Forum:Image Policy Follow-up

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Image Policy Follow-up
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 30 November 2009 by Psycho Robot.

Alright so, we finally got the Image policy passed. But we're not done yet! There are some more things to do, although hopefully this won't take nearly as long.

Template Changes

I really think we need to update our templates and add new ones as mandated by new policies. Here are my proposed changes:

Keep

Delete

  • [[Template:AnimGif]] - replaced by "Template:Gif"
  • [[Template:AA]] - replaced by "Template:OverAliased"
  • Template:Transparent - change name to "Template:Transparency"
  • [[Template:Watermarking]] - watermarked images should be speedy deleted
  • [[Template:Fa]] - covered by "Template:Gif"

New/replacement templates

Icon Name Description Category
Anim.gif Template:gif This image or animation has GIF dithering artefacts which make it appear grainy or blurry. A new version should be uploaded with a higher quality. Category:Dithered images
Needs Anti-aliasing.png Template:over aliased This image or animation contains anti aliasing to such an extent that it negatively affects the images quality. It should be recaptured with anti aliasing more expertly applied. Category:Images with too much anti-aliasing
http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/4062/combatimage.png Template:interfered combat This image or animation features combat in such a way that it interferes with the image's clarity. It should be recaptured using a player with Auto-Retaliate off or a monster with low HP that will be killed in one hit. Category:Combat images with interference
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1219/shadowbl.png Template:inventory shadow This image of an item's inventory sprite has a shadow. Please upload a new version with the shadow erased. Category:Inventory images with shadows
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/9324/superfluousarmour.png Template:unneeded equipment This image or animation features a character wearing more equipment than is necessary. To ensure that the subject is shown without distraction and to discourage vanity images, this image should be recaptured wearing only what is necessary or nothing at all. Category:Images with unneeded equipment
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9544/thirdpartyimage.png Template:outside image This image or animation was taken from another website, apart from the Game Guide. Fan sites usually own copyrights on images featured on their web sites and ask that they are not featured elsewhere. It is the Wiki's policy to honour this request, therefore another screenshot taken by an editor should be uploaded. Category: Third party images
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/7189/toolonganim.gif Template:long animation This animation is too long. There are excess frames at the beginning or end which are not needed. It should be trimmed or a new shorter version should be uploaded. Category:Animations which are too long
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/6436/tooshortanim.gif Template:short animation This animation is too short and therefore looks hectic or choppy. It should be recaptured in such a way that it looks more smooth. Category:Animations which are too short
http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/4666/uselessanim.gif Template:unnecessary animation This animation is of a subject which does not need to be animated. A still image should instead be used. Category:Unnecessary animations
Note: All templates will end with "If a replacement image is uploaded under a new name, add a speedy deletion tag to the original image."

Animation limit

In the policy that past, an animation per page limit was set to only 2 per page. But what about pages like Special attacks and Magic? I think this limit should be removed, and editors should be trusted to use their judgment to determine how many animations are too many.

Inventory shadows

This came up late in the last policy discussion and was not discussed very much so I was hoping to have a more formal consensus here. Should it be mandated that image shadows be removed from inventory images? I think it should, because the color of the shadow was designed to fit in with the brownish gray background of the RuneScape inventory, and it looks quite out of place here on the Wiki.

kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 02:00, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Been a while since the last post, hopefully this will shake up some more discussion... kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 17:15, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Template changes

Comment - I think the Unneeded Equipment template's description should be changed up a bit:

This image or animation features a character wearing more equipment than is necessary. To ensure that the subject is shown without distraction and to discourage vanity images, this image should be recaptured wearing only what is necessary. This only applies for images that are meant to show equipment.

It shouldn't really be a problem if the character is wearing armour or something in a area image or soemthing similar, unless of couse it's really distracting. If the player is really distracting, however, it would be common sense to upload a new version.Maybe use a different template to mark something like this, but not the same one as "Unneeded equipment". — Enigma 03:05, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

To clarify, you think that the unneeded equipment policy shouldn't apply if its an image of an area? I could see that, especially since sometimes you need to wear armour in a place or you die. I mostly had equipment and activity images in mind, since those are things you could do anywhere without wearing anything. Additionally, I think we need to do something other than say "only for equipment", because there are images like this which are also vanity images, but are not equipment images. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 03:19, September 2, 2009 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with that image. It's a normal player doing a normal thing. Who cares if someones wearing armour in a area image? What effect does that have on the article? Common sense, dude, common sense. People arn't going to go "Oh, that person is wearing a fighter torso in Varrock! I should do the same thing so nothing bad happens!" I don't think it really matters, it's unnecesarry work. — Enigma 04:08, September 2, 2009 (UTC)
I don't really dislike those kinds of images because I think "Oh no if they wear that in the image, others will think they have to wear it too" or anything silly like that. Its because its unnecessarily flashy, and in cases like that, I think its flashy enough to be a detriment to the subject. There's really no reason to have it, and ideally we shouldn't. It gets even worse when the person wears the same outfit in every image, which many people do. It becomes a matter of pride and ego, and that's not a good thing. It becomes just like watermarking the image. Worst case scenario, you wind up with things like [[:File:Runescapehd combat-multicombat.gif|this unholy abomination of hell-spawned demons which echo forever through my darkest nightmares]]. Ok maybe that was an overstatement, but its still pretty creepy. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 04:47, September 2, 2009 (UTC)
I see your point, and I agree, but what I suggested is that a different template be used, not this one. This one makes it sound like OH MA GOSH EVRA SINGEL IMAGE WITH A PERSON WEARING SOMETHING WIT DA EQUIPMENT NOT DA MAIN FOCUS NEEDS TA BE REPLCE-ED!!!!! Yeah, no. We need a different template, not this one. And I do agree that image is rather creepy o.O — Enigma 05:38, September 2, 2009 (UTC)
So what would the separate template say? I guess I don't understand why they need to be different. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 06:01, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Why are the last three templates animated?  Tien  12:34, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

