Template talk:no-image - Revision history

75.5.176.233: /* Category for people looking to add images? */ Reply

75.5.176.233 — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 01:52:22 GMT

Category for people looking to add images?: Reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:52, 7 December 2008
Line 11:		Line 11:
	::::Does that even fit the scope of the category? I don't even think the post you replied to there was true. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		::::Does that even fit the scope of the category? I don't even think the post you replied to there was true. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
	:::::If you really think that picture's necessary, you can do this: <nowiki>[[Image:NoPhoto.PNG\|thumb\|Inside the rocket]]</nowiki> {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 01:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)		:::::If you really think that picture's necessary, you can do this: <nowiki>[[Image:NoPhoto.PNG\|thumb\|Inside the rocket]]</nowiki> {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 01:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	::::::I guess I'll do that, then. --[[Special:Contributions/75.5.176.233\|75.5.176.233]] 01:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Bad Bad Guy: /* Category for people looking to add images? */

Bad Bad Guy — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 01:38:41 GMT

Category for people looking to add images?

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:38, 7 December 2008
Line 10:		Line 10:
	:::Yes, but in some cases like the [[Ruby Powered Rocket]] they need an additional image. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		:::Yes, but in some cases like the [[Ruby Powered Rocket]] they need an additional image. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
	::::Does that even fit the scope of the category? I don't even think the post you replied to there was true. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		::::Does that even fit the scope of the category? I don't even think the post you replied to there was true. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
-	:::::If you really think that picture's necessary, you can do this: <nowiki>[[Image:NoPhoto.PNG\|thumb\|Inside the rocket]]<nowiki> ~~~~~~~~	+	:::::If you really think that picture's necessary, you can do this: <nowiki>[[Image:NoPhoto.PNG\|thumb\|Inside the rocket]]</nowiki> {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 01:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Bad Bad Guy: /* Category for people looking to add images? */ suggestion for the annony

Bad Bad Guy — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 01:38:11 GMT

Category for people looking to add images?: suggestion for the annony

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:38, 7 December 2008
Line 10:		Line 10:
	:::Yes, but in some cases like the [[Ruby Powered Rocket]] they need an additional image. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		:::Yes, but in some cases like the [[Ruby Powered Rocket]] they need an additional image. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
	::::Does that even fit the scope of the category? I don't even think the post you replied to there was true. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		::::Does that even fit the scope of the category? I don't even think the post you replied to there was true. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::::If you really think that picture's necessary, you can do this: <nowiki>[[Image:NoPhoto.PNG\|thumb\|Inside the rocket]]<nowiki> ~~~~

Bad Bad Guy: /* Category for people looking to add images? */ Does Ruby-Powered Rocket fit the scope?

Bad Bad Guy — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:34:49 GMT

Category for people looking to add images?: Does Ruby-Powered Rocket fit the scope?

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:34, 3 December 2008
Line 9:		Line 9:
	::I'm sure most of the editors can figure out for themselves if an article needs an image. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		::I'm sure most of the editors can figure out for themselves if an article needs an image. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
	:::Yes, but in some cases like the [[Ruby Powered Rocket]] they need an additional image. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		:::Yes, but in some cases like the [[Ruby Powered Rocket]] they need an additional image. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	::::Does that even fit the scope of the category? I don't even think the post you replied to there was true. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

70.253.165.204: Reply

70.253.165.204 — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:23:33 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:23, 3 December 2008
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:I think we need something that stands out more for users than just adding it to be apart of the "Articles Needing Images" category. Sure, Just going to [[:Category:Articles Needing Images]] is a good idea, but to have someone to come across an article that doesn't regularly visit that category's page (or any for that matter), and notice that it needs another image, could be a better reminder. Something like a <nowiki>{{tobediscussed}}</nowiki> template at the top of the page. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		:I think we need something that stands out more for users than just adding it to be apart of the "Articles Needing Images" category. Sure, Just going to [[:Category:Articles Needing Images]] is a good idea, but to have someone to come across an article that doesn't regularly visit that category's page (or any for that matter), and notice that it needs another image, could be a better reminder. Something like a <nowiki>{{tobediscussed}}</nowiki> template at the top of the page. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
	::I'm sure most of the editors can figure out for themselves if an article needs an image. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		::I'm sure most of the editors can figure out for themselves if an article needs an image. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::Yes, but in some cases like the [[Ruby Powered Rocket]] they need an additional image. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Bad Bad Guy: /* Category for people looking to add images? */

Bad Bad Guy — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:18:33 GMT

Category for people looking to add images?

