Template talk:Artifacts

Dissolve and replace all instances...[edit]

Does anyone else feel it would be ideal to dissolve this template and replace all instances of it with Template:ShouldBePNG or Template:ShouldBeSVG since these templates specify which format to use and go into more depth about the advantages to each? --Anthony5429 14:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. This template is for things which are in the format they should be in, but obviously used to be in JPEG or something similar. - ^Рэд_хот^{(t • c • e)} 14:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

JPEG Overcompression[edit]

What template should be used for images that are in JPEG format (and should be), but were dramatically overcompressed? I think See Also links to such a template should be present in the Image Improvement tags. Will (Talk - contribs) 07:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No one responded, so I created {{Overcompressed JPEG}}. Will (Talk - contribs) 15:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23:47, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 06:02, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Artifacts → Template:Image artifacts – "FILE:" namespace stores more than just images now, and videos or sound files can have artifacts that need correction as well, so this template should indicate that it applies to images, and not just files, and different artifact templates need to be made for sound glitches or videos --Relisted. -- tariqabjotu 02:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC) 65.94.79.6 (talk) 23:47, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose - I don't think this is a pressing issue. (1) Template names are not generally visible to the reading public, (2) it's clear from reading the documentation (and not actually in any way clear from either the old or new proposed name) what this template is all about; (3) avoiding the Twinkle issue mentioned above seems sensible. — Amakuru (talk) 23:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A more general template dealing with any sort of artifacts can be implemented at the more general name, while the image-specific template should be so clarified. While awaiting such a general template, the redirect can remain. Informing Twinkle users should not be a bar to more sensible naming. That the documentation indicates what the template is for does not mean that the name of the template is all that good. -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:44, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

Comment. This template is used by the standard installation of the Twinkle tool editing script. Any page move will either require the resulting redirect NOT be deleted, or a notification of Twinkle's user base and maintainers at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle to change that script. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.