They don't need to be, those are just examples and subjected to change, however the "needless animation one" was something that Gaz and I hammered out here. Basically they are to demonstrate what they are. The "short animation" icon skips, the "long animation" icon has an unneeded pause. However if you dislike my literal take on the icons, you can suggest others! kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 15:31, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
Oh, just examples? Okay. As long as the actual template isn't animated, then I'm fine because tagging unnecessary animations with a template that is unnecessarily animated is rather... ironic.  Tien  16:16, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
To be honest that's a little bit what I was going for Lol kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 16:49, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - On what images should Template:outside image be used on? Game Guide images? --Nup(T) 12:49, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

Game guide images and any images taken from fansites, etc. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 15:31, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - For Template:outside image, perhaps is of a lower quality than normally used on the Wiki. should be removed because not all images taken from an outside source are of lower quality. --Nup(T) 04:58, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

I reworded it be about the copyright troubles that outside images sometimes bring, which is what the real problem is with them. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 05:02, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - About the "unnecessary" items, maybe it should mention that the only time it doesn't apply, is when a set of equipment (like the gilded armour set) is being worn? Black cavalier.png Zenihdrol Tribal top (blue).png 03:33, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

That's a good point, so I added it. If you can think of a better way to say it, go ahead and change it. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 03:47, September 19, 2009 (UTC)
I don't think that sentence is really needed, it's just like adding "Please do not place this tag on jpeg images, as jpeg images can't be made transparent" on the transparency template. --Nup(T) 08:57, September 19, 2009 (UTC)
What would you suggest? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 14:33, September 19, 2009 (UTC)
Remove it. I don't really have any problems with that sentence though, I just think that template is a bit too long. --Nup(T) 15:50, September 19, 2009 (UTC)
Yea I guess you're right. If people are concerned about the policy, they could always visit the Policy page

Comment - I too am of the "what's the big deal?" mindset. Someone abuses the vanity angle? "Revert." Simple, easy, no fuss no muss. --Dionisio 04:39, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

But what if there's nothing to revert to, or the existing image is in Standard Detail or something. I feel we need a template to identify and categorize images which need to be recaptured. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 04:42, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

Animation limit

I think the limit is a good idea. In special cases, like magic, special attacks, etc, the rule can be ignored. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 11:40, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough Lol kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 17:17, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Why 2? Most pages would only need one. Others would need more than 2. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 22:07, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Not sure, that was there when I got there and I never really thought too much about it. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 22:42, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Comment Like some people ahev said editors should use there judgement weather or not they need animations, But as Gaz said special attack's, magic. ect. The limit is raised a bit. MagicWilko 13:01, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - As long as it portrays something not on the page in these exceptions, I think the limit should be as many as needed to better the article. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 21:35, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion - How about we change it to "minimal animation should be used to display neccessary information"? Or something that conveys the same point. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 15:19, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind that. I think the two animation limit could be construed as a bit arbitrary. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:51, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion: separate animation pages - I think there should be extra pages made for showing the additional animations. For example, the special attacks page would contain just the information and static images while linking to special attacks/animations which would show all the animations and only the animations. This way, all the benefits of the animation limit are retained, while keeping animations available for those who want to see them. --MarkGyver 21:11, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Inventory shadows

Seems like a no brainer... I support. --Dionisio 04:31, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

It seems obvious to me too, but I am not the community, so I cannot single handedly decide it should be one way or another. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 04:33, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a no-brainer to me too. --MarkGyver 21:12, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Audio files

Comment - OK, this is hardly mentioned in the policy, if not at all. I was checking the recent changes when someone uploaded an audio piece and created an article just about that piece of music. What is the policy? There was an earlier discussion, but consensus was never reached whether to include the whole piece, a sample or not include and what was a copyvio. Maybe this needs to be clarified. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 11:57, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

No audio - This encyclopedia is meant to be a concise definitive source of RuneScape knowledge. While the audio is part of RuneScape, there's really not much to discuss about it, and even less to be gained from hearing a 30 second clip of it. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 23:25, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I call "paradox" here. Concise equates to "covering things sans extensive verbiage." It does not mean *not* covering things that are trivial. Documentation is the focus, yes? --Dionisio 04:45, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

Slight Support - Imagine if we had, for example, all the Runescape music before it got revamped. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 03:26, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - OK. But what are we supporting and opposing. I just wanted to know what the policy was. Are music pieces from RuneScape copyright violations? Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 04:02, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
Thirty second clips can be used royalty free in the US, but I'm unsure of what the UK's policy is. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 04:15, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Keep audio files - In regards with copyright, since the copyright owner (Jagex) is based on the UK, I believe the UK law applies here. UK laws are more stricter than the US laws. However, UK copyright law has a set of exceptions to copyright known as fair dealing, similar to the Fair use in the US:

s29.—(1) Fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical, etc, work, for the purpose of research or for a non-commercial purpose, does not infringe any copyright in the work, provided it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement of the source.

s30.—(1) Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another work, or of a performance of a work, does not infringe copyright in the work, provided it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement, and provided the work has actually been made available to the public.

