User talk:Rabbeseking/Archive1

Welcome
Hey, just realised that despite all your edits in updating the new info you haven't been welcomed yet, so welcome! The Light6 (talk) 09:48, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Horuss
Hello. Did you fix the Horuss page just now? If you did, thanks a bunch. 129.49.7.125 18:35, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

MSPA command tower
Capitalisation is against our MoS

Sorry if I was mean!
I don't know if you saw it, but I did reply to your message on my talk page. Aepokk Venset 20:02, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Jack Noirglish
I would just like to query the source on the filled in version of the image. I considered making one myself, and also encountered a filled in version on tumblr, but I was uneasy about canonicity concerns. It's probably not that big a deal, but I just have a general tendency to dislike having fan edits of images on the wiki when it can be avoided

Ehy did you delete my page? I spent time on that and look what you have done! You have destroyed it. I was only adding somefing to the fandom! ThisHomestuckMakesNoSense (talk) 03:35, February 17, 2013 (UTC)ThisHomestuckMakesNoSense

Border/thumb
MoS again. We only need them on images that aren't self-contained. In particular, transparent images generally should not have any frame on them. I'm thinking mostly of the weapon pages here

Books
Well done on the page! I especially think the image at the beginning is a nice touch, particularly given the hilarious caption. Aepokk Venset 19:05, February 23, 2013 (UTC)

Cherub babies image
There is nothing wrong with it, per say, more a minor improvement I would like to suggest an arrow to indicate the vacillation back and forth between Calliope and Caliborn, because the current image could be misinterpreted to mean that the baby-snake-form splits into two babies. (I have actually seen comments by people who actually made this mistake from reading the update itself, so I am fairly certain that people will definitely make that mistake with your diagram.) - The Light6 (talk) 07:23, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I'll edit it into a GIF so that the two babies shift like the first picture on the page. That work? Rabbeseking (talk) 07:25, March 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * That would be fine, actually, it is probably a better idea than the extra arrow. - The Light6 (talk) 07:28, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Apparently the entire idea of the picture was pointless, so fuck if I know. Rabbeseking (talk) 21:56, March 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * The placement of images on a wiki is (or at least should be) always a matter of "is this image needed, does it convey useful information, can I crop it down to the important part". I cropped the mating image because it was horribly tall, and I was very thankful that it simply didn't need to be that tall to convey useful information and thus I had an excuse to crop it. As to the young cherub image, I considered not having an image there at all, because as is always an issue with MSPA, there's the question of how useful images are when we can use page links. But I decided there ought to be an image there, and the hatchling was the choice out of the three that is the most informative.
 * The thing is that, generally speaking, a composite image is something that has several disadvantages. There are plenty of reasons for this, but the main one is very simple: flexibility. If multiple things are wanted in one image, we can construct that with divs, as I did here, for example. Additionally, images with large amounts of whitespace are generally a very bad idea, because space between images is for the article text!* So that's a negative for starters. But also it's useful to be able to move the component images around if we want to, and with a single composite image, that means uploading new versions every time, which is a nuisance.
 * I understand the frustration of spending time making an image only for it not to be used (it's happened to me on more than one wiki), but that's simply the way things work on a wiki, and it's really nothing personal