Talk:Jean Pierre Targete

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


How do you guys feel about the Gallery format that MyMindWontQuiet used here? I personally prefer the system I have used on the rest of the Artist pages so far, as it's consistent with the Hearthstone Wiki's artist pages and better sorts the cards into sets and is just a more visually appealing format for displaying cards with an emphasis on their artwork. --Bannanawaffles (talk) 00:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't mind your Gallery format, personally. For people like Samwise Didier and Glenn Rane however, I can see the appeal for a more compact format since they did artworks for many other things. Xporc (talk) 08:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
The one "I" am using is the one we have pretty much always used. It conveys the same amount of information but takes much less place, especially in cases where the artist has created 302302 cards or artwork, your format will bloat the page and more than double its size which is unacceptable, especially on mobile (something that most editors usually forget to take into account when doing formatting). For these reasons this format is not going to happen.
For a more in-depth explanation, the goal is not to show the full-sized art (otherwise we'd straight up list all art in [[File:pic.jpg|thumb]] which would be problematic), and the emphasis is not on the exact card set or card number or card text/stats (this is information available on the card's page itself, and is not very relevant to the artist, remember that the page is first and foremost about the artist, the art matters more than the exact card info) - the goal is to list them (while still providing a visual for it, not just a file name), and the "more compact" format we've been using manages to fulfill all these purposes without any drawback, while the one you used failed at a few of those, specially readibility. A good thing is that we have also recently added the possibility on Wowpedia to open images in a thumbnail in a simple click (clicking an image used to redirect you to the image's page, now it opens a window-inside-your-window that displays the full image), which reduces the need to have full-size images even more, specially when there's 329 of them. -- MyMindWontQuiet 11:55, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough, I just figured since our own sister site utilizes this format for a more card focused visual system that it would potentially function here as well. --Bannanawaffles (talk) 19:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Hmm, I'm fine with either. PeterWind (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
No to this guy.
Now for real, I think it takes too much space so the normal gallery looks more compacted and better imo.--Ryon21 (talk) 22:04, 2 May 2018 (UTC) --Ryon21 (talk) 21:55, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't have much to add to this discussion (I mostly agree with MyMindWontQuiet), but one thing that might be worth pointing out is that artist pages on the Hearthstone wiki don't usually separate cards depending on which card set they come from. They're separated based on game mode (regular cards available in play format, heroes, bosses, Tavern Brawl cards, credit cards, etc.), but you don't see cards from the The Grand Tournament set being listed in a separate section from cards from the Journey to Un'Goro set. Thus, I don't think a similar system should be applied in Wowpedia either; in my opinion, knowing that this card is from Servants of the Betrayer or that that card is from War of the Elements doesn't really matter much when, as MMWQ said, it's about the artist and the focus should be on the art itself. If people are curious which TCG set each card is from they can always just check the card data pages anyway. Just my two cents. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 05:47, 3 May 2018 (UTC)