Wikia's forums are a place for the community to discuss subjects with other members. Remember sign your post with four tildes: ~~~~
Click here to edit page
Click here to edit page
I've been thinking about this for a while now. Why do we have Appearance sections in the first place if this wiki allows the posting of images? Clearly letting the reader see a picture is easier than describing the character. In my opinion, it's just unneeded text designed to make articles longer. —Root 
(wall) | (• ◡•)| (❍ᴥ❍ʋ) 00:33, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
- I was confused about that myself when I first joined. I am okay with them being removed, but maybe they can only be kept for info that is possibly interesting/unnoticeable? I don't know. --
Sky
00:41, October 8, 2012 (UTC) - I have actually always thought they were silly and pointless for that same reason. Maybe it was included for characters like Marceline and Jake instead of integrating pictures of different forms that they take into the main area of the article, and then uniformly applied to the other articles arbitrarily. It might also have something to do with different clothing styles for the same reason. The only thing is that the gallery is a separate article, which is maybe undesirable for some reason?
- At any rate, an appearance section is certainly no more pleasing to the eye. I don't think there is a good reason to keep them. Flame Prince Finn 02:47, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
- The appearance section is a good way of describing the character, even though it has already images. Removing it is just nonsense.
I knew you'd come! I had a feeling Talk 18:23, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
- How is it nonsense, though? By removing appearance sections, it would effectively get rid of information the reader has already gathered by looking at an image; in other words, repeated information. What's really useful is describing a character's personality, since that can't be perfectly demonstrated in a picture and needs to be explained with text. Describing how a character looks is not useful information if there is already an image. Readers have eyes. One of the more egregious examples is the Stanley page. The appearance section says, and I quote:
- "Simply put, Stanley is a watermelon."
- Please tell me how this is information that hasn't already been made clear. Now, I think appearance sections would be useful for article with no images. Otherwise, there's no point to them. ——RootSword(wall) 02:02, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
- I like appearence sections for the main characters, and I agree with Blugo. I mean, what if someone was colorblind? Princess Fionna 02:09, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Being colorblind doesn't mean you are blind to all colors. Explain why you think the section should be kept instead of just saying it. -- Sky 02:13, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Being colorblind doesn't mean you are blind to all colors. Explain why you think the section should be kept instead of just saying it. --
- The appearance sections are used to talk about appearances other than the normal appearance, though. Characters don't look the same in every episode, and an appearance section is the place to address that. Granted, this probably only applies to recurring characters. As long as that is addressed, I think I could get behind the removal of the sections.02:11, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Simple solution: use a slideshow like the Marceline page. As long as there's no actual text describing what the character looks like. ——RootSword(wall) 02:17, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
- I absolutely hate slideshows. I personally think they look terrible.02:18, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
- It gets the job done, though...02:21, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Simple solution: use a slideshow like the Marceline page. As long as there's no actual text describing what the character looks like. ——RootSword
- Please tell me how this is information that hasn't already been made clear. Now, I think appearance sections would be useful for article with no images. Otherwise, there's no point to them. ——RootSword
- So should I take this to the voting forums? ——RootSword(wall) 01:43, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, you should take this to the voting forum.01:50, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
