Forums: Index > Watercooler > Image policy update

There has been quite a bit of activity surrounding image policy lately. I propose that most of the thoughts and policies can be tied together and that the community should make an effort to define, once and for all, what the policy should be.

Dr. F has stated recently that the image policy will be updated. The community should take full advantage of this to produce clear, concise and easy-to-follow policy that can be cited and enforced.

There is also policy that is followed by common consent that is not published. This is also the opportunity to state the policy explicitly.

Below is the starting list of policy (add some if you want to see it happen) and a discussion section for votes on each individual policy. The discussion section is the only section needed for signing.

New image policy proposals

1. Uploading offensive, abusive or pornographic images is a violation of wikia's terms of use and will result in a ban from this wiki.

2. This wiki requires ALL images uploaded to be categorized and published within 24 hours of upload. Any files not published may be deleted by any administrator at any time. Any files not categorized may be deleted by any administrator at any time. A simple guide is provided here.

3. Any image can be replaced with a clearer, cleaner, or higher quality picture. This includes user interface and background removal considerations.

4. Modded guns will be removed from any variant charts main page.

Discussion and vote

1. This is automatic policy from wikia, no vote required.

2. This is necessary for maintenance and is already policy, no vote required.

3. This is common consent policy followed by the community and admins.

4. This is common consent policy followed by the community and admins.

I vote yes Final signature 01:58, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

3. yes

4. Yes and no to this one. First, you can't even recognise if a gun has been created or found (created being what you mean by modded here) in most cases. Second, i am all for creating guns as this makes everything easier. Third, those guns that are recognisably created (in other words, where a mistake shows up) should be deleted, i agree with that.

Heres sth i wonder: If i create a character with a specific skin, screenshoot it and upload the image to the skins-page, does that count as modded too, because i never actually found the skin in the game? MattoFrank (talk) 11:41, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

Modded has different definitions according to who you talk to but (I think) to most it means blatently overpowered modded guns that cannot ever be found. A skin that cannot be owned is considered hacked. Final signature 13:42, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

Ok, if this is your definition of modded, then i vote yes MattoFrank (talk) 14:30, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

All clean and crystal clear. Punctual and straight to the point. This is absolute WIKIA standard. A "yes" vote to all. I... I am the King!Talk 23:35, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

4. Modded anything should be removed from anypage.  nagy   talkScorpio-fulllog     13:27, November 19, 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean userpages as well nagy? Or am I missing a definition? Final signature 19:18, November 19, 2013 (UTC)
Modded means anything that someone has created, not found, or changed once they found, as i have come to understand it. Cold- Hearted Anarchist (talk) 18:43, November 20, 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, but it's fairly hard to ID these things from mere images which have been posted. I... I am the King!Talk 18:56, November 20, 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Nagy. Modded and / or constructed weapons should be removed from any of the main pages. Although, I'm fine if people want to show them off on their own userspace. Just keep them out of the articles. Razldazlchick 05:34, November 21, 2013 (UTC)
+1 --Veggienatersml 09:53, November 21, 2013 (UTC)
objection! what is it with you editor-hating people? you cant even see if a gun was created or found in the first place MattoFrank (talk) 18:12, November 21, 2013 (UTC)
People use mods to make the game easy for a child. We are not saying you Matto, just people. It ruins the spirit of the game. There are pages devoted to willowtree on this wiki but EDIT:the MOST guides are not mainspace. Final signature 19:21, November 21, 2013 (UTC)
"Modded and / or constructed weapons", the objection refers to "constructed". Making a wiki of modded (not actual in-game) weapons is obviously pointless MattoFrank (talk) 02:45, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
its not so much editor-hating as it is the fact that no editor, to my knowledge, is supported by gearbox or 2K. if an item is indistinguishable from an actual drop the only differentiating factor is the uploader's distinction and reputation on the wiki. it may seem odd to some that one user might have a level 30 version of every weapon in the game. as ive said before "give me a lie i can live with and there will be peace."   Dr. F    Chemicalweapon   Wordpress shovel   Boston globe bullhorn  03:54, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
(i shud note that one user having a lvl 30 of every item IS a lie i can live w/)

Sorry for the late reply. When you mentioned main page/s I thought you meant the frontend, but in subsequent responses it seems we were both referring to the mainspace (which I think is the wiki vocab for it).

