This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Northern Counties Paladin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Davey2010 To avoid potentially triggering WP:3RR and to hopefully get a bit of clarity, could you please explain your rationale in reverting this and so many other bus articles' images to prior versions?
I'll outline mine first: I personally believe that Wikipedia pages of buses should have, if they exist, in-service photos of the buses with their first operator and in as best physical state as possible. In this article's case, I say preserved buses stand as an adequate equivalent, too. As-new photographs (or photos in as-new condition) highlight elements of the bus as they were intended by the manufacturer shortly after it rolled out the factory. In my opinion, they also help provide context for the history of the bus type - i.e. by demonstrating them with the operator they were most commonly used by at the time they were relatively new.
I don't see why, therefore, we seemingly can't part with the images as they now stand here. Why the insistence of sticking with photos from 2006-2009 and onwards from when the buses were near the end of their service life/with second or third-hand operators, when new photos can be made available that better demonstrates them? And please, tell me what constitutes "fine", " better" or " no issue" in your edit summaries? What precedence does the photo of the back of a Paladin Dart have over a photo of a one-in-four Paladin Atlantean in this article?
Another point that I'd like to pick up on is that as a regular mobile user (i.e. both through browser on iPad and Wikipedia app on my phone), I'm very mindful of making these pages accessible for other mobile users. As @ Kermelei also probably disputes, this image reorienting you have undertaken with this article, as well as on, say, Alexander ALX400 (why have you added a new image, by the way?), is causing quite a bit of sandwiching of the main body of text. I'll admit, I've done some arguably weird orienting of images on this article before, but that was to avoid sandwiching text between image and infobox and demonstrate the Atlantean rebody under its own heading. I'd just be mindful about that as you go on.
Again, all I ask is that you explain what it is you are trying to do without just leaving it in the edit summary as "past images were fine" or something as vague as that. What's the rationale, here? Why not allow these new images to stand? Hullian111 ( talk) 06:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)