Mabinogi World Wiki talk:Policy/Archive/00

Templates

Do you mean that you don't want people using any besides those two or that you don't want them creating custom templates and saving them as real pages so that they can refer to them on their own page?--Jacobpaige 20:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Customs are okay, I think. We had some people showing up on the NPC list because they were using the NPC infobox, so just want to avoid that. ---Angevon

Move?

To Mabinogi_World_Wiki:Privacy_policy? --Kevin 01:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Privacy policy is something else though, like non-disclosure of personal information. Isn't it? ---Angevon

Yep, this is totally the wrong place for this, it should definitely be moved back.--Jacobpaige 11:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Though I come to this a bit late, this is more for the code of conduct on this site. User privacy is an entirely different kettle of fish. --Irjustman 10:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Policies that I don't quite agree

• The "no players" rule. Personally, I think there are some players/guilds that should be recorded, like seal stone breakers. It's an issue of notability, if the entity is important enough to be recorded then be it. Problem is where to draw the line; we are obviously not WikiFur here.
• Inserting comments into articles. Sometimes inline comments can be useful.
• Joke articles. Remember Orehpus from last year? Or KHENTA SMASH? Even Mabinogi Wiki Renaissance Team have the Editing Skill.
• Lastly, nobody seems to have actually read the policy. Maybe link it somewhere, like in the edit page?

--Kakurady 01:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC) i agree that it might be ok to have article for very notable players like seal breakers and guilds that win the guild battle or own a castle.--Sozen Cratos Focker 04:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

For my part, I'll probably be your best guide. Even though I have a Mabinogi character and a Nexon account, I actively stay away from Mabinogi because it's more than I can handle. When I DO play, I want a reference that's filled with factual data and nothing else. I don't want information about guilds and such. Anything like that I can get in-game. As such, if I see something like that, I'll call you on it. If it's particularly flagrant, I'll deal with it accordingly.

Yes, I'm a noob in-game; think of me as your audience here. Thanks. --Irjustman 10:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Templates?

Why do we not allow the use of templates in user pages? Also, why not allow users to make {{Username/Pagename}} if it relates to the wiki in some way? --Kevin ^(•Talk•) 07:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Can we link to this from the NewMenu?

...or at least specifically the userpage bit. =\ -- Ladywinter 17:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Though it isn't navigating anything, can we place this in the navigation part of the sidebar? Makes it alot more visible to users --Kevin (‧_Ta^lk‧) 18:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what page the sidebar is on in order to add it there. It's not NavTree like I had thought ... But yeah, it could probably go right under "Random Page" and look fine. ---Angevon 03:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Objective vs. Subjective wording requested

This:

"Do not upload numerous pictures of yourself, your pets, etc. Do not waste its bandwidth and space with your huge pictures."

Is a bit too vague I think. Can we say something more like every user is limited to 2~3 pictures? And should a word count be imposed for information that's only player-related and not wiki-related? -- Ladywinter 22:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure how many pictures should be allowed. This question may need to be taken to the forum topic since the wiki masterminds don't really look at what's going on here. I think the picture amount could be made unlimited -as long as- the pictures are not hosted on the wiki server itself (i.e. users should use photobucket/imageshack etc. instead). ---Angevon 22:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

ohh, good point about the hosting issue...tho I hesitate to make the picture amount unlimited because of the ppl trying to make it MabiSpace...How about 5~10 pictures then, that are completely NOT wiki-related and only character related? I'm sure ppl can use a picture editor to stretch out that limit should they need to. -- Ladywinter 22:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Like I said, you'd have to ask someone higher-up than me by posting on the forum. ---Angevon 22:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

~10 pictures that are not already on the wiki? If they are on the wiki as pictures used on other pages, that wouldn't count? Pictures hosted on another site do not count toward your limit? something liek that? --Kevin (‧_Ta^lk‧) 22:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

