Warriors Wiki talk:Charart

=For Approval= Take it to the approval page

=Tweaked= Take it to the tweak page

=Discussion=

"It's fine"
Ok, so I feel like this needs to be brought up - and no I'm not acting as leader. I'm acting as one of your superiors (since that's technically what a SW is..). You all need to stop with the "it's fine" crap. It's getting way out of hand. Of course it will look fine to you if it's your image. If someone else says that they can't see something, or something looks wrong that makes it look like it doesn't match the other images, fix it. Don't say "Can I have a second opinion?" or "I think it looks fine to me, thoughts?" (which the latter is just another fancy way to ask for a second opinion). While you are the artist of your image, of course everything is going to look fine to you. No one likes to be told that something on their image looks wrong (me included, don't get me wrong), but it seriously needs to stop. Constructive criticism on an image is supposed to be criticism, not just a voice that gets brushed off, because that's really seriously rude. :/ 12:36, 4/22/2017

yeah, I agree. there's nothing wrong with using it sparingly, in the case you really think it's fine. but using it for everything gets really really tiring. 23:55, April 22, 2017 (UTC)

This has been a PCA issue ever since I can remember- it always has been. I agree with you, but I doubt this will make much of a difference unless some rule is enforced for it.. --PyroNacht (talk) 00:20, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Yup definitely an issue. I definitely think there's a time and place for asking second opinions, but it should only be used sparingly, as Skt said. People should do the comments given to them, and not try to brush them off, unless they're super positive that it's perfect the way it is. And even then, not so much imo, because one is not likely to see faults clearly in their own work.

Yes, and personally I don't feel like my chararts are great. Just saying. But obviously when someone just disregards your criticism, then you feel like you aren't respected. That's not ok. I think people want to believe they have done somrthing perfectly, especially with something minor.

Duly noted :) 01:10, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

@starry I know it's always been a problem, probably always will be, people may just need a reminder from time to time. especially those who haven't been here for years. 01:13, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

I agree. My comments on some images have been brushed off a few times, and I've felt like I've been too picky (which, at times, I admit I am a little picky), but then I noticed it happening a lot more with other people. Like... what's the point in having an approval page if no one listens to others criticism? I'm fine with people asking for a second opinion every now and then but this is constant. 02:05, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

I'm very proud with the one I'm working, but I make sure to listen to all the comments even if I think that it's fine myself. The "it's fine" thing is really annoying and basically the approval page is to make chararts better, as Patchfeather said. I haven't been on the wiki for even a year yet, and I honestly thought that Warriors Wiki had always been picky when it comes to chararts, but then I looked back at older archives and it was better even then. 02:25, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Alright, so thoughts on how to deal with this? I've been trying to incorporate a way, but really all I can think of is people being given a warning. Maybe like a 3 strikes you're out, kinda thing, but idk how that would work? Maybe if you do it 3 times your image gets declined? But idk if that's too harsh or not so don't take this to heart. Also prior to this, I've just been telling people to stop, but it kinda gets brushed off in itself, as you can see in some previous archives - like I tell people to stop, and they do it again 2 days later. So idk *shrugs* 19:56, 4/23/2017

OK, so, I read half of what you wrote before I got up and I liked the three strikes thing. While I got up, I thought "how about three strikes and your image gets declined?" Then I read the rest of it and it said that same thing! :) So I totally agree with that. 20:02, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

I think it depends. I've done it more than three times myself, and it's not always a bad thing, because often I can keep whatever it was I thought was fine. Especially for some with sharper shading styles, I've noticed in older archives that they often ask for second opinions if someone tells them to smooth it, because it's fine. Setting a strict three-time limit then having your image declined is a mite harsh, I'd say. I would, however, be in favor of declining if a user uses it three times on three separate issues. Then, that'd draw the line between an artist just trying to prove their point on one thing three times then getting declined, vs. a user who tries to refute every comment thrown their way. There's a difference between the two.

Yeah, that's kind of a better explanation than what I said earlier, but I digress. Like if a user uses it 3 times in kind of a harsh way then it could work. For example, if you Spooky were to ask someone to smooth their shading and they say "I'd really rather not, I think it's fine", then maybe that'd call for a warning? 20:14, 4/23/2017

That would work^^ Especially if someone used a tone that seemed like they were brushing someone off. But if someone just explains that that's their shading style, then I don't think it would be a warning, as they show that they value the other person's opinion but just don't think it's correct. If the artist gives a legit explanation for why they don't wish to change it, but offer to change it if someone else thinks it's not okay, then they shouldn't get any type of reprimandation for that. Especially if it's just on one issue, and they don't use "it's fine" very often in general.

