Of note is also that en.wp has been discussing if they would like the default thumbnail size to be raised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Increase_default_thumbnail_size_from_220px_to_250px
Consensus so far seems to point towards upping the default to at least 250, if not 300px. If that were to pass and other wiki's would not vehemently object, then similar operational concerns would be relevant for that, making it logical that both suggestions would benefit from being executed at roughly the same time. DJ On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 1:02 PM Derk-Jan Hartman < d.j.hartman+wmf...@gmail.com> wrote: > By default in MediaWiki, they are 120 pixel height, 120 pixel width. > > > Boxed 120x120. So neither dimension may exceed 120, but most thumbnails > will actually be smaller than that on one of the dimensions. > > Other wikis often increase the default gallery size. 200x200 would be a >> better default (or possibly even larger!). > > > I think we should do some user testing on that. Default normal thumbnails > are already 220px wide, 200 might be too big, but user testing seems best. > > There's a 2013 comment in the above Phabricator thread saying that >> different language editions shouldn't use different thumbnail sizes to >> prevent needlessly creating tons of files. That said, this ship has already >> sailed - tons of galleries already custom-set larger sizes, and >> Module:Gallery on English Wikipedia even tries to use 180x180 as the >> default for when people use a template to create a Gallery. > > > This would still hold true. There is a big difference between 1 wiki > deviating and ALL wikis deviating from a standard in terms of capacity (how > many differing thumbnails will get generated). Something like > Module:Gallery doesn't really register in that regard, as Category and > Special:NewFiles galleries are probably generating a ton more thumbnails > than any gallery in a wiki page will. > > There are also performance considerations. If that switch were to happen > in one go (essentially not possible, all wiki's would hammer the > thumbnailing api) and we would duplicate the file storage required for that > 'bracket' of files, which may or may not be possible. A change might have > to be made gradually (to avoid ddos the thumbnailer), and once the change > has been made likely we have to clean up the old thumbnail sizes as they > are not likely to be used any longer. We have done this before, there is > probably a maintenance script to cleanup thumbnails of certain sizes > somewhere.... > > The biggest issue might be that the gallery size of 120x120 is also used > by the file history table... So unless we want to double the file count for > this bracket, we would have to increase that size as well. > > More generally, what are the sizes of thumbnails already created by >> default? > > > The current pre rendered sizes are [ 320, 640, 800, 1280 ]. These are the > sizes for the download actions, and sizes used by MultimediaViewer. > These pre rendered sizes are pretty arbitrary and some improvements are > probably possible there. However it doesn't really matter for this issue. > What matters here is to limit the amount of common sizes used and the > pre-rendering doesn't actually take into account all common sizes (for > reasons). > > So > 1. Figure out a good new size > 2. Test the new size > 3. Decide if we want to up the size of file history items as well > 4. Roughly calculate how many bytes of thumbnails we would have to > generate and how much data that would take up. (depending on what to do > with file history this should also take into account old versions of files). > 5. See if we can handle that increase temporarily and/or permanently. > > Several points of this likely require involvement of the operations and > services (swift data storage and thumbor) teams. > > We could also introduce a new wgGalleryOptions setting and only update the > default for the gallery tag (traditional mode) itself and leave all other > thumbnail sizes of special pages, categories, file history etc at their > current size. This would likely be easier to deploy, but might be less > future proof (people might ask for those to be changed as an immediate > followup). > > DJ > > > On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 7:09 PM <peter.ingra...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> I'd like to talk about the default gallery settings, and the technical >> feasibility of updating them. By default in MediaWiki, they are 120 pixel >> height, 120 pixel width: >> * >> https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki/blob/master/includes/SetupDynamicConfig.php#L115-L123 >> * https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgGalleryOptions >> >> This is, in retrospect, too small. It's fine for something like a >> gallery of simple images that display well at low resolutions like flags, >> but it's woefully undersized for the far more common case of detailed >> artwork, photographs, screenshots, etc. Many other user-facing websites >> have adopted to show larger pictures when possible, backed by consumer >> studies. Other wikis often increase the default gallery size. 200x200 >> would be a better default (or possibly even larger!). >> >> What would be required to merge a change of this? Ideally for all WMF >> projects on MediaWiki, or all Wikipedias, but the English language edition >> of Wikipedia would also work. There's an old Phabricator ticket filed in >> 2012 (!) asking for permission to increase the Hebrew Wikipedia default >> gallery size: >> * https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T43712 >> >> And judging by the file currently used, it seems Swedish Wikipedia >> already has a larger size: >> * >> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/plugins/gitiles/operations/mediawiki-config/+/refs/heads/master/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php#11383 >> >> However, I was warned that it's possible the default image thumbnailer >> might need to be updated to create thumbnails at whatever the new default >> is. There's a 2013 comment in the above Phabricator thread saying that >> different language editions shouldn't use different thumbnail sizes to >> prevent needlessly creating tons of files. That said, this ship has >> already sailed - tons of galleries already custom-set larger sizes, and >> Module:Gallery on English Wikipedia even tries to use 180x180 as the >> default for when people use a template to create a Gallery. More >> generally, what are the sizes of thumbnails already created by default? If >> there's truly a desire to not create a new default image size, fine, let's >> set the gallery default to some value that's already being created (say, >> 220x220?). That won't cause any additional load, then. It might even >> reduce load, since fewer editors will feel the need to adjust gallery sizes >> upward manually to random bespoke sizes. >> >> I'd like to get this change eventually merged in. If there's anything >> else stopping just changing the above setting to a larger default, or >> stakeholders who'd need to be convinced, would be happy to hear feedback. >> >> (Context: We had a hacking night at the NYC Wikimedia chapter, and this >> list was recommended as a good place to take the temperature of this >> proposal. See >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Hacking_Night_January_2024 >> .) >> >> -SnowFire >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikitech-l mailing list -- wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikitech-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikitech-l.lists.wikimedia.org/ >> >
_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list -- wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wikitech-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikitech-l.lists.wikimedia.org/
