Content deleted Content added
David Eppstein (talk | contribs) |
Removing expired RFC template. |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
== Adding photo to each winner's row in the table == |
== Adding photo to each winner's row in the table == |
||
{{rfc|bio|sci|rfcid=7029148}} |
|||
I suggest to add a photo of each winner on the table ,any comments or thoughts?[[User:Rezameyqani|Rezameyqani]] ([[User talk:Rezameyqani|talk]]) 18:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC) |
I suggest to add a photo of each winner on the table ,any comments or thoughts?[[User:Rezameyqani|Rezameyqani]] ([[User talk:Rezameyqani|talk]]) 18:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:00, 16 December 2015
Awards B‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Mathematics B‑class Top‑priority | ||||||||||
|
Adding photo to each winner's row in the table
I suggest to add a photo of each winner on the table ,any comments or thoughts?Rezameyqani (talk) 18:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- My thinking is that 1) the table is already fairly massively long, that the amount of scrolling inherent in a version with even scaled photos would outweigh any benefits for even general users on decent connections, 2) such a large number of photos would present significant load-time issues for certain users on slow connections, 3) WP:accessibility issues would be significant for those utilizing mobile devices or small displays, and 4) anyone who cares to know what each of winners looks like can always pursue the links to their individual pages. There's also the matter that there are quite a great many entries in the list for which we have no photo, which would give the table an uneven look. Thus, I personally think photos would be superfluous, technically problematic, and a questionable format choice, from a design and aesthetic perspective. B all of that said, it's not the manner of addition that I would feel inclined to revert, personally. However, I would still strongly recommend reading WP:ARTICLESIZE before deciding whether to proceed. Snow let's rap 04:45, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- I generally stick to the idea that pictures of people normally aren't particularly useful or really even needed in articles unless it is their BLP page. Since the table links to each BLP anyways, a picture would be redundant since a reader interested in a specific person will just go to that specific BLP page instead. Kingofaces43 (talk) 18:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
- As stated above, there are already wikilinks directing readers to the winners' pages. It would make more sense to include images of the winners on their associated page if it is not ready included. The table is already incredibly long and adding images would convolute the page. Appreciate the good faith contributions but I think in this instance, would not improve the quality of the page. Meatsgains (talk) 03:39, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with Snow Rise. Making the article much longer would not be good. Maproom (talk) 09:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
- Accessibility (some readers have slow internet and limited data, especially in developing countries) trumps the benefit that adding images for each subject would give. Esquivalience t 01:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Hello, I was also asked to comment by the feedback request service. I have to respectfully disagree with the other comments because I believe adding photos to an article makes it better. Here is an example of one of my articles in which I used small (I will probably make them smaller) photos: List of prominent microbiologists. I still consider this article that I created incomplete and intend to reduce the size of the text within the table. But for your current table I would recommend combining columns to allow more room for very small photos and reducing the text size a bit. I don't like galleries in articles and suggest thumbnails on the right and left. Thumbnails can be made smaller by inserting the coding :..|thumb | 75px |.... Best Regards, Bfpage |leave a message 12:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- No to the pictures Summoned by a bot. I don't think adding pictures to the table is very useful. There's not much understanding about the subject at hand to be gained by knowing what the people who won the award look like at a glance. If you're truly interested in seeing what one or more of them look like, the image is just a click away. Leaving the images "behind a click" lets the reader decide if they want to see a picture, putting them on the table forces them to "pay the bandwidth" (time+money) to see the pictures they may not be interested in anyway. There's also the matter of relevance: I'm here to read about the Fields Medal, so pictures of that are great --
we're missing one side(the image of the reverse ought to be at the top, in my opinion!), maybe if it's on a chain or a ribbon? Pictures of the ceremony would be neat. Pictures of the winners? Seems tangential at best. -- Forridean (T/C) 07:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- No. The pictures might be nice in a subpage or separate article devoted to them, but they would clutter up and slow the main page. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- No images would not add much to this article. MilborneOne (talk) 22:10, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- No. The table is barely wide enough to fit on my laptop screen as it is, and on my phone I have to sidescroll to see a badly-wrapped version with very narrow text columns; additional clutter would only make it worse. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2015 (UTC)