Wikipedia talk:Image dos and don'ts: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:05, 24 August 2018

Latest revision as of 04:07, 17 January 2025

(14 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{Wikipedia Help Project|class=start|importance=Low}}

{{WikiProject Images and Media}}

}}

==Broken?==

Line 9 ⟶ 11:

{{to|Moxy}} I guess I need to start the D part of [[WP:BRD|B (you) R (me) D (supposed to be you)]]:

Neither your text about "random galleries" nor your text about [[WP:UNDUE]] belong here. Neither point is part of the parent guideline that this page is [[WP:INFOPAGES|obligated]] to reflect. 1) I don't even know what a "random" gallery is supposed to be – ifthe it'smisuse of galleries is about overuse, not "random" use, which suggests a bunch of images having nothing to do with the article, (not a problem I've neverever seen, thatand happen.already Itcovered by "Don'st pointlessadd toimages warnthat peopleare not to do something no one has ever thought to dorelevant."). 2) And [[WP:UNDUE]] is in no way specific to images. If you want to make a [[Wikipedia:NPOV dos and don'ts]], it would warrant mention there. It's definitely ''not'' one of the top points to put on a summary of [[Wikipedia:Images]], since, again, it's nowhere to be found onin that guide. —[[User:Swpb|<u>swpb</u>]]^{[[User talk:Swpb|''T'']] [[Wikipedia:Beyond civility|go beyond]]} 13:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

{{Gallery

Now to process. Apparently it bears repeating that in the absence of consensus, [[WP:STATUSQUO|status quo]] stands. Your options are 1) to convince me, OR 2) to convince enough other people so as to form a consensus without me. (You're welcome to ''neutrally'' advertise the conflict elsewhere to draw input.) Without one of those two things happening, your new text does not go on the page. —[[User:Swpb|<u>swpb</u>]]^{[[User talk:Swpb|''T'']] [[Wikipedia:Beyond civility|go beyond]]} 12:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

| align =

| title = This is a "random" gallery. I don't think it's what you mean to prevent, since no one does this.

| style =

| state =

| height =

| width =

| cellwidth =

| captionstyle =

| File:Shoehorn 01.JPG

| alt1=

| shoehorn

| File:Pickle.jpg

| alt2=

| pickle

| File:Vombatus ursinus -Tasmania, Australia -front-8.jpg

| alt3=

| wombat

}}

:A "random" or overuse of galleries is defined by link that is being added as " Generally, a gallery should not be added so long as there is space for images to be effectively presented adjacent to text. Gallery images must collectively add to the reader's understanding of the subject; avoid similar or repetitive images unless a point of contrast or comparison is being made". Why not link the second biggest problem we encounter.? The other problem we encounter is images that give to much prominence to minor topics as per [[WP:DUE]] "Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, juxtaposition of statements and '''imagery'''. This is also covered at [[MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE]] "Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context". So why omit - the page is to help those that are having problems?--[[User:Moxy|Moxy]] ([[User talk:Moxy|talk]]) 13:46, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

::Yes, galleries get overused. It's the word "[[wikt:random#Adjective|random]]" that is totally unhelpful: it doesn't appear in the guidance for a reason, because it has way too many meanings, none of which apply here. I've kept the link to [[WP:GALLERY]] with text that makes sense. And again, [[MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE]] is already linked here, in the bullet "Don't add images that are not relevant." It doesn't warrant more than one bullet. —[[User:Swpb|<u>swpb</u>]]^{[[User talk:Swpb|''T'']] [[Wikipedia:Beyond civility|go beyond]]} 14:06, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

== Refer to images ==

An old but very infrequent Wikipedia contributor here, hoping to raise something that has annoyed me about Wikipedia for a long time. I cannot find it mentioned anywhere, but that might be due to my lack of skill in searching, so my apologies if this is already being discussed somewhere.

I find it very annoying that many[citation needed] Wikipedia articles feature images that are ''not ''refered to in the article text. As a reader, this sometimes leaves me puzzled as to why an image is there at all, and sometimes also means that the image fails to have the correct context to make it a valuable addition to the page. As a reviewer (I personally seldomly review anything) I would also imagine that having a non-referenced image raises the same questions. My proposal would be that a "DO" in this list is to make sure that the image is referenced in the text.

Curious what others think. [[User:KeithWM|KeithWM]] ([[User talk:KeithWM|talk]]) 18:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)