What if it's not the artist that says it's fine, but a commenter? Like you know, when commenter 1 goes: Define the blah, and commenter 2 goes: its fine!! Does commenter 2 get a strike? 21:01, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that would especially get a strike in this case. 21:53, 4/23/2017

Whoops, my bad I read the question wrong. I'm not sure actually how we'd implement this for the commentors, but I do believe they should get some kind of warning, because just because one guy can see it, doesn't mean the others can. 21:54, 4/23/2017

.....when did we decide to impliment a strike system? Because I know that's nothing I agreed to. =\

Skye I never said we would actually input a strike system. :/ I suggested it and explained my ideas for said suggestion. There was nothing here that said we input a striking system. We're just putting in our ideas and thoughts on what to do for the it's fine thing.... 23:25, 4/23/2017

We're not penalizing people for saying something is fine, aside from asking them to do said comment.... and if they don't upload or it becomes disrespectful, then it would become a wiki rule issue.. but otherwise? That's a bit too much and I really think it would just cause more harm than good. Plus, your comment and Danny's comment basically stated you wanted to start doing that- which is seriously too much for an art project that makes pixels of talking cats.

I really disagree with having a strike system. If you only say "it's fine" every once in a while and you actually have a valid reason, then that should be all right. At worst, like Skye said, you should just be told to make whatever change to your image that you're resisting. And in response to Danny's comment, you should be allowed to discuss a comment on another user's image for sure. In order to make sure that we're not being overly picky and that someone isn't told to do something that isn't even correct, we need to leave the page as an open discussion. As long as everyone is being respectful and considering others' comments instead of automatically saying "it's fine", I don't see what the issue is. 00:49, April 24, 2017 (UTC)

Honestly, I have not seen people blowing off comments in months. A LOT of the comments lately have been terrifyingly nitpicky, and are actually matters of style. I cannot tell you how many times I have had to say "It's fine and I am not changing it" in regards to how I personally shade images, as I have always done it a certain way, and suddenly people are wanting super smooth shading. The strike system would just make people even more hostile and defensive about things regarding personal ways of doing charart. There is absolutely nothing wrong with knowing that if you do something you will be told to undo it, or that different people do things differently depending on what program they use, if they use a pen-tablet or not, etc. And this is going to only make people more picky about minuscule detail. Just my two cents before I get told off. 00:59 Mon Apr 24

Well... I think it shouldn't go that far. See, comparing the chararts in general from like 2013 and the ones now, tons of new styles have developed. It's 2017, different shading, texture techniques etc are used and I think it's a good thing? Some people now are just telling people to change stuff because /they/ don't like it, or misunderstandings (for example, it was a misunderstanding that the white on belly should be defined on Sparrow Fur while she is mostly white, but people forgot about it and that's okay) I mean myself had probably done something like "The ear pink should be more purple instead of orange" -_-...?? I kinda don't understand whether it's annoying to say "it's fine I'm not changing it" or "I'd like a second opinion"? Yeah, they're happening more and more, but people are also commenting on personal styles more and more as well. It just happens because we're having more diversity in terms of how to do chararts and of course it's okay to say your opinions - I think that's exactly when "asking for what others think" is useful? Like we all know asking for second opinions to clean off waste is not logical, but strikes may be too far. Yes, rejecting a comment is a voice brushed off, but not being allowed to do that is too. I'm sorry if I'm sounding rude or harsh? I'm trying to say we should just get to understand the difference between a problem and a preference, that's all.

