Difference between revisions of "User talk:Joseph256"
(→Fictitious work: new section) |
m (Answered) |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== Two “strange” images == | == Two “strange” images == | ||
Why did you uploaded [[:File:Bill Stats.jpeg]] and [[:File:Bill Stats Smaller.jpeg]]. They are basically screenshots of the infobox (even in a very bad quality). If I had to guess you didn't know how to add the image? I've added the image to the original infobox and the article is now using it, so I'm allow to remove them. And if you didn't know how to add the image I can explain it if you want. — [[User:XZise|xZise]] <small>[[[User talk:XZise|talk]]]</small> 11:35, 20 December 2013 (CST) | Why did you uploaded [[:File:Bill Stats.jpeg]] and [[:File:Bill Stats Smaller.jpeg]]. They are basically screenshots of the infobox (even in a very bad quality). If I had to guess you didn't know how to add the image? I've added the image to the original infobox and the article is now using it, so I'm allow to remove them. And if you didn't know how to add the image I can explain it if you want. — [[User:XZise|xZise]] <small>[[[User talk:XZise|talk]]]</small> 11:35, 20 December 2013 (CST) | ||
+ | : Yeah sorry, I didn't know how to use it so I compromised, and it's not because it's JPG but it's a very exploded view of Bill | ||
== Image type decision == | == Image type decision == | ||
Hi you uploaded multiple JPG images and the quality looks very poor. Now I would suggest using PNG instead, because those compress lossless so there are no artefacts. They are a bit larger but this isn't usually a problem, especially if the images aren't that big. If you look at the instruments you can see that they lost their edges and now are … fuzzy which (imho) doesn't look so nice. — [[User:XZise|xZise]] <small>[[[User talk:XZise|talk]]]</small> 11:35, 20 December 2013 (CST) | Hi you uploaded multiple JPG images and the quality looks very poor. Now I would suggest using PNG instead, because those compress lossless so there are no artefacts. They are a bit larger but this isn't usually a problem, especially if the images aren't that big. If you look at the instruments you can see that they lost their edges and now are … fuzzy which (imho) doesn't look so nice. — [[User:XZise|xZise]] <small>[[[User talk:XZise|talk]]]</small> 11:35, 20 December 2013 (CST) |
Revision as of 15:45, 3 February 2014
Fictitious work
Hi, I only want to say that fictitious works like most of your addition to Bill Kerman are usually not very welcomed. I mean if you are not affiliated with Squad who gives you the right to say when happened what. The crew article was usually fiction previously but some (three excluding me) weren't agreeing on the talk page.
Now I don't want to hinder your creative work, but except for the tutorials and campaigns fictitious additions shouldn't be made to avoid confusion what is fiction and what isn't.
This is only my opinion and I don't think there is an official rule which states if we allow this, so if you have any objections feel free to answer here and maybe there should be a general discussion/vote. — xZise [talk] 11:35, 20 December 2013 (CST)
Two “strange” images
Why did you uploaded File:Bill Stats.jpeg and File:Bill Stats Smaller.jpeg. They are basically screenshots of the infobox (even in a very bad quality). If I had to guess you didn't know how to add the image? I've added the image to the original infobox and the article is now using it, so I'm allow to remove them. And if you didn't know how to add the image I can explain it if you want. — xZise [talk] 11:35, 20 December 2013 (CST)
- Yeah sorry, I didn't know how to use it so I compromised, and it's not because it's JPG but it's a very exploded view of Bill
Image type decision
Hi you uploaded multiple JPG images and the quality looks very poor. Now I would suggest using PNG instead, because those compress lossless so there are no artefacts. They are a bit larger but this isn't usually a problem, especially if the images aren't that big. If you look at the instruments you can see that they lost their edges and now are … fuzzy which (imho) doesn't look so nice. — xZise [talk] 11:35, 20 December 2013 (CST)