|
Support guidelines for image size
- T·A·C·T·I·C·A·N·G·E·L
- I Lion Heart I
- That's right, I went there. Uniform image size, because I'm a uniform kind of guy. Diablocon 10:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Bluer 15:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC) : I prefer standardization as well. It's how we've been holding this wiki up and maintained it to a reasonable standard. I would also prefer the image to be within the dimension so that talk templates are placed one talk bubble after the other: it looks really unique that way. As well; what matters most is the contents; the text of the talk bubble.
- TA made the template. It may not be his by patent, but we should try to adjust to what he wishes. I guess I would upload a leg-less Garnet if there was no other way to downsize her. 8bit 20:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I prefer things to be uniform, i.e. the same. In my vision of everybody having separate sizes, it looks terrible...2127 21:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- As long as it's a little bigger. JudgeZarbi 22:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Crazyswordsman: I agree with TA. Your avatar shouldn't be any taller than the height of your talk template when you write one line.
Support the use of any image size
- Hexed: To a reasonable level.
- Vanishing Star: I agree with Hexed.
- Henryacores: The size should be as big as it must to be understood and as small as possible. Personal preference can also influence this, as long as it does not exagerate in size. And please don't use anything other than sprites or character\enemy artworks.
- Faethin: Of course. Common sense above all.
- Azul: Everyone else pretty much said what I had to say.
- Drake Clawfang: As long as the image doesn't ridiculously throw the alignments of the page out of whack, go nuts. 10 pixels seems a petty change to me. The whole point of the talk bubble is to represent the one who made it.
- To a reasonable level. Firstly, so people have some flexibility and secondly, because you blocked Faethin over this matter before we reached concensus. That's a bit unfair, isn't it? --SCM
- To a reasonable level, as said above. Truly, slightly larger images don't take away from the effect. -- YuanchosaanSalutations! 06:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- What he said. What she said. -- N/A 10:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Self-interest. My picture is too small in 50px. 60px is perfect. --BlueHighwind 14:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- BfD - 17:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Screw conformity. Individuality and common sense rule over being 10 fricking pixels too many. There. I've said my share. --Tex HOWDY!!! 23:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Pablo I think we should have a little smaller than 8bit's Garnet.
- I'm normally for most types of conformity, but not this. I've tried to modify the Balthier image and it won't work for me. So to bad so sad.--Muchomas35 01:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
TA, "uniformity for appearances sake"? There are quite a few editors who use different templates (yourself included), and I find the effect quite pleasing, individuality and what not. -- YuanchosaanSalutations! 06:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- @Yuan: Sure, that's all good and stuff, but that's not the point here. That is the point in the talkboxes over all, but the 50px margin is there so it's all the time. Go onto Faethin's talk page. Scroll down and it just looks stupid how his one is different. IMO anyway. It's 10 pixels different. It shows.
