44,429
edits
Forum:Full Gallery Articles: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(Created page with "{{forumheader|Watercooler}} I think we should have galleries as full articles, like other wikis such as the Super Mario Wiki, ZeldaWiki, WiKirby, etc. This only goes for galle...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{forumheader|Watercooler}} | {{forumheader|Watercooler}} | ||
I think we should have galleries as full articles, like other wikis such as the Super Mario Wiki, ZeldaWiki, WiKirby, etc. This only goes for galleries that are very large; small galleries would stay on the original page. [[User:Obsessive Mario Fan|Obsessive Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Obsessive Mario Fan|talk]]) 17:51, April 29, 2019 (EDT) | I think we should have galleries as full articles, like other wikis such as the Super Mario Wiki, ZeldaWiki, WiKirby, etc. This only goes for galleries that are very large; small galleries would stay on the original page. [[User:Obsessive Mario Fan|Obsessive Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Obsessive Mario Fan|talk]]) 17:51, April 29, 2019 (EDT) | ||
:We should check the pros and cons that other wikis have with this format. All in all, a gallery page is no different from linking to the images category of that same subject. For instance, [[:Category:Red Bulborb images]]. If we only have some images in such an article, then who decides what images are worthy? And if we're only going to stick to a few, why not make them count and keep it as an in-page gallery? Or if we can't establish a limit, and we include all, then what's different from linking to the category? It adds more maintenance, it forces the reader to go to a different page just to see an image... Dunno, there are probably advantages, but I'm not seeing them. — '''{''[[User:Espyo|Espyo]]''<sup>[[User talk:Espyo|T]]</sup>}''' 16:41, April 30, 2019 (EDT) | |||