Forum:Image replacement

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Image replacement
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 24 October 2010 by Liquidhelium.

What i suggest is very simple.(unless some complicated discussion prevents it from being simple... XD) As we made a runescape: page of the requests for merge and split, i suggest a "requests for replacement" page. This will be for images that have discussion what image is best. It is about versions that already have been uploaded but have been improved(or sometimes not...). This will prevent a revert war, and let consensus decide what version of the file is better. This is because it should currently be discussed on the talk pages, which are maybe the least visited pages on the whole wiki.(file pages are not visited often, especially not their talk pages)

Suggested "requests for replacement"


Support - As nom JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 20:55, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I haven't seen that many revert wars over files. This is just overly bureaucratic for a minor aspect of the wiki. --LiquidTalk 20:56, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

still, requests for undeleting is not used often either. It's just to get more views for more accurate consensus. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 21:20, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Overly complicated. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 21:13, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose - This is overly bureaucratic, and the thing you're talking about barely ever happens. If a need arises for discussion on which version of an image is better, there's always a file talk page, which is used more than you think. Anyway, Page maintenance really has nothing to do with arbitration on images, and it shouldn't. ʞooɔ 21:20, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Such a simple aspect of the wiki should never be that bureaucratic. Should we ever have to settle a dispute regarding a new image, it can be discussed in the File talk namespace. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 21:21, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Additionally, we can use various templates to add file talk pages to a certain category if there is a replacement discussion on them, similar to [[RS:RFC]]. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 21:47, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
Ok. good idea imo.Support that too. its just bcus previous discussions like this: [[File talk:Fire.png|[1]]], [2], [3] should be visited more, so draw attention more. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 22:01, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
If something isn't getting enough attention, put Template:Rfc on it. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 22:05, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
I don't believe that page is viewed often... I don't see many comments on pages tagged with that... JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 22:07, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
That's because the people who put the tag haven't checked back. Every once in a while I go through and address every page in that list. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 22:09, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
I think we should put the page in the RS:PM page, because i think that one is viewed more often, or we could make an apart template for these cases, which automatically puts em in the rfc category when it is in the file talk namespace, but says something like: "this image is considered to be reverted. Please comment below." Then i think this could be closed. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 10:02, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Per above. HaloTalk 21:26, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose - Per all, especially if it will be put in RS:PM. 222 talk 10:05, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Lolwut? That's just pointless. bad_fetustalk 12:50, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

This request for closure is complete A user has requested closure for Image replacement. Request complete. The reason given was: Nominator withdrawal after a week of discussion.

JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 14:26, October 24, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - Nominator withdrawal. --LiquidTalk 15:17, October 24, 2010 (UTC)