Artifact image, as well as being a face and caption. : Demoted To Extra

That's perfect. My only issue with the original take was that the last arrow wasn't 100% on Cyclops, but this handles that nicely.

The caption could briefly mention that there are three movies in some way, like "Cyclops over three movies: Going, going, gone...." That's a terrible caption (my mind's not focusing on anything decent), don't even think of using it, but it's natural enough for the caption to include something like "three movies."

Over the course of the movie trilogy, Cyclops moves to the back, and Wolverine moves to the front.

I think yellow arrows with black outline is the best one.

Bump because there seems to be a dispute on the discussion page.

Haha oh wow. The people posting in the discussion page for that article are ABSOLUTELY PISSED!

I can't help but lol at how they overreact and don't consider that there are actual rules and procedures on this site to determine a picture.

That said, lets put up the X-Men Cyclop picture and just be done with it please.

"Haha oh wow. The people posting in the discussion page for that article are ABSOLUTELY PISSED!"

Correction.

We're getting sick of you guys strolling in to make condescending, snarky jeers about the former main image page when that wasn't even what we were discussing.

To tell all of you what I had told Helter Skelter: My participation in the Image Pickin' thread was long since over. I had said all I wanted to, and left the thread to run its course. I've already done what I feel would be the best middle ground on the matter.

To wit, I did that hours before the first of you (Triple Elation) stopped by to talk down to us in "really simple" terms. We've been trying to discuss something else, but you guys keep jumping in to harp on the removal of the previous main image page. If we're "ABSOLUTELY PISSED!'" about something, it's that you guys can't be bothered to read a discussion before posting in it—and the attitudes you have taken in doing so are that much more infuriating.

Yes, by posting here on this thread once again, I'm invalidating what I told Helter Skelter about no longer participating—but that's only because I figured something was up after the third troper stopped by to make condescending jeers about the former main image page and clearly took no time to read the discussion at hand.

If you're going to participate in the discussion on the discussion page, do us all a favor and read the freakin' posts first. As Unclouded TJ said, you are all addressing a point made weeks ago. We've since moved on to a new matter.

(EDIT: Expanded a little on what I posted initially.)

edited 5th Feb '11 4:14:12 PM by TrevMUN

Ahem... I did read the complete discussion before I posted my suggestion.

I did not try to "make fun" of you. I actually agreed that the general example of the former Trope Namer having lost so much relevance within the confines of the wiki that it is no longer the page image any more is by itself a meta example of the the trope. That's why I suggested you add it to the trope's main page itself, not just as a remark in the Anime example, but as a specific example in its own right in a seperate folder "New Media" (because we have no other pre-existing examples in New Media yet for this trope.

But if you think that my message was snarky and condescending (I agree that it might have been a little curt) well, by all means ignore it. I don't care about an obscure character of an obscure Manga series I never heard about.

"I actually agreed that the general example of the former Trope Namer having lost so much relevance within the confines of the wiki that it is no longer the page image any more is by itself a meta example of the the trope. That's why I suggested you add it to the trope's main page itself, not just as a remark in the Anime example, but as a specific example in its own right in a seperate folder "New Media" (because we have no other pre-existing examples in New Media yet for this trope."

Two things.

1. You should have paid more attention to what we were discussing involving Camacan. Hitherto An IP Address had some other things to say on what Camacan's been doing. Until we resolve that, we can't do anything with the example.

2. If you were aware of the example we were discussing, you should have said so, and focused more on that than espousing your opinion on the former page image. The way your post is worded, it sounds like a cheeky and sarcastic suggestion that is unaware there is already such an example that's being discussed.

Now, please—let's take that topic to the discussion page where it belongs, and leave this thread for picking a new image.

(EDIT: Wiki markup goof.)

edited 5th Feb '11 4:52:48 PM by TrevMUN

Image is up with a commented-out note pointing to this thread. I think we're done here.