GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.



Gallery template usage[]

Think my next crusade is going to be making sure that the {{Armor art gallery}} template is used on all armor pages. Even some Prophecies armors, like Elementalist Elite Flameforged armor/Male, still aren't using it. I'm also going to phase out the {{{Type-file}}} parameter as I go so that our armor images will truly be standardized. I will of course re-upload existing files under the standardized names.

Is there anything else that should be dealt with at the same time? I'll write up a project page with checklist later today. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 18:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Good luck... You will find a lot of surprises. Pretty much everything that has the Attn.png next to it on the main project here will not be using the template. Furthermore, some page will have as many as ONE single image for the entire gallery... (Monk Primeval armor/Female - click at your own risk) Enjoy! RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 18:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Project page: GuildWiki:Armor galleries project/Template consistency. Not finished yet, of course. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 06:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
You can check of all galleries with the green checkmark, because those are already using the correct template. There are some horrible galleries in the others, though. Cress Arvein Cress sig.JPG 06:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

User:RoseOfKali/Mesmer gloves‎[]

Just bringing this to everyone's attention. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 18:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Love to help, but. . .[]

I would like to help with the project, but my hardware is not up to the task. I have the dreaded integrated Intel graphics card which I just found out can not do anti-aliasing. I can either continue as is with "aliased" (Pro-aliased?) shots or I could model for someone. Being in Japan will make that a little difficult to coordinate, but it is a possiblity. Bikeboy854 04:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that's a bummer... I'm not spending as much time online as I used to, and, especially with the time difference, I probably won't be able to help. I guess, if you can improve a gallery that's obviously bad, go ahead and do it. Aliased is still better than many of the images currently out there. And if you can find someone to take the shots for you, even better. If you ever see me as "Online" in GW, feel free to bug me about it. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 18:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


Image:Spectacles_F_gray_side.jpg is missing, but there's no checkbox for that in the master list. --◄mendel► 09:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the image was never there to begin with, as I recall. Most common armor needs to be redone, anyway. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 18:57, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I have a set of slim spectacles on my female necro (she wears Elite Kurzick armor, died a "muscle" pink) I didn't bother with the headgear -- since I planned to get the spectacles all along -- but could if there is any reason to do it). I have friends with a wide range of chars and armors, too, I suspect I could get a few more armor types, if desired.

I'll read the image specs section if I get a "go to it!" response, but simply put: Where should one load the images at? And I assume filesize is the goal, what size should I aim for? I can do almost anything else -- size-dimensions, cropping, etc... I have photoshop CS2 and a fairly high-end machine.
Has anyone considered a separate page showing a wider array of colors, too? I wouldn't expect to have a vast array of colors on the main page, but if one wonders about how a specific color looks it might be good to see if someone else has already done something in "that" color.OBloodyHell 17:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Slim Spectacles are actually done for the Female, and have been for a while. The Male could use a better background. Please, check the actual pages of the articles if you think you can help improve them. The checklists are sometimes not up to date. Also, check the dates of discussions you are replying to: this one was 2 months ago. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
As far as colors and other things, please read the guide at the top of this page, and also image uploading rules at GuildWiki:Image_use_policy. As a rule of thumb, if you are unsure about something, find a couple pages that are marked as "done" in this project and compare them to what you are doing. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:43, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I'll fix the project page, then, as it shows the female slim specs not complete. I have tinted on a male, but not slim, and apparently tinted are already done on male and female. :-/ I noted the date, but the checklist said they weren't done, and I assumed it was in order. If I may be so bold, the checklists are more critical than the stuff itself, as that tells people where they can contribute. My US$.02, anyway.
Thanks for updating the checklists. Many people who upload the galleries are not aware of this project, and will not update it along with the gallery. That's why I said that when you plan on updating an Nope.png, you should visit the gallery and make sure that it really is a "No." RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

spanish galleries[]