<nods> I think that's getting there. Really I just would like the wiki to give out hard numbers so ppl can't be all like "80 is totally not numerous, I have over 200 on my facebook!" -- Ladywinter 22:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the amount of pictures allowed for userpage purposes, that's something that would go on the Image Policy that I'm currently writing up. I'll discuss it with other staff members before a cap is set, though. I'll be sure to mention the possibility of hosting on outside sources. The Image Policy is still being drafted, and I should have it up by the end of this week. --Powder Rune 01:54, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we should have a size limit, opposed to image count limit. Like, 3000kb worth of images (combined, of course) only. My average screenshots are 100~300kb, so with that limit, you could get like 10 to 30 images. The only reason I say a size limit is because, I have 14 different images of my own on my page (which IJ has already said isn't TOO schmaltzy ._.), which I would plan to add more (for my upcoming ~5 pets I plan on getting in the future), and they only take up a mere 1~15kb each. When we talk about 'numerous pictures', do we mean any picture in general, or screenshots? I have no screenshots, but a dozen images, only taking up a total of 100~200kb total. ~Rusty~

Rune, Khenta, and I have decided that users can have up to 10 images adding up to 3,000kb filesize total in their user page, incorporating the suggestions above. Comments/complaints should go here. Not sure if there is a forum post for it. ---Angevon 04:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

There's no indication anywhere on what the word "images" defines, as I've previously asked for. Technically, I have over 10 images, totaling near 300kb, but the original problem had to deal with screenshot images (I think). Are my images "images", or are they safe? Also, what's to stop people from slamming images together to bypass the 10 image count. Say someone has 20 screen shots, and puts 2 of each together, forming 10, and the limit is under 3000kb. Technically, it's 10 images under 3000kb; and with the wording on the wiki, they pose no violation. ~Rusty~

An image is any picture you place onto the wiki, screen shots, portraits, maps, ect. I looked at your page, and even though you have over 10 small & neat images, that still exceeds the current limit. I understand your point; and your user page isn't as excessively embroidered as many others that we were having problems with, but you must also understand that we cannot make an exception or implement special circumstances for you, or else everyone would also be arguing that they fall under this category and it would just be a big mess. As of now, the limit is 10 images that are actually uploaded onto the wiki not exceeding 3000KB. You can have more than 10 images if you use an external host such as Photobucket or Imageshack. If you're still unhappy with the limit that you can upload onto the wiki itself, we're flexible enough to reconsider it as long as your proposal is reasonable, clear, and open-minded.

Also, to address putting multiple screen shots together to form one image, we also introduced a resolution limit of 1024 x 768 pixels maximum. It's fine if people make collages of their screen shots as long as it isn't bigger than that. But if it were two or more full-sized screen shots slapped together with no editing, it would be a violation. --Powder Rune 02:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Stupid question here

Can we upload non-mabinogi related pictures; for user page purposes? --♫ѕτя♪ 22:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. Our wiki wasn't made for that purpose, and that's not how user pages should be utilized. --Powder Rune 18:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

If you want something like that, there's Facebook for that, then link to it. This site is not for this purpose. --Irjustman 10:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

2.1 NEW User Page Policies

I just want to get something strait, there is or is not going to be warnings before pages are deleted. Earlier in the section it seemed like there was a warning, but the new bold stuff makes it seem like there is not. thanks in advance. one more thing, if it is said on our page we are not going to be contributing because of vacation, camps, etc will the pages still be deleted even if we are away and can not contribute. thanks in advance. slayer1o1 22:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

There will probably be no warnings since then we'd have to give users a grace period which would simply be time-consuming to monitor. To answer some of your other questions, quote: "If you have contributed to the wiki in any way, you will not be at risk, but users that have not contributed anything to the wiki will risk losing their user page and any image(s) associated with the user page." If you've contributed to the wiki, even in a minor way, and if your page fits the image guidelines, then you'll be fine. ---Angevon 22:54, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

To address your other concern: it's not a matter of how often you contribute, just if you've contributed at all. So if you made wiki changes and then went away for 6 months and came back, your user page would not be deleted even if you've been inactive. --Powder Rune 20:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the clarification. slayer1o1 22:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, starting today, we implemented that users that have been inactive for 6 months will have their pages deleted but not blocked because there's really no point in keeping pages for people that aren't there. So, disregard my first answer... --Powder Rune 21:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

If an old user comes back, it will be easy for them to restore the page using the "History" tab on it. ---Angevon 15:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Externally stored images

