-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Imgur Kaput
- Thread starter Fireld
- Start date
-
- Tags
- imgur vs battles wiki
- Status
- 35,060
- 41,649
How would we handle multiple scans for foreign languages where we have the kanji text and the translation scan in tandem?
- 34,628
- 41,944
Problem is, Fandom has a strict TOS against images that might be too violent or NSFW. Which scans and GIFs that may be violent may need other platforms.
It's obvious there should be rules against using Imgur and favor other platforms. If it doesn't violate anything Fandom related, then upload them to wiki. Otherwise, Gyazo and Catbox are often cited. Gyazo's main issue is something to do with only 10 recent uploads, but there can still be archived URLs from what Agnaa mentioned. Catbox also works, but the 200 MB limit is the main thing. And indeed, it is becoming harder to find alternatives that do not require paid subscriptions.@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @Mr. Bambu @DarkDragonMedeus @Just_a_Random_Butler @Agnaa @Qawsedf234 @Celestial_Pegasus @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @GrathOfLux @Dereck03 @Planck69 @LephyrTheRevanchist
We really need to reach a conclusion regarding this issue, and I am not well informed about the comparative quality and longterm reliability of image hosting sites.
- 18,195
- 19,618
Catbox is 200 MB per file. Paying money lets you increase this up to 1000 MB per file. They don't really have reason to do account-based limits, since you don't need to log in to upload.
As I've said, the main hiccup with it is that it's DNS blocked in Australia (meaning if people in that country don't use a public/global DNS server, they can't access it). Although this might not be a thing any more, since I can access it on my phone just fine.
Last edited:
- 21,631
- 13,558
I feel like we should just at best encourage others to find an alternative to be safe as opposed to just outright abandoning Imgur given a lot of pages we have uses Imgur scans out the wazoo for sources. Like Agnaa said earlier, this seems to be a temporary issue and Imgur themselves haven't outright told us that they're going to nuke everyone's posts on the site even if they're privated or are from a legit account.
- 11,748
- 14,169
Composite the image to be side-by-side or just upload both and link them each in the same relevant section of text.
I'm going to be honest, DDM, and forgive me if I'm not the most well versed in this, but I have never at any point in the last near decade I've been here observed the higher ups taking any particular issue with the scans that wasn't outright troll images or risque games that we since don't allow anymore.
- 18,195
- 19,618
In addition to this, I'm certain that they would contact us about any issues well in advance, rather than deleting one of their largest and most popular wikis with no warning.
- 34,628
- 41,944
It's been a while since I last heard, not sure if their policy had to do with violence. But are definitely strict if there's nudity as well as containing banned words
- 177,271
- 90,151
From what I recall, I have asked a Fandom staff member outright about if there is a risk that our wiki gets deleted due to copyright complaints if too many full comicbook scans are uploaded to it, and I was told yes, also going by memory, but nevertheless.
- 18,195
- 19,618
YouTube is considered quite unideal, given how copyright strikes, channel closures, and uploader decisions can result in videos being taken down. And heck, some channels can edit them after they've been uploaded, to a limited extent.
Websites like Imgur, Catbox, and even Fandom can handle videos nowadays, so I think it's better to put them there instead.
- 10,201
- 9,955
I have had some videos taken down on YouTube, even when they were private and short.
poor imgur
- 177,271
- 90,151
I asked ChatGPT for some information about Catbox.
"Catbox’s stated retention policy is basically “permanent,” but the practical reliability depends on what you mean by reliable: uptime, moderation/takedowns, and long-term business survival are different risks.
So in terms of “will staff remove it just because it’s old?” The site’s own documentation says no—age alone isn’t a deletion reason.
Even with “forever” retention, files can be removed if they trigger enforcement:
Catbox is a small operation, and it’s blunt in its own FAQ that some countries/ISPs block or interfere with access, and the workaround may be DNS changes or a VPN.
So “reliable” in the sense of always reachable worldwide is not guaranteed.
