Image Galleries

Ray Trace

Ray Trace

The fastest, strongest, and kindest Protector
Wiki Administrator
Poll Committee
Pronouns
She/her
MarioWiki
Ray Trace
There seems to be lacking a standard when it comes to organizing the image galleries. Most galleries such as Wario's and Donkey Kong's are organized by Screenshot, Sprite, Artwork, then miscellaneous, if any. Others such as Fawful's and Cranky Kong's are organized by Artwork, Screenshot, then Sprites.

Those disorganized character galleries are in the minority right now, but I think we need some sort of established standard so that galleries stay consistent. My proposal is to set a standard to make them organized as most articles are: Screenshots, Sprites, and Artwork.

Oh, and another related issue: I think we should split off sprites and 3D models into their own categories, or at least change the title "Sprites" a bit. Sprites are 2D digital renderings that use either frames or Flash stuff to animate while 3D models use textures, bones to animate, and lie on a 3D plane. For example, the wiki categorizes this as a sprite:

Boom_Boom_SM3DL_Sprite.png


When this is nowhere near being a sprite.
 
Screenshots, Sprites and Artwork seem like a good standard. As for the 3D models stuff, a lot of users would tend to think of them in the same way, but if we must distinguish the two then I suggest we name the section "Sprites and Models". Either that or a subheading titled "Models" in the "Sprites" section.

And the thing you said about categorizing sprites, I don't think we should split the models from Category:Game Sprites into a new category (if this is what you were suggesting). We'd have to made a new license when uploading images and all those things, so when it comes to categorizing sprites and models I think the collective term should be sprites.
 
Maybe we can call the Category:Game Sprites and Models instead of making an entirely new category? But then again, we'd have to change nearly every image in existence, which would be rather cumbersome if you ask me.
 
Personally I don't think it would be worth it. But I'm fine with distinguishing the sections on Image Galleries.
 
Baby Luigi said:
Maybe we can call the Category:Game Sprites and Models instead of making an entirely new category? But then again, we'd have to change nearly every image in existence, which would be rather cumbersome if you ask me.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't mind working on that. It'd probably take a while, but that's not much of a problem for me.
 
You just have to modify the template (and use a massive text replacer bot/manually do it to fix some ones that are just sitting there)
 
I think changing the header to "Sprites and Models" is a good idea; changing the category seems superfluous, but if everyone's gonna be insistent about the terminology, changing the category name, rather than making a new category, would be the way to go.

However, I've always thought "Artwork" -> "Sprites/Models" -> "Screenshots" would be a better order for the galleries, since screenshots are the roughest images, while art is generally the most polished and represent what the character is supposed to look like (while sprites/models have to deal with graphical limitations, at least in the earlier games).
 
Walkazo said:
"Artwork" -> "Sprites/Models" -> "Screenshots"
Click to expand...
This could be a good alternative.

As well as character galleries, should we have a solid standard for game galleries too? If so, then we may have to deal with the additional step of "Box Art and Logos" because looking at the vast majority of the current organization of game galleries, "Box Arts and Logos" is below everything else and separated from "Artwork".
 
Do you think we should also have a standard for the intros?
Something that states that every gallery must begin with "This page is a gallery of ''[[game]]'' or something different, but always the same.

Sometimes I see "This is the gallery of the game, ''[[game]]''" or "This article is the list of the pictures from ''[[game]]'' for the ''[[system]]''.

This is inconsistent, and I think a standard is great.
 
A simple "This is a gallery of (subject)" since what you're suggesting is implying that all galleries' subjects are games.

Or we can just remove it all together, since there is already a link that leads back to the parent article, and having a sentence there is kinda already pointing out the obvious.
 
It's still a good idea to have a slug line up there, rather than leaving the top of the page blank.

Consistency is good, but the intro could be changed up a little for different types of galleries - to provide a little variety.

Like "This is a gallery of images pertaining to the game [[blah]]." (which could, when applicable, be followed by "For a gallery of images pertaining to the remake, [[blahblah]], see [[Gallery:blahblah|here]].") for games, and then substitude "show"/"movie"/whatever if it's part of another media. Then "This is a gallery of images featuring (the) [[X]](s)." for specific subjects (characters/species/items/forms/gaming systems). Specialized subjects may also need specialized intros to work (i.e. "This is a gallery of the images from [[Rosalina's Storybook]], featured in ''[[Super Mario Galaxy]]''.").
 
I agree. That would be a consistent standard, the only thing is that there would be variations. But of course that's fine, and that's still a standard.
 
I agree as well, blank space is kind of an eyesore.
 
I supported it. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back