Jump to content

Talk:Kingston–Rhinecliff Bridge

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comment

[edit]

This article did not seem to exist yet near as I could tell although it had multiple red links. It was the only one of the 5 New York State Bridge Authority bridges that did not have one. Since the designer David B. Steinman was a childhood hero of mine, and since I lived in the area for 10 years, it seemed fitting. Comments are very welcome, I am only an egg at article creation. ++Lar 03:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

[edit]

We need a picture of this. Best place to do so: Kingston Point Park in Kingston. Nice, publicly accessible (and free) beach with view of the whole span. Daniel Case 21:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Got it! Although the one I ultimately used doesn't show the whole span, it gets the idea across. Daniel Case 15:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

(Copied from User talk:64.222.151.83)

On another topic, why do you keep reverting that picture? The new one makes the bridge look so small and hard to see. - Denimadept (talk) 23:36, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am reverting the picture because I believe that complete side view pictures are better because you can see the entire bridge, while you can only see part of it in a close-up picture. 64.222.151.83 (talk) 23:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that's helpful to know. Let me ask this. Wouldn't it be better to do the "side view" image rather larger? Not so much in the infobox, but in the main article? Let me demonstrate.

(elided)

Note that a crop of this image would be better, and adding the left side of the bridge even more so. Then you can add the image toward the end of the article and both images will be available. As it is, an admin appears to have deleted your most recent reversion. If this side-view image did in fact show the whole bridge, it'd be a better argument for using it. The {{wide image}} template is usually used for rather wide images, which this really isn't. Can you provide a full-width image, cropped down to show not so much water and sky? - Denimadept (talk) 00:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to do that but I do not have editing tools needed to crop an image on my device. 64.222.151.83 (talk) 00:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do. Do you have the rest of the bridge in another image? I could align them and crop the results, then update this image. - Denimadept (talk) 00:42, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do have the full span in another image. Where should I place the image? 64.222.151.83 (talk) 00:57, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please upload it to Commons and post the link here. I'll check it out when I get home after work. - Denimadept (talk) 01:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My Web Broswer is being blocked in a few minutes for routine maintenance, and I will be going to bed before it is complete most likely. I don't know where you are from, but where I live it is currently 9:23 P.M. I will have to continue this over the weekend. Check back here throughout the day tomorrow and Sunday and I should have a link to the file by Sunday. 64.222.151.83 (talk) 01:24, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okie dokie. - Denimadept (talk) 02:51, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just got a break from my other work and so here is the other image.. (Note: My IP address seems to have changed but I promise that I am the same user).


File:Rhinecliff Bridge.jpg 64.222.150.217 (talk) 17:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. And you see what I mean about the DHCP lease expiring. So it goes. I'll crop this. Is this something you shot, or something from elsewhere? It's important. I've made the change to the article. Thing is, the other image is still better. More contrast, shows the structure details better, nice color. You sure about this? - Denimadept (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just got another short break and I took a look at the article. The image does look better to me because you can see the entire span, not just a close-up of one span. Also, images taken in the daytime are often more clear than images taken at evening or night. And yes, I did take the photograph when I was in an airplane just starting its final decent (I forget where it was going-I've had the picture for several years, just never "published" it until now). 64.222.150.217 (talk) 21:29, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the point: it's a picture taken from a phone or similar, and looks like it. It doesn't show the structure of the bridge, it doesn't have the entire bridge on it, and it needs to be bigger. I was looking for an image of the entire bridge, end to end, with lots of detail between 2000 and 3000px wide which could be posted as a side-scrolling image. One thing you've done is given me a new understanding of this idea. I've long thought a picture of a bridge from the side was best, too. Now I've got to add, "and it's got to be a GOOD image" as well. This is NOT an attack on you. I'm just trying to be clear about my dissatisfaction with this image. - Denimadept (talk) 21:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just leaving work for the night and I see your point. I have another idea. One of the images that is in the regular aeticle already meets the criteria that I'm looking for. Could I put that image in the infobox and swap it with either the current infobox image or the other one that I kept trying to revert? 64.222.150.217 (talk) 23:04, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let's see what you mean. - Denimadept (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All set! 64.222.150.217 (talk) 23:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This one looks similar to the one I cropped earlier. - Denimadept (talk) 00:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you noticed, the one you cropped earlier is at the bottom right of the page, and the one that used to be where it is now is in the infobox. I swapped the two. If this does not work, I don't know what will, because I don't have anymore images. Wiki you now, Wiki you later! (talk) 01:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC) (That's my new account, by the way)[reply]

Woot! New account! Congrats. :-D Yes, saw the other one too. - Denimadept (talk) 02:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is this dispute finally resolved? I have other things that I need to do. Wiki you now, Wiki you later! (talk) 11:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, I want to hear from others. - Denimadept (talk) 05:30, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kingston–Rhinecliff Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:57, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kingston–Rhinecliff_Bridge&oldid=1202120286"