::::Ok, i shall move this to the page ''The Midna Art Debate''. It was good working with you people! --[[User:Seablue254|Seablue254]] 18:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Ok, i shall move this to the page ''The Midna Art Debate''. It was good working with you people! --[[User:Seablue254|Seablue254]] 18:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
<br>
<br>
:::::Ok, being well aware that this part of the debate has seemed to come to its end, I still would like to add my two-sense. So without anymore delaying:
Yes, I am the contributor of the "culprit image". My reason for going onto Deviant Art was to hopefully find this character image of Midna; (like that of Zelda's) to give a complete image of what Midna's true form looked like in a high-resolution shot, with a buff job. And well, success! I stumbled upon this image and decided that I would like to possibly use it on the Wiki as the best reference for Midna's true form.
Though I was late at getting to it, I was going to try and contact the doer of the art piece. It would have never been in my worst intention to ignore that credit should be given.<br>
I do thank the person who did contact the author of her imaging.
Back onto the subject of her image;
I in no way saw it as any possible "threat" to Wiki standards. Ok, sure, it does in a way define itself as a fan-art. However, this image was ripped from a Nintendo based imaging, in whatever way it was done, it IS a Nintendo image and therefore can very well be labeled Nintendo copyright. The idea, the design, the clothes, the colors, everything about this image was and is Nintendo's making. All I see here is that a fan took it to make it up a bit to fit high-resolution standards and put her in the pose he saw fit to her personality. If you ask me, the way she is posing fits who she is.
Sure, this image will forever be looked at as a fan-based image...but...its back-story gives information on a character in the game, [[Twilight Princess]]. I seriously and honestly thought it would do some good as, I myself and all know, that many, upon many fans were eagerly looking for an image of this nature of Midna's true form.
So, with all that being said, I still think it should be posted up on her gallery page. And ok, if majority of users still see it as fan-art based, then why not have a template made specifically for a fan-art.
Fan art can have a drawn line. I see it at the point where, maybe and possibly fan-art can be allowed. However, only images that gives a certain insight to whatever game it coincides with, and nothing more. If the image is as pointless as the Dancing Midna I caught sight of, then no, that would have nothing to do with informational purposes on the game at hand.
<br>
This found image does give some informational references to this chracter. I therefore will repeat, that I see no "threat" in having it posted up on her gallery page. --[[User:PrincessZelda TP|SmashBrosSheik]] 18:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
=== The Participants ===
=== The Participants ===
Revision as of 18:40, 3 June 2008
Template:Archive3Note: This is an actual debate that happened from May 29th, 2008 to May 31st, 2008. The normal page (Without this debate) Can be found here. A second round of this debate happened from May 31st, 2008 to June 2nd, 2008. The normal version (Without this debate) Can be found here.
Should fan art and altered official images be allowed on the wiki? Or should we only allow official art that is not altered and not fan-art?
The Image
The image in question was uploaded on May 28th, 2008 by TwilightPrincess TP. The controversy started because it came from DeviantArt, a site well known for fan-art. The image itself was created by DarklordIIID.
