Forum:Search icons

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in new Senate Hall or Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. jSarek 09:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Important disclaimer: pictures added to this page will not automatically appear among the randomly rotated ones. The template with links to them is protected. Please add new proposals under the Proposals header below. - Sikon 06:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Please use this file as a base for any new icons. All images should be .png files sized at 127 x 56 pixels. —Xwing328^(Talk) 18:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• We now have Wookieepedia:Search icons, which is split up into separate sections. -- Ozzel 03:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Looks like that latest Wikia update futzed up the code on the whole search icons thing. Enochf 00:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Oh, false alarm. I guess all the images are down, at least for now. Enochf 00:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In use

Click here to see all icons currently in use.

[edit] Proposals

Click here to see proposed icons and to post new proposals.

[edit] Rejected

Click here to see all rejected icons and the reasons for rejection

[edit] Comments

• Nice! -- Themelle444 18:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• I thought we could use some Vehicle/Vessel icons in the mix - JMAS 02:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• May I request the creation of a Droideka icon. I just love those wicked things. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • How's that work for ya? - JMAS 04:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • It works. :) -- Riffsyphon1024 16:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• May I inquire as to why these were rejected? I can guess the DSII one is because of the black bg color, but why the others? - JMAS 04:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, and the first two because of poor quality. - Sikon 05:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Fair enough. I made those at work, only having the use of MS Photo Editor to shrink the image. I'll try to remake them at home with Photoshop and make them look better. - JMAS 11:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Heh - I never expected the Death Star to pass, but it looks awesome! :) —Xwing328^(Talk) 16:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Is it just me, or should these images be at least marginally related to the concept of searching? I think probe droids and bounty hunters make perfect sense for search icons... but Burl Ives? Not so much. -- SM-716 talk? 17:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• I have to agree. Burl Ives absolutely should not be in there. Nor should Mt Sorrow, or any of the black and white ones, they just look rediculous. - JMAS 17:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree on the Burl Ives one... but I think that's more of an in-joke. The rest, though, are more SW related. Even Mount Sorrow. ^Jorrel _Fraajic 18:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I think that all of the icons are fine and appropriate. It doesn't matter if they are relevant to searching.--Doquis^{(HoloConference)} 18:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    • You should be able to make a search icon out of everything!--Themelle444 18:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
      • You should be able to clik on the picture and it brings you to the article. --DjMack ^Jorhaa'ir
        • The Wookiee wasn't appropriate to searching. BTW, Bly may be right about clicking the picture. Otherwise we will have countless threads asking about Burl and the Sun King. Maybe "Search" should be a separate image? Gonk ^(Gonk!) 18:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Now very cool! Rotating icons. -- Riffsyphon1024 18:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• The Wookiee was related to searching, he was looking down a scope. The Yoda one looks like he could be looking for one. Probe droids and bounty hunters also make sense. But the rest are really overkill. Wildyoda 19:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Yoda looks like he's about to TK somebody's ass into oblivion. Relating that to "Search" seems like a stretch to me. IMO, if you're going to have a random search icon thing like this, you need lots and lots of different icons in the pool. That means few, if any, limitations. (Though I'm not so sure about Burl :D ) Gonk ^(Gonk!) 20:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Variety is the spice of life. Joker1138^(Mandalore)
• Would it be obnoxious to ask that each one of these be put to a vote before it goes up (including the ones that are already up)? It just seems to me that a lot of things are being done lately by a single person making changes and asking if we like them later. Wildyoda 20:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Actualy, it would be obnoxious to ask that. If we voted on everything we did, no matter how small the change, nothing would get done. Honestly, who cares if the images don't have anything to do with searching? They're just pictures people, no need to get excited.--Doquis^{(HoloConference)} 21:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I perceive a crossover with the other Burl Ives-related debate. (Poor Burl; he never could have imagined he would become a focal point for such contention!) I think the same "SW notability guidelines" we will likely develop (however loose) should be applied to Search icons. That means Voren Na'al stays, even if his only image is black and white (down with blatant color favoritism!). Beyond that, I don't see a need for limitations here. And I agree with Shaelas about not voting on every little thing. Gonk ^(Gonk!) 21:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• I DEFINETLY agree with SM-716. The icons should be search related. Granted, some of them are sort of ambiguous, but that should simply be decicded by one of the administrators, and if there is great distaste for it by the Wookiepedians it can simply be removed. Also, I noticed that when loading (on dial-up, at least) The old Wookie one is displayed before a new one is chosen. Is this supposed to happen? Either way, random search icons were a great idea! ben8kenobi 21:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • If some aren't search related but are characters from the movies, (only the 6 movies!) like the Lando or the hooded Palpatine, it should be all right, for the obvious reasons.
