SmashWiki talk:Images
Category:User images
I think that the user images category should be used more often and more reliably. As such, I'm proposing a rule that all personal images must be in it. Failing to put a personal image into the category would result in a reminder to do so, possibly followed by deletion if the user doesn't comply in a reasonable length of time. Personal images would also not be allowed to be placed in any category used by non-personal images (presumably all the other categories). Toomai Glittershine 
The Non-Toxic 21:41, 3 October 2011 (EDT)
- I support this. Omega Tyrant
22:05, 3 October 2011 (EDT) - Why exactly do we need a category for user images? Mr. Anon
talk 22:30, 3 October 2011 (EDT)
- We currently have over a thousand uncategorized images - at least twenty times more than uncategorized articles, templates, and categories combined. We need to start chopping that down, and I figured taking personal images out of that group would be as good a place as any to start. Having a category exclusively for personal images would also add an extra layer of division between them and other images. Toomai Glittershine The Frivolous 23:06, 3 October 2011 (EDT)
- We currently have over a thousand uncategorized images - at least twenty times more than uncategorized articles, templates, and categories combined. We need to start chopping that down, and I figured taking personal images out of that group would be as good a place as any to start. Having a category exclusively for personal images would also add an extra layer of division between them and other images. Toomai Glittershine
Edited images
I've noticed User:Brandondorf9999 has been blocked a fair amount of times for "uploading edited images". If this has been a block reason, shouldn't there be something in the policy that prohibits such images? Mr. Anon
talk 21:05, 8 February 2012 (EST)
- I noticed that too. He had tried to make some of the background of the images white or tried to make some of them all shiny or stuff like that. ..... The Morning Sun 22:10, 8 February 2012 (EST)
If I recall correctly, most of those blocks weren't necessarily for editing the images, but for editing them in a way that made them worse (e.g. enlarging images, adding shoddy transparency) and engaging in revert wars over them. That said however I will write here that we will not accept (in the mainspace) edited images. Toomai Glittershine The Obfuscating 23:31, 8 February 2012 (EST)
- If you're including a guideline on edited images, I would also suggest including a guideline about avoiding the use of images from hacks; I know the Teetering article had an image of a moveswapped Mario, and Brandondorf got into trouble for uploading images of a "widescreen" hack. --- ReiDemon, Author Extraordinaire, 23:37, 8 February 2012 (EST)
- I was aware that many of his blocks were due to his images actually being lower quality, or for him image edit warring. However, the recent notice you added to the talk page seemed like it would be more meaningful if it had policy to back it up. Anyways, thank you for adding that note. Mr. Anontalk 23:52, 8 February 2012 (EST)
Image amendment
Fine with me, I usually add spaces in my pic names. RoyboyX Talk 19:47, 28 July 2013 (EDT)
Why do you think the amendment is extreme? Awesome Cardinal 2000 21:27, 28 July 2013 (EDT)
- Because it flies in the face of probably more than half of the images we have, and implementing your "must have spaces and avoid abbreviations" amendment would require us to rename them all without bot support (and then find and fix the affected templates).
- In addition I'm not convinced that making images easier to search for is necessary (why search for an image when you can just look in the articles where it would be, and if it's not there there's no reason for it to exist), nor that this rule would actually help (spaced/unabbreviated or not, search's dropdown bar acts the same). Toomai Glittershine The Hammer 23:56, 28 July 2013 (EDT)
