Battlestar Wiki talk:Think Tank/Promotional Images - Revision history

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* More discussion? */ re status

2007-09-04T16:40:27Z

More discussion?: re status

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:40, 4 September 2007
Line 13:		Line 13:
	:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
	:::While it sounds at first like an overwhelming task, but it'd be greatly simplified by a report of all images ordered by filesize. Work your way from the top until the filesizes are such that they couldn't support a "restricted" resolution, and you'd be done. Then you just have to keep an eye on the "latest images" to make sure nothing new comes up. Or if the report could be made permanent (special page, or whatever), then you could continue to use that to catch new offenders. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 21:20, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:::While it sounds at first like an overwhelming task, but it'd be greatly simplified by a report of all images ordered by filesize. Work your way from the top until the filesizes are such that they couldn't support a "restricted" resolution, and you'd be done. Then you just have to keep an eye on the "latest images" to make sure nothing new comes up. Or if the report could be made permanent (special page, or whatever), then you could continue to use that to catch new offenders. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 21:20, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

			== Notes on change ==

			I've gone ahead and placed this proposal under "proposals without consensus", since there isn't really a course of action here. Also, since we weren't targeted by NBCU for the takedown, unlike DrewCypher, et al., something like this may not be necessary at all, and the current tagging and image usage procedures seem to be effective. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 11:40, 4 September 2007 (CDT)

Steelviper: /* More discussion? */ it's not as bad as it sounds... in theory

2007-06-08T02:20:00Z

More discussion?: it's not as bad as it sounds... in theory

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:20, 8 June 2007
Line 12:		Line 12:
	:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
	:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
			:::While it sounds at first like an overwhelming task, but it'd be greatly simplified by a report of all images ordered by filesize. Work your way from the top until the filesizes are such that they couldn't support a "restricted" resolution, and you'd be done. Then you just have to keep an eye on the "latest images" to make sure nothing new comes up. Or if the report could be made permanent (special page, or whatever), then you could continue to use that to catch new offenders. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 21:20, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* More discussion? */ reply

2007-06-08T01:54:32Z

More discussion?: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:54, 8 June 2007
Line 11:		Line 11:
	Did we need more discussion on this issue before going ahead for a formal vote? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:07, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		Did we need more discussion on this issue before going ahead for a formal vote? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:07, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
	:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
			:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

Spencerian: /* More discussion? */ +more bell, but "cow" is missing

2007-06-07T17:27:53Z

More discussion?: +more bell, but "cow" is missing

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:27, 7 June 2007
Line 10:		Line 10:

	Did we need more discussion on this issue before going ahead for a formal vote? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:07, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		Did we need more discussion on this issue before going ahead for a formal vote? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:07, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
			:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: More discussion?

2007-06-07T14:07:58Z

More discussion?

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:07, 7 June 2007
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:: Most of the images are not in 16:9 format, and appear to have been taken by a camera. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 22:19, 5 March 2007 (CST)		:: Most of the images are not in 16:9 format, and appear to have been taken by a camera. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 22:19, 5 March 2007 (CST)
	:::Yeah, he promotional images are probably professionally taken and not stills from the video footage. --[[User:Mercifull\|Mercifull]] <sup>([[User talk:Mercifull\|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Mercifull\|Contribs]])</sup> 09:00, 9 March 2007 (CST)		:::Yeah, he promotional images are probably professionally taken and not stills from the video footage. --[[User:Mercifull\|Mercifull]] <sup>([[User talk:Mercifull\|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Mercifull\|Contribs]])</sup> 09:00, 9 March 2007 (CST)

			== More discussion? ==

			Did we need more discussion on this issue before going ahead for a formal vote? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:07, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

Mercifull at 15:00, 9 March 2007

2007-03-09T15:00:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:00, 9 March 2007
Line 5:		Line 5:

	:: Most of the images are not in 16:9 format, and appear to have been taken by a camera. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 22:19, 5 March 2007 (CST)		:: Most of the images are not in 16:9 format, and appear to have been taken by a camera. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 22:19, 5 March 2007 (CST)
			:::Yeah, he promotional images are probably professionally taken and not stills from the video footage. --[[User:Mercifull\|Mercifull]] <sup>([[User talk:Mercifull\|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Mercifull\|Contribs]])</sup> 09:00, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: reply

2007-03-06T04:19:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:19, 6 March 2007
Line 3:		Line 3:

	:1024768 was just a suggestion off the top of my head. Aren't the pictures widescreen? If yes, then the resolution would be slightly different. Or we could say "1024768 or a similar widescreen (16:9 aspect ratio) resolution". But doesn't NBC only want 400*400 pics? We'd still be above that. But then, we aren't just a picture storage site, so it might be ok. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 09:05, 5 March 2007 (CST)		:1024768 was just a suggestion off the top of my head. Aren't the pictures widescreen? If yes, then the resolution would be slightly different. Or we could say "1024768 or a similar widescreen (16:9 aspect ratio) resolution". But doesn't NBC only want 400*400 pics? We'd still be above that. But then, we aren't just a picture storage site, so it might be ok. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 09:05, 5 March 2007 (CST)

			:: Most of the images are not in 16:9 format, and appear to have been taken by a camera. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 22:19, 5 March 2007 (CST)

Serenity at 15:05, 5 March 2007

2007-03-05T15:05:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:05, 5 March 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Comments ==		== Comments ==
	Here's my first cut. Feel free to the adjust resolution (I'm not sure if I was too conservative, or too liberal for that matter). Some of our coolest ones that we have are actually 800x500ish, so I don't think 1024 would be THAT bad. Also, as we achieve more of a consensus somebody might create a subpage of this with a draft policy. I wanted to see if there were any major shifts in the consensus regarding the guidelines before I started hammering one out. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 07:32, 5 March 2007 (CST)		Here's my first cut. Feel free to the adjust resolution (I'm not sure if I was too conservative, or too liberal for that matter). Some of our coolest ones that we have are actually 800x500ish, so I don't think 1024 would be THAT bad. Also, as we achieve more of a consensus somebody might create a subpage of this with a draft policy. I wanted to see if there were any major shifts in the consensus regarding the guidelines before I started hammering one out. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 07:32, 5 March 2007 (CST)

			:1024768 was just a suggestion off the top of my head. Aren't the pictures widescreen? If yes, then the resolution would be slightly different. Or we could say "1024768 or a similar widescreen (16:9 aspect ratio) resolution". But doesn't NBC only want 400*400 pics? We'd still be above that. But then, we aren't just a picture storage site, so it might be ok. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 09:05, 5 March 2007 (CST)

Steelviper: + comment

2007-03-05T13:32:14Z

+ comment

New page

== Comments ==
Here's my first cut. Feel free to the adjust resolution (I'm not sure if I was too conservative, or too liberal for that matter). Some of our coolest ones that we have are actually 800x500ish, so I don't think 1024 would be THAT bad. Also, as we achieve more of a consensus somebody might create a subpage of this with a draft policy. I wanted to see if there were any major shifts in the consensus regarding the guidelines before I started hammering one out. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 07:32, 5 March 2007 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:20, 8 June 2007
Line 12:		Line 12:
	:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
	:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
			:::While it sounds at first like an overwhelming task, but it'd be greatly simplified by a report of all images ordered by filesize. Work your way from the top until the filesizes are such that they couldn't support a "restricted" resolution, and you'd be done. Then you just have to keep an eye on the "latest images" to make sure nothing new comes up. Or if the report could be made permanent (special page, or whatever), then you could continue to use that to catch new offenders. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 21:20, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:54, 8 June 2007
Line 11:		Line 11:
	Did we need more discussion on this issue before going ahead for a formal vote? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:07, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		Did we need more discussion on this issue before going ahead for a formal vote? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:07, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
	:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)		:We can vote on it, but the proposal appears to lack information on ''who'' is going to do the handiwork. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:27, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
			:: Right, we may want to get that ironed out before a formal vote. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 20:54, 7 June 2007 (CDT)