Forum:Part I / Part II images

So I was having a think about the lack of using Part II images to represent characters. I am aware that there isn't much need in using a Shippuden image to represent certain characters since they are similar, but since we have the ability to tabulate the images in the infobox, why can't we add two images for each character if they have two different appearance looks in the series ? For example, Kabuto is the same up until he absorb Orochimaru, so both the "Normal" and "Orochi-absorption" images could be shown in the infobox. Plus, from time to time, someone always comes along and complains that we're not using images from both series. Discuss below. --Speysider Talk Page 18:38, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
I like the idea. A Part I and Part II tab for character that have appeared in both isn't a bad idea at all. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 01:02, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * I too favor the idea. You've got my vote. Senju_Symbol.svgKotoSenju (OldUser:JaZZBaND)-Talk-Contributions 04:28, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * The idea isn't that bad, all we need is images with good quality, no black backgrounds and fit the characters perfectly without any contradictions between anime and manga depictions.  http://i1283.photobucket.com/albums/a553/anaspet06/Shakhmootssign_zps2a261e68.png  (Contact) 09:00, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree too -- ROOT 根 09:41, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * @Shakhmoot: There should be quite a few that hopefully can be used :)
 * Glad the idea is good! :) --Speysider Talk Page 09:50, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * I have a concern about this. First of all, Kabuto reverted to his normal self in the end, so that was only temporary. Second, if we do let this happen, I think it's only a matter of time before the infoboxes end up cluttered with numerous representations of characters through the franchise. We already use manga and anime ones for the characters whose anime depiction have some differences. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 19:16, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Why would the infoboxes be "cluttered with numerous representations of characters" ? All we'd need to do is define in the policy that only two character images are permitted if the characters appears in both Part I and Part II. I can understand the reasoning behind the "only one image to be used" when the policy was made but since infoboxes can have tabbed images, I can't see any reason why not. Plus, people will just keep complaining about it. And as I said, it would only be for characters who actually appeared in both and had different appearances, so characters like Orochimaru, Tsunade and Jiraiya won't count because their appearance is the same throughout the series. Kabuto's was an example to better explain what I meant. --Speysider Talk Page 19:29, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe Omnibender is concerned this will lead to a case where (for example) Obito has five images: young Obito, orange mask, purple mask, manga adult Obito because anime adult Obito got it wrong, anime adult Obito but with wrinkles in the wrong direction.
 * Maybe just a limit on the number of images per infobox, and then what those images are of is determined case by case. ~SnapperTo 00:09, August 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty certain the Infobox cannot hold that many images anyway or it would stretch right out of range, not even sure the tabulation allows more than two images anyway. Obito is a poor example, since he already has two images. And wouldn't need further. Naruto could be a good example, as is Sakura and Sasuke who have changed significantly between the time skip. However, i do agree on the discussion if there are many images available. --Speysider Talk Page 01:18 August 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Handles five without adverse effects. ~SnapperTo 00:29, August 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * I can understand the concern but... we're just suggesting Part I and Part II images. Meaning if the character appeared in Part I and Part II, we'd place the generalized image of them in Part I in the infobox and a generalized image of them in Part II for the infobox. In the case of Obito, he appears in a flashback in Part I as a child, and then, we can put up an anime version of him unmasked when it debuts (unless someone is absolutely anal about using a masked picture, and then we'll use that instead). Either way, we never put transformations (like Obito's Jinchūriki state) in the infobox, and there would still be a great number of characters with only one image in theirs, and those that do appear in both would only have two. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 00:43, August 12, 2013 (UTC)

The One piece wiki has pre and post time skip pictures as well as anime and manga ones in the info box and it is far from cluttered.--Kotoamatsukami (talk) 01:07, August 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * But we're not One Piece Wiki, nor do we want that many infobox images. Simply a Part I and Part II image would suffice. The rest of the differences can be noted in the Appearance section. That's what its for. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 01:35, August 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * What Ten Tailed Fox said. --Speysider Talk Page 09:10, August 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's evident by it saying 'Narutopedia' in the top left corner. The point is it doesn't cause a problem of cluttering the info box up. It should only show differences in the anime and manga if they a significant, just like how it should for the many characters that have significantly changed over the time skip. --Kotoamatsukami (talk) 22:04, August 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * That would be helpful if the appearance section didn't already note the differences between the anime and manga as well as the change in appearance/clothing. A part I and part II picture in the infobox should easily be enough. Any character who have a large amount of changes (mainly Obito) can have pictures up in the appearance and story sections. Joshbl56  22:58, August 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Anyone else want to input? Good idea, Speysider. That will definitely be an improvement. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 00:31, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * @Kotoamatsukami: I have no idea what you are trying to say in that message, please clarify. In some pages, the appearance section has a lot of images, several that are candidates for being used in the infobox instead to represent the character in their respective appearance. Appearance should only show pictures displaying extensive changes to a person (eg Naruto gaining NTCM changing his whole outward appearance), not minor changes (eg Obito changing his mask from the orange one to a specialised war version): pictures showing minor changes are prime candidates for choosing to go into the infobox instead to save room. --Speysider Talk Page 10:58, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