For the sake of argument I think one can assume modded items to be those that are not legitimately obtainable in-game; constructing with an editor a weapon which has all part1 on it isn't exactly going to be a hot topic of discussion so I doubt it needs to be considered at all.

^this^ -raz

That said, if you present me with an all5 barrel4 inventory of SMGs including but not limited to the Hellfire and Tsunami, while expecting me to believe that you found them all, then either you have quite literally been sitting on your ass for twelve hours a day in the Lair or you constructed everything in the Tree. This user is guilty of both.  nagy   talkScorpio-fulllog     05:35, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

In addition to Nagy's point of the "all nr.5 parts (BL) or all Dahl parts (BL2) reply". Note that I can pretty much tell that for example the picture of the Godfinger is a construct. Note that as soon as the page was made (pretty much on the day of the release of UVHUP 2) A picture of a "fully-made-off" Jakobs parts, Godfinger picture was put up. There is no way in h*** that it was obtained legally (also note that it still has the "Requires ..." line instead of an actual lvl. requirement. I think such pictures should get removed, I can pretty much guess that every mainpage picture with "fully-made-off" one manufacturer parts is constructed, although of course in a slight chance this could also be a false assumption, but taking human nature into account... I'm pretty sure they are all constructs if depicted as is. I... I am the King!Talk 11:25, November 22, 2013 (UTC)


I would like to point out things that are NOT present.

The policy does NOT include skins, so the hacked gearbox skins would stay.

The policy does NOT include red box guns (on variant charts).

These have been brought up in current conversations. Just giving full disclosure for any one wishing to make a formal argument to change the above proposal. Final signature 07:55, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

I suggest the following for #4 (Modded guns) since there are pages describing mods.

4. True gun images are required. Modded guns will be removed from any page as required.

This describes the spirit of the community, since pure mods are documented as well. Final signature 19:21, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

I thought it was like this from the beginning... or maybe I just assumed it was. Razldazlchick 04:08, November 23, 2013 (UTC)
Pretty much. It all wasn't really stated. Now its like marriage (forever hold your peace). Final signature 08:53, November 23, 2013 (UTC)
Marriage is ephemeral. It's like a deck of cards really. It begins with two hearts and a diamond, and ends with a club and a spade. -- WarBlade (talk) 11:39, November 23, 2013 (UTC)
Plus marriage is never flush, its starts in the hole and ends splitting up the full house. Final signature 10:36, November 24, 2013 (UTC)


Since the practice is already in place and the community accepts it, the following should be added to the policy:

5. Variant Charts should show appropriate level items (no red box items).

This is to clearly spell out what is taking place already and the communities acceptance of it. Final signature 19:44, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Admins are surely doing god's work, but I disagree with the red box proposal.

Convention - Really just inefficient bureaucracy: The reasons it "is taking place already" and that "[the community is accepting it]" is that it's statistically likely for items to be found at a usable levels. Likewise, it's equipped only if it's at a usable level, and submitted to the wiki only if the player felt playing with it noteworthy.

Noteworthiness isn't the point variant charts; They're meant to provide examples of variability.

Enforcing the law: The red box doesn't indicate that an item has been generated, nor does blue box poop smell of roses. There's little to a screenshot vouching the legitimacy of loot. User:Mr. Grimmjow Jaegerjaquez mentioned fake-finding-techniques, of which the red box was merely a symptom. User:MattoFrank also pointed out that even screenshots of items that bear no indication of being fraudulent have no guarantee of not being fraudulent. User:Dr._Clayton_Forrestor opined that there is more weight for the legitimacy of a screenshot by whom it was submitted than the image itself.

Impact: Red boxes aren't prettier or harder workers than blue boxes; red has zero problems with quality, legibility, or legitimacy. In fact, the real impact of creating a red box policy will be that you lose citations for the variant charts, lose time on removing them, lose contributors that will be disheartened by their efforts being in vain, and waste time that could have been applied to other problems in the wiki.

Bad Solution: The person that wants to remove the red box citation should generate an equivelent blue box, screenshot, and replace.

