User talk:Gooseta

From Camera-wiki.org
Jump to: navigation, search
This is the discussion page for Gooseta. Click here to start a new topic.


Discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the article itself, not for discussions about the subject of the article.


Welcome to Camera-Wiki.org!

Thanks for creating an account here on Camera-Wiki.org! We appreciate your willingness to help us create the most comprehensive camera and photography encyclopedia on the web. Camera-Wiki.org is a big website, so we'd like to offer a few quick pointers to help get you started.

First off, please let us know you're real - there are lots of spambots out there who like to create accounts and post spam. All you need to do is let us know you're a real human who's interested in cameras by clicking the "Edit" tab above and writing a short "hello, I'm a camera geek not a spambot!" message to us.

You also have a profile page that you can edit to tell us more about yourself if you'd like. It's purely optional but it's always nice to get to know another camera lover.

This website uses software called Mediawiki that's also used by WikiPedia. If you already know how to use and edit WikiPedia, you'll feel right at home here. If not, we have special page where you can learn to edit, called the Sandbox. It's a place where you try things out and experiment with no worries of breaking anything.

Where to find answers:

Where to ask questions:

How you can help:



Botscura (talk) 15:38, 10 July 2013 (PDT)

Template/Infobox

Hi Gooseta and welcome to Camera-Wiki! I noticed your query about creating an infobox template. This has come up multiple time in the past but we've never found a fully satisfactory answer. The problem is that most of the proposed templates are inadequate for the wide range of cameras we cover - remember that some are film, others digital; some have interchangeable lenses, and other fixed lenses; some have apertures, others not; etc. The other problem is that a lot of the camera specifications don't fit easily into a narrow vertical infobox. The preference so far for readability reasons has been to create a Specifications section within the article itself and we've created templates that have worked out well for lenses using this model (for example see the Vivitar Series 1 70-210 page for an example of the specifications template in use).

One proposal regarding camera specifications was a specifications section made from two templates; one that had the fields common to all types of cameras and a second template that was specific to the type of camera. So, for a Nikon D800, you'd drop in the common template + a DSLR template, but for a Nikon S4 you'd drop in the common template + a Rangefinder template. And the two templates together would make up the specifications section. No one has gotten around to doing the work involved to develop a prototype for this yet and you're welcome to work on it and pose some ideas. In general there are a lot of inconsistencies in Camera-Wiki and we hope over time to settle on good template layouts and converge all the articles toward some better standards. A good starting point would be to take a look at the Camera types article to get an idea for the differences and similarities any kind of template system would need to deal with.

Steevithak (talk) 15:52, 10 July 2013 (PDT)


Hello and welcome, Gooseta!

In fact, we already have several infobox templates; see Category:Infobox_templates. I will confess that I'm not that fond of them, mostly for one of the reasons Steve said; you end up with a 1930s folding camera with infobox entries like 'Autofocus: no'. If infoboxes work for you, go ahead and use them though; it's a collective project. I'd think hard about what kind of camera your box is going to apply to, and look at what people have done before in exisiting articles in that class. Some of the other editors may have something to say about whatever you produce (especially if you propose to replace what they wrote!) so it may be a good idea to roll out one or two examples, and invite feedback on the article's Talk page before spreading it too far. I love the diversity of styles across the wiki, and I'd hate this to be replaced with a uniform style. You can always tell when you're reading (for example) one of rebollo_fr's articles. Mine tend to be mostly longhand text, with at most a bullet-list as a concession to efficiency.

Cheers! --Dustin McAmera (talk) 16:44, 10 July 2013 (PDT)


Dustin McAmera, I agree we wouldn't want to have complete uniformity. I would like to see enough uniformity that visitors could easily find what they're looking for (e.g. common section names, similar page layouts), but I'm fine with the unique feel that each editor brings to the content. We'll eventually need to work on improving our mobile functionality for phones and tablets and having uniform section names for each article type will be crucial for rending the pages for mobile devices.

Gooseta, you may want to check out some of the past attempts at infoboxes. Most of these were only used a few times and then abandoned. I don't even used the one I created anymore. :)

Steevithak (talk) 09:25, 11 July 2013 (PDT)

Image size

Also, just a quick note on image size. For compatibility with the largest range of displays, it's best to avoid using very large images. Generally we recommend using images no larger than 500px to 600px for the primary images and thumbnails should be the 240px wide size. Remember that because they're hosted on Flickr, the user can click through to enlarge the image to any size desired. There are plenty of inconsistencies here too but take a look at some of the newer, non-stub articles to get a good idea. The Vivitar IC 101 Panorama is a good example or check the articles we tweet each Wednesday as they tend to be newer, higher quality articles. Steevithak (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2013 (PDT)

need photos

why did you remove the 'need photo' tag at the Canon EOS kiss redirect (Canon EOS 500) page? The page does not have a camera photo marked eos kiss.--Tkmedia (talk) 07:51, 11 July 2013 (PDT)

I know it's the same, just so it is a bit more complete. Not in this case, but sometimes the camera has additional features for other regions, date / data back, panoramic, flash. Same reason I prefer to have photos of both chrome and black cameras if both exist. On redirect, because it's the only way to have it listed in the Need Photos category page.--Tkmedia (talk) 17:37, 11 July 2013 (PDT)

Editing

Please be sure to include a summary of your edit so that admins can understand what you're doing more easily. And please be very careful if you edit a template as these can affect many articles on the site. I reverted some edits to the NeedPhotos template due to a "template loop" error the changes were causing on pages that rely on the template. Steevithak (talk) 11:27, 12 July 2013 (PDT)