Guild Wars Wiki talk:Projects/Category cleanup

User images

I have started this as a personal project, which I'm sure all of you who stalk the RC have noticed lately. I have already made the changes to the {{user image}} template, and now it's simply updating the existing images and getting the word out to add your username to any new images uploaded. I have also been adding the appropriate licensing templates to these images, and correcting naming issues when I find them.

I decided to make this a small part of a larger project because I know that there are other members of the community also working on various category cleanup project, and this will allow them all to come together and we can help each other, and gather other interested members of the community. -- Wyn talk 21:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible to update the Upload File thingy so that we won't have to do this again when we're finished? — Why 22:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe poke is looking into that and GWWT. -- Wyn talk 22:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Great, also, wow, I don't believe I've ever created an RCspam like this. — Why 23:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Should we also edit the image policy so it states that you must have your username in {{user image}} template? - J.P.Talk 11:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Until we work out the automatic options for this, I think we should leave the policy. -- Wyn talk 17:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I already asked about it there earlier today and poke just did the edit. - J.P.Talk 18:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw :D It's all good :D -- Wyn talk 18:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

/catchbreath. After editing about a 1000 images, we've (i actually) covered all images that starts with an A! Like how many there are in total? The Great Wikichu save me (us)! XD - J.P.Talk 16:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

There are, as of now, exactly 15,525 files in Category:User images. poke | talk 22:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh my god! - J.P.Talk 10:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I've worked my ass off but still we've just started I :D - J.P.Talk 18:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

As long as it progresses forward it's all good. There is no reason you have to try to get it all done in a day :P or a week. I have been doing some here and there as well as have several others. -- Wyn talk 18:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Guild images

I just noticed another category problem: only a few guild images got guild's name in their tag. This might be our next thing to have work on? P.S. I haven't been working on user image tags for few days now because i'm camping right now. Working in wiki with cell phone is rather slow and hard, and i don't wanna bomb RC to the ground every day :D - J.P.Talk 09:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess we could do something similar for the Guild images, but lets get this over with first. Also, I'll be in Greece without internet the coming weeks, so I won't be able to contribute to this until I'm back. See my userpage for when I'll be back. :) — Why 14:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Guild image will be done automatically during next week by Wikichu. The list is already created, so please do not add further names to the tags. poke | talk 14:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't really understand that last part, but, yay Wikichu. I'll keep my hands off the guild images. — Why 15:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

So how does this Pika... Wikichu works? And does it cover user images aswell? Or even all the images? O.O - J.P.Talk 19:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikichu is poke's bot, and it's only going to be doing Guild images. -- Wyn talk 19:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

"Wikichu, i choose you!" - J.P.Talk 19:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

But it could be used to tag user images aswell? - J.P.Talk 20:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Tags for these.

What tags [1] and [2] should have? And [3], [4], [5], [6] and [7]? Or do these need anything else? - J.P.Talk 09:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that they should be tagged with the ArenaNet image tag because they were inspired by elements of GW. Could be wrong though :\ Mini Me 15:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I put {{arenanet image}} to those pictures. There is {{fansite kit image}} too to choose, but i don't think it's used pretty much. I think we should bring these two tags together to make things more simple. EDIT: There are only 170 files in {{fansite kit image}} category :/ - J.P.Talk 16:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Fansite kit image is something completely different. Fansite kit image means they were taken from the Fansite kit on the website, which these images are obviously not. poke | talk 17:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

This explains alot, thank you. /bow ...but is this category clean? - J.P.Talk 17:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Category clean? What do you mean by that? poke | talk 22:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Are all the images in there in a right place. - J.P.Talk 10:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Another problem is when to use {{screenshot}} or {{arenanet image}}. There are some user images which Wynn have tagged as screenshots which i would have tagged as images. It's really hard to choose sometimes. Why we have these two anyway? It would be much more simple to only use {{arenanet image}}. What do you think? - J.P.Talk 11:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

We have subtags so that categories don't get as full as they are right now. poke | talk 11:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I know this sucks but...

After we're done, i think we should double-check the category since there are so many doing the cleanup right now and there might be errors left unnoticed. And i think i've made a few mistakes on the way -.- But i can do the double-check if you want? - J.P.Talk 18:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess... Checking them shouldn't take that long if we all take a different part. (Example: you check A to C, I check D to F etc.) Mini Me 18:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

It's best to do it after all the images in the category are tagged with an username. - J.P.Talk 18:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. It's going to take ages though :P --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Mini Me (talk).

Yup, we'll definitely have to make a second pass...with the sheer amount of images on the wiki, we're bound to have some mistakes. Nate 21:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

There will always be those that get tagged wrong, so checking tags is and always has been an ongoing thing. Older users who don't realize the tag has been changed for example. The best thing is just to watch what's going on, and if you see someone uploading images and tagging incorrectly drop them a note on their talk page. But yes, this will be an ongoing thing. The big reason I wished this to be done by people, rather than a bot is that a bot can't determine if a picture is a screenshot, or an arenanet image if those tags aren't present, a person can. A bot can't tell if one user uploaded it for another, so potentially the name of the image is what you have to use to determine the user name rather than the user that uploaded it. (This is particularly true for older images before we could rename them with a move, and would have to reupload to fix naming issues) And a bot would have more difficulties moving images to correct naming if necessary than a person would. I appreciate the good response this project has gotten from you all :D It would have taken me all summer to do it by myself! -- Wyn talk 21:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

It's gonna take all summer anyway. But i rather do this than vanquishing :D - J.P.Talk 10:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Case sensitive