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:18, 3 December 2008
Line 7:		Line 7:
	:::::In addition, that line with Nophoto.PNG is exactly what I just ''removed'' from the template. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 17:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		:::::In addition, that line with Nophoto.PNG is exactly what I just ''removed'' from the template. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 17:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
	:I think we need something that stands out more for users than just adding it to be apart of the "Articles Needing Images" category. Sure, Just going to [[:Category:Articles Needing Images]] is a good idea, but to have someone to come across an article that doesn't regularly visit that category's page (or any for that matter), and notice that it needs another image, could be a better reminder. Something like a <nowiki>{{tobediscussed}}</nowiki> template at the top of the page. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		:I think we need something that stands out more for users than just adding it to be apart of the "Articles Needing Images" category. Sure, Just going to [[:Category:Articles Needing Images]] is a good idea, but to have someone to come across an article that doesn't regularly visit that category's page (or any for that matter), and notice that it needs another image, could be a better reminder. Something like a <nowiki>{{tobediscussed}}</nowiki> template at the top of the page. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	::I'm sure most of the editors can figure out for themselves if an article needs an image. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 22:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

70.253.165.204: /* Category for people looking to add images? */ Stand-outy

70.253.165.204 — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:11:02 GMT

Category for people looking to add images?: Stand-outy

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:11, 3 December 2008
Line 6:		Line 6:
	::::That's not much help for a rarely-read article. Putting it in a category at least gives people some place to look for it. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 00:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)		::::That's not much help for a rarely-read article. Putting it in a category at least gives people some place to look for it. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 00:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
	:::::In addition, that line with Nophoto.PNG is exactly what I just ''removed'' from the template. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 17:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)		:::::In addition, that line with Nophoto.PNG is exactly what I just ''removed'' from the template. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 17:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	:I think we need something that stands out more for users than just adding it to be apart of the "Articles Needing Images" category. Sure, Just going to [[:Category:Articles Needing Images]] is a good idea, but to have someone to come across an article that doesn't regularly visit that category's page (or any for that matter), and notice that it needs another image, could be a better reminder. Something like a <nowiki>{{tobediscussed}}</nowiki> template at the top of the page. --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 22:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

It's dot com: uh...

It's dot com — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:52:26 GMT

uh...

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:52, 3 December 2008
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:I think such a category would be more useful than the template, actually. It makes articles look quite ugly.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)		:I think such a category would be more useful than the template, actually. It makes articles look quite ugly.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
	::After seeing it in use, I agree wholeheartedly. I've removed the visible portion of the template (although I did think it was clever) and just left the category. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)		::After seeing it in use, I agree wholeheartedly. I've removed the visible portion of the template (although I did think it was clever) and just left the category. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
-	::Why don't we just do this? <code><nowiki>[[Image:Nophoto.PNG\|thumb\|100px\|This article needs an image to summarize its content.]]</nowiki></code> --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 23:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)	+	:::Why don't we just do this? <code><nowiki>[[Image:Nophoto.PNG\|thumb\|100px\|This article needs an image to summarize its content.]]</nowiki></code> --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 23:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
-	:::That's not much help for a rarely-read article. Putting it in a category at least gives people some place to look for it. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 00:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)	+	::::That's not much help for a rarely-read article. Putting it in a category at least gives people some place to look for it. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 00:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::::In addition, that line with Nophoto.PNG is exactly what I just ''removed'' from the template. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 17:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Bad Bad Guy: /* Category for people looking to add images? */

Bad Bad Guy — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:33:30 GMT

Category for people looking to add images?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:33, 2 December 2008
Line 4:		Line 4:
	::After seeing it in use, I agree wholeheartedly. I've removed the visible portion of the template (although I did think it was clever) and just left the category. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)		::After seeing it in use, I agree wholeheartedly. I've removed the visible portion of the template (although I did think it was clever) and just left the category. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
	::Why don't we just do this? <code><nowiki>[[Image:Nophoto.PNG\|thumb\|100px\|This article needs an image to summarize its content.]]</nowiki></code> --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 23:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)		::Why don't we just do this? <code><nowiki>[[Image:Nophoto.PNG\|thumb\|100px\|This article needs an image to summarize its content.]]</nowiki></code> --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 23:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::That's not much help for a rarely-read article. Putting it in a category at least gives people some place to look for it. {{User:Bad Bad Guy/sig}} 00:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

70.253.165.204: Wait...

70.253.165.204 — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:36:00 GMT

Wait...

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:36, 1 December 2008
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:I think such a category would be more useful than the template, actually. It makes articles look quite ugly.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)		:I think such a category would be more useful than the template, actually. It makes articles look quite ugly.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
	::After seeing it in use, I agree wholeheartedly. I've removed the visible portion of the template (although I did think it was clever) and just left the category. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)		::After seeing it in use, I agree wholeheartedly. I've removed the visible portion of the template (although I did think it was clever) and just left the category. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	::Why don't we just do this? <code><nowiki>[[Image:Nophoto.PNG\|thumb\|100px\|This article needs an image to summarize its content.]]</nowiki></code> --[[Special:Contributions/70.253.165.204\|70.253.165.204]] 23:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)