Template talk:Largest cities of Bulgaria

There is a general lack of good panoramic images in Commons, so I wouldn't insist on using such of low quality, as the ones of Plovdiv and Burgas. If interested users would actually take a look, the Sofia picture is from the Business park, which is a good view for anyone who would have at least some degree of taste. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 11:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I can't find out what you insist with low and high quality, the quality of the pictures is not seen to be different even from close when you open the picture. When you open the picture in full resultion only the size seems to be slightly larger with 1,024 × 768 vs. 800 x 600 which doesn't matter by me and more important in such case is the type of the picture isn't it? P:S Burgas panorama's resulution which you determined as low quality is higher than that of the picture you placed, check. The panoramic images are still better descriptiopn of the cities than some bolcks, that is not the face of Sofia, neither looks as a picture of city. I don't want to say something offensive but I have no words for the Mladost 4's blocks, on the other side make camparision of this picture with Bulevard Cherni Vruh 06 - Sofia.jpg - A European atmosphere showing the tram lines, some European buildings and even a small panorama. So please thing of what is the difference between this picture and the blocks of the Bussiness park. Response? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.215.198.121 (talk) 12:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC) P:S: This you place for Varna is a view to Sveti Nikola not to Varna so it also should be replaced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.215.198.121 (talk) 12:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

The images are low-quality in terms of content.

• The current picture from Sofia is grey, dull and shows a boulevard with lots of tiny cars on it. No architecture, no spirit, nothing moving in that picture whatsoever. The image from the business park shows new buildings and evokes a clean, modern athmosphere.
• The current image from Plovdiv shows a bird's view of a couple of structures in the center. It's a generic picture that could be used in a news article and unlike the picture with the street I insist on, it cannot give an idea of what the city is like.
• The current Varna picture is just plain horrible. There's nothing in it - some sea tides and almost unnoticeable structures far in the background. I would rather think it shows a fortified line of bunkers somewhere in Sicily than an inhabited European city if I didn't know what it actually is.
• The current Burgas picture does not show anything either. There are some buildings, the sea and that's just it. It could be used to represent any single coastal town in the world. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 13:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

OK but the others are for more critics.

• Bussiness park Sofia - enough of this, man, I am amazed how you are insisting for such thing, the same you wrote for the current was exactly for this picture - a grey, dull and an forest of grey concrete boxes, nothing is moving on that picture. This show neither the architecture and neither the athmosphere of the city, that would be like presenting London with a picture from some of its getthos or suburbs where the typical architecture of London does not exist, the European archtecture and the trams are typical for Sofia at least in its center and they unlike the bussines park describe the architecture and the athmosphere of the city. It is an awful way to represent a city with bussiness buildings, not with its architecture, athmosphere or landmarks, neither city in the world is presented like that. The cities around the world are presenting with their architecture or landmarks, while Sofia would be presented with its just now build concrete boxes, horrible. I insist for old European architecture to be much better in presentation of a European city. I do not insist only for the current picture, just against the so called bussiness park, I also think this picture [ 1-Sofia-parliament-square-ifb.JPG ] or this [ NDK-front-view.jpg ] could be used also but not if all other pictures are panoramic.
• Previous Plovdiv picture did not show the typical inside of Plovdiv, rather a detail from isolated turn. I would be happy to use a better picture taken from earth view which shows something typical for the architecture of Plovdiv, but a panorama to the centre of the city still remains better than the previous used. By the way in Template:Largest cities of the United Kingdom all the pictures are panoramic.
• Previous picture for Varna was from the villa zone Sveti Nikola not from Varna and it rather looks as a view to a village, the current shows details both of the beach and the city and is maybe not a very good one as well, but it is still in Varna not in the villages.
• Previous Burgas picture is most likely a parking, until not a normally-looking picture for Burgas is taken, a panorama altough from distance remains better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.215.198.121 (talk) 16:14, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh and I forgot, that picture of Varna: [ City of Varna.jpg ] is probably better. 89.215.198.121 (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I will answer point by point:

The previous BP images were horrible. This one is good as long as it is balanced, well-illuminated and with a good perspective. If it looks like a ghetto to you, then I would recommend that you see a specialist. The ones you are pushing have both poor colours and poor perspective.

As I said, there are no good panoramics. In this situation, it would be better to use a normal view of the streets (and not single buildings). The street view is the best picture there is. Maybe this would work with some better colours: click, in a similar manner as this. (Edit: I've saturated the colours a bit, here)

I didn't know the 3rd picture isn't from Varna. I guess City of Varna.jpg is better, the one that is currently on the template is simply preposterous.

The Burgas aerial view simply cannot stay. It could easily pass as a picture of Mogadishu, Freetown or Malabo given the lack of any recognisable structures. The picture I used is not from a parking, it shows a street with cars on it and some older architecture can be seen, it has some movement in it and I would say it's good. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 17:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

For the bussiness buildings please read my point above, and check again which has poor colours and poor prespective. That what you suggest for Sofia and what you want to replace with it is simply preposterous. I don't know whether there are good panoramics or not, but the panorama to the centre of Plovdiv is good and better than Kapana and this, I've never said not to use land taken pictures, I find them even better, but there has to be found a better land picture than the panorama. For Varna I prefer the first because the sea is visible but I don't mind which of the two will be used. For Burgas that the view is indeed from some distance is true, but the previous Burgas picture still resembles a parking to unknowing third-party look, as 7 milliard readers would be if they read, it could easily pass to them as an auto exposition, preparing the most visible element in the heart of the work - the Mercedes S class for pose, supplementing by a comparatively not small-volumetric bus in the left of the masterpiece, who is arriving to the international exposition with the participation of Germany and Ireland to advertise Allianz, if you are getting what I want to say. Probably some new should be found instead. Regards. 89.215.198.121 (talk) 20:15, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I really don't wish to argue with an apparent troll, but if you're so eager to use good pictures, you can try finding better ones yourself. I've uploaded at least 50 images in that manner, and if you don't like what you see, better find something better. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 20:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

How you want. 89.215.198.121 (talk) 20:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Largest cities of Acre which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)