Somebody else is working on their armor galleries, too: Especial:Log/delete. --◄mendel► 13:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Their background is nice: Dervish armor, incomplete. --◄mendel► 13:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I see their male Norn armor came from our database since it is the one that I uploaded. Bikeboy854 12:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Compatible license is compatible :] Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 12:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I dunno, I think the background's a bit too dark. I think it's not a bad idea (trouble, since you have to isolate from the captured background, but that can be dealt with by making a sensible capture choice) to go with a fairly neutral grey background, but their choice is much too dark. Look at the enlarged form of the male dervish armor, for example -- you start to lose it around the head and feet. It also contributes to a "dreary" feel. I'd say you need more of a 10% grey level instead (that's probably more like 40% to 50%), with a similar "smoky" randomization.--OBloodyHell 18:11, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
What? RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
"Greys" are usually defined in simple terms, 10%, 20%, etc... this ties back to photography days. If you ever see a picture where someone is holding up a little square with different grey boxes on it, that was the for the photog to know how to adjust the coloration due to light variations during development (and it's still relevant for digital photos, even though the fixing is done in something like photoshop now). The backgrounds in the spanish ones linked above are too dark, I think -- any black parts of armor get lost in the background at top and bottom, and I point to the male dervish armor as an example. I think the idea of supplanting whatever backgrounds there are with a standard, neutral grey background is a good idea -- people don't realize how much surrounding colors affect your perception of something (I've seen a case where two different grey boxes, actually exactly the same shade, are such that ANYONE looking at them would SWEAR that one of them was much, much, much darker than the other -- even KNOWING this you still don't want to believe it. The eye is utterly fooled by the surrounding colors. By switching to a standard grey background, that issue would be minimized for armors. A lot of extra trouble, though. Worth considering doing at some point, though. The preceding unsigned comment was added by OBloodyHell (talk • contribs) 11:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC).
You don't do these by removing the "beach" background, you ideally do this by sustituting the gray background using TexMod, i.e. get the screenshot with that. --◄mendel► 13:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Are you kidding? TEXMOD? How many of our contributors will ever use it? Don't start something that cannot be finished. Isle of the Nameless is perfectly fine, and accessible to everyone. Keep it at that. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Are you reading? Properly? ;-) I say that if you want grey backgrounds, the only way to make this work properly (antialiased and all) is to use texmod. It's not hard to use, certainly no significantly harder than to position yourself on the beach just right; you start textmod, selct the GW executable and a package that would be provided, then you just go and do the screenshot in a place that's simple to reach. Lots of users are using Cartography Made Easy, and this is no harder than that. But I've never said we need to do this. We have a gallery of beach images that is almost complete, and I'd be daft to suggest that we start something new before that is finished. If you agree with B'Hell that it's worth considering doing at some point, though, then you ought to be aware that it involves retaking all the screenshots because anything less will look bad at the edges. --◄mendel► 10:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I misread your comment. In any case, I don't think anyone should attempt doing anything with texmod unless they are able to finish the project without relying on other contributors to fill in the gaps. And I don't think that's ever going to be possible with something this massive. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
If you're thinking about having friends model, only the person with the camera (who does the actual screenshots) needs TexMod, the model does not. --◄mendel► 22:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

True, but do you think anyone here has enough friends to cover every armor set for every profession? I think far from it. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Necromancer Asuran and Elite sunspear[]

