Talk:Portal:Miniatures

Hello,

So I "think" I finalized a major clean up of this section over a period of 3 months. I'll write down the philosophy of it and its benefits.

• This type of gallery presentation of all the 40k miniatures doesn't exist anywhere else (to my knowledge) on the web, and should be preserved.
• Prior to working on it [2022] , this section had rather bad press on the web (Reddit, dakka,bolter...), with people criticizing the unreliability of it and otherwise advising people not to trust it, which was counter-intuitive to the lexicanum being the major referencing wiki about 40k in general, but not about the miniatures.

The tools used were 

• • white dwarf magazines to source releases and find oldhammer pictures
  • catalogues/collector's guides to identify the range of miniatures trough time
  • Codexes and rulebooks for some outliers, altho those are rather unreliable to source release dates, and they also contain a healthy dose of misleading conversions

Design principles I applied 

• Separating specialist games and Horus Heresy from the 40k minis, in order to make the editor experience easier, and the user experience better.
• Only leaving officially released kits/blisters. That leaves out conversions, kitbashes, different paintjobs for the same model/unit... Basically anything that is redundant, or tricks the reader into thinking that a "conversion" was released
• Adding a "context" subtitle in the form of
  • a Codex release when available
  • the year of release when there was no event
    • And the month when there might be contentious about it (for example, a unit appears in a codex in year X, but was first seen in a white dwarf during Year X-1)
• Correct or update the source/the description when updating/moving any image
  • Correct and update the pages where said images are used for consistant trough the wiki
• Archive the webstore and Warhammer community pages. Every time. To this end downloading the webarchive add-on/pluggin (chromium browsers) helps ALOT.

Images

• Square images are the best solution for consistency trough the wiki, and works better with the "packed" gallery mode
• Cropping is good. Excessive cropping is bad.
  • The base should be entirely visible (except for aircrafts)
  • A model should be given some room to breath : A few millimeters of nothing between the model and the image borders does alot for a better presentation

--Siegfriedfr (talk) 12:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Citations

I agree the citation footnote thing is fairly annoying, it should be at the top or bottom of the article if anything. really the only holdout on this is inquisitor-S, you should take it up with him Harriticus (talk) 14:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

the top would really destroy the convenience of the pages. i'll wait for him to join the discussion, i have one idea about that --Siegfriedfr (talk) 16:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Also the ^{[Needs Citation]} tag wouldn't be needed if people, you know, cited the images. :) KazilDarkeye (talk) 14:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

On a serious, not-nitpicking note though, I do appreciate the work you put into this.KazilDarkeye (talk) 14:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Page title formatting

One brief nitpick I have for now is that the Dark Angels miniatures page has a differently-formatted pagename by default compared to the others. That's slightly irritating. Some of the other miniatures pages also have this problem. KazilDarkeye (talk) 14:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

i noticed that at some point, User:Inquisitor S. reformatted most miniature pages' titles. since i don't know the how's and why's, it's best to ask him --Siegfriedfr (talk) 16:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)