I've been testing it, but I haven't figured out the coding required to get an image stored on photobucket/imageshack/etc. to actually show up here on the wiki. Anyone know what to do? It's kinda bad if we tell people to do that and they can't. ---Angevon 23:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you'll need to allow <img> tag. I wouldn't be too sure about allowing that if there are any security issues with that tag. --Kevin _(»Talk«) 23:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

You know, on second thought, you're right. I've had enough experience moderating forums to know that allowing externally embedded images is a bad idea. I've removed that option from the policy page. ---Angevon 16:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Contributing Something

How about we make it 'contribute something meaningful', as a user can just make a spell check and get away with it. =\ --Kevin _(»Talk«) 04:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Then, what about the people that spell check a lot but don't have any other contributions? like hundreds of minor but useful contributions.--Sozen Cratos Focker 16:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, IJ, myself, and some others considered correcting spelling and grammar as meaningful contributions. There are a lot of people that are not wiki-savvy (and don't want to mess something up), and/or cannot find much more that they want to edit (we really don't need people trying to fix things that don't need to be fixed, do we?) other than spelling and grammar. Correcting mechanical mistakes makes the wiki look cleaner and more professional. Of course, the more the better. But in all, most of the staff has found it to be a very valid form of contributing. --Powder Rune 21:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

For Admins

Put these templates on the applicable users' talk page:

1. {{LockedUser}} for users whose userpage has been deleted and locked.
2. {{BannedUser}} for users who have been banned.
3. {{NullUser}} for users who have been null-routed. Only IJ will ever use this.
4. When simply deleting a page (not locking) just write a simple message on the talk page.

Figured it'd be more useful to have the template info here instead of on Rune's talk page. ---Angevon 15:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Image policy suggestion

• When taking pictures in dungeon lobbies or bright sunlight, turn off the 'Glow Effect' in Options.--黄恒升 ^{☞ 评论 ☜} 19:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

That's a good suggestion. Thank you. --Powder Rune 00:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

How about adding: Don't take an image when eating an Arat Berry becuase when you do, the screen gets blurry. - A Random User 03:09, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Not necessary you can turn of the blur effect by unchecking full scene effect in options (same effect from nao bombs).--Hengsheng120(talk•contribs) 03:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Regardless for Arat Berries. It will still blurr the Shadow Realm's screen. - A Random User 03:38, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Another suggested amendment to the image policy: replace

• Avoid wearing other gears (like large Two-handed Swords, shields) that get in the way of the gear being presented.

with something like

• Avoid wearing other gears (like large Two-handed Swords, shields) that get in the way of the gear being presented.
  • Do not wear gloves or shoes if you are displaying clothing that covers the hands or feet (such as dan uniforms).
  • If you are displaying long gloves or boots, do not wear a robe or long sleeved clothing that covers part of the glove or boot.

(in the pictures for Elven Glove, the sleeves cut off more than half the glove)--Sozen Cratos Focker 05:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• Some older versions of IE don't support the transparency of PNG files (seen as gray or black), but the transparency of the gif files is seen with my low-version IE computers at school. So if uploading a new image (usually, when an image is already up and either gif or png, I stick with it because changing the extension will make you upload a new file instead of a new version), I'd choose gif>png, for new ones (some programs export gif quite badly, though [yay mine doesn't]). Png files are already a big part of this image world, too xD Just a thought.  ;) Alien 06:15, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Username policy suggestion

We do not allow usernames that are misleading, promotional, offensive or disruptive.
    * Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the contributor. For example, misleading points of fact,  an  impression of undue authority, or the suggestion that the account is operated by a guild, group, project or collective rather than one individual.
    * Promotional usernames are advertisements for a company, group, or guild.
    * Offensive usernames make harmonious editing difficult or impossible.
    * Disruptive usernames include outright trolling or personal attacks, impersonation, or otherwise show a clear intent to  disrupt Mabinogi World Wiki.
These criteria apply to both usernames and signatures. Usernames that are inappropriate in another language, or that represent an inappropriate name with misspellings and substitutions, or do so indirectly or by implication, are still considered inappropriate.

There are no words in the Mabinogi World Wiki:Policy that directly state or imply the above statments. Technically, we cannot use a block template on User:Supernigger lol.--黄恒升 ^{☞ 评论 ☜} 20:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, good work with that. I think you covered everything. ---Angevon 23:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Not me, it's copied from wikipedia:username under the ccsa license :D--黄恒升 ^{☞ 评论 ☜} 23:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Conflicting sentences?