Got pictures of both, I hope they're ok because it took forever to crop them, so what do I do? put them here so they can be checked or just upload over the old ones?--Gene195 02:34, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems the male asuran armor needs to be retaken, if you followed the armor gallery style guide and taken the pictures as is asked there then yes you just upload over the old one, make sure to select correct copyright when you upload.The Elite Sunspear armor does not seem to have anything wrong with it,unless i missed that,i don't think we add new pictures to article because we (as in one person ) thinks it looks better then the old one,unless you wanted to upload that one for a different reason which I have missed. ( PS you forgot to sign ~~~~ ) Durga Dido 02:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Sunspear needs to be retaken on isle of nameless guess I shoulda mentioned its male necro. indeed I did forget to sign.. I always do :(--Gene195 02:34, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Eh.... looking at it my pictures are really small in comparison... dunno how to get it bigger, I'll try again in the morning.--Gene195 02:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
(arg edit conflict) I see it now,my mistake or maybe the wiki's mistake, it seems that when i click the elite sunspear armor link it sends me to the normal sunspear armor link instead,but yes you are right the elite one also needs to be retaken.In that case yes, if you follow(ed) the style guide feel free to upload them over the old ones.Now to figure out whats wrong with the linking.(edit)Maybe you have your game resolution low? like 640X480? (dont even know if game allows that) if you have it low you might want to change it in game to take a picture,or fight with your editor to get it ok :) Durga Dido 02:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Had everything on highest (including resolution) I think its just the angle I took the picture.--Gene195 02:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
To get the largest picture possible, you have to do 4 things. 1. Turn off interface Ctrl+Shift+H. 2. Hold your right mouse button and move the camera as close as possible to the character, until the feet are almost touching the bottom of the screen. 3. Make sure you are on a level surface. Trying to zoom while you are on an incline will be difficult and will give a bad angle to your screenshots. 4. Use Full Screen. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 03:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
(Clarification: Turning off the interface doesn't directly affect the actual size of the image you capture, but it does increase the useable area of the image.) Also, if your character has a small body size, then of course images of that character will be smaller relative to images of larger characters, and that's something you can't change, unfortunately. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 03:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