The "de minimis" rule also applies here. I think we can use the 30-second audio sample in articles, but there is no need for it to have its own article. Players who have not unlocked Music tracks might be encouraged to unlock them once they had listened to the "teaser" clip.

  az talk   14:16, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Support - Thanks for the info, Az the Knowledgeable. So now that we know the law, are we in support of the 30 second audio files? And will the music fade in or fade out at the end, or just an abrupt "cut out"? Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 08:40, October 16, 2009 (UTC)
I think the current music files (Category:Audio files) have been recorded with the "fade in, fade out" effect. Future recordings, if any, should be recorded with the "fade in, fade out" effect as well.   az talk   02:43, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Keep audio - While they are not inherent to an encyclopedia, why would we use them on Wikipedia? To provide information, for those who care, same reason why we really do not need to show animations, they can see them in-game. The only drawback to obtaining new files is the amount of time it takes to record all 609 and an ever growing Sound Bank. This can be a project if some was willing to take it off the ground with enough support. Ryan PM 01:38, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - How useful is a sample of the music if the tune isn't even notable to have it's own article? Also, since FunOrb has music downloads for "purchase" with orb coins, we might want to avoid that in case RuneScape follows suit. However, if the music track really is that important, we might as well include as much as legally permissible. --MarkGyver 21:20, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Interfered combat

I think this template should be called intefering combat, not interfered combat, because if it's called interfered it would seem like the combat is interfered. I hope that sounds clear. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 13:52, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

I could go either way, so I guess if no one else has an opinion, then it can be renamed! kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:57, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
I agree, interfering combat makes more sense. Jpv41193 15:55, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Watermarking

If a player's username appears in the image when there's no need for it (e.g. in the chatbox), would that be considered as watermarking? C.ChiamTalk 12:22, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

If it can be cropped out it should be, but if it is added in such a way that it cannot be removed, then it should be deleted. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:52, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
What about watermarks saying "RS Wiki only"? I've seen some of those... Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:15, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
If it can be cropped or edited out, great. If not, delete it. Its horribly distracting and reflects very badly on us. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 23:37, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Outsider image.. image.

The image was changed to a picture of a Gilded lecturn... what relevance does a lecturn have with an outsider image? I asked myself this and it didn't make sense. So I restored the image. If anyone can tell me how a lecturn has anything to do with stealing images, feel free to tell me. =/ Black cavalier.png Zenihdrol Tribal top (blue).png 21:02, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

That was based on a discussion here. I imagine the template will be split up into one template for third party images and one from the knowledge base. The knowledge base would use the lectern (since the KB is kinda like a book) and the other would use the thieving logo one. Feel free to give your input there! So far its pretty much just me Drizz and Tebuddy. Going swimmingly. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 22:17, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Images go on right

As in English we read from left to right, should we have a reccomendation to have the first image (depending how far away it is from the infobox) aligned right? Also, pages should be balanced (I.E. Rughly the same number of images on both sides). Just giving my 2 cents! Benzeman 17:10, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by the first image? For example, for items, do you say the detailed image is the first image or the infobox icon? I like the current 'format'. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:00, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
well not all images are recommended to be on the right, chat heads are just one which is prefered to be left but i dont think it makes any difference about balancing the amount on each side as long as the image is there and near to the text relevant to the image then it doesnt matter Slayer Timwac talk Fire cape.png 18:29, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
Not the infobox, but any other image. Also, the page should be balanced - an example of what I mean is Dragonkin - all but one of the images are on the right, some should be moved to the left, or removed completely (it is quite crowded). Also, an image just under the infobox should be on the left, but after ~3cm, it should look of to have an image aligned right  Woodcutting Benzeman talk contribsDragon hatchet.png  09:45, October 17, 2009 (UTC)
Where images should go has too many nuances and factors to have such a restrictive rule. It should be as it currently is: editors should use their judgement to determine where they should go. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:59, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
I can see what you mean, but balancing the page shouldn't be too hard  Woodcutting Benzeman talk contribsDragon hatchet.png  15:33, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
If that page really bothers you (or any other for that matter) why don't you start a discussion about "balancing" it and see who else agrees? Just some food for thought. Jpv41193 16:03, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
I don't like the proposal to have images on the left and right. For me, it's a very poor look to have text sandwiched in between images, especially as the text flows around images of different sizes and proportions, and it makes the text harder to read. It almost makes it seem as though the words are secondary to the pictures. Thumbnail and framed images should be on the right in my opinion, though I accept that judgement is more important than hard and fast rules here. But in principle, I think the idea of "balancing" images on left and right is a bad one. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 17:38, November 14, 2009 (UTC)
I agree that putting images on both sides of text looks awkward. I think it would be better to simply use judgment as far as image placement is concerned. Jpv41193 16:03, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

vanity images

"This image or animation features a character wearing more equipment than is necessary. To ensure that the subject is shown without distraction and to discourage vanity images, this image should be recaptured wearing only what is necessary or nothing at all."