What about the ones where we do use Manga and Anime images? Do we now pick one over the other?--TheUltimate3 (talk) 02:56, August 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I personally like the idea of using anime pictures because they're colored and most other pictures we have are already anime images. The only time I think we should use manga pics are when we have to show them in a certain form/mode (Minato in NTCM) and if they're colored. Using black and white images for the main infobox image seems like a waste if there are better images out there to choose from. Joshbl56  03:14, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * I believe we should, Ulti-sama. Anime should be used if its available. We could mention anime differences either in the appearance section, or in the Appearance section, so its not like the differences would be left out. And, in most cases, the differences aren't that extreme to begin with. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 03:50, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * TBH, I'm not entirely sure why manga images are being used in conjunction with anime images in some character infoboxes, other than the fact that another user decided we should without any valid reason. If an anime image of a character is available, it should always be used in the infobox, not both anime AND manga. As TTF said, the differences can be mentioned in the article itself. --Speysider Talk Page 14:18, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * I ask at all because in the past, things got incredibly stupid when discussion over which to use came up. On the one hand, colored manga images were considered more canon than anime images because those are what Kishimoto colored. But at the same time most of the difference between the two are negligible and a anime profile picture is the more the more standard one to use.
 * I personally would like to just use anime images, they are easier to obtain and things can remain consistant for all characters (We have a colored manga image of Naruto, but say Biwako Sarutobi uses a manga image).--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 14:58, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * I remember those discussions somewhat, honestly if the anime depicts a character, then the anime version should be used, regardless if it's not the "exact" same depiction (eg the hair colour is different, not even remotely valid in an argument). As you said, the differences between anime and manga are so small, they're negligible. So yeah, I agree with your idea to just use anime images in the infobox. If there is a huge discrepancy, mention them in the article, not the infobox. --Speysider Talk Page 15:06, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

How about using only manga images for characters who have good, coloured ones? For example, the Kage bodyguards all have great images thanks to chapter 489's cover. Jinchuuriki, too. What can be better than those? The angles are right, the colours are bright and pretty, they are just perfect for all purposes! Manga *is* the primary source, after all. Besides.. I know not many people (sadly) care, but some anime depictions are seriously plain ugly. --kiadony --talk to me-- 17:20, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Let's not. It has been customary all the time to replace manga images with their anime counterpart when they are available, just because a few characters have a different hair colour in the anime to the manga does not then mean the manga trumps the anime 50x over. As mentioned before, several people express annoyance for the random usage of anime/manga images for character infoboxes because it's not consistent. We either use ALL manga images or ALL anime images. Considering there are a LOT of pages for anime/movie only characters, it would just look weird. Keeping to all anime is better and prevents arguments (I can probably safely say 80-90% of the people who come here watch the anime and don't read the manga ;)) --Speysider Talk Page 17:24, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Agreed with both Spey and Ulti-sama. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 18:19, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * 80% of statistics are made up by the way. Also Clarification: Unless someone went in and changed the policy, it states that anime images are preferred unless a manga colored page is not available and doesn't break the visual flow of the page.
 * So yeah. --TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 21:50, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

So, is there anymore to be discussed? ~ Ten Tailed Fox 05:38, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * Don't think so. Most people here seem to be in agreement with the proposal. Cerez hasn't responded here yet though, would be good to hear from him on this matter (imo) --Speysider Talk Page 11:46, August 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * I still think setting a number of allowable images would be easier. Then people can have their manga images if they want them. ~SnapperTo 18:29, August 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * If you actually read the original proposal, I already stated ONE image for their appearance in Part I and ONE image for their appearance in Part II. Also pointed out by TTF, the anime is preferred over manga, unless an anime version isn't available. --Speysider Talk Page 18:32, August 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of what the proposal is, thank you. I am suggesting that the proposal would be better if it were something else. ~SnapperTo 18:37, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Though I don't think it's necessary, I wouldn't have a problem with having images of persons in Part I and Part II if the change is significant like the Knoha 11 growing up or Inari's appearance etc. This discussion, however, has no bearing on keeping manga images in infoboxes (like Konan, the Kage or Kō for example) or anything else like that. Should a conflict arise, we discuss before making a move. To be frank, our infoboxes are already too loaded so we should try not to overburden them even more: the article doesn't stop at the infobox essentially. For Obito and the revision shown, is that an example of what we would be doing, or just demonstrating the ability to have all of them? There's currently a Narutopedia (different language) that represents images of persons full appearance in the infobox and even another which has them as edo tensei or how they look during the war; is this something we'd also be doing as well?

