Wikipedia talk:Software screenshots

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comment below moved from Wikipedia:Village pump:

This is a good idea. I have one problem however. I think that a screenshot should be the whole screen. It looks weird to see the windows skin screenshot of firefox without the windows bar (I can tell its windows still). Plus, it doesnt give the user a feel of what the shot looks like. Also, screenshots should be 1024x768 and taken on a system running an open source operating system if the product is an open source product. Also, I think its silly to show wikipedia on the screenshot. The screenshot should be of the product description page, as it includes the firefox logo. I decided to upload a new firefox image to replace the old one: media:Firefoxtest.png. Perl

I'm not sure I agree with you about the open source issue - where a program runs most often on one system, but is also available for others, surely it's better to show the more usual one, as anything else implies bias. In cases where it's more or less evenly used on different systems, its harder to satisfy NPOV, but Windows is more commonly used in itself, and cutting the window-frames off avoids the issue. I don't see any reason to favour an open source operating system over a closed one any more than we'd favour GNOME over KDE.

As for resolution, I worry that a screenshot taken at 1024x768 will lose too much detail when scaled down to thumbnail size, as the majority of interface features will simply become too small to see. But that depends very much on what dimensions are used for the uploaded image and for the thumbnail.

Oh, and I think the reasoning behind showing Wikipedia is that it allows comparison with similar screenshots of other browsers - if the aim of the shot is to show what the program is like, it is more useful for comparable programs to be doing comparable tasks. - IMSoP 17:07, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense, but NPOV means showing all sides of an issue even if the majority is in aggreement over the issue. NPOV would require all operating systems to be shown. (Also, there seems to be confusion over the difference between an operating system and a window manager.) I think that 800x600 is weird because most people use 1024x768. Mabye its easier to see, but whatever. You can include a windows screenshot if you want, but I bet most people won't be able to discern which window manager the current screenshot comes from. I understand and appreciate your idea that the screenshot should be of the main page for comparison, but every time the main page changes, we will have to change the screenshot for every browser article so we can compare different versions. I think it is better to show different pages so people don't assume that they are seeing the same main page for comparison of seperate browswers, when the two shots are of different versions of the main page. Using the product page is much better, IMHO. Perl 17:15, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I wasn't confusing window managers (or desktop environments, or whatever GNOME calls itself) with operating systems; I was merely giving an example of something where we wouldn't take a stance, in response to your suggestion that we should deliberately favour open source. Nor was I saying you'd be able to tell - it was simply an analogy, or hypothetical equivalent.

As for the main page changing, that's an interesting point - although I don't think the actual layout of the main page changes all that often, only the fine details of what is linked to. Also, do all browsers have an equivalent of the "product page"? - IMSoP 17:27, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

When I said there was confusion between os's and wm's I wasn't talking about you confusing them. I meant that people confuse them frequently. The main page is about to be changed : Main Page/Test, and we will probably be experimenting with the margins of tables etc for a while afterwards. Perl 17:46, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

All browsers either have a 'product page' or are not worthy of being in this encyclopedia, according to many users who believe that something must be well-known in order to be included -- if it doesn't have a webpage, it's obviously not "worthy". Nonetheless, I agree with Perl -- if possible, open source software should be depicted on an open source OS. Opera is one of the only browsers I've seen that works better on Windows, and that's only because Linux doesn't come with Times New Roman, and defaults to Sans Serif, so Opera depicts many pages (including Wikipedia) with ugly and tiny fonts. Otherwise (especially with the Mozilla browsers), they're better on Linux. cryptfiend64 22:13, May 19, 2004 (UTC)

Any OS will be fine, as long as it is using the default theme/skin. Perhap we should show the default homepage? If no default, then show http://www.example.org, or product page as some suggested. Anyway, the screenshot should be as small as possible (as long as all/most UI elements are visible). Taking 1024×768 is not good when viewed as thumbnail. My recommendation is 640×480. And please use PNG over JPEG/GIF. --Minghong 09:58, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

from Mozilla Firefox: Despite prior discussions it was never mentioend that using Wikipedia Main Page for screenshot clerly conflicts with the Wikipedia:Avoid_self-references policy. ed g2s • talk 13:45, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No, it does not, what is meant by the avoid self-references reccomendations is that people should not write something like, some web pages, such as the one you're reading etc. However if you're going to take a screenshot with a random webpage you might just as well pick wikipedia. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 16:46, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)

Agreed with Ævar. Andre (talk) 19:34, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

The screenshot shouldn't be of a random page, but the product page. This usually includes the product logo as well. A self-reference could be of the form "such as this encyclopaedia", so any reference to Wikipedia itself should be avoided. Also choosing Wikipedia as a "good" page to take a screenshot of is arguably not NPOV. A screenshot of the product page is NPOV and works in any context. The Wikipedia front page is also full of current affairs and so is not timeless. A product page is effectively part of that product (or at least that build), and is relevant information with respect to the article. ed g2s • talk 21:27, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I have to agree with the original poster: Wikipedia screensots in pages other than Wikipedia is self-reference. The way I see self-reference, a page should stand alone: there should be no sign it is a Wikipedia article rather than an Encyclopedia Britannica article. I see no difference between browser screenshots use Wikipedia as an example and using "Wikipedia" as an example of a word beginning with "W" in the W article. —Ben FrantzDale 14:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)