Under the User Page Policy, it states...

"Unless they aim to improve the article, comments on talk pages do not count as contributions."

However, under the Talk Page Policy, it states that...

"Contributing to article talk pages does not count as contributing to the wiki. Your user page will still be deleted if you only contribute to talk pages."

It's minor, I believe this should be fixed. --Aramet 04:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Just add "with comments are not aimed to improve the article" into it

Ex."Contributing to article talk pages with comments are not aimed to improve the article does not count as contributing to the wiki. Your user page will still be deleted if you only contribute to talk pages with comments are not aimed to improve the article."--黄恒升 ^{☞ 评论 ☜} 04:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Under Images... "Do not upload images that blatantly expose mods. " , this should be worded better, since this suggests not showing how to mod, as opposed not showing the result of a modification. Something more like "Do not upload any images from unauthorized game modifications."

Actually, I think saying the latter would be even more confusing. "Do not upload images that blatantly expose mods" pretty much means, "we don't want to see your mods." It's under the image policy, so it wouldn't have anything to do with showing someone how to mod, although that's also against the rules but in a different section. Your way of saying it is unclear, unless you replace "from" with "containing."

But if I did that, it would sort of sound like, "No mods, no exceptions." I know there's several differing opinions on what's "blatantly showing your mod," but we mainly don't want to see any PMG swaps or obviously hacked clients. I'm pretty lenient when it comes to font mods because I lag like hell, too. That, and a lot of wiki users actually do mod in some way or another. How do you think we get CP values for monsters? Of course we don't want to see the CP value in any screenshot, but sometimes it's hard to hide things like text mods when you need them to play. Hope that clears things up a bit. --Powder Rune 15:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the person got confused by the "expose mods" part, thinking it's in reference to like a guide on modding (exposing how to mod). We could perhaps change it to "Do not upload images that blatantly show mods within them." ---Angevon 15:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. It's been changed. --Powder Rune 19:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Note for Future

Remember that in the future to make No-C3 area image taking in the image policy due to C3's dark pictures. -- գռփող400206^hawk400206 (խոսել^Talk | օգնություն^Contributes)

We'll call it the "Shadow Realm" or "Shadow World" areas (depending on NA's name). Generalizing "C3" would mean Taillteann, Tara, and related areas are bad, when they're the same as any other town like Dunbarton. ---Angevon 21:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Name Removal

I'm sorry, but I completely fail to understand why erasing the name (say, by putting a black bar over it) does not serve as an alternative. Could anyone enlighten me?Novaix 00:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Any erasure/blurring/etc. is still distracting and unattractive. The game gives us the convenient ctrl+n option, and it's not like it's hard to use. ---Angevon 21:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why it should be forbidden though. It would make more sense to allow it and it could be replaced at a later time?Novaix 07:18, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The idea is to make this a professional-looking work. We do not want people looking at the site and saying, "Ugh, how amateurish." It needs to look like something one could even think of paying real money to pick up. That's why you make things look professional. As players, we certainly have the means to do this. Plus I do not think Nexon forgot about the notion of making nice group pictures of you, your friends, your guilds, etc, where character names in-picture would actually be a real hinderance. I think that's what Angevon was trying to get at here. --Irjustman 07:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

So using Clone Tool to hide the name is ok then.--Hengsheng120(talk•contribs) 08:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily a good idea. If it's not perfect, you'll see your covering sheet where the name once was with an easily-visible line around it. What you get is a potentially amateurish result.