I do know that some wikians use(d) their same outfit over and over. But when I upload images, I wear equipment that does not look distracting. A guy with blue plain clothes and pink prince hair looks more distracting and vanity then one of my images where I wear (related) equipment. So I'm not quite happy with this rule. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 18:35, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
I looked through your file namespace contributions and couldn't find any image that you uploaded where you wore a setup like the one you're talking about... could you link a few of them so we could see what you're talking about? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 18:46, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
At these images the person does not wear any more equipment than is necessary: 1 2 [[:File:Corrupt dragon platelegs equipped.png|3]] [[:File:Corrupt Z staff.png|4]]. He's not wearing any armour.. but still it is vanity.. (I never heard that word in my life untill today)
Some of my images where I think the armour is not disctracting or doesn't show a repeated fashion: [[:File:Runescape_weapons_specialattacks_seercull-soulshot.gif|1]] 2 :File:Zamorak Godsword.png|3 4 Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 19:21, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
I do not see how any of the first four images are vanity at all... He's wearing nothing and everything is white... its about as drab and unremarkable as you can get! Now then, on to your animations. The seercull one to me, would need to be replaced. Firstly, the character is all gray, and so is the wall, so the character kind of "blends in" with the wall. The actual bow is also fairly gray. This makes it harder to see exactly what's going on with the bow. I don't have much of problem with the glassblowing gear... although the karil coif does seem rather silly if all you're showing is a player working on glass (why would they need the armour?). The Zamorak godsword image is 100% distracting. The armour is bright red and fire orange and the sword is gray. By the very nature of the human eye, the equipment is distracting. The armadyl godsword special isn't that distracting, mostly because the sword and the swirl are light colors and your gear is black.
So, not all images which have equipment are vanity. But they are all unnecessary. And even if we were to say "armor is Ok, but it can't be over the top", then we get into a whole can of worms as far as defining what is over the top. I can foresee a bunch of arguments and revert wars as people fight over armour set ups. "yours is over the top, mine is better!" "no, mine was fine, you just want your armour in there!" "No, you!" That has already been happening, and would just get worse. Why risk opening the door to that kind of conflict to facilitate something which is totally unnecessary to begin with? It doesn't make sense to me. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 19:45, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
What if it wasn't white? Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 20:19, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
I dunno, it depends. I suppose someone might put together some outrageous costume, but at that point it'd be easier to just say "I don't like this so I'll take it up on myself to replace his images with a more neutral apperance". Unless you'd like to mandate a standard wiki character appearance? That doesn't seem feasible! kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:31, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
This rule supports similiar appearance like Hapi, Requiem and 1andonlymike earlier this year. The Wikia strongly oppose(d?) this stuff. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 20:36, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
I don't quite understand that logic... How do you figure a rule forbidding costumes supports the return of the safari hat and guthix stole? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:39, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
It's about the monotonous appearance that leaves some kind of personal watermark on an image. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 20:57, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
I think I see what you're getting at now... Unfortunately due to the very nature of the Wiki, some people are going to upload more images than others. Its just the nature of the beast. The best thing we can do is try to limit the damage by taking out some of the vanity element of the monotonous apperance. Think about it, what policy WOULD you have us have? If we allow costumes but disallow people from using the same one over and over, how would you regulate it? How would you determine what "the same costume" is? Think about hapi, requiem, and tarikochi... they all had one part of their costume that was there "trademark", the pith helmet, the guthix stole, and the bowman hat. They all had differnet costumes, but that one single piece was their trademark. So a rule like that would be difficult, or even impossible, to enforce unless you enact strict regulations that border on fascism.
Secondly, you seem to be under the impression that this is all about banning vanity and monotonous appearances. In reality, that was not the reason. The real reason was to ensure that the equipment being showcased was shown without distraction. Sure, some costumes don't really distract from the subject, but rather than debate for hours on end and decide on countless of case-by-case bases, its so much easier and so much more efficient just to say "no costumes allowed". kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 21:29, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
Exactly why the template needs to be reworded. — Enigma 06:26, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
But to what? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 06:39, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
How about:
This image or animation features a character wearing more equipment than is necessary, which distracts from the subject of the image. This image should be recaptured wearing only what is necessary or nothing at all.
I think it should be OK, it would alow editors to wear a few non-distracting items. Short and sweet :-D  Woodcutting Benzeman talk contribsDragon hatchet.png  07:42, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
According to me trademarks could go as their distracting.Saradomin swordZorvarsingh [Talk] [Contribs] 11:02, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
The problem with allowing editors to wear a few non-distracting items is that "non-distracting" is completely subjective and impossible to enforce. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 18:05, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
Well, in that case, the only option is a blanket ban, and we just deal with distracting ones, and "ignore" non-distracting ones. Woodcutting Benzeman talk contribsDragon hatchet.png  06:53, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
I'd agree with that. In cases where the equipment significantly improves the image, then we can ignore the rule. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 16:59, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
How about: "This image or animation features a character with equipment that is distracting or not neutral. This is due to the equipment that is out of place on the subject or due to the personal dressing style of the character." Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 09:15, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
But how do you define "distracting"? I know what distracts me, but what distracts you, and what distracts other people, is bound to be different (i.e. wrong (kidding! (maybe))). Per RS:AEAE, admins simply cannot block people who appear to be distracting to them, because they aren't the sole arbitrators. That said, consensus would need to be reached every time an admin felt a block was necessary. That would take far too long. We need to avoid subjective, qualitative terms like "distracting". As such I strongly believe that the only definite way to accomplish the objective is to ask a single question: is it necessary? No? Then get rid of it. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 17:13, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
"As such I strongly believe that the only definite way to accomplish the objective is to ask a single question: is it necessary? No? Then get rid of it." Then chop (read crop) the head, legs and left arm of aswell, they aren't necessary either when you show a weapon. I will not be uploading any more animations or stills of equipment. Fed up with this crazy law. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 19:18, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

So, would This image also be vanity because I also wore mime gloves? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:55, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider it vanity, and per RS:IAR, it wouldn't need to be replaced, since the mime gloves really aren't distracting at all. Also, elf, there's a difference between just taking off equipment and cutting away bits of the character. Your argument is akin to "Well if I have to take my piercings off, I might as well just peel off my skin!" Its hyperbolic and irrelevant. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 23:34, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to have to agree with ElfAnurin here. I understand the logic behind getting rid of costumes like Hapi's with the Pith helmet and all, but to ban all equipment except the item being showcased? I think that's a bit much. Unless it's something glaringly distracting, I don't think they should be replaced. For example, see this gif, you replaced the animation with one where the player had no armour one. To be honest, I liked the previous version by Requiem which had the full Santa costume on, it looked good with the whole emote thing. I really wouldn't like to have to see the Wiki where all weapon images have some player with no armour on, some variety is good. C.ChiamTalk 15:18, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

