Spongebob456 wrote: Hi guys,

I thought now would be a good time to summarise.

  • We know from the evidence that having images be sufficiently distinct has positive effects on user experience. That basically rules out scenarios like this:
  • We also know from the evidence that having too many images clutters a page and creates visual noise for the reader, negatively affecting the viewing experience. This means having hundreds of images in a gallery simply is not viable. For mobile and desktop users this means they are less likely to return to the wiki which we surely don't want.
  • Regarding mobile users, it's worth stressing that many of our articles were blank in the mobile skin for a long while. When a user comes to a website, finds its articles blank, they're very likely not going to return. If we improve this mobile experience, we make it easier for mobile users to return to the wiki.
  • Copyright is also a concern. I think the fair use of these images is in doubt if we have such a high quantity of frames documented for an episode. Given how companies such as YouTube are clamping down on copyright more, this is an important issue. Furthermore, the changes in EU Law could affect us significantly. As I said before, these new laws that passed clampdown on copyright and shift the onus from the users to the website itself - in other words, Fandom. Fandom may be forced, by EU law, to deal with our images and to even shut us down while they do that. Much like GDPR, the EU may not provide much time for this to happen. Surely it is up to us to make this change smoothly and in accordance with the way we want it, rather than it being done in haste and in a way we don't want it.
    • And no we will not be asking readers to contact politicians to account for our inadequacies. If a website is inadequately designed, it is up to us to fix it. In no way is it viable to say “nope, we’re not changing our website, contact your politician or don’t come back at all”. It’s very silly to think that in fact. Interesting some would rather blame our readers before blaming ourselves - food for thought.
  • I understand the argument that SpongeBob has a lot of sight gags and facial expressions are important to some. With that, I acknowledge the argument for more images than the 25 I suggested. I’m hoping to find some middle ground here. Ideally, we want our image galleries to give a flavour of the episode without being a substitute for watching it. That’s why less than 200 images is very possible. It’s worth noting that for cameos, errors, specific details there are other sections they are appropriate for too. For example, if we see a tin of Snail-Po in the background, it’s perfectly fine to place that image in the trivia section (next to the trivia text saying Snail-Po appears) and on the Snail-Po article. This makes sense user experience wise and it helps SEO.
  • I know some have suggested having a more flexible limit for galleries. I would be open to considering that more, but it is a lot easier to create a blanket figure rather than "this gallery can be 80 images, but not this one". I am wondering if something a long the lines of "Gallery limits can be X number +- 10" is viable. Let me know on that.

Overall guys, I really ask we find some sort of compromise and agreement here. I’ve said the 25 images is flexible and even said if we can just get it down to any double figure number initially. Let’s not start the “we’ve been doing this for years, others should change around us” argument. We should move with the times and serve our readers better.

1. An e-commerce website is a terrible example. We're not trying to sell anything. These are galleries about the episode. If the galleries were on the episode pages, you would have a point, but since they aren't, you don't have one. 2. The only way to improve the mobile experience is through designing the mobile experience to be as good as desktop, not removing images. That won't solve anything. It doesn't matter if you have 1000 images or one image, if they can't see the image(s), that's the problem, not the number of images on the page. 3. As of right now, copyright is not an issue. If it becomes an issue, then we can deal with it then. There is no reason to be preparing the worst. How's that whole Brexit thing going? Remember when every Brit was overreacting to that? The fact that copyright was even brought up is just terrible. Also, I'm not sure how much power Article 13 or whatever laws the EU uses will have any effect on FANDOM since it is an American-based company. I wouldn't be surprised if Internet providers are the ones who get attacked more than website owners. In other words, Europe may go dark for some websites as it may be easier than asking American-based companies to remove their images or videos or whatever, especially one as big as FANDOM. 4. I know that you come from a country where politics is a joke, not like it is much better here in America, but at least, one person can't just overturn something because she feels like it. Writing to politicians is a good way to get any change made, so maybe, don't tell people not to write their politicians, especially if the change would benefit everyone in multiple ways, regardless of this discussion. I find it more humorous that you feel as if the "poorly designed" website is the fault of the users, rather than, you know, the designers. I think what makes it especially humorous is the fact that you are now just bringing up the website's design. Until now, it has not been about the design of the website, but, instead, the fact that the galleries are not being viewed by people or otherwise are "cluttered". If this is a discussion about the website's design, then the solution is to make a better website, not to change our policies because some designers don't want to, not that I think they are unwilling to make the change since I have yet to actually meet a designer of this website and know what his or her opinion is. 5. If it is important to some, then why get rid of it? I've given you your solution to the SEO problem. I think I've given you several solutions here and in your awful proposal. If you don't want to take it, then that's fine, but don't expect this wiki to make a change because you and the Staff aren't willing to do work. Speaking of work, we haven't talked about who would remove the images. I volunteer 456 to do it unless he thinks he is above the work. If you want to remove images, then I think you should go through all 593 galleries and remove them yourself. If you don't want to do that yourself, then this discussion doesn't need to go on any longer. I don't think anyone on this wiki is demanding these images be removed, maybe requesting, but certainly not demanding. 6. Double digits is too few images. It just is. 7. Regarding your final paragraph, "serving our readers better" is not your goal. Well, it is, but the way you are going about it is not helpful. I and many others have attempted to explain why it is unhelpful. The argument of "we've been doing this for years, others should change around us" is not one that applies here. It has never has. The reality is that no one here thinks that we shouldn't change. We think that not every solution is the responsibility of the users who use the website. Just because we contribute, doesn't mean we should be the ones to change. Sometimes, it is the Staff that needs to change. The sooner you realize that the sooner you can actually start helping the readers. Also, "We should move with the times and serve our readers better." What are we a newspaper? What times? It is not like this website is behind the current trend. In many cases, this website is often looked up to as the example for other wiki sites. I'm not saying that this website isn't outdated in some respects; the search feature comes to mind. (Seriously, get that updated.) I guess I'm saying that that might be the topping on the "I don't care about the users" cake you just laid out. You clearly don't actually care about getting these things fixed. You just care about making the Staff happy. You are supposed to be a representative of this community, not Staff. If they cared enough, they wouldn't send someone like you to do their bidding. They would send a Staff member to make these requests. I understand that they may be intimidated by some of the users here as Staff members haven't exactly had the warmest welcome here, but if they really believed that the problem was the galleries, they would go through that to tell us. Right now, there is no evidence that the problem is the gallery. If you can get some, then we can have a proper discussion, but until then, I stand by closing this and dealing with it later if it is actually important.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.