|
Proposal Archive
The following proposal has been discussed and is now marked as resolved. The page has been protected and now serves as an archive. Do not edit this page.
Date Resolved: May 26, 2021
|
|---|
Instructions
This page is the voting stage of this discussion: "Galleries where you can't categorize images."
With all concerns from the concern stage of this discussion having been resolved and taken into account, the proposal located in the "Proposal" section above has been created and moved to voting. To join the voting, you simply use buttons located in the "Voting" section of this page and fill the resulting page.
Have a happy voting!
Proposal
Stryker305 is proposing the following:
I suggest creating such a template.
|
Images in this subgallery are not allowed to be categorized. Images in the episode gallery don't match follow the proper naming scheme. |
|---|
The template prohibits categorizing images, since the images in the episode galleries (where you need to take the images from) are of poor quality, or do not correspond to the naming scheme.
What for? And everything is simple. I've noticed many times when users categorized low-quality or inappropriate images in subgalleries, and then added a DeleteGallery template, and the gallery was deleted. With this template, users will not categorize such images. 
Stryker305
(Message Wall)
(Contributions)
(Editcount), May 15, 2021, 07:10
Voting will conclude on May 26, 2021 at 9:49 AM EDT (13:49 UTC). BSpongeSM02 (W•C•E•L•A) 13:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Voting
Support - LegendarySponge115 M•C•E Big Birthday Blowout is the best!
Support - - Support - Anthony2306 (W•C•L•E) 14:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose - This is redundant as there already templates for low quality images as well as images that don't follow the naming scheme. Spot the Amoeba (W•C•L•E) 17:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - You did not understand. I've said that I've seen users categorize these images, even in spite of these templates. Stryker305(Message Wall)(Contributions)(Editcount)
- Reply - I understand that, but it's still redundant. Maybe there should be something in ESB:Categories about it. That would make a lot more sense and wouldn't just be unneeded. Spot the Amoeba (W•C•L•E) 17:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Oppose - This is redundant as there already templates for low quality images as well as images that don't follow the naming scheme. 
Reply - You did not understand. I've said that I've seen users categorize these images, even in spite of these templates. - Support - SpongeTron D (W•C•E) I love SB-129
- Support - Kylecocjin (W•C•E)
- Support - However I presume that this template would only be placed on the pages in instances where the main gallery's images are inadequate, as if this was just placed on unmaintained subgalleries when the user could have redone the subgallery but just couldn't be bothered to, the creation of this maintenance template would be an enormous vehicle for unproductive edit farming. The gamer 987654321 (talk) 16:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- Support - Figmeister (W•C•E) 21:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- Neutral - Arthur Read fan (talk) 06:17, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Neutral - - Very Strong Support - Yes. Every time I want to categorize a character subgallery, I'm going to have to see if, on the main gallery page, if there are 200 pics in it, and if it's in high quality, if there are no "it's about imagination" or "you're spraying cheese fizz on the camera" notice templates. This new notice would make stuff a whole lot easier, as I could just see if the subgal has that template being proposed, and if so, I won't categorize it, and if it doesn't have the notice, I will be able to categorize it. SupraRZmk4 (M·C·E·A·L·B) Ahoy matey! 01:07, 25 May 2021 (UTC)