Forum:Image reorganization

Greetings,

Quality and organization are the foundations of any wiki and, to put it bluntly, the CnC Wiki is sorely lacking in both departments. My impression that the wiki's contributors have been hampered not by lack of enthusiasm, for which there is abundant supply, but rather by a lack of direction. Without such direction contributions have been inconsistent in both the aforementioned quality and organization.

The state of image management unfortunately reflects this lamentable state. Currently auditing the image repository is not possible without significant labour. Lack of comprehensive categorization and inadequate descriptive file naming makes it impossible to check for duplicates, among other things.

I propose the following policy and plan to rectify this. It will require preserverance to implement fully but it will give those who have an interest in seeing the wiki's foundations strengthened for future growth something to work with.

Step 1: Categorization

Every image must be categorized. The image category structure will be something like as follow (incomplete example):
 * Images
 * Allied images
 * Allied unit images
 * Allied Rifleman images
 * Allied Medium Tank images
 * etc.
 * Allied structure images
 * Allied Construction Yard images
 * etc.
 * Allied organization images
 * etc.
 * Allied character images
 * etc.
 * Chinese images
 * etc.
 * Empire of the Rising Sun images
 * etc.
 * GDI images
 * etc.
 * GLA images
 * etc.
 * Nod images
 * etc.
 * Soviet images
 * etc.
 * USA images
 * etc.
 * User images

I'm not sure if you want to group the factions by game or what have you, but this is basic idea. Not the capitalization. Categorization of existing images can begin immediately as it is the easiest thing to do.

Step 2: File Naming

Some files have incredibly undescriptive names, like being just a string of numbers which doesn't tell us what the image subject is. The basic filename should look like:

For example:

This ensures each image has a unique name, makes auditing ludicrously simple, and allows us to group different iterations of the same unit in the same category. For example, for the Nod Stealth Tank we could have:

and  and   and   all in the same category for easy reference.

The source ID would be something like the following:

The type string would be something like the following:

Step 3: Sourcing

As you go through the images categorizing, and renaming the worst offenders, try to figure out where it came from and add that to the image description. This would be a good time to look out for unofficial art ("fanart") which should be purged along with duplicates.

Step 4: Profit? This should get things rolling. Suggestions and comments are of course welcome. - Meco (talk) 03:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the wiki is lacking in structure in a big way and I'll happily help out over summer as much as I can. I'm willing to put many hours in but my knowledge of the finer workings of wiki's is still lacking so a few prods in the right direction may be needed. If anyone comes across any images of buildings/units from any C&C game that are of poor quality leave me a link and I'll take a new picture on the highest settings. This is not likely to be an issue with the older games where it's the graphics that are the poor quality but I can name a few images from Red Alert 3 on the wiki that are taken a few quality levels below "very high".

Can I also recommend that we have a sample page that others follow the style for. I have seen lots of different styles on the wiki from a military briefing style to a very informal standard wiki style, and from huge passages that don't say much to short bullet points that are maybe too straight to the point. Dd7900 12:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You are certainly welcome to upload improved images. Generally when possible I take the image at the highest quality possible, crop, and shrink until the jpg is rather less than 150 kB. The objective is to upload the smallest possible image while still being clear.


 * One thing we have to look out for are "real world" images. We should replace as many of those with their "in-universe" depictions. Just one example: the Comanche. We need an image for Sakura's Commanche from the in-game engine cutscene where she shoots down the transport aircraft, and an image of the USA game unit.


 * As for good article examples, that might be a topic for another thread. Right now, I can't say I'm fully satisfied with any of the articles I've seen. Even the ones I've revamped are missing referencing. The best I can think of is the Mammoth Mk. II article. If you'd like to see where I'd like to take the C&C wiki, wander over to the StarCraft Wiki and absorb the formatting and organization used over there. - Meco (talk) 13:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Would you mind if the pictures were in png format? From my experience png's can be resized with less loss in quality than jpg's. Also as your talking about keeping images under 150kb is there a maximum size that a wiki can be? (sorry I don't have much experience on the management side of wikis)


 * I'll have a look at the Mammoth Mk II and StarCraft wiki too for formatting and hopefully go through a few pages tonight giving them a face lift. We can have a play around with a page till we get it perfect then use that to do the others if you like. Can use my talk page to discuss further if you want to save me posting more unconnected questions on this page. Dd7900 13:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The maximum upload size is multiple MB's but the wiki does not need images that large. The wiki is not an art gallery, it doesn't need ultra-high quality, or ultra-large (as in pixel length/width), images. The 150 KB is an administrative, not a technical, limit. It's there to get people to think about making their uploads more efficient and to the point.


 * We should not be concerned with others resizing the wiki's images for their own use. We should only be concerned with getting images which are sufficient for the wiki's needs. That need is well served by jpgs. From a legal standpoint, accepting a decrease in quality goes some way in justifying usage under "fair use".


 * The only time I don't care about using pngs is if the image is small to being with, like 10-20 KB, or if the image has lots of essential text and a decrease in quality makes it too fuzzy to read. Also, the only time I'd countenance breaking the 150 KB rule is for animated gifs, and there had better be a damn good reason for using those in the first place. - Meco (talk) 14:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I support this Image reorganization but please delete any unused images.(Saffy Nurbs 19:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC))


 * I'm only an occasional guest to this community, but if I can wave my own flag, I did a total rewrite of the King Raptor article that contains referencing and generally follows standard conventions both of this wiki (hopefully ;-) ) as well as some larger wikis that I've worked on. On that topic, if there are other improvements that need to be made to the article; let me know. Atarumaster88   ( Talk page ) 18:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)