I'm not sure the current colour coding works out. For one thing, Monk Asuran armor is Prohibitive, while Monk Ancient armor is Expensive. Now, they're both 10k armor which req 350 Bolts of Cloth, 10 Rolls of Parchment, 5 Vials of Ink and 35 of another rare material. Now, unless reputation is included in the determination of cost, then there's a problem here.
I also find it amazing that so many suits of armor have the same colour as Obsidian. Personally I'm in favour or removing the current coding system, it's currently misleading at best (to stick with my example, Monk Asuran armor is much closer in cost to Monk Obsidian armor than to Monk Ancient armor) and personally, with the links, I'm not even sure we need that much.
I feel simply having the note of "0k" Starter, if you're wondering 1k, 5k, 10k, 15k, FoW, would do the trick nicely. Anyone else have an opinion on this they care to share? =) -->ST Suicidal Tendencie Sig.jpg 11:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I thought I'd seen everything there was in cost, my bad. However, I disagree with r5 of rep (doing a storyline) holding the same colour as Obsidian. Maybe a new colour just for FoW armor? -->ST Suicidal Tendencie Sig.jpg 11:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Currently, the only one that does seem a little "off" in terms of sheer cost is FoW. But when you look at the names, it makes sense. This is a project, not an armor reference page, so the prices listed here are for those who just want to go on a "rampage" of buying armor to complete the galleries. Very easy for cheap and free armors, almost anyone can do that. Expensive starts to get, well, expensive, in time and money - this is why standard Kurzick and Luxon are listed under this category. Prohibitive makes it sound as extremely difficult and not worth the efforts for just a gallery, or literally, cannot be done by someone who just wants to get a set of armor for this project and is not already set up for it. There is nothing higher than Prohibitive, at least I can't think of it. For someone who just wants to make a new character and get a set of armor, getting Asuran isn't much easier than getting FoW (I know a level 8 necro who has FoW, but even with that kind of resources, it would take him a good long time to get Asuran and stay anywhere near level 8). RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 23:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah I know people in Spamadan often have FoW on a low level, and I once saw a level 3 Paragon in the DoA (which I'll admit really impressed me).
But the one thing I'd argue is it would take him a good long time to get Asuran and stay anywhere near level 8. Well... why would he have to stay level 8? o.O
The fact is, and I think most agree with me here, it's easier to do Raptor farms / get CoF runs, do books for Norn, or whatever, than save up all the ecto and Obsidian Shards.
You may well happen to have the rank, and decide to get the armor and help out the gallery.
But will you just so happen to have 900k lying around and think "I know, time to work on that page on GuildWiki..."? Personally, I doubt it. I still say Obsidian should have a catergory :P -->ST Suicidal Tendencie Sig.jpg 03:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
And what do you suggest its color and name it would be? Black and Very Prohibitive? I may have been long-winded up there and lost my point somewhere, but to me the definition is more like a cut-off: anything above is "Prohibitive" to most players. And how prohibitive? Well, anyone who knows anything about armor, knows that FoW is one of the most expensive possessions a single character can have. I just think it's silly to have a special category for FoW alone on this particular project's page. I find it unnecessary here.
But if you still disagree, feel free to propose something better. Your proposal of the "k" system above is much more flawed than the current, because it is obviously far more specific, but actually less accurate and/or descriptive. Many armors are available between the 0k and 1k levels. Kurzick 1k cannot be compared to Canthan 1k. 5k Vabbian costs almost 3x MORE than 15k Sunspear (in time and money), not less as the price would imply. Colors are very simple and generic, like traffic lights - green means piece of cake, I can get this with next to no effort; orange means this might hurt a little; red means Whoah there! this bites! The categories I would actually remove are "Free" and "Normal Cost" and merge them all into "Cheap," since even "free" armor has to be dyed gray, and there is only one single entry in the entire project under "Normal Cost" - the Platemail. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 04:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Meh... I don't get why people say Vabbian's expensive.
My sin got it, and since then rubies and sapphires have at least halfed in value... -->ST Suicidal Tendencie Sig.jpg 07:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Please, do a calculation on the cost of vabbian and elite ss, including materials, and then add the time to get to Kodash from when you first get Building the Base for the elite ss crafter (no running). All I'm saying is that it's nowhere near 3x cheaper, as would be implied by your "k" system. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
And this is where we differ.
I don't go on the assumption that somebody is making a character to get the armor to help out GuildWiki.
I think it... at the very bare minimum potentially misleading and / or inaccurate to take it for granted they have little to no progress in all GW games, and that they do not possess any Titles whatsoever. There's a fair chance that someone will have r5 of a given Title which is easy to achieve or that the person will be about half way in a given storyline. -->ST Suicidal Tendencie Sig.jpg 00:43, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
This IS where we differ, because in many cases only one or a couple "main" characters will be that well developed, and most others will be on beginner or intermediate level, half serving as mules, and that's when you actually care about how hard it would be to get a particular armor for them, if you decide to screenshot a gallery for that profession, because you noticed that the current one sucks, and out of the goodness of your heart want to fix it. If you have a level 16 character in any of the 3 campaigns whom you play only casually and don't care much about, you're not going to get him anything "Prohibitive" just to fix a bad armor gallery, be it FoW or Vabbian or Asuran, and will probably think twice about "Expensive" armor as well. So again, for the purposes of THIS PROJECT PAGE I don't see a reason to differentiate FoW from other "Prohibitive" items, and you still haven't proposed anything, anyway, outside of the "k" ladder, which I already explained why it is unfit for the purpose. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 01:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, obviously this is a subjective scale: if you already have the character and the armor, even a "prohibitive" armor is "cheap" for you. I've tried to clarify that in the article, feel free to improve upon my words. --◄mendel► 10:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
1... incident involving armor is enough for me
I've tried to state my case - I have, and know many people who have, multiple characters who have finished multiple storylines (NF + GW:EN being popular) - but I won't force that on anyone. Many people have characters who could, or are very close to being able to, get GW:EN armor as an example and surely, simple logic dictates, they will be the ones to get it?
Anyway, like I said, I tried to make a reasonable point so that the community could ponder it, but I'm not going to risk another one happening -->ST Suicidal Tendencie Sig.jpg 17:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Female Warrior Monument[]

Updated all of the wrong and/or missing images. Other than the fact that whomever took the dyed screenies didn't have the helmet visible, everything looks good. Jimbo321 00:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Male Paragon Deldrimor[]

Added all missing images (for the components too), and updated the existing images for consistency sake. All done. Jimbo321 02:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Female Warrior Gladiator[]