The policy as written wouldn't mandate a witch-hunt for all costumes to be replaced asap. I agree that perhaps replacing that image shouldn't have been a high priority, however I recently grabbed all my holiday rewards from Diango and I figured "as long as I have them I might as well get some replacements." The policy was never intended to address the monotony of the pith helmet, the guthix stole, or even the bowman hat, it was meant to address the distraction and counter-productive vanity that went along with it. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 16:56, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
IMO, Requiem's version should have been used rather than yours, and I don't think it should have been necessary to replace it at all. In any case, I really don't see how wearing some armour is really distracting at all. In some cases, possibly, it may be glaringly distracting, but mostly, it's still good. I find very few of the images with players wearing armour distracting or in the least counter-productive and think that you are going way to hard on these types of images. Again, I wouldn't like to see all our images with players wearing only one item and nothing else tbh, it'd be pretty dull. C.ChiamTalk 02:49, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
I can see where you're coming from. I just think you're being to much of an idealist. Yes it'd be nice if people could upload images and not abuse the whole costume aspect of it. But the fact is, people will abuse it if you give them the opportunity. How will you police it if they do? Will you ban them if they use a costume? Unlikely. So then what will you do to stop abuse? There really isn't a whole lot you can. The pragmatic fact of the matter is its easier and less time consuming to just say "no extra equipment", which is something I have been arguing non-stop here. When you do that, then it stops all kinds of arguments over what is and is not distracting. Remember, this is an encyclopedia, as such efficient and clear communication of ideas is our function. Allowing costumes is in direct conflict to that ideal, especially if it brings with it all sorts of abuse like we've seen in the past. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 03:13, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
What if we specifically target costumes that a player is using for all their animations/images, but not target images where the player is wearing a costume that is relevant/appropriate for the image? C.ChiamTalk 03:17, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
What if that image were Requiem wearing the santa suit and a guthix stole? Or Tarikochi wearing a santa suit and a bowman hat? Or Hapi with his pith helmet? Would that still be a violation in your mind? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 03:25, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
Yes, those should be replaced, since it is part of the costume after all.. C.ChiamTalk 03:28, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
But then you get into the things where they have like two or three "signature" pieces that they use prevalently over and over again. I guess that's not so bad, but its the same basic principle. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 06:22, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I think this whole thing is ridiculous in my opinion. This rule is taking out the personality in Wikia and is punishing newcomers for their awesome edits. It's angering some of greatest editors (imo), and it's just not welcoming to the new people who really want to help out! Enolith uploaded a damn good image of a woodcutting cape, and just because she was holding a few flowers in her hand, she had to be notified (this goes out to everybody who notifies about images, not just Psycho, who was the person in this case). This is ridiculous. All I see on User talk: pages nowadays are people being notified about what they are doing wrong. Even on my userpage, I really don't think I've ever gotten a "Nice job!" or a "Thanks!". My first archive was full of questions being asked, and talking with a few of my friends, but the few posts that did apply to images & my edits and whatnot, were me being scolded for something. Even if you do have to notify me or someone else about something, do it in a friendly manner, not just "You have done this incorrectly, it is not allowed." Insert a Template:=) or something, jeez, this is why Enolith quit. Wikia isn't about following all the rules, being perfect, doing your job right; it's about VOLUNTEERING, and when a person volunteers, they should be thanked, not scolded for any small mistake they may have made. Enolith's flowers, that's just ridiculous, if everybody wore simply their character's clothes and only the said item in an image, this wiki would be full of boring images with no personality. Taking off all of our equipment shows that we're boring conformists who MUST. FOLLOW. POLICY. like a bunch of damn robot zombies. We don't want our readers to think we're robots, we want them to think we're just like them. We're just another player, and we're not showing it by acting like robots -.- "Just another player" would be wearing something. "Just another player" would have a personality. When someone goes to a article, they don't care about the little side things that don't matter. Let's say I am a happy little merry player reading the RSW, scrolling through the Zamorak godsword page, if I think "Hmm, I wonder what the zamorak godsword looks like! I haven't seen it yet!" and I look at [[:File:Red d'hide blessed set female equipped.png|the image]], then I'm obviously looking for the zgs, not some zamorak dhide. Readers wouldn't care about what's around the zgs as long as they see the zgs. I don't know what it is with some people here, but I think some of us want this wiki to be organized down to the mark, to make it as perfect as possible, to make EVERY SINGLE IMAGE contain only the best quality of ONLY the said subject. Ridiculous what this Wiki has turned into.

Summarized:

1) Newcomers should be helped. NOT scolded.
2) Don't be afraid to have a personality, add a Smile at the end of your post ffs, we're not some monotone robots like I said above.
3) Don't be such a hypocrite when it comes to images. No one cares if there's a few flowers in someone's hand when looking at a wc cape.
4) If an image must be replaced (e.g. : someone wearing a half-jester, half-kyatt, bearmask image while holding a ZGS when the filename is File:ZGS_Wielded.png should be replaced.) then...
5) In continuation of 4, images should only be replaced by A MORE SUITABLE COSTUME or NO COSTUME. Limiting images to NO COSTUME shows we're a bunch of conformist monotone robots with no personality (no, I didn't just say those words because it sounds like a cool comic book, I said it because it's true.)

I consider myself a pretty damn good editor, taking pride in my work, and not once have I been thanked or acknowledged, like everyone should be. I'm not asking for User of the Month, just a little message on my talk page saying "Thanks!" or "Nice job!". Every user who puts hard work should be given a manual message, written by someone with their own hands, not just a "Template:Nice_job".

Everyone deserves to be scolded and only thanked when they truly do a whole rework of a large amount of pages or images or some other project on the Wiki

Everyone deserves a thanks or some kind of acknowledgment, and should only be notified when they are doing something wrong if it's a big deal. Flowers held in the right hand, while perfectly capturing the woodcutting cape DOES NOT COUNT.

This very well may be my one and only post, I'm not gonna dread coming on the Yew Grove everyday just to fight with everyone. I've made my point.

