Template talk:Screenshot

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Deletion[edit]

Am I right in saying that this template can still be used as a shorthand/more familiar template for GWW users for {{ArenaNet image|screenshot}}? If so, it shouldn't be deleted. Also, it's still used on some images. pling User Pling sig.png 02:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it's redundant to have two different templates with the same function (or, in this case, a limited template like this and another that does the same thing, while also having other uses). When I tagged this for deletion, only user images were still using it, but since it's still here other images have been tagged with this template. Erasculio 16:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
I see more use in keeping this template.. poke | talk 19:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Why? Erasculio 20:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
{{ArenaNet image|screenshot}} is longer, people are used to {{screenshot}}, people expect to tag a screenshot with {{screenshot}}, and there is absolutely no disadvantage in allowing people to still use this template. poke | talk 21:13, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
I second keeping it for simplicity Venom20 User Venom20-icon-0602-sm-black.png 21:35, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Arguably only some people from GW1W may be used to {{screenshot}}, since here the majority of users have tagged their images with the ArenaNet image template. This template is also less functional than the ArenaNet image one, considering how it only categorizes stuff in the screenshot category, unlike the more powerful template; which means, right now we need to change almost all uses of this template, considering how nearly everything we have today falls within one of the subcategories of the screenshot category.
I also see no point in having two templates doing the same thing, with one being superior to the other. Erasculio 21:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
This template is simply easier to use to tag an image. I don't see why we can't allow people to still use it. ShadowRunner 21:48, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
I doubt anyone other than anal categorisation freaks (like ourselves) cares about Template:ArenaNet images' custom category parameter or the extensive and complex hierarchical category system we've set up/proposed. For most people, the screenshot template is the most obvious tag. pling User Pling sig.png 21:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
The first and most important purpose of the ArenaNet image template is the licensing. The shortcut with this template fills that purpose quite fine. Everything else, the categorization in particular, is just an extra; an extra most random wiki users will not care about at all. As such they will tend to use the easiest way possible to do what they are required to do. If we only have the ArenaNet image tag, I can already imagine how many uncategorized screenshots we get. By keeping the screenshot template, we provide a shortcut template with a shorter name and with an extra effect. poke | talk 01:27, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
"As such they will tend to use the easiest way possible to do what they are required to do": which would be to add an upload form like the one in GW1W, in which contributors pick an option and the template is automatically added. If people had to manually add the templates at GW1W, it would be filled with uncategorized images as well.
But fine, I won't insist on this if so many people would like to keep this template (which IMO still doesn't make sense, but anyway). Erasculio 10:30, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
A template that is simply another template doesn't seem truly necessary to me, and possesses the potential to over complicate things. If {{ArenaNet image|screenshot}} is available, and that is what this template is, then why not just use that and delete an otherwise unnecessary template. Aqua (T|C) 14:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't really feel like repeating myself, but this template is not unnecessary. It provides a commonly used and simple shortcut. If pure wiki code is available, why use templates at all? I'm going to undo the deletion tag based on previous consensus above. poke | talk 15:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)