Also, how can an anime image be preferred to a manga one? You guys remember that anime is an adaptation/interpretation of Kishimoto's work and not the other way around right? If he had no intention of Konan having amber-coloured lamp eyes or A and B having yellow hair, why would we ever perpetrate that as true when we're able to show the right thing? I keep finding that we constantly keep conceding on decisions that were made in past because people've forgotten the main reason why we (well SimAnt) had the infoboxes tabbed in the first place.--Cerez 365 ™(talk) 18:50, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not entirely sure how this discussion ended up at "anime vs manga in the infobox image" tbh.
 * That revision was only to refer to my point previously where I had stated that loads of tabulated images would break the layout, it was not intended to indicate that tons of images would be used.
 * The image policy states that anime is preferred over manga. Some people are just anal over the colouring of someone's hair or eyes (which really does not change anything whatsoever) and decided the manga has to be put in, just because someone's hair is a different colour.
 * The proposal is that if they appeared in both Part I and Part II, an image from both series should be used (as most characters have some sort of change to their appearance), but some characters wouldn't need that because their appearance hasn't changed at all (Tsunade for example).
 * Hope that clears up stuff. The "anime vs manga" debate is irrelevant here and I don't know why it was mentioned, it doesn't have anything to do with this proposal and should be taken up in its own thread. --Speysider Talk Page 18:55, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * I haven't forgotten anything Cerez. In fact I mentioned the whole "manga v anime" in my first comment here. I just want consistency.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 19:13, August 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * And it is unfortunately relevant Speysider because at the end of the day that is what this entire discussion is based on. You want anime images in the infobox? Why? Ok fair enough, what about a colored manga image? Which one is more canon (the manga one obviously) which one works with the page more? (the anime one, as it is in color and more likely than not, so will most of the other images). Even if we came up with a decision of Part I and Part II tabs, the underlining issue of why we even have tabs in the first place comes back.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 19:16, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * No more discussion to be had on this then ? If that's the case, then the majority say yes to this proposal. --Speysider Talk Page 11:42, August 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * It would be wise to make a recap of what the proposal is, because from what I remembered, everything went all over the place.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 11:44, August 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Proposal is to have Part I / Part II images of characters if there is a significant change between both parts in the infobox. Also, a discussion needs to occur on the talkpages for those characters who seem to have an anime and manga image, when the anime image is more than satisfactory to use. --Speysider Talk Page 11:47, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

(reset indent)If there's no further opinions regarding this, we might as well go to appropriate talkpages and start discussing images based on this topic. --Speysider Talk Page 18:50, August 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * Did we ever figure out what we were going to do about that whole, Manga/Anime issue or are we just gonna ignore it until the problem presents itself like I planed on?--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 19:27, August 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently not as nobody else has been posting in this discussion topic regarding the issue. The overall consensus appears to be to bring up discussions on the appropriate talkpages regarding the images aforemented in this discussion. If anyone else wants to drop an opinion in about this, please do so asap. --Speysider Talk Page 19:30, August 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * You know where I stand on this. Part I and Part II images for all characters that have had changes, with a preference towards the anime picture. Differences between media can be mentioned in both the appearance and trivia sections. And given that we now have had another on the Image Policy talk page, asking for the infoboxes to display Part I and II images, I think that's the best route to go. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 08:25, August 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * (Y). I agree with your idea. The changes can be mentioned in the article. --Speysider Talk Page 08:35, August 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * I suggest we also standardize what the captions/headers of the images should be. As for changing how manga works in the infobox, it should stay the same until it is discussed disputing reasons using in the previous decision in a new forum. — S im A nt 12:43, August 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree on standardising the image tabs, maybe "Part 1" and "Shippuden" ?
 * Most of the pages using anime and manga images are only because there was a slight difference in colour, there really isn't anything to discuss there. --Speysider Talk Page 13:59, August 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Part I and Part II would suffice. Easier to type.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 14:06, August 28, 2013 (UTC)