Better Solution: If the problem of item legitimacy is THIS important to the wiki, User:Mr. Grimmjow Jaegerjaquez's mention of ID-ing things would work very well. Is there a way of ID-ing items in screenshots or adding something to a screenshot that makes the claim tracable or reproducable?

TL;DR: Leave the red box; take the conoli. Captainmcpants (talk) 13:54, November 30, 2013 (UTC)

Redboxes often indicate illegitimacy, in case of the Godfinger; this was created before the actual UVHUP 2 release (as stated by the block to use this item "Requires..."). And if I were to ID the pictures who are in wrong:
There are probably more of them out there, but we'll start with these for now. Of course the obvious question now is: "What makes these items 'constructed/modded' then?" The answer is simple, on the 100% positive ones: These items were obviously created prior to the actual release of the DLC, this is only doable by people who make use of the "Gibbed save editor", after the compatibility patch Gearbox releases; mostly occurring a few days before the release of one of their new DLC's. As for the 75% positive ones: Taking into account human behaviour (as I stated before), most "modders" are lax, given the tools to create items illegitimately they'll take the easy approach, when it comes to creating newly developed gear by Gearbox. Instead of carefully selecting weapon parts like a Dahl Barrel with a Jakobs Stock, etc and attach these to a Maliwan Sniper Rifle, they'll simply attach only Maliwan parts to the Maliwan Sniper (I took the Storm as an example for this btw, view pic. on page), and add the "Scope-Cap" for extra damage. Note: "initially upon a new release modders tend to go with power alongside the 'purely-made-off' principle."
This behaviour is extremely present with modders nowadays, if you wish, I could conduct a thorough sweep of the wiki and ID the wrongdoers. This, only if everyone sees my point and my theory behind it, and accepts it. If not then we'll have to take different means to purify the wiki. You know where to find me. ;-) I... I am the King!Talk 16:05, November 30, 2013 (UTC)
I almost forgot: for those who wondered: "even if you have (above standing) explanation, then why are you only 75% positive on the Avenger/Storm?"
Simple, unlike the 100% items, these COULD, and I said COULD with caps because it has a probability, that these items were legitimate finds. This, by them having the "blue box", instead of the red one, meaning that whoever got them, found them while having the proper DLC installed. Of course just having the "blue box" doesn't indicate anything, and going by the greed of people who can mod and their lust to quickly acquire new gear. These items have a high chance of being illegit. My suggestion: replace them with Aftermarket pictures, like the Storm had, upon it's initial page creation (until it was replaced). I... I am the King!Talk 16:19, November 30, 2013 (UTC)
So the community accepts it and it is a simple way to weed out modded items without technically checking up on them. The fact that it is in practice is what concerns me since there is no policy to cite what people are doing wrong. I had to add it out of conscious. Final signature 22:39, November 30, 2013 (UTC)
True, that could be an inefficiency to my solution. And it could cause angry masses questioning "why did my ... got deleted?!"
Note that my solution was just a proposition, you could use it and see where the ship strands (hopefully not with the masses), or you could decide not to use it, fine by me either way. As I was just offering my ideas upon the matter. I... I am the King!Talk 10:27, December 1, 2013 (UTC)
I was actually answering Capt.pants but I would love a team who could spot BL2 mods and purge them. Once the above policies on mods are in place it is a go for anyone. A team would give a bit of checks and balances if someone gets a bit too zealous but I don't think anyone would really challenge fishy item deletions. Final signature 11:23, December 1, 2013 (UTC)

My bad, I thought you were commenting to me. But yeah that could do. I... I am the King!Talk 11:51, December 1, 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I was just defending my original reasons. Although I never mentioned that community practice is how policy actually comes about. I only really care that it is clearly stated so peeps know about it. I wish I knew more about guns but I will stick to my areas. The red box policy should be in place as well. Final signature 12:50, December 1, 2013 (UTC)
Ok, then I'll be your technical guy, I've thoroughly investigated BL and BL2. Gearbox holds no secrets to me... Well apart from the ones they have over at their office... Urghhh... *sigh* I... I am the King!Talk 13:29, December 1, 2013 (UTC)