• I like it. It has most everything but Han Solo and Darth Vader. Edit: Thanks for getting those. -Fnlayson 04:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• While I appreciate you support Gonk, I must point out that it's Doquis, not Shaelas... at least for now.--Doquis^{(HoloConference)} 21:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Technically, you ARE Shaelas, not Doquis. Your userpage is at User:Shaelas, thus making you, User:Shaelas. If you want to be User:Doquis, then make the User:Doquis account, edit using that and close up User:Shaleas. Constantly changing your name like this is confusing for your fellow Wookieepedians, and in the future, I hope that you will chose a name that you will stick with. StarNeptune^{Talk to me!} 05:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I have started a new CT at Forum:Search icon tweaks. - Sikon 05:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• • • That's not really any business of yours, is it Star Neptune?--Doquis^{(HoloConference)} 11:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Say...I don't suppose we could have a NSPSSSD Search Icon? .... 11:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Good enough? Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 11:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Actually, Culator said he'll re-scan it so it looks better. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 11:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• I apologize Gonk, I'll soon change my name back anyways. As for you Star Neptune, you can read the comment I left underneath your message.--Doquis^{(HoloConference)} 11:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Happy now, Star Neptune? Is this less confusing?--Shaelas^{(HoloConference)} 12:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Wow. What's with the attitude? - JMAS 12:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
      • I don't really have much of an attitude. I just don't think it's Star Neptune's place to critisize my actions. But come now, this isn't the place to talk about it.--Shaelas^{(HoloConference)} 12:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
        • StarNeptune is an administrator. She has a right to criticize your actions. - Sikon 13:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
          • I already know she is an administrator, but I do not think that she has the right to critisize something that is my personal choice. It is not an administrator's duty to chastize users who frequently change their names. If I want to change my name, I don't have to close down my account. I can do what ever I wish with my name, and she, as an administrator, has no obligation to tell me otherwise. Now please, let's not discuss this anymore, especially here.--Shaelas^{(HoloConference)} 13:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
            • Can the attitude. You were in violation of the sig policy, so that is why I asked why I asked you to change your name. If it weren't for that, I could care less what you call yourself, but as an admin, I have to uphold site policies. StarNeptune^{Talk to me!} 16:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• Could some one trim the outline of an image for me? I tried to get the colour of an image down to the subject matter, but there is still a few edges left.--Shaelas^{(HoloConference)} 17:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• If you see an image that was rejected above, it might be because you did not create it as a .png to start with. Shaelas, sure, just upload it and give a link, or tell us what subject you want. —Xwing328^(Talk) 17:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• 

  
  Here it is. Please see what you can do with it. I am not too good with image links, so I just put it on here.--Shaelas^{(HoloConference)} 18:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Ummm...just a piece of a planet? I don't think we want that for an icon. —Xwing328^(Talk) 18:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Why not? We just have pieces of people and ships so far. Why not a planet? It needs some tweaking, but it could fit in with the others.--Shaelas^{(HoloConference)} 18:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Gonna have to concur with Xwing here. Planets just aren't identifiable enough. Good idea in theory, not in practice. Gonk ^(Gonk!) 18:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• On those two Ralph McQuarrie Kashyyyk ones, I think the second one, with less cropping, looks best. - JMAS 17:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Image:RevanSearch.png This one has got to go. It's an embarrassment to image editing. Painfully obvious that it's been modified....it just looks like a steaming pile of shit...--Redemption^Talk 18:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Any particular reason we have two Mauls? Chack Jadson 13:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Different versions is all, just as there is more than one of Palpidious and more than one gamorrean. - JMAS 13:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Font?