Nexon/devCat gave you the tools; use them! --Irjustman 08:05, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

They are also kind enough to make certain events non-repeatable, such as RPs.Novaix 10:21, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Text Mods

Do text mods in images for articles qualify to be against the image policy? --Aramet (Talk) 20:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I think this one depends on how obvious it is and on what page. It would be fine if it's on Current Bugs. ---Angevon 15:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Video Policy

We need this now since we can use videos.--Hengsheng120(talk•contribs) 05:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, the thumbnails are so freakishly small, that it's hard to tell what's going on with just about anything, so it should be okay. And um, when would we need to use videos?--^{Dяαмαятιѕтιс 's} ταιқ 01:02, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Skills..? I guess... --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 01:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

hence the requests to irjustman for youtube video activation. it streams much faster, and you can use HD/HQ videos and see everything at higher resolution. See here for code and here for example. If any of you used dfo wiki, you'd remember that the videos used to be the tiny .flv video format and now it got changed to youtube embemd format. Once the template and tag is activated you guy may need to watch out for unrelated videos that can easily be linked or videos with player names (which is usually showing, esp. in HD-versions).--Hengsheng120·^TALK_CONTRIBS 06:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I dont have a problem with videos but scanning them for policy violations (e.g., player or guild names shown briefly during a vid) is going to be harder than for a single image. The videos on the skill pages are helpful to see the skill in action but really dont tell you much as watching where someone clicks is difficult to follow and what is going on is not always clear without an explanation. Also, how easy would it be to set up say something stupid like a porn video or some ad for unwanted pharmaceuticals. I know you can do the same for an image but a video can hold a large number of disturbing and unwanted scenes as compared to an image. Again, I'm not against their use but I suggest that a close watch be kept on any vids added to the wiki and that their use should be restrained to where they are really helpful (e.g., not have someone add a vid just to display a player modelling a suit of armor). --ZRoc (Talk) 19:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Limiting Image Extensions?

Is it possible to limit image extensions a little more strictly? This would make templates a lot easier to create, without having to add the option to every image of what extension they would like the image to be. For example, even though it is already limited, Template:StyleMonster is limited to only using .jpg for monster images. Currently, the policy only enforces icons to be gif or png, while images that are not considered icons can be all three formats (Right?). I would like to propose that icons can only be gif, and images for only jpg. If this is kinda hard to understand, which I think so too cause I just thought of it on the top of my head, I can clarify farther if required. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 10:24, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I never thought I'd have to do this here..but... bump. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 21:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea of having .jpg's...makes it less confusing when I got to upload an equipment image, and it says it's a .png D:
Gifs, amazingly, can actually look rather nice for icons if they're created in Photoshop or Gimp (MS Paint compresses it rather horribly...). --Jαy 22:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I would prefer gifs over png, but I don't think all image editors can render gifs properly (I don't know where I got that idea from). I'm not sure. But I would prefer just having a limit of one type of file extension for icons and another for images. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 22:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I've never used gifs in my life :< --- Angevon (Talk) 23:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Do gifs work with transparencies?--^{Dяαмαятιѕтιс 's} ταιқ 01:03, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Yesh, gifs can have transparencies. --Δκυmσ - ταłκ 01:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Conclusion..? --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 01:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Change my mind. Gifs for icons, please, since most of them are already gifs. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 10:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Though, if it is possible, I would like to stay with -all- png, because of the lossless-ness and small file size. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 10:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

PNGs were meant to replace GIFs. However, the area that PNG is lacking support is the animation part, which i see that many people do not know how to make it (I talked about using .GIF animation files instead of videos for skill animations, but no one took up on that). Also GIFs tend to be rendered by deafault at a much lower quality than PNGs and while GIF may support transparent backgrounds, it does not support alpha channel colors (like colored glassy look). Also if the wiki gets comprehensive enough, I may need to talk to irjustman for SVG file support (vector xml drawings; zoom infinitly; much smaller size (than PNGs) for simple graphics) see what I mean by looking at Mabinogi.SVG, which is the mabingoi logo traced by User:Hengsheng120 using Inkscape. For more information about PNG advantages see Wikipedia:Gif#PNG_and_other_alternatives for more information. Limiting to PNGs for non-picture and JPG for pictures is fine for me. The main advantage of JPG is that it CAN be compressed (to sizes much smaller than PNG counterpart to reduce server load).--Hengsheng120·^TALK_CONTRIBS 10:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