No one can promise this for any third-party host, but you can judge risk signals:
Signals in favor of longevity
Signals of shutdown risk
If you upload non-problematic content and keep the link:
If you tell me what kind of images you’re hosting (personal photos, art portfolio, memes, project assets, etc.) and whether you need public hotlinks, I can suggest a redundancy setup that fits that use case."
"Catbox’s stated retention policy is basically “permanent,” but the practical reliability depends on what you mean by reliable: uptime, moderation/takedowns, and long-term business survival are different risks.
How long uploads are supposed to last
- Official policy: “Forever.” Catbox’s FAQ literally answers “How long does Catbox keep files for?” with “Forever … until the heat death of the universe.”
- Privacy/Legal page also says files you upload are available “forever, until you delete them.”
- Storage/archival behavior: Catbox has historically moved inactive anonymous files to cheaper storage (AWS S3) after ~5 months of no access, but the intent is still that they remain retrievable (you might see an intermission page while it’s fetched).
So in terms of “will staff remove it just because it’s old?” The site’s own documentation says no—age alone isn’t a deletion reason.
Reasons your file
Even with “forever” retention, files can be removed if they trigger enforcement:
- Banned content / AUP violations → files deleted, accounts banned.
- Copyright (DMCA) takedowns → content can be removed/disabled if a valid claim is filed.
- Commercial/CDN-style hotlinking without approval is explicitly disallowed in the FAQ (could lead to punitive action).
Site uptime and access reliability (day-to-day)
Catbox is a small operation, and it’s blunt in its own FAQ that some countries/ISPs block or interfere with access, and the workaround may be DNS changes or a VPN.
So “reliable” in the sense of always reachable worldwide is not guaranteed.
Will Catbox still exist in X years?
No one can promise this for any third-party host, but you can judge risk signals:
Signals in favor of longevity
- It’s been around for roughly a decade (the project publicly celebrated a “7th Birthday” in April 2022, implying a ~2015 start, and it’s still operating in 2025/2026).
- The operator has shown willingness to invest personal money and infrastructure changes to keep it running (colocation, offsite storage, etc.).
Signals of shutdown risk
- It’s user-funded, and the blog documents real funding shocks (e.g., Patreon suspension) and monthly deficits if funding drops, plus an explicit need to replace lost recurring income.
A realistic expectation (not a guarantee)
If you upload non-problematic content and keep the link:
- Retention: very plausibly many years (Catbox’s stated intent is indefinite).
- But for “how many years will the site itself last?”: it’s credible as a multi-year host given its track record, but it’s still a small, donation/store-supported service, so 10+ year certainty is not something you should bank your only copy on.
Practical advice if you care about long-term preservation
- Treat Catbox as a sharing link, not your only archive.
- Keep an original local copy, and ideally a second independent backup (another host, cloud storage, or your own domain).
- If you need “will still exist in 5–10 years” assurances, use paid storage with clearer SLAs/contractual terms.
If you tell me what kind of images you’re hosting (personal photos, art portfolio, memes, project assets, etc.) and whether you need public hotlinks, I can suggest a redundancy setup that fits that use case."
- 177,271
- 90,151
I was referring to that full comicbook pages are dangerous to upload to our wiki, not full-length issues with entire stories. Not even Imgur allows the second alternative as far as I am aware.
Last edited:
- 177,271
- 90,151
Anyway, based on this evaluation, I personally don't mind if we begin to allow Catbox links, but we likely need to provide official instructions in our wiki for optimal usage of both Imgur and Catbox, in order to minimise the number of disappeared image links.I asked ChatGPT for some information about Catbox.
"Catbox’s stated retention policy is basically “permanent,” but the practical reliability depends on what you mean by reliable: uptime, moderation/takedowns, and long-term business survival are different risks.
How long uploads are supposed to last
- Official policy: “Forever.” Catbox’s FAQ literally answers “How long does Catbox keep files for?” with “Forever … until the heat death of the universe.”
- Privacy/Legal page also says files you upload are available “forever, until you delete them.”