Just uploaded some new images using default grey, so the gallery looks good to go. As an aside, I've noticed that character height/size/whatever makes a fairly large difference - I'm unable to zoom in as closely on my little female warrior as I am on my max height male Para (I *think* my warrior is the shortest I could make her, although I can't recall). Jimbo321 20:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Character height does make a difference. Best you can do is turn off interface (Ctrl+Shift+H) and zoom in as close as you can. Also, you don't need to post here every time you update a gallery (unless you want to). When you update an armor status, just tell us what you changed in the edit summary, like "Warrior - F Gladiator done" or something like that, and that's usually enough. Good job, again. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 08:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Also, the fact that you corrected you signature with just 4 tildes makes it look like you posted your comment after I replied to it. ^_^ RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Common Armor [Female][]

I finally decided to finish the Common Armor part of my armor collection for my Female Elementalist, and was thinking about "updating" all the Common Armor [female] galleries (not Mesmer though) with the same model for some consistancy. This includes the Bandana, Woads (2), Glasses (3), Crown, Dread Mask, Mo Zhing, Chaos/Dragon/Glacial/Destroyer/Stone Gauntlets. I would also be doing a dye chart for those able. Anyone against this? Should I only do those that are not marked as "Good" on the project page? Thoughts? Khazad Guard 10:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with this, except for maybe one thing. If your character's hair obstructs the common headgear, and the one in the current "good" images does not, then I wouldn't advise changing it. But if your images are better, or at least as good as the current, then there really shouldn't be a problem. I think consistency is a good thing, especially for some of the uneven image sizes that are otherwise well taken. Dye charts will be great to have, too. I like what you did with the F Ele armor galleries, so I have full faith that you will also do a great job here. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Well I'll knock up the batch next week, and I'll replace the "no"/"okay" images first, and then I'll put the rest up here to decide. I guess I could even do a gender-swap and complete the male ele/male common sets too, but maybe later. Thanks Kali! Khazad Guard 03:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Good luck, can't wait to see it. :D RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 07:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
So did up the batch of head pieces earlier today. Uploaded the majority of them, but have some that I'm not sure about, so if anyone wants to have some input, please take a look at my Sandbox and let me know what you think. Get onto editing the gloves/gauntlets sometime next week Khazad Guard 19:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
I like all of them. In the bandana shot, you still have the shadows from your hair on the cheek, but not hair. ^_^ But that's a nuisance. I say go ahead and replace them all. I also like your dye charts, well done. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Knocked the rest up. I re-uploaded the profile shots for the left hand view (less shadows) except for the Highlander Woad because the left hand shot is the white side, so that is kept as right side view. Ruins the whole consistency thing, but i think it makes sense. If you want any more shots I have a front, side, left and right side of each head piece (even back shots of glasses ><). Also the Bandana is annoying me on the Common armor page because the water line isnt the same as the rest (stupid bandana tail hiding) but oh well...Khazad Guard 17:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Lol... I think you might be even more of a consistency freak than I am. ^_^ RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
It's been a month and I finally remembered...Anyway for those interested, I've uploaded the pictures as a trial onto my Sandbox. It's a bit of a mess, but the top set of each Gloves/Gauntlets are my pictures and the ones below are the current ones. I'm not sure whether to replace all the current ones, or just the ones that need replacing. Thoughts? Also I thought that the pictures where adjusted by height, so yes I will replace the current side views with ones that are the same width >< Sorry! Khazad Guard 14:06, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
The reason it's not adjusted by height is because this template is used for gloves, headgear, AND the deldrimor armor (iirc), and such a small height for vertical images made them weely weely tiiny. I remember there was a good reason for width-only. Also, your images look good, just go ahead and replace them. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 17:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay thanks Kali, will do. I'll upload the current profile ones for now until I get back on the desktop tomorrow. Khazad Guard 17:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Though, in all honesty, I'm not so sure about the clipping images with the "missing" boobs, that's the reason I took the glacial gauntlets one from the back Image:Glacial Gauntlets F clipping.jpg, it shows the same thing, but doesn't look as weird. ^_^ That or like blur it somehow? Do the black censor strip? :P RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 17:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah I wasn't sure about the disappearing boobs as well :S I'll try updating them with new SS this week- I think a censor strip might be too distracting (not that missing boobs and underwear aren't distracting) >< Khazad Guard 17:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Censor strip was a joke. ^_^ But I do think that taking the SS from the back might be better. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:46, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Monk Female Norn[]

