Forum:Standard Rationale

It's become apparent there is no standard rationale. I propose that part of the standard should be this: Resolution = 240p Low Definition 360p Standard Definition 480p Standard Definition 720p High Definition 1080p High Definition

Replaceability = 240p: Only by an image with a resolution of 320×240 or greater and with the same license format 360p: Only by an image with a resolution of 640×360 or greater and with the same license format 480p: Only by an image with a resolution of 720×480 or greater and with the same license format 720p: Only by an image in Widescreen format (nothing less than 1280x720 accepted) and with the same license format 1080p Only by an image in Widescreen format (nothing less than 1920x1080 accepted) and with the same license format Of course, you could still use Low, Medium and High if you don't know what it fits under, but these are my recommendations for trying for a mainstream rationale. Discuss your suggestions below. However, do not use this topic to bash me or to bash my suggestions. --Speysider Talk Page 16:05, August 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Bump. --Speysider Talk Page 10:36, August 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * By the fact nobody is even responding here, I take it nobody cares about a standard rationale. --Speysider Talk Page 11:45, August 8, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, I agree with this, because some users do not know what to put there. ~IndxcvNovelist (talk 16:39, August 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * I find it laughable how everyone keeps going on and on and on about no standard rationale and I try to start a discussion on it and NOBODY BOTHERS TO WASTE THEIR TIME RESPONDING. That tells me a lot: that you don't want one. --Speysider Talk Page 09:58, August 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * Forgive me for having a job and not even knowing this was even a thing. Anyway you already know my opinion of the rational, keep it simple, Low, Medium, or High, and replacability: Only be an image of similar rational. Also very simple.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 10:04, August 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * This was posted exactly 2 weeks ago today, not one user except for IndxcvNovelist and yourself have replied. I bumped it a few times and it was ignored. --Speysider Talk Page 10:06, August 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * Bump. I hope others will post their opinions. ~IndxcvNovelist (talk 15:54, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea of having a standard rationale. Though we can have the replaceability part a bit simpler like"Only by a higher quality image with the same license format". -- 16:03, August 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * What do you mean, Salil? ~IndxcvNovelist (talk 16:07, August 18, 2012 (UTC)