- Storage/archival behavior: Catbox has historically moved inactive anonymous files to cheaper storage (AWS S3) after ~5 months of no access, but the intent is still that they remain retrievable (you might see an intermission page while it’s fetched).
So in terms of “will staff remove it just because it’s old?” The site’s own documentation says no—age alone isn’t a deletion reason.
Reasons your file
Even with “forever” retention, files can be removed if they trigger enforcement:
- Banned content / AUP violations → files deleted, accounts banned.
- Copyright (DMCA) takedowns → content can be removed/disabled if a valid claim is filed.
- Commercial/CDN-style hotlinking without approval is explicitly disallowed in the FAQ (could lead to punitive action).
Site uptime and access reliability (day-to-day)
Catbox is a small operation, and it’s blunt in its own FAQ that some countries/ISPs block or interfere with access, and the workaround may be DNS changes or a VPN.
So “reliable” in the sense of always reachable worldwide is not guaranteed.
Will Catbox still exist in X years?
No one can promise this for any third-party host, but you can judge risk signals:
Signals in favor of longevity
- It’s been around for roughly a decade (the project publicly celebrated a “7th Birthday” in April 2022, implying a ~2015 start, and it’s still operating in 2025/2026).
- The operator has shown willingness to invest personal money and infrastructure changes to keep it running (colocation, offsite storage, etc.).
Signals of shutdown risk
- It’s user-funded, and the blog documents real funding shocks (e.g., Patreon suspension) and monthly deficits if funding drops, plus an explicit need to replace lost recurring income.
A realistic expectation (not a guarantee)
If you upload non-problematic content and keep the link:
- Retention: very plausibly many years (Catbox’s stated intent is indefinite).
- But for “how many years will the site itself last?”: it’s credible as a multi-year host given its track record, but it’s still a small, donation/store-supported service, so 10+ year certainty is not something you should bank your only copy on.
Practical advice if you care about long-term preservation
- Treat Catbox as a sharing link, not your only archive.
- Keep an original local copy, and ideally a second independent backup (another host, cloud storage, or your own domain).
- If you need “will still exist in 5–10 years” assurances, use paid storage with clearer SLAs/contractual terms.
If you tell me what kind of images you’re hosting (personal photos, art portfolio, memes, project assets, etc.) and whether you need public hotlinks, I can suggest a redundancy setup that fits that use case."
Should I ask about any other especially promising image-hosting sites as well?
- 177,271
- 90,151
Speaking of which, I did upload a two-page iconic quote by Thor to our wiki a while back, so I would appreciate if somebody can upload that file to Imgur or Catbox instead, so the image file hosted in our wiki can be replaced and deleted.I was referring to that full comicbook pages are dangerous to upload to our wiki, not full-length issues with entire stories. Not even Imgur allows the second alternative as far as I am aware.
- 18,195
- 19,618
From this thread the others don't seem too promising, but I could write up some official instructions on using them.Anyway, based on this evaluation, I personally don't mind if we begin to allow Catbox links, but we likely need to provide official instructions in our wiki for optimal usage of both Imgur and Catbox, in order to minimise the number of disappeared image links.
Should I ask about any other especially promising image-hosting sites as well?
- 18,195
- 19,618
Under our Editing Rules we currently have:
Gfycat has shut down, so we don't need to mention it any more.
- 177,271
- 90,151
Thank you very much for your help. That text seems good, except for that it should be much more clearly and strongly underlined that full-page comicbook scans should not be uploaded directly to our wiki.
- 18,195
- 19,618
How about instead
But really, if we want to implement that as a hard and fast rule, we might want to have a separate rule about that elsewhere, and inform people who patrol that any images of that kind should be deleted.
If you think it's necessary, that could be bolded.
But really, if we want to implement that as a hard and fast rule, we might want to have a separate rule about that elsewhere, and inform people who patrol that any images of that kind should be deleted.
- 177,271
- 90,151
Thank you again. That version seems good enough to use as a modified rule text, except for that "cannot" should likely be replaced with "are not allowed to".
