User talk:Ze-dan

Welcome!

Hello, Ze-dan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! The Bushranger _{One ping only} 15:34, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft images

I appreciate that you have located new images for aircraft type articles, but in many cases you are also removing existing images from articles. As per WP:AIRCRAFT-IMAGES we have a consensus to not do this without discussion first. It is fine to add images without discussion, just please don't remove existing images without a consensus to do so. - Ahunt (talk) 18:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The quality of an image is always more important than the quantity of images included — a gallery or a link to the Commons is preferable to flooding an article with images.

If an in-flight image is not available then the infobox or lead photo should show the best overall view of the aircraft and not a detail close up or similar shot.

--Ze-dan (talk) 18:35, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Aircraft consensus standard is to discuss before removing images, that's all. I don't think that contradicts other standards or is unreasonable to ask. In detail it says "Many existing images used in aircraft articles have been carefully selected to illustrate specific variants, angles of view or aircraft features. These images should not be deleted from articles without discussion and consensus that this action will improve the article on the article's talk page. Images may be added to the article without removing or replacing existing images without discussion." - Ahunt (talk) 19:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you removed an image of the aircraft in flight and replaced it with one on the ground. As explained at WP:AIRCRAFT-IMAGES "Infobox or lead images should show the aircraft in flight whenever such a picture is available." Also there was no reason given to remove the in-flight image from the article. I have restored the in-flight image to the info box and added your image in further down on the article. As WP:AIRCRAFT-IMAGES says if you want to remove an image please discuss first on the talk page and gain consensus. - Ahunt (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing images from aircraft articles and replacing them with ones that you have found. You need to discuss before removing images. - Ahunt (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My pictures better :-) --Ze-dan (talk) 20:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, to replace an image now requires discussion? That's a bit overly-bureaucratic, but thankfully AIRCRAFT-IMAGES is not policy. Let's remember that this situation is what we have WP:BOLD for, and let's recognize that AIRCRAFT-IMAGES is flying completely in the face of our traditional boldness (perhaps this would have been caught years ago if the addition was conducted on a more-visible page than the style-guide talk page?).

Moving on, you'd be much better off arguing which photos are better and which are not. Probably a lot easier than insisting that a discussion should have happened earlier. It's a little past that now. I think at least two of Ze-dan's images (on Bellanca 14-7 and Funk B) are of sufficient quality to challenge the lead image. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At WikiProject Aircraft we created that consensus specifically because we have had problems with people who think their images are better, when they aren't. I left his lead image at Bellanca 14-7 because it was better, but that was no reason to toss a historically significant image out of the article. I put his image further down the page at Funk B, because it wasn't better. - Ahunt (talk) 20:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And? That's no reason to unilaterally declare that any image change requires discussion, especially when even long-term editors (like me!) won't know that. Essentially you're giving yourselves a policy to point to after someone changes an image, but its current wording means it is unsuitable for that.

I mixed up the images at Bellanca (thanks to your edit summary ;-) - thanks for leaving the new image. Now, you say Funk B's "it [isn't] better". Why? I certainly don't understand why you think that, and I think it's safe to assume Ze-dan doesn't either. (in my view, the shadow under the wing obscures the aircraft) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 21:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As that says put in any images that you like, but just discuss before deleting images. I haven't removed any of his images, as they are all useful, I have just restored deleted ones as there was no reason given to remove them. - Ahunt (talk) 21:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but Ze-dan's belief is that his images are better. See his post above. Are you planning on explaining why the current images are superior? (as a general note, explaining 'why' in an argument [in the philosophical sense] is typically a much easier argument to make then referring to arbitrary rules, which, as I've already showed you, go against of one WP's core policies) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:02, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need in most cases to make an argument that the existing images are superior. In most cases the articles he has deleted photos from only have one or two images. I am not getting into discussions on "the quality of redness", as there is simply no reason to remove images from the articles. Adding them is fine. - Ahunt (talk) 22:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The quality of an image is always more important than the quantity of images included — a gallery or a link to the Commons is preferable to flooding an article with images. --Ze-dan (talk) 22:25, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We are not talking about flooding articles with images. We are talking about cases like this one where you removed a perfectly good historical image for no reason. The article only had one image and you removed it! While the one you added is good, I have no quarrel with adding it, but you made no case why the other single solitary historical image needed to be removed. - Ahunt (talk) 22:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We are talking about cases like this one where you removed a perfectly good historical image for no reason. — now OK? --Ze-dan (talk) 04:39, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No - images of the aircraft inflight are preferred for the info box and you still haven't given any reason to remove the historical image. - Ahunt (talk) 10:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they needed to be removed either – I'm just wondering what virtues the old Funk B image has over the new one in the infobox. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We don't seem to be getting anywhere with this discussion, so let's just deal with each image change on a case-by-case basis instead on the article pages themselves. - Ahunt (talk) 10:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you would answer the question I've asked several times... Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Funk B images are obviously a judgement call as they are similar views, both on the ground. I think the yellow Funk currently in the info box is slightly better as a lead image because it shows the plane's profile a bit better and also because of the colouring. If you switch the images you will find that the bright colours cause you to see that image first regardless of where it is on the page, mostly because the other image is very dull-coloured on a dull-coloured background and doesn't draw the eye. But the determining factor for me was that the yellow Funk image is facing left (into the page), while the other one is facing right (off the page). While MOS:IMAGELOCATION specifies this for images of people, the same general aesthetic principle applies to aircraft images as well. Combined these reasons make the yellow Funk image a slightly better choice for the lead. You will note that neither of these images were contributed by me. In fact the Saskatchewan Western Development Museum photo in that article is one I took. I don't go around claiming my images are better than anyone else's. As you can see though I had restored the yellow image after it had been deleted with no explanation. If he had put the beige Funk in the infobox and moved the yellow one down and made a logical edit summary that explained the choice then I might have not challenged that decision.- Ahunt (talk) 20:56, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]