The Debate
This image... Is it official art or fan-made by someone on DeviantArt? If it's fan-made it needs to not be on Midna's gallery page. --Ando 18:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Nevermind, I just went to DeviantArt, and it is, in fact, fan-art. Removing from gallery page (although it IS a nice picture!). --Ando 18:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Nevermind again, I'm behind on the times. Adam's already done it. Man, I need to look at all the edits before I say something. :P --Ando 18:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
O noes. This is awesome! Don't take it off! Make a fan art gallery! Just. Don't. Take. It. Off. The. Page. --Seablue254 19:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
It's already been taken off of the gallery; it's fan art, and fan art is unacceptable for articles and galleries. Fan art only has a place on user pages, which this picture is being used on; therefore, it won't be deleted. --Ando 19:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
...fine. keep awesome fan art off awesome pages. --Seablue254 19:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Seablue, This is an awesome picture and should be on the page fan-art or not.--Toon Link 00:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
This image is, in a way, semi-official. This image and others like it are of the actual model from the game. So, in a technical sense, it is official.--Mjr162006 00:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Exactly, it's really just an edited model of Midna. It's from the game still. Heck, this is such a good picture it should be on Midna's page.--Toon Link 00:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Semi-official =/= official. If I take a piece of official art and draw something on it, it's not "official art" anymore; it has been altered by a fan in a way such that it no longer resembles an officially released image. As a result, it is not appropriate for the wiki. Again, I agree that it is a great looking image (incredibly hi-res, to boot), but does not belong on any article or gallery. --Ando 15:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Your reasoning is flawed. According to what you said, we can't use any images that have had their background made transparent. And we can't use images that were blurry and have been cleared up. There is no difference between this model and a screenshot of a game. If we can't use this, then logic follows that we can't use any of the screensots either. This is, of course, absurd. I know you don't mean any of this. But like it or not, that is exactly what you are saying. I meant semi-official in that it was like a screenshot. So in that sense, my last post was consistent.--Mjr162006 16:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Case in point...Look guys, quit the semantics. Short answer is, Ando's right. This is a very fine line, and the level of tolerance must be zero. Otherwise where do you draw the line? I think the image to the right is pretty well done, and bar the addition of the blue swishes it's pretty much the same classification as the one we're discussing. But clearly this isn't suitable, as the pose is entirely non-canonical. Just because you take a game model and reposition it, it doesn't mean it's still acceptable. The image we're discussing could just as easily have been nearly identical, except with Midna's finger jammed up her nose. Would we allow that? --Adamcox82 22:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Every rule has its exceptions. The world isn't black and white. A consensus should be reached on whether or not to use an image. Sometimes, to convey an intended meaning, official sources are lacking. In such cases, other sources must fill the gap. Nintendo doesn't have official art of Midna's true form for obvious spoiler reasons. The "line" is not drawn only once. It must be closely examined, and possibly redrawn, whenever something approaches it.--Mjr162006 23:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
You can't tell us to quit the semantics just because you can't think of a comeback. Mjr162006 is right, you made the wings on the shadow isect queen tranparent, that was changing offical art.--Toon Link 23:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
While I find it amusing that one picture can create this much turmoil, I really must intervene...
The fact of the matter is, and I think everyone here will agree with me, a picture with Midna "jamming her finger up her nose" would be perceived as an insult to the character by everyone on this site, while this picture everyone seems to love. 50% love this picture, and want to put it on Midna's page. 25% want to keep the picture, but not on Midna's page, instead only on user pages, while the last 25% want to delete it outright.
This is what I think (bear with me): If a picture of Fanart is applied to a page (non-user), it should be of quality like this one, and should be labelled as much. eg:
As reasonable as this sounds, I can already tell people are going to blow this solution away. But, truthully, the world isn't just black or white. If you ask me where I stand, I'd have this on the page. But I don't think I'll get involved in this arguement any more than this. --Yuvorias, 31 May 2008 (EST)
Actually, no one wants it deleted. After all it's being used on your userpage. I agree 100%, only high-quality fan-art should be on an article (this isn't even entirely fan-art). If a litle kid scrribled a picture of Midna, it shouldn't be on the article because it's a bad picture. And, Midna with her finger up her nose wouldn't look all that professional.--Toon Link 02:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
But then, where do you draw the line of what is considered "high-quality"? High-quality can be subjective: some may consider it just extremely high-resolution pictures, while others may consider high-quality "as high as I could capture from the YouTube video". Others still will have differing opinions.
Regardless, though, I'm just gonna say this once: we don't make the rules, we just enforce them. This isn't just personal opinion (although it is an opinion that I hold). If it went along with the Wiki guidelines I'd allow it, but it doesn't, so... I won't. --Ando 05:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I've heard this rule quoted often, but where is it written down. Unwritten rules are not enforcible. As are rules that are not clearly spelled out to all involved. I've just looked at the guidelines and there is no mention for it. I think that there was a small page created recently that gave reasons for deletion of images. Where did those rules come from? Keep in mind that all rules have one thing in common, they tend to require revision from time to time. We all know who the owner of the Zelda Wiki.org domain is. But it has been made abundantly clear that the users that edit it are the owners of the site itself. Therefore, overriding a rule is a simple matter of a community consensus. Remember, it is not black and white. There are many shades of gray in between.--Mjr162006 05:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I can't find the rule either; I'll give you that one. :P It's something that I hear quite often though (especially from Adam, who's been here longer than the both of us combined), so I figure that it's a rule to enforce.