Which font is used? KEJ 10:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Times New Roman. _supergeeky1 ^{The Cantina} 12:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Wow, the default of defaults? Thanks. KEJ 12:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
    • If you want details, I think it's size 12, bold, with -5 kerning. It's not required, but please try to use the blank one linked at the top to keep some consistency. —Xwing328^(Talk) 18:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Not bold. If you are using Photoshop, non bolded, 12 with smooth anti-aliasing. --Redemption^Talk 18:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
      • True, definitely depends what program you are using. Stupid software inconsistencies :P —Xwing328^(Talk) 18:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Maximum occupancy

Is there going to come a point when the Template reaches max occupancy? There are currently 122 in rotation, with another 10 or so proposed. Let's assume most of those, plus maybe a few more get put into play. Is there going to be a point when no more will be added and this will be shut down? Like when it reaches 150 in rotation? - JMAS 18:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• 150 sounds good Joker1138^(Mandalore)
• I was actually thinking 100, with a new one based on each week's featured article, if it is an acceptable icon subject. But 150 sounds ok too. I'm not sure if size causes any additional lag for the system. —Xwing328^(Talk) 19:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • It will not cause any additional lag. The template code is cached on the client side. It's downloaded once and not downloaded again until it's updated on the server. You can add as many as you like, even 1000. - Sikon 13:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
    • 1000 sounds better! Themelle444 15:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
      • The more there are, the less we'll see of each one, though. jSarek 19:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Hmm. Maybe get 366 and rotate at 0:00 UTC (1 each day). tzzA 20:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Yea that's nice --Themelle444 22:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Nah, keep it random. But 1000 might indeed be too many. Gonk ^(Gonk!) 22:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Yeah, keep it random. We should have as many search icons as possible. KEJ 17:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
      • I think 300 would be good. We do need a limit. Chack Jadson 12:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions

I don't have the ability to do it, but could someone with the know-a-how make this image into a search logo? That's my proposal. :P Adamwankenobi 04:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• That's probably going to be difficult because of the bars. Do you have another image of that retarded li'l wookiee? KEJ 10:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• TBT. Please. He's got to get some recognition. .... 11:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Or even better, one of the bunnies. KEJ 11:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Gimme some Fels, people! Soontir! Jag! Roan! Havac 00:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I'll see what I can do when I get home to my photoshop. - JMAS 20:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
    • OK, done. See the proposals section. - JMAS 01:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
      • They look good. Havac 17:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• I don't think having Armand Isard is a good idea, since it's a Hyperspace image. Having it in the article is one thing, but having it all over the site seems unnecessary. -LtNOWIS 00:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
• I'm not too keen on this whole rotating icon thing... seems like we're really going overboard with it, it's almost distracting. I guess there's no real problem with it, but I think i like the idea of just having the search icon match the weekly featured article. --Azizlight 13:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I like the surprise element and the variety, and wouldn't mind seeing thousands of search icons. KEJ 13:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Hypocrite warning - i just made a Halagad Ventor icon :-) --Azizlight 13:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • ...and Leektar! Man, make up your mind! ;-) KEJ 14:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
• I must ask: What is it with people cutting off the tops of people's heads on these icons? IMO, it looks terrible, and I'm hesitant to approve those. —Xwing328^(Talk) 02:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I am in complete agreement with you. But, there are some that think chopping off the tops of heads and not having the subject centered looks "artsy." *shrug* - JMAS 17:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, that's artsy, sophisticated, chique. KEJ 21:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Non-encyclopedic? :P —Xwing328^(Talk) 00:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Why not moving icons? Or like two light sabers clashing or something??--Xerxes 16:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Because God hates animated GIFs. Havac 20:06, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Votes for deletion