Disappointed, Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 05:50, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

If you don't ask someone to follow a policy when they break it, how do they find out about it? Besides, Enolith had anger issues. Just look at her contributions. Just because one random person flipped the freak out at a simple request doesn't mean that everyone else feels like that. Besides, I've asked told tons of people exactly the same thing I told enolith, and she's the only one who reacted negatively to it. The rest of them just said "ok I'll do that next time" or whatever. Just because angry people talk louder doesn't mean most people are angry. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 06:07, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
By telling them "you broke a policy" in a friendly manner.
But, bringing us to my 4th and 5th point, why is this even a policy?! This is the stupidest rule I've heard of, really. People shouldn't be notified about this because it shouldn't be part of the policy. Sure, Enolith may have had anger issues a bit, but who doesn't? 1) All editors are equal, no matter what their personality or mood, 2) No human is perfect and we are ALL going to flip out some time. Aside from Enolith, even ElfAnurin was notified, who's been a dedicated wonderful user for a long time now. It's not just the newbies being notified about these things, it's even some of the more common editors around here.
And no offense, but that is a lie. Enolith is NOT the only one who has reacted negatively, and remember, no one that is notified is a four-year old. In fact, one user who is a " 38 year old school teacher living in the North East of England, near Newcastle Upon Tyne" was notified and reacted negatively, and was even notified by you, Psycho. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 06:20, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I think this is all just pure nitpicking and not at all needed. What's wrong with wielding flowers on a wc cape image? It makes people happy. Relax. You said that you wouldn't replace my image with the mime gloves. Then why replace the one with the flowers? I don't see the point. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 18:27, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Driz, I admit that what I did in that situation was a mistake; I reacted too fast and should have asked why he had uploaded 3 nearly identical screenshots of the same subject, however in my defense, the images had been deliberately cropped to include his character, (which you can see here), which is against numerous policies. As for Oli's concerns, I don't latch on every image with anything in it and pester the editor until they take it off. Enolith was a relatively new user, and I thought she might not be aware of the policy. Note that I said to take it off next time. I wasn't going to make a big deal about the flowers at all. I was just asking that she be aware of the policy for the next time she uploaded an image. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 18:37, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
I think that wearing other items should be fine, unless they really really really distract. Like wearing something on the torso and a weapon, and taking the shot from such an angle that the weapon is in front of the torso. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:29, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
I can agree not to warn people like Enolith again, if you think that would be in the best interest of things, but I don't think that kind of "extra equipment is ok as long as it doesn't overlap the subject" langauge should go into the actual policy, because then people will begin consciously deciding what hat to wear. "I'll wear my party hat for this image, it doesn't overlap", things like that, without thinking about whether its a detriment to the image or not. That also doesn't address the non-item images, such as emotes and skills. For example, what of File:Herblore potion mixing.gif? Or File:Yes.gif? What would we do about those? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 23:15, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
Well, we could also argue to a degree that having the same no armour (default clothing) apparel can be a vanity picture. Such as :File:Abyssal whip special.gif|Abyssal whip, Dragon longsword, :File:Dragon scimitar sever.gif|Dragon scimitar, :File:Dragon pickaxe.gif|Dragon pickaxe (and many others by me) animation files have the same look. One might think that since I "wear" the same attire, it must be a vanity picture. Not going to say all would think that, but (I swear that someone here or in another thread said something like this) some people are bound to upload more than others, but does that mean that I should change my default look (might be like thinking of a new trend/person with a vanity mark/etc.)? Either way, would a vanity picture be a constant, a variability in attire, or something of a different sort? Oh and one other thing, could you clean the file history of those? Thanks. Ryan PM 02:31, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
The quote you were referring to was "I think I see what you're getting at now... Unfortunately due to the very nature of the Wiki, some people are going to upload more images than others. Its just the nature of the beast. The best thing we can do is try to limit the damage by taking out some of the vanity element of the monotonous apperance.", said earlier in this thread (by me, funnily enough). As for your images being "vanity", there's absolutely no way. Its not as if you choose that particularly look to be flashy, like Requiem or Tarikochi. Anyone who says that's vanity doesn't understand what vanity is. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 02:51, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Ryan PM 03:28, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Oli, unless there's something covering up what should be shown, it should not replace. This also includes that people shouldn't wear ridiculous costumes, such as a kyatt top, jester hat, some other random, flashy clothing.

We shouldn't even be having this conversation.

The RuneScape Wiki is part of Wikia, correct?

Wikia is a place to volunteer, "Wikia is a wonderful place to get involved, develop community, build relationship and extend a hand" as Bonzi says it.

If Wikia is a place to volunteer, why is it that that people are "notified" about their volunteering? Saying "Hello, you did this wrong with your image" is just rude, people come to Wikia thinking they can help out with whatever productive thing they do, they shouldn't be notified about their help.

By "notified" I mean scolded or asked about their help, telling them "you did this wrong".

Sorry, but you can't volunteer wrong. You can do your work wrong, but you can not voulunteer wrong. And well, Wikia is not work, nor will it ever be.

That's just ridiculous. Anyone who clicks the save page button with a productive edit in the box should be thanked, not notified about what they did wrong.

"RuneScape Wiki the wiki devoted to RuneScape that anyone can edit"

Why don't we just change it to

"RuneScape Wiki the wiki devoted to RuneScape that anyone can edit, but if you do it wrong, you'll be notified and your edit will be totally massacred until it's correct"

Sickens me what this volunteering community has turned into, it's not longer fun for me anymore when we have to FIGHT about FLOWERS IN SOMEONE'S HAND. The quality that once made Wikia special is being taken away.

Psycho, even after you or someone else notifies a person, what happens if they don't follow it? What if they keep uploading .JPGs after you say "No .JPGs"? What are you gonna do, block them? Constructive edits no matter how ugly or crap quality are constructive edits. No less. Keep in mind that people are not payed for their edits, they don't get crap, not even a thanks (usually). I think according to that, people have a right to upload constructive images however they want.