When you are tagging, please be aware that the sorting feature on categories is case sensitive. If the user's name is Becky, please don't tag it as {{user image|becky}}. Thanks! -- Wyn talk 22:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't aware of thi. I'll have a look and repair the ones I did wrong, thanks Wyn. Edit: or, I guess, you could beat me to it, Wyn (blood hell you're fast ^_^). Nate 22:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't aware of this either. Sorry :\ Mini Me 23:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed some of these errors you've did. And i also move a page if it says becky, when it should be Becky. - J.P.Talk 10:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, is moving those images really necessary? How is it an issue, if they're tagged properly? Nate 11:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

You better check Guild Wars Wiki:Policy. See Image policy. There's a part about user images in there. - J.P.Talk 11:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

That was hardly a productive answer JP. I know the policy, I was just wondering whether moving images to fix becky-->Becky in the file name is needed/worth the effort, as I've seldom seen it done before. Nate 12:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

JP, by moving images and deleting the redirect you're breaking links. This is exactly why I was asking if this should be done.Nate 13:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Not really needed. poke | talk 13:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Images should not be moved at all. Tag them correctly, don't move them to match the tag. -Auron 13:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Plus you rather break image usages by moving the files instead of providing any benefit.

@Auron: They are moving the images so the name fits the original user name.. poke | talk 13:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's still pointless. You can't create an account with the lower case letter first, so moving them serves little purpose. People can't come along and create a lowercase "user:illusion," so I'm not seeing the point. As long as the image title is precise enough to find the user, the title is serving its purpose. It doesn't need to be any more precise than that. -Auron 13:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I've usually fixed the links before marking the redirect. I'm currently working with cell phone and my latest image moves have been done with it and trying to fix the links is rather hard with it. From now on if i move an image, was i on computer or cell phone, i'll fix the links before i tag the image for deletion. And sorry about the damn mess i've made. - J.P.Talk 13:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Case doesn't matter in image names. Just in the categorization. -- Wyn talk 16:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I fixed the image redirects that had links elsewhere for images that i've moved today. And i think i continue on moving images as needed, but this time i take care of the links right away. But i don't move signature images anymore. These have way too many links. - J.P.Talk 16:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

How are you guys going about doing these? x_x

Personally, I've been using the user list, marking it to show only users with edits, and then having an upload log open on another tab. I go down the list with the user list copying the name into the upload log, between the two to copy and paste until I find a user with images uploaded, and then once I find someone with uploaded images in the log, I open the search bar of Firefox and set it to highlight the text "user", and then go from the bottom of the list up to the top fixing all the tags. Then I go back to the user log, and find another person with uploaded images. Anyone else have a faster/better method than mine? I'd really -really- like to know, after spending 3 hours on one letter. x____x ~Ryuu[ Talk|Contributions ] 14:55, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Just got owned. >< ~Ryuu[ Talk|Contributions ] 15:00, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Added a link on the project page, to make sure nobody doesn't know about it... :P poke | talk 15:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Category:User_image&from=}. All those images don't have the person's username in the user image tag. -- Lacky 03:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, why do you keep repeating things? poke | talk 09:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, I have only done it twice, and secondly, I am just helping incase some people don't know what link you are/were referring too, and thirdly, who cares?. -- Lacky 10:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

About orphaned images.

After looking at images that are tagged for deletion and going to userpage related to them, i've found that many images aren't orphanes on purpose. On many cases user just has the wrong link on his page and haven't cared to fix it. - J.P.Talk 22:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

What is your point though? It is not our responsibility to check every orphaned image to see if it is a genuine mistake or not. If they really wanted the image on their page, or even wanted their page they would have noticed that the link doesn't work by now surely. --Lemming 22:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

As i think of it, why did i even point this out? :S But there where actually 3 images that we're orphans because of me, but they did show on the uploaders userpage O.o Anyway, i've fixed that now. I think we can forget this title. - J.P.Talk 10:41, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Files with wrong name

How should we tag files with wrong name, that dont have username in file name? Like this one[8]. Should be renamed or just tagged with the right username?{{user image|Name of the uploader or name of the user that use the image on his userpage}} Sharkinu 09:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Both, tag and rename. And i think you know what to do with redirects. - J.P.Talk 10:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually I'm trying to figure out. Sharkinu 11:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Image Tagging

While viewing through images, I noticed images like this one, which I didn't know if to tag as Screenshot or not. Should images like this one be tagged {{screenshot}}? Titani Ertan {{Snappy the Turtle}} 14:52, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Clearly a screenshot. - J.P.Talk 15:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

That would be a screenshot of the character 'box' which appears on the main character selection screen, and hence, a sceenshot. Ryuu - talk 21:02, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Basically, if it doesn't come from an outside source, i.e. official website, fansite, extracted with 3rd party software (texmod, or rendering software) it is a screenshot. -- Wyn talk 21:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

extracted with 3rd party software (texmod, or rendering software)

But that means..... FUCK! - J.P.Talk 21:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

...On second thought, those images sure got ArenaNet's property in them... - J.P.Talk 21:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Screenshot is a subtag of ArenaNet image... poke | talk 22:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, i meant to say screenshots. Sorry if i wasn't clear. - J.P.Talk 22:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:Weapon infobox

I think the weapons thing is mostly fixed, I made a change to the template the other day and its properly categorizing unique items. Everything else seems to work fine except the salvage materials auto templates, which only seem to work half the time. Also I think we need a standard for PvP-only skins and bonus mission pack skins which can't be salvaged. Some pages omit the salvage boxes, some say "Cannot be salvaged" or "None" on one or both parts. I think they should be omitted like they are for unique items, but they should be consistent however we decide to do it. -- Kirbman 20:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually there already seems to be a way, but no one uses it. That template contains a "salvageable" parameter that defaults to yes, but can be set to no for unsalvageable things. -- Kirbman 05:18, 4 September 2011 (UTC)