This page is for discussing all things search icons


I don't really know how this procedure even works, but I'm in favor of everything added here. We're in desperate need of new Search icons, and I'm not personally going to keep these hung up on objections to minor image artifacts or what have you. Toprawa and Ralltiir 07:13, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

  • We should add Harkas through R3 since Bob adding them back in 2010 and are still idling. Perhaps we could use all of Bob's some of JMAS and some of mine to make up for the little list we have in the search icons. I'm all in favor of a little of everything and not a ton of one source. JangFett (Talk) 07:28, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
    • I agree with Jang's comment above, but I think we should just add all of them from Harkas down. I think there's nothing wrong with having 200+ different ones to cycle through, it adds more variety. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 07:37, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
      • It's too much of TCW and less of others in comparison. Unless we can tack on more micro series and EU, then it would be more even. I pretty much suggested Harkas to R3 because of its two year idle, and unlike our current additions. :P Oh, and get rid of the duplicates, like Rex and the Ahsoka one. Choose one. JangFett (Talk) 07:39, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
        • As far as I'm concerned, there's no reason why we can't have a couple thousand Search icons, just to keep it from ever becoming stale, as it so painfully is right now. There may be a larger number of TCW icons here right now, but I think everything on this page is a good start for us for where we are at the moment. Toprawa and Ralltiir 07:44, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
          • (Edit conflict) Honestly, I think we should just add them all, but get rid of the duplicates, as Jang suggested. We're looking for a variety of new images right now, not a variety of sources. We can add more non-TCW later, but having a lot of TCW now doesn't hurt anything. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 07:46, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
            • Well, more sources and not just one source. The images that come from a source, is what I'm trying to say, if that makes any sense. But I'll agree with add all and remove duplicates. I will be making more icons too, but non TCW ones to add more variety. JangFett (Talk) 07:47, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
              • As far as there being "too much" TCW, I think there's a little bit of prejudice and bias coming out there. I don't think we should replace the ones currently in the rotating cycle. I think all the ones just added to the proposal page should be added to the rotation. And again, I don't think just any proposed icon should just be automatically added. But if the quality of the icon is good, like Tope said, there's no reason not have a couple thousand icons. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 16:09, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
                • I never said I did not want any TCW icons because it's TCW. It's fine to have TCW search icons, like Cad Bane and any other prominent character from that show. What I'm doing at the moment is creating more micro series to even out the TCW icons. What I don't want to see is duplicates of one character from the same sources, i.e, two Rex's, two Ahsoka's. I prefer your original upload of the latter rather than the recent one you uploaded. Now having a depiction of live-action Mace vs a micro series or TCW Mace could be a different story. Or a ESB Luke vs a ROTJ Luke. JangFett (Talk) 16:18, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
                  • While I do agree that we don't want too much of any one era/source/etc, I don't think there is an excessive amount of TCW icons proposed. And the more icons we can create from other sources, the less dominant any single source will appear. Though even if there were 10 TCW and 10 CW icons in a mix of 200 total, because whatever icon gets displayed is randomly picked, you could still get 3 in a row of either source, no matter how many or how few of a given source are in the line up. Let's both (and others hopefully) keep up the good work on icons from other material and let's get enough in the queue that we don't have to worry about seeing a repeat icon for a month. ;) - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 23:41, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
  • Hey, guys. I think add them in. Even if all mine don't get in, I don't really care too much (the Muk Muk Monkey one could use a better crop, for instance). But we just need some variety. As for TCW being over-represented, I think if we streamline the process of adding new icons and continue to add them, that would go away. We should by all rights have some SWTOR ones, for example, and can add those in in the near future. ~SavageBOB sig 02:04, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
    • I've got a couple TOR ones in there already. ;) But more will be present I'm sure. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 02:09, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
  • My opinion: Just add away. I'm so sick and tired of seeing the same icons over and over that I don't care one whit about over-representation or duplicates as long as it means more variety. —MJ— Holocomm Monday, February 13, 2012, 02:18 UTC

Image qualityEdit


Mmkay, just for everyone's reference, here's a shot of the proposal page, condensed and gamma-adjusted way, way down. Most of the icons are nice and clean and should go right on up. Some, however, have some weird little greeblies that need to go away. Some, like Squib through Pilf Mukmuk, may be unfixable. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 04:16, February 13, 2012 (UTC)