I just uploaded new images of the entire gallery for this armor, maybe check that they're up to scratch? In any case, the gallery is now complete (including headpiece), and has Isle of the Nameless-taken images now. Mrs J 13:56, September 5, 2009 (UTC)

I think those pics are good...but the colored ones seem to suffer from poor jpg compression? --Takisig2.png 15:12, September 5, 2009 (UTC)

No Helmet Gallery option[]

I've noticed that Dr Ishmael has edited a lot of the galleries to enable this option - despite the fact that most of them don't actually have a nohelmet image. It makes the pages look sloppy in my opinion, which is a shame considering that a fair chunk of those galleries had been finished and the nohelmet thing is far from necessary (imo). Thoughts? Jimbo321 03:24, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

Discussion is here: Template_talk:Armor_art_gallery#adding_.22without_helmet.22 Jennalee 03:29, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the linkage Jennalee :) I guess I should've known that there'd be an existing discussion about it somewhere. :P Jimbo321 05:20, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
The discussion doesn't say much about adding the argument to galleries that don't have the image. Adding a redlink to a complete gallery is unnecessary, it's optional, and should only be added along with an image, no redlinks, please. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:14, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
For the sake of more "linkage", could also point towards Gallery completion project. --Wolfie Wolfie sig.jpg (talk|contribs) 23:43, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
I linked it because I'd hope the discussion was kept in one place >_<. Tto clarify, I think it's a worthwhile addition, as with adding mesmer gloves to their galleries, but redoing a whole gallery over them is unecessary. As for redlinks, yes they are ugly but they do a better job of saying 'please upload something here' than a project page ever will for the average user so this should be taken into consideration if you're arguing for their removal. As for some contributions not being of top quality, this doesn't have anything to do with whether it's a good addition to the galleries or not but rather, uploader mentality and quality issues in general. Jennalee 02:28, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
I guess the 'please upload something here' thing depends on your viewpoint. I'm not familiar with armor gallery upload stats, but I wonder how many "average users" contribute high quality additions to the galleries. Regardless, a previously nicely finished gallery ends up looking kinda crappy with a redlink and has the potential to end up crappier still if someone uploads a mismatched or poor quality image. To summarize, I don't like the redlinks at all. For that matter, I think nohelmet is unnecessary and should be scrapped, but I'll take that discussion over to the Armor Art Gallery page where it belongs. Jimbo321 09:25, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
The only problem with the "please upload something here" viewpoint is that it's optional, so there's no need to request anything, it doesn't need to be there at all. So I think it's should be either an uploaded image or nothing, no redlinks. That's also the reason that it was made into an argument for the template, rather than hardcoded into the template with no option of removal. I was arguing against the whole thing when it was proposed, yet it got implemented anyway (with some bugs that I think are just now finally resolved), but in any case, there's no need to scrap it now that it's done, but it should not be added as redlinks, and it should be aimed to match the rest of the gallery. The W Obsidian example above shows how it should not end up looking... RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 11:55, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
If they can serve as a worthwhile addition, then why scrap it altogether? People will be inclined to upload shitty images if they can get away with it irregadless of whether it's a no-helm or not. I don't particularly care if there's redlinks or not - they're also in imcomplete galleries such as the monk ones missing their headgears or have terrible headgear images - yes I'm sure you'd like to flush them down the toilet also, but you can't because so few people have bald female monks, actually buy and display the expensive scar patterns, or would really care in the first place that the images exist except when they don't, and like, the red-links look sooo damned ugly. If they're so displeasing to the eye, then hardcode suitable placeholders that get used if there is no image, something like a generic gray sillouhete on a gray background for bodies with 'no image available' written onto it, or the sillouhete of a head for headgear, like those used as placeholders for unused character slots. The objections I can see here is that the recently introduced 'no-helm' option offends your aesthetic sense of 'perfectly good galleries being ruined by ugly red-links, or e-peen wagglers uploading substandard images with no regards to the quality desired for a wiki submission' and thus, you'd rather they not know that such an option to do so exists. While I am cynical and concede that this will be the likely outcome, I feel that it is a worthwhile enough addition to let the redlinks stay, and AGF that nice additions will be made to make it worthwhile. Jennalee 15:32, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I'm convinced. It does look fairly good when the page is done properly, and I suppose it never hurts to have more info. I added a fairly well-matched nohelmet image to