Category talk:Candidates for deletion

Removing animated pngs for gifs
Deletion request: File:FoE 2021 10.png

I think this speaks to a larger issue of how we want to handle animated pngs. The file flagged for deletion wasn't a "fallback" file, it's the original. Thanks to Fandom limitations, apngs don't animate when linked by the normal  syntax. A user converted it to a gif, degrading its quality (gifs don't support semi-transparency) but allowing it to animate. Fortunately it's not drastic on the flagged file, but it is noticeable in the way the glow does not fade out smoothly.

There is a workaround for apngs, where a direct link to the file will allow it to animate, though it has its own drawbacks. Its messier syntactically, the link doesn't show in "What links here", if the file's renamed it needs to be manually updated because redirects don't work with direct links. The workaround also can't be used in galleries, where we'd still be forced to choose between an animated-at-reduced-quality image vs the static original.

So tl;dr: do we update our file policy that apngs should be converted to gifs, acknowledging the quality degradation but allowing easier animation, or do we keep to using original formats, acknowledging that they need more work in linking and can't animate in galleries? RinasaurusRex (talk) 13:55, 12 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I had no idea about any of this! Very interesting technical problem...


 * Based on your considerations, I think the way things currently are is okay; in other words, we can keep uploading files in their original apng format and direct-link to them in tables, with the understanding that the thumbnails will only show the first frame in galleries. This way, we can avoid near-duplicate files, quality degradation and future confusion (such as mine 😛).


 * Additionally, to remedy the "What links here" problem we could manually add a link to the page that a given apng file is used in.  &#x232B; 0x08 &#x27E8;BACKSPACE&#x27E9; &#x27E8;talk&#x27E9; 14:30, 13 November 2022 (UTC)