Narutopedia talk:Image policy

Episode Preview images
So there was recently an image added to the Sasuke Uchiha article that depicted Sasuke's EMS closer up. However, this image came from an episode preview of an episode that wasn't released or even created at the time of the upload. As of today, that image is now fanon, because the scene it showed did not appear at all in Episode 331, which is the episode preview depicted in Episode 330. As a result, I have removed that image from the article and replaced it with the previous image. The purpose of this discussion is to discuss whether it should be added to the policy "Do not upload images from episode previews, they are technically fanon and therefore not permitted here. The reason they're considered fanon is because they can depict scenes that will then never be shown verbatim in the episode they're previewing". Thanks. Also, no arguments, no high and mighty behaviour, be civil. --Speysider Talk Page 17:52, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * An image produced by the anime, even if it's an image that is not used, cannot be "fanon". ~SnapperTo 17:57, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Even if it's produced by the anime, if it's in the episode previews, it's not canon until it's shown in the episode it's referring to. Whenever Sasuke used his EMS in Episode 331, it included his Susanoo, which the episode 331 preview at the end of episode 330 did not show. I'm not saying it's pure fanon, but it's kinda fanon because it's incorrect depiction. It's like as if someone had leaked the next episode on the internet which wasn't actually released and started taking screen grabs from that leaked episode to here: until an episode is officially released, it's fanon, just like how it is with manga if it's leaked early. --Speysider Talk Page 18:05, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Early manga information isn't permitted because the information can't be corroborated until the chapter is fully released. The anime, being a few years behind the manga, cannot have that problem.
 * It is not "fanon", it is not "incorrect", it is "promotional". ~SnapperTo 18:09, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's a sort of "filler" which technically makes it non-canon anyway. The point of this discussion is whether we should permit uploading of images from the episode previews, my stance is that we should just simply wait until the anime directors release each episode, rather than using images from episode previews. --Speysider Talk Page 18:21, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Is this the image we're talking about? Isn't this simply a cropped version of whatever scene in the episode that did show Sasuke's eye? Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:24, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes and no. That image was cropped from an episode preview shown at the end of Episode 330 (the preview showing Episode 331) and that particular scene didn't even exist in the actual Episode 331. I watched Episode 331 and every scene depicting Sasuke using his EMS either showed just one eye at a far distance or both eyes with the Susanoo surrounding it. --Speysider Talk Page 18:26, September 19, 2013 (UTC)

So that image did not appear in the anime then. Interesting inclusion in the preview then. Anyway, this does make me want to ask a question: If we cannot use anime preview for images where they are appropriate, then why can we use fanbook images? I mean I'm sure I'll find the answer backass and illogical, but I'm still curious.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 18:32, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you referring to the fanbooks that were for the original Naruto ? I believe those were the original Databooks before the "X no Sho" versions for Shippuden. --Speysider Talk Page 18:33, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Artbooks, fanbooks, databooks. Anything that does not appear in the manga proper. I am curious why those images, which are officially released yet not in the manga proper are allowed and we must have this discussion about the anime.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 18:35, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe it's because they were made by Kishi-sensei himself ? Could be wrong though. The anime, on the other hand, is an interpretation of what Kishi wrote, which makes it possible for errors to appear in the anime that didn't exist in the manga (like, X person had an earring in the manga but X wasn't depicted with that said earring in the anime) --Speysider Talk Page 18:36, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's lovely but that doesn't negate the fact that until it appears in the manga proper it is still technically not valid. And citing potential anime mistakes ignores that Kishimoto makes his own mistakes all the time, yet he gets a pass while we must have long drawn out discussion on every anime mistake.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 18:47, September 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * I mean I know I'm barking up a tree here and nothing I say will change the outcome. But it just seems to me that we're going to go with "Hey let's not use this good image for no other reason than it doesn't come from the anime/manga proper and to hell if it still comes from an official source."
 * And that's the last I will say about this subject as I do not wish to go into a pointless back and forth over it.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 19:04, September 19, 2013 (UTC)

