User talk:Werthead

Thoros of Myr
http://eternal0aranel.tumblr.com/post/26434603378/thoros-of-myr-cast

I don't know what to make of it. It's not what he looks like in my head.--Mesmermann 23:28, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Check this out: http://twitter.com/asimaahmad/status/220103162240053248  Curiouser and curiouser.--The Dragon Demands 23:44, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Comic-Con
Greetings! You may already know, but GOT will be involved with Comic-Con this year. Wikia will have a physical presence at the 'Con once again, and we've created this badge:

to remind users of this, and provide them with a link to Comic-Con Wiki. There, we will be updating live for the duration of the event with images, info, and exclusives for those users who are unable to be there in person. Would you be willing to allow this badge on the main page here (hopefully at the top of the right column) until the conclusion of the event? Please hit me up on my TALK PAGE and let me know either way so I can add it, or make a note that you've declined affiliation. You're welcome to add it yourself using the code above, but please drop me a note as well so I can track which wikis are participating. Thank you for your time! :)
 * http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o297/SCOTIMUS76/siggy4.png (profile)•(talk)•(email) 00:55, July 6, 2012 (UTC)


 * I've added this as it might get us more traffic and doesn't harm the site in any way.--Opark 77 13:41, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

Religion articles
Please weigh in on this discussion, Ser: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Great_Stallion#Content. I've been rounding out the religion articles. Should we have separate articles for "The Seven" and "Faith of the Lord of Light", or follow AWOIAF's convention of "Faith of the Seven" (used as an actual term in thee books), and "Lord of Light"? (because "Faith of the Lord of Light" isn't an actual phrase they use). I'm in favor of treating "Great Stallion", "Drowned God", etc. as the de facto main pages for "Dothraki religion" and "Ironborn religion", given the vast amount of overlap that would result (seriously, how much do we have to say about the specific legends and antics of the Drowned God? He fights with the Storm God.  That isn't useful for a whole page....wikis are not paper, but we have to think of ease of navigation (I also made a new Religion navigation template including these names).  Please weigh in.--The Dragon Demands 00:06, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

Map images
Great job on the map images, they are a big improvement to the location articles and very welcome. You're continued effort on them is very much appreciated.--Opark 77 20:59, July 8, 2012 (UTC)

Computer game info
Should we make any notes regarding the computer games at all? I thought they were unrelated to the TV series. http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Blackwater_Rush?diff=51819&oldid=39203 --The Dragon Demands 01:53, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

Casting
Any chance you can come on chat so we can co-ordinate writing articles for new cast members?--Opark 77 22:28, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

Apostrophes
Why do you keep using apostrophes as full quotation marks? This should only be done in the case of a quote within a quote. This wiki conforms to standard American English, and unlike British English, regular quotations must be made only with full quotation marks. I've been fixing these whenever I see them. --The Dragon Demands (talk) 00:14, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Ironborn
My apologies, I didn't realize that lowercase "ironborn" was standard; I got it bacwards and thought it was capitalized. I will now enforce the proper lowercase convention.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 00:14, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Stormlands map image
The Stormlands map image needs some adjustment, http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/File_talk:The_Stormlands.png --The Dragon Demands (talk) 17:25, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

Images
I'm still finding problematic images from you, including the latest two from today. Please could you take a look at our image policy. For each image that we use we need to ensure that we have the following information on the image page, all of which should be added by the uploader at the point of upload:
 * 1) The source (naming the video clip or episode for screenshots and providing a URL for images from other websites)
 * 2) A description (state what the image shows)
 * 3) A licensing tag ( for screenshots)
 * 4) Appropriate categories (e.g. Category: Image (Valar Morghulis) and Category: Image (Character) for screenshots of characters from "Valar Morghulis", to add categories type )

Please add this information yourself to images that you upload. If you fail to do so I will let you know and nominate the image in question for deletion. I will then review it 1 week later and will be happy if you have added the required information so we can keep it, otherwise I will have to delete it. If you need assistance adding the required information just let me know and I will do my best to help.

I highly recommend working from a template when uploading images. Personally I always copy and paste this for screenshots:

==Summary==

This image is a screencap from "EPISODE." The image is copyrighted by HBO. This image is used with the permission of HBO but on the understanding that it can be removed at any time. The image shows DESCRIPTION.

==Licensing==

Then I only need to fill in the name of the episode and a brief description. For images from other websites I use this:

==Summary==

This is a promotion image of DESCRIPTION from [URL WEBSITE].

==Licensing==

Then I only need to fill in a description, the source and choose a category e.g. Category:Image (Actor).

I've just been through the last months worth of uploaded images. You are still not adding a description or a source to the majority of your uploads. I have tagged the ones I cannot fix on my own for deletion, please can you sort them out. The latest two today don't have licensing tags either.

Please can you say where you get an image from - we can't claim we are making fair use of an image unless we establish that we know who the copyright holder is. Please can you give a URL if they come from another website.

Please can you state what your images show - this allows someone who is not familiar with the content to read the description and work out who or what is in the image, this is especially useful to editors when they are working with galleries and writing captions for images that they did not upload.

