Talk:Tuggeranong
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Tuggeranong is maintained by WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Canberra. | ||
|
Assessment comments
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|||
[edit] Too many images
I have to agree with Ambi on this one. There are way too many images on this page. If you feel they needs homes then write the Lanyon article and put them there. There is no way that you can define this as an appropriate number of images when they stretch on from teh en dof the article for 2 and a half images. If I was at work on a higher resolution it woul dbe even worse. --Martyman-(talk) 09:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- As per my edit comments, I have a strong objection to the removal of content as opposed to the addition or even editing or replacement of content. One solution to the quantity of images comapred with the anount of text, is the use of a gallery. On my screen at present (15") they stretch just past the end of the text. The majority of the images are default thumbnail size. The resolution of thumbnails is determined by your user preferences. My preferences are set to 200px at present. If your preferences are set to greater than that it would explain in part why you see "too many" pictures. The default for not logged in users is 180px. The guidelines talk about redundancy in terms of say three pictures of a general in uniform is probably two too many. See Wikipedia:Images#Image_choice_and_placement; we do not have that sort of redundancy here. Certainly we could have more text. I like to add content and do my little best in that regard, as do many other editors. In the mean time an aerial picture of Lanyon in the 1950s does tell a large story. Perhaps instead of removing the picture, somebody could add the accompanying text. If you can't be bothered,then leave the image visible as a trigger or inspiration for another editor. A suburb map and a picture of the artificial lake do not do justice to the district.--A Y Arktos 09:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- The resolution of your monitor is the factor effecting the image layout of the page not the size of your monitor. I have my default thumbnail size set as large as it will go becasue I feel the default is way too small. I think you may be designing for obsolete resolutions. There are some people out there browsing around with 1600x1200 screen that are going to think the article looks totally stupid. I think the article could probably support one maybe two more images than it currently has (2) but they should be good quality relavent images. The Lanyon ones are not relavent. Lanyon isn't even in Tuggeranong. --Martyman-(talk) 10:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
(1) The ACT Government thinks Lanyon homestead is in the Tuggernanong district[1], not just me and at least one other wikipedia editor. Lanyon is a place of interest in the district. (2)The current wikipedia default is 180 px. The largest setting is 300px, a very significant percentage increase. The default is not catering to the highest resolution but the more common lower resolution. The gallery produces even smaller images but I think adequate for the purpose.--A Y Arktos 10:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- WP:NOT states:" Collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles. If you are interested in presenting a picture, please provide an encyclopedic context, or consider adding it to Wikimedia Commons. If a picture comes from a public domain source on a website, then consider adding it to Wikipedia:Images with missing articles or Wikipedia:Public domain image resources." There is text, this is not a mere collection of images. There are two historic images and two others, one of which is redundant as it appears on the Lake page anyway and is rather poor quality at illustrating either the lake or the district. So we qare talking three images which have accompanying text, albeit brief, in the article. I am at present adding some text.--A Y Arktos 11:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
