Forum:Discontinue featured images

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Discontinue featured images
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 18 April 2017 by Liquidhelium.

The popularity of the RuneScape:Featured images system has been in decline for some time now. This year there have been only 2 nominations (1 and 2) for new features images, plus one request for de-listment (1). Each discussion has received only a handful of comments, with the latest nomination being commented on by only 3 editors. With the lack of community interest in the project I think it is time that we consider shutting it down.

I do not think this just because of the recent lack of interest in featured images, but also because I think that the project has little merit anyway. Basically all of the arguments that caused us to scrap having featured articles can also be applied to featured images:

  1. People reading the wiki do not care about an image being featured. Perhaps the criteria of "images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article" was enough to distinguish featured images at the time of the project being created but I don’t believe that this means much these days. With the vast majority of images on the wiki being high quality, there is realistically very little that makes a featured image different from any other image that a reader will see on pages that they are browsing on the wiki.
  2. The extra effort put into maintaining featured images is not justifiable to me when we do have a number of poor quality images that need improvement. I also think that a lot more maintenance would need to be done to improve our current pool of featured images: many are outdated and of obscure pieces of content. If we were to continue with the featured image system, I think we could do with delisting many of the current featured images and nominating images of more current content: however no one seems to be interested in doing this maintenance.
  3. With the current focus in discussions on how attractive an image is I don't think that the system is really working as a way to recognise the work of editors taking images. Some images are just ugly, regardless of how skilled an image taker is, but it having images of ugly subjects is just as important as having pretty images and it's unfair to penalise people taking these kinds of images.


Discontinue - as nominator. The wiki no longer gains any benefit from having the featured image system. We should move to using guides to help new people get into image taking and use the title as a way to recognise those who have made significant contributions. The history of featured image discussions should be retained but there should be no more nominations, featured images appearing on the front page, images with the template etc. as with featured articles. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 13:54, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - While the lack of interest is disheartening (personally I am always on the lookout for FIMG candidates - I just don't see that many), I do not see the validity of most of these arguments. FIMGs are an excellent way of showcasing pretty images of pretty things, perhaps showing readers a new view of something they would not see in-game with such quality, and they add some much-needed colour to the front page. To address the points made;

  1. The vast majority of images are high-quality, but that does not mean they are also exceptionally interesting or aesthetically pleasing. The image taker's skill is of course a major factor in the quality of an image, but when it comes to FIMGs, the subject at hand is also quite relevant. A brilliant image of something completely dull is great, but it's not FIMG material.
  2. Sorry, what extra effort? The occasional replacement nomination that happens less than once a moon? Obviously poor quality images should also be a focus, but I highly doubt people wake up and struggle internally in deciding whether to improve a bad image or go 'score' a FIMG. No featured images are outdated simply by the fact that they'd be replaced/delisted if they were (bar an exception where something is of historical value), and 'obscure content' is not an argument for anything really. We have a great image of something very nice-looking that's obscure by someone's standards. Erm, okay, so what? Should we only be featuring images of Lumbridge? I see absolutely no reason to mass delist our current pool of FIMGs - if you feel any in particular are no longer up to scratch, nominate them for delisting by all means, but if you ask me they're all fine (at least), bar perhaps one or two.
  3. We're not penalising anyone. People don't upload images for them to be featured, but because a(n) (new) image was needed. As I said before, yeah, some subjects are just ugly and no amount of brilliant oculus skills could get their images featured. Who cares? There are plenty of pretty subjects, whose images it is we showcase. I don't think the system was ever a way for image editors' work to be 'recognised', at least not more than a ltitle. The point has always been to display pretty pictures of pretty things on the main page for people to enjoy, and that's great. It's relatively low-maintenance (compared to e.g. RSWP or even FA, which could be edited daily and would have to be checked every so often) so that's not really a problem. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 15:33, April 11, 2017 (UTC)
What is the point of us having a whole system for "showcasing pretty images of pretty things"? How does that benefit us? I've said already that people reading the wiki do not care about seeing these images and I really do think that's the case. Are images like File:Tormented Demon.png, File:Photo booth (Falador).png and File:Mithril dragon.png really somehow more attractive than "regular" images that they see elsewhere on the wiki? Do people visiting the wiki at Easter 2017 really want to see an image of Grand Exchange and Holiday event portal from Christmas 2011? This is what I mean by featured images being obscure and outdated. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 07:32, April 12, 2017 (UTC)
That makes no sense, sorry. People looking for information about Easter will see a slightly more interesting main page when arriving before they find the information they need. Heck, their interest might even be piqued by seeing a nice image. The point of the whole system is to show how nice some stuff in-game looks, how well our editors can capture that and to make the main page more colourful. I doubt a lot of people care about 'on this day', sof the links such as skill guides, or the twitter feed, but some do, and they add diversity to the main page.
Any FIMG is no different from a "regular image" other than being of noteworthy quality and having a nice-looking subject, as determined by consensus. Yes, those images are more attractive than other ones - else their nominations would've failed. Scuzzy also makes a fair point; we aren't Spivak's Calculus on Manifolds - some people might not care about the FIMGs but who cares? Indubitably, some do, and it's a nice way to get a wiki community project nice and big where everyone can see it. By your argument (admittedly by reductio ad absurdum), the ideal main page would be a search bar. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 15:49, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - per fusswell - I think that recently we've been removing all the things that give the wiki community a little character. Discontinuing FIMG would certainly continue this trend. --dDbvitC.pngScuzzy Betahib8CAd.png 16:54, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

OpposeI think we should maybe review some new pics. 1wDmkih.png  Manpaint of the RPU (t)(c) 17:08, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - I like what Scuzzy brings up about us losing a bit more personality as a community. I was thinking we can probably give the feature image nominations a bit more coverage by putting it on the site notice? Santa hat.png Powers38 おはようヾ(´・ω・`) 08:10, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

Discontinue - per nominator. --Deltaslug (talk) 12:29, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

Oppose/Comment Seems to me (given the result of those 2 nomination requests) that perhaps the rate of rejection and attitude from people opposing nominations is a big turn-off for people who may want to nominate an image. Perhaps we should re-review criteria for featured image status, and "back off" a bit on being so picky about featuring an image. Kent Knifen (talk) 22:36, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

Comment - Did we really make a change as large as getting rid of featured articles when only 3 people supported their removal? Whoever closed that thread should be fired! Oh wait.... --LiquidTalk 00:36, April 13, 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - per Fswe1. Most of the images are pretty good and I don't think that project itself has little merit. Temujin 09:02, April 13, 2017 (UTC)

Keep - At the top of our main page we have 3 smallish pics, then almost all of the rest is boring text. Except for the Featured Image box on the right. We need it at least to keep the main page from being even more boring. I know we are an encyclopedia, but omg, so many words!!! Degenret01 (talk) 18:12, April 14, 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - per Scuzzy. 5-x Talk 10:26, April 15, 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - I've always liked seeing the featured image. Brightens the place up a bit. GKFX (talk) 16:46, April 17, 2017 (UTC)

Closed - Featured images will not be removed from the wiki. --LiquidTalk 18:19, April 18, 2017 (UTC)