Dragon Age Wiki talk:Image guidelines

Warden and Hawke pictures

I've changed something one thing regarding using the default pictures of Hawke (because there's none for the Warden). This was supposed to follow the same guidelines as previously written, e.g., the default player characters should generally not be featured in mainspace articles, except their own page (e.g. the Warden and Hawke.

As for the exceptions, I'd think the romance pages can be an exception as well, as an issue on heterosexual bias was raised (since all pictures from BioWare only showed heterosexual romances). --D. (talk · contr) 21:54, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

Just an update regarding this: all romance pictures have been removed, even if they're from BioWare. This is the compromise that came from Talk:Romance (Dragon Age II). --D. (talk · contr) 05:09, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

User images

I didn't add following, because there was no consensus about that.

• User page images violating any of these rules are subjected for deletion without warning.
• The user images that are not using within the Wiki for more than 72 hours are subjected for deletion.

-- Snfonseka (Talk) 05:16, November 8, 2011 (UTC)

Fan art

Do we have a policy on fan art? It seems to me that we shouldn't allow it on articles, even those where there are no images available (book articles for example), and that certainly seems to be the consensus. Should we simply write it in? King Cousland | Talk   19:43, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Don't know if my opinion counts but I agree we shouldn't allow it and we should write it. Asherinka (talk) 20:05, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

We have already built a consensus not to allow fan art, in forums. But didn't take any steps to insert that in here as a guideline. -- Snfonseka (Talk) 02:59, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

In a sense, it seems to already be in the guidelines (that is if you read it a certain way). Dragon Age Wiki:Editing guidelines do state to avoid speculations in articles. Fan art is in a sense speculating on the appearance of a character (at least in the case of one that has not been depicted). Balitant (talk) 03:04, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

True. But not very clear for a image guideline. We need to be specific. -- Snfonseka (Talk) 03:12, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Can we put this up for discussion and make it official? I want to resolve the Nicolas and Julien pages in a clear way so that there is no need to argue the matter. Balitant (talk) 07:09, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I think those pictures should be deleted. Asherinka (talk) 07:49, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

If this matter was already discussed (which I don't know when we discussed this), we can avoid the red tape and add it as a guideline. Fanarts can be removed from articles for any reason, but you can't say it's due to "policy" since it does not exist.

Regarding the pictures of Nicolas and Julien, you can tag them for deletion. Otherwise, they are deleted after a month for maintenance. --D. (talk · contr) 16:07, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

So this means we reached a consensuses to add this to policy. Right? -- Snfonseka (Talk) 14:59, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Official pictures by BioWare

Big brainfart as I just realized some of the pictures that I had previously deleted were officially released by BioWare, but had been removed since it featured Hawke or the Warden (I completely forgot this was okay in certain cases). I'd restore deleted pictures if there's a need (those were mostly on the class pages like Rogue (Dragon Age II)—but the infobox pictures were rather awful as those were just male Hawke with bad transparency issues). I think we can do away with them in most cases, e.g., picture featuring a creature with Hawke, or removing excessive pictures for gallery. --D. (talk · contr) 17:25, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

Thumb widths

Should we have a guideline regarding thumb width consistency? I've seen a number of articles where the thumb widths were all over the place (e.g. Leliana), and it irks the hell out of me. I get where the editors are coming from--they want to make screenshots more visible--but the screenshots themselves often don't really contribute to the content of the article that much and are basically just eye candy (especially if there already is a large infobox picture and a gallery that demonstrates differences in appearance across games). And if the reader wants to look at the screenshot in more detail, each screenshot can be clicked on and viewed in much better resolution than we can put into an article. In my opinion therefore, in most cases (i.e. unless it actually makes the image unrecognizable or breaks the formatting, e.g. with very wide or long images) all thumbs within an article should have the default width. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 08:09, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

I would very much support having a consistent size guideline. It'd make the articles look a lot cleaner and less cluttered. --Kelcat (talk) 08:38, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

I've changed the image sizes back to default on the Leliana page, agree it looks better now. Xsari (talk) 12:50, July 05, 2014 (GMT)

My proposal for the guideline alteration would be to add following to this page and to DA:MOS#Images: "For the sake of visual consistency, the width of thumb images should not be altered from the default (200px), except when it would make the image subject unrecognizable (very wide images) or break the page formatting (very long images)." I think I should post this to MOS talk, as well... --Koveras Alvane (talk) 15:09, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

I am 100% against regulating such thing. There are many cases which cannot be ruled out separately and a larger thumb is better than a smaller one or the opposite. Checking on wikipedia, their page images also have varying widths. 15:24, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

Speaking of Wikipedia, its MOS says this: "As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default..." And this: "Similar types of images within an article often look appealing if they appear at the same pixel size" (and I would argue that in-game screenshots are a similar type of images). It also lists several exceptions where deviating from the default makes sense, but I never said that there may not be any exceptions to the guideline. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 19:51, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

Should a forum be created to discuss/vote on this, or is it just going to be done here? If it's done here, I want to say that this seems like a decent idea to me, and I vote in favor of it. Norqi (talk) 20:28, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

I think we should follow wikipedia's style and apply only a maximum size. 17:09, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

...that was the plan. Most thumbs are not set to be smaller--they're usually tweaked to take up more space than needed, and that's what I spoke up against. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 17:12, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

You spoke of a fixed number than in very few exceptions can be decreased. I think we should go with 240px or lower, I feel 200px is way small. 17:40, July 7, 2014 (UTC)