  • I see what you're talking about. However, people aren't going to be saving the images, and gamma-adjusting them to see what kind of artifacts might be present on the image. So it really isn't going to affect the presentation in the rotating icon display is it? You wouldn't even notice most of those artifacts, with the exception of the blue glow around the holocron on the Satele Shan one, which is supposed to be there. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 04:26, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
    • On some icons, they're visible at regular monitor settings (though we already fixed or discarded most of those). In other cases, you can see them if you happen to be looking at your LCD at an angle. In any event, they shouldn't exist at all on a PNG file. Why would anyone try to justify artifacts anyway? The whole point of these icons is to make things look better. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 04:40, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
      • I'm not trying to justify them. Just trying to clarify if they would be noticeable if you didn't gamma-adjust them in the fashion you did. In the case of the Satele Shan icon. The only "artifacts" aren't really artifacts. It's a blue glow that is supposed to be there from the holocron. Do I need attempt to clean that away? - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 04:45, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
      • Well at least that explains what "tiny artifacts" means. Does that mean that the only way to make one of these is to use a PNG for the source headshot? The ones I uploaded were probably mostly from JPGs (on our site), though it's been so long I can't remember. ~SavageBOB sig 04:46, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
        • No, there's a valid distinction between a glow or transparency and a compression or editing artifact. And the source doesn't matter, so long as you know how to clean it up. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 04:57, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
          • OK, so how does one clean it up? Is it as simple as doing a gamma bomb to see the artifacts and then taking them out by hand? I'm a print designer, not a web designer, so sorry for the ignorance. ~SavageBOB sig 13:13, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
          • Snooped around on the webs a bit, and I found some ideas. But apparently the logarithm used in the Gimp isn't very good for downsizing images. I'll try to make another one of these and see what happens. May be that I'm SOL unless I get a better program. ~SavageBOB sig 13:42, February 13, 2012 (UTC)
          • Seriously, any tips? The fewer people who know how to do these, the more chance they stay stagnant. ~SavageBOB sig 12:41, February 16, 2012 (UTC)
            • I use Photoshop CS4, personally. I adjust the gamma, like Culator did. And if there are any artifacts away from the main image, then I fix those areas using the brush tool. Check it with the gamma adjustment, undo, tweak, gamma check, and so on and so forth. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 03:56, February 17, 2012 (UTC)


So, how long do the new proposals that are nice and clean sit on the proposal page before they get implemented? Do we need to have an official "2 week deadline" like for votes and CT discussions? - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 04:39, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

  • Well, some of the new proposals have now been up for 2 weeks. When we they start getting put into circulation? - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 22:46, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
    • Agreed. I think it's just up to an admin to put them in the rotation with the existing ones. You may just have to go bug some folks on IRC or something. :) ~SavageBOB sig 15:23, February 27, 2012 (UTC)
  • Just a bump to bring this back to folks' attention. Are only admins allowed to add new search icons to the rotation? Should we maybe have a CT to elect someone to supervise the process? Can we hammer out some guidelines for how the process of proposal to implementation will work? ~SavageBOB sig 19:54, March 22, 2012 (UTC)
    • Please, just do something. lol Let's get some of these in rotation. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 13:49, April 2, 2012 (UTC)


From proposed icon File:Lukeghost2-search.png, Darth Culator SavageBob stated "Actually cropped from the left, which current rules forbid." And he's right. The current rules do forbid that. Yet there are other approved icons in circulation that are cropped from the left. The current rules were created by a single user, Imperialles, and were never agreed upon in any way by the community. When a left crop is not a major distraction to the search icon subject as a whole, I see no problem with it being cropped from the left. For example, the aforementioned icon, it is just the Force ghost glow that is slightly cropped on the left, and it's barely noticeable. I think we need to have an actual discussion about and get an agreement on what rules should be in place for search icons. Rules that are agreed upon, at least, by those users that are taking an active role in the discussion on this page, and in creating and nominating new icons - not just a single individual. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 00:30, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. There is no reason we shouldn't be allowed to crop from the left if/when it's reasonable to do so. —MJ— Comlink Friday, May 4, 2012, 02:55 UTC
That comment about the cropped Force glow was from me, actually, but I was just arguing for what the rules are currently listed to be. I"m thinking that with, say the droid that comes out of Jabba's door, that might even be preferable. Then again, I can see the argument for consistency. I do think we should maintain the restriction against cropping from the top, though; it just looks tacky to me. ~SavageBOB sig 16:41, May 4, 2012 (UTC)
From the top, I agree. But from the left, when appropriate and not completely detracting from the image. And this is exactly why we need to have this discussion, and come to an agreement as a group, not a select one or few individual(s). - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 04:40, May 11, 2012 (UTC)


I realize it's protected, but what's the name of the template where all the currently used icons are listed and selected from? The one that is actually used in the sidebar, I mean. I'd like to add it to my watchlist so I can know when new icons are added. Thanks! ~SavageBOB sig 18:22, May 15, 2012 (UTC)

Smack in the middle of MediaWiki:Monobook.js. There were actually some changes made just about a little over an hour ago. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers Tuesday, May 15, 2012, 18:28 UTC
Interesting, thanks. I wonder if it might behoove us to make it a proper template so the list doesn't keep growing and growing on the main monobook page. But then again, I know little about all this coding stuff. :) ~SavageBOB sig 20:55, May 15, 2012 (UTC)
From the comment above the list, it appears that it was once that way, but that this way is faster. —MJ— Comlink Tuesday, May 15, 2012, 22:20 UTC

2013 editionEdit

Any image-savvy admins paying attention to the proposals page? It's time for some fresh blood, I think, and in particular there's an actual Cal Omas icon on there that can replace File:Omas-search.png, which really should have been done as soon as we had the picture. I'd add the images myself, but I don't know anything about images or how to check for artifacts (and certainly don't have the software for it). —MJ— Comlink 04:37, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

  • Hear, hear. (And I'm not saying that just because I happen to be the user who made the Omas icon. :P) Tinwe(comlink) 14:42, January 20, 2013 (UTC)