Warrior Female Elite Kurzik, and redid the entire gallery for Warrior Female Elite Sunspear (just for consistency, and the component images needed re-doing anyway). With the female versions done, maybe we could go with Jennalee's placeholder idea until someone either re-does the male galleries or uploads nicely matched nohelmet images. Something like this? That's pretty crappy quality, I just whipped it up as an example using an alpha mask over Warrior Elite Sunspear. I think pretty much anything looks better than a redlink though. Thoughts? Jimbo321 22:18, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, I think they look a lot better than redlinks. I'd like some imput from those who work on coding the templates, though, on how viable it is. Jennalee 00:24, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Nicely done. If it can't be automated in code (ask Mendel or other code gurus on here), it can be simply uploaded by hand onto the redlink, and then the new image can be easily uploaded on top of the placeholder once available. I like the placeholders Jimbo made, except maybe to have plain text that's easier to read, the italics get a little smudged (that or I'm still not all the way awake). I like fonts like Courier New or plain Arial for stuff like that. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 06:20, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Automating it would be simple with an #ifexist check, assuming you mean "show the 'no image available' pic if this pic doesn't exist." I could even do it now. It only depends on getting the "no image available" pics uploaded to appropriate filenames, like "No Image Available F.jpg" and "No Image Available M.jpg". There's just an issue that #ifexists requires another hit on the database, but since we're talking only two per gallery, I can't image the performance hit would be noticeable. Nwash 11:09, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
The problem isn't the performance hit itself, as wikia pages are highly cached (unless you update all of the pages, e.g. by changing the template :-P ). Because of the performance implications, there is a hard limit on "Expensive parser functions" that is currently set at 100 for our wiki; and we would need to be sure that none of the galleries reach that, or the templates will (partially) fail. (Currently, our skill bar template is the common cause for that.) --◄mendel► 12:15, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Right, and this would be a max of 2 per page, unless there's something I'm not thinking of. And yeah, changing the template would make for a one-time hit when the affected pages are next loaded, but that is quite minor. Nwash 12:18, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
The overviews have quite a lot of images, but they wouldn't be affected (?). --◄mendel► 12:27, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
I don't see anything in the code that should affect the overview pages (I'm assuming you mean Elementalist armor and Vabbian armor and such). The appropriate template for overviews just includes the image directly and shouldn't be affected by the change to the armor gallery template. Thus, you'd have a female no helmet and male no helmet image. Even if it were expanded to handle the head shots as suggested below, we shouldn't even come close to the 100 limit. Again, though, unless there's some special case I'm totally missing... Nwash 12:39, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Overviews such as this one? It still wouldn't hit 100, but it's definitely heavily redlinked. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 13:03, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
I count only 16 images, which is well below the limit. Once the #ifexist check is added to an image type, it will trigger on all pages that have it, regardless of whether the image exists or not. --◄mendel► 13:12, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
I redid the images using a more neutral Mesmer model and cleaned them up quite a bit. Also dumped the script font for Book Antiqua which is easier on the eyes. Just for testing/example purposes, I replaced the nohelm redlink in Male Warrior Elite Kurzik and Female Warrior Elite Luxon with the new placeholders. Check them out and let me know what you think. (Also, am I the only one that sees a full-length side view for the dyed helm on the female Kurzik? :|) Jimbo321 08:44, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
I like them! :D I'm not sure what you mean about the helm, female Kurzick what? Elite Warrior looks fine to me. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 10:51, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
It was actually Female Warrior Elite Luxon, and it's *still* borked for me after all this time. Check this out. Any gallery gurus know why that might be happening? jimbo321 talk 01:17, June 13, 2010 (UTC)
The problem is Wikia's dumbass image servers - once a thumbnail at a specific size is created, they will never re-create said thumbnail unless the original image changes. The original version of the image in question was a fullsize shot, and Wikia made a thumbnail based on that. When the correct headshot-sized image was uploaded, they should have recreated the thumbnails, but apparently they were off getting stoned or something and never did that. So I re-uploaded the image just now with a couple pixels cropped off one side in order to force the creation of new thumbnails. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 01:33, June 13, 2010 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks Doc. I figured it had something to do with caching, but I had no idea how to correct it. jimbo321 talk 05:20, June 13, 2010 (UTC)


