Policy Talk:Images

Gallery test

Generally there should only be one image of the unit in the infobox.

If there are more images you'd like to add to the page feel free to do so, but remember that it's easy to overload the page. For this reason please try to put the images below the text content of the page.

If there are more than four images (It seemed like a nice number), the images are very large, or you just want the page to look nice, please consider adding a "Gallery" section to the page. This will do a few things:

1. Present the images in a nice, consistent way.
2. Keep the images and text separate so Editors can find what they're looking for.
3. Add a link to the Table of Contents so everyone can see your images easily.

To create a Gallery, all you need to do is edit your page and include this code:

==Gallery==
<gallery>
File:IMAGEFILENAME|Image caption text
File:IMAGEFILENAME|Image caption text.
</gallery>

The Warhammer page uses this method to bring the images together. Here's the code:

==Gallery==
<gallery>
File:WarhammerInternalSchematics.jpg|The internal schematics of a ''Warhammer''. Note the pilot on the right.
File:Warhammer.jpg|''Warhammer'' from the cover of the original box set.
</gallery>

And here's what it looks like:

Gallery

• 

  The internal schematics of a Warhammer. Note the pilot on the right.

• 

  Warhammer from the cover of the original box set.

---

Discussion

This is just a sample to kick off a discussion. It isn't actual policy yet, even though that word appears in the header. (I did this so User:Revanche could take a break from writing policies for a while.)

Please feel free to add comments to this page, but please do so ABOVE the "gallery test" heading. Thanks!

To Be Discussed

1. What kind of images are allowed?
2. Attribution of images?
3. Copyright? (Should fit within BattleTechWiki:Copyrights policy)

Comments

Okay, first off, I think Wikipedia's image use policy is a must read for research purposes. A number of their policies have to do with copyright issues, which are different for us. In the interest of not reinventing the wheel, I think we should use:

• Always specify on the description page where the image came from (the source) and information on how this could be verified.
• Use a clear, detailed title. Note that if any image with the same title has already been uploaded, it will be replaced with your new one.
• Crop the image to highlight the relevant subject.
• The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject. Images in a gallery should be suitably captioned to explain their relevance both to the article subject and to the theme of the gallery, and the gallery should be appropriately titled (unless the theme of the gallery is clear from the context of the article). Images in a gallery should be carefully selected, avoiding similar or repetitive images, unless a point of contrast or comparison is being made. Just as we seek to ensure that the prose of an article is clear, precise and engaging, galleries should be similarly well-crafted.
• However, Wikipedia is not an image repository. A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article, and a gallery consisting of an indiscriminate collection of images of the article subject should generally either be improved in accordance with the above paragraph
• Note that it is not recommended to use animated GIFs to display multiple photos. The method is not suitable for printing and also is not user friendly (users cannot save individual images and have to wait before being able to view images while other images cycle round).
• Articles may get ugly and difficult to read if there are too many images crammed onto a page with relatively little text. They may even overlap. For this reason, it is often a good idea to temporarily remove the least-important image from an article and queue it up on the article's talk page. Once there is enough text to support the image, any contributor is free to shift the image back into the article. If a contributor believes such a queued image to be essential to the article, despite the lack of text, he or she may decide to put it back in. However, he or she should not simply revert the article to its previous state, but make an attempt to re-size the images or create some sort of gallery section in order to deal with the original problem.

--Scaletail 00:25, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with all those points, particularly #1 (Always specify on the description page where the image came from and how that can be verified.) and #5 (Wikipedia BattleTechWiki is not an image repository).

As for pages becoming too ugly and difficult to read, that's why I suggested

1. That there be only one image in the infobox.
2. That we encourage the use of a gallery tag to hold all the images. This is particularly important with 'Mechs that have a lot of variants, like the Warhammer and Archer.

Originally I said to use a gallery only if you had 4+ images, or wanted to make it look nice, but if we keep the pages consistent that would be better.--Mbear 16:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Copyright Tags

Wikipedia has a lot of image copyright tags that automatically add the license of the image to the upload. Does anyone know if BTW has these (or something similar)?--Mbear 16:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

We don't, mostly because it's not necessary. Every BT image is owned by Topps, under license to CGL. There's only a smattering of images that don't fall under that. --Scaletail 00:49, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Nutshell content

Any changes I should make?--Mbear 19:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

In order for 1 & 2 to work, we would need to amend the copyright policy. Images owned by Topps, Inc. don't fall under GFDL. I agree with 3 & 4.--Scaletail 00:53, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

OK. So how about this:

--Mbear 13:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)