I've cleaned up those two pages, and am working on a few more. There was 335 flag icons in one article alone, talk about excessive and redundant, that's ridiculous. Thanks for the input and comments, I appreciate it. Isaidnoway (talk) 20:11, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

For that many uses, I'd suggest using AWB (unless you want to copy/paste into a word editor and use another form of mass find/replace), might save a bit of time in the edit. Primefac (talk) 20:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)