That said, I do not think that this has been a sufficient problem to mandate systematic removals of all such files that are previously in our wiki.
That said, I do not think that this has been a sufficient problem to mandate systematic removals of all such files that are previously in our wiki.
- 11,748
- 14,169
Yeah that's what I meant as well. Don't upload full comic scans as in full, uncut pages.I was referring to that full comicbook pages are dangerous to upload to our wiki, not full-length issues with entire stories. Not even Imgur allows the second alternative as far as I am aware.
Last edited:
- 4,555
- 3,437
Using imgchest might be fine for an alternative.
The appearance is seemingly similar to imgur, same with how it works. Registering is free, which comes with 20 file and 30MB maximum for a single post. Unlimited space as far as i know. Similar to imgur, you can add descriptions below any file in any post as well.
A short example.
The appearance is seemingly similar to imgur, same with how it works. Registering is free, which comes with 20 file and 30MB maximum for a single post. Unlimited space as far as i know. Similar to imgur, you can add descriptions below any file in any post as well.
A short example.
- 177,271
- 90,151
Here is what ChatGPT told me about Image Chest/imgchest.com. It does not seem as reliable as Catbox.
But its Terms of Service explicitly say it can remove images that violate its rules, including without notice.
So in practice, “forever” means “no planned expiry for allowed content,” not a guarantee.
A blog post titled “The Real Cost of Keeping Image Chest Online” says it costs thousands per month to run, and frames sustainability as a real constraint.
That’s not automatically bad—just a reminder that free hosting depends on ongoing funding, traffic, and operator motivation.
There’s no honest way to promise a number, but you can think in risk tiers:
If your upload is clearly within rules and not attracting complaints, the removal risk is usually low—but non-zero because the ToS allows takedowns (rule violations, DMCA/copyright, illegal content, etc.).
Practical expectation: Often “indefinite,” until something triggers enforcement—but you should assume you could lose it at any time.
Given the domain has been around since 2019 and is registered out to 2030, plus ongoing posts/features, I’d treat Image Chest as reasonably likely to be around for “several years,” but not something I’d bet irreplaceable archives on for decades.
A sensible planning assumption (not a guarantee):
If the images matter (projects, documentation, references), the safest pattern is:
If you tell me what you’re optimizing for (NSFW allowed vs. strict, public vs. private, hotlinking, maximum “don’t delete me” priority), I can suggest hosting strategies that match that risk level.
How reliable is imgchest.com (Image Chest)?
“Reliable” for an image host really breaks into two things:- Will my image URL keep working? (uptime + business longevity)
- Will my image stay hosted? (policy + moderation/legal removals)
What Image Chest publicly signals about permanence
Image Chest markets itself as a “forever home” for media (that wording appears on its site materials and listings).But its Terms of Service explicitly say it can remove images that violate its rules, including without notice.
So in practice, “forever” means “no planned expiry for allowed content,” not a guarantee.
Operational maturity / track record signals
- Domain age: WHOIS data shows the domain was created in 2019, and the registry expiry is currently 2030 (renewed/held long-term, which is a mild positive signal).
- History/roadmap: Image Chest’s own “About” page snippet/timeline indicates it launched/grew around that 2019–2020 period and continued adding features (e.g., API).
- Public status page: They operate a status page showing current service health (though the “history” page in this snapshot shows no incident history listed).
Sustainability / shutdown risk (the biggest unknown)
A blog post titled “The Real Cost of Keeping Image Chest Online” says it costs thousands per month to run, and frames sustainability as a real constraint.
That’s not automatically bad—just a reminder that free hosting depends on ongoing funding, traffic, and operator motivation.
So… how many years is an upload likely to remain?
There’s no honest way to promise a number, but you can think in risk tiers:
1) Removal by staff (policy/moderation/legal)
If your upload is clearly within rules and not attracting complaints, the removal risk is usually low—but non-zero because the ToS allows takedowns (rule violations, DMCA/copyright, illegal content, etc.).