SVG's seem nifty, but not many people will have the ability to create SVG images without a new software. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 10:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I thought we didn't want to use templates that force specific image extensions. e.g Random's Template:Item subpages that you seem to be reworking. I'd prefer we do not force JPGs for pictures because many users use MSPaint which is horrible for JPGs. Myself, I'm not going to open up photoshop or gimp to save a higher-quality JPG when I can use MSPaint and make a perfect-quality PNG. It's just too time-consuming for me. --- Angevon (Talk) 15:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC) If you want to make policy for use with specific templates, I could go for that. Like, putting "When uploading monster pictures, you must use JPG because the template requires it." into the policy would be okay, but forcing it all across the boards, I am not okay with. --- Angevon (Talk) 15:43, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

How exactly does his template work? the item one, I mean. I was never really able to figure it out, I'm more comfortable with the table things that are on most pages. And also, Hengsheng120, apologies if I'm wrong, but you and the en.wikipedia.org user share the same name. Are you the same person?--^{Яειм 's} Talk 18:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

If this was enforced only on specific templates, all templates that I have created, are being created, and future templates that I create will be using the same file format, and I really doubt that anyone reads the meta, even I don't. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 19:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

And, it bothers me because some templates show multiple images. Having to put the {{{extension1}}}, {{{ext2}}}, etc for every images is just really annoying, meaninglessly extends the coding, and is especially annoying when the name of the icon is already given (like the template I'm making now) cause you're just inserting {{{ext's}}} for an image already named. Yeah... that made no sense at all. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 19:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay I understand what you're getting at. But please don't make templates that aren't really necessary. --- Angevon (Talk) 16:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Although I would prefer if every user uploaded images as the image policy states however in some cases if a poor quality image or an image that has an undesirable extension is all you've got then I think having that image is better than having nothing at all. Restrict the type of extension, that is allowed to be used, too much and you will have less people uploading images. If a template can't use an image because of its extension then either make a hard code copy of the template on the page (too bad if that doesn't work for the Dead Eiry project, having information available on the wiki is more important than being restricted by some well meaning project) or else change the template image parameter to the one that is now used in Template:Shadow Monster and Template:NPClisttable. --ZRoc (Talk) 19:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Banned for not contributing?

If i dont contribute to the wiki, but have an account could i be null-banned? (If i did nothing but read the articles)If so, could you tell me how to delete my account? Zale13 03:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

No, you won't be banned or null-routed, but if you create a user page, but do not contribute to the wiki, the user page may be deleted. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 03:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Possible Video Policy

Just a heads up, we are thinking of implementing a video policy. We've heard some complaints that we are using people's videos without permission. So, we will need the author's permission in order to use videos. I'm not sure how exactly we would get proof of permission from video contributors yet. But keep this in mind as we figure it out. --- Angevon (Talk) 14:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

i support a video policy, if i might jump in on some suggestions for it, must have names hidden, must have windows hidden, and must not be chatting in game. even with windows hidden the text can still be seen at the bottom. Miyani 16:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC) oh yeah, and no bad lighting. Miyani 16:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

you can put it on the "System" tab to avoid names.--Hengsheng120·^TALK_CONTRIBS 17:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Though, personally I don't mind the message "Battle Experience +1.00 exp" on the bottom, though party chats etc. does get annoying. I think I posted a few good example videos I found on youtube and into the wiki pages. Though personally, it was a bit of a challenge since finding a video without any windows, chat, etc. is rare. That and modification (some users may not care, but it's best, I suppose to avoid any videos with blatant modifications). --Miyuna 08:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Policy suggestions:
Avoid using videos that were not made for the some purpose of demonstrating the skill for the wiki (that way, there shouldn't be any complaints about videos being used without permission)
Avoid unnecessary editing such as adding music(distracting, and usually removes sfx from skills, etc.)
--Sozen Cratos Focker 12:53, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

On Category:Erinn the video plays a foreign song and is obviously displaying scenes from a foreign server (we don't have cherry blossom trees in Dunbarton's square). I don't see the point of the song and the video isn't really supplying much info. However, I would at least agree to the video if the implemented content it was displaying was actually from the NA server. --ZRoc (Talk) 18:43, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I think that's a mod. And yea, the video is nice but doesn't belong here.--Sozen Cratos Focker 07:39, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm fine with that, but would Foreign Videos of skills be acceptable for future skills until we replace them with NA ones? Most people are interested in how some unimplemented skills are like (such as Blaze), but once we get said skill (in the g10 update), we can make a completely new one to replace, right? --Miyuna 16:29, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe it would be helpful to have foreign videos of future/unimplemented content as long as an effort was made to replace it with NA related videos once the content is officially implemented here. It's the videos from foreign servers (or through the use of hacks) showing incorrect versions of implemented content, that really shouldn't be used. That also applies to songs from foreign servers, they don't tend to be in English and to the vast majority of NA players don't mean a thing. I still suggest we use videos only where they are obviously helpful (e.g., for many skills) and not for music videos, modeling equipment, character/pet design, etc.