I too have unknowingly been rude and I do apologize, I will not brish off comments again when I post Wildkit :( Rainbowmistake (talk) 18:06, May 3, 2017 (UTC)Chat

...I think the only problems are 1) If the OA is told to change their style (not explicitly but it's there in the comment) and 2) If there actually is nothing wrong and various people agree that the comment is invalid..I don't see why it would be wrong to say "It's fine" when there are comments like those. I think second opinions are fine because if more than one person thinks there's something that could be changed, the artist will know that they should since a lot of people probably see what's wrong. I get brushing off a comment can be rude so I think second opinions would be okay because the author gets more viewpoints on certain criticism instead of only one person thinking something's wrong. --  22:27, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

Nominations
I'm not sure what the heck's up with you guys lately, but this excessive pickyness has got to stop. I shouldn't sleep for like.. maybe ten hours, and then come back and see a whole slew of nominations (including at least one that's mine), because you guys can't handle someone having a different eye style or shading style that isn't the "PCA norm". Who cares if an image is a tiny bit flat in the shading department? Or if the ear pink is maybe one shade off. You guys need to cut this out, because I've about had it with the unnecessary nominations all because someone doesn't like the artwork; if y'all keep this up, I'll very likely consider closing the tweak nominations page temporarily until you guys get the point.

I'm not trying to make anyone angry, If I nominate an image, I think its far enough off to be nominated Rainbowmistake (talk) 16:33, May 1, 2017 (UTC)Chat

"Far enough off"? Erm, that's somewhat rude, Rainbow. Technically we don't even need a constant tweaking process. We could just go back to tweak week lmao, or only change images of there's a description modification.

I wasn't trying to sound rude. What I meant was that some just looked like they were perhaps more worthy of a nomination than others. And I'm sorry if that came off rude Rainbowmistake (talk) 17:18, May 1, 2017 (UTC)Rainbow

The tweak week process seemed to work quite well, from what I can tell of the old pages for it. The only times we'd need an open nomination page really is after book releases for new description cites and such - because I agree w/Skye that there's an excessive amount of nominations being posted. I find myself patrolling the activity feed nowadays, just to keep track of them :/

tbh i dont really want tweak week back; too many users spam the pages asking the same "why isnt the art right???" ive been debating bringing up a limit-smth like 3 or so nominations every fortnight per user. as well as there being newer people not asking questions about the art not being right, it would also force people to consider if its really worth it, would they want to use one of their only avaliable nominations on it? thats just my onion though. 18:04, May 1, 2017 (UTC)

I like skts idea with the 3 nominations per user, and i do agree a lot of nominations lately have been really nitpicky. 18:35, 5/01/2017

I have noticed a lot of nominations that have been very picky lately; I agree that it has become a bit of a problem. I don't suppport bringing back tweak week necessarily, since I think it's a positive that images can been improved whenever an issue arises (provided that issue is legitimate and not somebody being nitpicky). I think that it's a good idea to have a 3-nomination limit per two weeks as long as that just applies to people nominating images for shading, earpink, or eye styles and not for, say, a description change. 20:47, May 1, 2017 (UTC)

I agree with the limitation, i haven't tried to be nitpicky, I'm just trying to help Rainbowmistake (talk) 22:08, May 1, 2017 (UTC)chat

Furthermore, I think there's also some greediness going on when it comes to claiming images, imo. Like, constantly rushing to tweak an image is kind of rude, especially when the images belong to users who are still around soo... --PyroNacht (talk) 01:27, May 2, 2017 (UTC)

I think the three tweak nominations per 2 weeks is great. I'm finding when someone is nitpicking (I'm not pointing fingers, only in general since I joined PCA) they post multiple nominations. This might have them actually think about their nominations.

I also want to bring up people reserving art for tweak/redos and the artists aren't even known. I've spotted a few of my art I would very much like to claim was taken and gone before I could even try to reserve it :/ I only got lucky recently when awesome Spooky let me know. I think we should have a rule where the person nominating the tweak should track down the OA's and ask them (if active, say must have done an edit in three months or something, and a member of PCA) if they want it. Users can still reserve, but it will not be official until the user has responded. Even if the nomination is accepted, the list would have something like (awaiting {User} response, if not reserved to {User}) and when the user responds (or doesn't, in a week?) then a date can be added. This would help too for less unnecessary tweak nominations, because the user nominating would have to take more responsibility, rather than just a quick post and a reserve request.

Sorry that's long XD kinda been sitting on that for a while.Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  08:38, May 10, 2017 (UTC)

I believe asking the OAs before tweaking or modifying an image is an issue regarding to courtesy. Like Stealth, I've had numerous of my images getting tweaked without even a warning, which really disappointed me because chances are, I will agree to allow people to tweak my images should they have asked me about it. It disappoints me that this issue is getting so out of hand to the point where boundaries are necessary. At this point, I do agree about enforcing rules regarding to asking the OA(s) of an image before proceeding to tweak them, because every user should have a right to their own images.