Practical expectation: Often “indefinite,” until something triggers enforcement—but you should assume you could lose it at any time.
2) Site longevity (shutting down)
Given the domain has been around since 2019 and is registered out to 2030, plus ongoing posts/features, I’d treat Image Chest as reasonably likely to be around for “several years,” but not something I’d bet irreplaceable archives on for decades.
A sensible planning assumption (not a guarantee):
- 2–5 years: a reasonable expectation for “URL still works” if the site stays operated.
- 5–10 years: plausible, but increasingly dependent on funding and operator continuity.
- 10+ years: possible, but you should plan as if it won’t be that long.
If you need “years/decades” reliability
If the images matter (projects, documentation, references), the safest pattern is:
- Keep your own local backup (and ideally a second backup).
- Mirror to at least two independent hosts.
- For truly archival intent, consider an archival-focused service (or self-hosting on storage you control).
If you tell me what you’re optimizing for (NSFW allowed vs. strict, public vs. private, hotlinking, maximum “don’t delete me” priority), I can suggest hosting strategies that match that risk level.
- 18,195
- 19,618
Right, that's the one I forgot about.
The issues I see are:
- Younger than Catbox/Imgur, increasing doubt about how long it'll stay around for.
- Restrictions on the types of files that can be uploaded. Videos can only be uploaded as mp4s, and only by registered users (I'll make an account to investigate this further over the next few days).
- Limit on size of albums (10 for unregistered, 20 for registered, 50 for paid)
- 18,195
- 19,618
Ultimately, I don't think being around for 6 years instead of 10 years is a large enough difference that we should completely dismiss it.
But then again, I do think our wiki, Imgur, and Catbox together would cover our bases well enough, so I wouldn't be stressed over leaving out ImageChest.
But then again, I do think our wiki, Imgur, and Catbox together would cover our bases well enough, so I wouldn't be stressed over leaving out ImageChest.
- 21,631
- 13,558
Can we get actual confirmation from folks that uses Image chest if it's unreliable as opposed to a ChatGPT response? I don't want to jump to conclusions on a site just from an AI response.
- 6,618
- 3,528
I've been using it for around 2 weeks and nothing wrong so far. Only real downside is the upload limit of 30 mb per album. There's even some 1 year old+ files still up and going in there
- 1,876
- 4,525
I've used it to replace Imgur for a year and a half now. I think the site's best point of appeal is that it has nearly all of Imgur's most important features, like easy uploads of Gifs and moderately-sized videos (I've actually found video uploading better with Imagechest personally), public comments under posts, and galleries with large titles, text captions under images, and one-page scrolling (when I explored alternatives a while ago, I found that many sites with galleries forced you to navigate by clicking each image). A few features require you to make an account, but you can easily privatize your account and its images against those without links to them.
As for the limit of 20 files per gallery, I've always been able to upload far more despite not having a premium account. It could just be a bug, so maybe someone else should test it.
I don't think the file size limit of 30 megabytes would be a problem for the vast majority of videos/gif/images used as citation. I feel like in most cases, you won't miss anything important by cropping/removing unimportant scans or parts of a video.
The only real potential issue is long-term viability since Imagechest is newer than the other sites, but I agree with Agnaa that's it's likely not a big deal. Either way, the site's owner suggested in the FAQ that users will be alerted if some kind of change forces images to be taken down.
- 18,195
- 19,618
That's just how long their domain has been registered for. Website owners often book these in chunks of years or a decade at most. I don't think DNS providers can (or want to) sell rights to domain names forever.Well, the Image Chest owners have also only ensured that their site will stay around until 2030, and they do not have nearly as good security guarantees going by what I understood.
- 21,631
- 13,558
@Lloydblitzed @ProfectusInfinity Do either of you know how long of a video/gif you're allowed to post for a single gallery or does it depend on how much it takes up the 30 MB space?
- 1,876
- 4,525
I think it just depends on space. I've uploaded a 45-minute video before.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
