 |
This page or section is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. This thread was archived on 7 April 2009 by Bonziiznob. |
It has become apparent to me that the number of animations on most pages is reaching ridiculous numbers. Take for example a couple of larger pages like Slayer [[1]], Magic [[2]], and Hunter [[3]]. All of these pages contained at least 5 animations, at some points up to 7 different animations. I have since edited the slayer page to reduce the number. The problem with all of these animations is that while useful and descriptive, they are usually larger than still images and very distracting. I have also been thinking about the load we are creating on wikia servers and why the wiki as a whole is so entirely slow. For example, see what I did here on the zamorakian spear page [[4]]. I created a still of the special that is twice as large, detailed, and more than three times smaller than the image that preceded it.
I propose a policy that limits animations to one per page, and limits the filesize and dimensions to something reasonable (<500kb). 
TEbuddy 03:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Discuss
Support - I think that animations, while a nice addition to the wiki introduce a significant amount of lag when you include more than one to any article. I think that one animation is sufficient for each article and more than that just gets excessive. I don't think people want to lag while they are playing because of excessive animations. One should be enough. 
Tollerach hates SoF 
05:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Support - I'd say one or two animations per article at most. 
Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 07:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment - I think this should be a guideline included in the style guide, rather than a rockhard policy. In some cases it may be appropriate to have more than one animation per article. It is a very case-specific thing when animations are needed and when they are not; such things should be discussed on an article's talk page, and action should be taken after consensus. 
Wejer
08:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- In very few cases is even one animation necessary. To even give the leeway that allows editors to place more than one results in nothing but a slow loading page and a high server load. Perhaps part of the style guide is a good idea.
TEbuddy 09:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- In very few cases is even one animation necessary. To even give the leeway that allows editors to place more than one results in nothing but a slow loading page and a high server load. Perhaps part of the style guide is a good idea.
Support - This issue has been brought up before, and I'm grateful that someone has taken the initiative to address the lag issue... Instead of the style guide, the guideline should be included in our Image and media policy. az talk 15:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Support - I agree with Az.
05:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Support - As a somewhat active contributor to the wiki, I have noticed that after visiting, my page respond time is a bit slower. This would certainly help out the wiki. ~MuzTalk 00:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Support - I Agree that there should only be one or two animations at most. A still image should replace the majority of the animation while still revealing visually, a majority of what the action looks like while being preformed.
01:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- A Prime Example is the gravestone page. Most of the animations on the page can be better replaced with still-high quality image which reveal most the the information presented in the animation. Examples:
- A Gravestone still image taken halfway through crumbling to dust
- A Blessing taken half way through the blessing
Support - I don't see how any article would need more than two animations in the first place. We should keep lag to a minimum and have no more than two per page, and only more if it is necessary †
Blade
#† 04:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Support and comment - I think animations should be used sparingly if at all. I think an animation should be used only if it is necessary to represent something a still image cannot (this is will maybe happen once or twice, if ever). This will reduce page load times significantly and clear up the distractions that animated GIFs bring to the table. As "cool" as they might be, they ultimately do more harm than good. I think my favorite quote on the subject is this: "Just because someone took the time to invent it doesn't mean it's good." -Byte_Master http://i589.photobucket.com/albums/ss336/byte_master1754/bytesig2.png http://i589.photobucket.com/albums/ss336/byte_master1754/bytesig3.png 03:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Support, under one condition - That RS:IAR can be invoked, after consensus and in special cases. Wejer 16:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah. Having a limit to one animation on a smaller article (i.e. not huge) would make sense, but having more than one would make sense on something longer, like Magic or something. IAR is there to be used, after all. :) Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 21:44, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Weak support - I can understand people wanting to cut down on the number of animations in articles like Magic. I think 2-3 animations is fine. Anything over that should be... reduced. Having said that, I don't want all these animations simply deleted. Maybe have an animation gallery? ~ 
Sentry Telos Talk 02:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Somewhat Support - Many pages could do with 0-1 animation, but skills should have 2 or 3. For example fishing should have the skill cape emote, someone fishing and someone no hand fishing (cant remember what its called). But I do think 3 should be the tops. 
Poppop24 
-No handed fishing is located in the barbarian skills page.
13:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Support - Look at the Brimhaven Agility Arena page. It has way to many even my supposedly fast computer has trouble with them. 
Smart28 Talk HS Log Tracker 
18:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose- Why not make a reduced lag page, that is exactly the same just with animations. I have a relevantly fast computer and I enjoy looking at the animations. At the top of the page it could say: This is (page name here)with animations, if you have a slow computer we suggest you go to this page Here. Or when you go to said page its the same thing only you go to the page without animations and theres link to the page with the animations.
--File:Red phat chathead.png|30px|My hair is ftw ^.^ Noah Talk to meh here 
22:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment - That would effectively double the server load and number of pages we have noah, besides with the number of pages we have now it would never get done anyway. TEbuddy 23:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment I suggest that as a general rule of thumb, if you see an animation which you think is unnecessary as it does not provide any extra information which cannot be seen from a good still image, replace it with a still image of equal or greater information value and state your reason on the article's discussion page. If you are taking the still image from the animation it'self be sure to add the tag {{fa}} which will mark the image as an image which came from an animation -robinabo 01:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Close
Call for closure - Its been a solid week without any new information, and there is only one oppose. I am going to add the image to the policies here [5] and try and get that policy finalized asap. TEbuddy 05:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- I changed the 1 animation maximum. Most users recommend 1 - 2 animations per article, so I increased the maximum to two. I also added that additional animations may be added in where absolutely necessary. It would be hard to demonstrate emotes on a two animation maximum. I will now archive this page. 13:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)