Forum:Image policy
| Forums: | Index → Yu-Gi-Oh! Wiki Community Discussion → Image policy Please sign your comments with ~~~~. See Help:Signatures and Help:Talk pages for further information. | Post |
I have a few comments about the image policy. First off, why is so preferable to have a full card image. For real-world card, it makes perfect sense. But for some anime/manga cards, a good full-card image will never be available. Take "Clear Effector" for instance. The current card image is not very good, and I highly doubt that card will ever be used again. I don't believe that a better shot of the card is available in the episode itself either. Prior to the upload of that image, the article featured a full-body image of the monster, which was deleted as soon as the crappy card image became available. I understand that this is primarily a card game wiki, but that seems really excessive. At the very least, why not keep the "non-card" images for the card gallery pages? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:40, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
- In that case, the main page should have the card image, and the gallery should have both the card and the NC image. (similar to Card Gallery:Alchemy Beast - Moonface the Silver) -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 02:13, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
- While we are not Wikipedia, I think their Ignore All Rules policy is something every wiki should keep in mind. In this case, it would mean that, because there will never be satisfactory full-card images for many anime/manga-only cards, we shouldn't necessarily worry about applying that particular part of the image policy to those cards (and, indeed, there's really no reason for it to apply specifically to anime/manga cards at all; full-card images would be nice, but if we have to choose between a high-quality, partial card image and a low-quality full card image, I'll take the partial any day of the week). I also definitely don't like the idea of deleting the body shot of monsters just because we get a card image of said monster, to the point that i am willing to undelete in such cases (though I won't wheel war to keep them undeleted, and am always willing to hear well-reasoned arguments for why the images should stay deleted). 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:21, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- In that case, maybe we could clarify in the image policy that we don't necessarily need to apply it to anime/manga cards (not that I think we should replace good card images with good non-card images). Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:38, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- To be sure. I think that for anime/manga cards, the rough order of preference might be "good" card images --> "good" non-card images --> not-so-good card images --> not-so-good non-card images, or something. I say, let editors have some leeway to make judgement calls as to which image should be used on a card's page. 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:46, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 04:08, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- To be sure. I think that for anime/manga cards, the rough order of preference might be "good" card images --> "good" non-card images --> not-so-good card images --> not-so-good non-card images, or something. I say, let editors have some leeway to make judgement calls as to which image should be used on a card's page. 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:46, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- In that case, maybe we could clarify in the image policy that we don't necessarily need to apply it to anime/manga cards (not that I think we should replace good card images with good non-card images). Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:38, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- While we are not Wikipedia, I think their Ignore All Rules policy is something every wiki should keep in mind. In this case, it would mean that, because there will never be satisfactory full-card images for many anime/manga-only cards, we shouldn't necessarily worry about applying that particular part of the image policy to those cards (and, indeed, there's really no reason for it to apply specifically to anime/manga cards at all; full-card images would be nice, but if we have to choose between a high-quality, partial card image and a low-quality full card image, I'll take the partial any day of the week). I also definitely don't like the idea of deleting the body shot of monsters just because we get a card image of said monster, to the point that i am willing to undelete in such cases (though I won't wheel war to keep them undeleted, and am always willing to hear well-reasoned arguments for why the images should stay deleted). 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:21, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Also in favour of using perceptible non-card images over poor quality or tiny portion card images. But I don't think the non-card images should be placed in the card gallery, since it's a "card" (and figure) gallery. The way I've seen it is main article gets the most suitable image. The gallery gets all versions of the card. The "most suitable image" is the most recent English image > Second most recent English image > ... > nth most recent English image > order of other card image priorities > non-card image. And poor quality or misprint is good excuse to skip a priority. -- Deltaneos (talk) 23:37, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
- After "nth most recent English image" should probably be Japanese card images, and then "other card image priorities" (unless Japanese card images is part of "other"...). ;) 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:37, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