Can't wait to hear the answer to this one.

A volunteer, not an employee, Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 04:26, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Guys, I am unsure if this is the place for a long discussion about explaining to users about policies and edits that could be improved >_> Chicken7 >talk 06:18, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if I am getting off topic a bit, but this whole "vanity" thing all leads down to one thing: pointless notification, as mentioned above. People shouldn't be notified every time they upload something that's a bit off from the policy. For example, If I start uploading .JPGs for the rest of my wiki career, but do it in a constructive, meaningful, not-vandalism way, what's anyone gonna do, block me? Nope. I highly doubt that. Maybe yell at me and notify me some more. But oh well, I'd be contributing constructively, not much anyone can do about it. (remember, this is an example.) Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 06:22, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I think only blatant vanity images (like Tarikochi's or maybe Hapi's) should be replaced. If someone took an image of the dragon kite when it's released, and wears a nice hat, would you replace it? I wouldn't even think about it. Only if that someone wears that hat in a myriad of other images should you even think about it. I can't say it better than Diriz can. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 10:28, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I can agree to stop notifying people unless they do it over and over. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 19:23, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Psycho Nerd. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 20:09, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Eh...? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:11, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
That helps the discussion how? Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 20:15, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
There's no point in this discussion with him anyway coz he's staying a selfish lil nerd. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 20:21, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Please be civil. He just agreed to a compromise. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 20:25, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Psycho... You can notify them if you like. Just be nice. Make it personal, just do something to make it nice. Relax. Seriously, I'm not the type of person that would tell someone to relax, but it's all I can say. Don't stress out. They're just a bunch of pixels. Relaaaax.
And ElfAnurin, even though I agree with most of what you said, calling him a nerd is redicilous and completely unneeded. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 20:36, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
You know its starting to look like, despite all the people who supported it, I'm the only one defending this. The only reason I was defending it was because I honestly believed that it was in the best interest of the Wiki, but if it inspires this kind of negativity, and has this little support other than myself, then there's no way it can be for the best. As such I forfeit the debate. If no one besides me is going to step up and defend this, then it should be removed from the policy. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 20:46, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
I think it should not be removed but replaced or rewritten. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 20:54, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Well as I read I got the impression that no one opposed stopping another tarikochi, so how about something like "Players must not wear the same costume or items over and over in their images, as this is akin to signing an image"? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 21:00, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Yeah something like that. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:21, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
Yup, that sounds good. That was all I was really going for anyway. C.ChiamTalk 02:42, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Conclusion/Summary

Sorry but I am going to have to admit that this thing is way too long and jumpy to read every argument and section. Can some one who has been involved write a real short summary/conclusion?--Degenret01 04:42, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Well, I was going to summarize everything, then I got an edit conflict with Degenret Lol So here goes.

(saving my post by copying before pressing "Save page" ftw)

([email protected]#[email protected]#$ Smile)

I've got a few things to say.

First off, this little quarrel between Psycho and Elf, it's not unusual for humans to do. Elf had a reason to say "Nerd" and that is that Psycho obviously did something to make Elf angry. It's a simple domino effect that happens every day. The best way to solve something is to talk it out and resolve. I hope Elf replies, it would be sad to see him leave because of this. Forgive and Forget.

Regarding "notifying", Psycho and other people who notify, and whatnot, I think we all agree that a personality is needed. Add a smiley or something, don't use your own patented copy+paste notifying template, type it out and show that we're not jerks, we're just like them, we're just another player. Do NOT be a conformist, monotone robot.

My decision and opinion on the image policy, this discussion:

People should be allowed their own costumes, as long as it's not ridiculous, such as full jester with a gadderhammer when taking a picture for a fury is counted as extravagant. My first opinion would have to be allow similar costumes when someone wants to use them. People who volunteer don't usually get a thanks, therefore, they should at least be allowed to give themselves credit by wearing a little bowman hat. Wikia is a great place, and people need to be noticed for their work. If you guys don't agree with that, I'm satisfied if people are allowed to wear simple costumes, but not the same thing every time. People should be allowed a little fun, at least. File:DragonLong.png was not fun. I felt like a kid who blends in with the crowd :\ Nobody should feel like that. People need to be noticed for their work.

Now, I'm concerned that some of us are a little obsessed with policies. Yes, rules are always important, in RuneScape, in Wikia, in real life, but you must agree with me, policies are not everything, you shouldn't be so obsessed with policies to forget to have fun and enjoy your life. Wikia used to be a fun place to come to, to help out your community and extend a hand. I absolutely REFUSE to let that go away. I don't have much left to express myself with or to help out with, and I'm sure other people have fun and need Wikia too. I refuse to let this wiki turn to policies and obsessing over pixels. You have to agree with me on this.

I think we all agree.

Lastly, we are ALL equal, and we are ALL volunteers.

None of us are employees, we're just another player, we're just another personality.

I hope I made my point pretty damn well this discussion, this is a problem I'm passionate about.

Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 04:50, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Template changes:

To many small issues to summarize, I'd recommend just reading this section

Animation limit:

Ignore it for larger pages.

Inventory shadows:

No one seems to care one way or the other so no shadows it is!

Audio files:

They can be used here, as British copyright laws (called Fair Dealing) allow using the full piece of it for educational purposes.

Watermarked images:

Crop the watermark out, if not speedy delete it.