On a similar note, I suggest we ban videos of content not officially implemented on the NA server but where that content can be glitched/hacked into (usually meaning unimplemented regions). However, only where it can be inferred a glitch/hack was used to gain access or even worse, show the use of such a glitch/hack. --ZRoc (Talk) 02:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I think we shouldn't use anything at all that has any added music, it usually covers up the sound effects for what the video is supposed to emphasize. Even if the bgm is replaced without messing up the sfx, the abnormal combinations of bgm and scenery will be distracting and confusing. Gameplay videos used here shouldn't have any changes to the audio unless there's a VERY good reason --Sozen Cratos Focker 02:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, in that case, foreign videos for unimplemented skills (not ones that were made using glitches or hacks) would be acceptable until the said content is released in NA. Question, does the game's natural bgm be counted against it (the default music playing the background like dungeon_1 etc.)? --Miyuna 03:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understood your question, but if you're asking weather or not the normal bgm should be turned off, I'd say the natural bgm should be in there.
To elaborate on what i said earlier about how changing bgm could cause confusion: I'm sure that leaving everything the way it naturally is would make watching the video feel almost as natural as playing the game, thereby making it easier to focus on the main content of the video(Though i still think ctrl+n should be mandatury to discourage the spamming of "character showcase"-like videos.). Or maybe set bgm volume to half that of sfx so sfx sound clearer, but I'm biased toward that idea since I always have it like that cause i toggle meditation a lot.--Sozen Cratos Focker 04:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm agreeing with Sozen Cratos Focker o.O The world must be about to end XD Before that happens, I think your above suggestions (including use of ctrl+n) are good. Also, I believe Miyuna's suggestion to use foreign videos is fine (with the restriction to unimplemented content). --ZRoc (Talk) 01:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Also, if you can't find a suitable video (within policy rules and with the creator's permission) then make one yourself and if you can't make one then don't add an unsuitable one. Videos are nice to have but are not essential, so if a skill or some other content doesn't have a video it's not going to cause a problem. --ZRoc (Talk) 02:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I put up a basic video policy based on your ideas. Any more comments/suggestions/clarification requests should be put here. --- Angevon (Talk) 03:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the Style Studio

We should add a policy regarding the new addition by Nexon, the Style Studio. In my opinion, it should not be allowed for equipment pages because of the quality, unless it's just my computer, because the quality of the preview isn't that good. :\ --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 07:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

concur, it appears 'rough' to my monitors as well. -- Ladywinter 07:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

How blatant is "blatant"?

Would it be ok to use mods to make pictures for equips? Some of the images for weapons and clothing are against the policy or just poorly done. It would be convenient to be able to take the pictures without actually getting the item, but it might result in strange color combination just like character simulators, though technically, most colors are not impossible due to dyes and metal dyes.--Sozen Cratos Focker 13:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with anyone using mods to get equipment pictures, if you're willing to do it. --Angevon (Talk) 23:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Another image policy suggestion

To reduce pixelation, screenshots should be taken in windowed mode with the window stretched as much as possible, and for displaying equips, the camera should be zoomed in as far as it can without cutting off part of the item.--Sozen Cratos Focker 13:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Small Note

Under the "Do's", it mentions the delete template. I believe that changed slightly (there's no "reason=")..?..--^{Яειм 's} Talk 00:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Image Policy: Shadow Effect

Should having Shadow Effects turned off be added to part of the policy? They aren't so noticeable on clothing but on feets and shoes it's a little meh, it isnt a big deal but I was just thinking since they might be distracting. ex:[[1]] ----SwissedToast 21:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Implementation of a Signature Policy?

Because, apparently, something this stupid can cause an argument. (And large signatures seem to be a waste of space.) --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 04:39, 20 October 2010 (UTC)