Still, where do you draw the line? I have yet to see that answered. :/ As I've said, "high-quality" is relative. So... yeah, I'm agreeing with Yuvorias: I'm leaving this conversation as I see it degrading into nothing more than sheer argument and anger, and that's not cool. --Ando 05:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Would a formal vote be possible? That would be a more professional way of doing it. Also, I'm not angry at all. I perfectly understand what is being said. I'm simply trying to open doors to alternate sources. The decision for fan-made image to be used in an article should not be taken lightly. This image would convey a meaning with which there is no comparable alternative from an official source. Therefore, it is important that the possibility of using this image be carefully considered.--Mjr162006 05:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Aw shit. You guys battled through the whole night. *facepalm*. Time to fix this. --Seablue254 12:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Done. Now, please LEAVE IT. --Seablue254 12:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
You people are petty and silly. It's a model ripped from the game, posed in a manner that makes the character's distinguishing features most visible. It's mildly altered (the texture resolution was increased for neatness), but otherwise it's a solid picture that represents Midna's true form. It's from the game, I consider it official in the way I would a screenshot. The creator did NOT take any creative license in altering this image as someone's "case in point" example did. Therefore, it cannot possibly be defined as fan art. A fan rip, possibly - but it's altered so little that you cannot possibly group it in with some idiot that made Midna dance for fun. The lack of creative license taken in this model rip signifies that it is not only safe to use on the wiki, but its use should be encouraged over the blurry screenshots of Midna's true form we've had up until this image.
In addition - what the heck is a "canonical pose"? How can a POSE possibly be called canonical? It has nothing to do with the story. A pose is a pose. Are the poses from Twilight Princess's official site also non-canonical? --GoldenChaos 13:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Mrenh. But again, a line will have to be drawn at some point (such as, where is the line between mildly altering the pose and dramatically altering it to the point where it can't be used?). I propose that any future instances of such a discussion utilize the voting system proposed by Mjr, just so we can avoid having this discussion again. :P --Ando 13:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Num 1. If it's been altered, use my template, god damn it!
Num 2. Sure, lets use the voting system. --Seablue254 13:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm fine with a vote. I think this is the biggest talk page for a picture I've ever seen.--Toon Link 16:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
It is a legendary battle that should be remembered for all time. Well, no one got hurt and the outcome was constructive. Maybe we could archive this sometime for all future users to see. As far as I can tell, no one got all angry. No one resorted to insults. Everyone stayed professional. Quite a clean debate — debate, not argument. Debate sounds better. Someone come up catchy name for this debate. The something something debate, or something ^_^.--Mjr162006 16:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
The Fan-Art/Altered Art vs. Official Art Debate. I likes it. --Seablue254 16:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Could shorten it up to FAVO debate, short for Fan-Art/Altered Art Vs. Official Art debate. I really like that. —Mjr162006 17:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't know, "FAVO" Sounds kinda corny --Seablue254 17:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I GOT IT!!! I GOT IT!!!It is sooooo simple!!! ... ... The Midna Debate. Simple, effective, and elegant right? —Mjr162006 17:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Make it The Midna Fan-art Debate or The Midna Art Debate. The Midna debate sounds like it has something to do explicitly with Midna, which is not the case. --Seablue254 17:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Now we're on to something. Make it The Midna Art Debate. That's the shorter one. It also include altered art and official art in the title. That's it! —Mjr162006 18:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, i shall move this to the page The Midna Art Debate. It was good working with you people! --Seablue254 18:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
The debate would most likely have kept on going if were not for Jason's intervention. It is no secret that many users place a great deal of trust in Jason. A voting was made, where it was decided by Seablue254(Who, according to him, had actually paid no attention to the voting and could care less about it) that the image should be in Midna's Gallery anyway. At the moment, the image has a template, is in a category for fan art, and is in the gallery.
Another result of the debate was the consideration of the possibility of using a system of formal voting, like that for featured articles, in the event of another fan-art image of high quality is uploaded. This would avoid any future debates on the issue of using fan-art.
