Talk:Chitauri: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
::::::: I've just cropped the image so hopefully that's less of an issue. I feel like illustrations like these would be on the page if there was no infobox, so putting them there with a caption feels like the best alternative. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC) | ::::::: I've just cropped the image so hopefully that's less of an issue. I feel like illustrations like these would be on the page if there was no infobox, so putting them there with a caption feels like the best alternative. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
: There's definitely precedent for using this kind of image in {{tlx|first pic}}, but I don't know about the infobox. I'd put it as a thumbnail to the ''left'' on the page, in a case like this. (I'd definitely say you could use an image of the species' technology, writing, etc. in the infobox for lack of a direct depiction, but an image whose actual artwork doesn't depict anything adjacent to them feels like a stretch.) --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
:: Yes. An infobox picture is meant to depict the subject of an article, while an in-line image depicts something described in the text itself. There's a distinct difference. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
::: I dunno, I tried putting the image to the left, with the BTS image on the right, and it looked worse than it does now to me. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:14, 20 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 11:14, 20 October 2024
Infobox[[edit source]]
Is it worth having the infobox image if it, a) doesn't depict the article's subject and, b) is longer than the article itself? Jack ☎ 20:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've been using infobox images of elements being mentioned, with an explanatory caption, on a fair few articles (e.g. Wile E. Coyote), so I do personally think they're more helpful than not having them. As for the image's height, that's just because the panel it's from is vertical, although it probably could be cropped a bit shorter, since Rocket's not overly important to the image. Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 20:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- The caption's right there... Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 21:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've just cropped the image so hopefully that's less of an issue. I feel like illustrations like these would be on the page if there was no infobox, so putting them there with a caption feels like the best alternative. Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 21:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's definitely precedent for using this kind of image in {{first pic}}, but I don't know about the infobox. I'd put it as a thumbnail to the left on the page, in a case like this. (I'd definitely say you could use an image of the species' technology, writing, etc. in the infobox for lack of a direct depiction, but an image whose actual artwork doesn't depict anything adjacent to them feels like a stretch.) --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 21:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I dunno, I tried putting the image to the left, with the BTS image on the right, and it looked worse than it does now to me. Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 11:14, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