There must be a better way to have votes for deletion of search icons... and "dumb subject" doesn't really strike me as a valid reason (or at least it's not a very good one since it's a highly subjective one). KEJ 21:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• I'm going to be perfectly honest with you KEJ. A good portion of your icons suck. You really need to learn how to better crop your images and give us better results. Since I know the reason behind this subject is that a lot of them have been turned down. Thankfully I might add. --Redemption^Talk 22:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • But those have all been rejected anyhow. Feel free to delete or fix them all if you want. But that's not the issue I addressed. I addressed the issue of having a better way to do votes for deletion for search icons that have already been accepted. If you have any tips regarding cropping and image editing, post them on my talk page. KEJ 22:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Oooh. My mistake then. Thought you were about to go on a rant. --Redemption^Talk 22:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
      • No, not at all. KEJ 22:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Anywho, we need to get rid of, or fix, the Thrawn icon, because he's... well, squished. -- Ozzel 03:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I guess somebody already removed that one. Also, I removed the Rasha Bex icon, because of the poor airbrushing. -- Ozzel 23:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Doubles

In my recently spotty attendence, I guess I missed the opportunity to vote against this awful design decision, so I'll skip that. Is anyone else experiencing two images stacked? --SparqMan ^Talk 02:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Do you mean how the original Chewbacca one shows first and then changes to the randomly selected one? I have noticed that myself. - JMAS 02:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, no, never seen that happen. - JMAS 03:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Nor have I. jSarek 02:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Ick. That is a problem. Sorry you were not around to voice your opinion on this matter. I've also disliked having Chewie show up first. It shifts the page temporarily before replacing with another image. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
      • That's easily fixed. The only problem is that Sikon didn't want to do that, b/c then people without JavaScript enabled would have no picture displayed at all (currently they see the default Chewbacca one). —Xwing328^(Talk) 06:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
• Isn't a secondary javascript load an issue in the first place? Between the Flash banner on the right and the javascript load, the first few seconds really chug on most pages. --SparqMan ^Talk 20:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Hehe. Do you even know how many css ans js files are used in each page? —Xwing328^(Talk) 01:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blackened icons

Uh, when seeing Thrawn and Leia's search icons, does anyone else get a totally blackened image? -- SFH 20:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

• Seriously, no one else? -- SFH 03:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weird. Haven't seen that. Could it be a cache issue? -- Ozzel 03:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
    • If you find some, please report the specific ones here. Sometimes the files were saved in a not-quite-correct format and just need to be re-saved/re-uploaded. This happened once early on and was easily fixed. —Xwing328^(Talk) 05:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
• The only ones I've seen are Thrawn and Leia's icons. It's like that even on the template. -- SFH 16:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I think the Thrawn one should be fixed now. Which Leia one did you mean, the one in the bikini? —Xwing328^(Talk) 16:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
• Thrawn is back to normal, so that worked. As for Leia, yeah it was the bikini. -- SFH 03:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm getting the blacked-out Leia too, no idea what's going on Enochf 05:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, those are both ones that I re-uploaded, so the problem must be me. Are you having any trouble with ones I uploaded originally, like Image:Elscol search.png? -- Ozzel 05:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Speaking for myself, yes. Enochf 06:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
        • Same here, for what it's worth. KEJ 07:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wookieepedia namespace?

This entire search icon deal seems large enough and community enough to work into a Wookieepedia:Search icons namespace, with respective proposals and history sections. Thoughts? ^Jorrel _Fraajic 18:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• Heh? We do have name spaces. Who knew? (Ignore this section) ^Jorrel _Fraajic 18:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)