Apprentices and Tweaking
As I reserved Honeyfur, I felt like even though apprentices normally can't tweak, they should have the right to tweak their own images. 1) They have the files and should be able to tweak them 2) They should have the right to their own images. Thoughts?

I don't have a problem with an OA of any rank being able to tweak their own image, especially if they're active. Apprentices still shouldn't be able to tweak other people's images, as they're still learning themselves, but tweaking their own image is something different imo.

Yes, definitely. I always didn't get why apprentices couldn't tweak their own images images. Tweaking is also part of learning, and they should especially have a right to their own images.

Yeah I agree. No nominating or tweaking others images or anything, but yes if they want to do their own images, they can.Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  08:39, May 10, 2017 (UTC)

Erm, Stealth, anyone can nominate an image, regardless of rank/membership in PCA. Anyways, I say let the apprentices tweak their own images. It's so unfair otherwise.

Oh sorry mixed up making tweak and tweak nomination :PStealth f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  07:50, May 11, 2017 (UTC)

anymore comments?

Fox only leads are allowed to ask for more comments <span style="">22:42, 5/14/2017

Fox used to be a lead, and since she did start the discussion, I would think she's allowed to prod it for more comments. I've seen many a user do the same and I think it would warrant the same treatment as we would a PC nomination or a charart. She just wants a few more opinions, that's all.

I agree with apprentices tweaking their own images. :) 22:50, May 14, 2017 (UTC)

Branchwing - Join Request
Hey there, may I join? :) Branchwing (talk) 01:09, May 10, 2017 (UTC)

Sure^^ I've added you in as a kit, and make sure to read the guidelines.

Join Request - Erdich
Hi, I was wondering if I could join this lovely project? 20:21 Wed May 10 2017

Sure^^ I've added you in as a kit, and make sure to read the guidelines.

Join Request- Leafmist
Ok. I remeber that I joined this before, but then I wasn't in it anymore. Is this because that I didn't do a charact yet? because the computer I'm allowed to play on sucks, so I can't even go on Paint.Leafmist8 (talk) 02:41, May 12, 2017 (UTC)

Anyways, may I join again?

Welcome! I've added you as a kit, and make sure to read the guidelines again.

Eyes
A few days ago in chat, a user I have forgot noticed Reedwhisker's eyes were blue yet his chararts had his eyes as silver. What would we do now we know that he has blue eyes? Upload over the image? Do I need to do anything for it? also i skimmed over tweaking rules so if I missed something feel free to shoot me --

Nope, just upload over it. No need to nominate a tweak

Same goes for Tornear? Hes said to have yellow eyes but his are blue

also make sure you don't alter the eye style, keep it the same. 14:08, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

Join Request - Lady Mipha
Hi, I wanted to join Project Charart since I have GIMP and everything, can I join? - Lady Mipha (I need to mess with the siggie so yeah...)

Welcome! I've added you as a kit, and make sure to read the guidelines.

I anticipated for Spooky to add you because o god this person's username is Mipha the flashbacks of BotW are happening

they're happening --

Join Request- Jay&#39;s Wing WARRIORcats2507
Hi there, csn I join the project? ^^ Thank you in advance! And is it alright if I use just Clip Studio Paint for art? Jayflight (talk) 06:11, May 15, 2017 (UTC)

Welcome! I've added you as a kit, and make sure to read the guidelines.

mothflights kit alts
should these alts actually be in the early settlers blank? they're warriors by thunderstar's echo, which isn't that long after moth flight's vision. moth flight says it's been many many moons by then in the manga, so idk? what do you guys think 23:40, May 16, 2017 (UTC)

I don't know. It doesn't specify exactly how long it is from mfv to te, it could have taken place just a few days before "hunters", or warriors, were established, for all we know. 01:37, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

If TE was confirmed to be after MFV, then it would be plausible to give them warrior alts instead, because they were already listed in the allegiances as warriors by then.

Join Request?
Hello! I'm hoping to join the warriors wiki! May I join? :) Also, I read the guidelines and the signature, but on how to create a signature is pretty confusing. Could someone maybe help me? If so, that'd be great! ^^ Thank you for your time. Also, I use SAI, is that possible for these character arts? Cosmokitten (talk) 01:09, May 18, 2017 (UTC)