I was wondering about the file name system that you have been using when uploading files. In particular the "SS-" prefix found on quite a few of the files you have uploaded. What does this mean and why does it contain this prefix? I looked at a few and they appear to be in-game screenshots of the item/block/etc but I want to make sure. Another concern I had was about the files that contain only the item/block in question such as Birch Sapling.png. Those types of files should only be in a 16x16 pixel format to represent the smallest icon for them. Larger versions (150x150 pixels) should be marked as the name with " ig" before the extension (That is: a 150x150 picture of a Birch Sapling should be named "Birch Sapling ig.png" in this case). This is just a convention that has been established here on this wiki to allow better organization. Some of the wiki conventions or discussions are on the Forums. If you have any questions for me or about the conventions, either ask them here or in the appropriate topic in the Wiki Standards forum section.
I take pictures while playing in Hexxit during normal play and name all of them accordingly instead of keeping their default names. I use "SS" to stand for "Screen Shot" so I know what pictures are to be uploaded here instead of being viewed as an "I remember that" picture. I can change that if it's a problem.
And I apologize for the sapling picture. I probably should've checked the file size before doing that. I'll probably just keep adding pictures and basic information to pages and leave those to you then.
That's fine. I was wondering what the prefix means. We don't have an actual standard naming scheme for in-game screen shots that don't fit the "name.png" "Grid name.png" or "name ig.png" formats. I'm okay with SS being the prefix of some sort but this type of discussion on making a standardization for screenshots would be better off on the forums. I'll make a topic on it if you want to add your thoughts on it (I'll edit this post with a link when i make it). One thing I will make note of is, my current scheme for screenshots, which is a bit overly complicated, is naming them in the fashion of "ModName - Name - ExtraInfo.png" which gives a bit more detail of the thing in question without being too extravagent of a file name but I feel this is cumbersome and could be cut back a bit.
As for the current images, that is fine. I have no issue renaming them and gives me something to do in downtime after having reviewed edits for the day or whatever. Just as long as it isn't being done on purpose, a few accidents here and there are fine too as it does take time to remember some guidelines.
I have spaces before and after each hypen, so "Vanilla-Birch Log-Side view" becomes "Vanilla - Birch Log - Side View", however again it seems cumbersome. If you go without spaces, that is fine with me.
Taking two extra seconds to add spaces won't kill me. I think that looks a bit better anyhow.
I'll stick to that method then. I wasn't happy with mine and was using it as a placeholder until I could think of something better. This method would probably be what I would've come up with, but with the mod name attatched to it, too.
Just so you know, I am going through and renaming the images you have uploaded and editing the page to update the file name. If for some reason you need to re-use the images you have uploaded elsewhere but do not know the new name, check your contributions page and it will show the updated file name. Alternatively you can "edit" a page in source mode and see what the file name is that way.
Sounds good. I've already renamed all of the pictures I took to fit the mold and created a seperate folder for them. All future images shouldn't need to be edited with the possible exception of the "extra detail" slot.
For the most of it, all I want is to have each page to have at least one image so it's not too bland. And looking at the edits, I see you prefer the text to be in a block-like shape and not moved by the pictures, correct? Would you prefer the smaller pages to have the image(s) below the item info box for the most of it?
I prefer most images moved to the right side of the page. This is due to the side bar taking up a ton of room and we do not have the luxury of having images on both sides, while I would prefer it in some cases. In most cases however, images on the right will look the best UNLESS there is a section break and the images location won't be an issue for the text or for future images being added. I would typically say on smaller articles that an image below the text could be fine as long as there isn't too many more images that could be posted as it would better be moved to a gallery section.
In the end, a lot of this is visually subjective and on a page-to-page basis. Do what looks best, if something is wrong or looks amiss, I'm sure myself or another editor will move it. No one would fault you for doing what may look the best at the time.