Round Two
The Issue
Should we use no fan-art at all?
The Debate
I think making a whole article for this debate was kinda over-doing it but, I'm happy with the way things turned out. Yeah sure, I made myself rather unpopular but, I'm happy.--Toon Link 20:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
This what what was decided on, b/c it will serve as an example later.
Don't worry about making yourself unpopualr. I made it clear that i didn't give a damn about the voting in the article. I am probably unpopular too ;) --Seablue254 21:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
This should be more open next time around. I was gone for three days and I completely miss the entire discussion. This is a bigger topic that goes far beyond just this one picture. At ZeldaWiki.org we are always looking for the most official 'canon' material. I believe that if an image is 'cleaned or cleared' for better display, than that is perfectly fine as being 'official' BUT Credit MUST be given to the person who did end up doing the editing. In this case, the image was NOT altered for simple clarification of a blurry screenshot. It was a fan made picture based on a character from the game in the style of Official Artwork. It is completely irrelevant how 'good' of an image it is or not. We need to credit more than just Deviant Art. That is like making a credit to the New York Times for a specific article... It needs to credit the author or illustrator more specifically. In addition to that, like it was decided, it needs to be separate from all official artwork. I also think that this artwork should NEVER be on the actual page, but just on the characters gallery, like it was chosen. Mases 23:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Image credited as requested. Also, please pay attention to the notices at the tops of articles from now on.--Mjr162006 23:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't think that this image should be on the main character page either, but for a different, and much less opinionated, reason. It is a HUGE SPOILER, much more so than any of the images currently on the page.--Mjr162006 23:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not worried about being disliked, I have plenty of freinds off the internet. I'm not here to be liked, I'm here to improve this wiki.--Toon Link 23:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
As far as being open, we have Seablue254 and Jason to thank for ending it.--Mjr162006 00:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah. Thanks for putting blame on me. Don't forget you could have kept it going at anytime. :eyeroll: --Seablue254 00:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
I could have gone on for quite awhile. It had to be ended. The opposing arguments were the same every time. They were mostly opinion-based while mine were mostly fact-based. Sorry, but I have a habit of being brutally honest.--Mjr162006 00:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
...so did i do good or bad? --Seablue254 00:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
In my book, good. Mases might be a little irritated though.--Mjr162006 00:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not irritated, but this is something that is very important to me. Before Zelda Dungeon joined the Wiki, a bunch of sites were thinking about creating our own Wiki for reasons like this. Wiki's are meant to be factual, they are encyclopedias and need to be based on official information. There is no place for fan made rumors, fan theories, or fan artwork on official wiki pages (like the Midna page). The arguments FOR using this artwork were that it was so well done that it almost looked official, to the point where it looked like a manipulated version of the real Midna. What does this say... If you make fan artwork that LOOKS real, then it can be used? So if the Midna artwork was just not that good, but still based off the real Midna, why not include that as well? Why not just a fan art section for EVERY character. That is laughable and just plain wrong for a Wiki. Also, you have to remember this is a Wiki. No single person's opinion is worth more than another's. Just because Jason, Seablue254, Mjr162006, Myself, or anybody else puts forth their opinion, doesn't mean anything. No single person opinion is final or should force other peoples to change their opinions. Let's take an image like... http://www.zeldadungeon.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/MeloraMap%7E0.jpg . The image is pretty darn amazing, based on the real overworld map, but still, its not official and shouldn't be on a FACTUAL page. Mases 03:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
That's one of the reasons why we are not going to put the image on the main article. It's too close to being fan-art. But we can't get lazy and have a one-size-fits-all policy. Each image should be decided individually. As many people have clearly said, this particular image is no more fan-art than a screenshot is. The decision on this image is final. I have a lot of trust in Jason. If he says it is not fan-art, then it is not fan-art. But you are quite right in that we can't have a fan-art section for every character. It would grow to much and over-shadow the official images. Our two active sysops have been keeping a close eye on the uploaded images. I trust them to recognize normal fan-art and to take the proper action. They have gotten rid of a few of them since I joined.--Mjr162006 03:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
