Has this tram ever carried the official number in Klingenthal?
It came from Gera as Snack-bar tram and and was brought back to Klingenthal for the same purpose. On all photos in Klingenthal I see 90. Wouldn't it be better to adapt the database to this number (90), because it never wore another number after 2002?
And what is the future of this tram in Gera?
Thank you again for the great photos!

The author gave a comment about that here already some time ago:
https://transphoto.org/photo/1064463/?vid=139998#2250366

Hello, so i unterstand you. I dont know what will be right. :-) It is a situation that everyone can perceive a little differently.

Thank you for your explanations and comments.
I will start with a purely theoretical approach.
If I had ever photographed this tram, I would have given it for my own database and collection '90 Klingenthal'. That is the visible number on the tram and there is no discussion about that.
To make matters worse, the number turns out to be fake: that is something I absolutely did not know myself.
The site does have rules for this type of vehicle:
https://transphoto.org/page/197/
3. Inappropriate use

Inappropriate use of a vehicle is any where it performs functions unusual for transport and, at the same time, is written off from the inventory of the operating enterprise. This category includes sheds, change houses, stationary cafes, shops, floating houses and other similar options for using. Determination of the vehicle status.

According to the practice accepted on the website, vehicles sold for inappropriate use are marked as written off.

And I have applied this rule in the same way:
https://transphoto.org/vehicle/189838/#n200094

I understand that it was once intended to restore this tram in Klingenthal, after which it would have regained its original number.
If this had happened, photos taken before the restoration of the vehicle would still carry the old number and the photos would then have to be indexed under the old number.
There is no certainty at all as to whether the original number would have been used again: presumably, but since the restoration did not take place, one does not know either.
An example can be found here: https://transphoto.org/vehicle/504123/#n665421

This is theory. Now to the practice, as far as this tram is concerned.
Everything depends on the future. If this tram was bought to make a pub again, or for spare parts, I suggest to use the rules of the site. In both cities a gallery can be created for this cafe-tram: I don't have a problem with that.

If this tram was indeed purchased with the intention of turning it back into a real (moving or static) museum tram and this is also a credible project, then everything can be viewed in a broader context.
If this will ever be the case, 'withdrawn' will simply be replaced by 'out of service'.
I have no idea what will actually happen to it.
If it is known with certainty that the vehicle will have a future as a tram again (and not as a parts supplier or pub), then the status as out of service may be changed.
I would keep the numbering in Klingenthal at 90 anyway: his original number never got it back and we have to look at the previous status of the vehicle: written off / employed as a pub.
Despite the good intentions, nothing has changed in Klingenthal over the years. The original number can be seen in the history of the vehicle.
I suggest that the local editor, once he has more information about the future of the vehicle, should make some adjustments. Either definitively written off after Gera 234, or out of service in case of restoration to a museum tram.
In Klingenthal and Gera a gallery can be added (Bistro tram or similar).

A tram with a fascinating history...