File talk:Charr Staff.jpg

i don't think the armor is interfering with the image. there is no rule that says your player has to strip before its a valid image. its not a glamor shot and its not making it hard to see. &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 23:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * /Agree. Lord of all tyria 23:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * As long as it doesn't show off or distract from the item, i think it's fine.--[[Image:Marcopolo47 signature new.jpg]] (Talk) (Contr.) 23:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've been looking around for any rule that had to do with this issue. I've still reuploaded some images without armor and better lighting, because I was unhappy with the lighting myself. But for some weapon types it's a nightmare to get the picture to focus on the weapon. --RM 23:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No armor is just neutral and I prefer that too, since naked chars all look same (of the same class). You know your own armor the best and don't have an eye for it anymore (can easily focus on the item itself), but other people with other armor notice very well the armor in a picture and look at it too. But that all still depends on the one who decides to make a shoot and to upload it. There are hardly any rules about pictures. And the few given aren't followed by many users. Have seen pictures that have a small resolution but a huge file size -.- Whatever, if someone doesn't like it he can take a new picture and upload it here. No biggie. Everything's better than no picture at all. --Birchwooda Treehug 05:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

split?
I like this image as one the way it is better than split up the way it is on Dead Staff. &mdash; ♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 20:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, this is just a very non-standard way to do it. It's like a mini-gallery in one image, and looks kind of ugly to me.  EVERY weapon has details that are sometimes hidden from just a single view, but it's not often that we see the images done this way.  If there is something worth noting besides the regular screen shot, I think it should be put separately, not all jumbled into the same image.  Just my opinion.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg]] 22:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, and IT'S NOT DEAD STAFF, it's the Dead Scepter that I'm referring to. Very big difference here...  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg]] 22:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * In this case, I'd agree with RoseOfKali, just have the regular side-on / generic background image for the WeaponInfo box and the two staff head close-up front / side views as a separate image. --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 07:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I did the split and put the closeup in Notes of the article. Reverted main image to the old one.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg]] 20:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * To be more consistent with the general page-layout of other articles, looks better to place the image under the WeaponInfo box rather than down the page under Notes. But, good job. --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 02:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Like a thumbnail? I'm not gonna bother with it unless someone else wants to do it.  Good enough for now.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg]] 19:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, nevermind, I'll bother with it. :P RoseOfKali 19:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)