| Alsee added a comment. |
@Pbsouthwood, I also originally thought the simple and obvious answer was to use the first description. I definitely see some ugly and backwards aspects of using noreplace. However on deep thought, noreplace is probably the right answer. Consider an infobox that tries to add an automatic description, and an editor adds a short description template somewhere below that infobox. Yes yes, that's unthinkably gross and bizarre. The reason I did think of it is because I've already seen it. The description was either below the infobox, or it was below the infobox & below the lead. Gross... but it's a wiki.... we gotta expect stuff like that. If we use "first description" then we'd get the infobox-auto-description. If we use noreplace then the human description can be given priority. I think noreplace is probably what we want, even if it is a bit ugly.
There's an ugly corner case though. If an article has more than one {{short description|}} template, it's going to use the last one. It may be painful trying to figure out why the description is broken if you only notice the top description.
Cc: Alsee, Tgr, RexxS, JJMC89, Aklapper, Liuxinyu970226, Pbsouthwood, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, Wikidata-bugs, bearND, aude, Jdforrester-WMF, Mbch331
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
