Forum:Images Guideline

At the time of me writing this post, we have exactly 4,822 images. Most of them are not in use and from a quick survey of our current stock of images I see the following:
 * Categorization: Images are either uncategorized or with wrong categorization.
 * Images that have no place on the wiki: memes, user images, images belong to other franchises, etc.
 * Policy Infractions: Low quality, film grain, HUD elements, and other similar issues that make those images candidates for deletion.
 * Duplicated images: There are some characters, locations, etc. that present pretty much the same image with different name or format with sometimes having minor difference (usually unnoticeable on first glance).
 * Naming Convention: We have no clear naming convention. File names are either a weird string of numbers, letters, and other characters or the name do not reflect upon the content seen in the image.

Categorizing Images
Categories don't really take images into consideration and when trying to categorize images, there is no "right" category to use. For example, an image taken on the mission to Virmire could be categorized in: Locations, Assignment Locations, Mission Locations, Planets, and Mass Effect (and a few others if the image contain a shot of a character), the question is: does it really help in organizing our stock of images? Do the images really belong in those categories?

Unrelated to the Wiki
As I recall it was decided that personal images (meant for use on the User namespace) will not be uploaded into the wiki but hot-linked from outside sources. I cannot find any mention of this in the Mass Effect Wiki:Manual of Style or the Mass Effect Wiki:Community Guidelines. We do however have Mass Effect Wiki:Personal Image Policy that do allow this but limits the user to 10 files.

Do we or don't we allow personal or unrelated images to appear on the wiki? Do various memes and other fan art have a place here?

Current Policy Infractions
Although we don't have a thorough policy or guideline, we do have some ground rules regarding what is permitted to appear in images. Those images can be deleted, but going through all the current images and proposing deletion could take a long time, and admin discretion might be preferable in this case.

Duplicates
Duplication could be prevented (to a degree) if naming, categorization and/or tagging could work in a way that the wiki search engine will manage to locate and display relevant results. Currently most users just upload a new image because most images can not be located, unless spending ours in browsing the full list of the wiki's files.

How should we approach the issue of duplication? Arbitrary deletion or do we have a set of preferences (like file type, dimensions, etc.) which we apply to the decision making? What about future contributions, do we expect the description on new images to include a reason why although the image similar to other image(s) it has a reason to stand on its own? Do we expect contributors to upload a new version of files instead of creating a new, separate file?

Naming Convention
Couldn't find any policy or guideline in my search. I believe that a clear policy could help locate images and an efficient way of describing the image without needing to opening it. Here the issue is deciding what is suitable to any type of image (for characters, locations, missions/assignments, and equipment).

Active Discussion
We used to have the Screenshots talk page that lists and describe what type of images we've got and what we still need. A similar page (a forum post(s) would be more suitable) could help contributors focus their efforts in taking screenshots that the wiki really need and not waste time on images that we already have.

This is different then the PicturesWanted template as it can give specific instructions and give a place for discussing various topics related to images (future and present).

Summary
I know that this topic raises more questions then it answers and most of it relates to active suggestions rather then a policy proposal, but there was no other place to open such discussion.

After a discussion period, it might be worthwhile to split this proposal to six separate proposals in order to make the voting more accurate. Also currently the post is not too clear of what is the actual proposal, but give a place for discussion on how to form such a proposal.

-- [ silverstrike 11:11, May 1, 2012 (UTC) ]