I've been asking you to follow the image policy for several months now, I am starting to feel really discouraged by seemingly being ignored. I have archived your talk page in case you have been missing my messages because they are not at the bottom of your talk page.--Opark 77 (talk) 15:51, July 23, 2012 (UTC)

As I said, I was concerned that you have not been reading my messages and that is born out by your suggestion that I last contacted you about this in May.
 * Here are my edits on June 14.
 * Here are my edits from last night.

I am upset that you think I am not showing good form. I think it is reasonable to offer to work with uploaders to add the required information themselves. I have found that I am spending upwards of 8 hours of editing time every month working on our images. I initially tried to do everything myself. I found that it was such a drain on my time resources that I was not contributing what I wanted to the wiki, and was not enjoying the time I volunteered here. With the aim of spending less time working on the site's images I came up with the idea that I would do it for an editor the first time they got it wrong and then show them what I had done so they could replicate that next time. I would then expect them to be able to follow the policy but would be open to helping them if they did not understand what to do.

Where I know that I have made an editor aware of the policy, they have not responded to my message and they are continuing to break the policy then I threaten deletion of their images. Yes I am able to correct some of these images but I do not think it is right for this wiki to rely solely on my time to get the images in the state we want them. I am happy to be the lead editor in curating our images. I am happy to spend more time on it than anyone else does. However, I do want the rest of the community here to try to work with me. I have tried a softly softly approach and have been ignored. I am now trying to be more assertive about images to protect my limited time resources. I can do everything here, but I don't have time to. It is not fair of you to place expectations on me to handle all of our image issues when I am a volunteer just like anyone.

I have been open and polite in my messages. I have invited people to come back to me for help if they need it. I am saying this is wrong and you got it wrong so the onus is on you to fix it. I am happy to help you to fix it. If you are not willing to put the effort into getting it right then I am afraid we can not use it. I don't think that is bad form. I think it is a fair and reasonable way of ensuring a decent standard of image uploading from our contributors while leaving me with enough time to contribute to other areas of the wiki. Have you got a better way of handling this?--Opark 77 (talk) 17:15, July 23, 2012 (UTC)

You can check the history of your talk page to see who edited it and when. That way you don't need to re-read anything and can see exactly what was added. I didn't realise that you weren't aware of this functionality. I regret that my messages failed to reach you. I avoided adding them to the foot of the page because repeating the same header more than once in an article breaks the section linking. In future I will try to be inventive with my topic names so that things go to the foot of your talk page.

That aside I would still appreciate a response about how you would like to handle image policy violations in future. Have you got an alternate approach? Do you still think I was showing bad form?--Opark 77 (talk) 21:30, July 23, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words about my contributions.

I don't think it is appropriate or fair to call the Image Policy at present Draconian. It is not prescribing death for any who violate it, it merely asks the uploader to provide four simple pieces of information about the image they are adding. My approach to enforcing the policy is to point out where people have failed to meet these simple requirements, offer help and a one week window to correct them, and then to delete the image if it is still not up to our standard.

I also disagree with your characterisation of requiring four bits of information as constituting a "lengthy form". If you use the cut and paste templates that I have taken the time to provide then it is even less information, because the licensing tag is already in place for you.

Parts of the image policy originated with you. It was you who wrote that you wanted to avoid uploading duplicate images to the wiki. In order to weed out duplicate images it is necessary to appropriately categorize and name the images we have so that they can easily be compared to one another. I have spent hours going through our images to weed out duplicates and to ensure that they are correctly categorized because you asked that we avoid duplicates. Having reached a high standard of image use because of the efforts of myself and others, I think it behooves us as a wiki to have an image policy that maintains that standard, rather than allowing poor (or no) categorization and random image names to eradicate the hard work that has been done.

I am taking sole responsibility for policing the simple image policy that I modified. However, I don't believe that policing the image policy translates into me being left to do all the work on every image that fails to meet the requirements of the policy. I think it should be enough that I rigorously check every image that is uploaded and then enter a dialogue with the uploader where they have failed to meet the requirements of the policy, explaining where they have failed and what they need to do to correct it. If the uploader is not willing to spend further time getting their images up to the standard we require then I think it is reasonable for me to also spend no further time on that image, and to remove it for failing to meet our simple, four piece of information minimum. Nothing deleted from a wiki is ever truly gone, we have a deletion log and anyone with admin rights can restore deleted images where the uploader comes back with good reason to do so.

I am not saying that I don't have time to police the policy. I am saying that I am at the limit of the time I have and therefore will not spend time policing the policy and then doing all the work to correct any violations of the policy. I am happy to go on patrolling new images and discussing images that fail to meet our requirements with the uploader. I object to being told that doing so is bad form. I think I am being reasonable and fair in my approach. Once again I am asking if you have an alternative approach that you would like me to follow?

If you disagree with the image policy then by all means we should start a wider discussion about it. I think the onus is on you to do that because you are the one objecting to it.--Opark 77 (talk) 10:44, July 29, 2012 (UTC)