- 50px width all times because it presents nicer. You know like how on forums has the left (sometimes right) with the avatars and extra info, and on the right (sometimes left) in the bigger space, th text. Using a set margin just presents so much nicer. --I Lion Heart I 10:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think that would be a matter of opinion. To me, a little difference does not affect the layout too much. I think it looks fine, but others might not. In my opinion though, it's their template to do as they wish, within reasonable limits. -- YuanchosaanSalutations! 10:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- But the rules are 50px. It was never said 50px give or take. It was set as 50px for 50px width to be used. TA made it this way, TA wants it this way. --I Lion Heart I 10:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Wow, Faethin was blocked just because his talk template juts out ever so slightly. -_- | |||
Template:ILHI
I saw the edit war, but that only happened because TA was making it so it doesn't jut out. I am baffeled by Faethin's lack of saying anything though. Surely they should have talked it out instead of constantly reverting. | |||
|
Poor Faethin. I hope he comes back tomorrow. =( | |||
Yeah. That's over the top. We all play with fire all the time, TA. You especially should know. | |||
Faethin shouldn't have been blocked for such a dumb reason. I liked his template. | |||
Template:ILHI
I wish I understood who, or what, I am... | |||
Somehow I find the idea that TacticAngle knows what's best for everyone a little surreal, if not laughable. Especially when it's something as stupid as Talk Templates that we're talking about. | |||
That was what I was thinking when I switched my vote. | |||
THERE. HAPPY NOW? | |||
Template:ILHI
YAY! I EDIT CONFLICTED ILHI! As for the votes, yeah, you're right. | |||
I also remember that it was decided to have the images restricted to 50px to reduce the space taken up by the images whenever the talk bubble was used, but still allowed for enough of the text and contents. At the beginning, when this template was originally written from quite a marvelous piece of wiki coding that I doubt most of the voters above even know how to make, the images were bound to 100px, but it has eaten quite a lot of the space on the left margin. CSM decided to reduce the image to 50px and limit them to simple sprites and character art, and everyone followed suit. It was for the important part of the text bubble - the text, and I do agree that we should emphasize more on what we're saying... Now, I also notice some users using contrasting colors for their templates - it is recommended that the colors do not have striking contrast; we're not all with 20/20 vision and the eyes may not stand light from the computer monitor that long. It's all technical and logical concerns, really. | |||
With my font, if the colors don't contrast, you can't read it at all. | |||
I say the less rules, oversight, guidelines, and pesky regulations the better for all. It's not like it matters in any fashion anyway. | |||
I agree with Blue. | |||
Template:ILHI
@ILHI: No. There's Blue (BlueHighwind) and Bluer (Bluerfn).<rant>And I was supporting BLUEHIGHWIND, if the previous sentence wasn't clear enough.</rant> | |||
Template:ILHI
8bit BlackMage - Beyond the Sky TALK - Why do chemists call helium, curium, and barium 'the medical elements'? Because, if you can't 'helium' or 'curium', you... um... ._.; - {{{time}}} | |||
EDIT Conflict X2: 8bit no want conflict... 8bit just want talk..... ;_; My template must be one of the "excessively tall" culprits. If someone could show me how to "downsize" Garnet's image so it fits better I would be happy to comply. I'll probably be using a new image in half a month or so anyway, if there's no way to shrink the picture without cutting off Garnet's legs. | |||
FINE. I'll call him BH if I have to. | |||
Template:ILHI
Yeah 8bit, we're looking at you :P | |||
They're our talk templates we should be able to do what we want with them. | |||
Template:ILHI
@Scottyboy: That's saying you own something that doesn't belong to you. | |||
Just because he invented them doesn't mean that he should get creative control over them. | |||
Just because you think he shouldn't have creative control over them because he invented them, doesn't mean he won't. | |||
Template:ILHI
People set rules for reasons. People do things like limiting sizes for reasons. If you still can't figure out, you probably don't belong on this thread. | |||
|
Edit conflict. @TA, no matter what you try there are people out there that are going to vote for the "anarchist" option, where they can do what they like. | |||
8bit BlackMage - Beyond the Sky TALK - Why do chemists call helium, curium, and barium 'the medical elements'? Because, if you can't 'helium' or 'curium', you... um... ._.; - {{{time}}} | |||
One of which seems to be yourself... | |||
Only because I can't be arsed to switch my vote again. Oh fuck it, I will. DONE. HAPPY NOW? | |||
Hm, all three of the active admins are in favor of uniform size. I wonder what the verdict will be...
| |||
|
8bit BlackMage - Beyond the Sky TALK - Why do chemists call helium, curium, and barium 'the medical elements'? Because, if you can't 'helium' or 'curium', you... um... ._.; - {{{time}}} | |||
Question: Looking at the original Garnet image, it is indeed quite large. However, when I tested this image of Adrammelech in the template, it shrinked perfectly into place. That image is huge. Why is it that Garnet's image was so gigantic in-template and Adrammelech's is not? | |||
|
8bit BlackMage - Beyond the Sky TALK - Why do chemists call helium, curium, and barium 'the medical elements'? Because, if you can't 'helium' or 'curium', you... um... ._.; - {{{time}}} | |||
Ah, okay. Thanks. And for some reason I was blocked from doing one edit because I seem to share Faethin's IP address, but now I can edit again o.o | |||
Crazyswordsman - Final Fantasy VI, because Drake says he wants to link to FF7 every day, which is bad because that game is so far inferior to FF6. TALK - 04:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
This is just a test to see how big my image is. | |||
If it's uniformity we want, how far do we go? Perhaps it's just me, but I almost never notice if someone's template image is slightly larger or smaller. I do notice the unique templates though, like the ones TA, Nelo, Bluer, Chief etc have. Do we get rid of those too? I much prefer the flexibility that different image sizes grants us, however, if there are health issues rather than aesthetic, I will support image restrictions.