Unnecessary equipment images:

The current policy is too restrictive and is unfriendly to new editors as well as well as making the wiki sorta boring since everyone's nakers. It'll be rewritten to instead prohibit elaborate costumes used over and over.

kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 04:58, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

I Support these changes of the image policy. (Also Psycho, I hope you reply to my post, either here or on my talk page. I'm referring mostly to the paragraph explaining obsession with policies Wink) Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 05:05, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - All but one of these seem to be good. The problem is allowing more animations on longer pages. They already take too long to load so if anything, they should definitely follow the rule of 2 max. They should NOT be the exception, that's like shooting yourself in the foot before a race. And honestly, most (not all, just most) animations could be replaced with a screenie taken at the right moment.(I am not saying we should do that, I just think it wouldn't detract if we did.--Degenret01 06:12, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Support and question - Can I replace images with bigger and smoother ones ? Is it ok ? D-Sheep -T-G-E-H- Thieving 53 10:46, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we want bigger unless the original is really too small, as that tends to mean a larger file size. If your purpose is because of choppiness, just ask yourself if it is so choppy that it is obviously bad.--Degenret01 13:39, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Would it be possible to do what the Guild Wars Wiki does here with their animations? If possible, it would allow only those that actually want to see the animation with just a click of the image. This would allow for a smoother Wiki to compensate for lag. It would be a (maybe massive?) great undertaking to do this for all animations. We would take the first frame of all animation. Turn that frame into a PNG, JPG(JPEG), or GIF image. Finally putting a redirect to the animation file for those who want to view it. (I kinda answered myself here.) Would this be a viable alternative to our current system? Cheers. Ryan PM 05:35, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

That we could. Code is along the lines of [[File:animationfilename.gif|thumb=stillfilename.png|other parameters and whatnot]] (from here. Sounds like another good solution where needed. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 18:05, November 15, 2009 (UTC)
I Support this as long as there's some message that says click to see animation somehow, for the less smart people. Animations aren't made for them to be forgotten about, they're made to be seen. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 08:04, November 27, 2009 (UTC)


Ok, this is taking way to long to wrap up, I'm not gonna sit here and let 12 days go by without anyone posting, while people are still uploading images per the current policy. We've made our decisions, let's just wrap up the animation dilemma above this post and get this over with. After this thread is gone, just simply make a new thread if you have any concerns. Consensus to apply to the policy and close? Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 08:04, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Support - In before close? Well, I do agree with most of this and cannot think of anything better. I love the suggestion for the animations. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 09:46, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Though there seems to be a consensus that we need some sort of anti-vanity image rule, there seems to be no consensus as to how the rule should be worded and implemented. As such, there should be another discussion on that specific topic after the rest of this topic is wrapped up. --MarkGyver 21:40, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Restating what I just said 3 posts ago - Ok, yes sure, so LET'S DO THAT, come on people, agree? Put into place what we already have, and we'll take the animation issue to another thread. I'm not gonna wait any longer, no one's answering, why let the final choices we have made just sit there? Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 01:53, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

I'll go through this tomorrow and work on closing things up. I'm feeling lazy tonight though Lol kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 01:56, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

NO, SLAVE! Get to work, RIGHT MEOW! Alrighty then :P Thanks anyway.*waits for tomorrow patiently* Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 02:31, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

standard vs high detail

When we first started applying this policy (when the first version of HD came out) there was quite a seperation of quality between the two versions, hence we came up with the policy. But looking at and comparing the differences between todays SD and HD, I think the detail is better but hardly worth causing a replacement tag to be applied to the pic. It seems we are wasting time effort and energy replacing images that are quite good because of an older policy that doesn't really apply, so I submit we stop doing so. People can replace a picture if they feel the need to but let's take it off the project list so it is much less of a focus.--Degenret01 11:10, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - There's a huge difference. HD is much more realistic looking than SD. --Nup(T) 13:39, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - There sure is a big difference. Why else would my computer run smoothly on SD and crash on HD? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:59, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Of course HD is always better! It's not as if placing SD tags is the wiki's life, I think very few people do that. Not a big deal, imo. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 08:04, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Closure

This thread has gone on long enough and consensus has been reached about a lot of things:

Templates to be deleted

Template:AnimGif and Template:Fa, since are both replaced by Template:Gif

Template:Watermarking, since watermarked images which cannot be cropped will be speedy deleted

Template:Transparent renamed Template:Transparency (the most important change in this thread)

New templates

Icon Name Description Category
Anim.gif Template:gif This image or animation has GIF dithering artefacts which make it appear grainy or blurry. A new version should be uploaded with a higher quality. Category:Dithered images
http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/4062/combatimage.png Template:interfering combat This image or animation features combat in such a way that it interferes with the image's clarity. It should be recaptured using a player with Auto-Retaliate off or a monster with low HP that will be killed in one hit. Category:Combat images with interference
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1219/shadowbl.png Template:inventory shadow This image of an item's inventory sprite has a shadow. Please upload a new version with the shadow erased. Category:Inventory images with shadows
Information icon.svg Template:long animation This animation is too long. There are excess frames at the beginning or end which are not needed. It should be trimmed or a new shorter version should be uploaded. Category:Animations which are too long
Information icon.svg Template:short animation This animation is too short and therefore looks hectic or choppy. It should be recaptured in such a way that it looks more smooth. Category:Animations which are too short
Information icon.svg Template:unnecessary animation This animation is of a subject which does not need to be animated. A still image should instead be used. Category:Unnecessary animations

Animation limit

The rule can be ignored for pages where multiple animations add to the article, for example Magic and Special attack

Audio files

The entire audio file can be uploaded under the British concept of fair dealing as outlined in Copyright, Designs an Patents Act, sections 29 and 30.

Vanity images

The current unnecessary equipment part of the image policy will be changed to "Players must not wear the same costume or items over and over in their images, since this is like "signing" an image, and is therefore against our signing policy."

The minor changes will be made immediately, and the larger changes will be made over the next few days. Any changes which you feel have not been satisfactorily resolved will need to be done so in another thread. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 02:35, November 30, 2009 (UTC)