General Discussion

I would say yes.
 
Yes.

I'm working on something now to do just that.
 
Thanks that looks good enough
 
Would anyone happen to have an image of the player's guide for Wario World? It's the last one that's missing from the wiki's gallery (besides a couple of general books, but I've got those covered). However, I don't own it and Google hasn't been helpful.
 
Time Turner said:
Would anyone happen to have an image of the player's guide for Wario World? It's the last one that's missing from the wiki's gallery (besides a couple of general books, but I've got those covered). However, I don't own it and Google hasn't been helpful.
Click to expand...
Not my image, from an ebay listing:

UZadTMx.jpg
 
Since I was a bit updating the page of the stats of Mario Kart 8, I wanted to discuss a matter that I unfortunately haven't been able to discuss so far: as you noticed, when I did the same page for Mario Kart 7, I tried a new organization that keeps the in-game stats separated from the normal way of writing stats based on the bars, the reason is that, by doing this, I could use a more meaningful title that also suggests the presence of the stats translation tables below, that appear to often be overlooked in the Mario Kart 8 page; it also helps clarifying that the game works internally with points, and each driver or part has their point, which is not that obvious.
In the case of Mario Kart 8, the parts about the stats in points and the stats translation tables are even more interesting, as they clearly show how the game is definitely based on Mario Kart 7. Still, I can also see the point of the Mario Kart 8 stats page as it is now, in that all the stats are in a separate page, so that the people interested can immediately have them without having to find them in the main page.
I would actually only keep the values in points, since that's the way stats are stored and it is not obscure at all, still the values in bar format presented as difference from the standard parts are so widespread that I see their removal as a detriment for the readers, unlike other Mario Kart games before 7 the length of the bars is also directly proportional to the number of points, so they are not as misleading.
I was therefore wondering: for Mario Kart 7 and Mario Kart 8, should we prefer one approach over the other? Should we try a different approach still (e.g. creating a page with the stats in bar format and another page with the actual in-game stats)?
 
omg who changed Rosalina´s main page artwork?????

The one in SR looks horrible in the box plus its cropped INCORRECTLY (Look at the sides of her hair)

Someone change it back.
 
I agree; it's been changed back now.
 
Do people just crop characters out of scene artwork and just call it..."artwork"?

I don't like this idea. It's not very professional at all. Hell, the Nintendo of America book thing had instructions specifically against doing something like that in promotional material.
 
I was surfing random galleries and noticed Peach's have two sections full of artwork scans: "Miscellaneous" and "Scans"-> http://www.mariowiki.com/Gallery:Princess_Peach/wiki] Shouldnt we merge both or move some of the artworks from one to another? Like, some of the Club Nintendo's prizes scans (like the cards, calendar, manga, etc) and etc go to "Scans" and real miscellaneous artworks, scanned or not, be included on the "Miscellaneous" section? Or then merely creating new sections for "UNO Cards", "Trump", etc. I am not entirely sure, but I remember some other gallery pages with similar "issues"... And on a side note, does it really matter on Marios gallery if the 2D Artwork is shaded or not? Well, it probably does for the artists but I thought they could be mergerd as well in just "2D Artwork" section or a new gallery page only for his (Misc) 2D Art; since this guy seems to get one art everyday XD
 
I think the idea is to have clear-cut scans on one section and have miscellaneous artwork (those that aren't scans like the one where Peach is facing away from you) in another. I see what you mean: this, this, this, and perhaps this will go to scans. The cards, however, feel a bit too excessive to fit into an already-big gallery, so I think we'll have to remove them, especially since they often use already-existing sprites and artwork to begin with.

I myself created the distinction between shaded and unshaded, though while there isn't a huge problem to have it merged, that arose from my attempt at cleaning up the organization of Mario's miscellaneous artwork. I thought it would be easier to just group all the vector art into one spot, but there are two versions of vector art (especially since the unshaded also are in .svg format) so I divided it up into two. I think that works Does anyone think how I did the vector art is handled is fine?
 
I see...yes, my point is exactly that: separate them this way and I actually think the crads are un-needed: they can stay just on their respective Card/Gallery:Card pages (just an example).

For Mario I just spent time thinking again and I think there is no problem in having them separated this way: it doesnt make a big difference like I said before, so having them separated or not is okay, anyway...XD However I still think my idea of having a "SubGallery" page just for those 2D/Misc art at leadt for Mario would be somewhat more organized.
 
I want a bit of clarification on a point: is a sample of images sufficient, or is it necessary for every possible image to be present? For example, on Birdie, most of the sections only feature a small portion of each character's birdie animations. Should every character from every game be featured, or is the current selection sufficient?
 
Well, I think having different reactions for every character makes the page interesting. I like browsing through the different character reactions, especially how Mario Golf: World Tour makes them really unique.

I wouldn't consider tagging a page as incomplete if they don't have every picture, but if you want a fully complete page, I say it's recommended to have every character reaction.
 
At some point, though, I think that it becomes redundant, especially when it comes to lower-resolution games like Mario Golf (either GBC or N64) and Advance Tour. Why pad the galleries with extraneous images when a handful of them can achieve the same effect?
 
A solution I can think of is to put the reaction images into respective character galleries if size is the concern?
 
I don't think those pages should be repositories of every character reaction. As much as I like the images, the gallery kinda borders on excessive.
 
There is a thing I've noticed. A few people over at the wiki are re-uploading a bunch of images regularly, after having compressed it. With all the best intents no doubt.

Now what the problem is here is that while it may safe space on the original file, miniatures are not affected at all, because these are created by the MediaWiki software, which is not aware of original encoding while shrinking an image and produces an identical file from both compressed and not.

Seeing miniatures are the furthest most people will see images, is that compressing images really necessary? Not entirely sure what to do with it.

Wouldn't do it myself at least unless there is like 90% junk (meta)data in a sprite image.
 
I sorta agree with this. Doesn't uploading a new revision of the image counteracts any data saving you get from compressing the image?
 
The old one is indeed not removed, just archived.

The only reason it would be beneficial for the average user is if the image is shown in itself (i.e. not a thumbnail), and the size goes down significantly.

A few examples though:
File:MK8 Deluxe - Box NA.png - Useless compression (filesize down by 0,5%).
File:SpaceKoopaKid6.png - Not really needed (filesize down a third, which is only a mere kilobyte).

File:PeachIcon-SMG.png - Shaven of 6 KB, but only thumbnails are used which are not affected.
 
I was wondering, since we are currently uploading many textures on the wiki, should we create a new licensing template for textures, so we can also differentiate them better from actual sprites? Maybe we should also see the naming of the "Sprites and models" sections of the galleries, adding "textures" to the name.
 
I think labeling them sprites is good enough because the textures I see in question don't really resemble the traditional textures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back