(Reset indent) Well, preferably we still want it to be easy to upload missing images. If we simply upload the placeholders everwhere we are missing images, do we need to add instructions to go to "Upload a new version of this file" ? I suppose we should at least append the message to "missing image - help GuildWiki and upload it if you can" or something like that.

We can, of course, modify the template to check for existing images, and if they don't, display this image and link it to the upload form for that that image (a possibility we've had since the version 1.15 wiki software upgrade). Is it worth doing that? --◄mendel► 12:09, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

If clicking the placeholder takes you to uploading the proper image, then yes, do it pls. A "Help GuildWiki by uploading it!" message can be added to the placeholder. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 12:21, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Oh, and while at it, can placeholders be made for head shots as well? That way we can use these for all missing images, as sadly, some galleries still have redlinks. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 12:23, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
New versions with "Please upload" all done. Check them out in the galleries above. Too flashy with the GuildWiki "logo", or ok as-is? Also, while it's no problem at all to create ones for helm shots, there's probably no way that any text beyond "No Image" or somesuch could be included and still be legible. Jimbo321 13:57, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Purdy. I like it. For helm shots you could omit the "pls upload" thing, or make it small so that it can be seen when zoomed in on the image, while "no image available" can still be seen in the gallery view. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 14:12, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Images are uploaded to No Image Available M.jpg, No Image Available F.jpg, and No Image Available Head.jpg. I think that a single generic headshot should be ok (I used a bald monk). The text on the male/female versions doesn't align exactly - which annoys me to no end - but I won't bother changing it unless someone insists. :P All three images are here resized to appear roughly as they would in a gallery. If/when this gets implemented, I guess someone with some admin zap will need to delete the test images in the Warrior Elite Kurzik M and Warrior Elite Luxon F galleries. Jimbo321 15:03, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Looks fine to me, good work. Tip: use {{delete| reason}} to summon admin zap whenever you need it. --◄mendel► 15:27, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Testing of the tweaked template can be seen over at User:Nwash/Sandbox. Nwash 15:58, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Changes made. Much purging will likely need to be done before the results are visible, though. I'll get started on that... Nwash 17:20, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Awesome! Though, this is a bit of a nuisance, but I don't think you can do anything about that, because the common gallery is used for gloves, headgear, and individual deldrimor pieces. Gloves and headgear are almost all complete, that's the only one I could find where the placeholders didn't fit, so I wouldn't worry about it. This gallery can't seem to purge the gray back headgear, but this one looks much better (well, all things considered ^_^). RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 17:42, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Yep, I managed to miss one line when I was making the changes. It's fixed now, and I've seen no other misses so far. And yeah, that woad is a problem I have no simple solution to at the moment. Nwash 17:50, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
I fixed it. ^_^ You owe me 10k and some ink. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:57, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
Right, just meet me--HEY, WHAT'S THAT OVER THERE? casts Unsteady Ground, Storm Djinn's Haste, and runs away. Nwash 10:54, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
If only the image cache was as fast. :/ Let's see how you outrun Scorpion Wire. *evil grin* Now where's my ugly stick?.. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 12:53, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
:) Win! --◄mendel► 19:18, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
You bad boi, using the official wiki's images for the cut-out... 8-) RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 17:47, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
:P Well...I needed images that I could easily apply a mask to, and since those renders are all on a plain white backround they work perfectly. Using a freehand-select tool on a normal screenshot would've been a big pain in the ass. Although I guess I could've found a few nice WoW images to use instead. I'm sure that would've been a popular choice. :D Jimbo321 00:16, October 8, 2009 (UTC)