I think User:Mr. Grimmjow Jaegerjaquez knows quite a bit about the spoofing and natural generation methods out there, and I agree with the points he made regarding those highly analytical details. But my main point was that red boxes don't mean anything. Think about it - in the case of the Godfinger image it ISN'T the red box that gives it away; it's the TEXT that clearly spells out the REQUIREMENT that gives it away. I admit that I have a personal investment in this issue: due to the way I play I frequently have items to submit that do not meet my CHARACTER'S requirements but have no problem with my ACCOUNT'S requirement. Take for example this level 13 grenade mod I submitted: How could this image possibly be an attempt to deceive the wiki? Instead of seeing this red box item as one puppy from a dog breed, the policy will eradicate it like it's baby Hitler. Come on, guys. Think of the puppies. [[User:Captainmcpants|Captain McPants (talk) 14:31, December 1, 2013 (UTC)]]

The actual point of the matter is that the caretaker of the variant charts will take it out when he sees it, regardless of the above proposal. The above proposal (on all image policy, not just red box) is to give a heads up. For instance, I could have cited the policy for you had it been already published. So when you made your intent known to add to the variant charts, I would have given you a link to the policy. If you do not want the policy, vote no.

The reason I would vote yes is because I do not take care of the variant pages, deleted images can be resubmitted after leveling up, and the caretaker (crayolaz) has a point on making the page look decent. Final signature 20:00, December 1, 2013 (UTC)

Will do, though it doesn't look like the red box issue has it's own ballot booth, nor is it mentioned in the Disscussion and Vote section of this page; the only voting section on this discussion pages is for other elements of the image policy. I also had a look at Dr. F's statement and can't see the red box issue there. I'll just vote here and now: I Emoticon_no.png Object to the policy not on grounds that contributors shouldn't be informed, but that red boxes shouldn't be removed simply on grounds of being red (as apposed to genuinely flawed or fraudulent). Captain McPants (talk) 04:50, December 2, 2013 (UTC)

On the face of it, I would agree with you. However, knowing that gentle prodding will fail to get editors to re-submit after leveling, I agree with the point of weeding out lazy edits that make the page look bad when others are willing to take the extra step and submit proper levels of guns. As to the right to submit edits (images) that only the original author can fix to a standard (blue cards) would open up permanent mix match of blue and red cards.

The community should be able to hold a standard to gun images (such as no modded and no red box) and the original author can still fix level problems. The look of the wiki can remain at a high standard and those that wish can level a few times and submit legit gun varieties.

Many have remained neutral but approve of the standard by association. Final signature 08:17, December 2, 2013 (UTC)


The proposal for the image policy is as follows:

1. Uploading offensive, abusive or pornographic images is a violation of wikia's terms of use and will result in a ban from this wiki.

2. This wiki requires ALL images uploaded to be categorized and published within 24 hours of upload. Any files not published may be deleted by any administrator at any time. Any files not categorized may be deleted by any administrator at any time. A simple guide is provided here.

3. Any image can be replaced with a clearer, cleaner, or higher quality picture. This includes user interface and background removal considerations.

4. True gun images are required. Modded guns will be removed from any page as required.

5. Variant Charts should show appropriate level items (no red box items) and the entire gun.

Proposals 1-3 passed unanimously.

4 passed unanimously (depending on definition of modded). Proposal 4 was modified from the original wording due to pages documenting mods. Either way works.

5 passed unanimously with only 3 people actually voting (capt.pants recanted on his talk page). proposal 5 was made late in the game and should still be voted on, many remained neutral without commenting or voting. No one has reverted any red box reverts or challenged them. Final signature 07:17, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

EDIT NOTE: the entire gun was added per point from Crayolaz

Final Votes/Thoughts

Anyone want any other policy? Anyone want to cast a vote? Now is the time. Final signature 07:17, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support for #5. RBR is not hard to rectify on the player's part. If they are dedicated enough to want to post to the Wikia, I am sure they'll have enough dedication to get to the level required for the item. And if it's because they don't have a DLC, well, they shouldn't be posting the image anyway. MadCrayolaz ® 19:19, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

One other though, how woukd people feel about removing posts that only show the info box, and no weapon? The weapon is really the point of the image that goes along with the info, so I really don't get why people post images without. MadCrayolaz ® 19:43, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Oh that makes sense... thanks, I edited it to rectify the error. Final signature 19:46, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.