Wikipedia talk:List of images/Places/India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to "Wikipedia is not" point # 19 Wikipedia is not a collection of photographs. Consider adding the right kind of photographs to Mumbai and then deleting this article. - Hemanshu 17:00, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)


Point 19 in "Wikipedia is not" states A collection of photographs with no text to go with the articles. If you are only interested in putting a picture into an article but have no desire to write an explanation as to who the person is and why they should have an article, maybe the article shouldn't exist at all.

in my opinion this refers to images with no explanation. The photographs here are self explanatory. Nothing can describe a place better than photographs. Whilst planning my trip to India i searched extensively for information on the places I was to visit and found few photographs that gave any sense of what Mumbai was actually like. I consider these images to be relevent to the subject but inappropriate to place in the Mumbai page itself due to bandwidth limitations for people without access to broadband.

I think the images should stay. I am biased however as I took the photographs.

Joedjemal 06:37, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Great!

This article is great! I will prepare a similar one for Athens. Congratulations! Optim 08:18, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

[edit] VfD

Article listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion Apr 29 to May 6 2004, consensus was to keep and list on cleanup. Discussion:

they are images, indeed; are they definitive, of peculiar importance, or holiday photos? Do they have a rationale? -- Geogre

  • None that I can see. Delete. - Lucky 6.9 20:28, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. The author of the article on the Talk page seems to believe these are of informational value, but says he's biased because he took the pictures. This is borderline vanity page issue here. Besides, I highly doubt a visitor to this page will get a better sense of the city. Alcarillo 20:40, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Cleanup for now. Many are dull and uninformative. Soome of them are interesting --- whatever Mumbai-centre-colonial.jpg is, I want one --- but the explanations for them on this or on the image pages are subpar. I did learn that tropical climates must be hell on Bauhaus box architecture. Smerdis of Tlön 23:02, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep: informative. They're picture of landscapes from an obscure video game -- WE HAVE TO KEEP THEM! Ha ha, only serious. Someone should do likewise for other great cities. (Great cities, I said.) I doubt if many readers of the English WP have a clear idea about what Mumbai looks like, or any city in India, so even in its present rough form the article is informative. I agree that the selection is pretty random, probably the page can be focused by dropping some of them. Wile E. Heresiarch 02:27, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, I agree with Wile E. RickK 02:53, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, but list on Cleanup - not enough context. -Sean 03:55, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Half these pictures are of such poor quality they do not deserve to be kept. The other half need a decent cleanup in Photoshop. I'm all in favor of pictorial articles, but this is far from quality work. Cleanup or delete. And if boldly editing applies equally to photos as it does to text, I will have no hesitation about taking it on. Denni 05:35, 2004 May 2 (UTC)
  • Keep. I have been there - quality is not a part of the picture. Could use couplo words - please ?

End discussion

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Wikipedia_talk%7EList_of_images_Places_India_da9a.html"