On 28/09/2007, George Herbert <george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:
A reasonable image-pruning project, whose members vow
to reduce excess
images but leave the appropriate minimal appropriately balanced number
required to inform and attract on the pages, and make sure that those
images are tagged and rationale-ed appropriately, would be an
excellent thing. Especially as a contrast to the rabid deletionists.
Letting the naive image adders (or few
cartoonish-encyclopedia-preferred nuts) duke it out with the rabid
deletionists isn't working. I think those of us in the center have to
be a bit more assertive.
I like to reduce resolution on excessively huge comic scans and
screenshots (they should be no bigger than to provide a decent image
in the article; 250-300px in most cases IMO), and will sometimes write
rationales for album covers. (All it takes is a sentence or two in the
text! And some album and book covers are really encyclopedic subjects,
e.g. Peter Saville's work for Factory Records, or the post-1968 covers
of Scientology books with covers straight out of the Xenu story. And
that includes the volcano on 'Dianetics.') I figure that's reasonable
work on both ends of that score.
- d.