I'm hard pressed to find a reason this even matters. Like, at all. I admit, I was peeved about the use of the baby bijū from the omake song being mistakenly put in the "Background" section, replacing a perfectly decent anime rendition of manga events, but this is completely different. In fact, the preview image looks more like the actual manga rendition than the episode's does. Really, at this point, I think we should really stop being so anal. Some of these conversations are starting to channel the negativity of the Bleach Wiki and its pissing me off. It comes from the anime. Whether its a preview or not, I could really care less. In fact, I believe most people couldn't give a flying flip where its coming from, so long as its not from some fan artist. It came from the anime, its okay to use.

While I'm on that thought, why should we care if the preview image doesn't appear in the episode being previewed? How does that make it fanon? Furthermore, can some explain to me why these images being "filler" matters at all? Guess we should just scrap filler images for all filler material because they're "technically" not canon, as Kishimoto didn't draw them, and wash our hands of that completely. No. No, no, no, no, no.

I think this is one of those times where we need to make clear that these policies aren't the Constitution of the United States. On most wikis, and actually as suggested by Wikia itself, policies are guidelines that are meant to be followed until they start to defeat the purpose they were originally created for. The image policy is meant to spell out how to add images to avoid infringing copyright as best we can, and also to prevent the uploading of fan art. It is not meant to restrict people to a certain image resolution, or which part of the anime they are and aren't allowed to take pictures from.

Spey, I get that you are trying to do your best to make sure the policies are followed, but, I'm gonna be honest with you man; lately, it seems that whenever someone doesn't cross their T's and dot their I's exactly as is laid out in the policies, they should be burned at the stake. And if that doesn't work, arguments start on the policy pages. That's not what policies are intended for. I see no harm in the Sasuke EMS picture. I actually like it a lot and think it makes a fine addition to the article. That's all I'll say on this matter. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 03:34, September 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well I looked at the episode, the supposed scene in the episode preview didn't occur. There were shots of the EMS in 331 but they weren't the exact same shot the episode preview used. In reference to that EMS closeup, if someone is so desperate to have it as a closeup, then someone just needs to get a high quality screen grab of that scene in the episode 331 itself, not an episode preview which technically depicts a non-existent scene. Plus, the original image that was there (Sasuke's EMS.png) was actually in much better quality than that closeup shot, just sayin'. Regarding the policy, I'm not trying to burn people at stakes, but there has been a lot of arguing and people being very aggressive over changes because whatever contribution they made didn't get used, which is ridiculous and it's why I'm trying to make the policies be specific so there can't be any more of these stupid petty arguments. Simple. --Speysider Talk Page 06:53, September 20, 2013 (UTC)

Addition
If someone could do so, please add something to the "filename" part under the notes at the top, something along the lines of: "Please ensure the file names are kept short and don't break into two or more lines on the file page, as they will be renamed". I would add it myself, but ... you know ... --Speysider Talk Page 17:19, June 7, 2014 (UTC)

Loophole
The image policy has a fatal loophole concerning Dojutsu and other svg related user made images.

Thing is, those images did not come from official sources, they came from internet artists and were uploaded on the basis of providing examples.

However, there is no policy regarding this specific type of image and there is no standard format for them either given that each came from a different artists with different styles.

I suggest we create a standard for those expository images also used for templates because I received an unwarranted and unjustified violation warning simply for trying to upload self-made standard version of them when they doesn't even fall under the current image policy.

In a nutshell, if we are going to use unofficial sources to create svg templates then other unoffical sources should have the right to modify them provided they follow a standard set by the community.World Master (talk) 19:50, June 30, 2014 (UTC)


 * The warning you received was for uploading an entire scanlated manga page, not the replacing svg images. The svg images appear (?) to have been reverted out of preference and not an existing/non-existing policy. ~SnapperTo 23:27, June 30, 2014 (UTC)