Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:30, 13 March 2015

New York City Stub‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lede image dispute

Please consider joining the feedback request service. An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list: History and geography When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

There is a dispute between two editors about which lede image is better for the article:

Other potential lede images can be found here.

Opinions? BMK (talk) 03:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

• Oppose both images due to poor quality lens distortion from the sides and lack of tilt-shift. I recommend new camera gear and a short course in photography. Viriditas (talk) 04:07, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Actually, it may have escaped your notice that "oppose" is not an option here. You can prefer Image #1 or you can prefer Image #2,or you can suggest another image from the pool in Commons, but the article is going to have a lede image, whatever your opinions are about the photographs and the photographers. Unless, of course, you're willing to fly from Hawaii to New York City and take a photo and upload it - in which case I'll be sure to evaluate it with the same neutrality and lack of prejudice you brought to this comment. Mahalo, okole puka. BMK (talk) 05:29, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
    • I oppose both images for the reasons I gave. There is no "lack" of neutrality nor prejudice inherent in my comment. Image 2 (the current image in the lead), which fails to adequtely illustrate the street (the topic), also demonstrates the classical leaning, falling back effect inherent in poor photos that don't use tilt-shift. For those two objective reasons, image 2 is unsuitable. Image 1 suffers from similar tilt-shift and distortion issues, although it illustrates more of the street, but not enough. For those reasons, neither image is a good fit for this article. Perhaps you can find other images to choose from instead of asking others to do your homework for you. Viriditas (talk) 05:55, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
      • Since you clearly know nothing about the street, or what's on it, and since you failed to suggest an alternative from the Commons image pool immediiately available to us, or do any research about other possible CC images which we might use, there's no particular reason to take your comments into account at all, except, of course, that your obvious superiority to us lowly peons requires us to get on bended knee and kiss your ring. Since we actually live in a democracy, however, and since Misplaced Pages is more of an anarchy than anything else, I'll just ignore your bullshit and wait for the comments of other editors more interested in improving the encyclopedia, and less involved with the aggrandizement of their own egos. BMK (talk) 06:33, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
        • Await all you want, but I must note that you 1) failed to address my points, 2) assumed bad faith and engaged in personal attacks, and 3) failed to offer specific alternative images to choose from. I hope you won't ignore these points again. Or to simplify it for you: what good reason is there for anyone to use these images? I can't think of one. Viriditas (talk) 06:55, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
          • Since you seem a little lost, let me make it somewhat simpler for you to understand: (1) Choose image 1, (2) Choose image 2, (3) Choose another image from the Commons, {4) Choose another CC image of your choice, from wherever you may find it.

            Is that something that you're able to understand, or shall I rephrase it in words of one syllable so you can take it in more easily? BMK (talk) 07:37, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

            • Sorry, but that's really not how an RfC works; you received comments on the dispute. If you wish to receive other comments on other images, you'll need to present them. You're actually asking RfC respondents to do more than respond? That's a nice creative touch, but you're going beyond the framework of an RfC. Since you've offered no reasons to keep any of these two images, I suggest you remove them both from consideration. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to participate. I'm sorry, but I have no further free time to invest in your dispute. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 08:04, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
              • Thanks so much for your comments, but since you seem to be unable to follow a simple set of instructions, I'll just file your input away in the circular file, where they can keep the majority of your Misplaced Pages comments company. BMK (talk) 08:30, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

• Stub-Class New York City articles
• Mid-importance New York City articles
• WikiProject New York City articles
• Misplaced Pages requests for comment