I really hope that the debate doesn't spawn a debate.--Mjr162006 03:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, just woke up. now, Mases. According to what you're saying, we can only/should only use official art. I'm afraid that we would have to get rid of many pictures, such as screenshots, because those are not official. Alas, that is not going to happen, and therefore, fan art should still be allowed. Now Matt, i'm pretty sure that we can allow fan art up to a point, considering that it would over shadow the official images. --Seablue254 12:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Uh, what? Screenshots are directly from the game with no modification to them; that counts as official. The piece in question is modified, though, and that's the issue. --Ando 13:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Screenshots are ripped straight from the game and can be used because they are not fan created pieces of work. People should be credited for taking the screenshots, for the labor involved, but not for the actual creation of the picture. Screenshots are not artwork. They represent the game, not the person that is taking the screenshot. Not sure how you came up with the idea that I was inferring that screenshots are no good. Screenshots are fine and should be allowed. Mjr162006, lets please be a bit more reasonable. I know you put a lot of trust in Jason, but the way the Wiki is structured he has no more authority than any of the other 7 websites that are a part of the wiki. The discussion here is not what should be considered fan artwork, but rather, what should we do with fan artwork. Like I said before, it is a poor policy to accept fan artwork just because it is really good and closely resembles the game. The use of fan artwork should not be judged based on how good or accurate it is, that is not the point of fan artwork. If for some reason I am part of the minority and people want fan artwork on the Wiki, then there should not be limitations on how good or accurate artwork is. Mases 04:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
As an artist myself, I feel the need to butt in. Now I realize the picture was found on DeviantArt. And the artist placed it online for anyone to view it. But ripping it and using it other places takes it out of the artist's control. Not all artists would appreciate that, tho some would. Remember that Wikis are supposed to be completely open, which means that content found here can be used at your discretion. And thusly the artist becomes a nobody. Basically it's bad form to assume the artist wants his/her work on such an open site as wiki.
My art for example is LoZ related puzzles. Yes, I post them on forums and it doesn't cost anything to see them or try to solve them. But I draw the line at it ever turning up on a page here. The reason is bc I'd lose control over what happens to my work.Axiomist 05:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
A couple things. Mases, hold off on your comments please. You have made your opinion abundantly clear. We don't need it repeated another three times. Second, has anyone thought of actually contacting the author? Too late. I just did. I have a DeviantArt account. It won't be long now.--Mjr162006 08:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I have a policy that I am going to adhere to from now on. There is no changing my mind here. First, a little background info: My dad is a teacher at the local school. He is the FFA teacher (if you don't know what that is just look here). He orders shirts for the class every year. A year ago, we had some with my new policy.
“
We don't follow the standards. We SET the standards!
”
— My new policy
It is time for us to be leaders, not followers. We need to be progressive. If we tighten our grip, we will only strangle ourselves. No more petty arguments over fan-art. Times change. Accept it. PS: Our FFA chapter is one of the best in the nation. We have more proficiency finalists than any other chapter in the United States. So yes, we DO set the standards. A proficiency (or SAE) is a three to four year project where we aim to better ourselves. I was state winner in Aquaculture. With all of this, I am not afraid to take on set standards. I welcome the challenge. Don't believe that I was a state winner? Then see this. I'm at the top. See what school had a lot of winners that year?--Mjr162006 09:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
That's a really good philosophy, I think I'm gonna have to adopt that one as well. Anyhow, that's cool that you contacted the artist/author of the picture. I think it would be a good protocol to attach "Used with permission from _____......" to the information page of the image. And that when someone uses fan art in the future, they should follow your example and contact the artist for permission. I think fan art should be avoided when possible. But Nintendo really doesn't release as much official art as we'd like. It was Midna today, but I'm sure something else will come along with the next 3D LoZ title.Axiomist 15:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The use of fan-art will be allowed, but only when there are no comparable official alternatives. However, the images will be used responsibly. All future fan-art images must have permission from the creator before using in a main article.
Unlike round one, round two was ended by Matt. He made it very clear that ZeldaWiki.org should take on a leadership role. Both Matt and Axiomist agreed that permission should always be obtained from the creator of a work of fan-art.
Note: The request for the permission to use the image that is the cause of this debate has been sent. A reply is expected within the next few days.
