Forum:Featured images and NXT

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Featured images and NXT
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 16 May 2016 by Liquidhelium.

So it appears recently, after NXT was released, there's been a replacement for a large variety of images. Unfortunately, some of them are featured. To prevent future edit wars, I propose 3 solutions for this:

  1. Renominate all featured images to check if they still uphold to current standards
  2. Update regardless with a similar angle and pretend it's close enough
  3. Scrap the system entirely

I personally chose option 1, since just because something looks good in 2011 does not mean it looks great against newer content/NXT. Thoughts? --Jlun2 (talk) 19:38, April 28, 2016 (UTC)


Support 1 Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 19:41, April 28, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - I just realized point 1 won't solve newer updates. As a change, how about doing that about once every 2 years? Renominating every graphical update will be overkill, and yearly seems like a poor choice as well considering they tend to update mostly NPCs than entire areas. --Jlun2 (talk) 19:44, April 28, 2016 (UTC)

Support modified 1 Leave newer images, say under six months, alone. I don't know how many featured images are that new though, so that may be pointless. And spread it out a bit, so we don't have a million FIMG threads at once. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 19:46, April 28, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - Featured images prior to April 2014:

This represents 42/58 Featured Images excluding those mentioned at the start What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 20:12, April 28, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose all - Just renominate obsolete files when you get to them. Upload a new file, revert it, then run a nomination for your image. MolMan 12:35, April 29, 2016 (UTC)

What Mol said - Starting a nomination takes two minutes. And not all of those images (not even close) would even be affected by NXT (which would only be relevant to draw distance, as with e.g. Mage Training Arena). User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 19:18, April 29, 2016 (UTC)

Support 1 - They all need updating at some point to meet NXT's standards, especially when files like File:Falador park statues.png get reverted to a heavily outdated version (pre-graphical update of area) pjJ4pBM.png Abyssal vine whip.png 18:51, May 1, 2016 (UTC)

Support 1 - As a note, I strongly oppose #3. --dDbvitC.pngScuzzy Betahib8CAd.png 12:42, May 3, 2016 (UTC)

Proposal that actually makes some sense

One solution that might be the best of both worlds: Obsolete featured images can be uploaded over, but doing so will immediately delist it (the editor who uploaded the new file will be responsible for untagging it). It can then be renominated with the current image if anyone feels it's still worth featuring. If that nomination fails, the updated image will remain, but the file will no longer be featured.

This will fix such issues as this one where the area has undergone major updates, but the update itself leaves some not wanting it featured.

The obvious caveat here is that we'll begin losing some featured images without any discussion because of updates out of our control. At the same time, this might bring more life into the FIMG process by letting files come and go. The advantages are pretty good, though, to be honest. We'll no longer be sacrificing the quality of our currentness for the quality of our prettiness. We'll be letting ourselves update files in a timely manner, but we won't be going against previously established consensus. MolMan 20:43, May 4, 2016 (UTC)

Support - Sounds fine to me. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 19:53, May 9, 2016 (UTC)

Support - I can support that. It means then that images can be updated while still being given the chance to be featured after being updated (if it passes the nomination for featured again) pjJ4pBM.png Abyssal vine whip.png 12:19, May 10, 2016 (UTC)

Question - Would that apply only to obsolete images? Because some of the images in the recenf replacement spree weren't obsolete, so then this would not have applied there.mUser_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:02, May 10, 2016 (UTC)

Ya, it would only apply to seriously outdated images. Like File:Grand Exchange.png. But not to say, File:Count Draynor's coffin.png. MolMan 16:06, May 10, 2016 (UTC)
Then this would probably work. Perhaps create a template saying "used to be FIMG but was replaced because obsolete, start new nom if you want" that would remain on the file page for an arbitrary amount of time, say two weeks? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:28, May 10, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - I'd recommend we do nothing. Truth be told, I find the majority of the current FIMG nominations lacking, whether that be choice of settings, angle or another variable. To foster truly good images, I don't mind taking some time with getting them right. If delisting them in the short term is deemed appropriate, then fine, but I don't think we're going to be overly criticised for have a number of pictures out of date for a couple of months. NXT is still new, it's still buggy in places and still subject to change. I don't want our pace with FIMG be dictated by a sudden change in technology, when it's taken years to get to this stage. It's unnecessary. cqm 09:51, 11 May 2016 (UTC) (UTC)

This solution covers more than just NXT. Even without the new client, File:Grand Exchange.png was vastly different from its featured version. I think in terms of images, we should focus on having an image up to date more than having it deemed pretty. MolMan 11:46, May 11, 2016 (UTC)
I took this as concerning obsolete FIMGs. Nxt has not made anything obsolete. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 20:44, May 11, 2016 (UTC)

Support - I'm only new around here so take this with a grain of salt, but it seems odd that an outdated image would be prevented from being updated because it was chosen to be featured x years ago. Currency and accuracy should be a priority for images as well as articles, IMO. If people are worried about losing too many FIMGs, perhaps the outdated ones can be uploaded to a separate file and featured without preventing the original from being updated. Or just encourage people to nominate fresh images rather than holding on to obsolete ones. Lmnt (talk) 17:58, May 11, 2016 (UTC)

I'd rather not have separate files for features images. The point of the FIMG system (in theory) is that the image displays the subject well and in a helpful manner. If an image isn't used for anything except being featured, it really shouldn't be on the wiki. MolMan 18:04, May 11, 2016 (UTC)

Support - I'm okay if nothing is done either. I'm not sure how useful the featured images really are anyways. (FYI: the comment about the Zilyana image being the last of the Icyene is no longer accurate) --Deltaslug (talk) 13:41, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

Closed - Obsolete featured images can be updated. These images will be delisted until a new discussion is passed. --LiquidTalk 17:23, May 16, 2016 (UTC)