@JZ and Scottyboy: I quote the little thing at the bottom of this screen again: "Please note that all contributions to Final Fantasy Wiki are considered to be released under a Creative Commons attribution noncommercial sharealike deed...If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here. I can't stress that enough." @ILHI: I was under the impression that Faethin was blocked for TA's convenience and because TA didn't want an edit war. | |||
Oh, it feels so good to be back. There's a couple of things I'd like to clarify: I asked Faethin for his cooperation and warned him repeatedly. Taken from TA's talk page. A half truth is a full lie. This is an utter lie. This is what happened: Originally, TA entered the IRC channel and said something about BlueHighwind's picture being too big, a fairly neutral statement. Then I said mine was just as big as BlueH's. TA didn't say anything. He didn't ask for cooperation. There was no "Hey, Faethin, I need you to change your pic's size", nor there was any "Hey, I'm gonna change your pic's size for a while until we resolve an issue". No, TA went ahead and changed the picture's size without asking or warning, just because he felt like it. Because his margin got screwed up or whatever. Of course, I considered this an act, not of vandalism, but certainly not of good faith. So I reverted his edit. What did I get? A test template. I honestly didn't care, and what was the use of giving him back a test template? Clearly, I could do nothing about it, so I carried on. At the second attempt of reducing the size of the picture, I again reverted TA's edit. I'm not sure, but I guess this time I got the final test template before the block, I don't recall having checked my talk page. Again, there was nothing I could do, so I did nothing. At the third attempt of reducing the size of my template's image, I for the last time reverted TA's edit. Voila!. I was blocked. There was constant dialoge at the IRC channel. There was never a request for cooperation. Not one. He wanted to do it. He did it. I didn't like it. Too bad for me. Was I warned? If the test templates count as warnings, well, yeah. I was warned against not bending over to what our dearest admin wanted to do, as arbitrary as it may seemed. Where is the act of vandalism, though? Was reverting a change done to my own talk template an act of vandalism? Earlier today, TA argued, by whatever reason he thought valid, that the talk template was not actually "mine", in the sense that I have technically no right over it, that I do not own it. So, technically, any edit done on the template, was still to be weighted to determine, whether I liked it or not, if it was a useful contribution or as an act of vandalism. The reason behind this claim, that it was not in the first place my template, I have yet to understand. But whatever it was, I was quick to point out that had I made any edit to his talk template, I would most probably had gotten, again, a block. His swift answer was this: that I would probably get a test template or two if I decided to do that. Why would I get those templates? Why would editing a template that belongs to nobody get me a few test templates and possibly a block? Because it's TA's template and that is holy ground? Because he can actually block me and I can't? Our dearest admin once commented, during an edit on Aerith's page, about the dishonesty some users had shown regarding that fated move from "s" to "th". How can he talk about dishonesty after what he said that I just showed? In fact, I consider his attitude more of an inconsistent attitude than a dishonest one. Of course, I also consider inconsistency a far worse fault than dishonesty. It is, after all, both its predecesor and that of hypocrisy. Yes, this volume of text reflects how truly upset I am because of this arbitrary and unfair block. This, users who were nice enough to read this, is what I think of our dearest admin. Smart? Interesting? He's shown me to be nothing more than an inconsistent, arrogant jerk. Yet another one. It's just that this one happened to be able to block me. Too bad for me. | |||