User talk:RSArx/Archive 1

Welcome to my Talk Page!
I appreciate your visiting; please make yourself at home. Leave a friendly message if you'd like or even offer to meet up in game. Just behave or I'll have to beat you..with a Deathtouched dart. Also, if you're interested in joining the clan Citadel, then send me a message in-game and I'd be happy to invite a fellow RS Wikia member.

Sincerely,

Ordubis (RS Name: Alarius)

sdhdsadasasd
Well, ya know what: Start a thread if you care that much. Wikia has all the space in the world, we can afford a couple bits of memory. 23:35, October 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * Nah, I'm just displeased at general stupidity with anything computer related. On a side note, love the header. Really took some deep thought! =D Ordubis (talk) 23:39, October 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello.
 * For your GIF upload I will say this: There is a policy about images which states that PNG is preferred over JPEG and GIF, except in the case of original Jagex images uploaded in JPEG. PNG would be larger than JPEG in that case, yet be the same thing as the JPEG anyway.
 * However, I'm not just going to hide behind policy. Instead, I'll offer reasons.
 * GIF has been deprecated across the Internet since the creation of PNG because of Unisys Corporation's patents requiring royalties to implement Lempel-Ziv-Welch encoders.
 * GIF is limited to one-bit transparency and eight-bit colours (256 colours). While that is not a problem for your image specifically, inventory icons are a maximum of 32x32, meaning that the icons could use up to 1024 colours, which don't all fit in GIF but do in PNG.
 * An editor looking to use an image of an inventory icon for an article will use the image nomenclature and reasonably expect the code to be [[File:Item name, capitalised as in-game.png]] . Having some uploads as GIF and some as PNG would create confusion.
 * I hope that clears up any confusion. 23:50, October 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * I can respect a good answer like that. While I do not agree that GIF is deprecated as it is still fully acceptable while there are still a small handful of sites that cannot accept PNG, I do understand that it may be useful if the color pallet indeed does go that high. As for the image nomenclature requiring PNG, that also would make more sense. At least there is good reasoning behind this, some people are just misinformed on the actual image type. But I can understand if it's more focused around those points. Ordubis (talk) 23:57, October 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep. As for browser compatibility, PNG images with 1-bit alpha, even if 24-bit coloured, will work down to Internet Explorer 6, and using PNG for anti-aliased transparent images is the only way, because of GIF's support for only 1-bit alpha. 00:04, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah. I'm aware of the anti-aliased transparency for PNGs while GIFs only have single-bit alpha (with or without dither). However I figured the item images would be best suited for GIF use. However, being as it's practically hard-coded to require PNG, I see that would be a better choice despite the pros and cons. Personally, unless an image is pixelated (like an inventory icon), I prefer PNG myself. I actually even it over JPG as well, unless I'm working with a flat layer (without trans/alpha). Ordubis (talk) 00:09, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * LOL I am such a dick. Thanks proof. 00:14, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Doesn't being a dick entitle to have to piss someone off or in some way inconvenience someone? If so, nah you're fine bro... Ordubis (talk) 00:17, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

Reverts
Still, transparency can be added and it makes it better. Even if it's not inventory, images can add transparency. So ima revert it back, so please do not change it again. 18:48, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) It looks like an item, but it's not.
 * 2) The transparency makes it look a bit different than the interface so it could make it harder to find.
 * Do consider that before you spend all your time changing them. Ordubis (talk) 19:01, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * If you think they don't need transparency, just make a thread or so to discuss it. 18:52, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well it does not require transparency; otherwise I would have added it when I took all the pictures. If you want my opinion.. Frankly, you're making them look a lot worse. They weren't designed for a transparency as they are a dark image on a dark background. You would be wise to fix it, but I'm not going to waste my time reverting it again if you're going to be stubborn; there's just no use. Ordubis (talk) 19:01, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * As for the thread, I don't feel I should have to as not many people watch them and also due to the fact that a majority of those images were taken by myself anyways. My point only being that I shouldn't have to debate changing my own material. Plus, I've seen them in-game and understand their location and use. Any down-the-road joe can make an image transparent, but it doesn't make the image better. I believe this will confuse some of the people who look at it for two reasons. Ordubis (talk) 19:05, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Quick note: I just realized you're also giving me a lot of work in the near future. The images you are editing are also cropped due to the hilighting. What does that mean for me? I have to now get all the new images and get the "transparent scrolls" without the cropping.. Unless you would like to retrieve all the images and save me the effort. Oh, and assuming you even continue with the transparency.. We'll see. Ordubis (talk) 19:05, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * First, CC-BY-SA. If you can't stand people uploading over your image, adding transparency to your images, then you shouldn't upload them. The images are not only yours, they are uploaded on the site, and now anyone can use it with fair use. Transparency is needed on interfaces images (RS:IMG). Like I said, if you don't want to lose ownership on your images, don't upload them. Also, you already agreed to the license by uploading them. Thank you, 19:10, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * I knew you wouldn't catch my hint and instead use that to change the subject. Let me be blunt now. Look directly at "My point only being that..." I am referencing that I am not claiming anything as my own work but as experience and that I should not have to ask to change something I previously worked on. I am free to change just as anyone; this does not require debation just as you "freely" made them transparent, I may change the wiki as I feel it best helps the community. I'm already very aware of the CC-BY-SA and also of the fact that you do not read but rather skim things. Your entire message was not only a waste of your time, but obvious, pointless, and a waste of my time. Please re-read without a cop-out. Thank you. Ordubis (talk) 19:15, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

As the background isn't actually what we're trying to show it gets removed via transparency so that what we are trying to show is left in. If you are so concerned about the quality of the images apply the transparency yourself please. Otherwise somebody else will add it in 19:27, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

No, I'm saying that the background is required for the images; transparency isn't needed. The way the images are shaded, they need the background to better compliment them. Also, they're not items so they might give the wrong impression. Finally, you need to acquire new images before you're complete as every orange-bordered image is cut off. It's not the transparency quality, it's the transparency itself. Ordubis (talk) 19:31, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

Superior outfit equipped
Please explain how you got that image when it is not currently obtainable in game. 12:29, September 13, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Response
Those excuses are never a reason to edit war. If the majority of the pages of one type look one way, you should follow that example, not the example of the exceptions. Also, why would you think a contextless, captionless image randomly dumped on a page looks better than a captioned gallery? The pages I just fixed (mostly the BoL overrides) were terrible examples to follow. 12:53, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * I made no edit to Templar. It didn't need it. As this shows (setting it to look at (main) might be necessary due to intervening non-mainspace edits), I edited Superhero, Crown of Supremacy, Paladin, Aurora and the six BoL overrides to match the others, along with Superior.


 * I wasn't aware until today that the Superior outfit was still a reward for the week-long HiScores events. I thought it had been removed from them when it was made a reward for 30 (now 25) challenges completed. My main focus on the Super September page is on the main challenges table, and any guides made to help people do the challenges, not on the rewards sections. 13:14, September 13, 2013 (UTC)

Verbatim quotes from Jagex sources
Please do not just copy-paste whole sections from Jagex sources to use in mainspace articles. The only place where that is allowed is the Update namespace. 20:01, January 23, 2014 (UTC)

Removing messages from your talk page
Good to see a former editor back - however, the wiki has a policy of not removing discussions from talk pages. If you'd like to clear your talk page, you'll need to place the old text on a subpage (like User talk:RSArx/Archive 1) and then link to it on this page. -- 19:51, September 28, 2017 (UTC)