Style Guide

[funkychinaman]

I've been working on an IMFDB Style Guide. I got the idea from the Common Mistakes page. I figure it'd be nice to standardize a few things that a lot of people know, but others don't. Ideas? Criticism?

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Talk:IMFDB_Style_Guide

A few things:

- Gun image size. I've been starting at 300px and moving up from there. I'm not going to go crazy about it like Mr. Wolf, but I usually do 300px for pistols, 350px for SMG and short long guns, 400 px for rifles. That's just me though.

- Images on actor pages. 400px or 500px? Does it depend on the aspect ratio?

- Asian names, surname first (Asian style) or as specified in IMDb (western style)? Right now, I've been creating page name per IMDb, then creating an Asian style redirect.

[Greg-Z]

As it seems to me, 350 for handguns images, and 400 for others (small SMGs, like MAC-10, count as pistols). For actor pages 400 fits very well, with 500px images the place for table is too small.

[commando552]

I would say 400 is fine for the actor pages. I wouldn't bother changing it for different aspect rations as if the actor is in productions with different ARs it would look odd if the width changed.

As for gun images, I tend to go for 300 for pistols, 350 for abnormally large pistols or small SMGs, 400 for SMGs and small carbines, 450 for assault rifles and 500 for big stuf like an M2HB or a Bazooka. TBH I probably overly complicate it though.

Also should the standard width for 16:9 caps be 600px or 500px? When I first started doing stuff for the site most 16:9 stuff was 500px but now it seems to have shifted to 600px, with 500px being the width for 4:3 stuff. If this is the case should the width for 2.39:1 caps be larger, like 700px?

[funkychinaman]

Originally Posted by commando552

I would say 400 is fine for the actor pages. I wouldn't bother changing it for different aspect rations as if the actor is in productions with different ARs it would look odd if the width changed.

As for gun images, I tend to go for 300 for pistols, 350 for abnormally large pistols or small SMGs, 400 for SMGs and small carbines, 450 for assault rifles and 500 for big stuf like an M2HB or a Bazooka. TBH I probably overly complicate it though.

Also should the standard width for 16:9 caps be 600px or 500px? When I first started doing stuff for the site most 16:9 stuff was 500px but now it seems to have shifted to 600px, with 500px being the width for 4:3 stuff. If this is the case should the width for 2.39:1 caps be larger, like 700px?

700px seems a bit large, especially if the cap is in standard def.

[commando552]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

700px seems a bit large, especially if the cap is in standard def.

The problem is that as it stands the 2.39:1 caps look small in comparison to the pages that use 600px for 16:9. I think we should either increase one or decrease the other. Also a 700px 2.39:1 image is still vertically smaller than a 600px 16:9 image, so it is not making the page comparably "longer".

[funkychinaman]

Originally Posted by commando552

The problem is that as it stands the 2.39:1 caps look small in comparison to the pages that use 600px for 16:9. I think we should either increase one or decrease the other. Also a 700px 2.39:1 image is still vertically smaller than a 600px 16:9 image, so it is not making the page comparably "longer".

Just for reference, can you link to a 2.39:1 screencap?

[Markit]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

I've been working on an IMFDB Style Guide. I got the idea from the Common Mistakes page. I figure it'd be nice to standardize a few things that a lot of people know, but others don't. Ideas? Criticism?

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Talk:IMFDB_Style_Guide

A few things:

- Gun image size. I've been starting at 300px and moving up from there. I'm not going to go crazy about it like Mr. Wolf, but I usually do 300px for pistols, 350px for SMG and short long guns, 400 px for rifles. That's just me though.

- Images on actor pages. 400px or 500px? Does it depend on the aspect ratio?

- Asian names, surname first (Asian style) or as specified in IMDb (western style)? Right now, I've been creating page name per IMDb, then creating an Asian style redirect.

400px is probably the best size for an actor page. Any larger and it tends to affect the tables. As for the Asian names, I do them Asian-style first and then create a redirect for western style.

[funkychinaman]

Originally Posted by Markit

400px is probably the best size for an actor page. Any larger and it tends to affect the tables. As for the Asian names, I do them Asian-style first and then create a redirect for western style.

See, that's the kind of thing we should settle once and for all.

Pro-western:
-it allows us to stick with the established standard of going with what IMDb has.
-it allows some consistency with Asian actors who use western names, like Jet Li.

Pro-Asian:
-Some exceptions already made due to fame, like Chow Yun-Fat. IMDb has him as Yun-Fat Chow, but come on.