Category talk:Pixlr
The name is not clear what this category means (found in no dictionary). The intention seems similarly to Category:Images of low quality and Category:Images in lossless format with lossy compression artifacts --Perhelion (talk) 03:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've done this edit to. -- Perhelion (talk) 03:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- I did create the category because there where so many images in it; I did not filled it up myself. I guess that pixlr is some sort of jargon for pixelation errors (contraction) due to compression/decompression of low quality images. It seems indeed related to Category:Images in lossless format with lossy compression artifacts, but limited to icons and other small windows related objects. Nowadays, Pixlr is a public domain photo editor. No clear idea what the right name should be. --Foroa (talk) 06:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, I see "pixilated" would also apply? Now I actually see the «Category:Images in lossless format with lossy compression artifacts» is not applicable and different (because these are in lossy format). So I would suggest to rename this Category to «pixelation errors» as a subcategory of Category:Images with inappropriate JPEG compression (partially accurate Category:Images which should be in PNG format)!? -- Perhelion (talk) 15:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- I did create the category because there where so many images in it; I did not filled it up myself. I guess that pixlr is some sort of jargon for pixelation errors (contraction) due to compression/decompression of low quality images. It seems indeed related to Category:Images in lossless format with lossy compression artifacts, but limited to icons and other small windows related objects. Nowadays, Pixlr is a public domain photo editor. No clear idea what the right name should be. --Foroa (talk) 06:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
pixlr seems the name of an online graphic editor software. The images presents in the category seem to be screenshots. See [[1]] for more information. I don't know what to applies for its screenshot. The website seems to say 'free to use' as gratis, so maybe it should be deleted... Esby (talk) 15:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
There's nothing wrong with the category, although the file quality is problematically bad. That being said, all of the images are in use on is.wikibooks, so I won't pursue the matter any further. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:28, 14 June 2014 (UTC)